advertisement


House prices - Loadsamoney

It's not that affordable or lower-end house are not saleable...the issue is that there's much more profit in mid to higher-end housing so that's what gets built.

Clive

My brother has just retired as a building project manager and has been in the building trade all his life. His final project was 30 very expensive 2 bed apartments and they sold before the foundations were even built. Yes they made a good profit and he will no doubt get a good bonus but he has told me time and time again, the more expensive houses are the easiest to sell.

The most intense discussions on housing estates under section 160 are what percentage the affordable houses should be. Experience shows time after time that the cheap houses are the last ones to sell.

Making statements such as yours is bland and misleading.

Mick
 
The affordable housing commitments are simply a joke here in Camden. The council has been selling off a load of assets (that's another story) and developers are managing to weasel out the affordable housing comments by making good in some other way. A new rose bush here, clean a toilet over here, etc...

Quite a few new folks have moved in over the 12 years with the development but public services simply haven't adjusted to compensate with the demand.
 
Glad to see your post didn't upset the apple cart Mick.

Wouldn't want humane considerations to get in the way of profiteering after all would we?

Merlin

That is a dead easy snipe, now just say how you would solve the problem.

I have made a suggestion, please feel free to criticise it, but no more silly snipes please.

Mick
 
Are there no cheap terraced houses in your area. My first terraced house was £2500 in 1976 which had an outside toilet (average pay then probably about £3000), it was cheaper to pay the bank loan than rent a bedsit. I built an extension and moved onto a semi bungalow £23,000 in 1984 (average pay probably £8000). When the kids came along we purchased a 3 bed detatched £81,000 in 1994 (average pay probably £15,000).
Before everyone starts saying this has absolutely nothing to do with todays situation can i offer some advice on need.
1. My first house did not need to be where i would live all your life.
2. I did not need new furniture the sale rooms stuff was ok.
3. I ran an old car.
4. I purchased houses that needed work so i added value for my next step on the property ladder.
5. Buy and sell houses yourself you do not need estate agents.
6. You do not need solicitors to do all the conveyancing.
7. It took me about 3 months of renting to realise it was money down the drain and i was prepared to live in a rougher area than i could rent.

So your first place was a fair bit LESS than the average salary. I don't think that gives you any place to advise anyone buying their first property. It's hopeless. As mentioned earlier, unless you inherit a huge sum or are helped by parents, it is all but impossible to buy anything whatsoever in many areas of the UK. Added to that, many people are on zero hour contracts. What chance of a mortgage or saving for a deposit then?
 
Are there no cheap terraced houses in your area. My first terraced house was £2500 in 1976 which had an outside toilet (average pay then probably about £3000), it was cheaper to pay the bank loan than rent a bedsit. I built an extension and moved onto a semi bungalow £23,000 in 1984 (average pay probably £8000). When the kids came along we purchased a 3 bed detatched £81,000 in 1994 (average pay probably £15,000).
Before everyone starts saying this has absolutely nothing to do with todays situation can i offer some advice on need.
1. My first house did not need to be where i would live all your life.
2. I did not need new furniture the sale rooms stuff was ok.
3. I ran an old car.
4. I purchased houses that needed work so i added value for my next step on the property ladder.
5. Buy and sell houses yourself you do not need estate agents.
6. You do not need solicitors to do all the conveyancing.
7. It took me about 3 months of renting to realise it was money down the drain and i was prepared to live in a rougher area than i could rent.

I think you've missed the point - you are assuming that nothing has changed - where as everything has. My parents had an almost identical experience to yourself, however they are not saying 'what is the problem?' but realise that they did in fact have an easier time of things:

1) Wages increased in line with house price increases.
2) I'm assuming you sold your houses for significantly more than you bought them, helping fund the increased purchase price of the next.
3) By your metric there should be cheap terrace houses available for around £17k if the average wage is £20k. There are not - they start at about £120k round here.
4) My starting wage was £18k in 2001, the average was still about £15k. If we followed the same wage growth over 15 years the average wage would be around £60k. It isn't.
 
The only way to make housing more affordable with limited land is to go for higher density housing with more advanced construction techniques, I.e factory pre built sections and assembled on site.
 
There is plenty of land. What is needed is the will to sort out the mess that started in the '80's.
 
Clive

My brother has just retired as a building project manager and has been in the building trade all his life. His final project was 30 very expensive 2 bed apartments and they sold before the foundations were even built. Yes they made a good profit and he will no doubt get a good bonus but he has told me time and time again, the more expensive houses are the easiest to sell.

The most intense discussions on housing estates under section 160 are what percentage the affordable houses should be. Experience shows time after time that the cheap houses are the last ones to sell.

Making statements such as yours is bland and misleading.

Mick
Well Mick, forgive me now for stating the obvious and no doubt being bland....

It's also very much about location. Build in desirable location and you'll sell. Build in a challenging (poor, grotty whatever, choose your bland term) area and of course properties will be tough to sell, as would expensive housing - even more so in such an area. Location, location, location. Where do they normally want to build affordable housing? Of course the building plots are more affordable but until there's away around this we'll be stuck in the hole we're in. We have little mixed housing, we have poor, mid priceed and expensive gettos.
 
