House Prices Grow By 0.4% In August As Affordability Constraints Begin To Impact - Hometrack

[Converted Lurker]

Average residential values increased by 0.4% over August, bringing house price growth over the first eight months of 2006 to 3.9%, according to the latest monthly housing market survey by Hometrack, the housing information business. "Whilst the recent rise in interest rates has yet to impact on the market surveys, the sensitivity of the housing market to interest rates means that the London-inspired mini boom of the last eight months is likely to run out of steam over the autumn" comments Richard Donnell, Hometrack's Director of Research.

http://firstrung.co.uk/articles.asp?pageid...articlekey=2734

[Realistbear]

Average residential values increased by 0.4% over August, bringing house price growth over the first eight months of 2006 to 3.9%, according to the latest monthly housing market survey by Hometrack, the housing information business. "Whilst the recent rise in interest rates has yet to impact on the market surveys, the sensitivity of the housing market to interest rates means that the London-inspired mini boom of the last eight months is likely to run out of steam over the autumn" comments Richard Donnell, Hometrack's Director of Research.

http://firstrung.co.uk/articles.asp?pageid...articlekey=2734

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/28082006/325/home...-year-high.html

Prices rose 0.4 percent month-on-month to average 167,200 pounds,

a slight slowing in growth

compared to the previous four months when prices rose 0.6 percent each month...../

"Whether headline house prices rise by 4 percent or 6 percent over 2006 is

largely down to the scale of growth in the London market,"

the survey said, noting several headwinds such as affordability and higher interest rates.

It is pleasant to note the trend moving in the right direction. With such a huge bubble the momentum will take some time to go into reverse. A drop (plunge?) from 0.6% to 0.4% is healthy and represents a 33% correection MoM.

If its London only that is rising, we can no doubt expect to see some pleasant YoY negatives appearing before winter sets in.

[Golden Shower]

It is pleasant to note the trend moving in the right direction. With such a huge bubble the momentum will take some time to go into reverse. A drop (plunge?) from 0.6% to 0.4% is healthy and represents a 33% correection MoM.

If its London only that is rising, we can no doubt expect to see some pleasant YoY negatives appearing before winter sets in.

Blimey, 1 month's data from a not so good survey and it's HPC kabadi! Come on, RB, even you must know it's the position 6-12 months from here that really counts.

[sign_of_the_times]

Blimey, 1 month's data from a not so good survey and it's HPC kabadi! Come on, RB, even you must know it's the position 6-12 months from here that really counts.

the rug's been pulled - you just haven't looked down yet !

[the_duke_of_hazzard]

It is pleasant to note the trend moving in the right direction. With such a huge bubble the momentum will take some time to go into reverse. A drop (plunge?) from 0.6% to 0.4% is healthy and represents a 33% correection MoM.

Only you, RB, could interpret a 0.2% change in the rate of change at a traditionally quiet time of year as a "plunge" and a "33% correction".

[Golden Shower]

the rug's been pulled - you just haven't looked down yet !

It may well have been, but until we get evidence of a sustained slide in prices it's hard to take the cries of HPC seriously. Not that I pay much attention to this survey but Hometrack is positive, in other words prices up (in a weak time of the year too). Since when does positive prices indicate a falling market?

[BandWagon]

the rug's been pulled - you just haven't looked down yet !

It's going to take a good 3 to 6 months before we see the impact of the rate rise.

Looking good...

[Golden Shower]

It's going to take a good 3 to 6 months before we see the impact of the rate rise.

Looking good...

So another 3-6 months of renting, before you can even make a decision whether to stay out of the market or not?

This is a killer question, IMO. How long do you rent and wait before you can decide if you are right or wrong?

[sign_of_the_times]

This is a killer question, IMO. How long do you rent and wait before you can decide if you are right or wrong?

as long as it takes.......

gosh, I'm still alive after answering your question..

[Golden Shower]

as long as it takes.......

gosh, I'm still alive after answering your question..

Surely you must have defined some sort of cut off point which tells you if you are wrong or not?

[BandWagon]

So another 3-6 months of renting, before you can even make a decision whether to stay out of the market or not?

This is a killer question, IMO. How long do you rent and wait before you can decide if you are right or wrong?

Not at all. I'm renting a property in a prime part of London.

It's a private gated complex, individual parking etc.

It costs me significantly less to rent this place than it would to buy it. I don't have any worries about maintenance, and I can leave at any time.

On top of that I'm protected from the massive downside to the market.

The alternative is to buy a less pleasant property for the same money, AND be exposed to the downside.

Every month I live here I derive a real economic benefit from this property at lower cost to myself.

I'd be very happy to rent for 5 years. It's a no-brainer.

