Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Crash In The Attic

It's Worth What I Say It's Worth!

Recommended Posts

Link to Daily Mail article

A classic tale. Everyone on the street has sold and moved out, the whole place is boarded up, Council wants to purchase for £68,000 but she "thinks it's worth" £90-100k. Of course it is - she bought for £9,500 with Right To Buy, and has spent a whole £10,000 doing it up, so it must be worth £100k easily I'd have thought. If she waits a few months it will be worth £150k, then she can buy a really nice new place.

Good example of the description of someone as a 'grandmother' ('pensioner' often used too) in a tabloid "sadface" article. 55 years old, husband is 65. They're boomers, but so often in the comments on such articles (not this one, so far), as soon as the words pensioner or grandmother are used, there are dozens of posts talking about how much "the older generation" sacrificed for us, fought in the war etc. etc. All very true, but people seem to forget that they are sadly almost all dead now, or at least 85 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the financial situation before/after the move. They are 'boomers' as you say so this is important.

Quite often in these regeneration schemes homeowners have gone from low/zero mortgaged to quite heavily mortgaged. In Southwark bought out former tenants have had to leave London altogether being offered £100k for the flat, yet the new ones cost over £300k.

So I have some sympathy (but don't know all the facts) but you can't blame people for holding out for more. This is exactly how a banker would behave. For this couple at their time of life this could be a make or break deal.

Edited by aSecureTenant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever they have to pay in the end is what the house is "worth", not what the council or anyone else declares it to be.

If they are that desperate to get her out, they should just pay her what she wants. It's not like she's in a hurry to close the deal herself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the financial situation before/after the move. They are 'boomers' as you say so this is important.

Quite often in these regeneration schemes homeowners have gone from low/zero mortgaged to quite heavily mortgaged. In Southwark bought out former tenants have had to leave London altogether being offered £100k for the flat, yet the new ones cost over £300k.

So I have some sympathy (but don't know all the facts) but you can't blame people for holding out for more. This is exactly how a banker would behave. For this couple at their time of life this could be a make or break deal.

Only in a magic mushroom world is that "space", I could hardly call it a house, worth nearly one hundred thousand pounds, we have reached maximum Noddy level, hard to tell if the woman is taking the piss, or really believes the price fantasy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever they have to pay in the end is what the house is "worth", not what the council or anyone else declares it to be.

If they are that desperate to get her out, they should just pay her what she wants. It's not like she's in a hurry to close the deal herself.

I seem to remember some owners getting big payoffs to get them out of the way of the Scottish parliament when they were developing the land, it was something like bought for 6k, sold to the developer for 200k or something mad like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some sympathy here, yes she's a boomer and was right to buy but...

Look at what they are actually trying do, get her to swap a house that is hers (in theory at least) for a downpayment on some PFI slavebox.

Good on her I say

Edited by 23rdian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houses are being bought to be knocked down. To be replaced with even more expensive houses. Many of them being destroyed are social houses.

Where will the poor live as the amount of social housing is reduced?

How will this improve housing conditions? The only thing that seems to be done, is the forcing up of house prices in a needless manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm totally with her, actually. If the council / Local Regeneration Partnership or whatever want to knock her house down so that they can build some new ones, they should just give her a home of equivalent size and quality with no money changing hands at all. It's completely irrelevant how she acquired the house, RTB or whatever- legally it's her house now, and the council are effectively stealing it off her if they don't give her something equivalent in return without any expectation of further money from her. WTF is an 'equity loan' anyway?

Exactly the same thing happened round here with the Ferrier Estate, a couple of miles from me in SE London. Yes the place was an absolute dumphole, but there were a few owner occupiers there in three or possibly even four bedroom flats who got offered something like £150k for them. To the best of my knowledge there is absolutely nowhere within at least 20 miles of here where you can buy a three bedroom home for £150k, so those families, some of whom had 4 or more kids, presumably at local schools / parents having local jobs etc. were basically screwed.

And one other thing- this 'PFI' scheme is apparently costing £650m- to deliver 1500 homes, or £433k each? Am I missing something here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm totally with her, actually. If the council / Local Regeneration Partnership or whatever want to knock her house down so that they can build some new ones, they should just give her a home of equivalent size and quality with no money changing hands at all. It's completely irrelevant how she acquired the house, RTB or whatever- legally it's her house now, and the council are effectively stealing it off her if they don't give her something equivalent in return without any expectation of further money from her. WTF is an 'equity loan' anyway?

Exactly the same thing happened round here with the Ferrier Estate, a couple of miles from me in SE London. Yes the place was an absolute dumphole, but there were a few owner occupiers there in three or possibly even four bedroom flats who got offered something like £150k for them. To the best of my knowledge there is absolutely nowhere within at least 20 miles of here where you can buy a three bedroom home for £150k, so those families, some of whom had 4 or more kids, presumably at local schools / parents having local jobs etc. were basically screwed.

