Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
camem'

We All Want Rates To Go Up, Right

Recommended Posts

I think the general feeling on here is that we want interest rates to go up in the short term, as this is something which could speed up the price falls. On this site we're astute enough to spot that the potential falls in price will massively outweigh the pain of a few quid extra on the monthly payment at the start of the 25 year term ( neatly assuming they come back down a bit once we've got our nice big mortgages).

Question is, how long has it been so ? I presume in the past FTBs were desperate for rates to drop so they could stretch to that extra bedroom (whereas now just one bedroom would be nice) ?

Perhaps during a period of tight credit, FTBs want lower rates, but now we can get loadsa money everyone is more cautious and actually would prefer prices to be lower instead ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general feeling on here is that we want interest rates to go up in the short term, as this is something which could speed up the price falls. On this site we're astute enough to spot that the potential falls in price will massively outweigh the pain of a few quid extra on the monthly payment at the start of the 25 year term ( neatly assuming they come back down a bit once we've got our nice big mortgages).

Question is, how long has it been so ? I presume in the past FTBs were desperate for rates to drop so they could stretch to that extra bedroom (whereas now just one bedroom would be nice) ?

Perhaps during a period of tight credit, FTBs want lower rates, but now we can get loadsa money everyone is more cautious and actually would prefer prices to be lower instead ?

The Capital Borrowed is far more important than the monthly payment.

If IR go up to 7% which I believe is the MAX! Then this will add maybe £100 to my mortgage but the house I am buying may be £20/30K cheaper so its worth it. That extra £100 will eat away the capital!

TB

Edited by teddyboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect you're actually better off the higher the rates are, until house prices drop so low that building them beccomes uneconomical.

After all, most people borrow up to the point where their monthly payment meets their disposable income, so the higher the rates, the lower the house price and the lower the repayment required. That means you can overpay and rapidly reduce interest charges, if you're smart enough to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general feeling on here is that we want interest rates to go up in the short term, as this is something which could speed up the price falls. On this site we're astute enough to spot that the potential falls in price will massively outweigh the pain of a few quid extra on the monthly payment at the start of the 25 year term ( neatly assuming they come back down a bit once we've got our nice big mortgages).

Question is, how long has it been so ? I presume in the past FTBs were desperate for rates to drop so they could stretch to that extra bedroom (whereas now just one bedroom would be nice) ?

Perhaps during a period of tight credit, FTBs want lower rates, but now we can get loadsa money everyone is more cautious and actually would prefer prices to be lower instead ?

Yes a good old catch 22 - at the end of the day getting on the ladder is always going to be painful.

There's also the issue of once prices start to fall you'll probably want to hold out for another x years/months till prices bottom.

repayments right now still seem (at a stretch) affordable, and for better or worse the inflation pressure doesn't seem to be strong enough to increase interest rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

repayments right now still seem (at a stretch) affordable, and for better or worse the inflation pressure doesn't seem to be strong enough to increase interest rates.

:huh:

still not sure where this affordable idea comes from - try the sums in Cambridge, where to buy the house I rent Iwould cost me three times as much ...

here's a 2 bed 'starter home' which looks pretty grim, on for 300k near me. Average wage must be around 27-28k I guess, so let's forget all those people. Let's say Joe 'Above Average' who's earning 40k wants to buy it with a 20k deposit. Using 6% on 25 years his monthly repayments are 91% of take home pay !

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-117...pa_n=1&tr_t=buy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:huh:

still not sure where this affordable idea comes from - try the sums in Cambridge, where to buy the house I rent Iwould cost me three times as much ...

here's a 2 bed 'starter home' which looks pretty grim, on for 300k near me. Average wage must be around 27-28k I guess, so let's forget all those people. Let's say Joe 'Above Average' who's earning 40k wants to buy it with a 20k deposit. Using 6% on 25 years his monthly repayments are 91% of take home pay !

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-117...pa_n=1&tr_t=buy

What a fine example!!

