Steady As History Used To Be And Values

[craig12]

as this is my first post please forgive me if this is covered elsewhere,, could i ask all members please a 2 part question?

how much do you think homes are over valued as of today in % terms

will we ever see the history as it was , where by there was always a steady streem of first time buyers, you moved in to your first home , kept it and maybe moved up to a semi, then a detatched, 2.5 x joint income would suffice and checked by the lender, i have a carpet shop and although i dont depend on the housing market, i would be 3 x times as busy with a steady /not/ buoyant market...im no expert on the housing market , there will be many members with better answers .. but what i still cant get my head round is this..

as history provides a good clue , ie . 60s,70s,80s,90s,up to 2006 ish there was always the steady climb and the wage ratio to lending was sufficiant with around a 10% deposit to buy your first home, then 2007 came and it all went nuts, vendors making silly amounts of money in a short time, i wondered if longer lending might kick start the market .. ie 30-45 yr mortgages, that would bring the payments down ..

[chicker]

as this is my first post please forgive me if this is covered elsewhere,, could i ask all members please a 2 part question?

how much do you think homes are over valued as of today in % terms

will we ever see the history as it was , where by there was always a steady streem of first time buyers, you moved in to your first home , kept it and maybe moved up to a semi, then a detatched, 2.5 x joint income would suffice and checked by the lender, i have a carpet shop and although i dont depend on the housing market, i would be 3 x times as busy with a steady /not/ buoyant market...im no expert on the housing market , there will be many members with better answers .. but what i still cant get my head round is this..

as history provides a good clue , ie . 60s,70s,80s,90s,up to 2006 ish there was always the steady climb and the wage ratio to lending was sufficiant with around a 10% deposit to buy your first home, then 2007 came and it all went nuts, vendors making silly amounts of money in a short time, i wondered if longer lending might kick start the market .. ie 30-45 yr mortgages, that would bring the payments down ..

1) My gut feeling is 25% over valued in London/SE eg 500k properties falling to 375k within 3-4 years ,steady falls per annum.

2) Be careful with history. Anything before the majority of families having joint incomes, ASTs , right to buy and property porn etc in my eyes is irrelevant. I know people whose first and only house was a 3 bed and served them well raising a family. When homes were relatively cheap (60-70s lots of social hse building) there was no need for a ladder, you saved and saved, got married and struggled to buy. With inflation the struggle was short and the mortgage faded away. Happy days.

Also for many years there was a waiting list for mortgages. Working people were deemed in the main to be feckless and a poor credit risk. Property ownership was much lower then and even hire purchase was seen as a bit risque. The working masses also distrusted borrowing as many had memories of unemployment pre welfare state.

[Tiger Woods?]

Also for many years there was a waiting list for mortgages. Working people were deemed in the main to be feckless and a poor credit risk. Property ownership was much lower then and even hire purchase was seen as a bit risque. The working masses also distrusted borrowing as many had memories of unemployment pre welfare state.

This may very well come around again.