UK house prices

Dream on....

Depends if the rental markets takes a dive.

If economy turns sour grapes some part of migrant workers likely to go back home.

Coupled with falling asset prices and reduced rental income it can go horribly wrong.

We may be seeing the first seeds of it now.

Not far fetched at all. I'd say 50/50. Not good to be overly confident imho.
 
Dream on....

...I agrere - dream on.....

There is housing market, rental market and commercial market......

Housing market is still strong.....there is a glut in 'buy to let' so it has buckled slighly......rental market in inner cities and some areas is still strong.....and commercial market was rampaging very nicely until last few weeks when the jitters affected the pace....

...Like stocks, this market is also driven my mass panic and confidence.........Short term bad news is like cat among pigeons....so it has stalled...

.....Rate cuts on the way..?
 
Last edited:
No Income, No Job, No Assets! Dole bludgers in expensive houses with big televisions and fast cars. Buy Now, Taxpayer Pays Later!

I am really resentful of the moral hazard created by the government bailing out the reckless speculators at the Rock. Now we have a situation where bankers can gamble half the customer deposits on risky trades - if they win, they are a hero and get an 8 figure bonus - if they lose, the taxpayer can bail them out.


Hi LL, you definately have a point and correct in what you suggest but I think not doing anything would have been a lot worse than a gentle softly softly approach. Whilst NR maybe covered I doubt the BoE or the taxpayers can extend support to bail out every riskpro exec or company...

They could start by demoting the financial controllers and executives of failing companies, withdraw their pension schemes, take away their bonuses and share option schemes (oops... we'll let them keep their share options...) and get them to start in the post room delivering bad news...

What was those contraptions called in the bad old days where they would lock you into two planks with your hands and head sticking out?

Anyway, stick the management in front of various branches and let the public loose with tomatoes. At least you'll get some entertainment value... :cheesy:
 
Location.............

Hi LL, you definately have a point and correct in what you suggest but I think not doing anything would have been a lot worse than a gentle softly softly approach. Whilst NR maybe covered I doubt the BoE or the taxpayers can extend support to bail out every riskpro exec or company...

They could start by demoting the financial controllers and executives of failing companies, withdraw their pension schemes, take away their bonuses and share option schemes (oops... we'll let them keep their share options...) and get them to start in the post room delivering bad news...

What was those contraptions called in the bad old days where they would lock you into two planks with your hands and head sticking out?

Anyway, stick the management in front of various branches and let the public loose with tomatoes. At least you'll get some entertainment value... :cheesy:


Back to prices......

In Cornwall the local news has highlighted he fact that HIPS may have accounted for some of the lower number of houses put up for sale recently. Gasp - even a local estate agent has stated it will REDUCE its' coverage (and staff) in the county. However, it seems that demand is still high so one would expect prices to increase in Cornwall?
Norfolk, on the other hand, is reportedly experiencing falling prices? Maybe first time buyers can no longer reach that first rung on the property ladder? Perhaps retirement areas are more price robust than other places.
 
Last edited:
HIPS will probably cause prices to rise because they have reduced available supply by up to 30% according to a number of sources. Apparently 30% of the available market is made up of people who will put their house on the market just for interest or because they may wish to move up the street a bit. But when you have to fork out hundreds for a time limited load of nonsense that is of no value whatsoever, then these very people just cannot be bothered.

This has to be one of the most stupid ill thought out pieces of legislation ever having ignored all experts and stakeholders in the industry.


Paul
 
HIPS will probably cause prices to rise because they have reduced available supply by up to 30% according to a number of sources. Apparently 30% of the available market is made up of people who will put their house on the market just for interest or because they may wish to move up the street a bit. But when you have to fork out hundreds for a time limited load of nonsense that is of no value whatsoever, then these very people just cannot be bothered.

This has to be one of the most stupid ill thought out pieces of legislation ever having ignored all experts and stakeholders in the industry.


Paul

HIPS sounds like a good idea to me.

Doesn't that also stop the buyer spending time and cost for only the seller to withdraw because their intentions were merely a fleeting idea?

How about people who take out a survey and find out there are problems with the property and withdraw.

Gazzumping causing duplication of survey and solicitors costs for buyers.

I think it simplifies exchange. Having said that I don't know a great deal but sounds like a good approach to selling.
 
I think that if HIPS had become what they were originally intentioned for then it would have been fine. They were supposed to be the equivalent of a survey and in that case I would agree that they would be a great idea. Mainly because a buyer would not have to pay for a survey and the emphasis is on the seller. It would also have still catered for the 30% speculative area as the survey would not be time limited in the same way as I understand that HIPS are. If you actually go ahead and read them they are of very limited use in my view and just more red tape to the selling process.

Personally I will benefit from HIPS causing the reduction in available supply because I have more than one property and as such I think prices will rise which is all to my benefit. It doesn't alter the fact that all those involved in the industry were against them and that has to be important as they are the experts.


Paul
 
I think that if HIPS had become what they were originally intentioned for then it would have been fine. They were supposed to be the equivalent of a survey and in that case I would agree that they would be a great idea. Mainly because a buyer would not have to pay for a survey and the emphasis is on the seller. It would also have still catered for the 30% speculative area as the survey would not be time limited in the same way as I understand that HIPS are. If you actually go ahead and read them they are of very limited use in my view and just more red tape to the selling process.