I think people nowadays seem to take it for granted that there will be 2 high earners for every house purchase. We have worked on the 3.5 x MAIN plus 1 x 2nd Applicant for years and it worked. Somehow today this gets shunned.

We need to get Nu-Labour OUT! They are destroying the working man and woman!!!!

TB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes a good old catch 22 - at the end of the day getting on the ladder is always going to be painful.

There's also the issue of once prices start to fall you'll probably want to hold out for another x years/months till prices bottom.

repayments right now still seem (at a stretch) affordable, and for better or worse the inflation pressure doesn't seem to be strong enough to increase interest rates.

Also if it takes down the economy, many here will lose their jobs, banks tighten their lending criteria and the perma bears will probably still find themselves locked out of the market. I don't think we are going to see much movement either way in rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general feeling on here is that we want interest rates to go up in the short term, as this is something which could speed up the price falls. On this site we're astute enough to spot that the potential falls in price will massively outweigh the pain of a few quid extra on the monthly payment at the start of the 25 year term ( neatly assuming they come back down a bit once we've got our nice big mortgages).

Question is, how long has it been so ? I presume in the past FTBs were desperate for rates to drop so they could stretch to that extra bedroom (whereas now just one bedroom would be nice) ?

Perhaps during a period of tight credit, FTBs want lower rates, but now we can get loadsa money everyone is more cautious and actually would prefer prices to be lower instead ?

BRING BACK DOUBLE FIGURE INTEREST RATES PERSONALLY.

Any property priced at more than 3.5 times single income is too expensive!

That is the set multiple and should be followed as a realistic property price guide.

When do you buy, simply when you can afford to.

It may take another 4 years but property prices will again return to 3.5 times income.

Nobody thought they would drop in 1990 either!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High interest rates can definitely help people with a large deposit. In the extreme case of someone with a huge deposit, if interest rates went up to 10% resulting in a massive house price crash, then they may be able to buy the house for cash, in which case the interest rate is a irrelevance. The larger the deposit, the more a HPC reduces the % of the purchase price that needs to be borrowed, even for the same % purchase price.

For example, assume that two people want to buy houses which are presently 130K. One has a deposit of30K, one has a deposit of 70K. Then house prices drop by 30%. The price of the houses go down to 91K.

For the person with a 10K deposit, they now have to find 81K instead of 120K. Assuming that mortgage interest rates had gone from 5% to 15%. For a 15 year repayment mortgage they would have needed to pay £963.42 per month @ 5% before the crash, but £1154.36 after the crash @ 15%.

But for the person with a 70K deposit. Previously they needed to borrow 50K. At 5% their 15 year repayment mortgage would be £401.42 per month. After the crash they would need to borrow only 21K, and that would be £168.59.

So the person with the larger deposit benefits more. Note that my original example first used 7%, then 10% as the higher interest rate, but in both cases even the person with the smaller deposit had a cheaper monthly mortgage payment, so I had to up the IR to 15%. The person with the larger deposit still got a bigger "reduction" but I wanted to have one cost go up, while the other went down.

There is also the point that those with larger deposits can afford to pay more for properties than those with smaller properties, and hence can "out-compete" people with smaller deposits in terms of affordability, and this advantage will increase with rising rates. Hence less competition for properties, even at reduced prices.

Secondly, even given the same level of affordability, people who buy at high interest rates can benefit from "reversion to the mean". I.e. we'd expect low interest rates to eventually come up, and high interest rates to eventually come down. Who here would expect that a 15% rate would stay there very long? Same for a 3% rate. If you buy at high interest rates then your costs are more likely to come down over time, while at a low interest rate, they are likely to increase. So, that's a second advantage.

Billy Shears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High interest rates can definitely help people with a large deposit. In the extreme case of someone with a huge deposit, if interest rates went up to 10% resulting in a massive house price crash, then they may be able to buy the house for cash, in which case the interest rate is a irrelevance. The larger the deposit, the more a HPC reduces the % of the purchase price that needs to be borrowed, even for the same % purchase price.

