Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Papitogrande

  1. Wouldn't a surveyor take their lead from the lending institution?

    If I was a surveyor with the little amount of work I had at the moment I would follow the lead of the lender, even if it was unwritten?

    The RIC's man quoted appeared to be more of an EA than a surveyor for a lender?

    This is an interesting question. There is a bit of confusion on this thread about the difference between a survey(or) and a value/valuation, but leaving that aside.

    Colley's is a huge panel of surveyors and valuers, and it is owned by the HBOS group. Now if you're HBOS and you want to lend a bit less whilst still appearing to be in the market and making an effort to lend, you may let it be known, to the company you own, that lean valuations are the order of the day.

  2. Its an old people thing, I told me mam and dad the exact same thing, flog the house f8ck our inheritance we dont want it we will work for our shlt (me and 2 sisters who both agree)

    But they'er having non of it. the thing is though they love their bungalow, so you kinda have to accept that.

    I dont want it I'm a worker not a taker.

    Good for you Nelly, and I'm right with you on that. I think this is why the Equity Release market will grow massively over the next decade. Good folks like your parents who want to enjoy their old age, may have limited income from savings and pensions - for varied reasons, but they want to stay in the house they are in. No need to move into oldie accommodation because they are healthier than our grandparents were and can afford to pay for necessary modifications.

    This sort of money could go a fair way to replacing the mewed cash that's been propping up the economy of late.

  3. Evening all.

    Im in a bit of a pickle. Years ago me old dear remortgaged her house for various reasons - long story. I had pleaded with her to sell up and downsize thus wiping her debts...alas I failed. Her mortgage choices were limited and disasterous. Heres her situation:

    10 year Interest only, variable rate (0.5% above base). 7 years left.

    mortgage 80k

    savings 30k

    current repayment 190pm

    her income is not great, and to cap it off they are making redundancies where she works.

    Now, with the current situation in mind, and with the spectre of quantitiative easing on the horizon, I am confused as to what advice to give her. Im tempted to tell her to pay off a 20k chunk off the mortgage thus reducing her interest payments 25%, an encouraging her to overpay as much as possible - ecspecially whilst rates are low.

    Do you think this is the best course of action???

    That payment should drop to £100 by March.

    How old is she? My mum is 61 and widowed, in a not dissimilar position. She missed the window to downsize and my advice to her was to get some money out of the house and p1ss it away on cruises, knitwear and small dogs. Are your concerns mainly about your inheritance?

  4. This QE thing, I don't get it. The reason I don't get it is that I can not see where the inflation is coming from with jobs and wages are contracting.

    Apart from doing the helicopter, how do you get this money into society, will dole be more than wages ?

    Help I'm confused.

    I think the govt. just starts writing big cheques for grand projects and that it filters in to the economy. Along with that they give their pocket banks a few more billion in pretend money and make them lend it to people who will spend it on stuff.

  5. That's a big cut in a BTL mortgage only 65%, they must be pricing in a 35% crash from here on in.

    Yes that is exactly right because that is how they decide these things.

    Did all of you clever chaps read this article and fail to spot that the 65% LTV applied to BTL only on NEW BUILD?

    I find that hard to believe, unless you subconsciously screened it as it was at odds with your world view.

    Let me tell you why they've knocked NEW BUILD buy to let down to 65%. It is because the only people dumb enough to buy new builds (particularly flats) as a BTL are the ones that are getting hefty kickbacks from the developer. e.g-

    Flat values at £100k

    developer will chuck you £25k as an agency fee.

    mortgage lender stumps up £75k because you paid the £25k deposit, he doesn't know you or your company got £25k from elsewhere as the agent fee. Shockingly it can still be done legally, the bigger house builders won't do it unless you're buying volume and closing a site, but the smaller house builders are all over it.

    They are knocking the LTVs because they know full bloody well that the sale price is but a distant cousin of what money is changing hands.

  6. Why would you have to pay someone six or seven hundred pounds to buy something from them?

    I completely fail to understand mortgage arrangement fees, can someone explain it to me?

    The reason you would pay is that over the life cycle of the mortgage it is cheaper to pay a high fee for a low rate. I understand how some people would see it as a con. What is definitely a bit dodgy is that the fees can usually be added to the loan, no small change when they may be 2.5% of the loan and you add 25 years worth of interest on.

  7. You're getting crossed wires: I'm pointing out the flaw in this guy's argument and the fact that he's mistakenly used the phrase 'affordability is rising' when that in fact means that something is becoming cheaper. If you re-read his post, you'll see the mistake.

