how much did property prices go down to in the 90s?

IveSeenTheLight

jamescredmond wrote: »

my experience:

my pad valued at £62k at the top (late 80's)

down to £37k by jan '94

a 40%ish drop.

don't anyone say that this couldn't happen again.

Were not saying it can't happen, but you have to look at each area differently.
If you look at http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/HistoricalDataSpreadsheet.asp
or more specifically
http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/19_01_08PostTownsData3.xls
you can see areas that drop heavily and others that only show a very small decrease.
the largest drops I have randomly seen is in London and the South East.
Is this where you experienced these drops?

jamescredmond

I don't dispute the regional variations.

I started my last post with the words 'my experience'.

and this experience was in the s.midlands.

IveSeenTheLight

jamescredmond wrote: »

I don't dispute the regional variations.
I started my last post with the words 'my experience'.
and this experience was in the s.midlands.

Interestingly the spreadsheet does not list S-Midlands

From Wikipedia: -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Midlands

The South Midlands is an area of England. The term is not widely used and it is not one of the English administative regions. Its main usage is as a label for one of the areas identified by the Government for urban development. The area comprises the districts of Corby, Daventry, East Northamptonshire, Kettering, Northampton, South Northamptonshire, Wellingborough, Bedford, Mid Bedfordshire, South Bedfordshire and Aylesbury Vale.[1] The main settlements are Aylesbury, Milton Keynes, Northampton, Bedford, Luton, Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough.

Using these post towns in the spreadsheet, many are defined as the South East and East Midlands .
Randomly selecting the area appeared that London and the South East were affected the worst, but these are showing the East Midlands as pretty bad as well

Aylesbury - not on spreadsheet

Milton Keynes - -3% 1989, -2% 1990, -6% 1991, -10% 1992, +10% 1993, -4% 1994, following years all rises except -3% 2005. Total peak drop = 22.4% compounded (South East)

Northampton - -8% 1989, -3% 1990, +6% 1991, -13% 1992, -1% 1993, +3%1994, -1% 1995, following years all rises except -3% 2005. Total peak drop = 19.3% compounded (East Midlands)

Bedford - -3.89% 1989, -4.74% 1990, +3.67% 1991, -9.58% 1992, +1.57% 1993, +3.48% 1994, -0.72% 1995, following years all rises. Total peak drop = 14.8% compounded (South East)

Luton - +3.32% 1989, -7.85% 1990, -6.52% 1991, -11.17% 1992, +7.72%, -0.89% 1994, -4.99% 1995following years all rises except -0.33% 2005. Total peak drop = 27.7% compounded (South East)

Corby -1.01% 1989, -6.56% 1990, -6.01% 1991, -13.98% 1992, +2.16 1993, +10.95 1994, -8.43% 1995, following years all rises except -2.79% 1998, -1.11% 2000 & .9.49% 2005. Total peak drop = 30.1% compounded (East Midlands)

Kettering -3.47% 1989, -5.42% 1990, -2.42% 1991, -.10.74% 1992, -0.03 1993, -0.14% 1994, following years all rises except -1.08% 1997, & -3.95% 2005. Total peak drop = 25.5% compounded (East Midlands)

Wellingborough - -10.55% 1989, -4.08% 1990, -0.63% 1991, -5.40% 1992, -12.63, 1993,following years all rises except -0.86% 2000, & -4.86% 2005. Total peak drop = 37.5% compounded (East Midlands)

I could of course quote many areas affected much less than this i.e. Edinburgh with a 4.21% peak drop, but leave you to review the spreadsheet for your own areas

Alan_M_2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Were not saying it can't happen, but you have to look at each area differently.
If you look at http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/HistoricalDataSpreadsheet.asp
or more specifically
http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/19_01_08PostTownsData3.xls
you can see areas that drop heavily and others that only show a very small decrease.
the largest drops I have randomly seen is in London and the South East.
Is this where you experienced these drops?

Yup, Surrey, where I still live and watching it all come around again with a resigned feeling of deja vu.

budget_counsellor_shaz

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Were not saying it can't happen, but you have to look at each area differently.
If you look at http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/HistoricalDataSpreadsheet.asp
or more specifically
http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/19_01_08PostTownsData3.xls
you can see areas that drop heavily and others that only show a very small decrease.
the largest drops I have randomly seen is in London and the South East.
Is this where you experienced these drops?

Wow that is amazing!!! The information goes right back to 1983 when I bought my first house.

It was a 3 bed semi in the south east needed a lot of work. We bought it for £21000 and we saved £3000 for a deposit so had a mortgage for £18000........... those were the days:rolleyes:

Shaz

PasturesNew

budget_counsellor_shaz wrote: »

Wow that is amazing!!! The information goes right back to 1983 when I bought my first house.

It was a 3 bed semi in the south east needed a lot of work. We bought it for £21000 and we saved £3000 for a deposit so had a mortgage for £18000........... those were the days:rolleyes:

Shaz

Yes, the days ... of high interest and high income tax.

In 1983:
13.4% - mortgage interest
30% income tax
9% NI

mizzbiz

This thread is very interesting indeed, particularly the personla experiences of people who saw it last time. I feel it's a shame that a number of posters on this board both fail to understand the implications of what is happening and spout nonsensical opinions that this can't happen.

I was too young to see the last crash but I remember my parents struggling to pay, by today's standards' what was a very small mortgage at 15% interest. I also remember, a few years back, seeing a programme on TV about Negative Equity. One scene in particular sticks in my mind, where a guy had purchased a terraced house for £80k plus, and at the time the tv programme was showing, it was worth about 35k. He was devastated and could not move, sell, pay the mortgage, anything.

The failure of banks to ensure, especialy FTB's, were calculating their max payments is abysmal. If someones max capacity for repayments at 6% is 100k, surely they shouldn't be able to borrow 100k! Even if the rates went up by 1 or 2%, there was always the risk of living cost inflation to go with it, ensuring that many would struggle.

My parents, after their experiences always told me, no matter what they let you borrow, you MUST calculate your repayments as if interest rates are 15%. If you can't afford the payments on that, you can't afford the mortgage. Sterling advice.

pickles110564

mizzbiz wrote: »

One scene in particular sticks in my mind, where a guy had purchased a terraced house for £80k plus, and at the time the tv programme was showing, it was worth about 35k.

Where was this terrace? Beside Buck House?
I owned property back at that time and for 80k you could have bought a very large 4 bed detached in an excellant area.
I think over the years you mind has addled.

mizzbiz

pickles110564 wrote: »

Where was this terrace? Beside Buck House?
I owned property back at that time and for 80k you could have bought a very large 4 bed detached in an excellant area.
I think over the years you mind has addled.

what a tw*t.

I have never seen anything constructive or wise on any of your posts.

edit: also, if you read the rest of the posts, you will notice that that story is little different to the others on here.

pickles110564

mizzbiz wrote: »

I have never seen anything constructive or wise on any of your posts.

Just because you have been caught out you dont need to resort to that type of language.