Chaps

Sitting behind a pc complaining about the price of housing is dead easy, any moron can do it. What we need is sensible answers and not one person in this thread has even remotely approached that.

Building companies have never built affordable housing because no one buys them. If they were sellable, they would be built by the thousands. No builder will build a house that no one buys.

....

The moment you build the right amount of houses, the prices will fall.

Agreed on the solution Mick, and I didn't mean to whinge - however it does annoy me when people who have houses moan at those you can't. Walk a mile in the other person's shoes and all that.

However I would contend that the problems are not that no one will buy an affordable home, it's just that developers are lazy and greedy so are incapable of building houses that are affordable.

First, they are allowed to value the land at whatever they can get away with, typically they sit on land until the price is right to make the required profit. If you were not allowed to make a profit on the land for affordable housing then this may combat that side of things.

From my experience builders are grossly inefficient. They probably spend at least 50% more than necessary in some cases due to incompetence. Project managed and manufactured in the right way my house should cost less that £80k to build, its around 1100 square feet, three stories with 4 beds.

I know that my developer struggled to turn a profit on our phase of the development, however they had to:
Rebuild our back fence three times;
Repaint our front door twice;
Replace a newl post;
Re-fix and paint the entire first floor dot n dab on one wall;
Re-turf our lawn;
Re-lay the entire downstairs vinyl;
and probably more that I have forgotten.

They had to re-lay the pavements in our close because the council rejected the first lot, and I think they've also had to completely re-turf the play park as it still isn't open, so my guess is that the council rejected it the first time round.

The most comical/frustrating sage involved the flooding of our back garden. Water was springing up from next door and cascading over our retaining wall - it was a water feature that Chelsea Flower Show would give an award too!

After over a year of faffing and installing drainage in front of our french doors (to stop the house flooding) they finally decided to install some more land & french drains in next door's garden. After a day a half of two blokes sweating away in the August heat digging trenches they had to wait for the chippings to arrive. Although the developer hadn't requested it, one of the blokes (a contractor) took the initiative to investigate the hole in next doors garden where the water had come up from. To his surprise he found a french drain that had somehow been disconnected.

Two days of labour and the cost of 25m of drainage could have been solved in an hour. At no point did any of these 'professional builders' think to check the drainage plan and investigate the water source. Even the contracts managers had come to have a look. Any high and it would have been the construction director himself - clueless.

From my experience house builders in this country are useless. They all seem to offer the same amount on incompetence. If we could build decent houses for decent prices - there would still be profit - but the availability of more cheaply priced homes would help correct the market.

The way it stands I think a crash/correction is inevitable at some point. Unless loads of people move into the area in 20 years time I have no idea who will buy all the £500k+ houses that will be vacant when all the pensioners die, because they all acknowledge that their kids won't be able to afford them - the houses will probably be remortgaged or sold anyway to pay for healthcare costs the way things are going...
 
Might be a good idea to put some infrastructure spending in places that currently do not have a lot, they would then be more attractive places to invest and live in, old mining towns for example but no, London gets most if it.
 
The question really is how much have you spent in repayments over the years in order to climb the ladder Colin. Are you still repaying?

Where I live, a nasty three bedroom ex council semi is around half a million.

Not sure what kids are earning now but it's difficult to imagine them living comfortably by the time they reach middle age.

Mortgages paid off and new ones taken out to purchase rental properties.
 
Clive

My brother has just retired as a building project manager and has been in the building trade all his life. His final project was 30 very expensive 2 bed apartments and they sold before the foundations were even built. Yes they made a good profit and he will no doubt get a good bonus but he has told me time and time again, the more expensive houses are the easiest to sell.

The most intense discussions on housing estates under section 160 are what percentage the affordable houses should be. Experience shows time after time that the cheap houses are the last ones to sell.

Making statements such as yours is bland and misleading.

Mick

OK - so yes, one of the cheapest houses (or maybe even the cheapest house) in our close (of 20 houses) was the last to sell. However it was not rocket science to figure out why.

1) I think it was priced at £112k, but 20% was still owned by the developer, meaning that when the first purchaser came to sell the house it would have to sell for £140k for the purchaser to get their £112k back so that the developer got their 20% (£28k) - so that would have put some people off - although you were only paying £112k the developer was saying it was worth £140k - it's just been resold, but took a while to shift.

2) It was a 2 bed coach house flat but some bright spark who laid out the development:
a) Didn't give it a garage, even though all the other flats came with one (there are 3 garages under the flat - usually one is the flat's, the others are let at a peppercorn to another house - like ours).
b) Didn't give it a garden

3) The other similar flats in the close sold for £125k if the purchaser haggled well, these came with a garden and garage, and full ownership.

Using the same valuation, if you knock off £10k for the lack of garage and garden then the flat should have been priced at £115k for full ownership or £92k for part ownership. At this price I'm sure it would have been snapped up rather than sat around for the 12 months or so that it did.