Personally I will benefit from HIPS causing the reduction in available supply because I have more than one property and as such I think prices will rise which is all to my benefit. It doesn't alter the fact that all those involved in the industry were against them and that has to be important as they are the experts.

Paul

My understanding was that it is a survey on the house with eco friendliness attributes attached. I may have got it wrong. :rolleyes:
 
Depends if you’re Joe Public. The real arbiter of what’s real for Joe P is what they get fed in the media. UK Joe P are now starting to hear 25% over-valuation. So guess by how much then prices will start to decline?

Of course, it’s got nothing to do with value per se, but the perceptions of others’ perceptions of value. Which is where the media are so important. Makes me laugh when they outline by geographical area which property markets were ‘most’ over-valued! LOL.

Do you know how property assessors and estate agents (realtors) assess the value of a property in their area? They ask other estate agents and assessors in that area. Seriously, that’s how it works.

I have to admit to getting out perhaps a little earlier than many would consider necessary in that market, but then again, I’ve never been keen on attempting to pick the very top of any trend. Especially after the early 1990s. My early attempts at that exercise convinced me there was overall a more profitable probability in the fatter part of the tail which more than compensated for any few percentage points I may miss on a more relaxed exit. Getting out a couple of years ahead of the top yields a quite different bottom line to getting out a couple of years after the top – the property market also declines quicker than it rises. But of course, you need to be in an objective position as an asset holder rather than a home-owner for that objectivity to translate into sensible and timely action. Never get married to your assets.

As always, opportunities – both for those currently in that market and for those waiting for the best time to go back in.
 
In my view this will all come down to supply and demand. With the introduction of HIPS approx 30% of properties that used make up available supply is expected to disappear. If that does happen then demand will exceed supply quite dramatically and if that happens then prices will probably go up and not down.

The reality is none of us really knows and I remember seeing posts on here in 2003 telling us all the house market is about to crash. Four years later and prices have almost doubled. What I think we will see is a withdraw of money supply which will make it harder to borrow but just how this will affect things is yet to be seen. If it does happen then the broader economy will get hit very hard not just housing so the next few months are going to be interesting.

Paul
 
In my view this will all come down to supply and demand.
But demand being to what extent driven by potential buyers’ perceptions of future value and the ability of entry level buyers to purchase?

Fewer houses for sale may or may not result from HIPS, but that’s not the only factor.

If you’re sitting on an asset which has appreciated, but is unlikely to do so in the near to medium term future – what do you do? Under normal circumstances, you’d most likely sell. But there’s a lot more at stake if that asset is your home (not just a house – i.e. a property asset).

As a pure asset, the smart thing to do would be to sell now (if you can) and be prepared to come down to a price that yields a profit rather than holding on grimly to what it was worth at it’s highest (where have I heard that before?). Just like any other investment scenario.

As a home, and for most people their single and only real ‘investment’, my view is that the tendency will be to sit tight and largely disregard the medium term fluctuations. For those that are a long way into their mortgage or no mortgage, I can’t see them doing too much at all. For those newly into a mortgage, I can see negative equity looming, repossessions and rentals increasing in demand and value.

For those a few years into their mortgage with a healthy increase on original purchase price, these are the ones most active in up-sizing. Family growth, increasing income etc.

But what normally drives the housing markets is new starts: down-sizing is quite a small contingent of the overall mix and up-sizing requires up-sizing throughout the entire chain - and that starts with new builds.

NHBC's First Time Buyers Ability to Buy Index hit an all time low during the second quarter of this year. (15/08-07).

A combination of perceived lower or at least much slower increasing values in property and lack of new start purchase ability will inevitably lead to much lower demand.
 
I take your points Tony but I do remember in 2004 people selling their houses and moving into rented accommodation because a supposed expert economist has predicted falling house prices and ensuing crash. It didn't happen and all those that took his advice lost out in a big way. We just don't know what will happen but if demand is greater than supply then perceived value will not stop houses being sold and prices rising (all in my view of course). Either way it will be of interest.


Paul
 
You’re quite right Paul, it didn’t happen then. But those who did adopt that strategy in the early 1990s may have fared somewhat better. I was living in Holland at the time and had a couple of properties in the UK. I sold them just before the turndown and have no idea what they might have been worth today, but I know what they were trying to sell them for in 1996 - and it was well below my sale price 6 years before. I have no idea what happened to rental values as my interest in that side of things diminished rapidly with lack of involvement. But I can’t help thinking those that were able to get out of early phase mortgages probably did better than those that stayed in.

There does appear to be a regular cycle of doom-and-gloom and never-going-to-stop-rising which follows the oft-quoted 11-year periodicity. The thing is, the mood doesn’t always seem to translate into reality. It would be an interesting exercise to analyse the factors which do trigger the actual events.
 
i thought they said house prices were going back up again?

hmm I did have a brief chat with a bloke a few weeks back, he said he paid 5k for his house in 1974, and its now going for 355k, just him now, wife passed over, got a couple of adult kids.

Sell it ,I said.

But I was very, very, drunk...
 
You are right my friend the pierces rising day by day in uk, that why m thinking to take home loan but don't have any idea my friend but if u have any please inform me.

i will be very great full to you

Thanks
 
Top