Languish.org

Right, when to buy a home? We are looking in what is essentially the massive commuter belt outside of London's own mass transit system. The pandemic caused a noticeable upward push on prices on properties around here, but it seems to have stalled most recently.

Big question is what will happen when things reopen. Are all the pent-up demand gone? Most of it is still waiting to be unleashed post-lockdown?

What I think/hope is a big factor is that second/third/fifth properties are the investment option of choice for the English middle class (who they then blame the immigrants for daring to come in and rent them, and rich foreigners for driving the prices up). If inflation will actually start this year, interest rates might actually go up and then the buy-to-let deals will become less lucrative as the rents peasants like me can afford won't be enough to cover the mortgage payments with a profit.

Is that a realistic thing to hold out for? It feels like big changes can happen, but it's hard to see if those will result in a reducing even crash of prices, or they will fix the upward trend for another decade.

House prices have continued going up here despite Covid, with March 2021 as the highest monthly increase in twenty years.
Maybe something else is causing the stall?

It seems home prices in Central Texas remain defiant of anything that might slow their ever upward climb to infinity. Which is awesome for everybody since Texas has super high property taxes. I don't know who all these sick bastards are who moved here during COVID but it seems nothing will stop the red hot growth in this part of the country. We even have pretty significant COVID restrictions, I don't get it.

If I lived in California, with my income, I would actually pay less total tax. I hope all those conservatives fleeing California for the Texas tax haven made sure to check their property values first  :ph34r:

It always seems to work out that way for me. When Donald Trump did his big "tax cut" I ended up paying more tax. I live in the state that famously doesn't have big taxes but I pay more than equivalent me in California. It is almost like the Middle Class gets screwed or something  :lol:

Anecdotally there were a lot of people in London buying because of the stamp duty cut (or moving out and buying somewhere new/bigger). I've also heard reports of a big surge in people looking for family homes - probably inevitable after couple have been trapped in a one bedroom flat together for 12 months that they either split up or move somewhere bigger :lol:

There's been reports in the press on the decline in interest for certain London areas and a spike for country areas - which probably affects you quite a lot. But the decline in London has only impacted prices in a few boroughs (Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster from what I've seen), which makes sense because the people who live there can afford to move to a very comfortable version of the countryside and are senior enough to get away with permanently working from Porthleven <_<

I am aiming to have enough for a deposit on a flat in my area over the next 12-18 months (hopefully while the 95% LTV mortgages are available because otherwise :weep:) and I don't think there's any point in holding out for inflation or an interest rate rise (for a start given covid, given Brexit the inflation would have to be really bad for the BofE to start raisisng rates, no?). I just don't think it's very likely.

Separately:

QuoteThe Telegraph
@Telegraph
Replying to
@Telegraph
There's been a surge in demand for village properties in rural locations with extra bedrooms and outdoor space.

We take a look at villages you can move to near London with £500,000
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EyM49FPXEAM6Vmh?format=jpg&name=small)

https://telegraph.co.uk/property/uk/le

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1379012450922733571

I saw that thread - and especially that map - and after searching for local Communist militias I can join, felt that you and I are both a bit fucked :bleeding: :weep: :ultra:

In Canada traditionally the "property prices just keep rising" phenomenon was confined primarily to Vancouver and Toronto. Now, apparently, it's a nationwide phenomenon.

Whether that means a correction is coming, I can't say. But it seems the "property prices just keep going up" thing is pretty widespread.

A lot of the "Bay Area Flight" has actually been people moving from The City (San Francisco) to other parts of the Greater Bay Area.  Sadly, that includes Santa Cruz which was already in a huge upward spiral of prices.  People are buying houses unseen, in one case in Berkeley a house sold for a million more than offered because of bidding wars.

My cardboard shack under the interstate is looking sweeter by the day.

Quote from: PDH on April 06, 2021, 10:28:11 AM
My cardboard shack under the interstate is looking sweeter by the day.

It will cost $500,000 after the bidding war.

It has come apparent that I could sell my house for 450-500k$

That's a serious increase from 2 year ago & more than double from 10 years ago.

Generally waiting for house prices to drop is a losing game.
Maybe prices will go down one or two percent in the next year... but that'll save you less than what you've spent on rent over that year.

But generally yes, city centre flats are due for a sharp decline whilst balanced places, leafy but with decent rail access to the bright lights, are going to rise in popularity. Which is a shame as that's what I've been envisioning as my goal since before corona.
Read a piece earlier about big interest in Eyemouth due to the new train station being built there- I am very tempted. Well. If I hadn't just moved and all those other factors.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 10:26:49 AM

I saw that thread - and especially that map - and after searching for local Communist militias I can join, felt that you and I are both a bit fucked :bleeding: :weep: :ultra:

:ultra: It's ridiculous.

Berry is selling her flat, iirc.

Quote from: Tyr on April 06, 2021, 10:36:18 AM
Generally waiting for house prices to drop is a losing game.

The last time we had a big realestate crash in central Texas was the mid 80s after Reagan doomed us all with his tax plan.

Since then there is no point where waiting would have benefited you at all. It has always gone up COVID or 2008 economic crisis be damned. I am sure in most other growth areas it is similar. The only thing that waiting could benefit you on is loan terms unless you are some millionaire who pays cash. But you can just refinance for that.

So just how big are these £500,000 castles you can buy near London? Do they have their own drawbridges and moats?

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 06, 2021, 10:38:14 AM
Berry is selling her flat, iirc.

Yeah thanks but that's not the right area for us and is a flat.

I have long resigned from my ambition from a detached or even semi-detached property, but I am holding out still for a reasonably located sideways flat aka terraced house. Sideways soundproofing can be pretty effective, and there'd be a tiny garden.

There are acceptable 3 bedroom ones in the decent but inconvenient without a car areas where we are looking from £375,000 upwards. But 375 is the utmost upper limit of what I'd be willing to pay and it's quite above what my wife has accepted as an idea yet. :D

Quote from: Valmy on April 06, 2021, 10:40:52 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 06, 2021, 10:36:18 AM
Generally waiting for house prices to drop is a losing game.

The last time we had a big realestate crash in central Texas was the mid 80s after Reagan doomed us all with his tax plan.

Since then there is no point where waiting would have benefited you at all. It has always gone up COVID or 2008 economic crisis be damned. I am sure in most other growth areas it is similar. The only thing that waiting could benefit you on is loan terms unless you are some millionaire who pays cash. But you can just refinance for that.

Apparently there was a big drop here in the 90s.

I was reading couple of weeks ago that the government's new scheme of 5% deposit support (where the government guarantees such loans with the nominal reason of helping first buyers) will not (yet) be used for actual flats by the banks, as they are deemed too much risk with the furlough scheme ending and economic outlooks too uncertain. The article (Guardian) claimed it was this 90s crash that lives in the banks' memory.

Quote from: PDH on April 06, 2021, 10:28:11 AM
A lot of the "Bay Area Flight" has actually been people moving from The City (San Francisco) to other parts of the Greater Bay Area.  Sadly, that includes Santa Cruz which was already in a huge upward spiral of prices.  People are buying houses unseen, in one case in Berkeley a house sold for a million more than offered because of bidding wars.

My cardboard shack under the interstate is looking sweeter by the day.

My current, prospective property search is the Monterey area, so I feel that pain.   :(

$500,000 for 4-500 sq/ft 1-bedroom condo without its own washer-dryer hookup?  NOTHXBYE

The more livable places are near $700K

The rental market is not much (i.e. at all) better.

I'm not sure my income would make me eligible for a mortgage at either of those levels.

Quote from: Valmy on April 06, 2021, 10:43:03 AM
So just how big are these £500,000 castles you can buy near London? Do they have their own drawbridges and moats?

:lol:

Did a quick search for one on Zoopla and it looks like it gets you a 3-4 bed house either semi detached or detached :lol: :weep: :bleeding:

QuoteApparently there was a big drop here in the 90s.

Black Wednesday when we crashed out or ERM - back then we had far higher interest rates (about 10%) and inflation than most of the rest of Europe. There was a raid on Sterling and to try and protect the currency and stay in ERM the Chancellor (this was before the BofE set rates) increased interest rates twice in one day to 15% before they decided to let the value of Sterling fall below the ERM bands and the UK to crash out of Sterling.

But overall from the late 80s to Black Wednesday house prices fell by over 20% and there were lots of people in negative equity, plus interest rates were at 10% for most of the period. Black Wednesday was the nadir.

I'm not sure we're in that sort of situation again for many reasons.

QuoteI was reading couple of weeks ago that the government's new scheme of 5% deposit support (where the government guarantees such loans with the nominal reason of helping first buyers) will not (yet) be used for actual flats by the banks, as they are deemed too much risk with the furlough scheme ending and economic outlooks too uncertain. The article (Guardian) claimed it was this 90s crash that lives in the banks' memory.

oh no :weep:

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:04:09 AM

oh no :weep:

It's a subsidy intended for investors, not for the likes of you, mister, no matter what the PR line said!

Here in Toronto, the story for as long as I can remember it is that (a) we are in a property bubble; and (b) it is just about to pop - or maybe it already has!

I have read many, many articles along these lines, and many of them advance serious and apparently irrefutable economic arguments as to why this is so. Somehow, it has escaped the notice of these learned authors that exactly the same theories and predictions have been advanced for at least twenty years, yet the promised bubble bursting has not, in fact, happened.

It seems to me like no one has a freaking clue as to why property prices have not "burst", or can make a prediction that is worth anything. I assume that property prices will, in fact, at some point go down, because all markets are cyclical, but I am convinced no-one has any real idea of when or why they haven't already.

The analogy I use for such economic analysts is that they are like doctors who, no matter what the patient's condition, always tell the patient "you are going to die". I mean, it is always true, but it is somewhat important to know when ...

So there have been housing crashes in Alberta in the early 80s, and then again in the early 90s.  These days housing prices have been quite stagnant for maybe the last 10 years.  I could pretty much sell my house for the price I bought it at 10 years ago.  Now part of that is just depreciation (my house, and the neighbourhood, is 10 years older), but mostly it's just a flat housing market.

That all tracks very closely with the price of oil though, so I don't think it's particularly relevant to anywhere else.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 06, 2021, 10:53:18 AM

My current, prospective property search is the Monterey area, so I feel that pain.   :(

$500,000 for 4-500 sq/ft 1-bedroom condo without its own washer-dryer hookup?  NOTHXBYE

The more livable places are near $700K

The rental market is not much (i.e. at all) better.

I'm not sure my income would make me eligible for a mortgage at either of those levels.

The cheapest condo with 2 bedrooms I have seen in Santa Cruz (recently) was about 600k.  A mobile home in a trailer park manufactured house in shared-living lot can run as cheap as 400k if you don't mind that it was a meth house before...kinda joking.

Up until the pandemic Monterey was a bit better than here, but for some reason even more people are fleeing Silicon Valley to go there.

Yeah house prices here have broadly been rising since 1992 (minor dip in 2008, plateau in 2016). I am not convinced there's any value in waiting for the bubble to burst.

Plus I do think there's a really obviousl reason why house prices are rising in the UK: the numbers of properties we build is lower than population growth.

Yeah I kind of admire the war on normal people the UK is waging with its anemic building of housing. Pretty soon everybody will be a peasant again providing services for powerful landlords.

That is why I'm not really a believer in the North-South divide; at least houses are affordable here.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 06, 2021, 11:43:01 AM
That is why I'm not really a believer in the North-South divide; at least houses are affordable here.

I'm always obsessed with that chart that shows average net incomes in London and the North are basically the same if you include property costs.

QuoteYeah I kind of admire the war on normal people the UK is waging with its anemic building of housing. Pretty soon everybody will be a peasant again providing services for powerful landlords.

Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2021, 11:48:59 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Psst don't ruin all those people's fun.

Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2021, 11:48:59 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Re-mortgaging/access to more credit, a big return when you down-size once the kids move out, something to pass on to the kids.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 12:22:30 PM

Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2021, 11:48:59 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Re-mortgaging/access to more credit, a big return when you down-size once the kids move out, something to pass on to the kids.

Yes. This is a big one.
My dad is doing some work at the moment for a Cornish woman who just moved up here to be near her son who married a Geordie. She bought a really nice bungalow in the countryside for £100k or there abouts having sold her family home in Cornwall for 4 times that.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 06, 2021, 11:43:01 AM
That is why I'm not really a believer in the North-South divide; at least houses are affordable here.

Ish.
If you've a half decent job they are.
But half decent jobs are harder to come by in the first place, as is getting onto the path that can lead to them.
I think things are less awful than they were a decade ago but in many fields there's really little option but to have to go to London.

Also things change once you are on the property ladder. £50k vs £25k a year matters little when rent is £2000 vs £500 a month. But when your housing is covered its fine. Even if the mortgage payments are more thats not money that is disappearing into space barring a housing crash, its still yours (which explains why the government has no interest in bringing down housing prices).


Really its something that could be an interesting data representation experiment, the relationship between access to jobs and property prices. Its quite interesting to track just how much property prices shift as towns become somewhat more accessible, get a train station, etc... hmm.



At risk of pissing off some folks, rest assured I don't mean you here. Just thinking to some conversations I've had...
I have to say there is quite an entitled attitude amongst a lot of people who are priced out of London property ownership. They expect an awesome two bed flat in a trendy part of town, but not too noisy, walking distance from all the cool bars... at sub £200k or whatever it is.
Moving out of London and getting a job elsewhere? Why no. I can't do that. I like living here. I can't move to the badlands. Its uncool.
Moving out to a cheaper part of the London area? 90 minute commutes every day? No thanks.
So they continue to live in a garden shed, paying £2000 a month to cover the big house owner's mortgage.

For born and raised Londoners for generation upon generation I feel sorry for them. For teachers, doctors, etc... I have huge sympathy and really want something to be done. But there's an awful lot of people who just can't compromise in their life. There's little attempt to think of the big picture.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 12:22:30 PM

Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2021, 11:48:59 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Re-mortgaging/access to more credit, a big return when you down-size once the kids move out, something to pass on to the kids.

But higher taxes and so long as no member of your family ever wants to have kids again you can get a big return :P

Quote from: Valmy on April 06, 2021, 12:25:49 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 12:22:30 PM

Quote from: Barrister on April 06, 2021, 11:48:59 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 06, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Most people own a property so they benefit from prices going up.

YOu don't really benefit from housing prices going up though - you have to live somewhere.  It's not like you can cash out of your house.

Re-mortgaging/access to more credit, a big return when you down-size once the kids move out, something to pass on to the kids.

But higher taxes and so long as no member of your family ever wants to have kids again you can get a big return :P

You don't pay taxes on property value in the UK.

Damn. Texas screws me again.

You would pay inheritance tax when you pass your 2 million pound hovel on to your kids though right?

Quote from: Valmy on April 06, 2021, 12:26:59 PM
Damn. Texas screws me again.

You would pay inheritance tax when you pass your 2 million pound hovel on to your kids though right?

There's a tax on the sale of property and council tax is based on property values (due to the increase in property prices this is still based on the rates in 1992 :lol:). Edit: And that's a tax on the occupier not the owner, so I pay that tax.

Inheritance tax kicks in on estates over £325,000.

Given the average price house price in the UK is around £250,000 it's not normally a huge issue - it is more of a problem in London, obviously.

Although if you leave your home to your children then the threshold increases to £500,000. Also if you're married, any unused bit of your threshold gets passed on to your spouse - so if my estate is zero and I die first I could pass my £325,000 threshold to my (theoretical) husband, say, then the total tax-free value of the estate would be £650,000 - that would also apply if there's a car crash or something that kills both at once. So, in theory, if a couple owned two properties and left them to the kids that would also be tax free.

Obviously once you're over the threshold then the tax kicks in at 40% and it's a demand for cash which can cause issues if you've been left a huge asset like a house because you might not have 40% of the excess to hand which means you normally need to get into some sort of financing with a bank.

House prices in Peoria, IL, are great! :w00t:

:D

40% on the first pound of inheritance over 325? :o

Quote from: Valmy on April 06, 2021, 12:26:59 PM
Damn. Texas screws me again.

You would pay inheritance tax when you pass your 2 million pound hovel on to your kids though right?

There's no inheritance tax in Sweden. Texas seems to be pretty Socialist.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 06, 2021, 09:27:49 PM
40% on the first pound of inheritance over 325? :o

Or the first pound above 500k is it's a home. From a quick look that's lower than the US, no?

Quote from: Tyr on April 06, 2021, 12:22:38 PM
Yes. This is a big one.
My dad is doing some work at the moment for a Cornish woman who just moved up here to be near her son who married a Geordie. She bought a really nice bungalow in the countryside for £100k or there abouts having sold her family home in Cornwall for 4 times that.

Yeah and that goes the same in London. I know a Londoner born-and-bred. Family had a lovely home in a nice-ish bit of London which they'd lived in for about 20+ years. The dad died and the kids had moved out so the mum sold that property and was able to move into a very nice, far smaller house in Lewes - so a little bit country, little bit town - plus a big lump-sum she could put into her pension.

QuoteAlso things change once you are on the property ladder. £50k vs £25k a year matters little when rent is £2000 vs £500 a month. But when your housing is covered its fine. Even if the mortgage payments are more thats not money that is disappearing into space barring a housing crash, its still yours (which explains why the government has no interest in bringing down housing prices).

Honestly the single biggest driver for me wanting a flat is that while the rent and mortgage payments would be roughly the same I just want to stop giving that money to a landlord :lol: I get somewhere to live but I'm basically just giving that money to pay off someone else's mortgage which always annoys me.

At risk of pissing off some folks, rest assured I don't mean you here. Just thinking to some conversations I've had...
I have to say there is quite an entitled attitude amongst a lot of people who are priced out of London property ownership. They expect an awesome two bed flat in a trendy part of town, but not too noisy, walking distance from all the cool bars... at sub £200k or whatever it is.
Moving out of London and getting a job elsewhere? Why no. I can't do that. I like living here. I can't move to the badlands. Its uncool.
Moving out to a cheaper part of the London area? 90 minute commutes every day? No thanks.
So they continue to live in a garden shed, paying £2000 a month to cover the big house owner's mortgage.[/quote]
Well I feel very attacked :P

This doesn't match my experience - though I get it might reflect the way Londoners come across and I think it is definitely a bit of a thing when you first move to London. Either you are comparing your (normally decent) pre-rent salary with places back home or you're someone entitled who's just moved into Clapham (parents in Surrey), and you will end up buying a flat like that (parents paying your deposit and helping on the mortgage) <_<

But I think most people grow out of that pretty quickly and you work out what your priorities/compromises are. So a lot of my friends have bought now (though it's very difficult if you're single - which is another of my life problems that I'm forced to blame on heterosexuality). In general they're not living centrally - and only one or two are living near a tube station as opposed to buses or overground (which terrifies a lot of newcomers) - and they're not living in particularly exciting areas though some are up and coming. So it's places like Walthamstow, Leytonstone, Forest Hill, Streatham, Sydenham, Blackheath etc. A few cared more about location and wanting to stay reasonably central - but they live in high-rise, ex-council blocks on estates that aren't for everyone. That's normally the trade-off - you move out a little bit or you move into somewhere that not everyone is going to like.

Personally I'm probably more in the latter camp - I really love the area of London I live in. I've rented three flats/rooms around here for most of the last ten years and I want to stay here or near to it. It's not super-trendy (and, again, no Tube - which I think does knock £10,000s off the price). I currently live in a council block and I can basically afford the mortgage for a flat in another council block - which I'm fine with because they're pretty decent on the inside, I like the area etc but I know other people might not like it. I think for me and others in London the big barrier to actually being able to buy is the deposit - it's really difficult to save that much money if you're not able to get help from your parents (which I can't - hence why I'm still saving).

QuoteFor born and raised Londoners for generation upon generation I feel sorry for them. For teachers, doctors, etc... I have huge sympathy and really want something to be done. But there's an awful lot of people who just can't compromise in their life. There's little attempt to think of the big picture.

Doctors are fine - it's nurses I sympathise with :P

Back in the day the NHS used to have a lot of accommodation for its staff and councils would make flats that were disliked by families available to nurses. With so many hospitals in city centres and nurses being on low pay this was considered to be basic social solidarity.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 07, 2021, 06:54:09 AM
Back in the day the NHS used to have a lot of accommodation for its staff and councils would make flats that were disliked by families available to nurses. With so many hospitals in city centres and nurses being on low pay this was considered to be basic social solidarity.

The thing that slightly blew my mind when I was in hospital last year was student nurses. I think this is because it's moved from a purely vocational route to a university degree. So where I think it used to basically be like an apprenticeship where you'd get paid while you trained, now it's a degree so you don't.

One of the student nurses who I got chatting to was attending university in Roehampton which is very south-west London, but would get placements in any London hospital which were unpaid (I think there was a travel and lunch allowance). I assumed that it was basically because they do a lot more class learning - like maybe the first year in university or 3 days on placement/2 days study. But apparently not, from memory she was basically on placement for six weeks then one week in lectures. And she had student fees and loans like anyone else to pay for the privilege (though there is an NHS grant).

It's a ridiculous, broken system - and a really good example of how we've made far too many things degree-based/attach professional status to people with degrees instead of people with practical professional skills <_<

It made me very angry because I'd no idea.

There's a reason why the UK has such a large nurse shortage (as well as many other healthcare related professions) and have for decades resorted to importing them from abroad in bulk.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 07, 2021, 07:06:49 AM

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 07, 2021, 06:54:09 AM
Back in the day the NHS used to have a lot of accommodation for its staff and councils would make flats that were disliked by families available to nurses. With so many hospitals in city centres and nurses being on low pay this was considered to be basic social solidarity.

The thing that slightly blew my mind when I was in hospital last year was student nurses. I think this is because it's moved from a purely vocational route to a university degree. So where I think it used to basically be like an apprenticeship where you'd get paid while you trained, now it's a degree so you don't.

One of the student nurses who I got chatting to was attending university in Roehampton which is very south-west London, but would get placements in any London hospital which were unpaid (I think there was a travel and lunch allowance). I assumed that it was basically because they do a lot more class learning - like maybe the first year in university or 3 days on placement/2 days study. But apparently not, from memory she was basically on placement for six weeks then one week in lectures. And she had student fees and loans like anyone else to pay for the privilege (though there is an NHS grant).

It's a ridiculous, broken system - and a really good example of how we've made far too many things degree-based/attach professional status to people with degrees instead of people with practical professional skills <_<

It made me very angry because I'd no idea.

It is outrageous; hard to contemplate without raising my BP and risking giving the nursing profession even more work to do. My ex trained at Great Ormond St back in the late 70s and lived in a nurses' home in Bedford place just off Russell Square. She paid a peppercorn rent for that, so most of her small salary went on worthy activities like partying and enjoying central London....this is how it should be  :(

Quote from: The Larch on April 07, 2021, 07:13:53 AM
There's a reason why the UK has such a large nurse shortage (as well as many other healthcare related professions) and have for decades resorted to importing them from abroad in bulk.

Yeah - this made me look up recent stats on it and I was actually surprised how low it is for nurses. There are more overseas-born doctors in the NHS (excluding GPs where there's no stats because they're all independent) as a proportion than nurses, which I found surprising although that's probably just based on my own anecdotal experience plus my general disinterest in/dislike of doctors :ph34r:

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 07, 2021, 07:31:38 AM
It is outrageous; hard to contemplate without raising my BP and risking giving the nursing profession even more work to do. My ex trained at Great Ormond St back in the late 70s and lived in a nurses' home in Bedford place just off Russell Square. She paid a peppercorn rent for that, so most of her small salary went on worthy activities like partying and enjoying central London....this is how it should be  :(

Agreed :(

Having said that - and I don't know where they lived or how they afforded it - but I used to live next door to the Royal Free and there was one pub in particular that the nurses partied hard in :lol: Maybe the NHS discount was very good. I think if you're a pub near a hospital you can probably make a killing with a 50% NHS discount if you become the go-to.

Yes, some of the best partiers in the business  :lol:

There has been a partial reinstatement of the bursary I find :

https://www.nurses.co.uk/nursing/blog/do-student-nurses-get-an-nhs-bursary-and-how-you-can-apply-for-it-in-2021/#Student

Though this doesn't compare to a wage of course.

Interesting that this entire process has gone under the radar.

True on nurses.
Junior doctors only will suffer.
Really there needs to be a complete overhaul of the way we regard doctors and nurses. As book learning is becoming less valued a skill and people skills rise in importance, nursing becoming so hyper qualified that its almost at the level of a doctor in expertise and far more focus on the important people skills part.... yet they're paid more akin to receptionists.
More for the brexit thread here but this is a huge brewing crisis. The turnover in British educated nurses is huge, we are absolutely reliant on poor ignorant foreigners who just chase the slightly less shit salaries vs their home country.

[Sheilbh]Damn doctors, bastards choosing a career helping people with their health. If the fuckers really wanted to help people they would be lawyers.[/sheilbh]

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 07, 2021, 07:42:24 AM
There has been a partial reinstatement of the bursary I find :

https://www.nurses.co.uk/nursing/blog/do-student-nurses-get-an-nhs-bursary-and-how-you-can-apply-for-it-in-2021/#Student

Though this doesn't compare to a wage of course.

Interesting that this entire process has gone under the radar.

And I also think they'd still need a loan to cover the fees.

I think Tyr's right - and I blame Labour for this. Nursing only started to require a degree in 2009 instead of being a diploma and I don't think it should be. Based on my purely anecdotal experience 90% of what they learn is still learned practically - it's not like doctors' training where they spend a couple of years learning the theory and practicing on a corpse before they're allowed near live humans. But I think in part that was motivated by a good desire to make sure that nurses have status as professionals, which comes from a bad social bigotry that status = degree and you work backwards from ther.

I think it's similar with policing where I think there's a move to require a degree. As much as anything else nursing, policing, teaching used to be areas where you could have a career without a degree. Now it's like if you want a career in almost anything you need a degree.

Quote[Sheilbh]Damn doctors, bastards choosing a career helping people with their health. If the fuckers really wanted to help people they would be lawyers.[/sheilbh]

I spent a week in hospital last year - and have a chronic condition. Nurses are the greatest of us. Doctors are all psychopaths and monsters. I thought everyone knew this.

The Tories are to blame with the destruction of the polytechnics and devaluation of anything that isn't a university :p

https://youtu.be/EWJZK5zUS50?t=2

I think the police may already generally require a degree; but luckily a common route to becoming a copper involves working as a community support officer which is salaried and provides relevant experience (and doesn't require a degree).

Quote from: Tyr on April 07, 2021, 08:00:12 AM
The Tories are to blame with the destruction of the polytechnics and devaluation of anything that isn't a university :p

While university is generally a waste of time, a rarely spoken truth is that human beings aged 17 to about 23 are totally useless, annoying to be around, and disruptive. University is a way of warehousing these degenerates in a way agreeable to them: little is expected from them at university and they can debauch themselves in isolation from decent society.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 07, 2021, 03:53:32 AM
Or the first pound above 500k is it's a home. From a quick look that's lower than the US, no?

My quick look says in the US it's 40% on assets above 11.7 million.

Quote from: alfred russel on April 07, 2021, 08:12:58 AM
While university is generally a waste of time, a rarely spoken truth is that human beings aged 17 to about 23 are totally useless, annoying to be around, and disruptive. University is a way of warehousing these degenerates in a way agreeable to them: little is expected from them at university and they can debauch themselves in isolation from decent society.

:D

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 07, 2021, 10:29:37 AM
My quick look says in the US it's 40% on assets above 11.7 million.

You're right - looked at the wrong tax :blush:

That seems like an insanely high exemption.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 07, 2021, 10:37:57 AM
You're right - looked at the wrong tax :blush:

That seems like an insanely high exemption.

350,000 quid seems crazy low.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 07, 2021, 10:40:08 AM
350,000 quid seems crazy low.

Right? :P

Only about 4% of people pay it and there's lots of ways around it.

I mean personally I support a 100% inheritance tax above a certain threshold but I realise that's not a universally popular opinion :ph34r:

AFAIK over here nursing has always required a degree, albeit a shorter one than doctors (3 vs 6 years), and we've never had a shortage of nurses (hell, we even used to export a few hundreds every year to the UK  :P). How much practical stuff is done during those years I don't know.

Quote from: The Larch on April 07, 2021, 10:56:16 AM
AFAIK over here nursing has always required a degree, albeit a shorter one than doctors (3 vs 6 years), and we've never had a shortage of nurses (hell, we even used to export a few hundreds every year to the UK  :P). How much practical stuff is done during those years I don't know.

I was really surprised and a student nurse I was speaking to was in her first term. I think they were basically straight into placements doing the rounds, taking everyone's vitals every couple of hours.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 07, 2021, 11:02:07 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 07, 2021, 10:56:16 AM
AFAIK over here nursing has always required a degree, albeit a shorter one than doctors (3 vs 6 years), and we've never had a shortage of nurses (hell, we even used to export a few hundreds every year to the UK  :P). How much practical stuff is done during those years I don't know.

I was really surprised and a student nurse I was speaking to was in her first term. I think they were basically straight into placements doing the rounds, taking everyone's vitals every couple of hours.

Maybe it was because of Covid? IIRC over here they also took students quicker into hospitals as part of the emergency protocols and to cover for veterans that caught the virus.

In normal circumstances I'm not sure when a nursing student would first get into a "real" hospital placement, but I doubt it'd take place in the first year.

Quote from: The Larch on April 07, 2021, 11:08:38 AM
Maybe it was because of Covid? IIRC over here they also took students quicker into hospitals as part of the emergency protocols and to cover for veterans that caught the virus.

In normal circumstances I'm not sure when a nursing student would first get into a "real" hospital placement, but I doubt it'd take place in the first year.

This was pre-covid when it was just some alarming disease in China. But it would have been second not first term.

Just looking at a nursing degree prospectus on a website (different university) and it looks a little more academic/book-learning. But in the first year they do 16 weeks in three placements, second year is 24 weeks in four placements and the third year is three placements including the final placement which lasts 12 weeks. It looks like there's a course on "preparation for practice" in advance of each placement - and they are normally in different departments/hospitals around London.

I imagine my ward was an early one for most student nurses because it was generally adults who were recovering from an accident or some surgery etc but not super intensive care or A&E so probably a good introduction :hmm:

One for Tamas:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2021/mar/31/uk-housing-crisis-how-did-owning-a-home-become-unaffordable#Echobox=1617261404?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB

From reddit:

(https://preview.redd.it/ja4jsyq0v2s61.jpg?width=2481&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32b413cb7661ee67836ee8cf450b36a3062e5bab)

Well I guess it is time to move to Greece.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ez_vxAjXsAEyXDr?format=jpg&name=small)
:bleeding: :weep: :ultra:

Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2021, 12:59:46 PM
Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

I think the point is that even that avenue is now closing to people younger than you.

Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2021, 12:59:46 PM
Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

Oh we've already got that - loads of debt, 95% LTV etc.

Edit: And of course intergenerational inequality feeds into intragenerational inequality - from the IFS yesterday:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ez4lgAOWEAMDFN6?format=jpg&name=small)

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 12:58:40 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ez_vxAjXsAEyXDr?format=jpg&name=small)
:bleeding: :weep: :ultra:

Is that incitement to murder?

On this topic I bought this house fully planning to extend. There's a crap one story garage and most of the street has added another floor on top of that.
Had a brick layer take a look today and he reckons it'd be 50k to do that. Way above what I expected. :bleeding:
Looks like I'll be going with a much smaller extension for the forseeable and chances of buying something else in 5 years or so even if I stay around here have went up. 

How much of that 50k is the brick cost?

Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2021, 12:59:46 PM
Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

I am going through those mental gymnastics of financial analysis myself recently.

Do I rent for another 3-4 years, and keep my net worth as-is...

...or do I look at getting a mortgage that equals nearly 60-90% of my life's savings?

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 01:27:51 PM

Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2021, 12:59:46 PM
Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

I am going through those mental gymnastics of financial analysis myself recently.

Do I rent for another 3-4 years, and keep my net worth as-is...

...or do I look at getting a mortgage that equals nearly 60-90% of my life's savings?

Just get it over with. It probably won't matter all that much in the end, and at least you can stop thinking/worrying about it.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 01:25:41 PM
How much of that 50k is the brick cost?

A fair chunk of it. Plus steel beams.

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 02:59:57 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 01:25:41 PM
How much of that 50k is the brick cost?

A fair chunk of it. Plus steel beams.

Let me guess: the garage is too small for a car. Why not just build a room there instead?

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 01:27:51 PM
I am going through those mental gymnastics of financial analysis myself recently.

Do I rent for another 3-4 years, and keep my net worth as-is...

...or do I look at getting a mortgage that equals nearly 60-90% of my life's savings?

You're such a worry wort Tonto.  :P

You're not liquidating your portfolio to buy  house, you're using leverage to double your assets!

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 01:27:51 PM

Quote from: Valmy on April 27, 2021, 12:59:46 PM
Just do what I did and go into a demoralizingly huge amount of debt.

I am going through those mental gymnastics of financial analysis myself recently.

Do I rent for another 3-4 years, and keep my net worth as-is...

...or do I look at getting a mortgage that equals nearly 60-90% of my life's savings?

It is a big decision.  I am not sure what I would do in your position. 

And it's not even just the simple math above.

I'm about 3.5 years from being eligible to retire with a meagre pension before the age of 50, and assuming my family status (more to the point, lack thereof) remains the same...be in a position to never have to work again.

The "default" basic retirement plan to achieve that position is to move somewhere with a low housing cost/cost of living and have the freedom to do fuck all (travel...wine, women and song...etc.) with the rest of my days.