[sign_of_the_times]

Surely you must have defined some sort of cut off point which tells you if you are wrong or not?

why? what's the hurry?

history will prove I was right to wait

(hold the front page... VI's claim prices still rising...stop...Turkeys to be given vote on Christmas...stop...)

[Casual Observer]

Only you, RB, could interpret a 0.2% change in the rate of change at a traditionally quiet time of year as a "plunge" and a "33% correction".

6 months ago, RB was telling everyone that prices were falling at warp speed. Now, it's not far away. Which is the true situation? FTBs need to know some truth, not a pack of lies

Not at all. I'm renting a property in a prime part of London.

It's a private gated complex, individual parking etc.

It costs me significantly less to rent this place than it would to buy it. I don't have any worries about maintenance, and I can leave at any time.

On top of that I'm protected from the massive downside to the market.

The alternative is to buy a less pleasant property for the same money, AND be exposed to the downside.

Every month I live here I derive a real economic benefit from this property at lower cost to myself.

I'd be very happy to rent for 5 years. It's a no-brainer.

But you have to accept that you've missed out on huge capital growth up to now, if you'd bought rather than rent.

Edited August 28, 2006 by Casual Observer

[Realistbear]

why? what's the hurry?

history will prove I was right to wait

(hold the front page... VI's claim prices still rising...stop...Turkeys to be given vote on Christmas...stop...)

According to the Hometrack report, prices in my area (West Midlands) are up by 0.1%. I just don't see it as most properties around here are being reduced or are up for sale OR rent because they are not moving. New builds are being heavily discounted with one local builder just dropping his prices on half a dozen detached (none sold in months) from 289k to 250k. For Hometrack to get an increase it must mean fewer houses selling but at slightly higher prices? The reality around here is that prices are probably down 10% or so since the beginning of the year. I fully expect them to be down by 20% as winter sets in. If Jaguar is sold and production moved or severely curtailed all bets are off because the psychological blow will be enormous. Landrover closes in November

6 months ago, RB was telling everyone that prices were falling at warp speed. Now, it's not far away. Which is the true situation? FTBs need to know some truth, not a pack of lies

But you have to accept that you've missed out on huge capital growth up to now, if you'd bought rather than rent.

According to the Land Registry prices in many areas WERE falling at warp speed. Then the next set of LR figures, using a different methodology apparently (Miracle Method?), comes up with such a dramatic reversal that it beggars belief. Here is an example from the previous Q showing warp speed drops in London:

City Of London £313,388 Quarter ending March 2006: -4.5%

Hammersmith And Fulham £1,401,250 -17.9%

Wandsworth £1,230,830 -11.2%

Lewisham £351,863 -22.3%

Waltham Forest £317,750 -18.7% Year-over-Year -28.1% 6

Newham £226,026 -22.2%

Enfield £568,411 -13.7% -18.6%

Chelsea £2,020,714 -18.2%

City Of Westminster £1,819,466 -20.2%

Camden £1,224,703 -6.5%

Islington £519,102 -37.1%

Hackney £420,577 -15.3%

Harrow £538,874 -9.6% -13.9%

Lambeth £527,750 -2.8%

BTW, CO is not a "causal observer" but a VI as he consistently attacks anything that may suggest that his son's recent investment in a house was an ill-timed venture.

Hometracks report states:

"

Whether headline house prices rise by 4 percent or 6 percent over 2006 is largely down to the scale of growth in the London market," the survey said, noting several headwinds such as affordability and higher interest rates.

An annual return of 4%, even if true over the entire UK, is hardly losing out on "huge" capital appreciation. If you are a STR or STM and invested wisely you would make at least 5% in a savings account or much more than that if you invested in stocks. I am seeing at l;east 10% down since the beginning of the year and with my STM funds growing by an overall average of about 8% I am streets ahead of an OO who is seeing his "investment" drop monthly.

Edited August 28, 2006 by Realistbear

[Casual Observer]

According to the Hometrack report, prices in my area (West Midlands) are up by 0.1%. I just don't see it as most properties around here are being reduced or are up for sale OR rent because they are not moving. New builds are being heavily discounted with one local builder just dropping his prices on half a dozen detached (none sold in months) from 289k to 250k. For Hometrack to get an increase it must mean fewer houses selling but at slightly higher prices? The reality around here is that prices are probably down 10% or so since the beginning of the year. I fully expect them to be down by 20% as winter sets in. If Jaguar is sold and production moved or severely curtailed all bets are off because the psychological blow will be enormous. Landrover closes in November

According to the Land Registry prices in many areas WERE falling at warp speed. Then the next set of LR figures, using a different methodology apparently (Miracle Method?), comes up with such a dramatic reversal that it beggars belief. Here is an example from the previous Q showing warp speed drops in London:

City Of London £313,388 Quarter ending March 2006: -4.5%

Hammersmith And Fulham £1,401,250 -17.9%

Wandsworth £1,230,830 -11.2%

Lewisham £351,863 -22.3%

Waltham Forest £317,750 -18.7% Year-over-Year -28.1% 6

Newham £226,026 -22.2%

Enfield £568,411 -13.7% -18.6%

Chelsea £2,020,714 -18.2%

City Of Westminster £1,819,466 -20.2%

Camden £1,224,703 -6.5%

Islington £519,102 -37.1%

Hackney £420,577 -15.3%

Harrow £538,874 -9.6% -13.9%

Lambeth £527,750 -2.8%

BTW, CO is not a "causal observer" but a VI as he consistently attacks anything that may suggest that his son's recent investment in a house was an ill-timed venture.

