Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

deadasadodo

New Members
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by deadasadodo

  1. We've been buying/ selling - Hove to a greener part of Sussex. Listings have generally been coming on at peak of the market+ prices, due both to estate agents competing for business and sellers expecting what their neighbour got in 2017 plus a bit more. The house then generally sticks around until either the price is cut significantly or its withdrawn from the market. From a buying perspective it's just frustrating, as you have to wait for 3-6 months after a house is first listed before the seller is willing to consider a realistic offer. Chains are also difficult to create as a seller will sa
  2. Risk is the word here. If you don't know the area(s) very well renting for a year or so is a really good idea, as you'll reduce the risk of finding you hate the area and having to stump up a second fortune in stamp duty and fees. Investing all of your equity is a big risk though. If house prices fall and your portfolio does well you'll look like a hero, but if the opposite happens you're in trouble. You'll also commit to years of obsessively checking stock and house prices. Ultimately if it's your wife's money I guess she has final say. Personally I'd suggest renting for a year to
  3. The obvious financial risk of renting is costs incurred when your landlord kicks you out, so fees, removals, new furniture and deposit deductions. However, if you can afford to buy (and intend to) your main financial risk is the market moving against you and needing to find more money when you buy. The main financial risks of buying is being forced to crystallise a loss of you're forced to sell in a falling market, and the enormous cost of an unforseen move (stamp duty, estate agents fees, legal fees, etc). From a security perspective though you're way more likely to get kicked out
  4. Analysing the impact of working women on house prices is a bit like analysing the impact of the Earth going round the sun. Aside from the Incels and their ilk (who seem to think women as shrew like creatures to be used for sex and child rearing) the vast majority of people would agree that denying women the rights to work and have an independent financial existance was a huge historic wrong. This isn't going to change. What can change is how 2 salaries are judged in a mortgage application. But this involves banks making judgements. Should two mates or a homosexual couple buying together b
  5. Except it's not is it? We live in a welfare state, which is what this thread is about. Currently there's some support from the state should we lose our jobs or get ill, which helps mitigate some of the financial and personal risks we take in life. People have different views on who should get what. Sorry you don't like me telling stories. Personally I think our stories provide context for our views and concerns, and in a policy context sobby stories well told have a lot of power. But I'll hold back on them when I reply to you again.
  6. Thanks all. So views are that any support should either be a loan secured against the house, or on the proviso that the state comes in as a partner to share in any future HPI. Yes it would, it would also encourage the banks to step in before things got too out of hand for fear their security would be eroded to nothing. Like I said, giving our background this year for context - our position is lucky and I've always been quite debt adverse/ savings focused. My mind likes to jump to worst case scenarios and project the current situation into the far flung future, hence I started
  7. I went to the local Toys R Us a few months ago to get a grow bag for the youngest. Dreary, deserted warehouse is how I'd describe it. Ours is quite central and has free parking - I can't understand why they don't put in a soft play and a cafe to make it more of a destination for kids and parents. As it is they're just waiting for Amazon and co to put them out of business.
  8. Venger, politely can I ask how you'd structure the benefit system for housing support - for tenants and homeowners - and also your line on mortgage or rent forbearance? One reason why this thread has struck a chord with me is my wife lost her job earlier in the year. We can just about get by on my wage without drastic cutbacks, but there was a bit of 'drip drip' into our savings - unexpected car repairs and that kind of thing. Made me think about when we'd pull the rip chord so to speak and flog the house. Would I keep holding hope that things would turn around, even when the bank was th
  9. Just out of interest does your partner own/ mortgage the house or is she renting? I know several people who have kept their flat/ house when they've moved in with their partner - starts off as an insurance policy against the relationship going bad then stays on because they like the rent coming in. Mainly seems to be Londoners. Aside from the obvious 'one more rented house' thing it's not a great idea in my mind, as if there's an easy escape route there's a temptation to use it prematurely if the relationship goes through a rocky patch. Good luck to you - hope living with your partne
  10. Yeah, this. Plus properties haven't been revalued since the early 90s, so the huge in increace in wealth in some areas hasn't been reflected in the tax levied - round here expensive town center flats frequently pay less than council houses because they were grotty in the early 90s. Also the percentage increace cap encourages Councils to go for the maximum increace. If they don't they can't catch up with the 'lost' income if they need more cash in thr future. A badly designed tax that's been poorly implemented.
  11. I think the analogy is that, if someone could opt out of the NHS, they probably wouldn't be left to die in the street because their alternative medical provision (if any) didn't work out. The cost of saving that person's life would fall back on the taxpayer. Relating that to pension choices if a person made some poor investment decisions and hit retirement without any cash the tax payer would probably end up supporting that person through the benefits system rather than let them live in poverty. That said, your suggestion of broadening pension investment options out makes a lot of sense a
