Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

twatmangle

Members
  • Posts

    2,177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by twatmangle

  1. I'd like urgent replies if possible as, of course, "there is a lot of interest in the house at the moment" (think I know a used car sales trick when I see one hehe)

    I have a very simple question I wanted to put out to the community as I'm looking at moving into a new place with my girlfriend shortly. Simply:

    How much of an admin fee is too much?

    I've been given the following quote for moving in:

    That makes the total payable (on a rent of £850/month) - 2698.95. Over triple a months rent.

    We've negotiated with them on the admin fee as that part seems excessive, they've agreed to knock it down from 435.95 to 360, however it still seems to much to me. Included with the check in fee as well it's well over 50% of a months rent that we won't be seeing again.

    So, any thoughts? Is this normal nowadays or should we steer clear of this agency?

    Six weeks rent as a deposit is normal.

    Fees - additional £200 for all the checks and references (for a couple)

    Anything more than this, question it.

    Walk away if necessary.

    Based only on my experience.

  2. Did you not read the opening post?

    That reads to me as if they paid too much.

    It's a repo, doesn't mean they paid too much, or did anything wrong.

    Maybe they bought very sensibly and have lost their jobs, or illness, or death etc. You have absolutely no data to make an opinion on the matter.

    Just because it 'reads' to you, doesn't make it fact.

    Insufficient data.

  3. Agree. Those (of us) in their 30s have an interesting perspective to view things from. We paid less for our education than future generations will and we can still recall a time when houses were affordable. Those who jumped in too quickly still have time to sort things out. Those who have waited this out (and still are) may have a few years they can hold out before needing to take a 25 year mortgage. The generation at the crossroads (hang on, that's almost an X shape isn't it!).

    All of the people I know who are buying right now, (only a handful) are in their late 30s. It is that 25-year-mortgage thing that is lurking on the horizon which is acting as a fuzzy deadline.

    Were we luckier with house prices? I'm not so sure it was ever easy. In my case I remember at the bottom of the market, around '95, houses were equally unaffordable. Where I was at the time, I was earning 13K, and the cheapest houses were about 50K. A few years later, I was earning 16K, and starter homes, out of town, were 80k. (1998).

    But as you say, we didn't have 30k of debts before even leaving Uni.

  4. I never benefited from it, but suffering more than most and will pay for it for the rest of my life.

    This is what makes me angry too.

    One thing I am happy for though, is being in my 30s. Those in their 20's are being beaten with a much bigger stick than the one hitting me.

  5. Why should he base his offer on what debts the previous owner has on the property and not what he thinks it is worth? Why should he share their stupidity and pain?

    I think it's more to do with estimating the bank's minimum acceptable offer, rather than estimating the value of the house.

    Besides, as we've discussed, it's going to be very difficult to work out the outstanding balance based on the information available.

    It's a bit silly to assume that they were stupid to buy the house, or that they paid too much.

  6. Find out when and what it sold for last, then you can determine what is owed to the bank and set an offer to that, it's unlikely they will take a hit on the property just now and prefer to wait.

    Not enough data for that.

    Presumably you would also need details of the previous owner's deposit, mortgage details(IO or repay.), details of outstanding arrears or overpayments etc to get a full picture of the balance outstanding.

    But certainly it would give you a good indication of how much to offer the bank.

  7. The chief executive of my local council makes 20% more than the mayor of New York City -- a place with 50 times the population, a higher cost of living, and a much broader range of issues to deal with. The answer to your question is NO -- a 40 year old, ex-policemen with 5 years experience in local government, does not deserve £190,000 a year and a gold plated pension for life. The higher levels of local government are massively over-paid in the UK.

    What's that got to do with the question I asked?

  8. There is NO job in local government worthy of a salary greater than £25k. Think you're worth more? Fine, earn it in the private sector.

    I don't care what size budget you are in charge of, how many people you are responsible for, £25k is enough.

    The only important job is rubbish collection and they even do that woefully.

    I don't work in the public sector, I've got a proper job.

    However, I disagree with you that people in local government shouldn't earn more than 25k. Seems a bit silly.

  9. Seems doable if BoMaD has been there throughout life, ie free driving lessons, early years on dad's car insurance builds up some no claims, help with money for first car, early rent, student fees, moving for first job, possibly living at home if parents are in the SE. And of course to bulk up the house deposit itself. The rest of us have more commonly had debts to deal with during the age of 20s from various sources before any capital is built up.

    I can't speak for everyone, but I had absolutely no help from my parents, but still managed a 6 figure deposit.

    None of the above is applicable in my case. Didnt drive until 27, went to uni at 18 etc.

  10. But in most cases there is no loss, just less of a gain. Only the people who bought within the last few years will actually lose money and can't sell due to the size of the mortgage. But even for these once their current mortgage deal ends they will be forced onto expensive SVRs.

