UK House prices: News & Views

[G0ldfinger]

No, it was 2005.

 

GF you need to do a shorter-term chart too. 10 years or something

It actually was back in 2004.

 

http://gold.approximity.com/since1999/UK_H...es_in_Gold.html

 

People who sold their house in 2004 and bought silver from the proceeds can now buy 5.5 houses back!

Anyone? And silver is NOT done here, that's for sure!

 

http://gold.approximity.com/since1999/UK_H..._in_Silver.html

[frizzers]

[tinecu]

It actually was back in 2004.

 

http://gold.approximity.com/since1999/UK_H...es_in_Gold.html

 

People who sold their house in 2004 and bought silver from the proceeds can now buy 5.5 houses back!

Anyone? And silver is NOT done here, that's for sure!

 

http://gold.approximity.com/since1999/UK_H..._in_Silver.html

Nice graphs GF

[drbubb]

People who sold their house in 2004 and bought silver from the proceeds can now buy 5.5 houses back!

Anyone? And silver is NOT done here, that's for sure!

Sounds crazy, eh?

 

Iknow it may sound like "bragging" to some here, but there is a strange reality:

I sold my UK property in 2001, and bought Gold shares, with the profits from the, I was able to buy 10 flats

in Hong Kong in 2007-8.

 

And those flats have outperformed UK property.

 

I wish I could tell you what is screaming buy like precious metals were in 2001-4.

I am searching for something ... It isn't Silver today - that's for sure.

 

Silver today may be where Uk property was in 2004

[G0ldfinger]

...

Silver today may be where Uk property was in 2004

No.

[TrueNorth]

Thanks GF and CC.

[G0ldfinger]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/0...-crisis-bailout

The roof falls in on Ireland's Millionaires Row

In 2007 Shrewsbury Road in Dublin was the sixth most expensive street in the world. Now, post-crash, homes have been abandoned and the tycoon residents have run for the hills

...

The sharpest drop has been at the top of the market."

[drbubb]

The roof falls in on Ireland's Millionaires Row

 

In 2007 Shrewsbury Road in Dublin was the sixth most expensive street in the world. Now, post-crash, homes have been abandoned and the tycoon residents have run for the hills

...

The sharpest drop has been at the top of the market."

== ==

"...where prices have crashed by 50% or more."

"... the sixth most expensive street in the world, ahead of Beverly Hills's Carolwood Drive and St Moritz's ritzy Via Suvretta. ...where prices have crashed by at least two-thirds. 'It's right in the centre of things; it's a street that's always achieved top prices'..."

/source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/0...-crisis-bailout

 

At some stage in a crash, you see that: The High End falls more, because wealth has been destroyed for everyone and even many of those who had money find they have to downsize their commitments. Some jeave the country for greener pastures elsewhere. While others are afraid to buy, and no long see property as a one way bet.

 

Niall O'Farrell, the founder of a chain of formalwear shops, Black Tie, who stars on the Irish version of the television show Dragons' Den. O'Farrell is trying to sell his house – initially for €14m, although the price has been drastically cut in recent weeks to €8m.

 

Derek Quinlan, the property magnate who part-owns Claridges hotel, is also looking for a buyer for his Shrewsbury Road residence, priced at €7.5m, after quitting Ireland in favour of Switzerland a year ago. Nobody is biting. A house hasn't changed hands on Shrewsbury Road for two years.

 

The UK is probably AT LEAST 18-24 months away from this realisation. It happens closer to the end than the beginning of the slide. And it takes time to destroy long-held confidence.

[fitkid]

The roof falls in on Ireland's Millionaires Row

 

In 2007 Shrewsbury Road in Dublin was the sixth most expensive street in the world. Now, post-crash, homes have been abandoned and the tycoon residents have run for the hills

...

The sharpest drop has been at the top of the market."

== ==

"...where prices have crashed by 50% or more."

"... the sixth most expensive street in the world, ahead of Beverly Hills's Carolwood Drive and St Moritz's ritzy Via Suvretta. ...where prices have crashed by at least two-thirds. 'It's right in the centre of things; it's a street that's always achieved top prices'..."

 

At some stage in a crash, you see that: The High End falls more, because wealth has been destroyed for everyone and even many of those who had money find they have to downsize their commitments. Others are afraid to buy, and no long see property as a one way bet.