For example, assume that two people want to buy houses which are presently 130K. One has a deposit of30K, one has a deposit of 70K. Then house prices drop by 30%. The price of the houses go down to 91K.

For the person with a 10K deposit, they now have to find 81K instead of 120K. Assuming that mortgage interest rates had gone from 5% to 15%. For a 15 year repayment mortgage they would have needed to pay £963.42 per month @ 5% before the crash, but £1154.36 after the crash @ 15%.

But for the person with a 70K deposit. Previously they needed to borrow 50K. At 5% their 15 year repayment mortgage would be £401.42 per month. After the crash they would need to borrow only 21K, and that would be £168.59.

So the person with the larger deposit benefits more. Note that my original example first used 7%, then 10% as the higher interest rate, but in both cases even the person with the smaller deposit had a cheaper monthly mortgage payment, so I had to up the IR to 15%. The person with the larger deposit still got a bigger "reduction" but I wanted to have one cost go up, while the other went down.

There is also the point that those with larger deposits can afford to pay more for properties than those with smaller properties, and hence can "out-compete" people with smaller deposits in terms of affordability, and this advantage will increase with rising rates. Hence less competition for properties, even at reduced prices.

Secondly, even given the same level of affordability, people who buy at high interest rates can benefit from "reversion to the mean". I.e. we'd expect low interest rates to eventually come up, and high interest rates to eventually come down. Who here would expect that a 15% rate would stay there very long? Same for a 3% rate. If you buy at high interest rates then your costs are more likely to come down over time, while at a low interest rate, they are likely to increase. So, that's a second advantage.

Billy Shears

Billy, all good stuff. The other advantage of high rates (theoretically) is that even if there was a delayed reversion to the mean, that prolonged level of rates would be likely to lead to substantial real wage inflation (as the inflation levels which required that level of rates would eventually cause the population's real income to fall without it). So there would be some protection eventually through inflation eroding the capital (witness the 1970s and 1980s for the practical example). At low rates this would not happen (witness today) or if it did the absolute level of inflation/wage increases would be so much lower relatively as not to have a comaparable effect.

It is counter intuitive but I think taking out a mortgage at higher average historic rates is not necessarily a bad thing (provided you do not time it with another asset bubble - in 1973/4 you would have been in trouble bar the freakish 1970s inflation cycle - in 1989 you were in trouble until 1996).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:huh:

still not sure where this affordable idea comes from - try the sums in Cambridge, where to buy the house I rent Iwould cost me three times as much ...

here's a 2 bed 'starter home' which looks pretty grim, on for 300k near me. Average wage must be around 27-28k I guess, so let's forget all those people. Let's say Joe 'Above Average' who's earning 40k wants to buy it with a 20k deposit. Using 6% on 25 years his monthly repayments are 91% of take home pay !

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-117...pa_n=1&tr_t=buy

Nonsense, the example you give is located in one of the most expensive areas in Cambridge. If you have 300k to spend and only need 2 bedrooms you can live wherever you wish, picking a location which is 2/3 of a mile from the city centre is going to be pricey whatever market conditions exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still not sure where this affordable idea comes from - try the sums in Cambridge, where to buy the house I rent Iwould cost me three times as much ...

Well until I see the falls in house prices which we've all been waiting for - I'll assume people can still afford their homes.

That's not to say you can afford them, but someone obviously can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense, the example you give is located in one of the most expensive areas in Cambridge. If you have 300k to spend and only need 2 bedrooms you can live wherever you wish, picking a location which is 2/3 of a mile from the city centre is going to be pricey whatever market conditions exist.

Exactly - if you're talking about starter homes, there seem to be some at around £170-180K that would be OK. I know the town and I know some of the stuff in that region is in dodgy areas or miles out, but some of it isn't too bad, and only a mile or two out.

That price range still isn't cheap for your £40K man, but he could do it. Property will always look overpriced if you assume people "should" be able to buy property that is over 50% more expensive than the basic FTB stuff. (Not saying it isn't overpriced now, but that your example exaggerates how overpriced it is).

