Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

Yes - average/middle income earners were socially cleansed from central London a decade ago. Now the poor are being asked to leave - its an outrage and verging on what happened in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

Personally its cruel making the poor live in zone 1 - not an Iceland, Aldi or Lidl in sight. The cost of living is much higher.

What is an outrage is that my taxes are being used to allow people to live in £million houses and are effectively going straight into the pockets of BTL landlords.

It's an outrage that this has been going on for so long, and to be honest its tough sh1t if "the poor" can't afford to live in Pimlico or Chelsea. Just like it's tough sh1t that I cannot afford to live there either.

The sooner we get over this cry baby "bedroom tax" thing the better. I like this policy, it finally tips the balance back away from the people who have been riding high on Gordon Brown benefits for the last 15 years.

Edited by SEW247

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London rents at all-time high as prices rocket eight times faster than wages: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-rents-at-alltime-high-as-prices-rocket-eight-times-faster-than-wages-8578230.html. Rents are rising due to continued demand from people who cannot afford to buy and are forced to rent.

I can assure that there are plenty that rent out a spare bedroom in an owner occupied home in London for peanuts.....win win.....helps home owners with a bit of pin money to cover rising fuel and food bills......not everyone is greedy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Instead of trying to force people to move out, councils could have bribed eg 10k if you move to a country town, or next the sea. The council could then have sold a percentage of those vacant properties and so make money. No bad publicity from folk suffering from what is called the bedroom tax.

Please explain why the taxpayer should pay people to move out of houses they do not own and don't even pay market rent to occupy.

When a former landlord of mine wanted his house back, he sent us notice. Maybe he forgot to enclose the £10k cheque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brief conversation with colleague last night; he is selling his flat in Oval, bought 3 years ago for £245, asking £300. Had 65 viewings, went to blind bids, accepted £325. He also offered £25 over asking for the place he is buying. He said the market is mental. I just don't understand it, can't people see it's a bubble? I'm really losing faith in a hpc, if it's a good property in a good location it will sell, even above asking. What's left is the dross that is still way overpriced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London rents at all-time high as prices rocket eight times faster than wages: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/london-rents-at-alltime-high-as-prices-rocket-eight-times-faster-than-wages-8578230.html. Rents are rising due to continued demand from people who cannot afford to buy and are forced to rent.

I would seriously take those figures with a huge pinch of salt. They've been released by a PR agency working for a company with a vested interest in the perception that rents are increasing.

The reality is that rents in prime areas are crashing. Yields are heading to negative territory. In the past 6 months, rentals on central property have noticably declined. I recently spotted a 1 bed in Shoreditch which was on the market for £480pw at the end of last year (I know because I viewed it!) back on the market at £395 this week. This is anecdotal, of course, but you couldn't find a 1 bed in Shoreditch for less than £450pw 6 months ago, now there are loads and prices are falling. The same story is being replicated across prime locations.

Indeed, you can now bag a nice two-bed for about £400pw in Shoreditch, which was unheard of 6 months ago.

Edited by Dr_Mibbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brief conversation with colleague last night; he is selling his flat in Oval, bought 3 years ago for £245, asking £300. Had 65 viewings, went to blind bids, accepted £325. He also offered £25 over asking for the place he is buying. He said the market is mental. I just don't understand it, can't people see it's a bubble? I'm really losing faith in a hpc, if it's a good property in a good location it will sell, even above asking. What's left is the dross that is still way overpriced.

This has to be placed in the context of the extremely low number of transactions. What we have are international investors buying off each other, and people swapping houses occasionally. The market cannot sustain itself in this manner. Something has to give, the only question is when!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shows like homes under the hammer that just showed some property 'developers' making over 400k profit for less than a years work on a 3 bed flat cannot help matters.

Even at London at its most bubbly - finding people who more than doubled their money within these timescales is pretty impressive for this production team.

I imagine that type of profit in residential property developing - for a single place - perhaps is a 1 in 500 shot or similar odds.

Funny how they never manage to find the other end of the scale (That clearly must also occur) . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brief conversation with colleague last night; he is selling his flat in Oval, bought 3 years ago for £245, asking £300. Had 65 viewings, went to blind bids, accepted £325. He also offered £25 over asking for the place he is buying. He said the market is mental. I just don't understand it, can't people see it's a bubble? I'm really losing faith in a hpc, if it's a good property in a good location it will sell, even above asking. What's left is the dross that is still way overpriced.

That truly is mental - 33% increase between 2010 and 2013 when you consider the massive increases that have gone before. You are right about location, though.

In my area, flats that are just 'quite' well located are still not much above their 2007 'peak', where as flats in the better roads are probably 25% higher than they were then. Houses have done much better, probably 20% up on 2007 in the ok areas and 35% up in the good areas. Still nothing like Oval going up that much just since 2010!