I can't believe that anyone is so financially un-astute as to think Q on Q data actually tells us anything. BTW, RB is not a realist, he is a VI fantasist who posts anything to make people think prices have been falling .

Edited August 28, 2006 by Casual Observer

[brassfarthing]

Not at all. I'm renting a property in a prime part of London.

It's a private gated complex, individual parking etc.

It costs me significantly less to rent this place than it would to buy it. I don't have any worries about maintenance, and I can leave at any time.

On top of that I'm protected from the massive downside to the market.

The alternative is to buy a less pleasant property for the same money, AND be exposed to the downside.

Every month I live here I derive a real economic benefit from this property at lower cost to myself.

I'd be very happy to rent for 5 years. It's a no-brainer.

The truth is that you are paying someone else's mortgage off for them.

The course of action you're taking is the less risky in the current climate of uncertainty, perhaps, but it's very much the lesser of two evils. Buying into what you believe is an overvalued market is not wise; blithely saying that you'll be happy to carry on paying what I guess is many hundreds of pounds a month in rent for the next 5 years doesn't sound like a great alternative. How many thousands of pounds will that amount to -- £30K? £40K?

Don't get me wrong. I'm sympathetic. You're in a dilemma. But it's surely delusional to say that renting an expensive apartment over a long period is a "real economic benefit", and to sunnily present it as an ideal position to be in. The only one deriving "real economic benefit" in this situation is the person whose mortgage you are paying off.

Edited August 28, 2006 by brassfarthing

[Realistbear]

I can't believe that anyone is so financially un-astute as to think Q on Q data actually tells us anything. BTW, RB is not a realist, he is a VI fantasist.

Exactly my point. How does the LR go from plummetting prices one Q to the exact opposite the next without manipulating the data to suit Gordon's Miracle scam?

What Q on Q data should show is the TREND line. YoY tells you what happened compared with a year ago. A crash can chnage the direction of prices in a very short period of time and YoY negative may not show until months after the event. Most investors need up to date trend data and none rely on YoY.

The truth is that you are paying someone else's mortgage off for them.

The course of action you're taking is the less risky in the current climate of uncertainty, perhaps, but it's very much the lesser of two evils. Buying into what you believe is an overvalued market is not wise; blithely saying that you'll be happy to carry on paying what I guess is many hundreds of pounds a month for the next 5 years doesn't sound like a great alternative. How many thousands of pounds will that amount to -- £30K? £40K?

Don't get me wrong. I'm sympathetic. You're in a dilemma. But it's surely delusional to say that renting an expensive apartment over a long period is a "real economic benefit", and to sunnily present it as an ideal position to be in. The only one deriving "real economic benefit" in this situation is the person whose mortgage you are paying off.

Sadly , the huge number of sheeple who bought with IO or who bought at the top of the market and are facing repossession are worse off than renting. The interest they are paying to the Shy is rent if you are never going to increase equity. For many, this will be the reality.

In my case, I rent a 300k house for 750 a month. I have invested my STM funds and am now averaging about 8% return as I have unloaded most of my stocks to go to cash. If I owned the house I rent I would have already lost 50k since the beginning of my tenancy last August because that is how much prices have dropped around here in a year. So not only am I making a hefty 8% average return on my STM funds I am also "making" 50k on a house purchase that I am delaying until the market bottoms out.

It makes no sense NOT to rent on a falling market.

[Casual Observer]

Exactly my point. How does the LR go from plummetting prices one Q to the exact opposite the next without manipulating the data to suit Gordon's Miracle scam?

What Q on Q data should show is the TREND line. YoY tells you what happened compared with a year ago. A crash can chnage the direction of prices in a very short period of time and YoY negative may not show until months after the event. Most investors need up to date trend data and none rely on YoY.

No, Q on Q data tells you that the mix of houses sold varies each quarter (surprise surprise)

My area shows wild swings each quarter, depending on whether 1 of the 2 million pound houses sells, or whether it's just the usual £300 k average ones.