    For the rest there is no reason why they can't sell. Apart from greed. But many will have put off the sale up to three years ago and the reason they wanted to sell will still be there and the pressure will be building to breaking point. There are many reasons why people need to sell apart from the usual forced 3 Ds you have expanding families, bad neighbours, bad area etc. How long can you continue to put it off? Many will be giving in and will be joined by the usual sping sellers from this year.

    This, combined with falling demand is what is causing the glut in supply. I expect it to continue.

    Bit of a generalisation, and I think you're wrong. People who bought in the last few years (2008-2010) probably were required to have a 20-40% deposit, so are unlikely to any where near negative equity. In fact, house prices have actually risen 10% since 2008, so they should have no problems getting a mortgage if their current deal expires. Besides, currently SVRs are not expensive either, typically around 4%, so I think you're wrong on this point too.

    I think people who bought in 2005-7 are the most at risk, but again, they should have paid off a chunk of the mortgage by now. Unless they were on a IO mortgage, in which case, they've only got themselves to blame.

  11. When it says "home owners" does it mean those without mortgages? If so, the figures are unsurprising.

    Also, "homeowners under 35 hold just five per cent of the equity in their homes" doesn't seem particularly surprising if we are talking about those renting from the bank. Early on in your life you are paying more interest than capital.

    People with mortgages are the legal owners of the property, so I suspect home owners refers to mortgaged properties as well as those owned without a mortgage. Have a look at a Title Deed at the Registered Owners part.

    https://www.landregistry.gov.uk/www/wps/QDMPS-Portlet/resources/example_register.pdf

    All this nonsense and about 'home owners' not being the owners is just HPC wishful thinking.

  12. date event

    07 January 2011

    * Brief Description changed: • ***SALE WEEKEND, SATURDAY 4th & SUNDAY 5th DECEMBER 2010*** • Spacious mid terrace villa in cul de sac. Bay lounge, separate dining room, large dining kitchen, four bedrooms, bathroom and shower room, w/c cloakroom, gas central heating, partial double glazing, enclosed rear gardens. (SHS100141) (contd...) [Found by n/a]

    * Price changed: Offers Over £265,000 Fixed Price £249,995

    20 December 2010

    * Brief Description changed: • Spacious mid terrace villa in cul de sac. Bay lounge, separate dining room, large dining kitchen, four bedrooms, bathroom and shower room, w/c cloakroom, gas central heating, partial double glazing, enclosed rear gardens. (contd...) (SHS100141) [Found by n/a]

    30 November 2010

    * Brief Description changed: • ***SALE WEEKEND, SATURDAY 4th & SUNDAY 5th DECEMBER 2010*** • Spacious mid terrace villa in cul de sac. Bay lounge, separate dining room, large dining kitchen, four bedrooms, bathroom and shower room, w/c cloakroom, gas central heating, partial double glazing, enclosed rear gardens. (SHS100141) (contd...) [Found by n/a]

    21 September 2010

    * Brief Description changed: • Spacious mid terrace villa in cul de sac. (contd...) Bay lounge, separate dining room, large dining kitchen, four bedrooms, bathroom and shower room, w/c cloakroom, gas central heating, partial double glazing, enclosed rear gardens. (SHS100141) [Found by n/a]

    * Title changed: Holmhead Road, Glasgow Cathcart [Found by n/a]

    15 September 2010

    * Brief Description changed: • OPEN HOUSE VIEWING WEEKEND SATURDAY 18TH AND SUNDAY 19TH SEPTEMBER 2010 BETWEEN 2PM AND 4PM • Spacious mid terrace villa in cul de sac. Bay lounge, separate dining room, large dining kitchen, four bedrooms, bathroom and shower room, w/c cloakroom, gas central heating, partial double glazing, enclosed rear gardens. (SHS100141) (contd...) [Found by n/a]

    10 September 2010

    * Initial entry found. [Found by n/a]

  13. Where on earth can you get 8-12% yield in the UK today or even tomorrow after a 20% fall?

    Are you sure you are calculating your yield properly?

    Historically, yields of this order were normal for Landlords.

    EDIT: Please re-read my original post. I was talking about a future market that had fallen significantly, and possibly an 'overshoot' below the trend line. I didn't mention today or tomorrow.

    If the market does fall by 40%, it will be the middle aged and middle classes buying the most properties. FTBers will be out-competed by those with more money.

  14. But what fall would tempt you? 2%? 5%? 10%? And if prices are falling, would you really call the bottom? I don't think so. You would wai for the bottom.

    I'm talking about price falls all the way down to the 30-40% falls that many here are predicting. I thought I clarified this by mentioning overshooting.

    If there was a crash of this magnitude. I would see it as a buying opportunity. 10-20% probably not.

×
×
  • 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.