Housing market
- Thread starter matt j
- Start date
Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
Sorry, I thought you were implying people would have a longer retirement to fund due to living longer, whilst also saying the working class will only get worse off.
Darth Vader
From the Dark Side
Originally people who lived to retirement age took their pension and lived for a further 3 to 5 years. The pension age is rising in step with our longer lifespans to compensate for this. I have already taken almost 12 years of state pension and expect to take more. In mitigation I did leave school and started working full time at 15. Thats 51 years at work less 3 to take a degree and 1 for my teaching post grad so 47 years of working and paying income tax and NICs.
DV
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
I know one whos’s 72 now and he spends all his money on drink, drugs and finding opportunities for sex. I keep saying to friends when his name is mentioned “he’s going to die with his boots on” which is true but may well be some way off yet. Every time we meet he slips me some of his home grown grass which I put in a drawer and forget about. Once I was on a bus taking me from a landed flight to to T5. My phone rang and I unzipped the pocket of my coat to take it out. I looked around and thought one of these buggers has been smoking dope, which one is it? When I put the phone back, I felt something. It was a bag of skunk I’d put in there god knows when, when we last met. Had to flush it down the first toilet I came to- couldn’t imagine phoning the boss to say I was going to be late because I’m under arrest at Heathrow awaiting bale.
Seeker_UK
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans
It's good to hear he's not frittering it away.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
No pockets in a shroud!
Spraggons Den
pfm Member
….and the rest of his money he just wasted.
Aah, I see. I was talking generationally, they will be less likely to get on housing ladder & live in more modest property if they do; less inheritance to pass on. Life expectancy is heavily weighted towards relative wealth.
Ponty
pfm Member
Another nail in the coffin for small private landlords. Good, many will say. Well, with landlords exiting the market, supply is contracting and rents increasing. Good for long term, decent landlords of course. Demand is off the chart although it puzzles me slightly. Supposedly many have left the UK since Brexit, new houses are popping up everywhere yet there is a massive shortage. A friend saw a place to rent last week, viewed immediately, offered (at the already punchy asking price) and was told it had an offer over asking. Not sure where the money is coming from but there seem enough willing and able folks (at the moment…).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61817249
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61817249
Ponty
pfm Member
Of course, many properties (flats etc) forbid pets in the head lease so a moot point in any case. Kids can be equally damaging to properties! Ultimately a landlord is not forced to accept any prospective tenant (and vice versa).
Tony Lockhart
Avoiding Stress, at Every Opportunity
A few years ago I read that of all the houses that were bought under the Right to Buy scheme back in the late 80s/early 90s, a huge number were at the time of reading in the possession of private landlords, rented out at high prices with all sorts of extra add-on expenses, and much of the rental cost was provided by so called benefits.
Do we have any up to date info on this? Because all the new housing in my area appears to be on the rental market very quickly after build is complete.
Do we have any up to date info on this? Because all the new housing in my area appears to be on the rental market very quickly after build is complete.
hifinutt
hifinutt
yes i guess you are right about kids but one place i know of has cats , they have ripped into the flashing where they slide down the roof , scratched wood frames on door , and ripped up edge of carpets . Far more damage than other places with no pets .
A vast proportion, obviously. The thing is that it's impossible to answer, because if I own a £200k house with a £150k mortgage I only really own £50k. But I *think* I own £200k. That's one reason why property ownership in the UK is a sacred cow. Any government that does anything to derail the endless money train where I've "made" £100k in 5 years because my house has gone up by that much will be thrown out and won't come back for a century.
Agree (though I'm sure someone somewhere has guesstimated), which essentially means the horse has bolted.
Mike Reed
pfm Member
I do think that those who have seen a considerable increase in equity in their homes who decide to re-mortgage simply to release spending money. Maybe not so much now, but commonplace a decade and more ago. To my mind, a mortgage, regardless or interest rate, size or duration, should be priority one for paying off for the purpose of achieving full ownership. Okay, there are exceptions in personal circumstances, but I'm referring to those many mortgagees who have decided to capitalise of the increase in their property by, in effect, decreasing their equity, purely to splash out on sth.
Many BTL owners have used this method to advantage in building a portfolio in the past, but this is/was financially viable, despite risks inherent in BTLs.
Many BTL owners have used this method to advantage in building a portfolio in the past, but this is/was financially viable, despite risks inherent in BTLs.
If you like, but it's not necessary. I have no mortgage, I bought my house for cash, but the lack of a mortgage affects your credit record. I know at first hand. A friend of mine very smartly paid off all his mortgage apart from a few thousand pounds, pays a few tenners a month and benefits from this. In the case of my parents, they wanted to pay off theirs early, but when I pointed out that their investments were making more than the mortgage cost and that there would be early settlement fees they kept it running until it was paid off naturally. It's like any loan. Businesses borrow money at X % pa and use it to build their business. If the business profit exceeds the interest charges, they are making money. In the case of housing, if I could borrow £1M at 5%, pay the £50k pa interest and live in a palace that was appreciating at 10% without incurring stamp duty type fees, I'd be a fool not to. In fact a friend of mine is doing exactly this, he has an interest only mortgage on a 6 bedroom palace that costs no more than rental of a modest house. If and when he comes to sell, even if he can't pay off the capital sum he benefits from all the value growth. He's lived in a palace for a few hundred a month for 20 years, when he sells up the proceeds will buy him a perfectly decent family home outright. This is why people love property ownership in this country, provided you can service the loan, maintain and heat the place there's very little downside.
Mike Reed
pfm Member
'Twas not always the case, and it's with the benefit of hindsight that the years of property ups and downs had largely gravitated to 'ups' only over the last +/1 30 years. Certainly, at the time of buying my first house near U.K.C'. C'bury in '75 and subsequently, I didn't have the feeling of property being a one way bet. This started dawning on my in 200/2001 when, after 10 months in a small terraced house as a temporary base. it sold it for a £16K profit (approx. 23% increase at the time). However, it then went up by a factor of 2x what we paid. Really should have held on and rented it out but wife wasn't happy about its proximity to where we live now. However, those gold-plated 'investment' years in bricks and mortar may well be coming to a halt, I feel.