Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
leicestersq

Great Housing Fraud

Recommended Posts

Great Article in the Mail.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292336/Extraordinary-demands-housing-association-tenants.html

Just goes to underline what is going on with the so called 'housing boom'. Huge amounts of taxpayer money is being wasted on putting families, mostly foreign ones, into great accommodation.

What this person sees is probably just a fraction of the huge and uncontrolled fraud that has developed with regards to our housing policies.

When things are this bad, the only way out is to end it. Remove the obligation on local authorities to house people. Remove all housing benefit. It has to go, there is no alternative.

Just a small amount of benefit should be available to those out of work for their housing costs. They will need to find their own housing.

It needs to be done now, before these policies bankrupt our country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big problem is that there is no differentiation between people who want social housing; they are seen as a single mass when they aren't.

They need to be split into two streams:

i) Those who have a local connection and have spent their time on the waiting list, the traditional social housing tenant - deal with by HAs

ii) Those who qualify under the needs-based criteria - deal with by local councils in basic emergency stock

As it stands everybody under category (ii) gets to jump the queue ahead of category (i), and you get cases like the one in the story and local people can forget getting a house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Article in the Mail.

http://www.dailymail...on-tenants.html

Just goes to underline what is going on with the so called 'housing boom'. Huge amounts of taxpayer money is being wasted on putting families, mostly foreign ones, into great accommodation.

What this person sees is probably just a fraction of the huge and uncontrolled fraud that has developed with regards to our housing policies.

When things are this bad, the only way out is to end it. Remove the obligation on local authorities to house people. Remove all housing benefit. It has to go, there is no alternative.

Just a small amount of benefit should be available to those out of work for their housing costs. They will need to find their own housing.

It needs to be done now, before these policies bankrupt our country.

Good spot.  As you were writing this, I was it to the Blog site.

In my view those in receipt of LHA should be in the lowest grade properties, it gives them an incentive to move up by finding work. It also stops penalising those who do work and can only afford rents at the bottom end.

But top of the list is the great fraud that has gone on. As said before this system needs to be stopped and now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big problem is that there is no differentiation between people who want social housing; they are seen as a single mass when they aren't.

They need to be split into two streams:

i) Those who have a local connection and have spent their time on the waiting list, the traditional social housing tenant - deal with by HAs

ii) Those who qualify under the needs-based criteria - deal with by local councils in basic emergency stock

As it stands everybody under category (ii) gets to jump the queue ahead of category (i), and you get cases like the one in the story and local people can forget getting a house.

I think you fail to understand the problem. You need a third stream, those who are commiting fraud, and they should be streamed into prison.

The current system assumes that no one is committing fraud when they apply for free housing, and that people who work at councils are honest.

Until you can work out a way of ensuring that your streams are fraud free, then you should have zero streams.

I think also that we need a rule that says that anyone immigrating to the UK, must have funds to allow them to buy their own property and for them to be able to look after themselves, such that they can never have access to public funds. If they cant prove that, then tough, go somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1292336/Extraordinary-demands-housing-association-tenants.html

Not long ago, I had to do a field visit to one of our sites to show some properties to a family. The houses are new-builds in a really good, central location - I'd love to live in one myself. Three storeys, with three or four bedrooms, really nice - they were so new that the paint was still wet.

The family had just arrived in London from Somalia. It didn't take long for them to decide they'd seen enough. They didn't speak much English but they made it clear they weren't happy with the bedrooms on the top floor - apparently they didn't like the sloping eaves.

But the deal-breaker came with their next questions. First, they wanted to know if the property came with an automatic right-to-buy with a discount, which it didn't.

They are thinking of council-owned properties, but we are a housing association - a not-for-profit organisation that is funded by government grants, bank loans and rental income - so we hold on to our stock and simply let it out.

I thought that question was a bit odd, considering the family supposedly didn't have a penny to their name, which was why they were throwing themselves on the mercy of the good old British taxpayer. Where would they get the funds to buy a townhouse in central London?