    I distinctly remember seeing Northern Rock Together mortgages advertised back in 2006 at the peak of the madness for around 4% (possibly 4.99% come to think of it). If they weren't that cheap, then fine but don't shoot the messenger: my point still stands that it is evidently NOT cheaper to buy now than it was 2 years ago. Now, you need plenty of cash for a deposit whereas a deposit was optional in 2006, unless I dreamed the whole 100+% LTV subprime lending mania at the peak of the bubble...??

    I don't disagree with the overall thrust of your argument, but I sometimes feel it's important to pick up when a 'bear' gets their facts wrong and I'm pretty sure there never was a 100%LTV mortgage for 4%, I can't think of them being much less than 6% unless you were a graduate or professional.

  8. This is definitely true. I find now that for me to buy a home I would need to have about £50k as a deposit to avail of current low interest rates (avg. house price in my city is about £250k). With a deposit of less than 20%, I can only get a rate of 6% i.e. as if the recent interest rate cuts never happened. This compares with two years ago when I could have no deposit at all and get 4%. Meanwhile rents are falling in my area and I can still rent a property for half of the monthly cost of an 80% LTV mortgage.

    So yes, you're perfectly right, affordability for buying is declining while affordability for renting is rising. Not so sure about your other 9 points though... :P:lol:

    With all do respect, that is absorute borrocks.

  9. still over a million on rightmove.

    Thanks Bloo. So is that about the same as a year ago? Is it a fairly consistent figure over the last few years.

    I don't actually believe that anything other than a severe drop in the number of houses for sale would even begin to touch prices, it isn't the relevant issue, but it would be interesting if a lot of people had taken property off on the basis that they feel they can 'sit it out'

  10. The housing stock is exactly the same as it was a year ago. The laws of supply and demand don't apply to the housing market in the way your thinking, the supply is fixed.

    You're being a little pedantic there, clearly the OP is referring to the number of properties on the market, rather than in existence. Does anyone know if it is the case that less houses are up for sale now compared to a year ago?

    It's a shame that his 10 reasons were so lame because there is a case for anyone who wants to own their own home in the next 5 years to start making plans. Not to buy now but to get a good idea of what is around and what prices are being achieved. By the time the consensus of this board calls the bottom (some die-hards never will) it will have passed.

  11. We need to help people who are trying to sell their house.

    Currently the estate agents are in denial about prices and we keep hearing talk about how enquiries have gone up etc.

    This is giving vendors false hope and they are not being realistic about their prices, as if we haven't had a property bubble.

    If we had a month of no activity then estate agents may realise that prices really have to come down. Then we can have an housing market again with people selling and buying at lower prices. Why should people have to pay so much mortgage interest to banks for overvalued houses? Don't they realise they are being conned?

    No, simple fools that they are. We should round them up in to camps and repeat the message 24/7 over loud hailers. This is the only way. Obviously house prices have not fallen yet. Nobody is out there buying at 30%+ off peak prices. There are no bargains to be had. Houses will fall by 90%. Keep the faith. Do not buy. Ignore all signs that lending is increasing. Ignore all signs that market activity is increasing. Do not buy. It is VI spin - always. Nobody in the property or finance business ever tells the truth. They have planned this. They are planning to fool you. Don't buy. Don't think about buying. Don't even think about a strategy to buy in the short to medium term. No matter what the price is, no reduction is enough. (repeat together) I am not one of the sheeple.

  12. I used to assume that prices were due to drop by about 40% but that was before this financial crisis developed. Now it just doesn't seem realistic to think that, if prices are already down by approx. 30%, that in, say the next 3 years, they'll only fall by a further 10%.

    So what do you think now? 80 maybe 90% drop? Part of this forum's purpose, as far as I was aware, was for right-thinking people who were smart enough to see the bubble, to talk about what was the right price to buy and what was a good time.

    I may be wrong, perhaps it has evolved into a support group for people who think that the end of the world is nigh and we should protect ourselves now and never ever buy a house, for home buying is the way of the sheeple, amen - 100% guaranteed.

    Would you buy at 98% discount, you probably would, but you're mad if you think you'll be able to. if it drops 60% then do you think buying at 55% from peak is a mistake?

    I am really not advocating that people go out and buy now because prices are bound to rise in the second half of the year, I very much doubt they will. However wise heads on this forum have said that the time to buy will be when the 'man in the street' is saying property is a terrible investment. Well he's starting to say that now, in between some stuff about football and strictly come x factor, but he's starting to think it. Should those who do want to own be starting to look for the right place and deal for them?

