advertisement


Housing market

stevec67 said:
You must have led a sheltered life, it's not that small. The footprint is about 8m x 5, 2 floors, so 80 sq m overall. That's adequate for a 3 bedroom home. I've lived in a smaller 2 bed place, that was just shy of 50 sq m. Where they have fouled up the design is in insisting on having multiple bathrooms and lavatories, as is the modern way and as the market expects. This eats living space because you don't live in the bathroom.
As for the price, it's in Oxford. There are few more expensive places in the UK.
Click to expand...

You're right about the overall size, but the layout is terrible and makes very poor use of the space (or lack of it)... this is where UK builds are so poor... total lack of thought and innovation... yes changing it to something better might cost a little bit more, but so worth it.
 
IanW said:
An alternative view from Gary's economics as to why the rich will keep getting richer as they buy assets from everyone else, house prices and the stock market will rise and interest rates will go down:


And as a consequence this shift in wealth will continue to make the poor and then middle class poorer as the service economy is reduced as money is spent on assets. Pretty scary really. He does end with saying what people have been saying for years and years; the way out of this is to tax the rich more to redistribute the wealth and enable more public spending (MMT not considered or ignored for the purposes of getting the message out there).
Click to expand...

Supply won’t keep up with population growth, certainly not in places where people would prefer to live. As long as there are ‘enough’ people willing and able to pay current prices, that’s where they’ll remain (both sale and rent). If there are more, they’ll rise, if there are fewer, they’ll fall. Straightforward stuff I know but people forget the basics. Current interest rates are simply a reversion to pre ‘emergency‘ levels, and are historically low.
 
Ponty said:
Supply won’t keep up with population growth, certainly not in places where people would prefer to live. As long as there are ‘enough’ people willing and able to pay current prices, that’s where they’ll remain (both sale and rent). If there are more, they’ll rise, if there are fewer, they’ll fall. Straightforward stuff I know but people forget the basics. Current interest rates are simply a reversion to pre ‘emergency‘ levels, and are historically low.
Click to expand...
Supply has not kept up with requirements and so building companies and their shareholders have got richer and richer as prices for houses went up. So whether you are buying or renting costs go up, until, as you suggest, people cannot pay anymore.

I know that you often mention interest rates being low compared to historical rates, but they were set in different times with different economic conditions and really I am struggling to see how relevant that could be. His logic for why interest rates will go down seems logical to me, so we will see if you are right and rates will go up or he is right, and rates go down over the next couple of years.
 
Ponty said:
Supply won’t keep up with population growth, certainly not in places where people would prefer to live. As long as there are ‘enough’ people willing and able to pay current prices, that’s where they’ll remain (both sale and rent). If there are more, they’ll rise, if there are fewer, they’ll fall. Straightforward stuff I know but people forget the basics. Current interest rates are simply a reversion to pre ‘emergency‘ levels, and are historically low.
Click to expand...
Add to this the fact that the Boomers, the current crop of rent free home owners, are now coming towards the end of their lives and their homes will be sold, the proceeds going to their children, who may choose to invest in property or indeed keep the family home. So the money stays in the family, the rich get richer, you know the rest.
 
I used to think that a problem with all of this was that the bottom of the market will find it harder to get accommodation. My thinking was that higher mortgage repayments mean higher private sector rents, benefits lag behind, owners don't see enough return and so quit the market.

However I may have been wrong because yields from HMOs are increasing according to Paragon Bank. Presumably the wage component of the renters' incomes is sufficient to pay the increased rents. Or maybe they're falling into arrears - I notice that S21 is being used more and more to create homelessness, probably because owners are clearing out problem tenants or potential problem tenants because they expect a labour government to abolish S21 before the courts can cope with the resulting increase in recourse to s8. These problem tenants will indeed become homeless as the private sector is well advised not to give them a chance - again a consequence of the labour policy to rapidly end s21.

www.mortgagesolutions.co.uk

Average rental yields reach six-year high

Average gross rental yields came to 6.1% in the first quarter of the year, the highest average since Q2 2018, research from a lender showed.
www.mortgagesolutions.co.uk www.mortgagesolutions.co.uk

