Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About austrianec

  • Rank
    HPC Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This new furlough scheme is genius by the Treasury If someone is on £27k, the employer could pay £15k, government £6k at most. I calculate income tax and national insurance (employer and employee) for the employee at £4.7k. So the government spends £100/month on someone who'd otherwise be on JSA. It would appear there is no money left!
  2. The Guayas region of Ecuador had 10,000 excess deaths last month...that's 0.25% of the total population dying extra in a month. No country is claiming 2,500 deaths per million. Adjusted for the demography of the place, it's the worst affected place in the world (Bergamo did worse but has a lot more elderly). Unless you think the fatality rate of the disease is over 10%, that's a huge amount of spread in a tropical climate.
  3. https://twitter.com/J_CD_T/status/1245739661449977867/photo/1 A credible source on excess mortality. The figures are that 0.45% of the total population of Bergamo died last month. I find it inconceivable that April won't see similar figures as they only locked down on the 9th March AND household spread would continue even after a perfect lockdown. You've got 1% of people dying over 2 months. So even if everyone in Bergamo has already caught the disease (which I'm sure they haven't), that's a massive excess mortality.
  4. The LSL method for calculating the London average looks to have averaged the change in price in every borough. This magnifies the effective weight of the priciest boroughs; and with Kensington and Chelsea/City of London rising 11.5/20.9%, you get a nonsense figure out. It's even worse than that because they also have lower transaction levels than some of the other boroughs (no surprise because they're the biggest outliers) If you take the Land Registry figures for transaction by borough (it's similar data to the data they've used) and work out the average change per house sold, the figure
  5. In the example, the rent for 2 years will be over £25,000 (assuming CPI over 1%) so, on a £250k house, that's a 5% rental yield which I'd say is very high for non-housing benefit rentals High enough that it isn't overly generous to 'give' 5% back after 2 years (leaving aside the fact your house is probably over-priced by people using HTB round the corner) The only thing I wonder though is whether independent valuations would factor in any damage done to the property; if so, that could be one way of securing a bigger discount. As the builder has already established the couple in quest
  6. I notice Taylor Wimpey are offering would-be buyers with no deposit, the following... https://www.taylorwimpey.co.uk/buying-with-us/special-offers/springboard ...it seems as though they gift the home-buyer a 5% deposit after 2 years 'renting' the property, enabling the buyer to buy the property I imagine the process is legitimate (and not mortgage fraud) because Taylor Wimpey aren't a normal 'landlord' and can claim they're effectively giving you the house 'for free' for 2 years and keeping the money in trust for you as a buyer (just like people living rent-free with their paren
  7. I believe the 26% is of all house purchases (298,000 is 26% of about 1.15 million which sounds like the annual sales volume for all houses, not just FTB). So, assuming that at these bubble prices 'second-steppers' are generally using equity to trade up (if they're moving at all), that's going to be the majority of FTB
  8. I found this yesterday... https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/45809148 (nr Cambridge) Price reduced 4 times in just over 6 months. Was £475k...now £325k...presumably the same agent has talked them down the whole way...
  9. If most FTB-ers were buying new homes in which the sold price were being artificially inflated like this AND most other house sales are in chains of OOs (trade-ins effectively), that would explain how none of the house price indexes seem to bear any resemblance to what people can afford. Maybe the strength of HtB in inflating house prices is that it has deliberately pushed FTB-ers to new homes, removing the awkward problem of having to write down the amount of money they can actually borrow. I was assuming the current house price bubble was based on the same frauds as the first e.g. self-cer
  10. Is this to do with the new Basel regulations? Even based on 2010 house prices, this wonderful chart suggests rental yields were generally around 5%... https://www.lendinvest.com/buy-to-let-index/rental-yield/. Bizarrely they map that against current rental prices?! ...so you can only let 70% LTV to BTL "investors" at 2010 prices (I haven't checked the maths on the 6.9% but it sounds plausible). In reality, prices have increased since by 15-20% according to the Land Registry (nationwide). In London, they're up 60%...so if London house prices fall 25%, landlords will still have to stump up 40%
  11. I got a letter from my bank today stating changes to foreign currency business bank accounts. They are changing the terms and conditions to allow them to charge negative interest rates in the event that central banks pay a negative rate on deposits First they came for the investment banks yet it mattered not because everyone thought they were a load of t*ssers Then they came for the businesses yet it mattered not because a negative interest rate would be cheaper than the security required to protect that much cash under the mattress Then they came for the individuals yet it mattered not bec
  12. To be fair, I've just looked up the full income tables by decile here... http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-337425 ...and note that 20% of employees in South Cambridgeshire are on £51,000/year gross (compared with £41,000/year in Cambridge)...because the Science Park isn't in Cambridge. The statistical confidence is very low on those 2014 figures...but they are consistent with the 2013 figures. As for £100,000, the figures suggest that 150,000 of those earning over £100,000 work in Inner London...and that that's around half of such people in the
  13. https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/wpca/1929379928/report.aspx?town=cambridge £569.40 median full-time earnings (gross) for those living in Cambridge £574.90 for those working in Cambridge (possibly more relevant). Men earn £120/week than women which (£627.10), without wishing to gender stereotype, will be the tech premium In 'Employment by Occupation', there are 64,300 individuals listed. Just over 10% are "managers, directors and senior officials"...our median male salary will be somewhere in the professional class below. So your 10-15 years experience individual is probably towards t
  14. There are two factors here: 1. Rental yields are going to remain similar across all parts of the country. As there is more employment spending in London/Cambridge, prices continue to rise to give the 4% rental yield or whatever makes them equal to the rest of the country. Rental yields are ridiculously low because we're in a bubble everywhere but... 2. Because actual prices rise a little, people want to cling onto their "asset", reducing supply. Now since the booms in London/Cambridge are related to more transitory populations than elsewhere, there are more people looking to move (be that bu
  15. This reminds me of an analysis I did last year...based on payments of LHA, I calculated 79% of all renters in Blackpool would be claiming housing benefit. It is the highest of any district (Tendring with 71% came next). Even though LHA rates are no longer linked to the median private rental value in an area, it did rather make a mockery of councils' efforts to set a meaningful LHA rate. Disappointingly for someone renting in Cambridge, I found our market wasn't distorted in the same way with only 10% of rents being paid by LHA (just above the City of London at 6%)...although I'm sure a vast a
  • 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.