So I am not sure if getting a decent place to live in a super-high cost housing area only to try to unload that for a much lower-cost area within 3-4 years is wise financial move.  The only way I could afford to stay in the super-high cost area is if I lined myself up for a job there (not impossible)...but who wants a job if they don't need one?  :P

If you're planning to keep living in the same town then buying just makes sense in the UK at least.
YMMV in other countries with systems that disincentivise home ownership et al of course.
The only reason it wouldn't is if you suspect an epic house price crash that would cancel out the amount you'd pay in rent over the time you live there.

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 03:08:41 PM

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 02:59:57 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 01:25:41 PM
How much of that 50k is the brick cost?

A fair chunk of it. Plus steel beams.

Let me guess: the garage is too small for a car. Why not just build a room there instead?

That's part of the plan. It's really terribly built and ramshackle though.
I don't know anyone who actually keeps a car in a garage. I wonder why they don't put small utility doors on them as standard.

I think you could import wood for cheaper.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 03:21:14 PM
And it's not even just the simple math above.

I'm about 3.5 years from being eligible to retire with a meagre pension before the age of 50, and assuming my family status (more to the point, lack thereof) remains the same...be in a position to never have to work again.

The "default" basic retirement plan to achieve that position is to move somewhere with a low housing cost/cost of living and have the freedom to do fuck all (travel...wine, women and song...etc.) with the rest of my days.

So I am not sure if getting a decent place to live in a super-high cost housing area only to try to unload that for a much lower-cost area within 3-4 years is wise financial move.  The only way I could afford to stay in the super-high cost area is if I lined myself up for a job there (not impossible)...but who wants a job if they don't need one?  :P

If you are thinking about retiring in that short a period of time then buying expensive property now makes sense IF you assume that the transaction costs associated with purchasing and then selling it 3.5 years from now will be equal or greater than the increase in the value of the property when you sell it at that time.

It could increase enough to make that a good financial move - but it is a bet you are making.  And the horrible hypothetical is that around that time the market tanks and you are stuck with a big mortgage until the market recovers.

We bought our first property in the early 90s, and then about two seconds after we closed the market crashed.  So I have some first hand experience knowing what that feels like.

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 03:42:48 PM
If you're planning to keep living in the same town then buying just makes sense in the UK at least.
YMMV in other countries with systems that disincentivise home ownership et al of course.
The only reason it wouldn't is if you suspect an epic house price crash that would cancel out the amount you'd pay in rent over the time you live there.

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 03:08:41 PM

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 02:59:57 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 01:25:41 PM
How much of that 50k is the brick cost?

A fair chunk of it. Plus steel beams.

Let me guess: the garage is too small for a car. Why not just build a room there instead?

That's part of the plan. It's really terribly built and ramshackle though.
I don't know anyone who actually keeps a car in a garage. I wonder why they don't put small utility doors on them as standard.

You guys don't like it when I say there are some weird island-dweller idiosyncrasies in this country but this is one of the examples. :P At our apartment block the street is full of parking cars. Each flat comes with a "garage" which are in a line next to the building, but of course nothing since the Mini Morris could fit in those. Some people keep their throwaway shits there but I suspect for most they are in varying states of emptiness. It would make FAR more sense to demolish them and turn that area into a parking lot, the residents could easily park there and make the street less of a car-laden clusterfuck. But no, there must be pointless useless garages, because, well, because that's how it always has been.

I have noticed that...useless garages are prolific all over England.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 27, 2021, 04:14:56 PM

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 03:21:14 PM
And it's not even just the simple math above.

I'm about 3.5 years from being eligible to retire with a meagre pension before the age of 50, and assuming my family status (more to the point, lack thereof) remains the same...be in a position to never have to work again.

The "default" basic retirement plan to achieve that position is to move somewhere with a low housing cost/cost of living and have the freedom to do fuck all (travel...wine, women and song...etc.) with the rest of my days.

So I am not sure if getting a decent place to live in a super-high cost housing area only to try to unload that for a much lower-cost area within 3-4 years is wise financial move.  The only way I could afford to stay in the super-high cost area is if I lined myself up for a job there (not impossible)...but who wants a job if they don't need one?  :P

If you are thinking about retiring in that short a period of time then buying expensive property now makes sense IF you assume that the transaction costs associated with purchasing and then selling it 3.5 years from now will be equal or greater than the increase in the value of the property when you sell it at that time.

It could increase enough to make that a good financial move - but it is a bet you are making.  And the horrible hypothetical is that around that time the market tanks and you are stuck with a big mortgage until the market recovers.

We bought our first property in the early 90s, and then about two seconds after we closed the market crashed.  So I have some first hand experience knowing what that feels like.

The upside to the area I am moving to, is that it has a constant rotation of transient students (who are also government employees with a paid housing allowance) looking for a decent/affordable place to rent.  Even I bought, and then sought to move out of the area, but was laden with an underwater property...finding rental income from it would probably not be difficult.

Shoot, knowing the rental market there, just having a rental that allows pets would guarantee that is never vacant.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:21:03 PM

The upside to the area I am moving to, is that it has a constant rotation of transient students (who are also government employees with a paid housing allowance) looking for a decent/affordable place to rent.  Even I bought, and then sought to move out of the area, but was laden with an underwater property...finding rental income from it would probably not be difficult.

Someday, someday.....someday the housing market in this region will get better!

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:17:53 PM
I have noticed that...useless garages are prolific all over England.

I blame English men - I think it's normally a garage or a shed, sometimes both for no discernible reason. It's for the hobbies they start but never do and the tools they buy but never use :lol:

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:17:53 PM
I have noticed that...useless garages are prolific all over England.

Hmm, I think there are less than there used to be. A lot of council estate garages have been knocked down over the years I've noticed. Probably because it's a bit of a pointless expense, there's restrictive rules on what you can do in them and most cars are perfectly fine outside.

Most peoples garages are for storage and/or messy hobbies.

Although, seeing as how houses that were burned out due to a fire are still selling for 1.4 million, that day might be a ways away...just saying...

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:24:14 PM

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:17:53 PM
I have noticed that...useless garages are prolific all over England.

I blame English men - I think it's normally a garage or a shed, sometimes both for no discernible reason. It's for the hobbies they start but never do and the tools they buy but never use :lol:

At least American garages are usable, even if they too are often filled with those same hobbies/tools/random junk.  :P

The worst offenders are those who convert a perfectly good sized, usable garage into a crappy "bonus room" or asshatted bedroom that on the outside looks obviously like someone converted said garage into said room.

You cannot just slap a bay window into where the garage door used to be, with a driveway leading right up to it, and call it a day you barbarians.  :mad:

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 04:16:09 PM
You guys don't like it when I say there are some weird island-dweller idiosyncrasies in this country but this is one of the examples. :P

I love it! You should do an entire thread of this - although if you come for the British plug I will go spare :ph34r:

Can I go after the lame/useless electric razor outlets in the bathrooms?  :sleep:

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:33:46 PM
Can I go after the lame/useless electric razor outlets in the bathrooms?  :sleep:

Dangerously close to plug territory :P

It's just not safe to have wiring in the bathroom where there's lots of water :ph34r:

That's because you insane people do your own wiring. It's not pouring gas FFS.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:36:10 PM

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:33:46 PM
Can I go after the lame/useless electric razor outlets in the bathrooms?  :sleep:

Dangerously close to plug territory :P

It's just not safe to have wiring in the bathroom where there's lots of water :ph34r:

Hundreds of millions of Americans will disagree.  :P

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 04:45:19 PM
That's because you insane people do your own wiring. It's not pouring gas FFS.

:lol:

My dad did the wiring in all the houses I grew up in - and the plumbing - and he is very good at both in fairness. And my brother's done all of his too. I have no skills and will pay a man - and actually had to get an electrician to fix a fuse because my fusebox is from the 80s and is not like normal/modern fuseboxes :ph34r:

Having said that I know someone who's an electrician and when he first qualified we went to a mutual friends house and the dad mentioned the small electric shocks everyone got turning the lights on and off. He thought it would be a quick freeby fix so asked him to have a look. Turned out the entire house was a death trap and needed to be completely re-wired :lol:

Edit: Also my dad's number one reason for doing the wiring in all houses: electricians don't provide enough plug sockets. And having lived in normal houses since I entirely agree - it really annoys me.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:30:08 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 04:16:09 PM
You guys don't like it when I say there are some weird island-dweller idiosyncrasies in this country but this is one of the examples. :P

I love it! You should do an entire thread of this - although if you come for the British plug I will go spare :ph34r:

Are carpeted bathrooms off limits as well? What about the separate taps for cold and hot water?  :P

Quote from: The Larch on April 27, 2021, 05:09:17 PM
Are carpeted bathrooms off limits as well? What about the separate taps for cold and hot water?  :P

Oh no they're fair game - though, agian, I don't think I've ever seen a carpeted bathroom. I think it's a very 70s/old person house thing :hmm:

And I am 100% with you on taps.

My parents bathroom had a carpet for many years when I was a kid. I miss it. Though I didn't have to deal with cleaning it and drying it up when I got it wet.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:51:49 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 27, 2021, 04:45:19 PM
That's because you insane people do your own wiring. It's not pouring gas FFS.

:lol:

My dad did the wiring in all the houses I grew up in - and the plumbing - and he is very good at both in fairness. And my brother's done all of his too. I have no skills and will pay a man - and actually had to get an electrician to fix a fuse because my fusebox is from the 80s and is not like normal/modern fuseboxes :ph34r:

Having said that I know someone who's an electrician and when he first qualified we went to a mutual friends house and the dad mentioned the small electric shocks everyone got turning the lights on and off. He thought it would be a quick freeby fix so asked him to have a look. Turned out the entire house was a death trap and needed to be completely re-wired :lol:

Edit: Also my dad's number one reason for doing the wiring in all houses: electricians don't provide enough plug sockets. And having lived in normal houses since I entirely agree - it really annoys me.

:lol: That's way worse than what I was alluding to.

So true, never enough outlets.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:36:10 PM

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 27, 2021, 04:33:46 PM
Can I go after the lame/useless electric razor outlets in the bathrooms?  :sleep:

Dangerously close to plug territory :P

It's just not safe to have wiring in the bathroom where there's lots of water :ph34r:

It is though when done properly. :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:30:08 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 04:16:09 PM
You guys don't like it when I say there are some weird island-dweller idiosyncrasies in this country but this is one of the examples. :P

I love it! You should do an entire thread of this - although if you come for the British plug I will go spare :ph34r:

I consider British plugs to be superior.  :bowler: Also like that the outlets have an off switch.

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 04:24:29 PM
most cars are perfectly fine outside.

Are they, though? I mean, I would never, like, rent a garage or anything of the sort, but having a car outside in a very green area like ours here is bad. It's a constant struggle to prevent nature claiming for its own use. Storing a car in a garage is far more convenient. Not to mention not having to do any kind of basic maintenance on the bloody street.

Anyhow, let's move all of this to off topic and leave this thread to its intended purpose of expressing my angst over eventually having to put myself into ruinous debts to buy a shithole I'd be reluctant to even rent. 

I still think you should explore the country more rather than confining yourself to the home counties and London. You may find you can earn just as much money in Manchester or Newcastle and the housing suddenly becomes a lot more sensible. Though it may be difficult for your wife given her speciality?

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 28, 2021, 02:59:01 AM
I still think you should explore the country more rather than confining yourself to the home counties and London. You may find you can earn just as much money in Manchester or Newcastle and the housing suddenly becomes a lot more sensible. Though it may be difficult for your wife given her speciality?

The latter is part of it although more along the lines of she being very happy with where she is at the moment.

Exploring more is of course a good point, because, frankly, we have zero interest living in the worse-weather and worse-economy parts of the country, and this probably stems from ignorance. There's also a comparison with Eastern Europe to do when considering moving to a less prosperous area - we'd give up a lot by moving back (in the current situation, a functioning healthcare system comes to mind especially in case of Hungary), but there also would be advantages. So while the scale would still probably tip towards the UK when moving away from London and the SE, it would be less of an obvious choice.

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 02:49:51 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 27, 2021, 04:24:29 PM
most cars are perfectly fine outside.

Are they, though? I mean, I would never, like, rent a garage or anything of the sort, but having a car outside in a very green area like ours here is bad. It's a constant struggle to prevent nature claiming for its own use. Storing a car in a garage is far more convenient. Not to mention not having to do any kind of basic maintenance on the bloody street.

Even if it's just for cleanliness' sake it's better to keep a car in a garage rather than on the street. At least over here when buying a 2nd hand car the fact that it has been kept in a garage is normally considered to be a factor that increases its value (or rather than keeping it parked on the street makes its value go down much faster).

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 02:46:12 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 27, 2021, 04:30:08 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 27, 2021, 04:16:09 PM
You guys don't like it when I say there are some weird island-dweller idiosyncrasies in this country but this is one of the examples. :P

I love it! You should do an entire thread of this - although if you come for the British plug I will go spare :ph34r:

I consider British plugs to be superior.  :bowler: Also like that the outlets have an off switch.

British plugs are terribly large. Also what is up with British apple plugs that nearly need a wrench to be removed.

Quote. Storing a car in a garage is far more convenient. Not to mention not having to do any kind of basic maintenance on the bloody street.

Convenience is a big factor against garages. Having to open and close those awkward doors and the tightness of the parking vs just jumping in and you're off.
Maintenance is something yes. The few people I know who do keep cars in garages are classic car guys and one guy who does a side business buying and selling wrecks.

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on April 28, 2021, 02:59:01 AM
I still think you should explore the country more rather than confining yourself to the home counties and London. You may find you can earn just as much money in Manchester or Newcastle and the housing suddenly becomes a lot more sensible. Though it may be difficult for your wife given her speciality?

These days working in IT especially when it is possible to have a London job and salary whilst living in a much nicer place.

The missus seems the issue. Kill her Tamas. It's the only way.

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 03:15:46 AM
Even if it's just for cleanliness' sake it's better to keep a car in a garage rather than on the street. At least over here when buying a 2nd hand car the fact that it has been kept in a garage is normally considered to be a factor that increases its value (or rather than keeping it parked on the street makes its value go down much faster).

I don't mean to get into stereotypes but is part of that also that streets in Spanish towns tend to be narrower and there's possibly a higher risk of cars getting dinked etc?

I don't know anyone who uses a garage. You're far more likely to see people park in the drive or on the street - cleanliness is an issue but you just get/do a car wash every now and then. I've never thought of it as an issue or likely to impact on the value of a vehicle :mellow:

This does also get to one of my many issues of cars - the vast majority of the time, they're parked. We waste a lot of urban space with places for people to use and store vehicles for at most 2-3 hours a day <_<

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 04:03:25 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 03:15:46 AM
Even if it's just for cleanliness' sake it's better to keep a car in a garage rather than on the street. At least over here when buying a 2nd hand car the fact that it has been kept in a garage is normally considered to be a factor that increases its value (or rather than keeping it parked on the street makes its value go down much faster).

I don't mean to get into stereotypes but is part of that also that streets in Spanish towns tend to be narrower and there's possibly a higher risk of cars getting dinked etc?

I don't know anyone who uses a garage. You're far more likely to see people park in the drive or on the street - cleanliness is an issue but you just get/do a car wash every now and then. I've never thought of it as an issue or likely to impact on the value of a vehicle :mellow:

This does also get to one of my many issues of cars - the vast majority of the time, they're parked. We waste a lot of urban space with places for people to use and store vehicles for at most 2-3 hours a day <_<

OMG Sheilbh I don't know how narrow Spanish streets are but do you know how narrow English ones are?  :lol:

And on the insufferable pain of getting in and out of cars in garages (as Tyr brought up) the whole point is that these garags are too smal to have a practical use. I can tell you, the chore of opening and closing dors of garages where a car actually fits pale in comparison to the chore of keeping on-street cars in an even remotely acceptable state.

Also, Sheilbh, I understand in the middle of London a car appears of little utility. However, the whole world is not a built-up metropolis. :P

No one sane lives in the Cursed Earth.

For those complaining about narrow garages.  :P

https://twitter.com/moylato/status/1387139670962843658 (https://twitter.com/moylato/status/1387139670962843658)

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 04:37:01 AM
OMG Sheilbh I don't know how narrow Spanish streets are but do you know how narrow English ones are?  :lol:

:lol: Yeah - I could be wrong but I generally think the more north you go (and the worse the sunlight is) the streets tend to be wider to make the most of the daylight, the further south (better and more intense sunlight you get) the narrower streets are. The old built up bits in Spain I've been to are far narrower/denser than in the UK.

QuoteAnd on the insufferable pain of getting in and out of cars in garages (as Tyr brought up) the whole point is that these garags are too smal to have a practical use. I can tell you, the chore of opening and closing dors of garages where a car actually fits pale in comparison to the chore of keeping on-street cars in an even remotely acceptable state.

Yeah I just find this interesting. I've lived my entire life with my mum and dad keeping their car on the street and it's never been an issue they've thought of - we even had a separate garage at one point, but we'd just moved to a far smaller house so that was used for storage and the main car was parked in the drive outside. The garage was big enough to fit our cars too :lol:

The only person I know who did use their garage was my grandad who was a mechanic and had a vintage car like Tyr says.

QuoteAlso, Sheilbh, I understand in the middle of London a car appears of little utility. However, the whole world is not a built-up metropolis. :P

You know my views - our goal should be that cars are of no utility anywhere and are eventually banned. We need far, far fewer cars. And in any sort of town or city taking a block just to store vehicles is going to really kill density which should be the goal not sprawl - though I've no issue with park and ride models.

I was thinking of a comparison I saw on a webstie of some American city centre which had previously had large office blocks and quite good density, but now a huge number of those blocks had been turned into car parks :(

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 04:03:25 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 03:15:46 AM
Even if it's just for cleanliness' sake it's better to keep a car in a garage rather than on the street. At least over here when buying a 2nd hand car the fact that it has been kept in a garage is normally considered to be a factor that increases its value (or rather than keeping it parked on the street makes its value go down much faster).

I don't mean to get into stereotypes but is part of that also that streets in Spanish towns tend to be narrower and there's possibly a higher risk of cars getting dinked etc?

I don't know anyone who uses a garage. You're far more likely to see people park in the drive or on the street - cleanliness is an issue but you just get/do a car wash every now and then. I've never thought of it as an issue or likely to impact on the value of a vehicle :mellow:

Just as dirt can be washed, dinks can be repaired. In any case, I don't know what's the underlying cause for the decrease on a car's value, if it's something objective due to the cars being "at the mercy of the elements" or just a subjective quirk.

QuoteThis does also get to one of my many issues of cars - the vast majority of the time, they're parked. We waste a lot of urban space with places for people to use and store vehicles for at most 2-3 hours a day <_<

So many of the issues surrounding cars make no practical sense whatsoever. How it conditions urban design, the amunt of money it costs to keep one vs. the amount of time you use it, how inefficient it is energy-wise for mobility purposes, etc. They're accepted because people just don't think that much about these issues.

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 05:01:00 AM
So many of the issues surrounding cars make no practical sense whatsoever. How it conditions urban design, the amunt of money it costs to keep one vs. the amount of time you use it, how inefficient it is energy-wise for mobility purposes, etc. They're accepted because people just don't think that much about these issues.

Yeah - and we choose not to design spaces and transport around other options. We don't create an alternative and then flap our hands at how, unfortunately, there's nothing we can do and they are inevitable and essential.

Quote
You know my views - our goal should be that cars are of no utility anywhere and are eventually banned

:yes:

Destroyers of planet and society they are.

 :lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

It is still a good thing to aim for, imo.

And I say this has a suburban living North American.

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I'm from a super horribly disconnected rural town.
This is a big part of why I want to see more investment in public transport and a decline in cars.

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 08:18:13 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I'm from a super horribly disconnected rural town.
This is a big part of why I want to see more investment in public transport and a decline in cars.

I guess we ARE moving fast toward a new neo-feudalism, ensuring peasants remain locked to their villages like in the good old days IS a worthwhile goal.

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I grew up in the Highlands (in an isolated manse) and suburbia :P

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:20:00 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 08:18:13 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I'm from a super horribly disconnected rural town.
This is a big part of why I want to see more investment in public transport and a decline in cars.

I guess we ARE moving fast toward a new neo-feudalism, ensuring peasants remain locked to their villages like in the good old days IS a worthwhile goal.

You missed out the word avoiding in there.

It's really interesting if you examine the difference between those towns lucky enough to to still have rail service and those without. It's truly a key factor in whether the working class holds or falls.

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 05:08:46 AM

Quote
You know my views - our goal should be that cars are of no utility anywhere and are eventually banned

:yes:

Destroyers of planet and society they are.

Tyr, do you drive?

Quote from: mongers on April 28, 2021, 08:34:24 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 05:08:46 AM

Quote
You know my views - our goal should be that cars are of no utility anywhere and are eventually banned

:yes:

Destroyers of planet and society they are.

Tyr, do you drive?

I try not to.
The last year and a half is the first time in 15 years or so I've had a car. Which I had to buy for my girlfriends job.
For most of that time it was just her using it. With the baby I increasingly find I am, but I'll still bike or walk when I can.
A key reason I chose to buy this house rather than something bigger in a nicer area closer to my parents or work is the metro station nearby.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 08:20:51 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I grew up in the Highlands (in an isolated manse) and suburbia :P

And then you fled. ;)

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 09:05:00 AM
And then you fled. ;)

The second I could - I'm an urban homosexual by temperament :P

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 09:05:00 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 08:20:51 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 08:06:19 AM
:lol: Oh you urban-bubbled people.

I grew up in the Highlands (in an isolated manse) and suburbia :P

And then you fled. ;)

So many confuse the escape of the prisoner with the flight of the deserter. :(

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 08:47:59 AM

Quote from: mongers on April 28, 2021, 08:34:24 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 05:08:46 AM

Quote
You know my views - our goal should be that cars are of no utility anywhere and are eventually banned

:yes:

Destroyers of planet and society they are.

Tyr, do you drive?

I try not to.
The last year and a half is the first time in 15 years or so I've had a car. Which I had to buy for my girlfriends job.
For most of that time it was just her using it. With the baby I increasingly find I am, but I'll still bike or walk when I can.
A key reason I chose to buy this house rather than something bigger in a nicer area closer to my parents or work is the metro station nearby.

:cool:

Tyr, good going.

For many people in the UK a car is a necessity, but as you do, the calculated use of the alternatives, when possible is the 'way ahead'.

Thanks. It ain't easy up here. Really hope something changes soon. There are noises but... Very often in politically convenient directions whilst common sense stuff gets overlooked.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 09:06:09 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 09:05:00 AM
And then you fled. ;)

The second I could - I'm an urban homosexual by temperament :P

But it need not be so if the UK took a leaf out of the book of other urban European countries.
It's quite amazing I find the amount of Dutch, Belgians, Swiss, etc... You meet who don't move to the big cities at the first opportunity but keep living in their home town and commuting by train... ..
Because it is possible to do this there.

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 09:56:43 AM
But it need not be so if the UK took a leaf out of the book of other urban European countries.
It's quite amazing I find the amount of Dutch, Belgians, Swiss, etc... You meet who don't move to the big cities at the first opportunity but keep living in their home town and commuting by train... ..
Because it is possible to do this there.

Yes - but most Brits live within 20 miles of where they grew up. London's distorting in graduate employment but it's like a university for a little bit longer. It's a huge cycle of young people arriving for a few years before moving out - often to where they're from

But I also think gays flock to big cities regardless :P

Personally I'm pretty rootless within the UK - I grew up in Liverpool, Scotland and Oxfordshire. I'm pretty happy/comfortable feeling at home more or less anywhere - it probably helps that, like a cactus, I'm quite low-maintenance as a person. I don't particularly feel comfortable with asserting any of those identities (and I loath the home counties) - so I'm from Liverpool and I grew up in Scotland, but I probably feel as London as anything else. One day I might move out but I'm not sure where that'd be to - just somewhere near the sea.

Don't get me wrong guys the more people stop using cars the happier I will be, as it will make it more pleasant for me to do so. :P

It's just a very urban-centric view to not be aware the massive amount of hassle a car saves you. Tyr is starting to realise, though.

Sure but my entire point is we need to reduce the hassle of not using cars by increasing alternatives - and increase the hassle of using a car.

I am not baffled by the existence of cars or their purpose :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 10:19:38 AM
Sure but my entire point is we need to reduce the hassle of not using cars by increasing alternatives - and increase the hassle of using a car.

I am not baffled by the existence of cars or their purpose :P

Sure, but there will always be limits to that unless you want everyone to move into ant hives. e.g. here in England the next bus stop to us is a few minutes of walk so no hassle. But going to an outpatient care to the nearest hospital would have taken me something like 1.5 hours including a change, while with a car its a 15 minutes drive. Being carless is just a miserable experience if you are not young and alone and all that can be achieved is to reduce the misery but it will never be eliminated. Not until we reach the ant hive stage, that is.

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 10:16:27 AM
Don't get me wrong guys the more people stop using cars the happier I will be, as it will make it more pleasant for me to do so. :P

It's just a very urban-centric view to not be aware the massive amount of hassle a car saves you. Tyr is starting to realise, though.

Or you could be less of an idiot and stop assuming that we don't know what we're talking about. I've been driving since I was 18, and I do own a car, and am perfectly aware of the advantages it brings. I am also perfectly aware of the costs it entails too, and all the ills it brings. And nobody is talking about making cars dissappear, yet you keep purposedfully strawmanning our position. Read and think more and assume less.

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 10:33:09 AM
Read and think more and assume less.

I have no time for any of those things.

Read. Listen. Educate yourself. Once you've absorbed this come back and we can talk about the issue: *links to 45 min YT video of nutcase rambling*

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 04:37:01 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 04:03:25 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 03:15:46 AM
Even if it's just for cleanliness' sake it's better to keep a car in a garage rather than on the street. At least over here when buying a 2nd hand car the fact that it has been kept in a garage is normally considered to be a factor that increases its value (or rather than keeping it parked on the street makes its value go down much faster).

I don't mean to get into stereotypes but is part of that also that streets in Spanish towns tend to be narrower and there's possibly a higher risk of cars getting dinked etc?

I don't know anyone who uses a garage. You're far more likely to see people park in the drive or on the street - cleanliness is an issue but you just get/do a car wash every now and then. I've never thought of it as an issue or likely to impact on the value of a vehicle :mellow:

This does also get to one of my many issues of cars - the vast majority of the time, they're parked. We waste a lot of urban space with places for people to use and store vehicles for at most 2-3 hours a day <_<

OMG Sheilbh I don't know how narrow Spanish streets are but do you know how narrow English ones are?  :lol:

And on the insufferable pain of getting in and out of cars in garages (as Tyr brought up) the whole point is that these garags are too smal to have a practical use. I can tell you, the chore of opening and closing dors of garages where a car actually fits pale in comparison to the chore of keeping on-street cars in an even remotely acceptable state.

In civilized parts of the world we have automatic garage door openers that open or close your garage door at the click of a button.

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 09:56:43 AM
But it need not be so if the UK took a leaf out of the book of other urban European countries.
It's quite amazing I find the amount of Dutch, Belgians, Swiss, etc... You meet who don't move to the big cities at the first opportunity but keep living in their home town and commuting by train... ..
Because it is possible to do this there.

You know the size of those countries may have something to do with how you can commute from train from just about anywhere...

QuoteYou know the size of those countries may have something to do with how you can commute from train from just about anywhere...

Its funny that you hear this one a lot from North Americans about why stuff won't work there. I see it a lot from Americans on having a healthcare system. But I don't see why not. The only difference is rather than on an entire national level you'd have it on provincial or greater metropolitan area basis.

I don't expect the UK to reach a stage where I can live in Durham and commute to London every morning and be comfortable with this horrific lifestyle (some definitely do it...). But to be able to live in a town 10 miles away and have a comfortable time of living much of my social and professional life in the nearby city? Yes, this should definitely be possible.

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 10:16:27 AM
Don't get me wrong guys the more people stop using cars the happier I will be, as it will make it more pleasant for me to do so. :P

It's just a very urban-centric view to not be aware the massive amount of hassle a car saves you. Tyr is starting to realise, though.

Yes and no.
When you live in an area with crap public transport then cars are better. Yes. I've known this forever. I don't think anyone would ever dispute this.
However living in an area with decent public transport vs. living in an area with crap public transport and a car...its no contest. The areas with good transport are much better. A lifestyle without the stress of having to drive wins every time.
This goes beyond even the surface level personal effects and has an impact on a deeper level of helping society, sense of place, economy, etc... of the regions with better transport.

I have to say here you do seem to be drawing awfully close to a common fallacy you see amongst the car zealots who oppose any attempts to improve public transport or cycle lanes on the basis this reduces their ability to park right outside the pub. Nobody thinks we can just suddenly ban cars because we're all out of touch liberal metropolitan elites who don't realise people have to live in places like Ashington.
Its precisely for the benefit of people living in these unconnected forgotten towns that we think there should be more investment in public transport and the removal of the absolute need to own a car to live your life for millions of people.
If you're an older well off person and live in those towns then the car-based life works.
But if you're young or poor or disabled or in some other way hindered in getting a car then you're utterly screwed.
I'm absolutely serious when I say a huge problem in my days as a young adult was even getting to job interviews. The busses are infrequent, disconnected, and very expensive. As to having a social life if I had chose to live at home- forget it. Last bus at 7pm.
Really to me this stands out as the key factor in why the UK is such an absolute mess. Sort out the trains (and busses) and you sort out the country.


Recently youtube has been throwing this youtube channel "Not just bikes" at me. About a Canadian guy who moved to Holland and does a lot of great analysis on public transport and urban development and why the 20th century's car focussed ideals fail.
e.g.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul_xzyCDT98&t=345s

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 10:33:09 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 10:16:27 AM
Don't get me wrong guys the more people stop using cars the happier I will be, as it will make it more pleasant for me to do so. :P

It's just a very urban-centric view to not be aware the massive amount of hassle a car saves you. Tyr is starting to realise, though.

Or you could be less of an idiot and stop assuming that we don't know what we're talking about. I've been driving since I was 18, and I do own a car, and am perfectly aware of the advantages it brings. I am also perfectly aware of the costs it entails too, and all the ills it brings. And nobody is talking about making cars dissappear, yet you keep purposedfully strawmanning our position. Read and think more and assume less.

I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:11:36 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 28, 2021, 10:33:09 AM

Quote from: Tamas on April 28, 2021, 10:16:27 AM
Don't get me wrong guys the more people stop using cars the happier I will be, as it will make it more pleasant for me to do so. :P

It's just a very urban-centric view to not be aware the massive amount of hassle a car saves you. Tyr is starting to realise, though.

Or you could be less of an idiot and stop assuming that we don't know what we're talking about. I've been driving since I was 18, and I do own a car, and am perfectly aware of the advantages it brings. I am also perfectly aware of the costs it entails too, and all the ills it brings. And nobody is talking about making cars dissappear, yet you keep purposedfully strawmanning our position. Read and think more and assume less.

I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

We'd also be happy if Israel and Palestine would just learn to chill and get along.
Having something as an ideal does not mean you are ignorant of the myriad of problems that make it impractical in reality. Often it makes you all the more aware of them.

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:11:36 AM
I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

Eventually - I think that should be the policy goal - how do we get to zero personal cars.

I think it's a bit like meat consumption with the developments in cheaper and cheaper lab-grown meat. I think individuals owning their own internal combustion engine powered vehicle will be looked on by future generations with incredulity.

In the UK it is probably politically possible to limit car usage to posh people whose ancestors came over with the Conqueror. Other countries are less lucky with deeply ingrained grovelling instincts.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 11:18:07 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:11:36 AM
I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

Eventually - I think that should be the policy goal - how do we get to zero personal cars.

I think it's a bit like meat consumption with the developments in cheaper and cheaper lab-grown meat. I think individuals owning their own internal combustion engine powered vehicle will be looked on by future generations with incredulity.

Whereas that strikes me as an unreasonable ideal for our lifetimes unless we are only talking about geographically tiny countries. :P

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:20:36 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 11:18:07 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:11:36 AM
I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

Eventually - I think that should be the policy goal - how do we get to zero personal cars.

I think it's a bit like meat consumption with the developments in cheaper and cheaper lab-grown meat. I think individuals owning their own internal combustion engine powered vehicle will be looked on by future generations with incredulity.

Whereas that strikes me as an unreasonable ideal for our lifetimes unless we are only talking about geographically tiny countries. :P

But what's the difference whether you're talking about Belgium or the West Midlands or Greater Atlanta?

Americans only do their daily commutes by plane.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 11:18:07 AM

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:11:36 AM
I think Jos and Sheilbh are both on the would be happy to have personal cars gone side.

Eventually - I think that should be the policy goal - how do we get to zero personal cars.

I think it's a bit like meat consumption with the developments in cheaper and cheaper lab-grown meat. I think individuals owning their own internal combustion engine powered vehicle will be looked on by future generations with incredulity.

Look, I'm a proponent of urban transit and look forward to getting back on the LRT once this pandemic is over.  I'm all for increased electrification of vehicles.

But there is no reasonable prospect of getting to zero ICE vehicles any time soon.  Forget smaller centres - there's still a lot of people who live in straight-up rural areas.  I just drove a 780km drive (one way), then unfortunately had to turn around and drive back.  There's a whole lot of farmland out there.  Because I was travelling on the main highway I theoretically could have gotten away with an electric vehicle, but as soon as you get off the big highways and onto the secondary ones, forget about it.

And that's before I start talking about northern Canada.

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:20:36 AM
Whereas that strikes me as an unreasonable ideal for our lifetimes unless we are only talking about geographically tiny countries. :P

I think we'll see geographically tiny countries moving to that within the next couple of decades - I definitely think we'll probably see it witihin our lifetimes.