 

The UK may be AT LEAST 18-24 months away from this realisation

 

The UK may be AT LEAST 18-24 months away from this realisation

 

Well we do agree on some things.

I see that sort of timescale approx 18 months behind the US and can see severe corrections all the elements are falling into place for a disaster.

[fitkid]

Why is there a constant stream of people demanding the government "do something"? Just what are the government supposed to do?

 

Carry on whith the show what more do you expect.

 

From:

 

 

 

[G0ldfinger]

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...howtopic=156023

Greetings, I was out today looking at a repo house and the agent told me she is starting to see more repossessions come on to the market in North Wiltshire after a complete stoppage of them for a year. I was told they are being put on slowly and most planned for next year.

 

I asked about the market generally and was told that they are selling but the vendors are having to take big hits on asking prices to get sold. There is a lot hanging about that is just too expensive.

 

All good news from Wiltshire

From the same thread:

I've noticed the same in my almost daily search of Bristol and 20 miles surrounding it. All of a sudden I see decent houses coming up for auction, which hasn't been the case for a very long time. And these are real auctions, with the tape clearly visible on the toilets.

 

Every day probably one or two out of a list of ~160 properties.

[neil324]

My area of Birmingham have noticed quite a few repo's this last month, some ok prices to.

 

Also there was about 4/5 new build flats that was built 2006/2007, these were marketed for some time at just below what was paid in 2006/2007, one sold the rest was pulled off the market. So banks are definitely trying to manage the falls.

[fitkid]

THE MASSES.

 

Yes the bbc need to correct their page.

But i dont believe the prices were higher at all there has been no transaction volume or any real market for the last 2 years except in the auction room.Where prices have been discounted heavily.ZIRP, LIES, DAMN LIES AND STATISTICS from a country wholly dependant on its property market for survival is the REAL SAD TRUTH.

 

An example a local commercial property came to market approx 12 months ago a former ethel austin retail outlet.It was marketed by the agent for £450,000.00.It recently ie last 3 weeks went to auction for a guide price of £250,000.00 -£275,000.00 and realised a sale at £300,000.00 at auction.The property has recently been tennanted by a local discount retailer on a rolling month contract with a 24 hour severance with a yield of £18,000.00 per annum.Someone clearly lost their brains or had a funny twitch in the auction room and forgot to pack their calculator.

I can easily see the tennant vacating and the yield being zero after xmas.The purchaser probably (very mistaken in my opinion) thought he was getting a bargain as the price was discounted from £450k to their bid of £300k but it is only worth £150k in a REALISTIC market.

NOW THAT FOR ME STIIL SHOWS PROPERTY FEVER IS STILL GRIPPING BRAINLESS BRITS.

The property has recently been tennanted by a local discount retailer on a rolling month contract with a 24 hour severance with a yield of £18,000.00 per annum.Someone clearly lost their brains or had a funny twitch in the auction room and forgot to pack their calculator.

I can easily see the tennant vacating and the yield being zero after xmas

 

Well that 'NOSTRADAMUS' prediction did'nt take long to transpire walked past that retailer today and they have covered the windows with

 

"CLOSING DOWN SALE

ALL STOCK MUST GO

BY 8th JANUARY 2011"

 

Not really dificult to see,just bleedin obvious.At least they are giving more than 24 hours notice.

 

I hope he gets the twitch sorted and takes his brains and calculator to the next auction.

[drbubb]

BEATING THE RUSH? / Prices dropped 15%

QUOTE

REDROW just discounted their major development in Loughton (London - zone 6) by nice 15% ...

Perhaps they have some cash flow "issues" or they just see the market tanking hard and fast ????

Are the new builds a good indicator of the market???

I think so as the developers can not just wait for couple of years. They have to sell what they build ASAP ...

Old price £326k:

New price £284k:

UNQUOTE

 

/per HPC thread: http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/ind...156631&st=0

[d2thdr]

Sounds crazy, eh?

 

Iknow it may sound like "bragging" to some here, but there is a strange reality:

I sold my UK property in 2001, and bought Gold shares, with the profits from the, I was able to buy 10 flats

in Hong Kong in 2007-8.

 

And those flats have outperformed UK property.

 

I wish I could tell you what is screaming buy like precious metals were in 2001-4.

I am searching for something ... It isn't Silver today - that's for sure.

 

Silver today may be where Uk property was in 2004

 

I actually agree with you. I think Silver will do well, but gold will do a lot lot better. If given a choice today, I would rather buy gold than silver. I think I would ride the silver bull to 75$, but sell it off then for some more gold.