    On the issue of VIs. As I've always made clear I'm a mortgage broker, I still am although it now accounts for less than 10% of my income and I've moved on - I think that business is finished and will be dead by the end of this year regardless of house prices. I could still be accused of being a VI - fine, pin that label on me.

    There is another type of VI though, far more pernicious and I think there are a number of them on this forum. They are for economic, political or social reasons, completely out of the housing market. They either know they could never buy a house or they know they would never want to. They are using their wisdom and reasoning (quite abundant in some cases) to persuade as many others as possible not to buy a home for their family. Why, because it makes them feel better about their choice/circumstances. It is completely self serving, no doubt quite innocent in some cases but I suspect quite knowingly in others. I'm not naming names, partly because it's rude but mainly because I haven't written any down or remembered any, it's just an opinion I have formed and shoot me down if you disagree.

  13. As I have said many times -- the Vested Interests will stop at NOTHING to peddle their bullsh1t...

    "A local property expert said: ‘With the first green shoots of recovery starting to show in the property market, now is an ideal time to buy, so Davina obviously decided to strike while the iron’s hot.

    ‘This kind of estate is very rare, particularly in such a picturesque location, so I think it will turn out to be a very shrewd investment at just the right time.’"


    I actually saw this story in today's mail. I found a copy in the pub that had presumably been left behind by some foaming dog lover. It's hilarious how the estate agent gets in his green shoots quote so clumsily.

    However I think there is an important point here, you put this down to VI spin and you may ultimately be right. That does not alter the fact that activity in the market has risen significantly in the first month of 2009, and that will change the course, or slow the pace, of this crash. Put in to the context of the past few years activity is still low but there has been a definite change, maybe we should be debating that on this forum.

    There are a number of key changes that are happening now. Either we dismiss them all as VI nonsense and hold firm to the belief that having been proved correct about there being a crash, that now the most pessimistic of forecasts must certainly be true. Alternatively they could be discussed objectively.

    I seem to recall that you Eric mentioned something or other about loose lending practices being at the heart of HPI, Lear loans? The logic goes that banks tighten up and this leads to lower prices - all perfectly true. In 2009 though I think we could see the pressure exerted on lenders to grant more mortgages lead to a relaxing of criteria and granting more loans. Not to how it was in 2005 but different to how it was in 2008. For the link lovers


    I don't pay much heed to the above, however when I am all of a sudden being courted and invited to lunch by a number of mortgage business development managers, the same ones who I barely spoke to last year, something clicks. When they tell me that they are taking an aggressive approach on market share, I listen. These are people I've known for some time and they were totally upfront last year in saying they didn't want to lend, this year the message is "We've got money to lend, we want to do business"

    Added to this buying activity is higher than at any time in the last 12 months, there is some fairly smart money going in to property at prices much lower than they were 12 months ago. From what I can see property is moving for about 25-35% off peak prices for standard property, more for flats.

    My point being, and I may be rambling because I'm suffering a bout of insomnia, is that 35% may not be far from the total drop. I assume that many here gather not only for the witty banter but because they want to know when the optimum time will be to buy a home. If you are going to live somewhere for 5 or more years, you shouldn't give a hoot about picking the absolute bottom of the market and you'll never do it anyway. The best you can hope for is that you make your move slightly before the bottom and use the fear of further falls to get yourself the right discount from the reduced figure.

    40% off peak - could be a good deal, and you could get it soon.

  14. PS

    One thing I can tell you which I think happens in all cases is that when they accept an offer they have to put it in the paper and invite anyone who wishes to make a counter offer to do so.

    If your question is due to you having an interest in a place then find out where they publish such offers.

  15. I can't be certain about any statutory requirements, but I looked at a repo property in Leeds and the agent said they kept them at price x for a month and then dropped to price y (this was done in consultation with the lender). He said that in practice they ended up at auction if there was no firm offer after 3 months.

    I think the over riding factor was that they to be seen to try and get the best price for the property (and to cover their hole in case the evicted punter tried to sue or avoid the debt later). Interestingly the agent said that in such a falling market the best price might mean getting it into an auction asap, which I can see the logic of.

    The house, which I didn't buy, was a student-let 5 bed in a good location near Headingly (the student area of leeds) It was sold in 2006 for £300k (probably inflated to make it a 'no money down' deal, but someone would still have took a £255k mortgage on it). I could have bought it for £125k there and then, this is without negotiating, it was a pit mind.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.