But in fairness my suspicion is that the energy transition is probably going to be as seismic between now and my hypothetical death on my 100th birthday in a Palm Springs pool. I think our daily lives will look as different over the next 50-60 years for someone from, say, pre-WW1 to the 1960s. I think we are about to enter a period of significant and accelerating change.

And in the same way as I think America was at the cutting edge of that transformation - especially the car. I think this will be Asia at the cutting edge, especially China, because frankly what we in the UK do about climate is broadly irrelevant compared to the adjustment that China needs to make to meet their own targets (which I think they will).

Quote from: Barrister on April 28, 2021, 10:56:45 AM
You know the size of those countries may have something to do with how you can commute from train from just about anywhere...

It's a bit of a cop-out, to be honest. Yes, we're not going to have convenient mass transportation covering every square inch of our low population density areas in Canada (or the US).

But North America is still doing a pretty crap job with mass transit in our high and medium density areas. The reason we don't have good mass transit in our medium sized cities, or linking the suburbs to city cores, or linking fairly close urban centres has little to do with the size of the country.

:yes:
The Nirvana Fallacy is creeping in here.
Of course some guy living up in a remote corner of the Yukon isn't going to have local bus service. He is going to need personal transport.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to provide this in more inhabited areas.

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 11:42:53 AM
:yes:
The Nirvana Fallacy is creeping in here.
Of course some guy living up in a remote corner of the Yukon isn't going to have local bus service. He is going to need personal transport.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to provide this in more inhabited areas.

But that's little like your ideal and doesn't really need to be motivated by appeals to a goal unable to be reached any time soon.

I think is a perfect example of taking something reasonable that we pretty much all agree on (having mass transit that would make it easier to get around in short distances) and then putting in a statement (cars are terrible/need to be done away with) that then drives people apart.  It doesn't help when you then claim people are focusing too much on the ideal when you are positing your ideal scenario.

In the OTT, Tamas mentioned the slums one must live in in the London area at around £450k.

Saw this in the local area market today...   :P

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/77294611#/

And it appears to have a proper garage. :hmm:

:ultra: :weep:

Though I am always suspicious of converted churches. I always feel like the proportions end up being a bit weird and you often end up having to split windows in half so you have a floor window - plus they feel far more likely to be haunted.

I wonder what the heating cost look like.

Is Freehold the good tenure set up?

The other thing I've noticed in high-end upgrades around here in the country, are giant doors (in either the kitchen or living room/lounge area), that open up straight to the outdoors, such as in this place...

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/79740390#/

(https://media.rightmove.co.uk/129k/128416/79740390/128416_30578252_IMG_02_0000.jpeg)

(https://media.rightmove.co.uk/129k/128416/79740390/128416_30578252_IMG_04_0000.jpeg)

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 28, 2021, 05:15:04 PM
Is Freehold the good tenure set up?

Yep.

On the giant doors - you're right that's a big trend here (though just an expansion of French doors? :hmm:) I'm a big fan, if only I could afford a high end flat/house. Especially because from, say May to September you'd probably eat outside and that's where you'd entertain anyway.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 28, 2021, 05:19:44 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 28, 2021, 05:15:04 PM
Is Freehold the good tenure set up?

Yep.

On the giant doors - you're right that's a big trend here (though just an expansion of French doors? :hmm:) I'm a big fan, if only I could afford a high end flat/house. Especially because from, say May to September you'd probably eat outside and that's where you'd entertain anyway.

But then wouldn't you want an open kitchen?

:lol: To the outdoors.

And I don't hate open plan - I just think as a trend it's over.

Also I clicked through and I don't like that house <_<

Man, these esoteric English cultural rules are taxing.

Are garage door openers a thing in You Kay?  I'm guessing not.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 28, 2021, 09:02:02 PM
Are garage door openers a thing in You Kay?  I'm guessing not.

Those do exist and are advertised, however I can offer no data on the takeup or numbers installed.  :bowler:

Quote from: garbon on April 28, 2021, 11:52:13 AM

Quote from: Tyr on April 28, 2021, 11:42:53 AM
:yes:
The Nirvana Fallacy is creeping in here.
Of course some guy living up in a remote corner of the Yukon isn't going to have local bus service. He is going to need personal transport.
But that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to provide this in more inhabited areas.

But that's little like your ideal and doesn't really need to be motivated by appeals to a goal unable to be reached any time soon.

I think is a perfect example of taking something reasonable that we pretty much all agree on (having mass transit that would make it easier to get around in short distances) and then putting in a statement (cars are terrible/need to be done away with) that then drives people apart.  It doesn't help when you then claim people are focusing too much on the ideal when you are positing your ideal scenario.

Well yeah, if you're a politician you wouldn't say "Death to cars!", but we're just folk who know each other idly chatting here.
Its a bit pointless to argue against something that is obviously an extreme dream-scenario by presenting the extreme reasons why the ideal wouldn't work and ignoring the actual realistic steps before this utopian future.

Quote from: Tyr on April 29, 2021, 05:44:02 AM
Well yeah, if you're a politician you wouldn't say "Death to cars!", but we're just folk who know each other idly chatting here.
Its a bit pointless to argue against something that is obviously an extreme dream-scenario by presenting the extreme reasons why the ideal wouldn't work and ignoring the actual realistic steps before this utopian future.

Yeah exactly I'm not trying to build support for my end goal incremental policy by incremental policy.

I'm saying what I'd like to see in an ideal, some ideas on how we start to guess there, plus my theory that energy transition is going to be enormous and I think we will end up going in that direction.

Edit: And for all of Toni's links - £450k in my area would get you up to a 3 bedroom flat.

There is zero chance you ever get Texans to give up their cars and trucks, except maybe in the most fashionable urban areas.

So electric is probably as good as it is going to get here.

Lately I've been laughing at this beauty if you've half a million to spare:

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/104968019#/

Quote from: Tyr on April 29, 2021, 10:58:59 AM
Lately I've been laughing at this beauty if you've half a million to spare:

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/104968019#/

I mean if you always wanted to imagine you live on a starship this is the property for you.

Quote from: Tyr on April 29, 2021, 10:58:59 AM
Lately I've been laughing at this beauty if you've half a million to spare:

https://www.rightmove.co.uk/properties/104968019#/

That looks like it comes from the "laboratory habitat for subjecting people to sensory deprivation experiments" school of interior design.  :yucky:

:lol: :ph34r:

That looks like someone told their interior designer that it's essential they can easily clean up after committing their many, many murders.

Edit: I should say I spend a disproportionate amount of time looking at insanely expensive properties so I can judge their decor decisions. There's no bigger sign of why the rich don't deserve their money than what they do with their money.

Had a quick look what you can get for ca. 500k in my district.

For 540k you can get a 111m² ground floor apartment, but you have to get permission to use it for living, as currently it's a mixed living/working designation. For 548k you can get an 89 m² fixer upper. The next ones (around 500k) are for 50-60 m². There's a 77 m² one for 289k, but it needs to be renovated, AND it comes with a lifetime tenant. :lol:

The tenant seems to be ... excentric:

(https://cache.willhaben.at/mmo/9/448/572/639_-1106322631.jpg)

(https://cache.willhaben.at/mmo/9/448/572/639_2126569724.jpg)

(https://cache.willhaben.at/mmo/9/448/572/639_1245175325.jpg)

(https://cache.willhaben.at/mmo/9/448/572/639_-1628775299.jpg)

(https://cache.willhaben.at/mmo/9/448/572/639_711390060.jpg)

(And yes, the shower is in the kitchen. Rent revenue is €3624 p.a.)

That sci-fi house is only missing a black monolith in the middle of the room.

(https://cdn.computerhoy.com/sites/navi.axelspringer.es/public/styles/1200/public/media/image/2018/07/monolito-odisea-espacio.jpg?itok=CdCeqTIj)

Quote from: Syt on April 29, 2021, 11:10:21 AMAnd yes, the shower is in the kitchen.

I was going to ask exactly that.  :lol:

Quote from: Valmy on April 29, 2021, 10:46:03 AM
There is zero chance you ever get Texans to give up their cars and trucks, except maybe in the most fashionable urban areas.

So electric is probably as good as it is going to get here.

First they came for our burgers and I said nothing.
Then they came for our F-150 and I said nothing...
;)

Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2021, 11:18:22 AM

Quote from: Syt on April 29, 2021, 11:10:21 AMAnd yes, the shower is in the kitchen.

I was going to ask exactly that.  :lol:

Syt has reassured me about London :lol:

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 29, 2021, 11:23:48 AM

Quote from: The Larch on April 29, 2021, 11:18:22 AM

Quote from: Syt on April 29, 2021, 11:10:21 AMAnd yes, the shower is in the kitchen.

I was going to ask exactly that.  :lol:

Syt has reassured me about London :lol:

You occasionally see that with old apartments, but it's very rare these days.

If I were held under $500K, this is probably the current (available) top contender in my prospective housing market:

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/2205-Golden-Oaks-Ln-Monterey-CA-93940/19311876_zpid/

(Community laundry facilities  :yucky: )

Wait...560 square feet?

Damn. Well I guess it is good it is just you.

Or a similarly sized house for double the price!

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/142-19th-St-Pacific-Grove-CA-93950/19323633_zpid/

And the "unlimited money" contender...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/170-Spindrift-Ln-Carmel-CA-93923/2071955179_zpid/

And for Sheilbh...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/566-Aguajito-Rd-Carmel-CA-93923/296242221_zpid/

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/9e53a3f1391609bcce7cab89262df989-cc_ft_1344.jpg)

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/7c4c062ff16ba32991e19d1424e19a2d-cc_ft_768.jpg)

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/ec1c8f9d9ff1671c820c4106fecf74cf-cc_ft_768.jpg)

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/169bf1a74a93f45e00157e19b49faf7c-cc_ft_768.jpg)

For 500k£, you can buy my across the street neighbor and have 100k to spare. It's a 4 room 4 bathroom house. The listing doesn't say house sq but I'd estimate at 4k sqf.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
For 500k£, you can buy my across the street neighbor and have 100k to spare. It's a 4 room 4 bathroom house. The listing doesn't say house sq but I'd estimate at 4k sqf.

You sure about that?  500k£ converts to like $850k CDN.

Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2021, 12:37:52 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
For 500k£, you can buy my across the street neighbor and have 100k to spare. It's a 4 room 4 bathroom house. The listing doesn't say house sq but I'd estimate at 4k sqf.

You sure about that?  500k£ converts to like $850k CDN.

150k!

The house is 700k$cad, Google tells me that's 408k£.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:39:45 PM

Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2021, 12:37:52 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
For 500k£, you can buy my across the street neighbor and have 100k to spare. It's a 4 room 4 bathroom house. The listing doesn't say house sq but I'd estimate at 4k sqf.

You sure about that?  500k£ converts to like $850k CDN.

150k!

The house is 700k$cad, Google tells me that's 408k£.

I wouldn't have guessed you lived in such a fancy neighbourhood!

Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2021, 12:46:01 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:39:45 PM

Quote from: Barrister on April 29, 2021, 12:37:52 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 29, 2021, 12:36:15 PM
For 500k£, you can buy my across the street neighbor and have 100k to spare. It's a 4 room 4 bathroom house. The listing doesn't say house sq but I'd estimate at 4k sqf.

You sure about that?  500k£ converts to like $850k CDN.

150k!

The house is 700k$cad, Google tells me that's 408k£.

I wouldn't have guessed you lived in such a fancy neighbourhood!

It's not that fancy but the GMA is going thru a price correction. Not sure what the official statistic is but anecdotal evidence show my neighborhood avg price having double over the last 2 years.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 29, 2021, 12:25:47 PM
Or a similarly sized house for double the price!

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/142-19th-St-Pacific-Grove-CA-93950/19323633_zpid/

Yeah but O.S. Caulfield lived there in 1905. You just cannot buy that kind of history.

Seriously though, that is a cute little house. Not 900k cute though.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 29, 2021, 12:29:53 PM
And the "unlimited money" contender...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/170-Spindrift-Ln-Carmel-CA-93923/2071955179_zpid/

12.5 million dollars for a 2,000 sq foot home? For that kind of money it better come with villages that I have feudal rights over.

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 29, 2021, 12:29:53 PM
And the "unlimited money" contender...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/170-Spindrift-Ln-Carmel-CA-93923/2071955179_zpid/

:mmm:

Though the lack of swimmable bay would be an issue for that type of money.

QuoteAnd for Sheilbh...  :P

:P :hmm: I'm not actually a fan....

How is it compared to the UK?

I've swam here in Scotland, Cornwall etc - North Sea, Atlantic - so I think it'd probably be okay (though maybe need a wetsuit) but I have no idea what it's like in comparison because I know the Gulf Stream is weird.

Edit: Near where I lived in Scotland is amazing for surfing so they often have legs of international tournaments there and it was always kind of funny seeing poor Hawaiians or Aussies adjusting :lol:
(https://coresites-cdn-adm.imgix.net/surfeurope_new/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/thurso-east-3.jpg?fit=crop)

I'm not really sure, TBH...something we had always been told when I was stationed there...after doing some googling, I found myself mistaken (why I removed my post...not fast enough!  :D )...but it does seem to be mostly competitive/wet-suited types.

I guess I had casual swimming in mind.

Makes sense - I'd be casual but in a wetsuit. Nothing as fun, though initially bracing as jumping off a harbour wall and swimming in :wub:

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 29, 2021, 12:32:57 PM
And for Sheilbh...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/566-Aguajito-Rd-Carmel-CA-93923/296242221_zpid/

I really dig the weird partially carpeted floor.

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/c456ddcdb71e6c5a61ec6a61fbd8d28b-uncropped_scaled_within_1344_1008.webp)

That is really cool and creative.

Quote from: Valmy on April 29, 2021, 12:20:55 PM
Wait...560 square feet?

Damn. Well I guess it is good it is just you.

Prices on the Central Coast are even higher now - all the "San Francisco Flight" actually resulted in most just moving out of the City and to places like Santa Cruz, Monterey, etc.

Quote from: Valmy on April 29, 2021, 01:39:49 PM

Quote from: Tonitrus on April 29, 2021, 12:32:57 PM
And for Sheilbh...  :P

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/566-Aguajito-Rd-Carmel-CA-93923/296242221_zpid/

I really dig the weird partially carpeted floor.

(https://photos.zillowstatic.com/fp/c456ddcdb71e6c5a61ec6a61fbd8d28b-uncropped_scaled_within_1344_1008.webp)

That is really cool and creative.

The cats need places to vomit.

Monterey Bay is around 55-60f year round - a bit cold.  That's why the Great White sharks love it, lots of cold water wildlife here!

Quote from: PDH on April 29, 2021, 01:57:53 PM
Monterey Bay is around 55-60f year round - a bit cold.  That's why the Great White sharks love it, lots of cold water wildlife here!

Sharks tho :o :ph34r:

If there's sharks that house is probably a bit too close to the water for me.

The Central Coast is a marine mammal protection area, that means less fishing and more protections for the otters, seals, and sea lions.  That also means that the sharks who find such mammals tasty also roam here.  Every year we get breathless news reports showing sharks swimming in the Bay - though they don't actually do too much.  (people walking on the seaside rocks and getting swept out by big waves is a far greater problem).

The surfers don't seem to mind the sharks too much.

I remember lovely (and very throaty) morning sea lion chorus that could heard all the way up hill on the Presidio.  :wub:

I live near enough to the wharf that I get to hear them most of the year around - it was confusing the first few nights, now they are just "The Boys"

Quote from: Malthus on April 06, 2021, 11:30:25 AM
Here in Toronto, the story for as long as I can remember it is that (a) we are in a property bubble; and (b) it is just about to pop - or maybe it already has!

I have read many, many articles along these lines, and many of them advance serious and apparently irrefutable economic arguments as to why this is so. Somehow, it has escaped the notice of these learned authors that exactly the same theories and predictions have been advanced for at least twenty years, yet the promised bubble bursting has not, in fact, happened.

It seems to me like no one has a freaking clue as to why property prices have not "burst", or can make a prediction that is worth anything. I assume that property prices will, in fact, at some point go down, because all markets are cyclical, but I am convinced no-one has any real idea of when or why they haven't already.

The analogy I use for such economic analysts is that they are like doctors who, no matter what the patient's condition, always tell the patient "you are going to die". I mean, it is always true, but it is somewhat important to know when ...

The Globe and Mail has a piece on Canada's housing market which explains some of the causes for the rising prices:

The trouble with 'bubble': Why Canada's red-hot housing market is defying the burst (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-the-trouble-with-bubble-why-canadas-red-hot-housing-market-is-defying/)

If all of Canada has had a growth of 168% since 2000; what are Toronto and Vancouver?  (And if Britain is 104%, what is London?)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/apr/30/uk-house-prices-increase-at-fastest-rate-since-2004

QuoteHigh demand and low supply could create conditions for housing super-boom, says Nationwide

Pastel-coloured houses in Sedgefield, County Durham
The average UK house price was up by 7.1% in April compared with the same month in 2020, to a record of £238,831. Photograph: Peter Atkinson/Alamy
Mark Sweney
@marksweney
Fri 30 Apr 2021 09.16 BST

92
House prices in April rose at the fastest rate since 2004 as the UK faces a potential sales "super-boom", with buyers rushing to take advantage of the extension of the government's stamp duty holiday.

The average UK house price rose 2.1% in April compared with March, the biggest monthly rise recorded in 17 years, according to the mortgage lender Nationwide.

The frenzy of activity in the property market pushed the average UK house price up by 7.1% in April compared with the same month in 2020, to a record of £238,831. The average UK home is worth £15,916 more than a year ago.

The annual rate of growth was up on the 5.7% recorded in March, and just below the peak rate recorded during the coronavirus pandemic of 7.3% in December.

"Just as expectations of the end of the stamp duty holiday led to a slowdown in house price growth in March, so the extension of the stamp duty holiday in the budget prompted a re-acceleration in April," said Robert Gardner, the chief economist at Nationwide.

The UK's biggest building society said high demand and the limited number of homes on the market could fuel a summer boom, with double-digit percentage growth in annual house prices a possibility by June.

"The combination of high demand and low supply could create the conditions for a housing super-boom the likes of which we haven't seen since the early 2000s," said Iain McKenzie, the chief executive of the Guild of Property Professionals.


Guardian business email sign-up
The market is also being boosted by the low cost of borrowing, with the government encouraging lenders to offer first-time buyers 95% mortgages by offering a guarantee scheme running until the end of 2022.

Advertisement

Last month, the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, extended the stamp duty holiday on houses sold for less than £500,000 in England and Northern Ireland until 30 June. After that, it will be reduced to £250,000 until 30 September, before returning to its original level of £125,000.

"Housing market activity is likely to remain fairly buoyant over the next six months as a result of the stamp duty extension and additional support for the labour market included in the budget," Gardner said. "With the stock of homes on the market relatively constrained, there is scope for annual house price growth to accelerate further in the coming months."

Andrew Wishart, property economist at the consultancy Capital Economics, said an acceleration in annual house price growth into double digits over the summer was now "all but guaranteed".

He added: "With the economy set to recover quickly and interest rates very low, we don't think that the current surge in house prices will be followed by a correction."

I guess the only thing, as usual, is that people who are asked to comment are all financially interested in making people think prices will rise.

Quote from: Savonarola on April 30, 2021, 01:48:53 PM
If all of Canada has had a growth of 168% since 2000; what are Toronto and Vancouver?  (And if Britain is 104%, what is London?)

Since 2000 - only 116% :ph34r:

Quote from: Savonarola on April 30, 2021, 01:48:53 PM

Quote from: Malthus on April 06, 2021, 11:30:25 AM
Here in Toronto, the story for as long as I can remember it is that (a) we are in a property bubble; and (b) it is just about to pop - or maybe it already has!

I have read many, many articles along these lines, and many of them advance serious and apparently irrefutable economic arguments as to why this is so. Somehow, it has escaped the notice of these learned authors that exactly the same theories and predictions have been advanced for at least twenty years, yet the promised bubble bursting has not, in fact, happened.

It seems to me like no one has a freaking clue as to why property prices have not "burst", or can make a prediction that is worth anything. I assume that property prices will, in fact, at some point go down, because all markets are cyclical, but I am convinced no-one has any real idea of when or why they haven't already.

The analogy I use for such economic analysts is that they are like doctors who, no matter what the patient's condition, always tell the patient "you are going to die". I mean, it is always true, but it is somewhat important to know when ...

The Globe and Mail has a piece on Canada's housing market which explains some of the causes for the rising prices:

The trouble with 'bubble': Why Canada's red-hot housing market is defying the burst (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-the-trouble-with-bubble-why-canadas-red-hot-housing-market-is-defying/)

If all of Canada has had a growth of 168% since 2000; what are Toronto and Vancouver?  (And if Britain is 104%, what is London?)

QuoteTen years ago, The Economist magazine concluded Canadian real estate was grossly overvalued. Nine years ago, Merrill Lynch declared Canadian housing was afflicted by "overvaluation, speculation and oversupply."

10 years ago I tried to explain to Yi that he should stop reading the Economist like it was the Bible and start considering other sources.  People have been calling our market a bubble for a lot longer than just 10 years ago.  Hell I have a friend who sold his house 20 years ago looking to cash in on the imminent collapse.  He is still renting.  I think he still reads the Economist too.

To answer your question for Vancouver in 2000 the average price was 400k.  Now it is 1.8.   Here is a chart going back to 1977.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/pandemic-real-estate-vancouver-1.5898782

Also my answer is v wrong.

Property prices in London since 1990:
https://landregistry.data.gov.uk/app/ukhpi/browse?from=1990-01-01&location=http%3A%2F%2Flandregistry.data.gov.uk%2Fid%2Fregion%2Flondon&to=2020-06-01&lang=en

I think we are due for another few years of the current boom. Covid has pushed forward the rise of flexible working a decade or two overnight and people are slowly adapting and moving to where they would actually rather live and away from the places they were forced to live for work.
This might well see London prices brought down in the long term once foreign investors wake up to this.
Bad news for anywhere nice in the north. Though intetrsting potential afoot for how society will change if all of the educated skilled people from small towns aren't forced south.

Ok so when are monthly change in average property prices data coming out next in the UK? There was big news on the year-to-year March percentage of 17% but no mention this year of how prices are changing month to month.

We are now rather seriously looking to buy (or rather, more seriously than ever before) but I am quite worried about buying at the top. I saw some mention that in the US it is expected purchases will fall by 25% by the summer, I think in Hungary they have already plummeted by 30% recently, would be good to know what's going on in the UK.

In our area it still feels rather frenzied. Good deals (as in, nice houses which would had been 350-ish a year ago being advertised for 400) are being scooped up in what feels like days/a week. But, I am thinking, if what's going on and looming in the world won't put a stop to price rises, what will?

The second dilemma is: IF there are price drops coming, will they be big enough to offset the potentially higher interest rates we'd pay if we wait? I am quite convinced we ought to find a deal which offers fixed rate for the whole 20-25 years period - 10 years might be enough a cushion but if this IS the top of prices for a while, we may find ourselves in a bad situation 10 years from now, if forced to renew on decreased value and much higher interest rates.

Rambling done.

Quote from: Tamas on April 06, 2022, 05:36:08 AMOk so when are monthly change in average property prices data coming out next in the UK? There was big news on the year-to-year March percentage of 17% but no mention this year of how prices are changing month to month.

Latest general stats released at end of March go up to January:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflationandpriceindices/bulletins/housepriceindex/january2022
I think they're updated quarterly.

You might also find the Land Registry site helpful - though this also only goes up to January 2022 and back to about 2005 but is a monthly breakdown:
https://landregistry.data.gov.uk/app/ukhpi/browse?from=2006-01-01&location=http%3A%2F%2Flandregistry.data.gov.uk%2Fid%2Fregion%2Fengland&to=2022-02-01&lang=en

I think it's released monthly but is normally a snapshot of two months ago (I think the estate agents release data on a more monthly basis - but obviously there may be issues with using their data :lol:). Thing that strikes me about sales volume is that it's actually a little low compared to the normal range over the last 16 years - I assume that's because people aren't selling now? :hmm:

QuoteWe are now rather seriously looking to buy (or rather, more seriously than ever before) but I am quite worried about buying at the top. I saw some mention that in the US it is expected purchases will fall by 25% by the summer, I think in Hungary they have already plummeted by 30% recently, would be good to know what's going on in the UK.

You know my view that the market has been supported by low interest rates but the fundamental issues is fairly chronic undersupply. I don't think that's going to change over the medium/long-term but will in the short-term if interest rates rise because of inflation.

Here's a Times Money piece which has some predictions from the different groups (but, in the UK, the statistics is backwards looking - the projections are being made by estate agents and banks):

QuoteWhen will house prices fall?
By Hannah Smith    updated April 4, 2022

Buying a home

The UK property market boom might soon be over, as experts predict that rising inflation and the cost of living crisis could cause prices to fall as much as a tenth in 2023.

Currently the market is overheated. According to the latest figures, property prices have increased by an average of 14%, or £33,000, making it increasingly difficult for first time buyers to get a foot on that elusive first rung.

In this article we explain:
    Why house prices are currently so high
    What you can expect to pay for a home in the UK
    Whether house prices will fall this year
    House price predictions for next 5 years
    What will happen to property prices 2022 and beyond

This article contains affiliate links that can earn us revenue*

Why are UK house prices so high?

The price of the average UK home has nearly trebled since the turn of the century.

On the surface, it looks like the main long-term driver has been simple supply and demand: a shortage of housing stock compared to high demand for properties.

While this is a factor, the Bank of England says its record-low interest rates have really been powering the housing market.

Rates have been at rock bottom for more than a decade, and were at a record low of 0.1%. As a result, it was very cheap to borrow money to buy a home.

The Bank of England increased the base rate in December 2021 in response to soaring inflation in the UK to 0.25% and then twice again in 2022 to its current rate of 0.75%. Further rises are expect throughout 2022.

The Covid-effect

Since the onset of the Covid crisis, low interest rates have been joined by three other important factors in driving up house prices:
    The stamp duty holiday
    Higher savings rates during lockdowns
    People wanting to relocate for pandemic-related lifestyle reasons
    Desire for bigger homes with more space

But what is the trajectory from here – will house prices drop?

Growth in average house prices in the UK gathered pace in the second half of 2020 – a trend that continued through 2021 and into the first months of 2022.

It had been expected that the end of the stamp duty holiday and furlough last year would result in less demand for house purchases but that has not proved to be the case.

In March 2022, UK house prices grew at the fastest rate since 2004, at 14.3% in a year, according to Nationwide, up from 12.6 per cent in February.

The London market was again the weakest performer in the UKThe price of an average home now a fifth higher than at the start of the coronavirus pandemic – £265,312, or more than £33,000 higher than March 2021.

We have more on how to avoid paying too much for a house here.

While the first interest rate rise from the Bank of England came in December, there was a lot of speculation in the months before that it would happen and a number of lenders raised their rates in expectation.

What are the regional variations?

There are a number of reginal variation within the Nationwide figures:
    Wales remained the strongest with house prices up 15.3% year-on-year
    Yorkshire saw a 13% year-on-year rise
    London was again the weakest performer in the UK at 7.4%
    But prices in the capital are still the highest in the UK at £518,333

Is there a greater demand for rural locations?

With working from home likely to be a more permanent part of many people's lives, demand for properties outside cities and commuter belts has jumped.

Lockdowns highlighted the value of greenery and space, triggering a surge of interest in properties in rural and coastal areas, according to ONS statistics.

House prices in some hotspots – such as Conwy in North Wales, North Devon and Richmondshire in the Yorkshire Dales – have risen at three times the national rate.

House prices in Scotland, meanwhile, rose 16.9% over the year to August – against a growth rate of 9.8% in England and 12.5% in Wales – with estate agents reporting significant interest in rural and remote properties there.

Meanwhile seven London boroughs have seen price falls. And Londoners bought a record number of homes outside the capital in the first half of the year.

House price predictions

What does the future hold for the UK's housing market? There are a few factors that could put a dampener on the recent spectacular growth.

The cost of living crisis, impacted heavily by record petrol and energy prices, alongside rising inflation and tax rises could dampen economic growth and stall the housing market. Rising interest rates to curb soaring inflation will increase mortgage rates.

But, at the moment for those that can borrow, mortgages are still cheap. So it's a good time to buy even with many buyers chasing just a few properties. Find out which, if any, lenders are still offering mortgages below 1%.

This, of course, assumes that the upward trajectory will continue and buyers don't end up feeling that they overpaid.

Capital Economics expects the Bank of England base rate to peak at about 2%, pushing average mortgage rates to 3.2pc. While still historically low, that is double the 1.6pc rate recorded at the end of 2021.

In this respect, in large part due to the "race for space" in rural and coastal areas, many housing market predictions remain bullish: Hamptons house price forecast is for a rise of 3.5% a year between 2022 and 2024.

Lloyds Banking Group expect house prices to maintain their current strong levels over the next year, but growth to be much flatter through 2022, at around 1%.

Property consultancy Cluttons suggest that in some parts of London, prices could fall by as much as 10 per cent next year while Foxtons predict growth of 1 to 3 per cent in the capital.

In the short-term the property market is expected to continue its upward trend, but high inflation will push interest rates up which, coupled with squeezed household finances, will slow the housing market down by the end of the year and into 2023.

I wonder if your area is particularly exposed to Londoners wanting a bit of green?

QuoteIn our area it still feels rather frenzied. Good deals (as in, nice houses which would had been 350-ish a year ago being advertised for 400) are being scooped up in what feels like days/a week. But, I am thinking, if what's going on and looming in the world won't put a stop to price rises, what will?

For what it's worth - my experience is it's also frenzied on the rental market right now.

QuoteThe second dilemma is: IF there are price drops coming, will they be big enough to offset the potentially higher interest rates we'd pay if we wait? I am quite convinced we ought to find a deal which offers fixed rate for the whole 20-25 years period - 10 years might be enough a cushion but if this IS the top of prices for a while, we may find ourselves in a bad situation 10 years from now, if forced to renew on decreased value and much higher interest rates.

From what I've read the long-term fixed rate mortgages here are relatively new and not offered by many/all banks/building societies which may limit them and make them a little more expensive even than you'd expect for a fixed rate. Just because it's a smaller market at this point.

My understanding is most mortgage providers generally offer shorter term fixed rate mortgages for 5 years and then at the end of 5 years you'll normally be able to update th terms to a new fixed rate for another 5 years and so on. For obvious reasons :lol:

Seen this 2000 BBC article being shared and :weep:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/593477.stm

Some highlights:

QuoteProperty prices rose in December at a rate of 30% a year. Estate agents say it is not a repeat of the disastrous 1980s boom. Are they right? BBC News Online's Alex Hunt reports.

When the good times were rolling in 1989, property prices were rising at an annual rate of 34%.

The cost of the average home, led by London, more or less doubled between 1985 and 1989.

We all know now that those increases pushed prices up to an unsustainable level. After a 33% slump the average property price only reached 1989 levels again in 1997.
[...]
No-one wants to see that sort of boom followed by bust market - also seen in 1972/73 and 1978/9 - returning to the UK.
[...]
To some extent all those points are true, but there are worrying signs that things are about to change.

The UK's largest mortgage bank, Halifax, recorded property prices rising at an annual rate of more than 30% for the month of December. In the three months to the end of the year prices rose at a rate of 20%.

The average cost of a property in the UK is £83,000, up £10,000 on the year according to figures compiled from its lending by the Halifax, which will this week release details of regional breakdowns.

According to the latest, broader Land Registry figures, for July-Sept 1999, the average cost of a property in the UK was £97,600. In the London area this figure rises to £155,000.
[...]
 With average UK earnings of £23,000, this will make the average home 4.3 times more than average earnings. This is approaching the house price-to-earnings ratio of five hit briefly before the bubble burst in 1989.

The situation in London is even more extreme. The average salary is £28,000, the average property price is 5.5 times that.

These sorts of prices have already begun to freeze some out of the London property market.

Even joint buyers - say a nurse and a teacher with a combined income of £45,000 - now find it difficult to buy more than a small flat unless they find a mortgage company willing to stretch the standard lending criteria of 2.5 times joint salary.

Good God. Average house price is now about 9 times average salary in England and Wales, at about 14 times in London :weep: :bleeding:

Sickens me to think. I know people bought not too awful flats around 2000 for well under 50k. These days that'll be getting you a proper crack den or super rural shack.
Even in the late 2010s there was an area I liked where prices were within reach.... Not so now.
Hell. Just since covid the place where I'd probably buy a "forever home" in the UK if that was the plan (Chester le Street) has shot up thanks to its ECML station and Londoners moving up.

In 10 years, my house market price went up by 2.3x and they say Montreal still has a long way to go before calming down.

I bought my first property in 1993. It was a condo unit of 600 ft.² and we paid just under $100,000 for it. We sold that in 1996 for 120,000 and bought our first house for 250,000. It wasn't much of a house it was actually all dark brown summer cabin on the North Shore. About 800 ft.² but on a large chunk of land which we thought we would build on eventually. Our first child came along and that space became a bit tight and we didn't have the resources to build so we sold that for 280,000 and bought a larger house for 395,000 in 1998. That was about 1600 ft.². In 2009 we decided to take advantage of the plunge in prices to buy substantially larger place. We sold our house for 700,000 and bought our current house for 1.5 million. I won't tell you what that is worth now.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 11, 2022, 08:30:42 AMI bought my first property in 1993. It was a condo unit of 600 ft.² and we paid just under $100,000 for it. We sold that in 1996 for 120,000 and bought our first house for 250,000. It wasn't much of a house it was actually all dark brown summer cabin on the North Shore. About 800 ft.² but on a large chunk of land which we thought we would build on eventually. Our first child came along and that space became a bit tight and we didn't have the resources to build so we sold that for 280,000 and bought a larger house for 395,000 in 1998. That was about 1600 ft.². In 2009 we decided to take advantage of the plunge in prices to buy substantially larger place. We sold our house for 700,000 and bought our current house for 1.5 million. I won't tell you what that is worth now.

