Notting Hell

Honestly don't know why EA don't just publish full addresses... it's so easy to find out this information. Just makes buying/selling houses more of a hassle.

It's obviously an HMO... https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20113/houses_in_multiple_occupation/910/register_of_hmo_licences No licence at the moment, and it is unoccupied. Address is 105 Botley Road.

Google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/51.60484733446779,-0.1115789946293698 House number is 296 from street view. Address is: The Mushroom House, 296 High Road, Wood Green, London, N22 8JA (from https://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode) Land registry holds Freehold and Leasehold for the address (search here: https://search-property-information.service.gov.uk/) Inspire ID is 55252299 (Google search for Inspire ID map to find this information) Land registry states the land is freehold. "land at Town Hall Park, High Road, Wood Green" (search here: https://search-property-information.service.gov.uk/search/search-by-inspire-id) Last sold for £180,000 in 2015.

I think that's right, but when property is owned in ltd company it is subject to corporation tax (not sure on the exact rates, but it also doesn't have tax-free £1m threshold). I think the ltd company strategy is only useful for when the family intends to operate a business as a going concern (i.e. is not going to sell the property).

I predicted that there would be issues that arise from IHT + HPI. The problem is that lots of people now own houses that have value outside the IHT threshold (£1m for property left to children/grand children). Any value above that, and the estate has to leave behind an additional £66k per £100k value above £1m for the house to be inherited free of IHT. For example, if you have a house worth £2m, you get £1m tax free, and £1m is taxable. To pay the tax on this £1m, the estate needs £1m/0.6 - £1m = £666k additional to pay the tax bill. So to inherit a house worth £2m, free of IHT, the estate has to leave behind £2,666k. This is where the problem starts, because the estate does not have £666k in cash to pay the tax. Not only does the estate not normally have this amount in cash, but the inheritors do not have the cash either. Furthermore, £666k is 20x the average wage, and the inheritors could generally speaking not even mortgage the house at this price to pay the tax. Thus it forces the sale of the "family home". This is the inevitable consequence of rampant HPI and fixed IHT thresholds. I think this is all by design (that is, not increasing IHT thresholds).

30,000 is the freehold enfranchisement premium. This would be approximately the sum of future ground rents + "marriage value". So in practice when there is a long leasehold, the freehold is not that much. There is nothing unusual about this set of transactions.

Recently read Road to Wigan Pier. It occurred to me I don't believe I have ever seen a slag heap.

What do you mean precisely here? Where is the price scrubbed out from. What reasons are actually given in practice?

Data is also reported here: https://houseprices.io/?q=221+Lake+Road+West%2C+Cardiff%2C+CF23+5QY The data is probably from the same source however: the LR sold price database.

The previous listing for the house on Rightmove was in 2014. The 2023 sale does not have an associated listing, suggesting it wasn't listed on the open market, and therefore the transfer was between known parties. 2014 £557,000: on Rightmove 2023a £850,000: no listing 2023b £1,250,000: on Rightmove Could also be related to IHT possibly an attempt to keep estate under nil-rate band including house+remaining assets?

I mean, it's not possible for it to be insolvent is it? The young will simply have to pay, it's as simple as that. It cannot by definition be insolvent because the government transfer service will just take some other generation's money.

The annual immigration figures are to be released in a couple of weeks, which probably has something to do with it. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/11/net-migration-million-home-office-government-conservative/ https://archive.ph/y2z9A I suspect daggers are being drawn...

Melissa Lawford is in that video LOL see recent thread: https://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?/topic/249364-property-market-to-change-as-boomers-leave-in-boxes/

The Times: Come on, tech bods, find us a better way to buy homes https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/come-on-tech-bods-find-us-a-better-way-to-buy-homes-7rs0jjm3k https://archive.ph/dIhHb Does anyone have any ideas how tech could improve the buying/selling experience in the UK market. I think one of the difficulties is that there are so many people involved in the buying selling process that makes it all very difficult: 1. buyer 2. buyer's spouse 3. buyer's solicitor 4. buyer's solicitor's secretary/admin 5. buyer's surveyor 6. buyer's mortgage broker 7. buyer's bank 8. buyer's moving co. 9. HMLR 10. HMRC 11. seller 12. seller's spouse 13. seller's solicitor's secretary/admin 14. seller's bank 15. seller's moving co. etc.!!! Multiplied by number of houses in a chain, you can easily have hundreds of people involved in a single chain of housing transaction!!!

Completely agree. To look at another way, you have one group of students who are prepared to do hard and socially useful degrees (medicine, engineering, etc.) and their lifetime taxes end up subsidising the prats who study English, Theology, Geography etc. who have indulged themselves.

The student loan is the most pernicous tax there is. It's not just a graduate tax. It's a hereditary tax. If your parents couldn't pay, you get greater tax for the rest of your life. Totally immoral.

So many commenters prattling on about "17% interest rates" without any understanding of the house price interest rate product. I am endlessly amazed at how financially illiterate people are.

Yeah exactly, the ones who pay the high transaction costs are also most affected by the magnitude of negative equity if it does occur.

1 short of 100k annual income????!?!

Yes, but what I am saying is that often (but I accept not in the context of a Telegraph article), that when a young person uses the term "boomer" they just mean "old person", rather than to mean the technical definition. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boomer There is variety of accepted definitions. I should have been more specific in my previous posts, but I was referring to Boomer to mean anyone above 60+, but I accept this is not the technical definition. My point somewhat being that we now have pensioners looking after pensioners, and pensioners now inherit, rather than people who are younger where the inheritance would make greater difference to their life trajectory.

Maybe but do you think the term Boomer is used colloquially in the sense of "anyone born between 1946 to 1964"? I would say that Boomer really means "old person". Maybe someone who is over 60+, rather than the exact defnition. It's not clear if you take the exact definition, why the article only talks about boomers? What about all the pre-boomers who are also "dying off"?

Also the other aspect I was thinking about negative equity... I realise this is not a representative example, but say you buy a £1,000,000 2BR flat close to work to your city job in London. You find yourself in negative equity, and you consider selling. Once you are in a better financial position you wish to buy. Therefore, you must make the transactions: SELL existing house, BUY new house. The cost to sell might be 3% + solicitor fees etc. So that's £30k+ gone immediately. You then intend to rebut a £1,000,000 flat. You pay £70k+ stamp duty (no longer FTB either) So to exist negative equity and re-buy at some point in future you pay £100k + for this set of transactions. Assuming that the equivalent rent for a 2BR flat might be 3k, then if you SELL/BUY you are spending 3 whole YEARS equivalent rent. So you essentially have a 3 year window to sort your finances out/hope that interest rates change.

Sure, but reading between the lines, I interpret the article as anyone who is retired who might want to downsize, which means boomers and whoever is left of the generation(s) before them.

Yes, it's quite astonishing really. The personal finance journalist I do know (did know) at University is writing contrary to her own interests. It's a bit sad really. Gotta keep that blue rinse flowing

I would have thought so too, and I would do so personally, but that's not the case in my family.