  12. I've shamelessly stolen this link from a poster on the FT, who thought it's a good analogy for trading Bitcoin:
  13. I manage a geographically distributed team and things have been dead as a dodo for the last week or so - once a few key people knock off it's hard to get anything done and everything goes flat. So I'm left with not a great deal to do (hence posting here at 9.30) with the nagging fear that a client will ask for something important NOW and they'll be no way of getting it done.
  14. Venger, I have been reflecting on Beary's comments whilst on a long drive. As I've said, I've been lurking here for a long time and feel I know posters, but obviously I haven't been posting for long and forum regulars don't know me from Adam. Looking at what Beary said I thought "what would people think of me from my posting history?" - the answer is a angry person who wants to pick a fight, mainly with you. So, I apologise - sorry. I still think the best laid plans can come unstuck despite our attempts to build a safety net, and life frequently kicks people in the guts for no good reason
  15. V, I get (and agree with) your view is that people should make their own safety net. What I don't get is whether you're naive enough to think that there are no circumstances that could quickly burn your safety net to the ground, or you honestly believe that you'd go to sleep penniless in a cardboard box telling yourself that this is quite ok as your own actions or inactions brought you to this point. Your arguments play the man rather than the ball. You clearly believe I've a selfish vested interest and nothing I can write will make you think otherwise. I understand you want to buy a hous
  16. Marvelous - a forum full of people agreeing with each other would be a dull place indeed. Are you implying though that everyone involved in the design and sign off of S24 was a renter? I remember getting throw out of my rented house because my absentee landlord wanted to sell. I know three people who have been chucked out of their rented houses this year as the landlord wanted to sell. My best mate at school sat his GCSEs whilst living in a B&B after his parent's home was repossessed. A baby friend is woefully behind on his mortgage after his high earning wife got postnatal depress
  17. Crikey V, you and I have no knowledge of each other outside of this forum. For all you know I could be the policy wonk behind S24 and now, my work completed, I've decided to start posting here. I'm not of course, but the point remains. I sense I'm not going to convince you that I'm not 'pity the homeowner and screw the renter', and that my brain didn't make a cognitive flip when I bought a few years ago after 20 years of renting. For the record though (again) I agree speculators and the intentionally overstretched should live by the consequences of their actions, I'm just not so keen on p
  18. Off topic, but your posts are wonderfully well written Beary - a real pleasure to read.
  19. Taking tenure out of the equation, it's unfair that people who make their own safety net (via saving) are denied benefits. I like saving, have a 12 year old car, have a week in Cornwall or France every year etc, etc. My neighbours get a new car every year, go on lots of lovely holidays and from the sound of things don't save very much. Yet if we both lose our jobs they can claim a full range of benefits and I can't. I also agree that in the present system it's unfair that housing equity isn't included in a means test. As I said upthread, it's unlikely that someone would be able to remortg
  20. I think you're right here that Fear of Missing Out is one driver of the bubble, but being first mover doesn't seem to be much of an advantage in tech. MySpace and Friends Reunited, Excite and AltaVista, Napster and (out of examples here) are all earlier versions of the things you listed that aren't around anymore. Google is a great example of a company that came late to the party with a much better product that crushed the incumbents.
  21. Bitcoin's cheerleaders are a trinity of techies, libertarians and speculators. The former two either can't see or don't care that the price is entirely driven by the speculators. There's a certain irony that Bitcoin fans on this site understand that housing is in a speculative bubble, but deny there's one in Bitcoin. This time it's different, yeah right. That said, do I wish I'd bought some Bitcoins a few years back - yes. Would I sell out before the inevitable crash - probably not. Is everyone affected by the Bitcoin bubble in the same way as they are by house prices - no.
  22. Yeah, and if you're sticking money away for a deposit then you're more likely to have a reasonable pot of savings that makes you ineligible for benefits. The changes the OP highlighted seem like a reasonable compromise, with any support for mortgage payers based on a loan secured against the house.
  23. Sorry V, but this is is a case where a renter gets a better deal than a mortgage payer - renters can get housing benefit to pay their landlord's mortgage pretty much immediately, whilst a mortgage payer has to wait 39 weeks to recieve support (both savings and partner income dependent). You can't remortgage and borrow money against your mad gainz if you don't have a job. My point was that national insurance should act like the name suggests - if you pay in a lot you should have be able to get a reasonable pay out (for a limited period) that helps towards your outgoings if you fall on hard
  24. Doesn't seem like a particularly generous benefit - nothing for 39 weeks, nothing if you've got too much savings, interest only set at 2.19% and a maximum loan size of 200k. That said, moving it to a loan secured against the house seems fair enough. IMO true out of work benefits should be shifted to a system where you get a single payment that's a proportion of your former salary for a set period of time, with the job centre leaving you to get on with it unless you ask for help. After, say 6 months, proper recruitment professionals should be brought in to help people get jobs. The current
×
×
  • 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.