This 'penniless' family also wanted to know whether they got a residents' parking space with the property. I had to tell them 'No' to that as well. They shrugged and spread their arms, as if to say: 'How on earth do you expect us to live here? Why are you wasting our time dragging us here?' And off they went.

They could afford to be so sniffy because we have Choice-Based Letting (CBL). Once, there was pressure on applicants to accept properties when they came up or risk dropping back down the list. Now that's gone, so they can just keep saying No till we deliver exactly what they want - they're actually more demanding than tenants in the private sector.

Our problem as a housing association is that we are subcontracted to local authorities and have no say over the lists of people for whom we have to find a house - we are simply given the list and if someone is on it, they have the right to take one of our properties (with their rent heavily subsidised by taxpayers).

Even if it would be overwhelmingly obvious to a five-year-old that the applicants were chancers, we have to smile and say, 'Yes, sir' or 'No, madam'. In fact, we can't even describe them as 'tenants' any more - we've been told we must call them 'customers' the legal position is that local authorities have a statutory duty to house those in need and will determine whether they need emergency housing (such as immediate B&B accommodation) until a long-term property is found.

That's where I come in. I've been doing this sort of work for 15 years and we see a massively disproportionate number of people arriving from overseas.

The law was changed in 2000 to say that asylum seekers would not be eligible for social housing but it doesn't seem to have hugely affected the types of people that we are seeing. I suppose that's partly because once asylum is granted, they do become eligible - and those who go on to get British citizenship can invite members of their family to come over and join them.

Overall, the system is a joke. It rewards those family members who have just stepped off a plane by giving them a wonderful property in a central location, while Britons who have been here for years or even generations have got no chance of getting to the top of the list.

This is because British applicants tend to be already living with family - parents, etc - so technically qualify as being housed. Recent arrivals with kids in tow do not and are given priority. That said, single mothers as a group are hugely over-represented among social housing tenants; the perception of girls becoming pregnant to get a council flat isn't completely without foundation.

My particular bugbear, odd as it may sound, is satellite dishes. These pose a huge problem for us, especially with our Turkish 'customers' (for some reason a lot of the families we are asked to house are Turkish).

The first thing they want to know - well, after the free parking and the right to buy, of course - is whether they are allowed to put a satellite dish the size of a small helipad on the front of the property. Some of them need to put up two dishes so they can guarantee getting all the channels they want.

As a result, some of our properties end up looking like GCHQ. I'm told the problem is something to do with the signal for Turkish TV not being strong enough.

We always say No. If they think we really mean it - because the house is a new-build or period property - they will turn the place down, no matter how nice it is.

Properties with open-plan kitchens can be a problem too, as Somalian or other Muslim 'customers' often don't want a kitchen that opens straight on to a reception room, and these type of houses are always turned down. I was given the reason by one man: If he wanted to invite other men around to play cards or whatever, he didn't want them to see his wife making food in the kitchen.

I really have no idea how some of the people who come to us become eligible for such heavily subsidised properties, although I have my theories.

One of our 'customers' is a musician of west African descent who is doing really well and often appears on TV. Certainly, tributes on his website as well as comments from his agent are effusive about just how successful he is. Yet he and his family recently rang us to arrange some property viewings - they were on the council list and wanted rehousing in a more central location.

He was very fussy: it had to be a period, character property and it had to be in London Underground's Zone 1 - ie, central London.

We showed him a beautiful, four-storey Georgian property in a central London square with a park in the middle. He seemed delighted, as well he should be - this is a house worth well over £1 million and a normal rental would be £1,000 a week. He's getting it subsidised for £130 a week.

My personal view is that this house should be sold and the money invested in new-builds - we could have a dozen flats for the same money, and so help lots of families, not just one.

But no one else in the department seems to agree. I can't understand it: surely we are supposed to provide a safety net for as many people as possible, not the keys to the palace for just one family?

Anyway, this family didn't seem to appreciate their good fortune. As soon as they moved in, they bombarded us with a litany of complaints. Nothing was ever right.

