Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by tenroom

  1. No one's expecting your house number and street name, mate . . . just the area. WTF is the Berms ?
  2. Notable you don't say where you live now. . . a bit embarrassing, is it ?
  3. The kind of Londoner whose social life revolves around a bit more than the Dog and Handgun pub in South London . . .
  4. Even though I'm in zone 2, I couldn't begin to imagine life without a car. Anyone who's tried getting a minicab to drive 3 miles from the West End will tell you that there's no change outta £15 WTF
  5. I know people in Harlesden and none of them have reported instances of faeces on their doorstep ot urine on their car doorhandles either. Yes, they find some of the young men intimidating and aggressive but in reality the majority of the violence and drug-dealing is largely confined into these ruffians' own circle. You can find drugs anywhere . . . In Harlesden and in Kensington. In fact you'll find that most of the clientele for Class A drugs like cocaine reside in the "nicer" parts of town and although they aren't the ones doing the mugging, they bear as much responsibility as the crackheads in Harlesden for the buoyancy of the market in drugs.
  6. Don't you mean job losses will mean a crash ? All you armchair economists don't half talk bo11ox. A house price crash does NOT equal a recession
  7. I'm not sure about this and tell me if I'm wrong but hasn't every housing market crash been attended by a marked and clearly defined recession ? I clearly recall that of the late 80s / early 90s but not the one in '73. I don't recall the former recession actually being caused by a housing crash and I believe the 70s crash had more to do with oil prices than anything else. Desite what the bears say, the economy has sound fundamentals with high employment, steady if unspectacular growth, optimism from employers, low wage demands and relatively low interest rates. I don't see how a change in sentiment can realistically sink this market unless it's underpinned by a complete and utter lack of faith in the overall economic picture.
  8. I'm not disagreeing with your comments on Harlesden - I can't really see it happening either but I don't think it's because the current incumbents are there. Kensal Green and Kensal Rise are simply closer to Notting Hill/Ladbroke Grove and that's why they've begun the gentrification process. I agree that there aren't any "character" areas left - it really is a matter of somewhere becoming "cool" because it has Victorian properties. How daft is that ? The one everyone was touting was Hoxton - what a sh*thole . . . full of poncey students with sharkfin haircuts wearing vintage Fila tracksuit tops that cost half their student loan drinking in bars playing generic house music at full pelt. . .
  9. I may have missed out the "undesirable" in my first sentence but I made reference to it all the way through the post. Do you think that council flats are some sort of new phenomenon ? There've been council flats in Notting Hill for more than 40 years and that hasn't stopped W11 becoming the most expensive postcode in the country. In fact many of those same council flats that you seem to think only house scum are selling for £400K so wake up and smell the coffee . . . your type of snobbery is heading for the suburbs and the commuter lines - leave London to those who can deal with a little bit of a buzz If you prefer the bland and soulless that's your choice but the topic centres around gentrification of areas which, hitherto, have been considered "run down". No I've never lived above a drug dealer - to my knowledge - but one would imagine that if he drew as much attention to himself as you allude to, it's unlikely you'd have had to put up with it for a year as he'd probably have been raided.
  10. The sheer snobbery in some of these comments is breath-taking. I mean "get rid of the incumbent population" ?? I'm sorry but you're talking utter bo11ocks and here's why. Taking Notting Hill as an example, gentrification has taken place after a considerably lengthy period of being "best kept secret". By thi sI mean that NH was home to a fairly arty and bohemian population who were NOT moneyed. They lived cheek-by-jowl with many of the Windrush immigrants who couldn't find accommodation in other parts of London thanks to British racism. That's why you'll find that many Windies of that generation don't have much in the way of nasty things to say about Rachmann as he was at least willing to allow them to rent his properties. Moving on, the area became a successful hotch-potch of multi-culturalism and was frequented by the likes of the former war minister Profumo during his ill-fated affair with one Christine Keeler. Many aspects of the 60s fashion explosion were born in the area. The likes of Jimi Hendrix socialised (and sadly, died) there. The very "undesirables" you'd want shipped out are the ones who created the f***ing buzz in the first place. Following that ridiculous film, the area was subject to an explosion in investment which saw dickwads from the home counties, flush with media or banking cash, to buy up property in the area. Nothing wrong with that but truth be told, nigh on 99% of them had and still have nothing to add to the actual fabric of the area in terms of personality or "vibe". They just turn up expecting to buy a ready-made lifestyle and that's it . . . all they have to do is wait. It's almost as if they're expecting a f***ing show. If it was simply a matter of huge, stucco-fronted Victorian buildings, there are countless areas in Central London you can find that sh*t - not just Notting Hill. People came to the area for what they perceived to be its unique spirit which could be found in fashion boutiques, the music of Rough Trade right thru to Wall of Sound Records, Portobello Market, Notting Hill Carnival which, before you claim forces all the yuppies to f**k off for the weekend, actually has more white people in attendance than black these days. These elements of what made the area so attractive in the first place would be non-existent if they'd tossed out the undesirables. Gentrification is bullsh*t anywhere else. Just pop along to somewhere like Maida Vale . . . Absolutely heaving with new money. Loads of white, so-called "middle-class" living in those huge mansion blocks on Elgin or Sutherland Avenues. Go along to any of the bars and see just how bland and soulless people with money can be. They sit in shitty pizzerias like the Cochonet in designer dress-down clothes staring blankly into the street praying for anything, ANYTHING to liven up their existence. The only people laughing are the wideboys selling the cocaine to them. Maida Vale never had anything but good housing stock and tree-lined streets and, frankly, that was never enough.