And one other thing- this 'PFI' scheme is apparently costing £650m- to deliver 1500 homes, or £433k each? Am I missing something here?

+1

If some one wanted to knock my house down I would want them to offer me something at lest as good as a replacement with no cost to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1

If some one wanted to knock my house down I would want them to offer me something at lest as good as a replacement with no cost to me.

And there's the sense of entitlement that comes with property and few other assets

You have no practical right not to expect you could lose out owing to politics, with any asset. If you've put all your eggs in one basket then tough.

And there endeth the lesson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the converse to deflation isn't it? They say deflation is bad because people will hoard money and stop buying, waiting for prices to be cheaper. With rising house prices people don't sell, just waiting for it to be worth money and therefore bringing the housing market to a standstill. It doesn't take a genius to realise that stable (and affordable) house prices would save everyone a whole load of pain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the converse to deflation isn't it? They say deflation is bad because people will hoard money and stop buying, waiting for prices to be cheaper. With rising house prices people don't sell, just waiting for it to be worth money and therefore bringing the housing market to a standstill. It doesn't take a genius to realise that stable (and affordable) house prices would save everyone a whole load of pain.

Yep, you could just sell easily to someone at a reasonable price, and buy somewhere else at a reasonable price, then treat the house as a home and get on with more important things than clinging to imaginary notions of HPI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there's the sense of entitlement that comes with property and few other assets

You have no practical right not to expect you could lose out owing to politics, with any asset. If you've put all your eggs in one basket then tough.

And there endeth the lesson

Hard to know whether you approve or disapprove, but the point stands. If they want her to give up her house, they should make sure they pay her enough to get another one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to remember some owners getting big payoffs to get them out of the way of the Scottish parliament when they were developing the land, it was something like bought for 6k, sold to the developer for 200k or something mad like that.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/apology-demanded-over-lamont-s-snp-land-deal-claim-1-3089866

Developer given 840k, when plans fell through he bought the land back for 50k.

Nice work if you can get it.

She needs to raise her asking price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there's the sense of entitlement that comes with property and few other assets

You have no practical right not to expect you could lose out owing to politics, with any asset. If you've put all your eggs in one basket then tough.

And there endeth the lesson

If HM's Government were to take my car, and give me enough cash to buy a 20 year old Escort, I would not be happy. Fek all to do with property, although a roof over your head is more fundamental than a car.

If she can get a similar place in a similar area for £68,000, fair do's. If she can't, she has every right to be pi$$ed off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some sympathy here, yes she's a boomer and was right to buy but...

Look at what they are actually trying do, get her to swap a house that is hers (in theory at least) for a downpayment on some PFI slavebox.

Good on her I say

I agree - and normally I have zero sympathy for boomers like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to know whether you approve or disapprove, but the point stands. If they want her to give up her house, they should make sure they pay her enough to get another one.

Why? There is no morality in this, just declining boomer political influence

I don't blame her for being hacked off and fighting this, but at the same time it is simply a risk we all take

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And one other thing- this 'PFI' scheme is apparently costing £650m- to deliver 1500 homes, or £433k each? Am I missing something here?

You didn't share the right house at Eton, and you are not getting a "bung"? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why? There is no morality in this, just declining boomer political influence

I don't blame her for being hacked off and fighting this, but at the same time it is simply a risk we all take

There is morality in this, it is theft. Doesn't make it any more acceptable that it is the council doing it.

They are going to knock her house down and build new ones on the site which will be more expensive. They should give her one of these new homes for it to be right.

This has happened near where I live and the developer and council made a fortune. The old homes were seized because they had large gardens and more houses could be squeezed onto the same land. Those moved lost out as their homes were valued at less than the new ones. The actual cost of building a house isn't that much, it is the land with planning permission that is valuable. Strangely the land went up in value after being transferred to the developer. So that being said she is being taken for a ride and I hope she fights tooth and nail against this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If HM's Government were to take my car, and give me enough cash to buy a 20 year old Escort, I would not be happy. Fek all to do with property, although a roof over your head is more fundamental than a car.

If she can get a similar place in a similar area for £68,000, fair do's. If she can't, she has every right to be pi$$ed off.

Is that an old car or a young woman? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is morality in this, it is theft. Doesn't make it any more acceptable that it is the council doing it.

They are going to knock her house down and build new ones on the site which will be more expensive. They should give her one of these new homes for it to be right.

Is it boomer day it something?

It's not theft. It's democracy. What happens when the next generation gets a sniff at power after being neglected. Payback's a bitch hey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   215 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.