[drbubb]

I actually agree with you. I think Silver will do well, but gold will do a lot lot better. If given a choice today, I would rather buy gold than silver. I think I would ride the silver bull to 75$, but sell it off then for some more gold.

Possibly, just possibly... Put options may be where Gold was back in 2004-5

[G0ldfinger]

Let's analyze this a little further.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/persona...-withdrawn.html

Fresh mortgage drought warning as banks lending targets withdrawn

...

House-hunters have been warned to expect a New Year mortgage drought as Britain's nationalised banks will no longer be obliged to offer affordable home loans

Bring it on!

 

Under the terms of the bail-out deal struck with Government at the height of the financial crisis, Britain’s biggest high street lenders were set targets for how much they must lend to housebuyers.

A despicable attempt of market manipulation.

 

These targets were imposed to ensure that ordinary people could still borrow money during the recession, ...

If only 50% of lending was a available, then a drop of 50% in house prices would solve the problem. No manipulation needed.

 

... and have helped stimulate the property market over the past two years.

Stimulate? High house prices are bad for everyone, stupid! Look, like high food prices, why should high house prices be good?

 

The best rates are already reserved for borrowers with large deposits.

Exactly how it should be, my dear.

 

Experts said it would become even tougher for borrowers with such small deposits once the lending targets are no longer in place.

Very good. If they haven't saved anything, they should be renting.

[G0ldfinger]

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE

 

“But the real problem is that there is not enough competition between the banks.

Uh, ah, a banking cartel? And that from a paper bug!?

 

“The way to increase competition is by forcing them to reduce their rates and start lending again, it is a regulatory problem.”

B/S. They want high rates so they become sound again so they can compete. Low rates will ruin them, stupid.

 

A lot of people would be asking where has all our money gone.

To the banksters, to China, and in the commodities and gold market, stupid.

 

“A shortage of lending for first time buyers at higher loan to values is acting as a constraint on the market.”

Good! Imagine a place where house prices would be 70% off! Paradise!

 

A spokesman for Lloyds Banking Group said: “Mortgages are very much available for borrowers and we continue to approve in excess of eight out of 10 mortgage applications.

This is the real problem, stupid.

[G0ldfinger]

please explain further

Say, the banks wanted all deposits 50% higher (relative to the house price) and would only be willing to provide 50% of the loan volume than in previous years.

 

If so, then a 50% HPC would solve the problem:

 

(i) Any cash deposit for a 100% house would be double the deposit for a 50% house.

 

(ii) Since HPs would have crashed 50%, in fact LESS than 50% of the original mortgage would be needed (because the deposit has now double the relative size).

 

But what are our politicians doing? They fudge it up and make one big cluster fudge out of it!

 

EDIT: Here an example:

 

House costs 200,000, person has 20,000 cash deposit. Needs a loan of 180,000 with a LTV of 90%.

Now HPs crash 50%.

House is worth 100,000, person still has 20,000 cash deposit. Needs a loan of 80,000 (less than half of 180,000) with a LTV of 80%.

 

Conclusion: a HPC of 50% would make everyone happy!

[BoldAsBrass]

The pathetic attempts to put a positive spin on the figures sums up this joke of a government perfectly. I wonder what the bovine excrement being fed to the masses in 12 months will be?

 

Would you prefer a government that said ....'Look chaps, the last lot made a right mess and let house prices get completely out of control. So we are going to do everything we can to get them back down again.'

 

Electoral suicide apart, what would the consequences be of a 50% fall in the price of property?

 

Well any repossessions would force banks to re-value the assets against which their loans are secured. Which would mean every bank and building society becoming technically insolvent. There would probably be bank runs as savers raced to get their money out and the banking system would collapse.

 

This didn't happen in the late 80s/early 90s because the amount of money lent into the property market then was a mere bagatelle compared to the amount lent to fuel this 10 year old bubble.

 

So, no banking system. How would the economy function without banks? The goverment would have to run a clearance system - to enable money to continue to be moved electronically - but, there wouldn't be any lending - the savers will have taken their toys home.

 

The present government's duty and intention is to get out the hole dug by the last government - without an economic crisis. Which is why what we are going to get is inflation and real terms reductions in house prices over a very extended period.

 

 

[BoldAsBrass]

House cost 200,000, person had 20,000 cash deposit. Person has loan of 180,000 with a LTV of 90%.