  11. er . . . no you don't. Golborne ward may not be the most salubrious part of the Royal Borough but challenge most people to buy a one bed flat in Trellick Tower and see what they say. Frankly, I'd rather live in the Grove than any part of South London . . . least I wouldn't be miles away from a bloody tube station
  12. Depends what you mean by deprivation. If you mean there are families who don't have shedloads of dosh, drive Beemers and dine at expensive restaurants, then sure, there is deprivation. There aren't any people living rough and destitute and I can tell you that there are council estates in the heart of the "Kensington" edge of Notting Hill. It'd be nice if people commenting on this area actually knew what they were talking about . . .
  13. This isn't beyond the realms of possibility. Ladbroke Grove and parts of Portobello were effectively off-limits for the police about 25 years ago. They were taking the piss, though and they thoroughly deserved the bloody good hiding they got in Brixton and Tottenham around that time. I won't go into detail but they sure made life hell for anyone who wasn't white when I was a teen. If the Grove can be gentrified, anywhere can . . .
  14. Harlesden IS rough but you can get KFC at 4am any night of the week. Tough about the white bird gettin' racially abused in the street but, hey, it's happened to all of us . . . just gotta get on with it
  15. The kind of people making these huge bonuses aren't exactly NEW to this level of income. Don't you think they bought prestige London property ages ago ? These people are buying gold and silver; they're buying Ferraris and Lamborghini Murcielagos ; they're buying holiday homes and expensive jewellery. We're not talking common or garden variety traders here, we're talking about heads of department, big time economists who know where to put money for maximum return.
  16. He's probably in a pay dispute with the board owner so he's downed tools to demonstrate why, without him and his "cheerleader" posts, most of the bears will just give up and make an appointment with Charcol to discuss an I/O BTL 5% down mega-mortgage fixed at 8.9% for 6 months on an off-plan 2 bedder in Walsall. Thing is, judging from some of the posts I read on here last week, a lot of 'em have given up hopes of a crash. Read what I mean here
  17. I disagreed with your assertion that people will plough right back into the market instead of waiting for it to "bottom out". Your recollection of properties being snapped up almost as soon as they came to market was a very visible phenomenon up until very recently - certainly in London where i live. I concede that the fundamentals underpinning the last crash are not in evidence at the moment or if they are, they've been well hidden but I fail to see what that has to do with with demand once a crash is in effect. I never implied that people choosing to stay at home could precipitate a crash - that'd be daft. I said that once the market does crash - and it will - all those aspiring homeowners will suddenly develop the urge to stay home or rent and do so with gusto. Once the housing market is in reverse, the party's over. The papers and the news will be full of stories of repossessed families and singletons tossed out on to the streets because rates hit the 7% you mentioned, never mind 15. Mortgage sizes are DOUBLE what they were back then so the net outcome is the same and that's without counting the level of unsecured debt that many mortgagors have taken on to supplement their mortgage payment-ravaged income.
  18. I disagree. Last time around, the crash went on for years - '88 right thru 'til '93/94. It was almost as if all the demand simply vanished. All those people clamouring to get into property suddenly decided that, actually, renting or staying at home with the folks wasn't that bad an idea after all. Sentiment at the time was along the lines of "Why should I buy a property now when it's value is only going to fall. I'll just be in negative equity like all the people I'm hearing about on the news every day". I don't remember people of 20-30 ( the age of many priced-out FTBs) even thinking about property back then. Sure they knew there'd been a big boom in prices but people forget easily especially when the news around them was all doom and gloom. high rates, negative equity, record repossessions, lenders going after people for shortfalls, people literally walking to their building societies and handing back the keys. To the bottom of my soul, i don't thing that merely having somewhere to live is not the primary drive for single people to buy property - the hitherto surefire prospect of sizeable profit is. It's generally widespread knowledge that there are far more single occupant households in this country than ever and this trend is set to continue. Yes there will be families that will get back in on the market's way down but the overall demand across the nation won't be ANYTHING like what it is now. Once this market turns, it is going turn very, VERY hard.
  19. While that nightmare scenario might hold true for traditional rental arrangements between tenant and landlord, it doesn't work like that when you lease propety to a housing association. Because my friend is leasing his properties to the housing association, his contract is withthem and not with the actual tenants who'll be living int he property. What this means is that in the event of any fraudulent claims, the Housing Benefit agency would claim back money from the housing association and not my friend. The Housing Association cannot approach him for recompense. I admit that purchasing ex-local authority property can be fraught with pitfalls similar to those you describe but there are ways in which you can protect yourself. It's no different to buying private really. You do have to know what major works are planned and you do have to do some research into the local authority's record on maintenance because not all lawyers are created equal. I found myself in a situation where I was going to have to dish out nigh on £13,000 for roof repairs and window replacement - both of which really needed to be done. I got a grant from the local authority as I'd recently been made redundant. They paid the lot and as long as I didn't sell up before 5 years, I wouldn't have to pay a bean. You just have to know how to deal with these things and ensure you're fully informed.
  20. I don't in general but considering Notting Hill Housing Trust offered me only a little less for mine 2.5 years ago, I think it's safe to trust him on this one.
  21. Actually it does exist. A good friend has recently bought a couple of 3-bed ex-local authority flats in low-rise (no more than 3 floors) buildings which are more than 40% OO. They're both close to tube stations in the Royal Borough and local supermarkets. He rents them out to housing associations on 5 year leases. Gets £2K per month on each after doing just over £450K for the pair. Damn sight better than the 5% yields the period conversions are getting these days . .
  22. Potential STR . . . Fed up with the rat-race. Thinking of letting the equity pay the rent and going back to making music.
  • 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.