For example, we had just installed a new fitted kitchen, leaving space for white goods - we don't supply those, that's down to the tenants. Sorry, customers!

Anyway, this family had brought with them a 'slim fit' dishwasher. But the space we'd left was for a standard-sized unit. Believe it or not, they wanted us to come back, take the kitchen out and refit it with units that matched their dishwasher.

In any case, I don't know how that family qualified for social housing. If I were being charitable, I would guess that they had got on the list before they had a better income and managed to stay on it.

More of this at the link.

Anyone on here had experience of this?

Written in typical wail style, but has anyone confirm any of this rant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kitchens SHOULD be separate by default...the foreigners have a very valid point.

If law allowed it, current developers would do away with the "little room" and have tenants taking a dump in the living room, bog roll above the widescreen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kitchens SHOULD be separate by default...the foreigners have a very valid point.

If law allowed it, current developers would do away with the "little room" and have tenants taking a dump in the living room, bog roll above the widescreen!

Less walls more profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO there is some truth in the assertion that it has been and continues to be government policy to avoid a financial collapse. UK Plc is hooked on HPI for economic survival as we know it. With FTBs priced out the government has no other alternative than to raise immigration to mop up the lower end of the market to create more demand at all levels due to the knock on effect. FTBs cannot afford to buy but migrants can be offered subsidies and allowances to fill the available homes removing them from the marketplace. Migrants are also more willing to share a home purchase among large numbers of relatives. I was a witness to this phenomena in California where newly arrived migrants from South of the Border and from Asia would often have 8 cars parked in front of a house and on the lawn indicating 3 to 4 families per house.

The consequences of a HPC are probably a lot worse than most of us believe. HPI is 40% of our economic "growth" according to ONS statistics. HPI is the fuel that keeps people borrowing and investing in bricks and mortar which in turn provides jobs in the EA shops, builders and ancillary industries (skips hire for improving propertyt, new Smallbone and Devizes kitchens, large appliances from Neff etc etc.).

Kill HPI and you kill the economy.

So what are we to do to get the UK weaned off HPI addiction? Any ideas? Anybody?

Edited by Realistbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kill HPI and you kill the economy.

So what are we to do to get the UK weaned off HPI addiction? Any ideas? Anybody?

Is the UK economy actually alive?

HPI killed a proper economy, and HPC will remove the parasite and at least allow what remains of the economy to slowly repair itself and ultimately recover. Whilst the parasite is still sucking blood from its host the economy will remain on life-support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Less walls more profit.

and what size widescreen to accomodate...the 24ins or the full effect 32ins....oh noes....you need at least a 47ins wall for a basic 3D setup these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO there is some truth in the assertion that it has been and continues to be government policy to avoid a financial collapse. UK Plc is hooked on HPI for economic survival as we know it. With FTBs priced out the government has no other alternative than to raise immigration to mop up the lower end of the market to create more demand at all levels due to the knock on effect. FTBs cannot afford to buy but migrants can be offered subsidies and allowances to fill the available homes removing them from the marketplace. Migrants are also more willing to share a home purchase among large numbers of relatives. I was a witness to this phenomena in California where newly arrived migrants from South of the Border and from Asia would often have 8 cars parked in front of a house and on the lawn indicating 3 to 4 families per house.

The consequences of a HPC are probably a lot worse than most of us believe. HPI is 40% of our economic "growth" according to ONS statistics. HPI is the fuel that keeps people borrowing and investing in bricks and mortar which in turn provides jobs in the EA shops, builders and ancillary industries (skips hire for improving propertyt, new Smallbone and Devizes kitchens, large appliances from Neff etc etc.).

Kill HPI and you kill the economy.

So what are we to do to get the UK weaned off HPI addiction? Any ideas? Anybody?

I think that the dangers are much greater if systemic defrauding of the taxpayer is allowed to continue. That is guaranteed to bring about a collapse of the state, as more and more join in the 'claiming', whilst fewer and fewer can afford the 'paying'.

A collapse in house prices would lead to....cheaper housing.