Edited by Magpie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Property will always look overpriced if you assume people "should" be able to buy property that is over 50% more expensive than the basic FTB stuff.

So, uh, how is your 40k-earning, mid-30s FTB ever going to 'move up the ladder' if they're 'getting on the ladder' by paying 180k for a crappy two-bed in a bad area?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is counter intuitive but I think taking out a mortgage at higher average historic rates is not necessarily a bad thing (provided you do not time it with another asset bubble - in 1973/4 you would have been in trouble bar the freakish 1970s inflation cycle - in 1989 you were in trouble until 1996).

The key thing here is real interest rates, i.e. adjusted for inflation. That said, figuring out how exactly to adjust for inflation anymore is extremely controversial -- do you include house prices/mortgage payments (G. Brown says 'no'; I say 'yes')?

2001-2005 had low-to-negative real interest rates in relationship to property, which is why so many made so much with so little effort or capital risk. But many will be caught holding the bag when this state of affairs, inevitably, readjusts to a normal real interest rate, which is happening now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, uh, how is your 40k-earning, mid-30s FTB ever going to 'move up the ladder' if they're 'getting on the ladder' by paying 180k for a crappy two-bed in a bad area?

Like I said, I ain't saying it ain't overpriced. But it doesn't help to exaggerate and make the situation look even worse than it is. The stuff on Rightmove at that price isn't in especially bad areas, so there's no point picking a £300K property in an expensive bit of town as a particularly good example of current prices.

I appreciate that the ladder is broken and all that, but when it's working the typical trajectory would be to buy something below average, then move on to average and beyond by selling the below-average to new FTBs. If there is a correction in future, hopefully people on average wages in their twenties will once again be able to buy, but they shouldn't necessarily expect to be able to buy the average property.

Edited by Magpie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly - if you're talking about starter homes, there seem to be some at around £170-180K that would be OK. I know the town and I know some of the stuff in that region is in dodgy areas or miles out, but some of it isn't too bad, and only a mile or two out.

That price range still isn't cheap for your £40K man, but he could do it. Property will always look overpriced if you assume people "should" be able to buy property that is over 50% more expensive than the basic FTB stuff. (Not saying it isn't overpriced now, but that your example exaggerates how overpriced it is).

ok, so that was a little unfair, trying to get joe 'above average' to buy an 'above average' place. (come on though, look at it !) - try again with the average FTB wage at purchase price of 170-180k and it still doesn't work, or even, god forbid the average uk wage (18-19k?) and ANY CB house and it doesn't work.

Fortunately, in Cambridge we are well into the crash - observe the pyramid collapsing from the bottom, starting with the BTL brigade; it's quite elegant how the top end 'hasn't noticed' yet :

BBC News in depth UK house prices Q4 2005, search on cambridge

Flats average price 177k : down 14.3 % (in one quarter !)

Semi average price 227k : down 10.4 %

Terraced average price 241k : down 0.7 %

Detached average price 385k : down 1.8 %

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so that was a little unfair, trying to get joe 'above average' to buy an 'above average' place. (come on though, look at it !) - try again with the average FTB wage at purchase price of 170-180k and it still doesn't work, or even, god forbid the average uk wage (18-19k?) and ANY CB house and it doesn't work.

Fortunately, in Cambridge we are well into the crash - observe the pyramid collapsing from the bottom, starting with the BTL brigade; it's quite elegant how the top end 'hasn't noticed' yet :

BBC News in depth UK house prices Q4 2005, search on cambridge

Flats average price 177k : down 14.3 % (in one quarter !)

Semi average price 227k : down 10.4 %

Terraced average price 241k : down 0.7 %

Detached average price 385k : down 1.8 %

That's interesting. I know the BBC prices tend to be a bit variable as they work off small samples, but still seems to be a pattern.

Do you think the top end "hasn't noticed". Or perhaps that as prices went up they got compressed and the flats became more overpriced than the top end. I cetainly tend to see new-builds as more overpriced than the rest of the market, so maybe that's part of what going on there, a major fall in those prices, accompanied by a smaller one in the rest of the market? I'd be interested to know what you think - haven't been looking closely at the market up there for years, so I'm not sure how ground much the new-build thing

has gained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The stuff on Rightmove at that price isn't in especially bad areas, so there's no point picking a £300K property in an expensive bit of town as a particularly good example of current prices.