 

First, let's think about how many loans like this have been taken out over the last 10 years. Millions? And a lot of them were for 95%, 100% or, in some truly insane cases, 125%.

 

So, bank has lent 180k secured against an asset 'worth' 200k.

 

Now HPs crash 50%.

 

Suddenly bank has lent 180k secured against an asset now 'worth' 100k. The economy is in a tail spin because house prices are falling and people are not spending money and unemployment and repossessions stalk the land.

 

The bank repossesses a house originally valued at 200k and sells it at auction for 100k. Apart from the 80k loss (which it may take forever to recover from the repossessed mortgagee) - it now has to acknowledge that its entire loan book is underwater - perhaps by as much as an average of 25% (who knows?)

 

One thing is certain - the bank is now flouting all the capital adequacy rules and must rebuild its capital base. How would it do that? Who is going to buy bank shares in this situation? We've already had one banking crisis and bail out. I can't see people queuing up to buy bank shares in the next crisis.

 

Waiting in the wings, of course, are the priced out younger generation. But, in the situation above, who is going to give them the 80k mortgage they now need to buy the 100k property. The banks sure as hell won't have the money to lend.

 

Conclusion: a HPC of 50% would make everyone UNhappy!

[drbubb]

Thanks for drawing up this scenario...

 

...has to acknowledge that its entire loan book is underwater - perhaps by as much as an average of 25% (who knows?)

 

One thing is certain - the bank is now flouting all the capital adequacy rules and must rebuild its capital base. How would it do that? Who is going to buy bank shares in this situation? We've already had one banking crisis and bail out. I can't see people queuing up to buy bank shares in the next crisis.

 

Waiting in the wings, of course, are the priced out younger generation. But, in the situation above, who is going to give them the 80k mortgage they now need to buy the 100k property. The banks sure as hell won't have the money to lend.

 

Conclusion: a HPC of 50% would make everyone UNhappy!

Happy or not, it may come.

 

Here's what I suggest, let the old banks crash and burn. (But give depositors 95-98% of their money back)

Set up new banks, with better management and more prudent lending policies.

 

Most people will be happy with a maximum of 50-60% LTV if house prices are cheap enough to start with.

 

"who is going to give them the 80k mortgage they now need to buy the 100k property."

 

Post crash, there will be plenty of cheap properties, and even a few surviving landlords, who can then rebuild.

The landlords should be maybe 50%LTV maximum, and FTBers maybe 60%LTV maximum.

 

The problem will not be: how can FTBers afford the properties, it will be who can the banks find to take the unwanted properties off their hands. The FTBers will set the prices, not the BTL kings or the vendors.

[BoldAsBrass]

Thanks for drawing up this scenario...

 

Happy or not, it may come.

 

Here's what I suggest, let the old banks crash and burn. (But give depositors 95-98% of their money back)

 

Where would the money come from to give depositors their money back? With all the banks underwater to the tune of billions each - how could you let them crash and burn? Someone would have to take over the debts - and they would be in the same position. Loan book of 2x secured against assets of 1x. Still bankrupt and, most importantly, still unable to lend money.

[BoldAsBrass]

Thanks for drawing up this scenario...

 

 

Happy or not, it may come.

 

Here's what I suggest, let the old banks crash and burn. (But give depositors 95-98% of their money back)

Set up new banks, with better management and more prudent lending policies.

 

Most people will be happy with a maximum of 50-60% LTV if house prices are cheap enough to start with.

 

"who is going to give them the 80k mortgage they now need to buy the 100k property."

 

Post crash, there will be plenty of cheap properties, and even a few surviving landlords, who can then rebuild.

The landlords should be maybe 50%LTV maximum, and FTBers maybe 60%LTV maximum.

 

The problem will not be: how can FTBers afford the properties, it will be who can the banks find to take the unwanted properties off their hands. The FTBers will set the prices, not the BTL kings or the vendors.

 

An FTB can't set the price if there is no-one around to lend money to him.

[romans holiday]

Where would the money come from to give depositors their money back? With all the banks underwater to the tune of billions each - how could you let them crash and burn? Someone would have to take over the debts - and they would be in the same position. Loan book of 2x secured against assets of 1x. Still bankrupt and, most importantly, still unable to lend money.

I always thought [along with Roubini] that the best strategy to sorting the mess out would have been to nationalize the banks.