Thursday, Jan 29, 2009
-1.3%MoM, -16.6% YoY
Nationwide: January house price index
The price of a typical house fell by a further 1.3% in January, as the deepening economic recession and financial market turbulence continued to weigh on housing market sentiment and activity. January’s decline leaves the average price of a typical house at £150,501, down £30k from last year.
Prices fell £2,547 in January, down 1.7% without the seasonal adjustment
Posted by little professor @ 07:12 AM (1906 views) Add Comment
26 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. Jon said...
According to my calendar we still have a few days left in January - either someone's been fiddling with the date my PC, Nationwide has a crystal ball, or they aren't expecting anymore house purchases to be made this month.
2. phdinbubbles said...
What have they done with fionualala and her time machine! Spoilsports.
Good of them to put a straight red line on the House Price to Earnings Ratio graph to remind us that we're heading somewhere south of it.
3. little professor said...
Tendline has gone up since last summer - every month prices remain above trendline it drags the trendline up.
4. little professor said...
N.B. prices now down 19.1% from the peak. We're back at May 2004 levels.
5. little professor said...
6. paul said...
The figure that no-one's mentioning is the fall since peak of 20%. It should be remembered that prices have been falling for more than a year so the YoY figure understates the size of the total decline.
7. it_is_going_with_a_bang said...
"the relationship between buyer enquiries and approvals has broken down"
A note of caution for all those out there who wish to draw too much from 'enquiries' leading a recovery.
8. troy said...
that was quick it's not even the end of January yet
they're going to look pretty stupid if there's a last minute upturn. lol
9. str 2007 said...
I'm a bit dubious about that trend line. 2.9% growth per annum doesn't sound unrealistic, but given current prices they feel way above what they should be. I guess running the trend line from '94 at 2.9% P/A would give and indication of where the falls are going, but given the severity of this downturn an overshoot below is very likely.
And yes I noticed Ms. Early was missing in action.
10. uncle tom said...
The trend line has always been a red herring - what justification is there for the notion that house prices should always rise in real terms?
Prices will now fall below 'trend', but that does not mean that they will then be below a sustainable level - the trend line will gradually correct downwards over the coming years.
11. doom&gloom said...
Their 'House Price to Earnings Ratio' claims the long run average is 4, but this depends on which period of time you are averaging over. I would make the case that this would be 3.5 at most, if you include figures before 1975. Could well be even lower if you disregard 2003-2008 figures as a recent abberation.
If you believe average UK earnings are set to fall 60%, it's quite easy to see peak-to-trough house price falls reaching 80%. Already fallen 35-45% in non-Sterling terms.
12. 51ck-6-51x said...
"Historical experience suggests that interest rate cuts typically take 18-24 months to feed through into the wider economy, so it is certainly still too early to claim that they are having no effect."
- Historical experience suggests to me that the outside lag in the UK is 6-12 months, however at present this lag may well be longer due to the clogged system.
13. ana lytics said...
Aye, -19.1% since peak using Non Seasonally Adjusted data, -18.2% for the SA numbers.......
It seems that Nationwide have finally clocked that it's silly to include the 5 year comparison, as that will inevitably fall into negative territory during Q2 (even if prices stay at Jan 09 levels - which they won't)......... average house prices in 1st half of 2004 were as follows (rounded to neaarest £100):
Jan 04: £134,800
Feb 04: £138,700
Mar 04: £142,600
Apr 04: £145,900
May 04: £149,000
Jun 04: £151,500
Jan 09 is £150,500, so drop 1% (say) off that each month and homeowners are gonna be under water on the 5 year comparison by the end of May I reckon, maybe April if there are 1.3% falls each month for the next 3 months............ ouch.........
Effectively, this means anyone who bought within the last 5 years and MEWed just a little (i.e. more than they repaid in Capital) will be in worse position by 30/06/09 compared to when they bought.............. i.e. when they come to remortgage, they will struggle to get a competitive deal if they were originally on a 90% or more LTV.........
Add in the blimmin horrible and rather widespread job losses, the Economic stats from yesterday (UK worst hit, etc) and this HP crash isn't even halfway toasted for me.......... in fact looking at the Price Earning Ratios from Nationwide, it looks like we're roughly half-way back to the long term average of 3.26, but there's always an over correction.......... long way to go.........
14. 51ck-6-51x said...
Martin Gahbauer, is on Bloomberg TV right now.
15. letthemfall said...
It seems Nationwide have a new economist dispensing wisdom. He appears to be talking more sense than the previous incumbent.
Uncle Tom: I think the argument is the land houses are built on is a fixed resource so prices will remain fixed to incomes; hence they rise at the same rate. What will happen in future is an interesting prospect. Presumably if wages trend downwards from now on, then so will house prices.
16. phdinbubbles said...
Martin is fionnualalala's sidekick
Let's laugh at Fionnuala Earley
17. stillthinking said...
Check out this graph instead. This valuation system based on disturbances around an equilibrium and the long term interest rate is better IMO. Methodology described here http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article6250.html and probably mentioned on another post.
18. mark wadsworth said...
@ Ana Lytics 9.34 am, I did a Fun Online Poll on that very topic.
Summary here, although to save you the bother of clicking, the opinions were spread pretty evenly between March 09 and June 09 as the month in which prices will go 5y-o-5y negative.
19. stillthinking said...
Forgot to put down my main point, that we haven't reached the equilibrium yet. So, as usual, things are much worse than they seem....This model doesn't account reductions in disposable income and affordability when taxes rise, or even mass unemployment.
20. voiceofreason said...
I was looking at yields on BTL in Southampton.
£170K victorian semi yields 5% gross, 4% net, with huge capital loss risk.
10 year BT (British Telecom) bond is 8.625% and trading at 90% of face value.
If I were an institutional investor, I would not be lending money for mortgages unless LTV is really high ....
21. hash browne said...
@Stillthinking.
Nice graph......
what does it mean??
22. phdinbubbles said...
16. stillthinking
Great graph!
But when comparing the 1989 peak with the 2007 peak in terms of affordability (around x5 income (1989) compared with x6.5 income (2007) according to nationwide) does the 89 peak not turn out to be bigger as a a proportion of income because of higher base rates? - e.g. a person taking out a mortgage on the average house on the average salary in 89 would probably have been paying a greater proportion of their monthly income than someone doing the same in 2007 (although the average 2007 LTV is likely to be higher than 89 pushing up the monthly outgoings).
23. ana lytics said...
@ mark w 10.33am.....
i'm with you........ if someone held a gun to my head and made me bet on the month where it goes 5yoy megative, I would have April..... then May 2nd choice......... March is a rank outsider - too soon - prices won't fall 8K (in two months 5.3% overall, 2.7% per month) - although i hope they do! ......... June and July are non-starters........ would mean than prices could go UP a little and we'd still be 5yoy negative - that's not gonna happen ........... it's all about the pace of the fall now........ if you're a <1% per month bear, then punt on May. If you're a >1% per month bear, then April is the go.......... nearly evens between the two i reckon........ but i'll have April........
24. titaniccaptain said...
@Wadsworth
Im also with you............cant beat shameless yet informative advertising lol
25. Letsgetreadytotumble said...
21. phdinbubbles
We had MIRAS then that basically reduced mortgage payments. A 10% mortgage effectively became something like a 7% mortgage
26. mark wadsworth said...
@ LGRTT, MIRAS was a straight subsidy to home purchasers so all it did was push up the nominal price paid. SO the effective interest rate was lower and as a result the amount that FTBs were prepared to pay was higher. The benefit of this accrued directly to the vendor, who achieved a higher price.