Thursday, Feb 21, 2008
The ice age is coming the sun's zoomin in
Firstrung: UK house prices crash in certain areas of the UK in final quarter of 2007 - Land Registry
The latest fourth quarter Land Registry statistics have shown that house prices in certain areas of London have crashed in the last quarter of 2007. These prices could be the first indcation that the much discussed 'credit crunch' has finally begun to eat away at house prices in areas that were previously deemed to be impregnable.
Posted by converted lurker @ 07:35 PM (1665 views) Add Comment
18 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. hpwatcher said...
Anyone seen anything of Confused76?
I really miss his laugh!
MUWHAHAHHHHAHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
2. str 2007 said...
There was a post recently showing how the various surveys were compiled - could anyone re-post it so I can check these figures for accuracy. Then I can do my cartwheels. I'd hate to have put my back out only to be told tomorrow that house prices actually went up !
3. sacred contracts said...
str 2007 said... since its based on the Land Registry that's real prices paid and the soundest of the guides available - though of course not as sound as it would like to be since all those flat builders have been lying to them... however all the surveys will have suffered from that.
4. sacred contracts said...
whoops sorry about including the said... part in my copy of your name str 2007! Oops.
5. Mikedx said...
Tip of the iceberg...
even though they fell 17% in some areas in the last quarter, I think more is still to come!
Of all my friends who are currently trying to sell their house, not one of them has had any offers or even viewings recently.. I feel bad for them. I also feel bad for a few of my past schoolfriends/workmates who have bought or moved recently..
Still, I'm probably now paying over the odds rent here, but if it all turns to shit we can hand in the keys and bugger off tomorrow!
6. Jimmyb said...
If this hits the main stream media there's going to be a bloodbath out there.
7. Passive said...
Sacred Contract: what do you mean about flat builders lying to Land Registry. This is a new one on me. Please help me understand.
Thanks
8. paul said...
I haven't seen confused for a while, yes.
He'll be back no doubt though - I'd like to think him smarter than to rush out and buy a one bedroomed flat in Tooting for 250k right now or something silly like that.
9. growler said...
@str2007: That was me:
http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/article3368343.ece
It would be good for forum organisers to capture this as it must be a FAQ?
10. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
"deemed to be impregnable"
just as the "titanic was unsinkable" .....
11. str 2007 said...
Thanks Growler, I thought there was a reference to some level of screwed Land Registry figures in that article - this is it.
'The Land Registry also uses simple rather than mix-adjusted averages. So if you get lots of very expensive properties selling in one period and lots of cheaper ones in the next, you would get an average falling price, which would be misleading.'
I wonder if a couple of larger BTL landlords got out in that period. Or perhaps the Land Registry themselves gave some half wit the instruction to start repairing there previous dodgy apartment sales figures (one at a time so no-one notices) and they went and did the whole of Guildford in one hit.
I struggle to believe (as much as I'd like to) that Guildford dropped 9.7% in 3 months without any mention of other Southern Home County commuter towns.
Has anyone analysed the Land Registry figures yet to see if there is any consistency ?
I might just hold off on the cartwheel a wee while.
12. nopensionnohouse said...
I cant see a quarterly report anywhere on landreg!
http://www.landreg.gov.uk/search/default.asp
13. growler said...
I think what we are seeing with Land Registry (don't have stats or time to analyse) is far less properties sold - those being sold only because they have to be. Therefore we'll see more volatile numbers. Looking forward, all the vendors that have been told by their EAs to wait are coming on the market now. This low volume will cause spikes, but I do not believe the LR have had to make the excuse in years gone by as much as they are now. So in summary, this volatility is in my view the symptom of a HPC.
14. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
The figures make a reasonable amount is sense from what i've seen going on locally.
That is the houses that are selling are
Being priced to sell and then ...
Having to take offers
The figures being quoted are not huge is percentage terms - although probably painful in hard cash terms on the ground.
15. geed said...
Nopension; the BBC use Land Reg figues, click on the link below and you will find that Edinburgh has fallen -5.8% in the last quarter! You can search the whole of the UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/uk_house_prices/html/qp.stm
16. justwatching said...
Passive @ 7. Builders/developers get the asking price for property, then bung the purchaser a lump sum. Property appears on the Land Reg at full price, kick back not recorded, buyer now has cash to burn, figures massaged, everones happy. This was the topic on a recent tv programme, Panorama??
17. Deadspider said...
I thought LR changed their method in around Sept'06 to an "Apples for Apples" method ie they only use houses which have been sold twice since April 2000 . So a wrecker which is refurbed and extended and then sold for more than the purchase price shows up as huge HPI . Could be wrong though .
18. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.