Crazy to think that this site was started in 2002/3 because a lot of people already thought that prices were too high then. We had already had a massive increase from 1999-2003, that continued until 2007 and has then pushed on again until 2013 after a very slight let up. Nominal prices are well over twice what they were 10 years ago around here, and probably more like three times in more central areas.

It can't keep going up, can it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has to be placed in the context of the extremely low number of transactions. What we have are international investors buying off each other, and people swapping houses occasionally. The market cannot sustain itself in this manner. Something has to give, the only question is when!

I have been asking myself that question for the last 4 years, others for much longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London does appear to be almost totally disconnected to nearly everywhere else in the UK.

Take Edinburgh for example. Prior to the bust was on a similar level to London in regards to 'prices can never fall here'

In fact probably more so due to not having gone through the London bust of the early 90's

Yet prices here have dropped almost across the board (with a few exceptions) by about 10-20 % from peak.

And in FTB areas over 30% from peak.

When the London bust really arrives - and it must someday !?

Its gonna be spectacular . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would seriously take those figures with a huge pinch of salt. They've been released by a PR agency working for a company with a vested interest in the perception that rents are increasing.

The reality is that rents in prime areas are crashing. Yields are heading to negative territory. In the past 6 months, rentals on central property have noticably declined. I recently spotted a 1 bed in Shoreditch which was on the market for £480pw at the end of last year (I know because I viewed it!) back on the market at £395 this week. This is anecdotal, of course, but you couldn't find a 1 bed in Shoreditch for less than £450pw 6 months ago, now there are loads and prices are falling. The same story is being replicated across prime locations.

Indeed, you can now bag a nice two-bed for about £400pw in Shoreditch, which was unheard of 6 months ago.

Good to hear rents are dropping at last. HB effect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London is different. Every penny of QE, every penny of those bank rescues flows via bonusses into London house prices. (OK a lot of it is being used to speculate on oil and commodities as well).

I have no idea how it will all end but at some point there have to be visible negative consequences of QE, and then presumably it will stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London is different. Every penny of QE, every penny of those bank rescues flows via bonusses into London house prices. (OK a lot of it is being used to speculate on oil and commodities as well).

I have no idea how it will all end but at some point there have to be visible negative consequences of QE, and then presumably it will stop.

But the number and wages of high paid jobs must be collapsing in London.

The banks have been slowly shedding jobs for the last couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would seriously take those figures with a huge pinch of salt. They've been released by a PR agency working for a company with a vested interest in the perception that rents are increasing.

Yeap.

Not to mention, the London Evening Standard is an estate agents' brochure with some daily news tacked on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shows like homes under the hammer that just showed some property 'developers' making over 400k profit for less than a years work on a 3 bed flat cannot help matters.

Even at London at its most bubbly - finding people who more than doubled their money within these timescales is pretty impressive for this production team.

I imagine that type of profit in residential property developing - for a single place - perhaps is a 1 in 500 shot or similar odds.

Funny how they never manage to find the other end of the scale (That clearly must also occur) . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London is different. Every penny of QE, every penny of those bank rescues flows via bonusses into London house prices.

This isn't really true. Bonuses in the City are at a 15-year low, reaching £1.5bn this year (compared to £12bn in 2007), and over a third of City jobs have been lost, with more job losses on the way.

QE has however inflated the stock market, which is in itself approaching bubble territory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't really true. Bonuses in the City are at a 15-year low, reaching £1.5bn this year (compared to £12bn in 2007), and over a third of City jobs have been lost, with more job losses on the way.

QE has however inflated the stock market, which is in itself approaching bubble territory.

It is largely true! City swillers have comped themselves to higher basic pay to replace the politically sensitive bonus. The govt is running a £130bn annual deficit to replace the debt-financed demand mortgage lending used to generate - most of that money is spent in London and the South East. Financial repression is most advantageous to those with the biggest mortgages, in effect the provincial poor are required to subsidise the housing costs of wealthy Londoners. The principal beneficiaries of the stock market bubble are naturally those closest to it, with the greatest investment in it, they are of course... City swillers. Even the criminal bastards we've actually managed to get shot of have walked away with six and seven figure redundancy settlements - and leveraged every undeserved penny into bricks and mortar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is largely true! City swillers have comped themselves to higher basic pay to replace the politically sensitive bonus.

I work on consulting projects within investment banks, and I can tell you categorically that it is not true.

95% of people in these banks are at Analyst/Associate/VP level, being paid a basic salary of 35-80k, with the 'average' salary about £55-60k. Bonuses have collapsed, there is very little lateral hiring (a source of payrises in the past), and 100,000 people have lost their jobs over the last few years.

There is media attention about huge increases in basic salaries, however this applies only to a few very fortunate individuals. For the vast majority, basic pay is static. You only have to look at Banking salary surveys to see this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work on consulting projects within investment banks, and I can tell you categorically that it is not true.