It'll be interesting to know more about what's really happening in terms of accommodation for people who are wholly dependent on benefits for their income.
 
mandryka said:
It'll be interesting to know more about what's really happening in terms of accommodation for people who are wholly dependent on benefits for their income.
Click to expand...
I think that it's a complicated picture. Single people without children do very badly indeed. Those with children are, I believe, better provided for because of child welfare. Whether this is a sweeping generalisation or largely true across the population I don't know.
 
stevec67 said:
I think that it's a complicated picture. Single people without children do very badly indeed. Those with children are, I believe, better provided for because of child welfare. Whether this is a sweeping generalisation or largely true across the population I don't know.
Click to expand...

One major issue I suspect is that the DWP has a reputation of being very difficult to deal with - a labyrinthine and unhelpful bureaucracy. They can cut a tenant's benefits and they can demand repayments from the landlord if the tenant was overpaid, at least when the rent was paid direct. So there's a much bigger risk of losing money if you take them on - even if just a component of their income is benefits. I won't do it.
 
IanW said:
Supply has not kept up with requirements and so building companies and their shareholders have got richer and richer as prices for houses went up. So whether you are buying or renting costs go up, until, as you suggest, people cannot pay anymore.

I know that you often mention interest rates being low compared to historical rates, but they were set in different times with different economic conditions and really I am struggling to see how relevant that could be. His logic for why interest rates will go down seems logical to me, so we will see if you are right and rates will go up or he is right, and rates go down over the next couple of years.
Click to expand...

IMHO rates won’t vary that much from where they are currently. Ultra low emergency rates encouraged asset speculation. Savers got completely shafted so looked elsewhere for a return, such as property (also encouraged by Brown’s pension dividend raid). Provided inflation is kept in check, a 5% risk free return on savings will prevent many from getting involved in BTL etc. Why bother with the risk and hassle, particularly in such a hostile environment? It’s certainly a question I ask myself. Although I also know that with landlords exiting the market and demand continuing, rents will only go one way IMHO.
 
tuga said:
The price is not unreasonable for a 3 bed but the areas are. It's bloody cråp. The national space standards are an insult...
Click to expand...

I’ve no doubt you can buy a far larger house for the money. But it won’t be in Oxford. Pay your money, take your choice.
 
Ponty said:
I’ve no doubt you can buy a far larger house for the money. But it won’t be in Oxford. Pay your money, take your choice.
Click to expand...

These 3 beds, also in Oxford, are still small but larger and cheaper:

www.rightmove.co.uk

Check out this 3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale on Rightmove

3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale in Stevenson Crescent, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9GR , OX3 for £575,000. Marketed by Redrow
www.rightmove.co.uk www.rightmove.co.uk

www.rightmove.co.uk

Check out this 3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale on Rightmove

3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale in Stevenson Crescent, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9GR , OX3 for £600,000. Marketed by Redrow
www.rightmove.co.uk www.rightmove.co.uk

Greedy developers use the minimum dimensios but sell at mid-range prices...
 
tuga said:
These 3 beds, also in Oxford, are still small but larger and cheaper:

www.rightmove.co.uk

Check out this 3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale on Rightmove

3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale in Stevenson Crescent, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9GR , OX3 for £575,000. Marketed by Redrow
www.rightmove.co.uk www.rightmove.co.uk

www.rightmove.co.uk

Check out this 3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale on Rightmove

3 bedroom semi-detached house for sale in Stevenson Crescent, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9GR , OX3 for £600,000. Marketed by Redrow
www.rightmove.co.uk www.rightmove.co.uk

Greedy developers use the minimum dimensios but sell at mid-range prices...
Click to expand...

Many factors to consider. The same house a couple of streets away can be vastly different in price. Bottom line, if they’re overpriced, they won’t sell.
 
well new experience for me , friends house had 11 offers from the 18 who saw it in 3 hours viewing . unprecedented demand so now its going to best and final offers . at the moment we have a few favourites like FTB but never seen this before .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top