We rented for a decade, longer than we should have, because my wife knew the landlords (it was a duplex; they lived on the ground floor). The landlords were an elderly Ukrainian couple and we were on very good terms with them - so we were very comfortable there. What changed was when we were going to have a kid; we really needed more space.

House hunting was an unpleasant experience - this was in 2007 or so, bidding wars everywhere. We kept loosing them. Finally, we got our present place - a three bedroom mock-Tudor in the Kingsway area. We paid $660k. Not sure how much it is worth now? Quite a bit more, no doubt.

Going to mute and report all Canadians over this.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2022, 08:45:55 AMGoing to mute and report all Canadians over this.

You'd better go ahead and do the same with all Southerners too.  :P

I'm just going to do it to everyone who was in a position to get on the property ladder before, say, 2004 :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2022, 08:45:55 AMGoing to mute and report all Canadians over this.

To a Canadian living in Vancouver?  :shutup:

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2022, 08:50:44 AMI'm just going to do it to everyone who was in a position to get on the property ladder before, say, 2004 :P

At least around here, the prime time to buy was 2014, not 2004. Many of the houses in the area I used to live in were ~$60-$80,000 for a 3br/2ba-equivalent and now sit in the $250-$300,000 range.

Hell, even just buying last year was a good move in my market.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 11, 2022, 08:50:44 AMI'm just going to do it to everyone who was in a position to get on the property ladder before, say, 2004 :P

I bought my first house in 2002 for $100k with zero money down.   :cool:

That being said I bought my current house in 2011 and it really hasn't gone up in value at all.  I think it might have gone up in the last 6-12 months but the market here has been flat for years.

I wonder if this is going to have any noticable effect soon:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/apr/11/homebuyers-could-struggle-with-mortgages-as-uk-banks-tighten-affordability-tests

In the short term the buying frenzy will intensify as people try to enter the market before rates increase.

So in America, mortgage refinance demand drops 62% year-over-year as rates rise.

Can that mean that people whose fix-rate period is ending choose to remain on variable, hoping interest rates would go back down soon? Because that would be foolish.

IIRC, Americans have long fixed-rate period, 15 to 30 years. What does refinancing means in an American mortgage concept?

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 13, 2022, 09:24:41 AMIIRC, Americans have long fixed-rate period, 15 to 30 years. What does refinancing means in an American mortgage concept?

I assume it's similar to Canada - "I have a mortgage at X% interest, but the current rate is X-y% so even if I eat the penalties for getting out of my current mortgage early it is advantageous for me to get a new mortgage." We've done it a few times, even if our mortgage terms have been shorter.

It makes sense that the demand for this has gone down given increasing interest rates. Folks are just going to stick with their current mortgages because better offers aren't available. I wouldn't read too much into that decline, unless I misunderstood what "refinance" means in the American context.

Quote from: Tamas on April 13, 2022, 09:15:02 AMSo in America, mortgage refinance demand drops 62% year-over-year as rates rise.

Can that mean that people whose fix-rate period is ending choose to remain on variable, hoping interest rates would go back down soon? Because that would be foolish.

So no, I think it means people are not breaking their mortgage terms to get lower rates... probably because lower rates aren't available.

Jacob is right about refinancing.  It's like paying off credit card debt with another card that has a lower rate, but for a mortgage.

Which is different than a 2nd mortgage, which is when you've built up some equity in your home and you borrow against that.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 13, 2022, 01:50:52 PMJacob is right about refinancing.  It's like paying off credit card debt with another card that has a lower rate, but for a mortgage.

Which is different than a 2nd mortgage, which is when you've built up some equity in your home and you borrow against that.

UK, like Canada, has short term fixed mortgage. 3-5 years. You refinance your interest rate at the end of a term but not the entire mortgage.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 13, 2022, 01:55:30 PM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 13, 2022, 01:50:52 PMJacob is right about refinancing.  It's like paying off credit card debt with another card that has a lower rate, but for a mortgage.

Which is different than a 2nd mortgage, which is when you've built up some equity in your home and you borrow against that.

UK, like Canada, has short term fixed mortgage. 3-5 years. You refinance your interest rate at the end of a term but not the entire mortgage.

I remember years ago some on Languish (OvB maybe?) being astonished that in Canada we had to distinguish between the mortgage term and the amortization period.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 13, 2022, 01:55:30 PMUK, like Canada, has short term fixed mortgage. 3-5 years. You refinance your interest rate at the end of a term but not the entire mortgage.

Right.  Tamas was asking about the drop in US refinancing.

Yeah - I recognise more what the Canadians are saying but still need to learn a lot.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 13, 2022, 01:55:30 PM

Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 13, 2022, 01:50:52 PMJacob is right about refinancing.  It's like paying off credit card debt with another card that has a lower rate, but for a mortgage.

Which is different than a 2nd mortgage, which is when you've built up some equity in your home and you borrow against that.

UK, like Canada, has short term fixed mortgage. 3-5 years. You refinance your interest rate at the end of a term but not the entire mortgage.

You can also refinance mid-term in Canada. We've done it several times. You pay a penalty, but with falling interest rates the penalty is often less than the savings you get from the lower rate.

Interesting on fixed term - although you fix them ever 3-5 years rather than for the term, that is still incredibly common (from chart dump by Resolution Foundation after the latest interest rate rise by the BofE):
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FR_xHQcXIAAW5Tg?format=jpg&name=small)

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 11, 2022, 05:54:46 AMIn 10 years, my house market price went up by 2.3x and they say Montreal still has a long way to go before calming down.

there are signs it is calming down now.  But of course, the city will triple your taxes long before that. :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on May 05, 2022, 09:33:32 AMInteresting on fixed term - although you fix them ever 3-5 years rather than for the term, that is still incredibly common (from chart dump by Resolution Foundation after the latest interest rate rise by the BofE):

10 year fixes are increasingly common. I just got one which should take me through to the end of the mortgage.

Luckily I got it just before receent rises - until I started researching, I didn't know you could re-mortgage six months in advance - getting the deal sorted out at current rates to come into play later. Saved me at least £2K a year.

I want a full term fixed one when we get there. Especially if we do end up buying this year, just before the crash.

Quote from: Tamas on May 05, 2022, 10:10:52 AMI want a full term fixed one when we get there. Especially if we do end up buying this year, just before the crash.

Good luck. Last time I looked they were seriously uncompetitive (about 2.5% more than 5 year fixes), probably because there is such a tiny market for them here.

Quote from: viper37 on May 05, 2022, 09:39:53 AM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 11, 2022, 05:54:46 AMIn 10 years, my house market price went up by 2.3x and they say Montreal still has a long way to go before calming down.

there are signs it is calming down now.  But of course, the city will triple your taxes long before that. :P

 :lol:

I live in Laval, it was going to happen no matter what.

I'm on a 5 year fix. There was the balance between not having interest rates go crazy so it costs more total and being able to pay it off ASAP.

I used standard variable rate for mine back in the day; figuring that the rate would fall in hard times and rise in good (but be affordable). Stagflation did not seem likely back then.
In 2007 we bought another house for my mother-in-law to use and got a very sweet deal, the rate was the Bank of England rate + 0.9%. When the financial crisis hit the bank rate plummeted so buying that place cost us virtually nothing in interest  :cool:
That was from a Dutch bank that exited the UK market shortly afterwards  :hmm:

The place I rented in the UK is back on the market, and half the rent I pay now...

Any of our resident Brits know a nice lass that take on a retired-young Yank in a couple year's time?  :P

Quote from: Tonitrus on May 26, 2022, 06:57:42 PMThe place I rented in the UK is back on the market, and half the rent I pay now...

Any of our resident Brits know a nice lass that take on a retired-young Yank in a couple year's time?  :P

If you're looking for somewhere to flee as the US crumbles you're looking at the wrong place.

We'll see, in a couple of years time we should have sacked the current government  :yeah:

Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on May 27, 2022, 02:22:05 AMWe'll see, in a couple of years time we should have sacked the current government  :yeah:

Even with labour winning the next election I do fear the UK is set for damage limitation at best for the next decade or two.

I've mentioned before that Ireland, somehow, has an even more broken housing market than the UK - another piece on that:

QuoteMajority of Irish renters receiving state housing benefits
Patrick O'Donoghue
Thursday May 26 2022, 12.01am, The Times
Dublin
Ireland

More than half of renters are receiving state support towards their housing costs, a study has found.

The ESRI found that almost 300,000 households received state support for their rental costs in 2020, up from 135,000 in 1994. This amounted to 54 per cent of all renters and 16 per cent of the total number of households.

Barra Roantree, an economist at the ESRI and one of the authors of the report, said the increase reflected a "resurgence" in renting and a shift away from home ownership since the early 1990s.

Roantree said that it was "tricky" to compare Ireland's level of support for renters with that of other European countries.

"The way Ireland provides its support to renters is quite different from other countries," he said. "Most other countries would have a more established social housing sector. While ours is growing, we have historically differed [from Europe] in how we provide that support."

Comparable figures were difficult to source as the housing sectors of other countries differed from Ireland's, he said.

"Ireland might look like a lot more households receive support for rental costs but then, in other countries, they will have much more affordable renting. Part of that is because the private sector isn't as much of a thing there," he said.

The study also found that many low-income households faced high rent-to-income ratios, yet did not receive state support for their rental costs. However, almost one in five of renters in receipt of state support were in the top half of the income distribution.

Roantree said this trend was creating an "insider-outsider" dynamic in housing support. Renters who have experienced income-growth since they first applied for state support continued to be eligible for subsidies, he said.

"You need to have relatively low-income when you apply for social housing, but if your income then changes, you're not evicted from local authority housing, nor should you be. Whereas, about one third of those renting in the bottom half of the income distribution, don't get any support for housing costs," he said.

The report found that the share of households eligible for housing support had declined by nearly 13 per cent between 2011 and 2019. It also found that the maximum rent allowed for single adults claiming housing assistance payment (HAP) only covered 6 per cent of one-bedroom tenancies across Dublin.

"The consequence of that is either they can't afford to get somewhere under HAP or that they have to pay a big, big top-up," Roantree said. "They [HAP rates] were set in 2017 and haven't been increased since."

Variation across local authorities in the contributions they make to identical households' rental costs were also revealed by the study.

A lone parent with two children earning €25,000 per year would pay a contribution to their rent of just €226 per month in south Dublin county council, while the same household would pay €313 per month in Donegal but €450 per month in Meath, the report found.

Cian O'Callaghan, housing spokesman for the Social Democrats, said the study's findings were clear evidence of the unaffordability of rental costs. He said renters were spending increasing amounts of their income on meeting their basic housing needs and that families in the rental sector were "under huge pressure".

"The state now spends in excess of €1 billion a year on subsidies that go to private landlords and investment funds through HAP, rent supplement, RAS (Rental Accommodation Scheme) and long-term leasing payments. This is more than €1 billion of public money that is inflating and driving up rents," he said.

The public money spent on providing these payments would be better invested in creating additional supply of cost-rental homes, he said.

"This would give households that are struggling in the private rented sector a secure, affordable and long-term housing option," he added.

The Department of Housing did not respond to a request for comment on the findings of the study.

Saw an economist article the other day arguing for the Japanese approach in the UK :bleeding:

Ie basically a return to victorian style do what you want. Only without Britain Inc to keep companies from being too horrible

Fully behind that :lol: :ph34r:

The contrast of prices to income in Japan v UK, Ireland and heavily zoned US cities like San Francisco has swayed me.

I'd have environmental and building standards but as long as you meet them, do whatever you want. I might have some conservation areas within cities and towns plus things like areas of natural beauty - but otherwise a free for all.

Quote from: Sheilbh on May 27, 2022, 06:57:44 AMFully behind that :lol: :ph34r:

The contrast of prices to income in Japan v UK, Ireland and heavily zoned US cities like San Francisco has swayed me.

I'd have environmental and building standards but as long as you meet them, do whatever you want. I might have some conservation areas within cities and towns plus things like areas of natural beauty - but otherwise a free for all.

I challenge you to spend time in Japan and have the same view.
The donut effect and urban sprawl are so key to the nations problems.

The bank sells my house today.  That seems property price related.

If its my property I should be able to build whatever the heck I want as long as its safe.

Quote from: Razgovory on May 27, 2022, 07:16:36 AMThe bank sells my house today.  That seems property price related.

:( sorry Raz, this must be terrible.

Quote from: Tamas on May 27, 2022, 07:17:27 AMIf its my property I should be able to build whatever the heck I want as long as its safe.

To some extent you can.
The trouble is safe isn't a binary and it's very debatable where the line lies.

Where this doesn't apply is if you'll be wrecking someone else's home with your development. Say building a tower block and blocking somebody else's light.

Quote from: Tamas on May 27, 2022, 07:17:58 AM

Quote from: Razgovory on May 27, 2022, 07:16:36 AMThe bank sells my house today.  That seems property price related.

:( sorry Raz, this must be terrible.

I go looking for apartments today.  There's nothing in my town so I'm moving to a larger nearby town.  It may yet turn out for the better.

Quote from: Tamas on May 27, 2022, 07:17:27 AMIf its my property I should be able to build whatever the heck I want as long as its safe.

Are you becoming a free man on the land?

New in the I will believe it when I see it files-

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-house-prices-beginning-end-050001846.html

Quote from: Josquius on June 01, 2022, 07:23:18 AMNew in the I will believe it when I see it files-

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-house-prices-beginning-end-050001846.html

I admit that it's an open question whether there will be meaningful fall in property prices, but the rise of them must be coming to an end, for most of this year, at the very least. I can't see how the upward momentum could be kept unless by significant state subsidies.

Quote from: Tamas on June 01, 2022, 08:11:03 AM

Quote from: Josquius on June 01, 2022, 07:23:18 AMNew in the I will believe it when I see it files-

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-house-prices-beginning-end-050001846.html

I admit that it's an open question whether there will be meaningful fall in property prices, but the rise of them must be coming to an end, for most of this year, at the very least. I can't see how the upward momentum could be kept unless by significant state subsidies.

As I've mentioned before, IMO we're currently in the midst of a big national game of musical chairs.
Loads of people are escaping the place they had to live as it was close to work (Mostly London but also other cities) and/or using the disruption of covid as an excuse to make a big change that they might otherwise  have all made at more spread out times decades down the line (if they decided to make it at all).
The numbers involved here are however finite and have to be burned through eventually leaving behind a normalicy which is somewhat different to before; higher prices in nicer but somewhat more remote places, a bit less demand in cities, etc...

Buuuttt.....
When demand in many areas was already 4000% of affordable capacity (number pulled from my arse) then a 500% drop isn't going to mean much.
Likewise buy to let remains a thing. I've seen no signs this has dropped. I can guess at arguments why it might have gone up even.

I can see things dropping in your area. Though elsewhere....

Then on top of all this is of course brexit and Ukraine which shouldn't help prices.

Yeah we may be limited in the downside because there still must be lot of pent up demand holding out (like us). But on the other hand widespread buy to let by small investors mean rising interest rates will dissipate profit margins for a lot of people. Won't be able to raise rents too high in a recession while the mortgage the poor schmuck renter paid for you will have its interest rise.

In more crash ho news....

https://citymonitor.ai/housing/renting/london-landlords-sell-houses-property-bubble

oh no not the landlords :o

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 07, 2022, 04:30:12 PMoh no not the landlords :o

 :cry:

It's weird how in the UK it is felt necessary to explain the benefits if 10 year fixed mortgages like this when in the US (and Hungary) full fixed term is the default people consider and usually take:
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/jun/18/10-year-fixed-rate-uk-mortgages-value-loans-deals

I blame people relying on mortgage broker advice instead of thinking for themselves :p

Full fixed term is very rare here.  As is a ten year rate.  Mainly because other options have been much better.  Holding a variable rate mortgage over the last 20 or so years has been thhe wise choice.  And so it is not that surprising that this sort of analysis would be helpful.

I fixed ten years on my mortgage because at below 1% interest rate, there seemed to be very little upside opportunity.

Yeah, I got 30 year fixed at 2.0 in 2019, because why not.

So tempted to buy that rental property right now 🤔

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 07:48:27 AMSo tempted to buy that rental property right now 🤔

I thought landlord's were evil? :D

Quote from: HVC on June 18, 2022, 07:58:15 AM

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 07:48:27 AMSo tempted to buy that rental property right now 🤔

I thought landlord's were evil? :D

I never said that?

They're doing whats logical and chasing a gap in the market.
What is wrong is that this gap exists and it is profitable to get a buy to let mortgage.
I will support politicians closing off the feasibility of making money in this way but while it is possible I see no moral issue with those who chase it in general - exceptions of course for those who know they're gouging to house people in dangerous houses et al.

I, on the other hand, have said landlords are evil - and I stand by it  :ph34r:

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 07:48:27 AMSo tempted to buy that rental property right now 🤔

I think you would be buying the top.

I don't get the logic of having variable interest rate mortgages.  With fixed rate, you can always ratchet down your rate and refinance if for some idiotically absurd reasons fixed rate goes down to 1%.  With fixed, you know the monthly expenditure you're committing to, and that commitment will only stay the same in worst case.

With variable rate mortgages, you can be thrown out of your house when your payments balloon, and usually at the worst time for you to be thrown out.

Quote from: Tamas on June 18, 2022, 09:18:29 AM

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 07:48:27 AMSo tempted to buy that rental property right now 🤔

I think you would be buying the top.

In areas that have seen price rises this past decade yes.
Elsewhere....

Not going to its most likely. Too busy. But I ponder.

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 10:55:24 AMI don't get the logic of having variable interest rate mortgages.  With fixed rate, you can always ratchet down your rate and refinance if for some idiotically absurd reasons fixed rate goes down to 1%.  With fixed, you know the monthly expenditure you're committing to, and that commitment will only stay the same in worst case.

With variable rate mortgages, you can be thrown out of your house when your payments balloon, and usually at the worst time for you to be thrown out.

Very few people are on a variable mortgage though. I imagine the benefit of re-fixing every 2-10 years is that you'll have lower costs because the bank know there'll be a shift at the end of a fixed period.

My understanding is that generally the UK has some of the lowest mortgage rates in the world and I imagine not having a thirty year fixed rate is part of that (and in an earlier life I worked on litigation from around interest rate hedging and the thirty plus year fixed can very much go against you too). The other part is very strong legal rights for lenders though in practice repossessions tend to be pretty low, in part because a big chunk of the market will re-fix regularly so when there's a crash and interest rates are cut homeowners get a bit more of the variance - as I say it goes both ways.

I mean I'm applying for a not very credit-worthy mortgage at the minute and rates are about 2.5%, which is high here.

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 18, 2022, 12:37:43 PMI mean I'm applying for a not very credit-worthy mortgage at the minute and rates are about 2.5%, which is high here.

This seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

The American 6% is still below current inflation, so presumably a negative real rate as well.  Obviously there are expectations of a drop in inflation cooked into the rates.

Quote from: Zanza on June 18, 2022, 12:57:07 PM

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 12:53:22 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 18, 2022, 12:37:43 PMI mean I'm applying for a not very credit-worthy mortgage at the minute and rates are about 2.5%, which is high here.

This seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

Not when real wages are falling...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-14/uk-cost-of-living-squeeze-intensifies-as-wage-growth-slows

How does it relate to mortgage rates, though?  If the bank loses more to inflation by lending out than it gains from interest rate (even assuming zero default risk), then what's in it for bank?  You don't have to loan out money at any cost, I would think.  If people can't afford to finance mortgages at rates that make sense for you, then you just don't lend it out, you don't give away your assets because negative prices is the best customers can offer.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 18, 2022, 12:58:00 PMThe American 6% is still below current inflation, so presumably a negative real rate as well.  Obviously there are expectations of a drop in inflation cooked into the rates.

That makes a lot more sense, though.  It's not current inflation that matters, it's compounded inflation over the duration of the mortgage (probably more complicated than that, though, since you have to account for many sources of uncertainty of the mortgage duration, but that's beyond the scope).  It's probably reasonable to expect that average inflation over the next 15 years won't be 6%.  However, you don't need to compound 9% inflation for that many years for the 15-year inflation to average to more than 2.5%.

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 12:53:22 PMThis seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

It's only fixed for a few years so they expect to be able to reset the rate then which will reflect base rate and interest at that point(obviously that's a risk for me). And I assume they don't think inflation is going to last - in Europe it does seem to be in fewer areas of the economy and there's lower wage rises so the economy in general looks less inflationary than the US which may be a difference too.

Also they made their offer a couple of months ago so... :ph34r:

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 01:02:09 PM

Quote from: Zanza on June 18, 2022, 12:57:07 PM

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 12:53:22 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 18, 2022, 12:37:43 PMI mean I'm applying for a not very credit-worthy mortgage at the minute and rates are about 2.5%, which is high here.

This seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

Not when real wages are falling...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-14/uk-cost-of-living-squeeze-intensifies-as-wage-growth-slows

How does it relate to mortgage rates, though?  If the bank loses more to inflation by lending out than it gains from interest rate (even assuming zero default risk), then what's in it for bank?  You don't have to loan out money at any cost, I would think.  If people can't afford to finance mortgages at rates that make sense for you, then you just don't lend it out, you don't give away your assets because negative prices is the best customers can offer.

When I re-read your post, I realized mine is not relevant to it and deleted it.

I bought my property in the middle of the worst of the worst 2008 recession/banking collapse and I met and courted my wife in the very late 90's, before dating apps and social media. Anybody else feel like they got out of the dating market like those on the last choppers out of 'Nam, hanging by the skids? :hmm: 

Quote from: Legbiter on June 18, 2022, 01:28:05 PMI bought my property in the middle of the worst of the worst 2008 recession/banking collapse and I met and courted my wife in the very late 90's, before dating apps and social media. Anybody else feel like they got out of the dating market like those on the last choppers out of 'Nam, hanging by the skids? :hmm: 

There's the opposite too. Kids who've only ever known tinder and always had hook ups on tap without leaving their room.... I'm jealous there.

Though I do wonder about the dynamics of tinder in a small place like Iceland.

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 18, 2022, 01:18:31 PM

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 12:53:22 PMThis seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

It's only fixed for a few years so they expect to be able to reset the rate then which will reflect base rate and interest at that point(obviously that's a risk for me). And I assume they don't think inflation is going to last - in Europe it does seem to be in fewer areas of the economy and there's lower wage rises so the economy in general looks less inflationary than the US which may be a difference too.

Also they made their offer a couple of months ago so... :ph34r:

Oh, I see.  Mortgage that's fixed for a couple of years is not fixed, it's variable rate mortgage.  Fixed rate means that the interest rate is fixed for the duration of the mortgage, not for some arbitrary introductory period.

Then I think there's not really any fixed mortgages here. But it's not a floating rate.

The usual are two, five and (some) ten fixed rates, at the end of which you either fix the rates for another two, five or ten year period. Obviously you can also re-mortgage and I think when you can do that is normally linked to when the first fixed rate period ends. It's not just an introductory rate though.

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 03:10:42 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on June 18, 2022, 01:18:31 PM

Quote from: DGuller on June 18, 2022, 12:53:22 PMThis seems nuts to me, but maybe I'm missing something.  Wouldn't inflation on its own wipe out the value of the loaned money?  Or do the lenders expect the inflation rate to reset to zero tomorrow without the interest rates rising?

It's only fixed for a few years so they expect to be able to reset the rate then which will reflect base rate and interest at that point(obviously that's a risk for me). And I assume they don't think inflation is going to last - in Europe it does seem to be in fewer areas of the economy and there's lower wage rises so the economy in general looks less inflationary than the US which may be a difference too.

Also they made their offer a couple of months ago so... :ph34r:

Oh, I see.  Mortgage that's fixed for a couple of years is not fixed, it's variable rate mortgage.  Fixed rate means that the interest rate is fixed for the duration of the mortgage, not for some arbitrary introductory period.

Its not really introductory either since when the fixed term is up you can switch lenders.

Quote from: Grey Fox on June 18, 2022, 07:46:25 PMIts not really introductory either since when the fixed term is up you can switch lenders.

What's important is that you are at the mercy of the market rates after getting yourself into debt.  In US, if you take a 30-year fixed mortgage out at 4%, then that's the most you'll pay for the next 30 years.  If the market rate goes to 20%, you'll still pay at 4%.  If the market rate goes to 2%, you'll pay 2%, because you'll refinance.

It sounds like you guys are at the mercy of the market rates.  If you get into mortgage at 4%, but the market rate jumps to 20%, then eventually you'll be paying 20%.  It may be a couple of years later, it may be to a different lender, but that's still going to be much higher payment than what you initially planned for.  That's a huge difference.

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 01:48:05 PMThere's the opposite too. Kids who've only ever known tinder and always had hook ups on tap without leaving their room.... I'm jealous there.

Are you really?  It seems pretty arid in comparison to grappling down in the mosh pit.

How does refinancing work in the states? Why would your bank refinance at 2% if you signed at 4% for 30 years?

Quote from: HVC on June 18, 2022, 09:53:49 PMHow does refinancing work in the states? Why would your bank refinance at 2% if you signed at 4% for 30 years?

I think it's a different lender usually.

Quote from: HVC on June 18, 2022, 09:53:49 PMHow does refinancing work in the states? Why would your bank refinance at 2% if you signed at 4% for 30 years?

They don't have a choice in the matter.  You always have the option of repaying the mortgage early.  This is exactly what you do when you refinance, you take out another mortgage and immediately repay the first one with the loaned amount.

So basically you pay off the principle with a new loan. Are there any penalty fees?

Quote from: HVC on June 18, 2022, 10:30:00 PMSo basically you pay off the principle with a new loan. Are there any penalty fees?

I don't think so.  If your rich aunt died and left you with a bunch of cash, I think you can pay off your principal in one shot without any penalties.  There are refinance fees, though, so it doesn't make sense to refinance for 0.1% lower rate.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 18, 2022, 08:32:59 PM

Quote from: Josquius on June 18, 2022, 01:48:05 PMThere's the opposite too. Kids who've only ever known tinder and always had hook ups on tap without leaving their room.... I'm jealous there.

Are you really?  It seems pretty arid in comparison to grappling down in the mosh pit.

The grass is always greener.

But they do seem to get laid more. Though yes, possibly at the expense of fun boozy times unrelated to such things.

1955:

(https://i.redd.it/5lmgkig2j3791.jpg)

That's apparently 85k considering the "normal" inflation.

One thing I don't see discussed too often though when talking about home prices...

take a look at those pictures.  Those houses are tiny!  2 bed - 1 bath - either nobody makes houses that small, or nobody wants houses that small.

It's both. My area has a whole slew of houses that small, but they're all from the '50s and '60s and I don't think I've seen anything like them built up recently.

They're still quarter-million dollar homes.  :blink:

Quote from: Habbaku on June 22, 2022, 01:38:32 PMIt's both. My area has a whole slew of houses that small, but they're all from the '50s and '60s and I don't think I've seen anything like them built up recently.

They're still quarter-million dollar homes.  :blink:

We had whole neighourhoods like that on the North Shore up until about 5-10 years ago.  But pretty much all of that has been knocked down to create more dense multi-family dwellings.  Given the lack of buildable space here I think that is necessary.  The trick is to also build out the supporting infrastructure (schools, playgrounds, greenspace, libraries, community centres, etc etc. to accommodate the expanding population - but I am not sure we are doing a great job on that front.

In Edmonton city council has had a push to build more "infill" housing - knock down the tiny post-war stuff in order to get more density.

The problem is though, while in some cases they might knock down a detached home to make a duplex, for the most part they're just knocking down cheap, small homes on expensive land and replacing them with large, expensive homes on expensive land.  Not sure how much it's doing for density.

Prices. Must. Not. Fall.

QuoteFirst-time buyers may get a boost from this week's announcement that the Bank of England will no longer expect lenders to check if they can afford mortgage payments at higher interest rates – but experts do not expect it to lead to a mortgage free-for-all.

From 1 August, banks and building societies will no longer be required to stress-test a borrowers' finances with the mortgage market affordability test when working out how much to lend.

The test meant checking that a borrower could still afford their loan at the end of any short-term special offer period in the event of rising interest rates. Lenders worked this out using the "revert to" rate – the standard variable rate or tracker rate that borrowers would move on to, plus three percentage points.

Lending money to people who can't afford to pay? I think America tried that. Didn't end well.

Quote from: Barrister on June 22, 2022, 01:07:29 PMOne thing I don't see discussed too often though when talking about home prices...

take a look at those pictures.  Those houses are tiny!  2 bed - 1 bath - either nobody makes houses that small, or nobody wants houses that small.

The house I live in now is a 1950's-era built for military families, and it is a on-the-small-side (by today's standards) 2-bed 1-bath.  It has been renovated a bit of course, but mostly in the lipstick-on-a-pig style (the wood floors are likely original).  My brother is a contractor and noted some of the differences from more modern homes (such as higher than normal ceilings).  And it has weird things (hold your ears UKers) like the washer/dryer in the kitchen instead a separate room.

Quote from: HVC on June 25, 2022, 08:03:53 AMLending money to people who can't afford to pay? I think America tried that. Didn't end well.

It's been in the works for six months or so and is a fairly technocratic change.

In 2014 the BofE two new stress tests around mortgages for banks - this one and loan-to-income calculations. They review them every year and last year proposed getting rid of this one so it's just based on loan-to-income - after that proposal they did a consultation etc and are now doing it. They basically think loan-to-income is the better one for guarding against too much debt.

The UK government is considering allowing 50 years inheritable mortgages.

QuoteSam Freedman
@Samfr
Govt: we need to something about lower home ownership?
Everyone: build more houses?
Govt: It's really tricky - maybe 100% mortgages?
Everyone: build...houses?
Govt: ooh or maybe forever mortgages
Everyone: houses?
Govt: maybe we could cut stamp duty again?
Everyone: HOUSES!

British housing policy is going to end up turning me Maoist :bleeding:

Build more high rises.

The housing association where I used to work... They actually changed their goals in recent years from build more houses to build the right houses.
I do think that's the all important key to remember. I'm not sure the UK even does have much of a housing shortage in terms of pure numbers on a national level.
What it has is a mismatch of housing types, sizes, and locations to meet demand/necessity.
Oh. And ownership of course. A small but significant part of the mismatch there.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on July 01, 2022, 07:13:47 PMBuild more high rises.

:lol: Those are particularly difficult to get through planning in many areas.

Although interesting thread from housing policy wonk for the Centre for Cities:

QuoteThe Levelling Up Bill's planning proposals will reduce local opposition to new homes
The Levelling Up Bill is the last and best chance for this Government to leave a positive and permanent legacy in housing.
Blog post published on 1 July 2022 by Anthony Breach

One of the most important bits of the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill heading through Parliament are the changes it proposes to the planning system. These changes might sound technical, but they actually lay the basis for big improvements to the planning system and are a chance to achieve a significant supply-side reform.

If successful, they will make life easier for local authorities, make planning more certain and less confrontational for residents, and actually deliver more homes alongside the infrastructure they require. However, if these proposals don't make it through Parliament into law, then the Levelling Up Bill will fail to address not just England's housing crisis but also the political conflict generated by our gummed-up planning system.
England's planning system is unpredictable, fragmented, and slow

There are three relevant problems with the current system in England:
First, it is too uncertain and discretionary. This makes the housing crisis worse and the system unpredictable for everyone, including existing residents. Proposals to build on particular sites can be "defeated" on technicalities, only to then return several years later, damaging trust in the planning process.
Second, national government is not a proper referee of the system. As Centre for Cities has shown previously, there is not a clear divide between local and national responsibilities in the planning system, with local plans often running to hundreds of pages as they duplicate national policy while also struggling to set out clear local policy to solve local problems.
Third, many places are failing to agree local plans. York is the most famous example of this, having not agreed one since 1954, but currently only 42 per cent of Local Planning Authorities have up-to-date local plans. This damages local housing supply, but also the ability of the council to provide infrastructure and certainty in the planning process.

The Levelling Up Bill will make England's planning system more rules-based and predictable

Two sets of changes are proposed under Section 83 and 84 of the Levelling Up Bill:
First, local policy that duplicates national policy is to be removed from local plans. This is a common problem, especially when slight differences in phrasing mean that policies written with similar intent do not have precisely the same meaning.
Second, national policy is to be given much stronger weighting when making decisions on planning applications. The national guidance will now matter as much in local planning decisions as rules contained in the local plan, and applications to develop land now must comply with both local and national policy except under extreme circumstances.

The sum of these changes (sometimes described in commentary around the Bill as the National Development Management Policies) is that local plans will deal with local problems, and national policy will deal with national problems. It is the logical next step after the creation of the National Planning Policy Framework a decade ago, which consolidated 1,500 pages of national guidance into a single 60-page rulebook for developers, local authorities, and residents to use.

The changes will make the planning system simpler and stronger

In practice, the Levelling Up Bill's changes mean that local authorities will have a smaller number of rules to enforce, but greater ability to enforce them.

To give an example – local plans today often set out local policy to tackle climate change. Since climate change is a national and global problem though, these sections often have lots of duplication and contradiction of policy elsewhere. As a result, developments that may pass carbon policy in one local authority will be rejected in others; while places which reject proposals on climate grounds are likely to be subject to an appeal due to contradictions with national policy.

It's not just climate change. This type of duplication of policies is very common, and part of why local plans in England today are 500-page checklists, rather than map-based strategies that set out where development of varying types can and cannot take place.