A few badly run banks might have trouble, but that is only a 'might'. We need a bit of a pruning in the banking sector anyway. And if the government let a few banks go, the state survives.

The state wont survive if it makes defrauding the taxpayer so easy and so profitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the UK economy actually alive?

HPI killed a proper economy, and HPC will remove the parasite and at least allow what remains of the economy to slowly repair itself and ultimately recover. Whilst the parasite is still sucking blood from its host the economy will remain on life-support.

I agree. The problem is that the government cannot allow a HPC because it would destroy our economy very quickly. ON the other hand, the longer they allow HPI to continue the greater the addiction. This is, I believe, the heart of the problem in this nation.

The US are now letting the housing market fend for itself with the removal of subsidies. The second leg down was triggered by this. There is a direct correlation between HPI and economic growth both here and in the US. The only difference is that the Americans are willing to deal with the addiction by letting water find its own level so to speak. Houses prices are down 50% or more in many states and yet the US is still showing growth. That is because the parasite is being allowed to die--at great cost--but in the long term America will be a healthier country for it.

We are not wiling to bite that same bullet. HPI is our very life in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You put it on it's side :)

sofa up the wall.....great idea....next youll be having us standing on a plane to save a few bob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the UK economy actually alive?

HPI killed a proper economy, and HPC will remove the parasite and at least allow what remains of the economy to slowly repair itself and ultimately recover. Whilst the parasite is still sucking blood from its host the economy will remain on life-support.

Very well picking on housing benefit claimants (and the excesses should be stopped) but the real parasites are in the so called "square mile" they have grown fat and bloated on financing HPI, corrupted the regulators and hollowed out the "real economy." The tape worm, that is "the City" needs to be tackled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most striking and worrying thing in that article was the assertion of the level of corruption in some council departments.

If one has been able to manipulate the system in return for backhanders you can be damn sure there will be others.

What's the betting that because it is in the Mail there will be no attempt to investigate said claims, in any event could there ever be political will to do so?

If a problem was discovered and it was a huge one much milking of it would be made by the far right, that could lead to a public backlash against the persons living in these properties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very well picking on housing benefit claimants (and the excesses should be stopped) but the real parasites are in the so called "square mile" they have grown fat and bloated on financing HPI, corrupted the regulators and hollowed out the "real economy." The tape worm, that is "the City" needs to be tackled.

I think we agree that 'fraud' in the Square mile needs to be addressed as well.

But some seem to be using the 'crimes' that occur in banking and elsewhere as justification for allowing fraud to go uncontained lower down the social scale.

There is no justification for it at any level, and it needs to be addressed. It is now so bad as regards housing, the cost so huge, that the only solution I can see is that this benefit needs to be stopped entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of our 'customers' is a musician of west African descent who is doing really well and often appears on TV. Certainly, tributes on his website as well as comments from his agent are effusive about just how successful he is. Yet he and his family recently rang us to arrange some property viewings - they were on the council list and wanted rehousing in a more central location.

He was very fussy: it had to be a period, character property and it had to be in London Underground's Zone 1 - ie, central London.

We showed him a beautiful, four-storey Georgian property in a central London square with a park in the middle. He seemed delighted, as well he should be - this is a house worth well over £1 million and a normal rental would be £1,000 a week. He's getting it subsidised for £130 a week.

:lol:

Next Labour politician I meet I am going to punch in the mouth. 100% guaranteed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you fail to understand the problem. You need a third stream, those who are commiting fraud, and they should be streamed into prison.

The current system assumes that no one is committing fraud when they apply for free housing, and that people who work at councils are honest.

Until you can work out a way of ensuring that your streams are fraud free, then you should have zero streams.

I think also that we need a rule that says that anyone immigrating to the UK, must have funds to allow them to buy their own property and for them to be able to look after themselves, such that they can never have access to public funds. If they cant prove that, then tough, go somewhere else.

:lol:

Good luck with that!

