Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Seen It All Before

New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Seen It All Before

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie
  1. A million quid around there gets you a four-bedroom house with a large garden. A fair price for a place with a quarter of the space would be a quarter of the price. No? Also look at the floorplan. Where would one put the second bedroom the details say is possible? It looks like a landing that's been made into a flat - everything opens off the living room including the khasi!
  2. Er, everyone who disagrees with you is not an estate agent, dude. We should certainly ignore selling / buying expenses, because in the example given there, wouldn't have been any. As for repair costs, well, what's a reasonable amount on a £95k house? Maybe a few hundred a year? In fact, you could probably get away with nil or nearly. I have seen houses offered that had had no maintenance done in 45 years and the asking price was the within 2 or 3 per cent the same as the one round the corner that had been well kept. Condition of a house has basically no bearing on its price as far as I can
  3. In London it's even worse, in that not only are prices 9 or 10x salary but the salary is itself taxed more heavily and excludes you from lots of benefits. If you did your calculation net for net you'd find Londoners' wage advantage is more than consumed by housing costs. Notwithstanding which, the question is surely - affordable to whom? In London houses only have to be affordable to non-doms who earn city money and who pay much lower taxes than us proles. People have been arguing that affordability versus UK wages was about to cause a price crash for at least 11 years now. It's not happ
  4. I'd say this place was worth about £275k in the current market, if even that.
  5. Interesting. So for the sake of argument let's say you sold at £95,000, which Nationwide says was the average house price then. Had you kept your £95,000 house, you would now have one worth about £170,000, so a £75,000 capital gain. Over those 11 years, if you had been paying only the interest on a £95,000 mortgage, you'd have laid out say 3.5% of that a year for eleven years. If you had rented the same average house, you'd have laid out a similar 3.5% of its steadily increasing price (averaging about £130,000) over that period. So the interest-only mortgage would have cost £36,575 to serve,
  6. I see no difference in principle between renting a house and renting the money that buys a house. Either can be argued to be money down the drain. The claim that people who rent from landlords are somehow paying the landlord's mortgage makes very little sense. In practice most rental yields just about cover the interest. I've got a flat that I let out unfurnished. The value is probably about £600,000 and the gross rent is £30,000pa. The net rent is that less 18% for letting and management, then take off the service charges and the usual maintenance and the residual is about £21,000. Take o
  7. There is, however, a yield on property as well in the form of a place to live in. What's a pile of cash for if not to be spent?
  8. We are renting, but have just bought and will be moving in a month or two. We each had a flat which we let out in order to rent in an area of London with decent schools. We sold one flat to buy the house. 50% deposit, 3x salary, and an eyewatering price for what is basically a semi in a pleasant area. The other flat we still have. It is in a nice white stucco part of town with canals, restaurants, transport links and parks. There are four other flats in the house; 3 of the 5 owners are foreigners and 4 of the 5 occupants are foreigners. Certain areas of London have been 100% bought up by f
  • 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.