Under the new system however, planning policy on climate change (and other national issues) will be simpler and more consistent across England, as duplication will be removed and national policy will be weighted appropriately. This does not mean it will be "one size fits all" – when appropriate national policy could set parameters on metrics (e.g. cycling infrastructure) that then leave room for local authorities to adopt the approach that suits local needs.

Planning will become much more certain for everyone involved. Developers will know that for the trickiest things, they face the same set of rules wherever they go to build. Local authorities will be able to focus on making sure developers get the local elements right, whether that's infrastructure, or social housing, or public services. It is town planning as it is meant to be – solving problems rather than creating them.

Greater certainty in planning is good for local authorities, local residents, and new homes

Combined with noises from central government that the role of housing targets is likely to diminish if the Bill is passed, the quid pro quo for councils is clear: if local authorities can agree local plans, then central government will get off local government's back.

The stronger role of local plans will increase both the responsibility of local authorities and certainty for residents. Residents will now know that if a local plan is agreed, development will happen in specific locations, be joined up with infrastructure (using the new Infrastructure Levy and the infrastructure delivery strategies that the Bill also contains), and that there is less chance of successful appeals by developers when planning permission is denied.

This will reduce conflict in the day-to-day planning process and ensure that more homes are built in appropriate locations, with greater consent by residents. Local plans will become much more effective tools of local government, while becoming shorter and easier to update, with less onerous evidence and policy requirements. Councils will likewise have strong grounds to reject speculative proposals that do not comply with local and national planning policy.

Of course, central government will have to uphold its end of the bargain, by absorbing some of the more difficult and controversial policy areas to make it easier for local authorities to agree local plans. However, local authorities that fail to agree local plans will leave themselves open to speculative development and a risky appeals process, because they will have omitted their responsibility to provide clear leadership for their local area.

Government must deliver on the Levelling Up Bill's supply-side reforms

In its planning changes, the Levelling Up Bill proposes a classic supply-side reform. Muddled Government waste and red-tape is to be cut and replaced with clear rules that increase certainty for private businesses, the public, and the state itself.

As further planning changes will likely be off the table for the rest of this Parliament, the Levelling Up Bill is the last and best chance for this Government to leave a positive and permanent legacy in housing. Sections 83 and 84 of the Levelling Up Bill must pass into law, or the Government's housing strategy will flop.

Just checked and my borough's local plan is over 600 pages long, plus supporting neighbourhood plans and obviously the wider Mayoral London plan :lol: :bleeding:

Quote from: Tamas on July 01, 2022, 05:48:24 PMThe UK government is considering allowing 50 years inheritable mortgages.

Do they know that there is a limit to this?  Even if you make it a 1000 year mortgage, you still have to make interest payments on principal every month.  :hmm:  Well, technically, you can allow the borrowers to roll interest payments into higher principal.  I'll shut up now.  :ph34r:  :unsure:

1000-year mortgage?  Isn't that called a leasehold over there?  :P

I will say on inheritance, that seems to be an area where the UK does weirdly little. You don't run into too many people living in a house they inherited.
Amongst continental folks I know I've heard of lots of stories of this happening - Swiss friends say its pretty standard in many villages, houses are never for sale there and simply inherited forever.

I guess this is because so often our elderly are forced into selling or choose to sell to down size whilst folk in other lands don't?

Aren't all mortgages inherited? I mean if the estate wants to keep the house.

Guardian article using Nationwide as a source assures everyone property prices are not going to decrease, despite the Bank of England recklessly hiking interest rates despite the slowdown in property price increase.

I especially like how the article's list of "why prices will stay afloat" they completely ignore the buy to rent sector which I imagine can be noticeably hit by the double whammy of higher interest rates and recession.

Quoteationwide says UK property price rises have slowed for the third consecutive month and most recently from 11.2% in May to 10.7% in June. The slowdown in growth can be traced to the beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and an escalation of Britain's cost of living crisis.

Unsurprisingly, property owners ask whether a crash is on the horizon, especially now that the economy is heading into a downturn and possibly a full-blown recession. Adding to the gloomy atmosphere, Bank of England officials, seemingly immune to the prospect of a slump, have begun to raise interest rates.

While it would be naive to dismiss the possibility of a large and sustained fall in home prices, the weight of evidence is to the contrary.

Advertisement
For one thing, the property market is not homogeneous. London and the south-east have suffered from the Brexit-induced flight of continental workers since the 2016 referendum vote, depressing price growth in most central districts. Meanwhile Wales and south-west England have witnessed rocketing values following the trend for retired people and white-collar workers embracing coastal towns and rural areas that boast fast broadband. This shift is likely to persist, driving hotspots to fresh highs.

Just as important, thousands of sellers are able to ride out a lack of buyers. They want to move home, but they don't need to make the leap. In other words, their impulse is discretionary and when they find the number of buyers has dried up, they don't sell.

In June last year there were 213,000 transactions. By May this year the total had dropped to almost 100,000, according to HMRC figures, yet prices continued to climb.

The market is undoubtedly going to moderate as disposable incomes are squeezed and homebuyers become even more circumspect about making large outlays. Yet with unemployment low, banks reliant on mortgage business, and politicians aware property investment remains a British obsession, prices are unlikely to take a tumble.

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 01:44:09 PMAren't all mortgages inherited? I mean if the estate wants to keep the house.

No, at least not in Canada.  The mortgage stays as a charge on the land which is what you are thinking about.  But when the mortgagor dies, the mortgage accelerates and come due payable in full.  Either the mortgager has mortgage insurance or life insurance to cover the payment or the estate has to either refinance or sell.  If selling is the only option then it could turn into a foreclosure sale.

Interesting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 01:44:09 PMAren't all mortgages inherited? I mean if the estate wants to keep the house.

No and, as ever, it's not a new idea. This has been looked at in the 2000s and the 2010s as well - I think it's based on Japan where you can get 100 year mortgages - in the British state's long odyssey to try absolutely anything to solve the housing crisis except for building more houses :lol: :weep:

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Historically homes were mortgage free at the time of death. It's really in the last 20 or so years that it has become an issue.

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 02, 2022, 05:49:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Historically homes were mortgage free at the time of death. It's really in the last 20 or so years that it has become an issue.

How is that possible? Surely historically people of all ages still died.

Well i own the family home, so don't have to worry*, but I wonder how big an issue this will become in cities with insane house prices.


*When I visit I get to say "my roof my rules" so it's worth it :P

Quote from: Valmy on July 02, 2022, 05:51:35 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 02, 2022, 05:49:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Historically homes were mortgage free at the time of death. It's really in the last 20 or so years that it has become an issue.

How is that possible? Surely historically people of all ages still died.

Yes, now think about the other side of the equation we are talking about.

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Property tax often plays into that as well.  After my father passed recently, mom is almost certainly going to need to sell/downsize from the family home due that expense (which is increasing by %50 from last year). 

But, at least the home was a great investment...she'll have a golden ticket for the remainder of her life afterwords.

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 03, 2022, 09:41:50 AM

Quote from: Valmy on July 02, 2022, 05:51:35 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 02, 2022, 05:49:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Historically homes were mortgage free at the time of death. It's really in the last 20 or so years that it has become an issue.

How is that possible? Surely historically people of all ages still died.

Yes, now think about the other side of the equation we are talking about.

What equation? I thought we were talking about people dying before their mortgages were paid off.

Quote from: Tonitrus on July 03, 2022, 01:44:12 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Property tax often plays into that as well.  After my father passed recently, mom is almost certainly going to need to sell/downsize from the family home due that expense (which is increasing by %50 from last year). 

But, at least the home was a great investment...she'll have a golden ticket for the remainder of her life afterwords.

Yeah, especially true in Texas as we have the highest property taxes in the US, or very nearly so.

I, for one, think it a governmental evil that a property tax alone can force someone from their home.  :sleep:

Quote from: Tonitrus on July 03, 2022, 04:26:48 PMI, for one, think it a governmental evil that a property tax alone can force someone from their home.  :sleep:

It does. I think income taxes are far more just than the use taxes and property taxes Texas prefers which seem to disproportionately hurt the lower and middle classes.

And the propaganda is always we have low taxes...just don't research what your taxes would be in other states too closely.

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

More often than you think. :(

Quote from: Razgovory on July 03, 2022, 11:36:58 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

More often than you think. :(

Right, sorry :console:

Quote from: Valmy on July 03, 2022, 03:26:14 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 03, 2022, 09:41:50 AM

Quote from: Valmy on July 02, 2022, 05:51:35 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on July 02, 2022, 05:49:28 PM

Quote from: HVC on July 02, 2022, 05:36:24 PMInteresting. Wonder how often people lose the family home because people can't refinance.

Historically homes were mortgage free at the time of death. It's really in the last 20 or so years that it has become an issue.

How is that possible? Surely historically people of all ages still died.

Yes, now think about the other side of the equation we are talking about.

What equation? I thought we were talking about people dying before their mortgages were paid off.

You are focusing on people dying.  I am talking about their financial affairs at the time of death.  Yes there are going to be some small percentage who die young - but we are talking about the aggregate, and historically most people had their mortgages paid off well before the day they died.  House prices, as a percentage of income, was historically much lower.

One for Tamas - and impeccably on brand by the Telegraph :lol:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXVMoq3XkAAVqGt?format=jpg&name=small)

 :lol: :bleeding:

QuoteHouse prices
UK house prices rising at 11% a year despite cost of living crisis
Average price of a home was £271,209 last month after the 12th monthly rise in a row, says Nationwide

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/aug/02/uk-house-prices-cost-of-living-crisis-price-rise

Good luck, Tamas.  :console:

It's 0.1% month on month and mortgage applications are falling. The number of new ads coming in to my inbox under my max price setting is increasing (although still mostly crap I would hate to pay that much for).

We are getting there. :)

Canadian house prices are currently declining (but not below pre-pandemic prices) but it looks like that slide will not last long.

QuoteThe latest projections from Statistics Canada show that Canada's population is poised to grow much faster over the next two decades than the federal agency forecast just three years ago, suggesting any downturn in the country's housing market is likely to be short-lived.

Indeed, the revised Statscan figures released last week underscore the need for policy makers to clear the way for more housing and infrastructure projects now to accommodate a fast-growing national population that is projected to increase by around 10 million people by 2043.

Ignore Gateshead on here and look at the England & Wales line.

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.plumplot.co.uk%2FCity-Gateshead-real-house-prices.png&hash=daa87d237244317707efcb24166ffc241c9ef19f)
I thought it curious to see that house prices are actually pretty under control...its just wages that aren't keeping up.

Though yeah, looking at stuff like this on a national scale is dumb, on the other side of the fence you have...

(https://i.plumplot.co.uk/London-real-house-prices.png)

Just randomly stumbled on this site, it has some interesting data.
https://www.plumplot.co.uk/London-house-prices.html

I never thought I would say this, but London looks inexpensive relative to Vancouver.

QuoteBanks and building societies had already begun putting up mortgage interest payments before the Bank of England announced its latest base rate hike to 2.25%, piling more pressure on homebuyers and owners.

For some, the increased charges could add thousands of pounds to their total home loan costs over the next couple of years.

Santander, NatWest and HSBC are among the lenders that have this week increased their mortgage rates for new borrowers – in some cases by as much as 0.8 percentage points.

Other banks and building societies are expected to quickly follow suit and reprice their deals upwards now that the Bank has raised interest rates by 0.5 percentage points – the seventh increase since December.

Even though Bank of England continues to be one of the most modest central banks at this stage (despite facing one of the highest inflation), seems like its starting to have an effect on the mortgage market.

My main thesis is that together with the economic downturn and thus inability for many renters to keep up with the 10% rent increase for example yours truly has accepted from their landlord, this is going to eat away at the profit of many buy-to-let mortgages, making many people sell.

Buy to let folk have already been jumping ship for a few years no?

Sadly I expect this to be a real monkeys paw outcome.

One for Tamas - really interesting and slightly alarming thread on housing costs:
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1572975530722627584?s=20&t=DpYH5racZS8lkSE9da-ONA

Key point, basically, if you adjust interest rates for affordability - size of payments to income, other debts etc - then the impact of estimated interest rates are as big as the early 90s recession even though they're substantially lower:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FdRU7Y6XkAEL5cd?format=jpg&name=small)

As so often with housing charts - and disappointingly - it feels like the key period when things started to go really wrong was the New Labour government. Not fully sure why or what mistakes were made in that period :hmm:

Worth remembering things started going wrong rather globally in that period.
I suspect the root of the problem lies in the 80s,it just took time to really take off.

Quote from: Josquius on September 22, 2022, 05:53:24 PMWorth remembering things started going wrong rather globally in that period.
I suspect the root of the problem lies in the 80s,it just took time to really take off.

:lol: Maybe - selling off a lot of housing stock and not replacing it was definitely a problem but I'm not sure why it'd take twenty years to show up. The 80s and early 90s basically seem like, as Brown would've put it, normal Tory boom and bust.

Something shifted in the late 90s, early 00s and moved everything up a level. I think there is something to the financialisation argument - but I'm not sure if there's more because it is really striking:
(https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https%3A%2F%2Fd6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net%2Fprod%2Fee64f390-88df-11eb-a380-55dd5ea0f975-standard.png?dpr=1&fit=scale-down&quality=highest&source=next&width=700)

With everything that is going on in the UK, I guess the only question left is: will the fall in property prices compensate for the rise interest rates for those like us who wait?

The fall itself, no.  The fall added to people who took out second mortgages to finance rental units and investment properties... maybe. Depends how common that is out that always. Pretty common here. Once those people are underwater supply is going to go up quite a bit. If central banks let interest rates go up that high. Right now these people are compensating by jacking up rental fees, but there's only so much the rental market can bare.

(https://i.redd.it/qorznrombwp91.png)

Illinois is clearly the place to live if you want a house.

I am surprised the west coast red zone goes so far east.

Probably that's their yearly income sucks, rather then prices being high (by other state standards)

Well, it's income in relation to housing prices. So I assume Tennessee housing prices are significantly lower than NY or California, but their median income is also a lot lower.

Yeah something seems weird about the massive lack of affordability in Idaho and western Montana.

Is it just recreational properties being purchased by people from outside driving up prices?

That must be it - because there's also a few splotches of deep red in like northern Michigan that again wouldn't otherwise make sense.

I am starting to see prices trickling down in the automatic alerts I am getting - there's more within our absolute limit the alarm is set to, and there seems to be more non-vomit inducing properties on sale in that bracket. Nothing dramatic yet, but getting there. But right now is probably the worst time to buy; mortgage rates are up significantly but it hasn't had its full effect on the prices yet.

Are things bad enough to offset the "savings" of renting vs. Paying a mortgage?

What time scale are you thinking for it being a good time to try?

Quote from: Josquius on November 05, 2022, 06:10:48 PMAre things bad enough to offset the "savings" of renting vs. Paying a mortgage?

What time scale are you thinking for it being a good time to try?

I am not saying a property market collapse is anything near a certainty (in this country in particular a lot of effort will be spent to avert it) but we are seeing the post-2008 financial system -which fuelled the current bubble- under great duress which finds the UK in a particularly vulnerable position (compared to other first-tier economies). If there is going to be a bubble collapse within a timeframe that still lets me complete mortgage payments before retirement, it is going to be the next year or so.

So I want us to wait until spring/summer next year and assess the situation. 

There's a bit of a post-covid bubble - especially in some areas of the country (not London) - but since 2008, not so much:
(https://monevator.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/real-house-prices-nationwide.jpg)

My interpretation is that there's a bit of bubble-ness, there's a bit of an impact from financialisation but that doesn't explain the 1997-2008 increase. What does is increased demand from a growing population and very constrained supply from not building enough houses. So even when I see doomsday scenarios like a 30% fall in property values, that takes us back to, what, 2018 levels?

I've said it before but I think the key shift and what we should aim to fix is the 1997-2008 one (including improving wages):
(https://www.schroders.com/en/sysglobalassets/digital/insights/2021/updated-175-years-housing/chart-1-house-pricess.jpg)

Edit: Also I think the sky-rocketing of rents in the last decade are maybe more of a bubble supported by low interest rates - but also indicate, to me, decades of under-supply coming to roost.

Edit: Also relevant and a little worrying:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fgx2G2JXEAAAhoU?format=jpg&name=small)

I see the bubble around the country as pure musical chairs with remote work moving forward a decade or two in just a few years due to covid.. Loads of people with good jobs suddenly unchained from the office (largely in London) and free to live where they want.
No data to hand but locally I do notice prices going up most in rail accessable and coastal spots.

Terrible terrible news unfolding  :ph34r:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/nov/28/uk-homeowners-forced-to-settle-for-below-asking-price-zoopla-says

Quote from: Josquius on November 29, 2022, 04:15:52 AMTerrible terrible news unfolding  :ph34r:

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2022/nov/28/uk-homeowners-forced-to-settle-for-below-asking-price-zoopla-says

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EuOAlQHWQAIIHt8?format=png&name=small)


The government will soon step in, I am sure.

Most unsurprising news of the month, the British governments extends for a year the scheme giving state guarantees to banks for handing out 5% deposit mortgages.

QuoteThe government is extending the mortgage guarantee scheme, which helps buyers with small deposits get on the property ladder as higher borrowing costs threaten to put the brakes on the UK housing market in 2023.

The scheme, launched in April 2021, was billed as a way of helping turn generation rent into "generation buy". It had been due to finish this month but the government said it would now run until the end of next year. The Treasury said the scheme had helped more than 24,000 households across the UK, with first-time buyers behind 85% of the transactions.

The initiative supports banks and building societies that offer 95% loans, meaning buyers only have to raise 5% themselves, on a house worth up to £600,000. These high loan-to-value (LTV) products are predominantly used by first-time buyers who, given the breakneck growth in house prices seen in recent years, struggle to raise a deposit.

I don't think there's anyone here on that train, but you always see certain folks keen to blame the housing crisis on immigration....popgrowth.png completions.png

I think there's a link - population growth in the last 20 years has been at the highest level since the post-war baby boom. Immigration is part of that. At the same time we have not built enough houses and are building at about half the rate we were during the baby boom.

My take from that is more that I don't think you can be pro-immigration and NIMBY (Lib Dems <_<). Similarly from a more conservative side I don't think you can be pro-family and NIMBY because of the impact housing has on people coupling up, having kids etc. Those options will lead to crisis at some point.

Although I think the radicalised Tory pensioner base of being anti-immigration, hating the under-65s and NIMBYism is (evilly) coherent.

Semi-related, via the Institut Paris Region - this really surprised me (big driver in London is primarily international migration):
(https://www.institutparisregion.fr/fileadmin/DataStorage/_processed_/f/6/csm_01_International_DSI_bis-05_f8116b2f67.png)

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 20, 2022, 11:01:09 AMMy take from that is more that I don't think you can be pro-immigration and NIMBY (Lib Dems <_<).

I mean you can be if you want to support landlords.

Then there is Labour, in favour of good public services but strangely reticent about taxation  :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 20, 2022, 11:01:09 AMI think there's a link - population growth in the last 20 years has been at the highest level since the post-war baby boom. Immigration is part of that. At the same time we have not built enough houses and are building at about half the rate we were during the baby boom.

My take from that is more that I don't think you can be pro-immigration and NIMBY (Lib Dems <_<). Similarly from a more conservative side I don't think you can be pro-family and NIMBY because of the impact housing has on people coupling up, having kids etc. Those options will lead to crisis at some point.

Taken alone looking at figures since the 90s suggests there is a link.
However correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation and by comparing to the 50s/60s when we had a similar rate of population growth you don't see the same happening.
This suggests something else other than population growth is at work- namely not building enough.

Quote from: Josquius on December 20, 2022, 12:09:43 PMTaken alone looking at figures since the 90s suggests there is a link.
However correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation and by comparing to the 50s/60s when we had a similar rate of population growth you don't see the same happening.
This suggests something else other than population growth is at work- namely not building enough.

But isn't it the interaction of both?

If you have net emigration, as we did until the 90s, and relatively low to no population growth, as in the 70s-90s, then you don't need to build much new housing each year.

I have to admit the constant claim by Brits that Britain is shit had a lot more credibility back in the 70s-90s before everybody started wanting to move there.

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 20, 2022, 12:13:37 PM

Quote from: Josquius on December 20, 2022, 12:09:43 PMTaken alone looking at figures since the 90s suggests there is a link.
However correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation and by comparing to the 50s/60s when we had a similar rate of population growth you don't see the same happening.
This suggests something else other than population growth is at work- namely not building enough.

But isn't it the interaction of both?

If you have net emigration, as we did until the 90s, and relatively low to no population growth, as in the 70s-90s, then you don't need to build much new housing each year.

Obviously population growth increases demand for houding - particularly if growth is largely adults. Nobdody needs to study graphs -it's just obvious. What the graphs do show is that the calamitous decision to forbid the reinvestment of right to buy receipts in new Council housing haunts us to this day. From 100K+ completions a year in the 60s and 70s to virtually nothing, with just a bit of mitigation from the housing associations.

There's also the very significant rise in single households over the last 30 years - you can have excess demand even if the population is stable or declining.

Quote from: Valmy on December 20, 2022, 12:22:28 PMI have to admit the constant claim by Brits that Britain is shit had a lot more credibility back in the 70s-90s before everybody started wanting to move there.

Yeah. I think that Britain is a relatively popular destination slightly confounds everyone. Both the "the country's gone to the dogs"/Daily Mail and "rainy fascist island"/Guardian strands of British opinion - which are not small :lol:

QuoteObviously population growth increases demand for houding - particularly if growth is largely adults. Nobdody needs to study graphs -it's just obvious. What the graphs do show is that the calamitous decision to forbid the reinvestment of right to buy receipts in new Council housing haunts us to this day. From 100K+ completions a year in the 60s and 70s to virtually nothing, with just a bit of mitigation from the housing associations.

I totally agree and probably need to relax the borrowing rules for councils too.

QuoteThere's also the very significant rise in single households over the last 30 years - you can have excess demand even if the population is stable or declining.

Although, how much of that is now a function of housing? There's been a big social shift in the last 30 years. But I think now you have people who want to form a family but aren't because they can't afford a flat, which understandably they want first before they have kids etc.

I'm not fully on the housing theory of everything in Britain - but I'm not far off and I think it has social consequences like families not being able to form because they can't save a deposit even on two incomes.

Quote from: Gups on December 20, 2022, 12:27:46 PM

Quote from: Sheilbh on December 20, 2022, 12:13:37 PM

Quote from: Josquius on December 20, 2022, 12:09:43 PMTaken alone looking at figures since the 90s suggests there is a link.
However correlation doesn't necessarily equal causation and by comparing to the 50s/60s when we had a similar rate of population growth you don't see the same happening.
This suggests something else other than population growth is at work- namely not building enough.

But isn't it the interaction of both?

If you have net emigration, as we did until the 90s, and relatively low to no population growth, as in the 70s-90s, then you don't need to build much new housing each year.

Obviously population growth increases demand for houding - particularly if growth is largely adults. Nobdody needs to study graphs -it's just obvious. What the graphs do show is that the calamitous decision to forbid the reinvestment of right to buy receipts in new Council housing haunts us to this day. From 100K+ completions a year in the 60s and 70s to virtually nothing, with just a bit of mitigation from the housing associations.

Everything is related to everything. Obviously population growth is a factor. But to say it is THE factor just doesn't line up.
I do find it really curious that population growth levels back in the mid 20th century were very close to the supposedly disastrous levels we see today...yet because we had a government that actually built, and despite having just had so much levelled in a war, we didn't get runaway property prices.

And yes. For the adults vs. children factor I considered whether it'd be worth shifting the numbers 20 years. But at a glance that doesn't seem to reveal much.

As to right to buy...I'd just stop at saying the whole thing was a mistake. The idea that you can replace a lost social home one for one is just fundamentally flawed. Houses are not interchangeable, location is a key factor in what makes them what they are, and you can't have more than one building in the same location.
The problems in the UK are less a shortage of housing overall (though that is creeping up) and more a complete mismatch in where people want/have to be and where the housing is.

QuoteThere's also the very significant rise in single households over the last 30 years - you can have excess demand even if the population is stable or declining.

I do think we are starting to get a handle on that in the last 10 years or so with recognition of the need for more one bed flats rising so less family homes being converted. Around me you even see many former HMOs being converted back. A quick google doesn't throw up actual numbers to check.
Again however I'd say this is an issue of broken supply rather than demand.

Windsor, Ontario:
 (https://i.redd.it/1js1jple9vaa1.png)



I believe parking fees are an extra, though.

It's a fixer upper :P

It's a wheelchair ramp with a roof on it.

Quote from: HVC on January 08, 2023, 07:58:37 PMIt's a fixer upper :P

She just needs some love :)

 :lol:

Meanwhile, property prices in the UK might be accelerating down the slope (couple of percentages down so far only, though), it is a bit noticeable in my area but not enough yet to make up for the hike in interest rates. But getting there.

Quote from: viper37 on January 08, 2023, 07:53:44 PMWindsor, Ontario:
 [i



I believe parking fees are an extra, though.

I wonder what the value of the land is?
Reminds me of a lot of Japanese properties where the property itself is a negative value on the land due to the cost of demolition.

Quote from: Tamas on January 09, 2023, 03:59:41 AM:lol:

Meanwhile, property prices in the UK might be accelerating down the slope (couple of percentages down so far only, though), it is a bit noticeable in my area but not enough yet to make up for the hike in interest rates. But getting there.

Plenty of downwards pressure to come  :cool:

The correct time to buy is when friends and colleagues think you are utterly mad for doing so, 1995/6 was the last time this happened in the UK. Then we had the excellent economic growth of 1997-2008, which legitimately buoyed prices up, followed by the financial crisis and zero per cent interest rates hence the current distortion.

Looks like Wells Fargo is getting out of the mortgage business. Tamas you might be getting your affordable prices soon.

Quote from: HVC on January 11, 2023, 02:45:31 PMLooks like Wells Fargo is getting out of the mortgage business. Tamas you might be getting your affordable prices soon.

In an ideal world, Wells Fargo would be out of business.

Saw an end of terrace that looked ideal enough to view and if decent make an offer a bit below the current (and already somewhat reduced since the start of the ad) asking.

It is marked on Rightmove as "offer received over X" or something to that effect, I asked the estate agent kid on the phone he said yeah its still available but I am thinking we are being hooked in with it.

He offered to show us two other properties while we are there we said sure why not, those two have confirmed our viewing time for tomorrow (they are clearly empty refurbishment projects), but the one we actually do want to see haven't.

The two other ones are, well, one I am tempted to just tell him we ain't bothering because a bit of research made the street and immediate neighbourhood sound very suspect despite what seems quite low reported crime rates. The other one seems more decent, but a mid terrace and not that far from that dodgy street.

Moreover, both 3 bedroom terraced ones are on offer for 385k which is actually more than our primary target which is also in a very clearly better neighbourhood. So no way we would entertain that offer.

I can already see this whole house hunting will be an exhausting process, and we don't even want to start in earnest yet. This primary target was just too nice a match to what we want to ignore.

I will probably check out those two other dumpy-er houses though, just to build some frames of reference in my head, and gauge this particular agent and agency.

Quote from: HVC on January 08, 2023, 07:58:37 PMIt's a fixer upper :P

Really you are just buying the lot with that kind of property.

Quote from: Tamas on January 17, 2023, 05:34:29 PMSaw an end of terrace that looked ideal enough to view and if decent make an offer a bit below the current (and already somewhat reduced since the start of the ad) asking.

It is marked on Rightmove as "offer received over X" or something to that effect, I asked the estate agent kid on the phone he said yeah its still available but I am thinking we are being hooked in with it.

He offered to show us two other properties while we are there we said sure why not, those two have confirmed our viewing time for tomorrow (they are clearly empty refurbishment projects), but the one we actually do want to see haven't.

The two other ones are, well, one I am tempted to just tell him we ain't bothering because a bit of research made the street and immediate neighbourhood sound very suspect despite what seems quite low reported crime rates. The other one seems more decent, but a mid terrace and not that far from that dodgy street.

Moreover, both 3 bedroom terraced ones are on offer for 385k which is actually more than our primary target which is also in a very clearly better neighbourhood. So no way we would entertain that offer.

I can already see this whole house hunting will be an exhausting process, and we don't even want to start in earnest yet. This primary target was just too nice a match to what we want to ignore.

I will probably check out those two other dumpy-er houses though, just to build some frames of reference in my head, and gauge this particular agent and agency.

Wise to see a bunch even if you're pretty sure they're not for you. I saw tonnes before I decided on one- often asking to visit them just because they ticked one or two of my theoretical list of criteria.  There was always the chance of a surprise.
Hell. The house I did buy was that- originally I was looking to spend sub 100k on an upstairs flat, most likely in a different town to where I did buy. Saw this house mainly because it was walking distance from where I was renting but it turned out to have a lot of appeal.

Yeah with renting I have definitely discovered that viewing makes a big difference. You can "feel" if a place is right for you or not far better if you are standing inside it.

I have to say though, we haven't even started house-hunting in earnest and I am already tired of estate agents.

Quote from: Tamas on January 18, 2023, 05:43:20 AMI have to say though, we haven't even started house-hunting in earnest and I am already tired of estate agents.

Then they are doing their job. :)

Quote from: Tamas on January 18, 2023, 05:43:20 AMI have to say though, we haven't even started house-hunting in earnest and I am already tired of estate agents.

Truly the worst :lol: :console:

There's a reason why, in polling on trust, they're in the bottom five between government ministers and journalists.

It was off to a great start right from the get-go. I called this agency about the above property. Some lady answered and while I was starting to say why I was calling, a big background noise started, I assume by a group of people going out to lunch since I did call just before noon. The lady, however, was quick to handle the situation, by hanging up on me without a word.

Normally this would have been the end of my business with any company doing that to me, but its not like I can go to somebody else for this particular property, so I re-dialed and this time the kid I have been dealing with answered, and to his credit he was eager to be of service.

Still when today we confirmed the viewings, to my request of receiving the phone number of the guy who'll actually meet me at 6PM deep into some estate I have never been to, he suggested if something does come up I call their generic number and they'll rearrange. I am inclined to stand them up but I need the viewing-experience and who knows they might end up having the property we want.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/28/why-uk-house-prices-could-plunge-by-20-after-the-latest-interest-rate-hike

QuoteWhy UK house prices could plunge by 20% after the latest interest rate hike
Larry Elliott
Economics editor
Property market has defied gravity for years but analysts say rising mortgage rates will mirror the 1980s price crash

dark cloud above a for sale on a house
Dark clouds are gathering over the UK property market after years and years of prices defying gravity. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian
Sat 28 Jan 2023 08.00 GMT
Britain's estate agents normally radiate optimism but they will be watching anxiously at noon next Thursday when the Bank of England is expected to announce the latest blow to a rapidly weakening property market.

Crunch time has arrived for a sector that for years has appeared to defy gravity. Threadneedle Street's monetary policy committee (MPC) is poised to raise official borrowing costs for a 10th meeting in a row, with mortgage approvals already running 30% below their pre-pandemic levels and house prices down by 4.3% from last August's peak, according to the Halifax bank.

Further falls are inevitable as borrowers adjust to an era of persistently higher interest rates. The City is braced for a half percentage point rise, to 4%, and for the rate to remain at least as high until the Bank is sure inflation is sustainably on course to hit its 2% target.

How should you fight inflation? (Spoiler alert: not with interest rate rises)
Joseph Stiglitz
Joseph Stiglitz
Read more
Analysts are agreed that 2023 will see further falls in house prices, with one predicting a peak-to-trough fall of more than 25% once inflation is taken into account.

There are structural reasons why house prices tend to go up in the UK – tough planning laws, a tax system that rewards home ownership, a sharp fall in the number of new homes being built since the 1950s and 1960s – but occasionally there are breaks in the trend.

This year is on course to be one of those break periods. A long boom driven by record-low interest rates has run its course.

The party was always going to end sooner or later as, even with rock-bottom interest rates, finding a deposit for a home and meeting mortgage payments became more and more of a struggle. Figures from the Halifax this week showed a first-time buyer was paying just over £300,000 to get a foot on the property ladder and needed a deposit of £62,000. More than 60% of mortgage completions were in joint names last year.

But two other factors have contributed to the rapid cooling in demand: the steady increase in official interest rates since late 2021 and the impact of Liz Truss's brief premiership, which involved mortgage rates rising to almost 6%.


Andrew Wishart, a property economist at Capital Economics, said average quoted mortgage rates had climbed from 1.4% at the end of 2021 to a peak of 5.7% in November last year. While the effects of Kwasi Kwarteng's budget had worn off slightly, mortgage rates were still likely to be just above 4.5% by the end of the year.

"While the current level of house prices was affordable when interest rates were 2%, that's not the case with mortgage rates at 5%, 4% or even 3%,' Wishart said. "Higher mortgage rates mean buyers will be less able and willing to borrow, reducing their budgets and putting downward pressure on house prices. To return affordability to a sustainable level by year-end would imply a drop in the price-to-earnings ratio from almost eight times income now to below six, consistent with a drop in prices of around 20%."

George Buckley, a UK economist at Nomura, said house prices would need to fall because rising interest rates had made it more expensive to service home loans. The extent of the fall would depend on how quickly this adjustment happened. According to Nomura, to return the mortgage repayments-to-income ratio to its long-term average by the end of this year would require a drop of 20% in prices. If the adjustment took place more slowly between now and the end of 2027, the decline would be just under 10%. Nomura's central forecast is for prices to fall by 15% by mid-2024.