Are you applying for social housing because:

a) you live locally and have insufficient income to obtain housing in the normal way

B) you have urgent houisng needs such as dependent children or elderly relatives

c) you wish to collude with corrupt council officials to commit fraud

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lived in various HA's over 20 years and its true you can ask for a fitted kitchen, a 1 million pound townhouse in central London, a private resident bay, the right to fit a satellite dish, white goods for the kitchen. But you won't get it. You can ask for a discounted right to buy, but 18K on a 300K apartment is pointless. You can keep rejecting what the HA offers you, but that won't mean the HA has anything better to give you, my HA has mostly single bed apartments - get married and have kids and you will be doing that in a single bed flat for many many years. Want a garden? no chance. I only got my flat becuase the previous tenant couldn't walk up to the second floor. I, like all my neighbours, are extremely grateful to be living where we are and they are all British born.

HA's should sell their stock and build cheaper apartments in more distant location - indeed this is what my HA and Peabody HA (biggest in the UK) is doing. The new builds are in places like Croydon and other outer suburbs. Existing tenants (and local residents as well as key workers) can apply and the new builds are say 65meter, two beds with a shared ownership option at a price (for example) of 175K. Shared ownership is a pain apparently. Peabody and my HA build these apartments cheap and can afford to rent them cheap as they don't make a profit; do you really think the cost of building apartments has rise as much as the actually selling cost?

The article is a typical Daily Mail, complaining about peoples 'attitude' which is meaningless and based on the the rant of one HA worker. He hates his 'customers'.. who doesn't?

As for the corruption that he is guesting, why doesn't he report it?

My colleagues and I go on field visits to see families who are supposedly on the breadline and cannot subsist except by the largesse of the British taxpayer.

Peabody has a remit to relieve poverty in London. Whats to be done? kick people out of their property so that they become poor by paying 60% of their income in rent? They, like many HA's, are charities which were set-up by private money to take people off the breadline. Believe it or not most income to finance the HA operations comes from rent and if you take away the property speculation element from rents then they charge the true cost of housing.

Edited by Peter Hun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lived in various HA's over 20 years and its true you can ask for a fitted kitchen, a 1 million pound townhouse in central London, a private resident bay, the right to fit a satellite dish, white goods for the kitchen. But you won't get it. You can ask for a discounted right to buy, but 18K on a 300K apartment is pointless. You can keep rejecting what the HA offers you, but that won't mean the HA has anything better to give you, my HA has mostly single bed apartments - get married and have kids and you will be doing that in a single bed flat for many many years. Want a garden? no chance. I only got my flat becuase the previous tenant couldn't walk up to the second floor. I, like all my neighbours, are extremely grateful to be living where we are and they are all British born.

HA's should sell their stock and build cheaper apartments in more distant location - indeed this is what my HA and Peabody HA (biggest in the UK) is doing. The new builds are in places like Croydon and other outer suburbs. Existing tenants (and local residents as well as key workers) can apply and the new builds are say 65meter, two beds with a shared ownership option at a price (for example) of 175K. Shared ownership is a pain apparently. Peabody and my HA build these apartments cheap and can afford to rent them cheap as they don't make a profit; do you really think the cost of building apartments has rise as much as the actually selling cost?

The article is a typical Daily Mail, complaining about peoples 'attitude' which is meaningless and based on the the rant of one HA worker. He hates his 'customers'.. who doesn't?

As for the corruption that he is guesting, why doesn't he report it?

what is a "key worker"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lived in various HA's over 20 years and its true you can ask for a fitted kitchen, a 1 million pound townhouse in central London, a private resident bay, the right to fit a satellite dish, white goods for the kitchen. But you won't get it. You can ask for a discounted right to buy, but 18K on a 300K apartment is pointless. You can keep rejecting what the HA offers you, but that won't mean the HA has anything better to give you, my HA has mostly single bed apartments - get married and have kids and you will be doing that in a single bed flat for many many years. Want a garden? no chance. I only got my flat becuase the previous tenant couldn't walk up to the second floor. I, like all my neighbours, are extremely grateful to be living where we are and they are all British born.