95% of people in these banks are at Analyst/Associate/VP level, being paid a basic salary of 35-80k, with the 'average' salary about £55-60k. Bonuses have collapsed, there is very little lateral hiring (a source of payrises in the past), and 100,000 people have lost their jobs over the last few years.

There is media attention about huge increases in basic salaries, however this applies only to a few very fortunate individuals. For the vast majority, basic pay is static. You only have to look at Banking salary surveys to see this.

Indeed its largely a HPC myth that london is stuffed to the gills will people earning mega money with 100k "entry level" jobs. Infact the average salary in london is 35k.

http://career-advice.monster.co.uk/salary-benefits/pay-salary-advice/uk-average-salary-graphs/article.aspx

http://www.payscale.com/research/UK/Location=London-England%3A-London/Salary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/housing_benefit_and_local_housing_allowance/housing_benefit: "Only one person per household can claim housing benefit". The census and ONS report numbers are also for households. It really does look as if over half of all renters in London receive HB.

Hello, newbie here. I thought this might be of some interest on a London thread and particularly those in the North London area.

I sent a Freedom of Information Request to my council (Haringey) a few years ago to ask them how many households in my area (Muswell Hill) are receiving housing benefit (LHA) for private rentals. The answer I got back was very interesting. I asked them to break it down by postcode, so how many households in the N10 area are receiving housing benefit for private rentals. The answer I received back was: 429.

According to this map http://www.haringey.gov.uk/frbak/2011_muswell_hill_ward_profile-2.pdf the Muswell Hill ward has 4321 individual households. Now, be aware that the Muswell Hill ward doesn't cover the N10 postcode exactly, (the ward actually covers some of N10 and some of N8) but if we assume that the N10 postcode area has a maximum household figure of 4500 (based on the household figures of Muswell Hill ward and surrounding wards) and according to that document 22.9% of households in the ward were renting privately, that would amount to approx 1030 households in the N10 area privately renting.

If 429 of the 1030 privately renting are receiving Local Housing Allowance, that means that 41% of private renters in this middle class area of North London are receiving some housing benefit for private rent. I think this is a staggering amount, even with the possibility of error of +10 or - 10%.

It will be interesting to see what effect, if any, the overall benefit cap has on rentals in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work on consulting projects within investment banks, and I can tell you categorically that it is not true.

95% of people in these banks are at Analyst/Associate/VP level, being paid a basic salary of 35-80k, with the 'average' salary about £55-60k. Bonuses have collapsed, there is very little lateral hiring (a source of payrises in the past), and 100,000 people have lost their jobs over the last few years.

There is media attention about huge increases in basic salaries, however this applies only to a few very fortunate individuals. For the vast majority, basic pay is static. You only have to look at Banking salary surveys to see this.

So, who are all these people paying £450k + for a 55 sq meter leashold flat in suburban London? There seem to be a hell of a lot of them. Where is the money coming from???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, who are all these people paying £450k + for a 55 sq meter leashold flat in suburban London? There seem to be a hell of a lot of them. Where is the money coming from???

Bank of mum and dad and low interest rates. I only know one (girl) who bought in london in the last 2/3 years, had some equity in her old flat outside london and got a gift from her wealthy parents!!! Everyone else I know has moved out of london and 'cashed in' most paying top whack elsewhere.

Who this last round of fools think they are going to sell on too is anyone's guess.

bulgaria-lady-and-bulgarian-man-in-traditional-costume-riding-on-horse-and-cart-at-the-kazanlak-rose-festival-web-081.jpg?w=800

perhaps ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on people, I have explained this to you time and again - ASIAN INVESTMENT IN LONDON PROPERTY. I opened up my postbox today. of the three bits of junkmail, one was a gvt info brochure and 2 were London property fliers. That is about right every day.

Until there is some political will to prevent foreign buyers, I cannot see a crash in London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonuses in the City are at a 15-year low, reaching £1.5bn this year (compared to £12bn in 2007), and over a third of City jobs have been lost, with more job losses on the way.

QE has however inflated the stock market, which is in itself approaching bubble territory.

I find it hard to believe that the figures for bunuses are so low, even in 2007, but in any event, the route the money takes to work itself into asset prices is irrelevant. If The government supported the car industry to the tune of 500 bn GBP, then house prices in Coventry would go up. If they supported the mining industry, house prices in Sheffield would go up. When they support banks, house prices in London go up.

(Very) back of envelope calculation: 500bn over 5mn households in London = 100,000 per house. OK, I accept that's the absolute upper limit (of the direct aid), as it will also be being used to inflate other asset bubbles, and if you agree that it's inflating the Stock Market, then you should agree that it must also have some effect on house prices.

Edited by BigPig

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.

  • 284 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.