Sign up to Business Today

Free daily newsletter
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning


Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Kallum Pickering, the chief UK economist at Berenberg, said the scale of the correction in house prices mattered because the wider UK economy was sensitive to large swings – either upwards or downwards. Judging by the latest bulletin from the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), he said, the imminent downturn was likely to be on a par with the early 1990s, when interest rates peaked at 15%, and the global financial crisis, when the UK banking system teetered on the brink of collapse.

"In contrast to the recent string of surprisingly positive data for the economy as a whole, the December RICS housing market survey makes for grim reading," Pickering said.

The headline house price balance – the gap between RICS members saying prices were going up against those saying they were going down – stood at -42.0% in December, compared with -25.7% in November, the lowest monthly balance since October 2010 and the third largest annual drop going back to 1978.

"The biggest annual drop happened in the late 1980s, before the early 1990s housing market crash and recession, while the second largest fall occurred during the global financial crisis in 2008. Although a housing market downturn was widely expected by economists (including us), the monthly drop in the December survey far exceeds our and consensus' expectation," Pickering said.

In the early 1990s, a doubling of unemployment prolonged and deepened the house price crash, as people who lost their jobs had to sell their homes in a falling market. While the low level of unemployment currently makes a repeat of the record repossessions unlikely, Wishart says there will still be a sizeable fall in prices.

"Overall, even in the absence of forced sales we think that higher mortgage rates will lead to a severe repricing in the housing market this year. The nominal peak-to-trough house price fall of 12% we expect is shy of the falls of almost 20% seen in 2007-09 and 1989-92, and only takes house prices back to their March 2021 level. But note that in real terms it amounts to a 27% drop, on a par with those episodes."

Apparently analysts reckon us house prices are near the bottom and UK prices are flat after 4 months of decline....

Is that it.

Quote from: Josquius on February 14, 2023, 06:06:11 AMApparently analysts reckon us house prices are near the bottom and UK prices are flat after 4 months of decline....

Is that it.

One bank reported something like -0.5% the other reported stagnant at their avg prices down like 30 quid.

As I understand, however, there's easily 3-4 months (often 6) before an agreed deal gets completed AND shows up in these statistics. So we haven't even seen the effect of Truss' mini budget yet.

Inflation is far from over (In the US they just reported 0.5% increase month on month after a (revised) 0.1% increase in December). The fact that UK mortgage rates have not followed the last 0.5% hike by BOE tells me the banks need to compete on a drying up market.

It's not done yet.

The Times had a piece on how all three major reports were effectively useless because missing significant data (e.g. based on mortgage approvals and thus missing cash buyers) or months out of date.

I'd add that flatlining is equates to significant decline when there is high inflation.

Fwiw I'm getting a lot of emails about fairly hefty reductions. But I'm not sure how much that is a real shift or just something that happens with estate agents going in too high.

I keep getting this idea that if I moved to the UK, and started a real estate/property management company that was ethical, honest, and treated both owners/buyers/renters all decently...I could corner the market. :hmm:

Quote from: Tonitrus on February 14, 2023, 07:39:07 PMI keep getting this idea that if I moved to the UK, and started a real estate/property management company that was ethical, honest, and treated both owners/buyers/renters all decently...I could corner the market. :hmm:

The questionable assumption being that's what owners want.

I do think there's room for an ethical company, not all landlords are cunts, but they'd be niche.

QuoteThe annual percentage change for average UK house prices was 9.8% in the 12 months to December 2022, compared with 10.6% in the 12 months to November 2022 and 12.0% in the 12 months to October 2022.

The average UK house price was £294,000 in December 2022, which is £26,000 higher than 12 months ago. Average house prices increased over the year to £315,000 (10.3%) in England, to £222,000 in Wales (10.3%), to £187,000 in Scotland (5.7%) and to £175,000 in Northern Ireland (10.2%).

On a non-seasonally adjusted basis, average UK house prices decreased by 0.4% between November and December 2022, while average UK house prices increased by 0.3% during the same period 12 months ago.

So I am not getting how going from 10.6% to 9.8% (a decrease of 0.8) translates to a change of -0.4% but I am sure they have their reasons.

I am assuming, if these are deals completing in December, the Truss Effect is still not visible in this.

Industry members declare worst is over based sales completed in December (the -0.4% in a month thing), except that Charlie Lamdin fellow who is I think is the only one on this list not financially linked to the market being propped up (he has a good Youtube channel which I may be basing my opinion too much on)

QuoteFollowing the Land Registry December HPI published this morning, Newspage asked brokers and property experts for their thoughts.
Sofia Jones, Managing Director at London-based independent mortgage broker, Penny House: "Though annual price growth is now back in single digits, and prices fell by 0.4% in December, I think we will see less of a property crash than many have been predicting. A correction is looking increasingly likely. With inflation edging down more than expected, we're now likely to be near the top of the current base rate increase cycle. Once inflation is back to target, we may even see the Bank of England cut rates to stimulate the economy, which will support house prices and reignite demand. That being said, though demand has fallen since the mini-Budget, it has by no means dropped off a cliff. The start of 2023 has been very busy for estate agents and mortgage advisers, and there's still a lot of competition for property. Given the lack of supply, prices are unlikely to fall as much as we all felt back in October when the fallout from the mini-Budget was intense."

Charlie Lamdin, property expert at Moving Home With Charlie: "Everyone is underestimating how many downward pressures there are on house prices, and how long they will remain in place. Even if there is the occasional month of 'stabilisation', we are at the beginning of a long downward trend in average house prices. Land Registry figures only include around 40% of transactions so they are not an accurate measure, and are subject to revision for up to 13 months. Prices will not bottom out until 2024 at the earliest. There is very little transparency on what is happening at the coal face of transactions, but we know that transaction numbers are around 15% down on their pre-Covid 5-year average. It's not a lack of demand that's the problem, as there is still plenty of interest and desire for property. It's a lack of available finance to pay last year's prices, which is what sellers are holding out for."

Sharon Hewitt, MD at Beaconsfield-based relocation company, Chiltern Relocation: "Prices may be nudging down but we are not witnessing the sharp slowdown many predicted. On the contrary, we have received more enquiries at the start of the year than last year and, in our daily conversations with estate agents, they are happily reporting a strong start to the year with higher viewings levels than they expected. Our enquiries are from downsizers, clients relocating for job moves and clients moving out of London due to the ongoing working from home trend. Rumours of the property market collapsing 20% are so far unfounded."


 
David Conway, director of Woodford Green-based mortgage broker, Clayhall Financial Services: "December was juddering, but the property market was buoyant in January. There's almost a 'feel good factor' emerging as buyers are surprised at being able to access fixed rates of around 4%. Mortgage rates are on a downward spiral. Lenders are actively competing for buyers' business and they are also being innovative in the buy-to-let market. With affordabilty and lending calculations expected to improve, unemployment now predicted by the Bank of England to not rise as much as expected and inflation slowly getting back under control, 2023 should be a year of recovery not carnage. The projected house price drops should be nothing but a blip."

Zaid Patel, director at London-based estate agents, Highcastle Estates: "Though this data shows that prices are slowly edging down, properties are still selling and the market hasn't collapsed. We just sold a property 4.4% below the asking price, which isn't too bad at all in the current climate. There are fewer first-time buyers in the market, though. Vendors are more open to accepting offers slightly lower, as long as it's reasonable and feasible for them. There is still activity but estate agents and mortgage brokers need to play a big part to educate sellers and buyers on the housing market's current status to manage their expectations."

Austyn Johnson, founder at Colchester-based Mortgages for Actors: "There shouldn't be a house price crash, as over the years, lenders have been adapting their processes to make sure there is a buffer to minimise struggles caused by rising rates and employment issues. People are also getting savvy and a lot of people who have been made redundant have gone self-employed to keep some money coming in. This is a correction, and bit by bit, the corrections should smooth over the wobble and create some stability. Here's hoping anyway. When the McDonald's drive-thru is empty every day, then I'll worry."


 
Rhys Schofield, managing director at Derbyshire-based mortgage advisers, Peak Mortgages and Protection: "Adam Smith popularised supply and demand in 1776, a concept that most of us understand. At the core of our broken property market is that there are not enough houses to go round and the gap gets worse each year as we don't build nearly enough new ones, which means prices can only really go one way. Those doom-mongers talking up a crash are likely to be disappointed this year in what just feels like a normal pre-Covid market. Business is brisk and rates generally aren't as bad as people had actually feared for normal residential customers."

m

Director of Benham and Reeves, Marc von Grundherr, commented:


 
"A combination of economic turbulence, increasing mortgage rates and a squeeze on household finances has been the perfect recipe for a reduction in the rate of house price growth and that's what we've seen since the closing stages of last year.

When you also couple these factors with the usual seasonal slowdown that hits the market during December, it would have been more of a surprise had house prices continued to climb.

However, what's important to note is that the rate of decline has been far more marginal than many predicted and this should stand the property market in very good stead for the year ahead."


 
CEO of Alliance Fund, Iain Crawford, commented: "The property market has gone through a transitional period, whereby buyers have had to reassess their purchasing power, while sellers have had to come to terms with this reduction and make the necessary adjustments to their asking price expectations.

This has caused house prices to fall gradually over the last few months, but there's already signs that having found a new middle ground, the market has stabilised in 2023."

Managing Director of Barrows and Forrester, James Forrester, commented: "It's been a long cold winter, with harsh economic headwinds battering the UK on all fronts, so it was only inevitable that they would breach the usually impervious walls of the UK property market at some point.


 
The good news is that while house prices have started to cool, the damage has been less severe than forecast and although we're not out of the woods just yet, we can now see the sunlight through the trees."

But the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

In a way it might be the worst of all scenarios - enough of a fall to harm people who bought in the mean time, but not enough to really help people trying to buy.

FWIW I've heard from a couple of people that there might be a glut of formerly rental properties on their way to the market - partly because tax changes over the last few years make buy-to-let far less attractive but also because of new rules on a minimum EPC rating for the rental market (moving the minimum EPC from E to C in 2025) which leaves landlords with the choice of paying to improve their properties or shift it to buyers. Almost makes me wonder if I should hang on - but I think that would be a bad and rash decision :ph34r:

So 2025 is the time to buy?  :hmm:

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 15, 2023, 07:19:48 AMBut the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

In a way it might be the worst of all scenarios - enough of a fall to harm people who bought in the mean time, but not enough to really help people trying to buy.

FWIW I've heard from a couple of people that there might be a glut of formerly rental properties on their way to the market - partly because tax changes over the last few years make buy-to-let far less attractive but also because of new rules on a minimum EPC rating for the rental market (moving the minimum EPC from E to C in 2025) which leaves landlords with the choice of paying to improve their properties or shift it to buyers. Almost makes me wonder if I should hang on - but I think that would be a bad and rash decision :ph34r:

In my experience rental properties are in general in a pretty sorry state. Like ours, we are ok with it (it not too bad compared to the crap I have seen), because its just the two of us and we don't intend to stay here for too long, but if we bought it, we would not leave a single bloody thing untouched in fixing it up to civilised standards.


Otherwise yeah, one of my big problems with the "it's all going to be fine" estate agent crowd is that we just had two years of crazy price increases fueled by some very specific circumstances, a couple of which (near-zero interest rates and the flushing of British and world economies with a buttload of liquidity) have not just been stopped but actively reversed to the other direction (ok maybe the liquidity bit not as much as it should have). Going back to levels before the pandemic mania should be the base case in my opinion, with the open question of things falling more.

But, then again, this is the UK property market.

In our neck of the woods, it does seem like more and more adverts are letting go ok the pandemic highs as their asking prices, but it is painfully slow (like decreasing 5-15 k every month from prices 400k+), meanwhile buying power must have noticeably reduced due to the rate hikes. That Charlie guy called it a Mexican standoff a couple of months ago and I think it is largely still ongoing.

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 15, 2023, 07:19:48 AMBut the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

Again, you aren't taking general inflation into account.

Quote from: Gups on February 15, 2023, 08:05:12 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 15, 2023, 07:19:48 AMBut the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

Again, you aren't taking general inflation into account.

A valid point if we are thinking in the abstract of the value of a house.

Though most peoples wages have not kept pace with inflation.

Quote from: Gups on February 15, 2023, 08:05:12 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 15, 2023, 07:19:48 AMBut the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

Again, you aren't taking general inflation into account.

Do you mean its more likely going to be an overall 20%-10% fall?

Quote from: Tamas on February 15, 2023, 08:07:11 AM

Quote from: Gups on February 15, 2023, 08:05:12 AM

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 15, 2023, 07:19:48 AMBut the thing I keep thinking is a 20% fall gets us to where we were in 2019 - when housing was still very expensive.

Again, you aren't taking general inflation into account.

Do you mean its more likely going to be an overall 20%-10% fall?

On the (pretty big) assumption that prices fall back to 2019, yes.

Just a general observation (as I am not an expert on UK housing prices) - property prices tend to be very "sticky" coming down.  People have mortgages, and in general unwilling to sell for less than their home's perceived value.

So rather than a decrease in price what can happen is just a prolonged period of declining sales and flatlining values, while inflation slowly lowers the value of the property.

Of course sometimes prices just crash, also, but that more tends to come as a result of foreclosure or people just walking away from their property because they are so far underwater.

In Germany they expect prices to fall by about 7% to the late 2021 level. After growing property prices for more than a decade. Hardly a crash, more like a speed bump...

We just had the lowest number of sales since 2009.  Prices are down to around 2020 levels but not as low as the pre-pandemic levels. Rental units are hard to get, and the population continues to grow - something's gotta give.

Also the reason I keep thinking it's not likely to be a bubble that bursts is rents which are increasing at the fastest rate in years and really crazy right now. I get that due to tax changes and regulatory changes landlords might be renting out less/selling properties which is removing them from the rental market but I think we just have a really chronic shortage of supply.

This story is grim - but I've heard similar. What's striking is this isn't just central London and Oxford and Manchester - it's basically happening in all of our cities (and I see similar stories/problems in Dublin and in some North American cities too):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64625435

We saw it start in zone 1 and 2, now it's out to zone 5; similarly initially London and Oxford, now Bristol, Leeds, Nottingham etc.

I'd guess rent hikes are the result of rate hikes (which cut into BTL profit margins unless they push them on to renters) and the same rate hikes and the tax changes prompting landlords to remove themselves from the market.

Also I have seen news and comments rents are also past their peak, for example: https://propertyindustryeye.com/rents-beginning-to-stabilise-as-supply-rises/

We are talking a lot about buying a property here but thinking on Sheilbhs post of a ex rental sell off and what I've seen locally... It does seem to be getting ever harder to find somewhere to rent.
This is becoming a big problem. Not everyone can afford to buy and renting is pretty vital for worker mobility.
Logically it's evidence we need the government building more social housing again but we all know how slowly these things go and how reluctant governments are to actually do things.

Reaganomics are a failure in every western country they've been use. On every point.

Scarcity of rental offerings is becoming a significant problem in Germany as well. Our population grew by 1.1 million persons last year to an all-time high and housing stock grew at most by 300.000 units.

And due to high interest rates and high prices for construction, new projects have totally cratered. New mortgages are down massively and big investors stopped all projects.

Quote from: Josquius on February 16, 2023, 10:50:34 AMWe are talking a lot about buying a property here but thinking on Sheilbhs post of a ex rental sell off and what I've seen locally... It does seem to be getting ever harder to find somewhere to rent.
This is becoming a big problem. Not everyone can afford to buy and renting is pretty vital for worker mobility.
Logically it's evidence we need the government building more social housing again but we all know how slowly these things go and how reluctant governments are to actually do things.

Yes worth flagging that the UK has an unusually large social rent sector compared to other similar countries - which, I believe is about 50/50 council and housing association.

The problem is because there isn't enough housing it is still expensive. It's a bit like childcare where agian the UK spends a lot more than normal. The British state and its services is like the Woody Allen joke of two old women sat in an expensive restaurant: "the food's terrible." "And such small portions." :(

Once we have the necessary recession to kill off inflation, it could be a neat stimulus to launch big building programs.

Or I guess we can just print institutional money again.

Quote from: Tamas on February 16, 2023, 02:14:59 PMOnce we have the necessary recession to kill off inflation, it could be a neat stimulus to launch big building programs.

But that relies on the British people choosing to build over a heritage supermarket carpark that may have bats over permanent recession :hmm: :ph34r: :weep:

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 16, 2023, 02:17:25 PM

Quote from: Tamas on February 16, 2023, 02:14:59 PMOnce we have the necessary recession to kill off inflation, it could be a neat stimulus to launch big building programs.

But that relies on the British people choosing to build over a heritage supermarket carpark that may have bats over permanent recession :hmm: :ph34r: :weep:

 :lol: Yeah that's a tough one.

Sounds like post-pandemic rebalancing, if nothing else, was well on its way before the Truss disaster:

https://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/breaking-news/2023/2/sales-slide-by-30-as-buyer-demand-wanes--claim

QuoteReduced homebuyer activity has led to a 30.5% drop in UK house sales, new research suggests.

The data also shows that one Scottish city is the only place to report an increase in transactions over the 12 months to September 2022.

Analysis of sales volumes held by the Land Registry up to September 2022 reveals there have been 843,600 sales transactions completed across the UK.

This marks a drop of 30.5% compared with the 12 months previous during which there were 1.2m sales.

A regional analysis of the UK market by self-employed agency brand eXp shows that each and every corner of the land has seen a decline in sales, nowhere more so than the East of England where the annual figure has dropped by 37.3%, from 125,808 to 78,887.

In the South East, sales have dropped by 37.2%, closely followed by the South West with a 37.1% decline.

The smallest drop has been seen in Scotland where a decline from 121,544 transactions to 105,465 marks an annual drop of 13.2%.

A random little game. How much did the property sell for?

https://propertyguessr.fun/locations

Yikes :ph34r:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FpZsqhFXgAAhHb0?format=png&name=small)

and That's just averages for the whole country. Houses are way more the 4 times the cost in Toronto, for example.

Italy shows that the best way to have cheap housing is to be in a country during a demographic collapse (though I understand the Italians are working pretty hard to turn this around)

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:01:01 PMItaly shows that the best way to have cheap housing is to be in a country during a demographic collapse (though I understand the Italians are working pretty hard to turn this around)

The Detroit strategy of creating a dystopian hellscape is pretty good too.

Please - we are trying our best.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 20, 2023, 07:07:55 PM

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:01:01 PMItaly shows that the best way to have cheap housing is to be in a country during a demographic collapse (though I understand the Italians are working pretty hard to turn this around)

The Detroit strategy of creating a dystopian hellscape is pretty good too.

That's what keeps the rent down baby!

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 20, 2023, 07:15:11 PMPlease - we are trying our best.

The demographic collapse or the dystopian hellscape?

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 20, 2023, 07:15:11 PMPlease - we are trying our best.

 :lol:

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:48:43 PMThe demographic collapse or the dystopian hellscape?

Dystopian hellscape.

UK population is growing fine and record high net immigration - so very much not collapsing demography (I think Britain and France have the youngest cities in Europe) :lol:

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 20, 2023, 08:02:49 PM

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:48:43 PMThe demographic collapse or the dystopian hellscape?

Dystopian hellscape.

UK population is growing fine and record high net immigration - so very much not collapsing demography (I think Britain and France have the youngest cities in Europe) :lol:

As you inch towards Dystopian hellscape immigrations drops, so you'll get two for the price of one.

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:01:01 PMItaly shows that the best way to have cheap housing is to be in a country during a demographic collapse (though I understand the Italians are working pretty hard to turn this around)

Which part are they trying to turn around? The lack of rocketing real estate prices or the lack of babies?

Quote from: Jacob on February 21, 2023, 12:45:07 PM

Quote from: Valmy on February 20, 2023, 07:01:01 PMItaly shows that the best way to have cheap housing is to be in a country during a demographic collapse (though I understand the Italians are working pretty hard to turn this around)

Which part are they trying to turn around? The lack of rocketing real estate prices or the lack of babies?

Lack of babies. The Italian government has been pretty desperate trying everything they can think of over the past quarter-century or so to get people to have babies. Back in 1995 it was 1.18 Babies per woman and now it is 1.47...still not good but progress. Ironically I bet the cost of living going down due to demographic collapse will help them a bit. When there are entire abandoned towns and buildings all over the country it makes finding housing for young families much easier.

Quote from: Valmy on February 21, 2023, 01:07:27 PMLack of babies. The Italian government has been pretty desperate trying everything they can think of over the past quarter-century or so to get people to have babies. Back in 1995 it was 1.18 Babies per woman and now it is 1.47...still not good but progress.

Gotcha. Thanks :)

QuoteIronically I bet the cost of living going down due to demographic collapse will help them a bit. When there are entire abandoned towns and buildings all over the country it makes finding housing for young families much easier.

Unfortunately I don't think it helps that much... young families also need a bunch of services (primarily child care, education, pediatric medicine) and those are often sparse in places where abandoned towns and buildings are common.

Further 0.5% month on month price drop according to Nationwide puts us into negative year on year territory for the first time since the start of the pandemic bonanza in June 2020.

And as this chart from the Telegraph of all places show, we are following the 2008 trajectory very close so far:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FoRmxJ-WQAEAdhk?format=png&name=900x900)

2008 would still put us ahead of pre covid iirc.

Quote from: Josquius on March 01, 2023, 03:30:12 AM2008 would still put us ahead of pre covid iirc.

Yes, so far from unlikely to repeat I think.

The interesting question though is that 2008 stopped and turned around because interest rates were slashed to zero and QE launched. That almost certainly will not be happening this time around (not for a couple of years anyway) so where will the bottom be this time around?

A bit more informative if the showed the 5-10 years before showing housing prices spiking.

Quote from: HVC on March 01, 2023, 04:05:40 AMA bit more informative if the showed the 5-10 years before when housing prices spiked.

The point I think is to compare the rate of fall.

Currently the "bullish" narrative (and there's a lot of that in the UK, as people's livelihoods depend on the property ponzi scheme, and not just estate agents') is that "sure prices are falling a bit but 0.5 isn't a crash, stop scaremongering!"

And this chart servers to disprove that. Trajectory can still change I am sure (the new budget is coming in a couple of weeks I think, if the government wants to slash and burn everything to save the property market, that'll be the time to do it), but clearly right now is on one that is not different from what people commonly accept as a "crash".

(https://images.twindig.com/tzbmbGw9jN6BlJc1eWwHeyDCwsrIMrYhLKvrlO9BqTs/w:896/h:0/rt:fit/g:sm/aHR0cHM6Ly90d2luZGlnLWZpbGVzLWV1LmFtczMuZGlnaXRhbG9jZWFuc3BhY2VzLmNvbS9tYXJrZXQtdmlld3MvaG91c2UtcHJpY2VzLzglMjBIUEklMjBMb25kb24ucG5n.png)

Doom. :(

(https://y.yarn.co/bc3c18e1-cbfa-403e-8358-67c86dac0563_text.gif)

Interesting charts, if true, UK data of course:
https://twitter.com/alexgroundwater/status/1632495667049291779

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqfKJ3LWAAM05Fr?format=jpg&name=large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqfKJ3LX0AIZeDM?format=jpg&name=large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqfKJ3MWwAArEKS?format=jpg&name=large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FqfKJ3MWIAEzFc4?format=jpg&name=large)

Quote from: Tamas on March 01, 2023, 07:12:13 AM(https://y.yarn.co/bc3c18e1-cbfa-403e-8358-67c86dac0563_text.gif)

Damnit. Now I want to watch The Big Short.

Quote from: Valmy on March 06, 2023, 11:27:58 AM

Quote from: Tamas on March 01, 2023, 07:12:13 AM(https://y.yarn.co/bc3c18e1-cbfa-403e-8358-67c86dac0563_text.gif)

Damnit. Now I want to watch The Big Short.

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/SparklingOfficialAtlasmoth-size_restricted.gif)

Quote from: Valmy on March 06, 2023, 11:27:58 AMDamnit. Now I want to watch The Big Short.

Margin Call is a better movie.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 06, 2023, 03:24:04 PM

Quote from: Valmy on March 06, 2023, 11:27:58 AMDamnit. Now I want to watch The Big Short.

Margin Call is a better movie.

Is it?  :hmm:

They are both amazing, that is for sure. I think I admire Margin Call a little more just because when it came out the economic crisis was virtually current event. Whereas The Big Short came out many years later.

Of the two I'd also go for Margin Call.

I've never heard of margin call. Big short is good though.

The Big Short is an adaptation of Michael Lewis' book.  I've only read a part of The Flash Mob, but my distinct impression is his entire career is sensationalizing complex issues.

The Big Short paints a picture of an industry of loud, unlikeable greedheads with their heads in the sand.  And our intrepid trio of courageous shorters swim against the stream to bet against them.  But Hank Paulson's brother ran a hedge fund that made a mint off of shorting MBS.  CDS was a systematic risk precisely because lots and lots of people had bought them.  But Paulson's hedge fund, and the other hedge funds that shorted MBS, didn't make their trades barefoot while listening to shitty metal or work out of their mom's garage so they aren't cool enough for the movie.

Margin Call is a great story about believable human beings confronted with the information that they can only save their own company (and their own net worth) by throwing every other person in the world under the bus.

Incidentally, "I like your shirt, do they make it for men too" is a perfect example of what I think of when I hear talking smack.

Margin Call is much better than The Big Short.

Margin Call is the better movie, but The Big Short is more entertaining.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 06, 2023, 05:14:38 PMIncidentally, "I like your shirt, do they make it for men too" is a perfect example of what I think of when I hear talking smack.

They are not clear on what a man is? Sounds woke to me!

Surprisingly, Halifax has reported a 1.1% rise in property prices month on month. Their mortgage director did say the general trend remains down, but it does cast a doubt at the pace of it, and the number will no doubt be used by estate agents and pundits to prop asking prices up.

I wonder.... as regular sales go down surely it'd make sense for average prices to go up as those who don't really care about mortgage rates make up a bigger percentage of the number of sales going on?

With inflation at 10% that is really quite a fall.

Quote from: Josquius on March 07, 2023, 04:38:13 AMI wonder.... as regular sales go down surely it'd make sense for average prices to go up as those who don't really care about mortgage rates make up a bigger percentage of the number of sales going on?

Good point.

The charts I posted a couple of years ago clearly show activity is falling sharply so that would support that read.

Quote from: Josquius on March 07, 2023, 04:38:13 AMI wonder.... as regular sales go down surely it'd make sense for average prices to go up as those who don't really care about mortgage rates make up a bigger percentage of the number of sales going on?

My favourite property market Youtuber agrees with this, claiming trading volumes going down (and they are down) price volatility goes up: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7-ks0Vb-MQ

We'll see. I'm not clear what the result will be from the financialisation side of housing interacting with the physical lack of supply. I think post-pandemic prices are probably a bubble (and I see lots of emails about price reductions right now) but I think there is a physical reality of more demand than supply and - so far - employment data has held up relatively well, wage growth has been higher than expected (but lower than inflation still) which supports that demand.

The BofE is also signalling that they're not necessarily anticipating significant further interest rate rises - I think 4% which is where we are now is roughly what the market is expecting the peak to be too. In addition the UK has (technically) avoided a technical recession so far.

There may be a general economic collapse - but I'm not sure. I think a lot depends on how Europe as a whole deals with energy in the next year when we'll have no Russian supply at all and the impact that has on prices and the economy and also whether the US (as is looking possible right now) actually manages a soft landing. And also China's course.

Overall I think there's lots of indications in lots of directions and I don't personally have any confidence in what I think will happen.

Average UK prices fell 1.1% from December to January. Trust The Guardian though to take the edge off of such terrible news by focusing on the seasonally adjusted number and the year-on-year change:

QuoteInflation in UK house prices has slowed, new figures from the Office for National Statistics show.

UK house prices fell by 0.6% in January, the ONS says, following a 0.4% drop in December.

This pulled the average UK house price down to £290,000 in January, which was £17,000 or 6.3% higher than 12 months ago.

The housing market cooled at the end of last year, after the disastrous mini-budget drove up mortgage rates.

(https://i.redd.it/gse5zsevhnpa1.png)

With interest at 4% instead of 1%, it's still significantly more expensive to buy a place though.

I have been following the UK housing reddit. Most of the time when somebody posts about prices going down (like yesterday a bloke mentioning the official 1.1% monthly decline data) they get furiously downvoted.  :lol:  I wonder if it is just a contingent of estate agents or they are reinforced by people who want to get out of their looming remortgage pains by sheer force of will.

Quote from: Zanza on March 25, 2023, 02:31:47 AMWith interest at 4% instead of 1%, it's still significantly more expensive to buy a place though.

I don't remember if Germans were also stupid enough to load up on short fixed-term mortgages or if its allowed there to have the interest fixed for the whole of the mortgage duration?

Quote from: Tamas on March 25, 2023, 06:50:58 AM

Quote from: Zanza on March 25, 2023, 02:31:47 AMWith interest at 4% instead of 1%, it's still significantly more expensive to buy a place though.

I don't remember if Germans were also stupid enough to load up on short fixed-term mortgages or if its allowed there to have the interest fixed for the whole of the mortgage duration?

I guess short term, variable rate mortgage also exist here. But the normal case is a fixed rate 10, 15, or 20 year mortgage. You will also typically need at least 10%-20% down payment.

Some graph for OCDE countries:
 (https://i.redd.it/xqr6kz8q25qa1.png)

It's amazing Canada has such high values.
Is this vancouver screwing up the national numbers with its insanity? Or in regular towns is it really so expensive?

From my experience in the UK this is a key stat where national numbers tend to be pretty pointless.

Vancouver and now, Toronto have been killing the numbers for many years but since 2021, every other big city has joined in on the fun.

I bought my house in 2012 for ~200k, In 2019 I could have sold it for ~350k. In 2021-22 it accelerated to at min 500k.

Quote from: Josquius on March 27, 2023, 02:43:19 AMIt's amazing Canada has such high values.
Is this vancouver screwing up the national numbers with its insanity? Or in regular towns is it really so expensive?

From my experience in the UK this is a key stat where national numbers tend to be pretty pointless.

Regular towns have been catching up too.

Quote from: viper37 on March 27, 2023, 10:15:07 AM

Quote from: Josquius on March 27, 2023, 02:43:19 AMIt's amazing Canada has such high values.
Is this vancouver screwing up the national numbers with its insanity? Or in regular towns is it really so expensive?

From my experience in the UK this is a key stat where national numbers tend to be pretty pointless.

Regular towns have been catching up too.

Covid ramped up the house prices in the boonies as people moved out of cities thanks to remote work. Now work is trying to get people back into offices and these people are getting squeezed.

Asking prices in our area are barely budging (mostly from "ambitious in 2021" prices to "massive mortgage burden in 2023" ones), but in the meantime there's barely any  mortgages being taken in the national background, so I hope reality will start setting in soon:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FsYAC2JXgAECBaG?format=jpg&name=large)

How high are the rates for you guys?

Quote from: Grey Fox on March 29, 2023, 08:05:38 AMHow high are the rates for you guys?

Looks like we could do around 4.2-4.3% right now at the top of what we are willing to pay.

That's really good. It's really not that high for a 86% year to year drop.

5 years fixed?

Quote from: Grey Fox on March 29, 2023, 08:31:13 AMThat's really good. It's really not that high for a 86% year to year drop.

5 years fixed?

yeah its for 5 years fixed

Quote from: Grey Fox on March 29, 2023, 08:31:13 AMThat's really good. It's really not that high for a 86% year to year drop.

5 years fixed?

I'd imagine so - pretty similar to what I've been able to find for 5 year fixed but I'm slightly higher, but at a slightly higher LTV so that's the trade off I suppose.

Lots more reporting lately in the press, eg
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65090846

And anecdotally locally, that renting  just keeps getting harder.

It's really weird and I can't wrap my head around why.
It being locally could be just the covid musical chairs but if it was the case in London it'd be getting easier which... It isn't.

Well allegedly landlords are exiting the market since its a far less profitable business now. And with asking prices still stuck to the ceiling, it's not like renters can just switch to being owners, so rental supply is down while demand is unchanged, perhaps even increased as first time buyers find themselves locked out with this combination of rates and prices.

But as I heard the rental market will follow the properry market eventually.

One issues is that there is apparently easily a 6 months lag on property price data so it's not easy for prospective sellers or buyers to see the true state of the market.

The tax benefits on renting have gone plus landlords are being required to bring their properties up to a certain standard environmentally.

Plus there's more demand than there is supply. It's not all financial magic and estate agents. Which I think is why even though mortgage rates have gone up, the cost of a mortgage is still, on average, lower than renting.

So where have all these "missing houses" gone?
Left empty and for sale?
Have flat shares been cut down to have people renting more space?

We don't have many vacant properties:
(https://www.tomforth.co.uk/emptyhomesforgood/1_EnglandHasVeryFewEmptyHomes.png)

And we're pretty good at flatshares and other means of making sure that we have very little living space per capita:
(https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/534dec1fe4b007abc0108d36/1405482379316-BKZNQGCCYL5S93SB2NN4/image-asset.png)

It's not a con, it's not just financial flim-flam. It's decades of not building enough housing to keep pace with a growing population. It's the story of modern Britain:

QuoteMe sowing: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!

Me reaping: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.

Yeah this has been a problem for a long time. But it undoubtedly has suddenly gotten much worse in the past year or two. Something is happening to make it harder to find somewhere to rent.

Quote from: Sheilbh on March 29, 2023, 05:11:19 PMthe cost of a mortgage is still, on average, lower than renting.

Assuming the minimum 10% deposit I very much doubt that is still true.

Quote from: Grey Fox on March 27, 2023, 06:16:27 AMVancouver and now, Toronto have been killing the numbers for many years but since 2021, every other big city has joined in on the fun.

I bought my house in 2012 for ~200k, In 2019 I could have sold it for ~350k. In 2021-22 it accelerated to at min 500k.

