DoubleBubbleTrouble

Well I just put a spreadsheet together from the CML stats and it really doesn't tally with the NAEA ones unless there is a massive drop in April that aren't in the CML figures yet. For April from the CML data I have 90,500 loans for "all home purchases" and 34,700 for FTB's making a figure of 38% of mortgages for First Time Buyers. So unless they have dropped BTL loans from their main loans data or cash purchase have gone through the roof I can't explain the NAEA's data.

Anyone know where I can get a historical series of data on the percentage of buyers who are FTB. I desperately want to graph it. Cheers. If you are wondering who is replacing the FTB's look at this; Number of BTL mortgages 2000 120,300 2001 185,000 2002 275,500 2003 417,500 2004 526,300 2005 701,900 From the CML http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/filegrab/1MM6.xls?ref=2784

Couldn't agree more. This phrase, as used by the government, by definition means all other property is unaffordable. Shouldn't they be doing something about that instead of building a subclass of smaller property. Especially in light of the shocking revelations of the Shelter report into the cramped living conditions of many UK families and the impact on health. Forget "affordable housing", it's time to make all homes affordable again.

No the headline clearly says based on expectations a report will show... i.e. it hasn't been released yet.

Nothing on their website yet... Which one is due out soon? You can see what they mean about the pound... up in about every currency http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/...ncy/default.stm

One way elevator... doesn't come funnier than that. Cheers, that is the best bit of comedy I've heard all year.

Unfortunately it sounds better than it is, all they are warning is that you'd lose out on means testing by downsizing! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5024410.stm

Unfortunately I'm somewhat too old for this one 18-25 you have to be!

We would love to educate everyone about the artifical cost of land along with the other myths that persist i.e. high house prices are good for people (we'll leave the prices never go down myth to HPC as it's doing a great job on that front already). The problem is we have to get in front of them first. BTW have you seen; http://www.labourland.org/

I get the distinct feeling the majority of HPC'ers seem to believe that can have no influence on the market and policymakers whatsoever, that all the odds are stacked against them and their voice and actions can make no difference. Of course this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Consequently there doesn't seem to be much appetite at all amongst the HPC community for any direct action. This is a shame since a little concerted effort can have surprising results.

I've always suspected many of those involved have regarded the energy rises as a "temporary blip" hence they can just try to weather the storm. I think it's fair to say that it's looking more and more like prices will stay higher than expected now. I wonder if this sentiment will feed through soon as well.

Alfie, the problem is and remains that the people you wish to target with that message will never come to a website like this. You need a more mainstream platform in order to target mainstream opinion. The very concept of this site is akin to herecy for your average punter who thinks high house prices are a good thing.

Had a very interesting discussion with someone who happens to work for a large construction company t'other night and I happened to ask how rising energy costs affect their business. Their reply was that it had a massive impact primarily on concrete costs and also on all the other fuel costs. However it takes time to feed through because all the contracts are negotiated on a 6 month, 1 year or 2 year basis. That got me thinking how long will it actually take for increased energy costs to really filter through to the CPI. Likes of Tesco must have energy contracts on a yearly basis which will only really start to bite into costs soon. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I'm afraid you're probably right. Got this rubbish on the Labour email list: I suggest everyone fills in the above form and points out how are young people supposed to save for a pension when they are having to sink huge amounts of money into housing thanks to Labour's stewardship of the housing market.

If anyone spots stuff like this we'd be extremely grateful if you could tip us off by emailing: webmaster@pricedout.org.uk_nospam_please-remove-this-bit

Not if they've seen the returns they are getting on their money they won't be!

Well I had posted some more info on the Priced Out forums but our turkish hacker friends have closed them for the night. Here's what you're looking for although there isn't any context you're missing out on; http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/225/A7..._and_tables.pdf

Not so impressed myself I have to admit.

As you can imagine we've been actively investigating how the government percieves the housing market and it's future. We came across this graph in the full budget report we hadn't seen before, nothing particularly scintillating... UPDATE: Our site got hacked within an hour of posting this, many thanks to megaflop for restoring the image.

Mortgage lending should have regulated much sooner, for both personal and BTL mortgages, and should include enforced limits on available lending. The limits should take account of the level of debt a person can obtain in the wider context of the effects on house prices, the economy and the social implications, not just on the basis of whether a person can service that level of debt. Housebuilding should have been targeted much sooner, not allowing it to slide to the lowest levels since WW2. Home building policy should aim to keep the housing market stable rather than being a soviet style command economy controlled by the government on political whim.

It doesn't normally drop wildly although it does have a tendency to rally after big drops if everyone isn't scared out of their wits...

They are still well off their top though... can't imagine what possessed people to buy back into them. Can only think it was private investors thinking "property" + "share" = "safe!". Only way to beat the city is to invest 10yr+, buy at the bottom and enjoy in 10 years time.

Interesting story although it doesn't have some of the details. There were two schemes that Prescott's mob were pushing; 1. Key worker living 2. HomeBuy (with 3 variations on it) The former seems to have been rolled in the latter recently. It would be interesting to know which one this article is related to. FYI the list of key workers;

Someone got the link to this...!

I think you'll find that's the whole of Scotland not just Glasgow. Part of the unwritten government policy of using us as the testing ground for controversial legislation. Coming to a statute book near you soon. No. Could you imagine, would you pay near 2K to lose your home!