Aside from that - the flats are overpriced anyway - they should cost less than £50k to build, so realistically the £140k flat should have been priced at £120k* and sold for £108k or something like that - the hard to shift flat would have then been priced at £78k for shared ownership - and there, hey presto, we have what is actually an affordable home.

House builders are just incompetent idiots - but we are stuck with their dumb logic and lazy ways unless somehow they are forced to change.

*One of the flats sold for £140k in May 2014 (when built) but only sold for £118k in July 2015 showing it was overpriced. However it's probably regained in value for the new owners as the high priced homes that Bovis are building are pushing up the property prices. Because we bought our house at a discount it could be worth as much as £40k more according to Zoopla - however it is just a correction as I think some of the houses on our estate were underpriced anyway - or slightly below the price curve at least. The same house type was selling in 2007 for £225k. Still doesn't mean we can afford to move as anything bigger is a lot more money - will help when we remortgage though.
 
Merlin

That is a dead easy snipe, now just say how you would solve the problem.

I have made a suggestion, please feel free to criticise it, but no more silly snipes please.

Mick

Mick,

I just felt you were taking a snipe at those who were making suggestions that you didn't consider worthwhile because of the lenses through which you see the world.

So suggestions? Well, it's a little like trying to shut the stable door in light of the almost complete sell off of local authority housing which has been greedily gobbled up by the private rental sector.

Given that we are where we are however, I would increase taxation on property sales in the UK firstly and I would up the percentage paid on higher value properties in comparison with the lower end. Make the buying and selling of property far less attractive as an investment.

Perhaps more radically, I would penalize heavily those with more than one property including private landlords and any companies they might set up to avoid paying taxes. I would cap private rentals as a percentage of property value and would prosecute those who fail to abide by the laws or pay their dues.

I would seek to close down the profiteering and tax avoidance in the private buy to let market, with the long term aim of making housing more affordable for all.

The only losers are the banks and those who are more than comfortable from a financial perspective. Everyone else benefits from what I can see. In the long term, the additional taxation raised through these measures could be ploughed into local authority housing on old local authority sites which would then have the affect of lowering housing costs organically.

Policies that are unlikely to find favour in the Tory heartlands I grant you Mick but policies which just might provide a more equitable society for the vast majority of British citizens.
 
I think you've missed the point - you are assuming that nothing has changed - where as everything has. My parents had an almost identical experience to yourself, however they are not saying 'what is the problem?' but realise that they did in fact have an easier time of things:

1) Wages increased in line with house price increases.
2) I'm assuming you sold your houses for significantly more than you bought them, helping fund the increased purchase price of the next.
3) By your metric there should be cheap terrace houses available for around £17k if the average wage is £20k. There are not - they start at about £120k round here.
4) My starting wage was £18k in 2001, the average was still about £15k. If we followed the same wage growth over 15 years the average wage would be around £60k. It isn't.

In Durham there are still cheap properties. The area of my first house they are still available for £55k upwards. I am not saying "what is the problem". We are lucky up north extensive building has depressed bottom end prices.
 
In Durham there are still cheap properties. The area of my first house they are still available for £55k upwards. I am not saying "what is the problem". We are lucky up north extensive building has depressed bottom end prices.

Fair enough - I am aware that there can be a north south divide in property prices, I remember looking at the time we were buying and finding great houses for lots less than here in Devon. What are the job prospects like? - genuine question, not being sarky.
 
Lardlords bleed everyone dry, domestic and business tenants alike, ****ing vampires. Do **** all for their money and make a packet, no work but plenty of reward, where's the moral in that?
 
Fair enough - I am aware that there can be a north south divide in property prices, I remember looking at the time we were buying and finding great houses for lots less than here in Devon. What are the job prospects like? - genuine question, not being sarky.

Engineering has gone to Poland, Slovakia etc. builder, plumbers, plasterers doing well. University brings quite a few jobs.
 
Fair enough - I am aware that there can be a north south divide in property prices, I remember looking at the time we were buying and finding great houses for lots less than here in Devon. What are the job prospects like? - genuine question, not being sarky.
It depends where you look. Prices in some parts of south Manchester (eg Hale and Bowdon) are high, much higher than most of Devon. There are jobs but many of the high salaried ones need the transport links the locality benefits from. London is where so much of the work is.
 
Lardlords bleed everyone dry, domestic and business tenants alike, ****ing vampires. Do **** all for their money and make a packet, no work but plenty of reward, where's the moral in that?

Another perspective: Do you expect people to sell up every time they move city or country for work? The current tax system does not make it cost effective to buy and sell properties on a short timeframe (less than 10 years). The costs of selling and buying again can be tens of thousands of pounds. Not all landlords are trying to make unreasonable profits, many need to rent their home for a period for work reasons. I am against any policy that makes it more difficult for people to move to where the work is.
 
The days of 'affordable' as in 3.5 x one average local wage and a 10% deposit buying something half-way decent are long gone.

That's what myself and my then wife did in 1980. Our combined salaries covered the cost, but we were hardly quids in. Then the interest rate went up to 17% ...

Jack
 


advertisement


Back
Top