That's definitely a feature here too. Loads of people working in cities moving to other, smaller cities or towns or country immediately after covid.

Bristol's always been relatively expensive but I have friends who live there and bought years ago. They were saying properties are still going so quickly that they often don't even get put up online.

QuoteAssuming the minimum 10% deposit I very much doubt that is still true.

I suppose it depends where you put the cost of the deposit. It's not normally included. The deposit is part of the cost of buying so in theory it should sit with the mortgage cost, but it's actually saved by renters so feels like in practice it should be on that side of the calculation.

But it's true - been that way for a while:
(https://mediacloud.theweek.co.uk/image/private/s--yhMvfl7J--/f_auto,t_content-image-desktop@1/v1679061634/theweek/2023/March/Halifax_rent_vs_buy_chart_2023_2.png)

There's lots of regional variation - biggest in Scotland where homeowners pay over 20% less than renters for an equivalent property. Only exception is the East of England:
(https://mediacloud.theweek.co.uk/image/private/s--auCareXV--/f_auto,t_content-image-desktop@1/v1679061634/theweek/2023/March/Halifax_rent_vs_buy_chart_2023.png)

QuoteYeah this has been a problem for a long time. But it undoubtedly has suddenly gotten much worse in the past year or two. Something is happening to make it harder to find somewhere to rent.

I'm not sure on renting specifically but I think part of it is displacement post-covid, with WFH for middle class workers as a new norm. The last two years have seen a huge rise in the average property price - except in London. That's odd compared to previous increases where London normally leads the way. This time London's way behind, the biggest increases were initially in the South-East but now, I think, highest in the North-East, North-West and Yorkshire.

I think part of what's driven the last two years has been government juicing demand, but I think also that demand is being moved around and distributed slightly differently than pre-pandemic. I think there's also been a shift in the space people want because they're expecting to WFH so it may be that everyone is now looking for 1 room more than they used to?

I also think the unresolved cladding issue probably has an impact because there's tranches of inner city flats that were once quite attractive, but no longer what people want (they want space, outdoors etc). They're currently unmortgageable so people are either basically trapped until the cladding is fixed or there's flats that basically can't be sold. I think the last estimate is 10,000 buildings with millions of inhabitants that have basically been removed from the market (for sales). That might be resolved on the legal side with Gove forcing developers to cover the cost of fixing cladding for many buildings but it'll take time to feed through.

QuoteI think part of what's driven the last two years has been government juicing demand, but I think also that demand is being moved around and distributed slightly differently than pre-pandemic.

Yes, I mentioned this one as a possibility but logically you'd expect London to have become easier if that was the case but evidence suggests otherwise.

QuoteI think there's also been a shift in the space people want because they're expecting to WFH so it may be that everyone is now looking for 1 room more than they used to?

This could be more it. What I was saying about share houses dropping in popularity. As well as needing a WFH office I imagine the experience of being cooped up during lockdown also has people wanting bigger places, which puts those who would normally go for this in a tough position.
You'd still think there should be something left at the bottom due to this switch though- I've seen nothing to suggest whilst 3 room is harder to get, 1 room is easier.

QuoteI also think the unresolved cladding issue probably has an impact because there's tranches of inner city flats that were once quite attractive, but no longer what people want (they want space, outdoors etc). They're currently unmortgageable so people are either basically trapped until the cladding is fixed or there's flats that basically can't be sold. I think the last estimate is 10,000 buildings with millions of inhabitants that have basically been removed from the market (for sales). That might be resolved on the legal side with Gove forcing developers to cover the cost of fixing cladding for many buildings but it'll take time to feed through.

The much talked about leasehold reform should help a lot with these too.

QuoteK house prices in biggest fall since 2009
UK house prices are falling at the fastest annual rate since the aftermath of the financial crisis, new data from Nationwide shows.

Nationwide reports that UK house prices fell for the seventh month running in March, as the aftermath from the disastrous mini-budget continued to hammer the housing market.

This month, they fell by 3.1% compared to a year ago, which is the largest annual decline since July 2009, Nationwide Building Society said.

Across the UK, prices fell by 0.8% month on month, leaving the average UK house price at £257,122.

All regions of the UK saw a slowing in price growth in Q1, with most seeing small year-on-year falls. West Midlands was the strongest performing region, while Scotland remained the weakest.

In the relevant UK Housing Reddit, downvoters are out with a vengeance trying to make all negative comments on the housing markets disappear. Anxiety of owners is clearly growing.  :D

Bunch of conflicting data today.

Despite Nationwide reporting something like a 0.6% decrease in prices since last month, Halifax is reporting a 0.8% increase in the same period: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/06/house-prices-rise-unexpectedly-third-month-in-a-row-halifax

Meanwhile, Zoopla complied March-on-March data which shows supply up 56% and demand down 43%, but spins it saying it is all excellent because they are both slightly up compared to 2019: https://www.zoopla.co.uk/discover/property-news/zoopla-house-price-index-march-2023/

Which is a fair comment of course considering the anomaly that was 2020-21, but also dishonest because if we dismiss 2020-22 as irrelevant then surely asking prices also should be based on 2022 tops.

Nationwide and Halifax covering different sides of the market on average?

Quote from: Josquius on April 06, 2023, 06:47:58 AMNationwide and Halifax covering different sides of the market on average?

That must be it. The zoopla article mentions that the cheaper parts of the country such as Scotland etc continue to see strong demand and its the previously most heavily overpriced regions whicb have seen the fall in demand. So I guess depending on market share things can get skewed.

Curious. Is this the covid reshuffle continuing or something else I ponder?

Quote from: Josquius on April 07, 2023, 12:26:56 AMCurious. Is this the covid reshuffle continuing or something else I ponder?

Maybe just simple affordability. Most expensive properties are the farthest from what people can afford repayments on.

Quote from: Josquius on April 07, 2023, 12:26:56 AMCurious. Is this the covid reshuffle continuing or something else I ponder?

I think it's definitely part of it. If you look at Scotland lowest demand is in Glasgow and Edinburgh, in England lowest demand is in London.

The post-covid price boom has affected London (and a few other cities) least - I think part of that is the middle class WFH re-shuffle (and second home buying). Might also help explain why prices have gone up so quickly in the last two years if part of it is buyers from very expensive regions moving buying in cheaper ones.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 07, 2023, 07:25:24 AM

Quote from: Josquius on April 07, 2023, 12:26:56 AMCurious. Is this the covid reshuffle continuing or something else I ponder?

I think it's definitely part of it. If you look at Scotland lowest demand is in Glasgow and Edinburgh, in England lowest demand is in London.

The post-covid price boom has affected London (and a few other cities) least - I think part of that is the middle class WFH re-shuffle (and second home buying). Might also help explain why prices have gone up so quickly in the last two years if part of it is buyers from very expensive regions moving buying in cheaper ones.

Yeah but surely also super-cheap credit. our area wasn't exactly unpopular or cheap pre-pandemic, but after the stamp duty holiday it just exploded - not surprisingly it's in acceptable distance of London with greens and open spaces in similar distance.

Quote from: Tamas on April 07, 2023, 08:38:54 AMYeah but surely also super-cheap credit. our area wasn't exactly unpopular or cheap pre-pandemic, but after the stamp duty holiday it just exploded - not surprisingly it's in acceptable distance of London with greens and open spaces in similar distance.

Yeah but the super-cheap credit has been a thing since 2009. There was a big spike in 2021-22 and I don't think super-cheap credit, which was already a condition in 2019, is enough to explain it.

I think various covid factors are key. I think there's been a bit of a re-shuffle for those who can WFH and a very strong focus on properties with outdoor space after lockdown (true for me - in my flat hunt I've not looked at any flats without a garden or balcony). But I don't think the effect is largely to decrease demand a bit in certain cities and add new demand on top of what already existed in other areas like the South-East/commuter towns.

The stamp duty holiday helped pump demand. But also I think the huge increase on household savings over that period because of lockdown which I suspect increased the number of people with deposits and probably increased the size of deposits. We're a country that loves credit, but during covid households were saving 20-25% of their income and I think that is tied to the subsequent boom in house prices. Partly because that's just what British people do - we don't save, we buy a house as an asset which is the store of our savings and we downsize/release equity as we get older. Also given the rise of inflation in the last year that was probably the right choice because inflation isn't kind to savings/financial assets.

Too late for me but... <_<

I'm looking at buying a place in Switzerland. Nice, high end new development and great location in the city. The development itself is going to be in a park. The list prices are insanely high and the agent was super pushy about first come, first serve. "Act now!!!".

I just checked the website and since February, the number of available units went from 8 to 13. People are canceling their reservations.

Something is up even in Switzerland...

Quote from: Hamilcar on April 08, 2023, 09:13:10 AMI'm looking at buying a place in Switzerland. Nice, high end new development and great location in the city. The development itself is going to be in a park. The list prices are insanely high and the agent was super pushy about first come, first serve. "Act now!!!".

I just checked the website and since February, the number of available units went from 8 to 13. People are canceling their reservations.

Something is up even in Switzerland...

Which city ? (or canton if its a small place and want to leave it vague)

This is very strange. I hear the situation is usually one of a sellers market where they get to be choosy about just who they sell to.

Switzerland is way over due for something resembling normalcy to establish itself given the decline in the power of the banks and multinationals shifting out tonnes of jobs.

Quote from: Josquius on April 08, 2023, 10:18:22 AM

Quote from: Hamilcar on April 08, 2023, 09:13:10 AMI'm looking at buying a place in Switzerland. Nice, high end new development and great location in the city. The development itself is going to be in a park. The list prices are insanely high and the agent was super pushy about first come, first serve. "Act now!!!".

I just checked the website and since February, the number of available units went from 8 to 13. People are canceling their reservations.

Something is up even in Switzerland...

Which city ? (or canton if its a small place and want to leave it vague)

This is very strange. I hear the situation is usually one of a sellers market where they get to be choosy about just who they sell to.

Switzerland is way over due for something resembling normalcy to establish itself given the decline in the power of the banks and multinationals shifting out tonnes of jobs.

CS and UBS are firing everyone

Aaand here we go: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/homeandproperty/the-return-of-100pc-mortgages-could-spell-disaster-for-the-housing-market/ar-AA19Jj1A?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=02560e1fde86441194cd1ad7b989dbf4&ei=6

QuoteSkipton Building Society plans to launch a new loan that would allow borrowers to bypass standard deposit requirements by using their rental payment history. Borrowers typically need to pay a deposit of at least 5pc of the purchase price when taking out a mortgage.

:bleeding:

QuoteThe challenge of helping first-time buyers is a growing battleground area in the run-up to the next general election. Labour has announced it is working with lenders to develop a state-backed mortgage guarantee scheme to help first-time buyers take out loans.

:bleeding: :bleeding: :bleeding:

YES, the problem has been not enough money pumped into the property demand. DEFINITELY.

FFS.

Labour have also said they'll do planning reform "to build more genuinely affordable homes for those looking to get on the housing ladder". I'd like to think that's true but it sounds suspiciously like some magic third thing that won't actually increase supply - especially given Labour's recent line that "housing isn't a market, it's a human right". Which I'll believe when I finally see Lib Dem Councillors at the Hague, until then it's very much a market.

So my suspicion is it'll be something weird and complicated that tries to sidestep supply and demand.

On Skipton that's a very good idea. People are paying well over 25% of their net income on rent which makes saving for a deposit difficult - but is also, I think, a really relevant factor in whether someone is credit-worthy that, at the minute, is not taken account of. Given that in most of the country home-owning is cheaper than renting these are people with a regular history of paying more than the cost of a mortgage being treated as risky because they don't have family money.

The 3 main parties have all been keen to announce nimby empowerment policies in recent years so if labour do do something it won't be till they're in power.

Incidentally I wonder where plaid and the snp stand on nimbyness.

There's a housing crisis in Scotland too - the Scottish government has missed their own targets by an even bigger margin than in England.

Not sure on Plaid - I think a lot of their policy offer focuses on second homes. Which isn't going to solve problems but makes sense given Plaid's base is the Irish Sea coast, Snowdonia etc. So rural, beautiful, very popular with tourists but irrelevant to Cardiff or Swansea or most of South Wales.

(https://content.crea.ca/creastats_assets/board_charts/edmo/median_price/mls05_chart01_median_single_detached_xhi-res.png)

Just for fun I looked up Edmonton housing prices.

As you can see there was a pretty steep increase from 2000 to 2008, with prices roughly tripling in that time.

But really prices have been remarkably stable ever since.  I know I bought my house in 2011 and it's worth about the same now as when I bought it.  There was a bit of an upward blip the last couple of years (almost certainly covid-related) but that's come down again.

Is it because Alberta's economy has been steady, but no big oil booms over the last dozen years?  Or because we're still pretty good at building houses (Edmonton is in the middle of the prairie and lots of available land still)?  Because I know if you look at other major cities in Canada prices have been steadily increasing this entire time.

What's the population growth over time would be another consideration. And empty buildings another. The expensive Canadian cities are seen as "investments"  a lot of time before being seen as homes.

Quote from: HVC on April 11, 2023, 03:42:00 PMWhat's the population growth over time would be another consideration. And empty buildings another. The expensive Canadian cities are seen as "investments"  a lot of time before being seen as homes.

Population has steadily increased over that time:

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/20373/edmonton/population

Population in 2000 - 924,000.  Population in 2023 - 1,544,000.

Huh interesting. I've been for work and it didn't seem large. But then again it's not like I had a lot of time to sitesee.

Meanwhile in the rental market:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65103937
:bleeding:

Rental cost for a room in a shared flat/house is nos over £700 in every London borough. Across London it's now over £1,000 - for a room :bleeding:

Trends in other cities like Manchester, Leeds, Glasgow etc are big increases too.

Have to say as much as news reports are fairly doom /hopeful for the market being in decline I'm seeing tonnes of sold signs locally.

Quote from: Josquius on April 15, 2023, 07:43:35 AMHave to say as much as news reports are fairly doom /hopeful for the market being in decline I'm seeing tonnes of sold signs locally.

I mean, the question is how much they are selling for, isn't it?

Quote from: Tamas on April 15, 2023, 11:00:33 AM

Quote from: Josquius on April 15, 2023, 07:43:35 AMHave to say as much as news reports are fairly doom /hopeful for the market being in decline I'm seeing tonnes of sold signs locally.

I mean, the question is how much they are selling for, isn't it?

A big part of the problem I thought was people not buying expecting prices to plummet.

But regardless. House across the street from me just gone up for sale for 40% or so more than I paid at the start of lockdown.

Well for sold prices to fall people need to buy. :)

But yeah. Via people I watch/follow I happened on a weekly youtube "show" for estate agents going through statistics. Average asking prices just seem to have stopped rising this year, but the number that has not stopped rising is the number of price changes each week, just keeps going up and is noticeably above the 2017-19 average.

Other statistics like number of sales completed seem right now to be around that 2017-19 average, except maybe deals which fallen through.

I'd say the whole Mexican standoff thing is still largely ongoing, at least around these parts.

Saw on Reddit a guy complaining who I suspect is rather representative. He is trying to sell his London flat to buy a house outside of it. Not getting lot of views and no offers. He is fully aware of how much harder it is to get a big enough mortgage but he has reached the point where he is unable to further decrease his asking price, because he is unable to make the house sellers budge on theirs, so if he decreases his sale price further he won't have enough to buy something that is worth selling his flat for.

I imagine this will break to the downside as there's going to be a slow but constant trickle of people having to sell (divorce, death, remortgage looming) will bring the average price down and make the penny drop for other people as well to understand no they won't get something better if they hold out, but it sure is painfully slow.

QuoteEscalating turbulence in Britain's mortgage market as banks hike rates
The turbulence in the UK's mortgage market is escalating as lenders lift the rates on their loans, putting a squeeze on households looking to remortgage this year.

The jump in wholesale borrowing costs, as the City anticipates the Bank of England will continue to lift Base Rate this year, is causing ructions across the market.

On Friday, TSB withdrew its 10-year fixed mortgages with just a couple of hours notice, and also lifted its two and five-year fixed rates by as much as 0.8 per cent, Mortgage Solutions reports.

According to The Times today, the country's third- largest lender, Santander, made changes over the weekend, while Coventry Building Society is expected to increase all its two, three and five-year deals tomorrow.

"Santander, made changes over the weekend & TSB withdrew all its 10y fixed-rate deals on Frid with just 2.5 hours' notice.
Coventry Building Society will inc all its 2,3 & 5y deals tomorrow.
Other lenders have all increased fixed-rate deals by up to 0.85% points" @thetimes

Quote from: Barrister on April 11, 2023, 03:35:53 PM(https://content.crea.ca/creastats_assets/board_charts/edmo/median_price/mls05_chart01_median_single_detached_xhi-res.png)

Just for fun I looked up Edmonton housing prices.

As you can see there was a pretty steep increase from 2000 to 2008, with prices roughly tripling in that time.

But really prices have been remarkably stable ever since.  I know I bought my house in 2011 and it's worth about the same now as when I bought it.  There was a bit of an upward blip the last couple of years (almost certainly covid-related) but that's come down again.

Is it because Alberta's economy has been steady, but no big oil booms over the last dozen years?  Or because we're still pretty good at building houses (Edmonton is in the middle of the prairie and lots of available land still)?  Because I know if you look at other major cities in Canada prices have been steadily increasing this entire time.

My guess is that the same graph for Vancouver would be a steep dip in 08 with increases year over year after 2009.  I would also guess that is because Vancouver has been infamous for the amount of time it takes to get new developments approved and, significantly, for the developers who could afford to do so, it made sense to keep land back for future development. 

In a relatively stable price environment it does not make much economic sense for developers to hold onto undeveloped land.

Couldn't find an exact match, but this one is pretty close and prepared by the same people (CREA) so it's mostly doing an apples-to-apples comparison.  Unfortunately this one only goes back 10 years.

(https://content.crea.ca/creastats_assets/board_charts/vanc/home/vanc_chart05_xhi-res.png)

Thanks

An affordable central London property with absolutely zero catch to get on the property staircase with.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jul/30/step-to-riches-disused-stairwell-in-london-could-be-yours-for-just-20000?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Doom

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/money/property-and-mortgages/landlord-dream-nightmare-only-beginning-2743368#:~:text=Experts%20have%20said%20the%20rising,seen%20the%20worst%20of%20this.

Quote'The landlord dream has turned into a nightmare — and it's only the beginning'
The rising costs of mortgages for landlords and a shrinking rental property market has a knock-on effect on the cost of rent


The owners of more than 11,500 rental properties were behind on their mortgage payments over the last three months as rising mortgage rates continue to cripple landlords' finances.

Data from UK Finance, the banking trade body, found that there were 11,540 buy-to-let mortgages in arrears of 2.5 per cent or more of their overall loan in the third quarter of 2023, up 29 per cent on the three months before.

Like all mortgage holders, landlords who do not own their properties outright have been hit — or will potentially be hit — by higher mortgage rates. Experts have said the rising costs are having a drastic effect on landlords' personal finances and resulting in an exodus from the rental market.

"This is a staggering rise in arrears and sadly unsurprising. Worryingly, we have not seen the worst of this. Landlords rely on rent to cover their mortgage payments, and many will not have the personal resources to cope," said Ranald Mitchell from Charwin Private Clients.

"Falling into arrears like this has a huge impact on their ability to remortgage for years to come, and it will have far-reaching consequences for their credit profiles. What was once a dream has turned into a nightmare for many."

Since December 2021, the Bank of England has gradually increased the base rate from 0.1 per cent to 5.25 per cent today in a bid to fight high inflation. This feeds through to the interest rate you are awarded on your savings and that which you pay on your mortgage.

The average two-year buy-to-let mortgage now costs 6.22 per cent, compared to 2.9 per cent two years ago and 3.05 per cent five years ago, according to the data company Moneyfacts.

If a landlord with a £300,000 mortgage was remortgaging after five years today, they would see their monthly costs jump to £1,555 from £762. If they were coming off a two-year deal, their monthly costs would rise to £1,555 from £725.

According to the estate agent Hamptons, landlords in the UK are now paying 40 per cent more — or a combined £4.3bn — in interest payments than last year.

For many, the numbers simply no longer add up. Around a quarter of landlords are planning to sell a property over the next 12 months, according to a survey from Simply Business, and almost one in 10 said they had sold a property in the last 12 months. Some 43 per cent said the decision to sell up was based on higher mortgage rates.

On the other end of the spectrum, just 3 per cent of landlords were planning to buy a new rental property.

The rising costs of mortgages for landlords and a shrinking rental property market has a knock-on effect on the cost of rent. According to Hamptons, the average cost of rent in Great Britain increased by 11.7 per cent to £1,325 a month in the year to September.

Graham Cox, from the Self-Employed Mortgage Broker, said: "The current rent levels are completely unsustainable. It means that landlords are experiencing void periods when tenants jump shop, move in with family and friends or into cheaper accommodation where available."

High mortgage rates are the latest in a string of changes to the buy-to-let sector that has made it harder for landlords to make money from their rental properties.

In 2016, the amount of income tax relief landlords could claim was restricted, meaning they had to pay tax on a larger portion of the rent they received. Landlords also used to be able to take 10 per cent off their rental income for "wear and tear", but now they can only claim for any actual costs that they incur.

Expanding a rental portfolio has also become more expensive, as most buy-to-let owners now pay an extra 3 per cent in stamp duty. The stamp duty bill on a £300,000 house rose from £2,500 to £11,500.

"The buy-to-let sector has been hit harder than any of late. As if the taxation changes weren't bad enough, we now have higher interest rates causing untold pain," said Craig Fish, director at Lodestone Mortgages and Protection.

"Historically, landlords would have had surplus funds to weather this storm, but those reserves are now depleted and so mortgages go unpaid. The worst is yet to come, and it seems there is no solution. I predict a horrible ending."

Tiny violins everyone?

I'm less disdainful of landlords then I am of airbnb assholes. I mean rentals have to come from somewhere. Not all of them are slum lords. But yes, fuck the bad land lords.

Quote from: HVC on November 13, 2023, 06:51:43 AMI'm less disdainful of landlords then I am of airbnb assholes. I mean rentals have to come from somewhere. Not all of them are slum lords. But yes, fuck the bad land lords.

Sure. I'm fine with land lords being a thing that exists. Rentals are needed.
What I really hate though is buy to let. People who get a loan specifically to buy a property to rent out, having renters pay off their mortgage with a bit of profit.

Also notice the title of this news thread: https://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2023/nov/13/uk-house-asking-prices-fall-economy-growth-slowdown-stock-markets-business-live

I remember earlier this year regularly being annoyed by the Guardian for posting rise in asking prices as "property prices" rising. When it comes to fall they are quick to point out it's asking prices. What a racket.

BTW on asking prices, some people are definitely still trying... the exact mirror image of the house we bought in July (minus the extension and modifications that ours has) a couple of streets away has been posted with an asking price above the asking price ours had and 5% above what we actually paid for ours.

Quote from: Josquius on November 13, 2023, 06:54:05 AM

Quote from: HVC on November 13, 2023, 06:51:43 AMI'm less disdainful of landlords then I am of airbnb assholes. I mean rentals have to come from somewhere. Not all of them are slum lords. But yes, fuck the bad land lords.

Sure. I'm fine with land lords being a thing that exists. Rentals are needed.
What I really hate though is buy to let. People who get a loan specifically to buy a property to rent out, having renters pay off their mortgage with a bit of profit.

Being heavily leveraged as a landlord is just a really risky and reckless thing to do. Being a landlord has all kinds of costs and risks and these guys are just gambling they won't have big repairs and their properties will increase in value and rents will go up and so forth.

Their reckless decision to heavily leveraging themselves is not anybody's responsibility but theirs. I guess it just depends on how systemic it is that landlords have big mortgages to be paid off.

Dishonest crap continues even from the Guardian: "highest property price rise in 10 months!" then you read it and it turns out it's asking prices on rightmove do nothing to do with property prices: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/mar/18/house-prices-rise-in-biggest-increase-for-10-months

Tamas, you're a perfect data point to demonstrate the validity of my latest Great Truth.  Namely, that people do things that make them angry because anger is a pleasurable emotion.  This was Roger Ailes profound insight when he founded Fox.

Like with roller coaster, but with rage?

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 17, 2024, 08:18:24 PMTamas, you're a perfect data point to demonstrate the validity of my latest Great Truth.  Namely, that people do things that make them angry because anger is a pleasurable emotion.  This was Roger Ailes profound insight when he founded Fox.

 :huh: if you are implying that people should avoid reading news that upsets them despite what's in there and why it is written having considerable impact on their lives, then you are a great data point for one my Great Truths: systems like Orban's work because people want to be lead and want comfortable lies created for them so they can shed feelings of responsibility.

Quote from: Tamas on March 18, 2024, 04:09:09 AM:huh: if you are implying that people should avoid reading news that upsets them despite what's in there and why it is written having considerable impact on their lives, then you are a great data point for one my Great Truths: systems like Orban's work because people want to be lead and want comfortable lies created for them so they can shed feelings of responsibility.

But Orban' lies are not "comfortable" lies.  They are threatening lies.  Danger lurks.  We are under assault by the Jew  moneymen and gays and dirty immigrants.

Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 18, 2024, 06:37:52 AM

Quote from: Tamas on March 18, 2024, 04:09:09 AM:huh: if you are implying that people should avoid reading news that upsets them despite what's in there and why it is written having considerable impact on their lives, then you are a great data point for one my Great Truths: systems like Orban's work because people want to be lead and want comfortable lies created for them so they can shed feelings of responsibility.

But Orban' lies are not "comfortable" lies.  They are threatening lies.  Danger lurks.  We are under assault by the Jew  moneymen and gays and dirty immigrants.

They are comfortable lies because it gives a clearly defined reason for all the problems in your life, and a man/party who is fighting for you.  You just need to give them power and they'll take care of it.

I think both are maybe true. It is, on a political level, a comfortable lie (and, to an extent, all "explanations" in politics are) that is not necessarily challenging as a belief to hold.

But I also think that in somme cases there is a libidinal/pleasure principle side of it which has an impact on the form of that politics. Trump is, I think, the most extreme example (and before him it was Berlusconi) of that I think. It's also true of Fox News - it's a dopamine hit and pure id.

Though I'm not sure the extent it applies to all of the different "Trumpian" or populist or radical right movements. For example, I think if you look at some of the European movements like Le Pen in France or Meloni in Italy, they're very much repressing that in order to achieve and/or maintain power. I think Orban probably falls into this category too - I'm not sure Orban supporters get the same vicarious thrill that I think Trump ones do.

Ibiza locals living in cars as party island sees rents soar (https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68730891)

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/rents-aren-t-unaffordable-young-112110154.html?guccounter=1

QuoteWorking less won't help young people get on the housing ladder
Tom Harris
Mon, April 8, 2024 at 1:21 PM GMT+2

Two major events in recent memory have contributed to the sense that the current generation of young people have had their life chances stolen from them.

The first is the credit crunch and associated financial crisis of 2008, the consequences of which, even now, have yet to be appreciated. When young couples have their application for an affordable mortgage rejected by their bank, the seeds of that decision all too often seem to trace back to the collapse of Lehman Brothers in the United States and the subsequent exposure of the appalling mismanagement of their own organisations by bankers across the world.

The second cause of grief for the living standards and aspirations of the current generation is, of course, the Covid pandemic. Social historians of the future will have their work cut out for them as they seek to reconcile the enthusiasm with which the public demanded the shut down of the economy and the previously unimaginable scale of state support to be paid out to employees for work not done, and the subsequent outrage at the fall in productivity and anaemic wage growth that followed, as if the two factors were entirely unconnected.

Whatever the causes of the current discontent, the despair of Generation Z at the throttling of their aspirations is a palpable political reality, and one with which current and future governments must deal. Young workers face the prospect of not being able to buy their own homes until well into their thirties, or even forties, unless they can rely upon generous handouts from wealthy parents, further institutionalising the disparity between this country's haves and have-nots. With growth in rents set to outstrip wages for the next three years, the issue will only become more salient.

But the answers to this dilemma from those directly affected fall far short of economic reality. Of course higher wages for less work would suit many; when has such a prospect not been popular? But as the pandemic proved in painful detail, such solutions, while having a short-term attraction, can only store up massive – perhaps insurmountable – problems for the future.

Even the civil service, the backbone of the British establishment, is responding to the long-term economic impact of lockdown by demanding the same pay for 20 per cent fewer hours worked – an indication, were cynical ministers to exploit the claim, that the service is significantly over-staffed with far more employees than the workload might justify.

Unless some top secret economic theory has been unearthed that turns financial orthodoxy on its head and promises extra productivity in exchange for less work and higher, unaffordable wages, the only apparent solution to the current crisis facing people in their twenties seems to me to be for the economy to grow at a far faster rate than has occurred in the last decade, for consumer demand to mirror that growth and for lending institutions to begin to take risks on mortgages.

It might be remembered that the current expectation of home ownership after securing your first job was not a reality for many when the current generation of boomers and Generation X were children. The vast expansion of private home ownership and associated prosperity of the '80s and '90s did not come about because of workers' rights, but because of free market economic policies that freed up the jobs and the financial markets.

If solutions to the current challenges exist, they do not exist in repeating the follies of the dim or recent past: 1970s corporatism and economic lockdowns served only to store up misery for the many. As former chancellor Denis Healey once said, when in a hole, stop digging. A generation reared on positive affirmation from their parents, who were authoritatively assured by them that everything they said, did or painted was marvellous, can no longer rely on other people – particularly the older generation – to solve their problems for them. There is no deus ex machina waiting to swoop to their rescue.

Today's problems are not new; previous generations faced the same dilemmas, and they suffered a long, difficult road on the way to salvation. The chief difference is that too many of the current generation seem to believe they are so special that they can rely on the magnanimity of the state and their employers to come to the rescue.

A rude awakening awaits.

Yeah, whatever.

Quotecan no longer rely on other people – particularly the older generation – to solve their problems for them.

We broke it, now stop complaining and fix it :D

He's worried about his pension and rents, get to work gen Z layabouts  :lol:

Hard to imagine the hubris of someone lecturing an entire generation.

Mr Harris' wiki page :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Harris_(British_politician)#:~:text=Thomas%20Harris%20(born%2020%20February,the%20party%20in%20August%202018.

Looks like he is following a Lee Andertal trajectory to me. It is strange how many people, once they near retirement age, conclude it is very important for the workers to work hard and take the crumbs they are given  :hmm:

Well he ticks all my "would punch" boxes.

I'm seeing lots of stories lately bemoaning how landlords are dropping out of the game due to how hard its becoming for them with tightening regulations (what? A house fit for habitation? Ridiculous!) and rising interest rates.
Oh dear, tiny violins at the ready.
Though it is interesting in its shifting around the groups in the game of "Who doesn't get a house" with it being single mothers with 3 kids reliant on benefits now being left homeless whilst those who've been able to save up enough to buy are able to move out of their parents house.

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:55:39 AM.

I'm seeing lots of stories lately bemoaning how landlords are dropping out of the game due to how hard its becoming for them with tightening regulations (what? A house fit for habitation? Ridiculous!) and rising interest rates.
Oh dear, tiny violins at the ready.

How do these tighter regulations benefitting tenants and hurting rich landlords fit with your view of the Tory party as always being on the side of the rich?

Actually, what's really killed the smaller scale private sector rental market is the removal of the right to offset mortgage interest against tax. They have been replaced to a certain extent by build-to-rent developer/landlords but there's no reason to celebrate the decline of the sector.

Quote from: Gups on April 09, 2024, 03:59:19 AM

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:55:39 AM.

I'm seeing lots of stories lately bemoaning how landlords are dropping out of the game due to how hard its becoming for them with tightening regulations (what? A house fit for habitation? Ridiculous!) and rising interest rates.
Oh dear, tiny violins at the ready.

How do these tighter regulations benefitting tenants and hurting rich landlords fit with your view of the Tory party as always being on the side of the rich?

Amidst massive pressure and growing public outcry they slowly roll out half hearted reforms that fix part of what needs fixing?
Do you think they're idiots and could get away with delivering absolutely nothing that voters want?

QuoteActually, what's really killed the smaller scale private sector rental market is the removal of the right to offset mortgage interest against tax.

This hasn't come up in any of the moans I've seen curiously.
But that does sound like something very dodgy so a good move.

QuoteThey have been replaced to a certain extent by build-to-rent developer/landlords but there's no reason to celebrate the decline of the sector.

A house which already exists in the housing market being repurposed explicitly for someone to profit rather than being bought by someone who wants a house to live in for the mid to long term, vs. nothing being replaced with a home available to rent... This sounds like a good thing to me.

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 04:12:01 AMAmidst massive pressure and growing public outcry they slowly roll out half hearted reforms that fix part of what needs fixing?
Do you think they're idiots and could get away with delivering absolutely nothing that voters want?

Actually I do think they are idiots. I don't think there has been massive pubic pressure except on Greenfell which has affected developers, not private landlords. I doubt that more than 1 in 1,000 boters have even heard of the Housing (fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 which was pretty minor in its effect. 

QuoteThis hasn't come up in any of the moans I've seen curiously.
But that does sound like something very dodgy so a good move.

It was not dodgy per se. It was just a standard set off against profit since it was a cost, similar to repairs. Personaly I agrred with its abolition nevertheless. It's had a very significant effect since rates went up.

QuoteA house which already exists in the housing market being repurposed explicitly for someone to profit rather than being bought by someone who wants a house to live in for the mid to long term, vs. nothing being replaced with a home available to rent... This sounds like a good thing to me.

Not everyone wants to buy a house or live in it for teh mid to long term. Most/all European countries have a substantial private rented sector and seem to have far fewer problems than the UK where house owership is an unhealthy obsession.