HA's should sell their stock and build cheaper apartments in more distant location - indeed this is what my HA and Peabody HA (biggest in the UK) is doing. The new builds are in places like Croydon and other outer suburbs. Existing tenants (and local residents as well as key workers) can apply and the new builds are say 65meter, two beds with a shared ownership option at a price (for example) of 175K. Shared ownership is a pain apparently. Peabody and my HA build these apartments cheap and can afford to rent them cheap as they don't make a profit; do you really think the cost of building apartments has rise as much as the actually selling cost?

The article is a typical Daily Mail, complaining about peoples 'attitude' which is meaningless and based on the the rant of one HA worker. He hates his 'customers'.. who doesn't?

As for the corruption that he is guesting, why doesn't he report it?

As for the corruption that he is guesting, why doesn't he report it?

When the corruption is from the top down, who do you report it to?

I guess all he can do is let the newspapers know, which is what he just did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've lived in various HA's over 20 years and its true you can ask for a fitted kitchen, a 1 million pound townhouse in central London, a private resident bay, the right to fit a satellite dish, white goods for the kitchen. But you won't get it. You can ask for a discounted right to buy, but 18K on a 300K apartment is pointless. You can keep rejecting what the HA offers you, but that won't mean the HA has anything better to give you, my HA has mostly single bed apartments - get married and have kids and you will be doing that in a single bed flat for many many years. Want a garden? no chance. I only got my flat becuase the previous tenant couldn't walk up to the second floor. I, like all my neighbours, are extremely grateful to be living where we are and they are all British born.

HA's should sell their stock and build cheaper apartments in more distant location - indeed this is what my HA and Peabody HA (biggest in the UK) is doing. The new builds are in places like Croydon and other outer suburbs. Existing tenants (and local residents as well as key workers) can apply and the new builds are say 65meter, two beds with a shared ownership option at a price (for example) of 175K. Shared ownership is a pain apparently. Peabody and my HA build these apartments cheap and can afford to rent them cheap as they don't make a profit; do you really think the cost of building apartments has rise as much as the actually selling cost?

The article is a typical Daily Mail, complaining about peoples 'attitude' which is meaningless and based on the the rant of one HA worker. He hates his 'customers'.. who doesn't?

As for the corruption that he is guesting, why doesn't he report it?

I have to agree with this post

I think you will find that a new kitchen can only be fitted after a period of around 20 years (there are specific rules on this )

and a property is deemed decent even if the bathroom is up to 30 years old

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO there is some truth in the assertion that it has been and continues to be government policy to avoid a financial collapse. UK Plc is hooked on HPI for economic survival as we know it. With FTBs priced out the government has no other alternative than to raise immigration to mop up the lower end of the market to create more demand at all levels due to the knock on effect. FTBs cannot afford to buy but migrants can be offered subsidies and allowances to fill the available homes removing them from the marketplace. Migrants are also more willing to share a home purchase among large numbers of relatives. I was a witness to this phenomena in California where newly arrived migrants from South of the Border and from Asia would often have 8 cars parked in front of a house and on the lawn indicating 3 to 4 families per house.

The consequences of a HPC are probably a lot worse than most of us believe. HPI is 40% of our economic "growth" according to ONS statistics. HPI is the fuel that keeps people borrowing and investing in bricks and mortar which in turn provides jobs in the EA shops, builders and ancillary industries (skips hire for improving propertyt, new Smallbone and Devizes kitchens, large appliances from Neff etc etc.).

Kill HPI and you kill the economy.

So what are we to do to get the UK weaned off HPI addiction? Any ideas? Anybody?

Easy. Build council houses and remove the right to buy. Provides economic activity for the building sector, and people in secure tenancies with modest rents will spend money on the NEFF cookers. Private landlords will have to cut rents to get tenants, and offer better terms. Rental yields will fall, and house prices come down.

From this perspective, I can see Thatchers aim when she introduced the right to buy, and stopped councils building replacement properties. It's worked out very well for the housing parasite class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 258 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.