Why?

If you're buying a house in your mid-30s when there's little to no wage inflation, you'd better expect to live there for a long, long time, because odds are high that you'll never be able to afford anything better. So if a mid-30s FTB on probably twice the local average wage (i.e. a well above average buyer) can't even afford a two-bed in a good area, who can?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok, so that was a little unfair, trying to get joe 'above average' to buy an 'above average' place. (come on though, look at it !)

I know, but those terraces around there and around Mill Road have always been a bit overrated by those who can't imagine living more than a 10-15 minute saunter from Kings Parade so it's not so surprising they're overpriced.

Why?

If you're buying a house in your mid-30s when there's little to no wage inflation, you'd better expect to live there for a long, long time, because odds are high that you'll never be able to afford anything better. So if a mid-30s FTB on probably twice the local average wage (i.e. a well above average buyer) can't even afford a two-bed in a good area, who can?

Ah, but that's why I deliberately referred to buyers in their twenties in my second message. I agree with you that if, as now, FTBs are mainly in their thirties with not much wage inflation expected, they need to try and buy somewhere they could live for a good while. But if we ever do get the property ladder back in a meaningful way, I don't think it's right to say that the average buyer should be able to buy the average property.

I'm not really arguing with you at all, just pointing out that the original example exaggerated the (real) problem. Property within about a mile of Cambridge town centre has been a bit overpriced for a long time - it's not so outrageous to suggest looking a mile further out to find something better. It would still be overpriced historically, and plenty would be priced out there, but not as much as camem's example implied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:huh:

still not sure where this affordable idea comes from - try the sums in Cambridge, where to buy the house I rent Iwould cost me three times as much ...

here's a 2 bed 'starter home' which looks pretty grim, on for 300k near me. Average wage must be around 27-28k I guess, so let's forget all those people. Let's say Joe 'Above Average' who's earning 40k wants to buy it with a 20k deposit. Using 6% on 25 years his monthly repayments are 91% of take home pay !

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-117...pa_n=1&tr_t=buy

I live in Cambridge too and it's truly horrible round here. What should be starter 2 bed terraces, some with ground floor bathrooms, routinely go for 250-300k. It's utter utter madness. :( I recently saw a one-bed ex-local authority flat on rightmove for 89k. Wonderful! I thought. HPC has arrived at last! In the small print, though, it revealed that it was a 50 percent equity share.... :(

To boot, we have a city council full of elderly libdem councillors whose headline policies are endless recycling initiatives, and have no interest in reducing crime, affordable housing, etc. I now have 2 different bins and 3 different recycling boxes, but have no room in my tiny expensive rented flat to put them :(

Exactly - if you're talking about starter homes, there seem to be some at around £170-180K that would be OK. I know the town and I know some of the stuff in that region is in dodgy areas or miles out, but some of it isn't too bad, and only a mile or two out.

That price range still isn't cheap for your £40K man, but he could do it. Property will always look overpriced if you assume people "should" be able to buy property that is over 50% more expensive than the basic FTB stuff. (Not saying it isn't overpriced now, but that your example exaggerates how overpriced it is).

Bear in mind, though, that these houses USED to be the basic FTB stuff! I know people who bought these kind of houses up until the late nineties and they were considered poky starter homes. It's only since 2000 that in Cambridge 2-bed terraces with downstairs bathrooms have suddenly become "desirable", "upscale" property, reserved for people earning 50/60k+. Let's not forget, too, that several people were recently charged for running brothels in "desirable" Romsey Town; that there was a street stabbing in "much sought-after" Riverside two months ago; and that it was only last year that the police crackdown got rid of the abandoned needles lying about in the "upmarket" Mill Road area. These are still "gentrifying" areas for the most part: up until a few years ago they were not places that people who could afford 300k would have considered buying a house in; they're the Kilburn or the Hackney of Cambridge!

