Wednesday, Apr 21, 2010
The onward march of Home-Owner-Ism
Metro: First-time buyers 'at 19-year low'
"Banks are demanding far higher deposits since the credit crunch struck, meaning that first-time buyers must often save tens of thousands of pounds before they can get a foot on the ladder. This, coupled with rising house prices, has seen the average age of a first-time buyer rise to 32 compared with 31 in 1991, said GfK. "Lack of deposit capital is at the root of this problem, as fewer than one in six hold sufficient funds to make the necessary down-payment," said GfK. But as first-time buyer numbers are in decline, GfK has found that an increasing proportion of first-time mortgages are being granted to the over-50s as baby-boomers buy up properties for their children, who are "locked out" of the housing market."
Posted by mark wadsworth @ 07:44 AM (1212 views) Add Comment
9 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. mrflibble said...
But as first-time buyer numbers are in decline, GfK has found that an increasing proportion of first-time mortgages are being granted to the over-50s as baby-boomers buy up properties for their children, who are "locked out" of the housing market.
And we wonder why this hpi madness continues...
2. paul said...
"Lack of deposit capital is at the root of this problem, as fewer than one in six hold sufficient funds to make the necessary down-payment"
Ahh yes. "What I'm selling isn't too expensive at all, it's just that buyers don't have enough money"
I'm amazed the press still laps up this ordure.
3. alan said...
How come we don't hear much about the failure to support FtBs as its election time? Maybe all those older people just want to sit back in comfy chairs and watch their house prices rise.
If IRs increased to pay savers a fair rate, then house prices would reduce. Maybe that would upset too many people?
As a house owner, I wouldn't mind if prices dropped back. I paid a lot less for my house before prices rose. I didn't buy it as an investment or a pension, just a roof over my head.
If you love your kids and have the money, then its natural to extend a support to them. I think it might be better to teach them independance - but that is hard when the housing market is rigged.
4. fallingbuzzard said...
http://www.gfknop.com/pressinfo/releases/singlearticles/005720/index.en.print.html
Even the stats in the press release don't add up or rather have been picked intentionally to highlight a trend that doesn't exist in the survey data. Poor form for gfk but I never trusted their surveys because of the way they pull together samples.
5. Stevie Dee said...
"one in six" that's rather optimistic. What it means is that one in six parent's have the money left to support their kids, as the rest are skint. Finally, to coincide with after the election we are going to see our version of the twin towers as this housing bubble/monster is finally slane. A big juicy zit, after which we will see the men from the mummies boys. And forget the stockmarket, that will go in september. So if you are in late 50's buy tins of food. And an american pitbull, because when your local drugged up young adults want something, they won't even ask nor give you a tip.
6. luckyjim said...
A '19 year low' but 'up slightly on the year before' ?
7. uncle tom said...
The first few lines of this article are enough to demonstrate the abysmal standard of journalism accepted by rags like Metro.
Firstly 1993 to date is not 19 years, its 17 years; and it's not a 19yr/17yr/near 20yr low at all..
..it's lowest since records began in 1993, which is very different.
This article implies that FTB sales were lower about twenty years ago. They weren't. This is almost certainly the lowest level since Mrs T promoted home ownership in preference to council tenancy, back in 1980; and quite possibly the lowest level since WWII.
8. luckyjim said...
UT
No, it's the lowest since last year.
9. 51ck-6-51x said...
LuckyJim,
You are correct but Uncle Tom makes valid points regarding the lack of journalistic quality here.
* The change on last year is +4.7% (hardly "at near 20-year lows" [sic])
* If it was the low it would simply be the lowest recorded, not an x-year low.
* The series started 17 years ago not 20 as suggested.