Quote from: Gups on April 09, 2024, 05:29:23 AMIt was not dodgy per se. It was just a standard set off against profit since it was a cost, similar to repairs. Personaly I agrred with its abolition nevertheless. It's had a very significant effect since rates went up.

Yeah what I've heard is that it's about tax. Personally I think the rental sector would generally benefit from professionalisation and big housing companies rather than small landlords. Though I've only experience of the small landlord.

QuoteNot everyone wants to buy a house or live in it for teh mid to long term. Most/all European countries have a substantial private rented sector and seem to have far fewer problems than the UK where house owership is an unhealthy obsession.

I don't think that's right.

I think German speaking countries - Germany, Austria and Switzerland - have very large private rented sectors. Lots of Europe have owner-occupier as the norm. The UK rate of owner-occupiers is slightly below EU27 average. From my understanding, UK stats are pretty similar to France, both in terms of proportion of owner-occupier but a far bigger social rent sector than most of Europe.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 09, 2024, 06:42:43 AM

Quote from: Gups on April 09, 2024, 05:29:23 AMIt was not dodgy per se. It was just a standard set off against profit since it was a cost, similar to repairs. Personaly I agrred with its abolition nevertheless. It's had a very significant effect since rates went up.

Yeah what I've heard is that it's about tax. Personally I think the rental sector would generally benefit from professionalisation and big housing companies rather than small landlords. Though I've only experience of the small landlord.

You don't trust a big government agency with elderly lives, but you do with their homes? Something that effects more people and is easier to screw with? ;)

Quote from: HVC on April 09, 2024, 06:45:24 AMYou don't trust a big government agency with elderly lives, but you do with their homes? Something that effects more people and is easier to screw with? ;)

:P That's about society not about big government or not.

Although actually the problem of small landlords is also true with homes for the elderly. In the UK there's loads and loads of very small businesses in the elderly social care sector. Largely, like landlords, people who bought a B&B or small hotels as an investment. They're often family run on incredibly small margins. They're not sophisticated businesses and in the UK they were a large proportion of the really distressed properties after the financial crisis. It's normally funded by local government.

But it's a nightmare to regulate properly, they've got tiny margins so really need to keep costs down (wages for carers, furnitures, food etc for the residents) - I think it's a sector we could really do, like housing, with consolidation.

That article is hilarious. It identifies the harmful effects of the 2008 meltdown, but then lauds the deregulation of the 80s, which created the lack of regulation in which the meltdown could occur.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 09, 2024, 06:42:43 AMI don't think that's right.

I think German speaking countries - Germany, Austria and Switzerland - have very large private rented sectors. Lots of Europe have owner-occupier as the norm. The UK rate of owner-occupiers is slightly below EU27 average. From my understanding, UK stats are pretty similar to France, both in terms of proportion of owner-occupier but a far bigger social rent sector than most of Europe.

I was surprised by this but you are right. Zooming out to look at owner-occupation globally, it's surprising to see that the highest percentages are all East European/ex-USSR countries and Asian countries. I wonder if teh definitin of ownershp varies from place to place.

In the UK, holding a 99 year lease would be regarded as ownership but it is very rare that anything other than that or a standard rental is offered for residential property. For example, there is no real market for a 10 year residential lease. I expect that market norms vary considerably by country

Those countries that are doing better than the UK on housing are generally those that do the unthinkable and actually build more homes.
This should of course be our priority in the UK.
But it does seem really much too popular in some circles to lay into stuff like landlord licensing, rent controls, etc... as if its somehow responsible for the problem rather than merely seeking to control and shift around the fallout that comes from not building.

As I've said before what I really hate about private landlords is those who took buy to let mortgages for say £500 a month repayments purely to make £600 a month renting the property out. Its entirely an investment and one often made by people who can't actually afford it once the system starts to shake a bit.
If you need to work away a few years and you rent out your home, or you're holding onto your gran's old flat until your kids are older, or even you actually have the money to buy a property to rent out...these are different things and far less shitty in my eyes.
Its not the concept of rental housing which is wrong, its buy to let.

Really, ideal world, social housing should be covering a lot more in terms of short term rents.
And right to buy needs to be destroyed. Stuff like this is depressing-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-68601378
I recall when working at a housing association hearing of people who would be offered a place in London...only to turn their nose up at it because it was excluded from right to buy.

What is wrong with private rental?

Buy to let was scandalous for a quite a while, since until fairly recently you could write off your mortgage payments for the buy to let property as business expense, I believe.

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 11:27:43 AMBuy to let was scandalous for a quite a while, since until fairly recently you could write off your mortgage payments for the buy to let property as business expense, I believe.

I covered that above. No you couldn't. You could write off the intereston the mortgage payments against your income tax in general. You now only get a 20% credit on the difference between the rental income and the interest on the mortgage. So if you are a higher rate tax payer (40%) the relief is halved.

Nothing wrong with right to buy per se (originally a 1970s Labour policy promoted by the left of the party). It was the 40-60% discounts against market value and the fact that the receipts couldn't be spent on new housing that was the issue.

Quote from: Gups on April 09, 2024, 12:03:08 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 11:27:43 AMBuy to let was scandalous for a quite a while, since until fairly recently you could write off your mortgage payments for the buy to let property as business expense, I believe.

I covered that above. No you couldn't. You could write off the intereston the mortgage payments against your income tax in general. You now only get a 20% credit on the difference between the rental income and the interest on the mortgage. So if you are a higher rate tax payer (40%) the relief is halved.

You may be de jure correct, but Tamas is de facto correct as well, as many buy to let mortgages were interest only in practice.

I still don't understand why writing off interest on a business loan was considered a scandal.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:24:38 PMI still don't understand why writing off interest on a business loan was considered a scandal.

It's not a business loan. "Buy to let" is a mortgage type which you can get for properties where you agree not to live in them for X months (6 months I think).

So people who could only get 0.2%  interest on their retirement nest egg from a bank could swoop in and buy up second-fourth properties with better conditions than people who actually wanted to live in them and had the same amount of deposit, driving prices higher.

And most of them would do that on interest-only mortgages, again being able to get even lower rates than people who needed the property to live in AND write that mortgage interest of.

If it's not a residential property, how is it not a business loan? 

And why the angst against interest only mortgages?  If the lender is prepared to take the risk on a loan that never declines, why is that a problem?  And of course people that are more credit worthy get lower rates.  Is this the first time people have realized that?

There is some subtext that is going on that is at the heart of the angst but I am not sure what it is.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:40:04 PMIf it's not a residential property, how is it not a business loan? 

And why the angst against interest only mortgages?  If the lender is prepared to take the risk on a loan that never declines, why is that a problem?  And of course people that are more credit worthy get lower rates.  Is this the first time people have realized that?

There is some subtext that is going on that is at the heart of the angst but I am not sure what it is.

Pretty sure this is about residential properties?

My understanding is that the legislation provided tax benefits for people to buy residential properties to rent out, but those same tax benefits were not available to people who wanted to buy residential properties for the purpose of living in them themselves.

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 12:52:16 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:40:04 PMIf it's not a residential property, how is it not a business loan? 

And why the angst against interest only mortgages?  If the lender is prepared to take the risk on a loan that never declines, why is that a problem?  And of course people that are more credit worthy get lower rates.  Is this the first time people have realized that?

There is some subtext that is going on that is at the heart of the angst but I am not sure what it is.

Pretty sure this is about residential properties?

My understanding is that the legislation provided tax benefits for people to buy residential properties to rent out, but those same tax benefits were not available to people who wanted to buy residential properties for the purpose of living in them themselves.

A residential property is one in which the owner resides.  Hence the name  ;)

If the properties are bought for the purpose of being rented to others, that property by definition is not a residential property. It is a rental property.

But I am starting to see the subtext, there appears to be angst that properties that might be bought as residential properties are instead being purchased and used as rental properties.  Why is that a bad thing?

QuoteBut I am starting to see the subtext, there appears to be angst that properties that might be bought as residential properties are instead being purchased and used as rental properties.  Why is that a bad thing?

Because it forces people to remain renters in a country where renters have little to no rights and safeguards.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:57:32 PMA residential property is one in which the owner resides.  Hence the name  ;)

If the properties are bought for the purpose of being rented to others, that property by definition is not a residential property, it is a rental property.

Ok.

And you don't understand the problem people have with the state providing financial benefits to people buying residential property and turning it into rental property, compared to the benefits provided to people wanting to buy residential property to reside in it?

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:02:46 PM

QuoteBut I am starting to see the subtext, there appears to be angst that properties that might be bought as residential properties are instead being purchased and used as rental properties.  Why is that a bad thing?

Because it forces people to remain renters in a country where renters have little to no rights and safeguards.

How does it force them? A person with a sufficient downpayment and income could also purchase the property.  The reason people rent is because they lack one or both of those things.  And so there is a necessity to create more rental units.  So back to my question.  If the imperative is to create more rental so that people can be housed, why the angst against policies designed to create more rental units?

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:05:00 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:57:32 PMA residential property is one in which the owner resides.  Hence the name  ;)

If the properties are bought for the purpose of being rented to others, that property by definition is not a residential property, it is a rental property.

Ok.

And you don't understand the problem people have with the state providing financial benefits to people buying residential property and turning it into rental property, compared to the benefits provided to people wanting to buy residential property to reside in it?

A property is not inherently either residential or rental property. Although I suppose if the state wished to make it so, it could do so by way of zoning restrictions. 

Same question to you, if the imperative is to create more housing, why the angst against policies which encourage the creation of rental units?

Is there some unstated assumption being made that if the properties were not being rented that the price of residential properties (i.e. those in which the owner resides) would drop?

In Sweden home prices are going up again after the dip. :)

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:57:32 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 12:52:16 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 12:40:04 PMIf it's not a residential property, how is it not a business loan? 

And why the angst against interest only mortgages?  If the lender is prepared to take the risk on a loan that never declines, why is that a problem?  And of course people that are more credit worthy get lower rates.  Is this the first time people have realized that?

There is some subtext that is going on that is at the heart of the angst but I am not sure what it is.

Pretty sure this is about residential properties?

My understanding is that the legislation provided tax benefits for people to buy residential properties to rent out, but those same tax benefits were not available to people who wanted to buy residential properties for the purpose of living in them themselves.

A residential property is one in which the owner resides.  Hence the name  ;)

If the properties are bought for the purpose of being rented to others, that property by definition is not a residential property. It is a rental property.

But I am starting to see the subtext, there appears to be angst that properties that might be bought as residential properties are instead being purchased and used as rental properties.  Why is that a bad thing?

It appears that it's because a) creating more landlords is not a good thing b) rent is more expensive than mortgages.

Isn't the answer to that to create even more rental supply?

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:10:44 PMA property is not inherently either residential or rental property. Although I suppose if the state wished to make it so, it could do so by way of zoning restrictions.

I'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

People buying existing housing for the purpose of renting it out got financial benefits that were not provided for people buying housing for the purpose of living in it.

This is either good public policy or not good public policy. The prevailing opinion in the UK seems to be that it's poor public policy, hence it's "a scandal".

You seem to be arguing that it was good public policy?

QuoteSame question to you, if the imperative is to create more housing, why the angst against policies which encourage the creation of rental units?

I think the criticism is that the scheme only created more rental units by cannibalizing units that previously were owner-occupied, not by increasing the housing stock?

And therefore served as a giveaway to people with enough capital to become landlords, with no impact on the amount of housing stock.

... but maybe that's not what happened?

QuoteIs there some unstated assumption being made that if the properties were not being rented that the price of residential properties (i.e. those in which the owner resides) would drop?

No, I think the criticism is that it made it harder for new buyers to enter the market as buyers while providing financial support for people with more money to build their wealth by becoming landlords - and that this happened without increasing housing stocks appreciably.

Now, the criticism may be incorrect - but that is what I understand the substance of the criticism to be.

Is it your contention that the buy-to-let scheme actually increased housing stock in the UK?

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMPeople buying existing housing for the purpose of renting it out got financial benefits that were not provided for people buying housing for the purpose of living in it.

Yes. The other side of this is that this tax relief applies to individuals who buy a property in their own name with a personal mortgage.

This type of tax relief (and lower taxes generally) would be available if they set up a company to hold the property. As I say on balance I think it's probably right to have got rid of it because I broadly think those individual, hobbyist landlords who are buying for retirement income are generally worse landlords than a corporate.

QuoteThis is either good public policy or not good public policy. The prevailing opinion in the UK seems to be that it's poor public policy, hence it's "a scandal".

You seem to be arguing that it was good public policy?

I think six of one half of the other :lol:

I think it's probably better to get rid of it than not. The downside has been that it has really impacted the profit for individual landlords, so I believe there has been a decline of properties available on the private rental market as those landlords get out - either selling properties to corporates or to individuals as owner-occupiers. I don't necessarily think it was a scandal though.

But I think the purpose was broadly to encourage that type of investment as a form of retirement saving. For an individual it was a tax efficient way to invest. For that policy goal of the 90s/00s Britain I think it worked.

On the other hand the reason it was got rid of was "fairness". For all that's posted on here, the last 14 years of Tory government have always tried to produce tax changes that can broadly be described as progressive (in particular by the IfS scorecard) - and have significantly increased the tax take as a proportion of GDP. I think a lot of that has actually just been by introducing complications.

But to the extent that their goal was to increase the tax take on higher rate tax payers v lower rate tax payers (while also leveling the plaing field between owner-occupiers and landlords) then they've met their goal.

I don't think either goal was to increase housing supply because it's not about supply or demand just ownership.

I see CC is in a mood again

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PMIf you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

I thought "residential properties" meant "housing" and used the term as such to make my point. I was not proposing a definition, and am happy to use any definition you prefer to clearly communicate my point - which is that financial benefits were provided to landlords and prospective landlords for buying housing, benefits which were not provided to people wanting to buy that exact same housing for the purpose of living in it themselves; and that that state of affairs is seen as poor public policy (hence "scandal") because it represented a wealth transfer to those who were well off, and did not positively impact the housing situation.

What I'm interested in learning about is whether that was in fact good public policy, ultimately insignificant, or whether it was in fact crappy public policy like Tamas, Josq, and others are saying.

I thought you might have some insight here, but if you are not interested in that line of discussion that is of course your prerogative.

If you have a different point to make, I'd be happy to hear it. Otherwise, have a nice day.

Quote from: Sheilbh on April 09, 2024, 02:00:34 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMPeople buying existing housing for the purpose of renting it out got financial benefits that were not provided for people buying housing for the purpose of living in it.

Yes. The other side of this is that this tax relief applies to individuals who buy a property in their own name with a personal mortgage.

This type of tax relief (and lower taxes generally) would be available if they set up a company to hold the property. As I say on balance I think it's probably right to have got rid of it because I broadly think those individual, hobbyist landlords who are buying for retirement income are generally worse landlords than a corporate.

QuoteThis is either good public policy or not good public policy. The prevailing opinion in the UK seems to be that it's poor public policy, hence it's "a scandal".

You seem to be arguing that it was good public policy?

I think six of one half of the other :lol:

I think it's probably better to get rid of it than not. The downside has been that it has really impacted the profit for individual landlords, so I believe there has been a decline of properties available on the private rental market as those landlords get out - either selling properties to corporates or to individuals as owner-occupiers. I don't necessarily think it was a scandal though.

But I think the purpose was broadly to encourage that type of investment as a form of retirement saving. For an individual it was a tax efficient way to invest. For that policy goal of the 90s/00s Britain I think it worked.

On the other hand the reason it was got rid of was "fairness". For all that's posted on here, the last 14 years of Tory government have always tried to produce tax changes that can broadly be described as progressive (in particular by the IfS scorecard) - and have significantly increased the tax take as a proportion of GDP. I think a lot of that has actually just been by introducing complications.

But to the extent that their goal was to increase the tax take on higher rate tax payers v lower rate tax payers (while also leveling the plaing field between owner-occupiers and landlords) then they've met their goal.

I don't think either goal was to increase housing supply because it's not about supply or demand just ownership.

Thank you :cheers:

QuoteSame question to you, if the imperative is to create more housing, why the angst against policies which encourage the creation of rental units?

This creation involves the elimination of owner occupier housing units.
And it isn't just a neutral replacement either. Demand is far outpacing supply and this is adding even more demand.

I suppose you could argue there is some actual creation going on where they subdivide a 3 bed house into 5 bedsits... But this is more a symptom of our problem than a solution.

Quote from: Gups on April 09, 2024, 12:05:06 PMNothing wrong with right to buy per se (originally a 1970s Labour policy promoted by the left of the party). It was the 40-60% discounts against market value and the fact that the receipts couldn't be spent on new housing that was the issue.

The left of the Labour party in the 70s wasn't exactly a font of universally good ideas. ;)

Even without the discounts its an idea with lots of issues.
It contributes to creating Swiss cheese social housing where you'll often find in a single block of flats 3 social landlords, 3 private individual landlords, 3 corporate private landlords, 3 owner-occupiers. Makes sorting out any maintenance works a absolute nightmare.
Even away from flats having such weirdly scattered estates can really reduce efficiency of maintenance and damage the ability of social landlords to do much more than the minimum, poor anti social behaviour management, etc...

Then there's also the factor that there's a big need for social housing in some areas where building more housing just isnt particularly practically possible.
It's often about more than just having the money. There's also having the sites and permission.
Even assuming they can get all this it leaves quite a large gap between a sale and a replacement.

Were it up to me I'd have some social housing built basically along shared ownership lines (though improvements definitely possible there) but most of the rest should be totally blocked from ever being sold.
Living in social housing should be a good enough deal you don't want to buy.
If you really really do have to, the reduced rents you're paying there should help you save for a house elsewhere.

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:48:02 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

I think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:23:05 PM

QuoteSame question to you, if the imperative is to create more housing, why the angst against policies which encourage the creation of rental units?

This creation involves the elimination of owner occupier housing units.
And it isn't just a neutral replacement either. Demand is far outpacing supply and this is adding even more demand.

I suppose you could argue there is some actual creation going on where they subdivide a 3 bed house into 5 bedsits... But this is more a symptom of our problem than a solution.

Implicit in your criticism is that housing units would have been purchased by those who are now renting those same units.  I suppose the further assumption is that the reason the first assumption is true is because the rent is higher than the carrying costs of actually purchasing.

And so, if that all of that is true, why didn't the renter just purchase the property in the first place?

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 02:33:44 PM

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:23:05 PM

QuoteSame question to you, if the imperative is to create more housing, why the angst against policies which encourage the creation of rental units?

This creation involves the elimination of owner occupier housing units.
And it isn't just a neutral replacement either. Demand is far outpacing supply and this is adding even more demand.

I suppose you could argue there is some actual creation going on where they subdivide a 3 bed house into 5 bedsits... But this is more a symptom of our problem than a solution.

Implicit in your criticism is that housing units would have been purchased by those who are now renting those same units.  I suppose the further assumption is that the reason the first assumption is true is because the rent is higher than the carrying costs of actually purchasing.

And so, if that all of that is true, why didn't the renter just purchase the property in the first place?

We are over simplifying here of course. But the basic answer would be that they could have afforded the house in a market where only people like themselves were interested in buying it to live in,  but not in a market where you have wealthier people offering greater sums to get it as a buy to let property.

QuoteI think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.   

Maybe a difference in tax law between countries here.
A lot of these buy to let people aren't getting business income off it. From what I gather its only once they get a sizable portfolio that it becomes best practice to setup a business.

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:39:23 PMWe are over simplifying here of course. But the basic answer would be that they could have afforded the house in a market where only people like themselves were interested in buying it to live in,  but not in a market where you have wealthier people offering greater sums to get it as a buy to let property.

Yes, that is the implicit assumption for sure.  But is there any support for that contention?  Prices are rising all over the world.  It is not a function of local tax policy regarding writing off interest.
 

QuoteMaybe a difference in tax law between countries here.
A lot of these buy to let people aren't getting business income off it. From what I gather its only once they get a sizable portfolio that it becomes best practice to setup a business.

I think there is perhaps another error of definition creeping in.  A business need not be a company.  The last time I looked at the stats, most businesses were actually not incorporated.  So if someone is running a business of renting property they are entitled to write off the costs of running that business, even if they are running the business as a sole proprietor (i.e. a non incorporated person who is taking the income personally as the owner of the business).

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 02:29:12 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:48:02 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

I think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.

So we agree residential property can also mean tenants as residents, good.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 03:20:24 PM

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:39:23 PMWe are over simplifying here of course. But the basic answer would be that they could have afforded the house in a market where only people like themselves were interested in buying it to live in,  but not in a market where you have wealthier people offering greater sums to get it as a buy to let property.

Yes, that is the implicit assumption for sure.  But is there any support for that contention?  Prices are rising all over the world.  It is not a function of local tax policy regarding writing off interest.
 

It's complicated as this isn't the only factor at play in the price of properties.
But certainly house price rises are wavering of late with lots of landlords getting out.

As I say too it's generally shifting who is missing out. Often the renters aren't people who can even afford to rent and are getting benefits to do this.
Often you also see people "dropping down a level" when it comes time to buy - rent in the poshest area, buy in the 2nd poshest.

So it's swings and roundabouts.
 Buy to let being crushed is a good thing, but it is having the effect that those who are losing out are far more commonly those on the bottom who are otherwise homeless and can't really flat share or live with parents as many of the buyers do.

On a short term this is a huge problem though longer term it seems right to me that the market is brought to this natural state and then the government need to do their job and properly provide for the poor themselves rather than subsidising buy to letters.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:31:24 PMIsn't the answer to that to create even more rental supply?

No, that's very bad. It gives even more power to the capital class.

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 03:25:21 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 02:29:12 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:48:02 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

I think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.

So we agree residential property can also mean tenants as residents, good.

Tenants are rent paying occupiers of the space. They have no rights as a resident of the property other than those granted under law to renters. The failure to draw distinction between ownership rights and rental rights is a fundamental error.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 05:04:22 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 03:25:21 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 02:29:12 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:48:02 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

I think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.

So we agree residential property can also mean tenants as residents, good.

Tenants are rent paying occupiers of the space. They have no rights as a resident of the property other than those granted under law to renters. The failure to draw distinction between ownership rights and rental rights is a fundamental error.

I don't know what you are on about I don't think we are having the debate you think we are having. You wrote it is incorrect to call rented out properties residential they should be called rental properties. In the UK I have never in 11 years heard that term used, however I had been desiflgnated a resident in properties I rented. So there is nothing to debate, you were wrong in the context of the topic which was the UK and may very well have been right in a Canada context which I did not challenge.

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 05:28:57 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 05:04:22 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 03:25:21 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 02:29:12 PM

Quote from: Tamas on April 09, 2024, 01:48:02 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:45:00 PM

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 01:32:11 PMI'm not interested in arguing definitions with you.

If you look back at your first post, you were the one who proposed a definition.  It was wrong, but it suited your argument.  It is too cute by half to now say you don't want to discuss whether the definition you gave that is the whole basis for your position is flawed or not.

It was not a wrong definition in the UK. A property with tenants or owner-occupiers in it is a residential property, NOT a commercial one.

I think you are misunderstanding another distinction in property law - the distinction between commercial property and other properties.  Rental property is certainly not commercial property, but it is property which is used for business purposes - ie. rental.

So we agree residential property can also mean tenants as residents, good.

Tenants are rent paying occupiers of the space. They have no rights as a resident of the property other than those granted under law to renters. The failure to draw distinction between ownership rights and rental rights is a fundamental error.

I don't know what you are on about I don't think we are having the debate you think we are having. You wrote it is incorrect to call rented out properties residential they should be called rental properties. In the UK I have never in 11 years heard that term used, however I had been desiflgnated a resident in properties I rented. So there is nothing to debate, you were wrong in the context of the topic which was the UK and may very well have been right in a Canada context which I did not challenge.

Really you have never heard something referred to as a rental property? I find that very hard to believe.  But if that's true, there must be some other British name for rental property.

Quote from: garbon on April 09, 2024, 02:02:32 PMI see CC is in a mood again

Well, yeah sloppy use of language to defend a public policy position is always problematic.

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 09, 2024, 04:23:16 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:31:24 PMIsn't the answer to that to create even more rental supply?

No, that's very bad. It gives even more power to the capital class.

A true Marxist, better for the system, to fail completely than to ameliorate the concerns of the poor and let the system continue.

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 04:22:19 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 03:20:24 PM

Quote from: Josquius on April 09, 2024, 02:39:23 PMWe are over simplifying here of course. But the basic answer would be that they could have afforded the house in a market where only people like themselves were interested in buying it to live in,  but not in a market where you have wealthier people offering greater sums to get it as a buy to let property.

Yes, that is the implicit assumption for sure.  But is there any support for that contention?  Prices are rising all over the world.  It is not a function of local tax policy regarding writing off interest.
 

It's complicated as this isn't the only factor at play in the price of properties.
But certainly house price rises are wavering of late with lots of landlords getting out.

As I say too it's generally shifting who is missing out. Often the renters aren't people who can even afford to rent and are getting benefits to do this.
Often you also see people "dropping down a level" when it comes time to buy - rent in the poshest area, buy in the 2nd poshest.

So it's swings and roundabouts.
 Buy to let being crushed is a good thing, but it is having the effect that those who are losing out are far more commonly those on the bottom who are otherwise homeless and can't really flat share or live with parents as many of the buyers do.

On a short term this is a huge problem though longer term it seems right to me that the market is brought to this natural state and then the government need to do their job and properly provide for the poor themselves rather than subsidising buy to letters.

But that's really the issue isn't it?  if you create public policy which forces out the number of rental units available, there are almost certainly going to be an increase number of homeless homeless people.

Which is why I stated the question the way I did, if providing more rental units is the imperative.

But you really seem to be disagreeing about is that assumed imperative.  You seem to be advocating for a public policy outcome which reduces rental units so that in the price of all property declines.

I think that's very bad public policy and does a great disservice to those who cannot afford to purchase their own homes.

Homelessness was very nearly wiped out by the last Labour government (and entirely during covid). It's vastly increased since 2010, but primarily because of austerity (particularly cuts to local government who are responsible for that).

It's one of the clearest, most obvious and shaming demonstrations of the last 14 years. Not sure it's been too much a function of property shortage (though the cost of social housing is) or ending the tax break for buy to let.

Sheilbh, is your understanding that buy to let:

1) Increased housing starts?

2) Significantly increased the availability of rental housing (potentially keeping rent relatively low), thus keeping homelessness lower?

Because if so, it seems pretty good.

Bloody millennials.  :mad:

(https://i.postimg.cc/Rh4zjjcV/image.png)

(Haven't read the article, but choose to believe it's a 100% accurate summary. :P )

It's true in Britain. External plumbing, separate hot and cold water, fake fireplaces, carpet in the bathrooms, washing machine in the kitchen.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 05:48:34 PMBut that's really the issue isn't it?  if you create public policy which forces out the number of rental units available, there are almost certainly going to be an increase number of homeless homeless people.

Which is why I stated the question the way I did, if providing more rental units is the imperative.

But you really seem to be disagreeing about is that assumed imperative.  You seem to be advocating for a public policy outcome which reduces rental units so that in the price of all property declines.

I think that's very bad public policy and does a great disservice to those who cannot afford to purchase their own homes.

We need to underline again though that the number of available homes isn't being reduced. Pieces are just being shuffled around the board to make things more equitable.

You have the old way, where people with buy to let mortgages are making unearned money. Often this is off the government paying decent money to house (very often in shit conditions) people that can't afford housing themselves and, due to past penny wise pound foolish policies, the government can't house in a more efficient way.
Then you have the shift, where people with some money who were previously priced out of affording a home will be more able to afford one.

The fundamental problem still remains - we haven't built nearly enough houses.
However providing for this bottom rung group who are just trying not to be properly homeless is much easier to do than meeting the needs of those who are a few steps above beggars can't be choosers.

Somewhat related to the problem and shifting demand issues, but not due to to these recent changes... A great place we saw this shift locally was in a part of town called Heaton. Traditionally a working class/verging on middle class, decent residential area, go back 15 years and it was rapidly becoming a student ghetto. People were buying up family homes that went on the market and subdividing them into basic HMOs for students.

Building more family homes- nightmare. Space is at a premium. You need a lot of land to provide for what that market demands. Especially if you're going for this outer-city/inner-suburb location that was really appealing.

Building more student homes on the other hand... they're single young people. They don't need much. Tower blocks being built around the city centre house them far more efficiently and in a way that is better for the students themselves- they want to be near the centre where the universities and the pubs are.

Today there's been a big shift of students into living in these new blocks around the centre whilst Heaton is frequently being mentioned in the national press as a real up and coming funky area for young families.

The only losers are the people who wanted to make money buying property then charging basically the same rent they would have done for the whole house to each of the 5 students they packed into the house (I'm seriously annoyed about this in hindsight). Sadly they've largely been replaced by corporate landlords owning the tower blocks and who also overcharging, but you can't win them all.

Quote from: Jacob on April 09, 2024, 06:43:45 PMSheilbh, is your understanding that buy to let:

1) Increased housing starts?

My read - which could be wrong - is that it basically had no impact on this. It increased the size of the private rental sector and was also part of social housing (as housing benefit is up to a % of market rent and largely goes to private landlords). So it changed the ownership mix of housing stock, but I think it's probably unlikely to have made a huge difference to the amount of housing stock. One slight caveat is I suspect buy to let owners may have divided houses - so, for example, terraced houses in London split into two or three one bed flats (I live in one now).

But generally I don't think it's a factor not least because the people who benefit from the buy to let rates are people who arre buying and taking out mortgages in their own name. They're not setting up a company which would be a more tax efficient way of doing it (and probably better from a liability perspective). So I don't think they're going to be capable of doing the build to let approach.

Also, as I've mentioned before, our planning system can be unpredictable and involve long which means we have far, far fewer "small" developers than countries like France and Germany. That sector is dominated by bigger players who can afford the risk (it's why I think planning reform could increase supply but also sources of supply, make it more competitive and diverse in terms of what's being built). But buy to let are basically in the already built market.

Quote2) Significantly increased the availability of rental housing (potentially keeping rent relatively low), thus keeping homelessness lower?

Because if so, it seems pretty good.

So I think this is a bit of a maybe. As I say my understanding is that analysts have said that one of the factors driving rents at the minute (which are increasing a lot faster than house prices) is that buy to let landlords are getting out of the market. It may also be a factor in house prices flat-lining. Some are professionalising and incorporating a company to take hold the property because there's still tax benefits that way, but others are just selling up either to owner-occupiers or corporate landlords. So even if that isn't necessarily changing the availability of homes to rent structurally it means there's an uneven market as they're sold/change hands.

Anecdotally I know a few people who have had that experience that the landlord won't renew their tenancy because they intend to sell. Similarly I believe the previous owner of my flat (which I now own with a mortgage) was a buy to let landlord.

On the interaction with homelessness, I'm not so sure. I think part of it is possibly related to rent prices increasing as private renters tend to be most at risk, so if the change to buy to let has increased rents then it's a factor. But I'm not sure it's a big one.

As I say the last Labour government had rough sleeping down to about 500 people in the UK. From everything I've read it was very, very difficult to get the number lower because those people's needs were quite difficult to meet and there was an element of "lifestyle choice" for a hard core within that group. But "lifestyle choice" was a phrase Suella Braverman used to describe the current situation which is just wrong. This year I think the estimate is that there's around 4,000 rough sleepers which is vastly higher - I don't think those extra 3,500 people who Labour had housed have made a new "lifestyle choice" in the last 15 years.

However beyond rough sleepers there are other categories of homelessness - people with precarious housing/unofficially homeless (in shelters, B&Bs, squats etc), the statutorily homeless (declared to their local authority and seeking support) and others. I think the big drivers of that are less to do with availability or even price of properties to rent and more to do with benefit reforms by George Osborne as part of austerity - in particular the benefit cap, the two child benefit limit, the way universal credit works where that's been introduced and the "bedroom tax". It's really difficult to compare homelessness with now and 2010, as the rough sleepers are just the visibly homeless, and there's been changes to statistic collection so we have far better data now (this is one of the slight curses of this government is that on lots of metrics they're condemned for, often it's literally because we've only recently started counting - so some of those condemnations are fair, others probably not) - but overall it looks like homelessness has at least doubled in the last 15 years.

That then can lead to rough sleeping because, for people who are homeless the support is from the local authority, but local authorities have a lot of statutory duties (roads, bins, social care for adults, social care for kids, safeguarding etc). As part of austerity central government funding to local government was cut hugely - I think it's climbing again now but about a 50% cut of core funding from 2010 to 2020. Understandably local authorities have often made the decision to cut back on everything else they can to protect the budget for children's services, children's social care etc - and that goes for homelessness too. While the funding has been cut the priority and focus for local authorities in emergency housing and that sort of thing has gone to families with children.

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 05:44:00 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 09, 2024, 04:23:16 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:31:24 PMIsn't the answer to that to create even more rental supply?

No, that's very bad. It gives even more power to the capital class.

A true Marxist, better for the system, to fail completely than to ameliorate the concerns of the poor and let the system continue.

You don't get to have a revolution when the bellies are full. :)

Unless Tolkien was bitching specifically about stuff in *his* back yard I wouldn't call him a NIMBY.

woops

Quote from: viper37 on April 10, 2024, 04:42:21 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 05:44:00 PM

Quote from: Grey Fox on April 09, 2024, 04:23:16 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on April 09, 2024, 01:31:24 PMIsn't the answer to that to create even more rental supply?

No, that's very bad. It gives even more power to the capital class.

A true Marxist, better for the system, to fail completely than to ameliorate the concerns of the poor and let the system continue.

You don't get to have a revolution when the bellies are full. :)

True that