Edited by Zaranna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense, the example you give is located in one of the most expensive areas in Cambridge. If you have 300k to spend and only need 2 bedrooms you can live wherever you wish, picking a location which is 2/3 of a mile from the city centre is going to be pricey whatever market conditions exist.

300K to spend?

Let's assume that they have a 50K deposit, which is quite big. That's 250K left to find. At a generous 4x salary, that's 62.5K household income.

For how many people who live in Cambridge is this "affordable". Perhaps we can say that the entire country is "affordable" as Paul McCartney can buy any house for sale anywhere in the country?

Billy Shears

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, I ain't saying it ain't overpriced. But it doesn't help to exaggerate and make the situation look even worse than it is. The stuff on Rightmove at that price isn't in especially bad areas, so there's no point picking a £300K property in an expensive bit of town as a particularly good example of current prices.

I appreciate that the ladder is broken and all that, but when it's working the typical trajectory would be to buy something below average, then move on to average and beyond by selling the below-average to new FTBs. If there is a correction in future, hopefully people on average wages in their twenties will once again be able to buy, but they shouldn't necessarily expect to be able to buy the average property.

But there are no "starter homes" in Cambridge any more. (Look on rightmove for property below 120k if you think there are). If you look at the price-range of what's available in Cambridge, 2-bed terraces ARE the lower, "starter" end of the market. That one is especially overpriced at 300k (prob should be more like 250k); but 2-bedders at 225-260k ARE the bottom end in the city at the present time. Unless you're counting 200-220k one bed flats in places like the Triangle. Which would be silly :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general feeling on here is that we want interest rates to go up in the short term, as this is something which could speed up the price falls. On this site we're astute enough to spot that the potential falls in price will massively outweigh the pain of a few quid extra on the monthly payment at the start of the 25 year term ( neatly assuming they come back down a bit once we've got our nice big mortgages).

Question is, how long has it been so ? I presume in the past FTBs were desperate for rates to drop so they could stretch to that extra bedroom (whereas now just one bedroom would be nice) ?

Perhaps during a period of tight credit, FTBs want lower rates, but now we can get loadsa money everyone is more cautious and actually would prefer prices to be lower instead ?

As a young FTB in 1975 I always prayed for IRs to fall (mortgage IRs were 11% then). I didn't worry about the effect on prices, since mortgages were strictly limited to wage multiples, and salaries on mortgage applications were checked very rigorously. Consequently low IRs was money in the bank to the struggling FTB or wannabe FTB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in Cambridge too and it's truly horrible round here... Let's not forget, too, that several people were recently charged for running brothels in "desirable" Romey Town; that there was a street stabbing in "much sought-after" Riverside two months ago; and that it was only last year that the police crackdown got rid of the abandoned needles lying about in the "upmarket" Mill Road area. These are still "gentrifying" areas for the most part: up until a few years ago they were not places that people who could afford 300k would have considered buying a house in; they're the Kilburn or the Hackney of Cambridge!

All fair, and I'm not trying to say the prices make any sense.

I always thought the Mill Road are was overrated anyway - it just happens to be one of the few areas close to the centre with houses that aren't college-owned.

On the other hand, you could say similar sorts of things about parts of say Islington - it used to be rough, still is in parts, yet it's become "gentrified" and terraces and flats go for stupid prices. That probably isn't going to change, and central Cambridge prices are probably never going back to where they once were, so the FTB stuff of the future probably will be a bit further out. And yes I know some of what's further out is dodgy council estates, but it's not all like that.

Yes prices are stupid, but no, £300K isn't the standard FTB property, you could probably get something pretty acceptable in the £200K region. (But yes, it would still be overpriced at that so falls are needed if the ladder is going to make any sense in the future there).

(Also I don't view Cambridge through rose-tints, but come on, the "Hackney of Cambridge"? I've lived in both and I don't think anywhere in Cambridge can come close to Hackney for the hassle and squalor...)

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 302 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.