Do you really believe that the Land Registry fiddles the figures?? Just because the variations don't suit your view that prices are "in crash warp speed" (despite you saying today that "we're moving close to a crash")? You must be a complete fruit cake

Most pathetic RB CONSPIRACY THEORY of the year:

According to the Land Registry prices in many areas WERE falling at warp speed. Then the next set of LR figures, using a different methodology apparently (Miracle Method?), comes up with such a dramatic reversal that it beggars belief.

Edited August 28, 2006 by Casual Observer

[Converted Lurker]

Has anyone read the reporting on the Hometrack report from Reuters? :angry: The Firstrung report comes direct from Hometrack's pr folk, an un-altered press release and it is very well balanced IMHO. However, check this out from Reuters/Tiscali/Guardian other mainstream titles..."House prices rose at their fastest rate annual pace in nearly two years in August, a survey showed on Monday in a sign the Bank of England’s surprise interest rate hike this month has not hit sentiment yet. Property consultant Hometrack said house prices rose 3.9 percent in August compared with a year earlier, the highest rise since September 2004 when they rose 4.6 percent."

Anyone reading that at first glance would believe values went up 3.9% in August..very naughty...

[PropertyGuru]

I just tried to post a link to a story about the first prosecution under the new HMO rule s- no sign of the thread.

No one interested in how BTL landlords are starting to be penalised???

[Guest The_Oldie]

The truth is that you are paying someone else's mortgage off for them.

The favourite saying of Estate Agents .

In truth, rental payments often do not cover the cost of any mortgage that the landlord may, or may not, have.

If I were to take cash out of the bank and purchase the house that I'm currently renting, I'd be £5.000 PA worse off .

[Realistbear]

No, Q on Q data tells you that the mix of houses sold varies each quarter (surprise surprise)

My area shows wild swings each quarter, depending on whether 1 of the 2 million pund houses sells, or whether it's just the usual £300 k average.

Do you really believe that the Land Registry fiddles the figures?? Just because the variations don't suit your view that prices are "in crash warp speed" (despite you saying today that "we're moving close to a crash")? You must be a complete fruit cake

Most pathetic RB CONSPIRACY THEORY of the year:

According to the Land Registry prices in many areas WERE falling at warp speed. Then the next set of LR figures, using a different methodology apparently (Miracle Method?), comes up with such a dramatic reversal that it beggars belief.

It is naive in the extreme to trust much of anything this government has responsibility for. Tony Bliar and his cohorts have been guiilty of distorting facts and data for years. Anyone seriously believ the CPI figures? No. Does anyone really believe we are better off now than when they came to power? No. Does anyone really believ that their housing data is NOT manipulated to suit their agenda? I doubt it very much. Wake up and smell the coffee and come to grips with reality--Governments can and do lie.

Edited August 28, 2006 by Realistbear

[brassfarthing]

Exactly my point. How does the LR go from plummetting prices one Q to the exact opposite the next without manipulating the data to suit Gordon's Miracle scam?

What Q on Q data should show is the TREND line. YoY tells you what happened compared with a year ago. A crash can chnage the direction of prices in a very short period of time and YoY negative may not show until months after the event. Most investors need up to date trend data and none rely on YoY.

Sadly , the huge number of sheeple who bought with IO or who bought at the top of the market and are facing repossession are worse off than renting. The interest they are paying to the Shy is rent if you are never going to increase equity. For many, this will be the reality.

In my case, I rent a 300k house for 750 a month. I have invested my STM funds and am now averaging about 8% return as I have unloaded most of my stocks to go to cash. If I owned the house I rent I would have already lost 50k since the beginning of my tenancy last August because that is how much prices have dropped around here in a year. So not only am I making a hefty 8% average return on my STM funds I am also "making" 50k on a house purchase that I am delaying until the market bottoms out.

It makes no sense NOT to rent on a falling market.

You've missed the point -- no doubt deliberately.

Of course we are all interested in TRENDs. The question mark hovers over what constitutes a trend? When it suits your VI position, you say that a trend is reflected in a Q. When it doesn't suit you, you say that Y on Y is the one. Just as sometimes you say that detached houses are the stats to look for, while at other times (on the same day even) you claim that flats are the real indicator. When the stats say that prices are rising, you say that the stats are wrong because you've seen a house round the corner that is on the market for less than it once was. When the stats show a slow down in the increase, or even an actual drop, you crow about how the stats don't lie. You constantly illustrate your position with your own area in the West Midlands while at the same time admitting that your area is particularly vulnerable and unrepresentative because of the recent factory closures.

Here is the fact of the matter. You claim to be a tribune of the people but are anything but. I feel genuinely sorry for most people who use this site who find themselves priced out of the market. You are someone who has exploited, and continues to exploit, the market. You keep boasting about how much money you earned on the US property market. You brag about how you STR 2 or 3 years ago. The simple fact is that you sold at the wrong time. You STR because you were convinced that there was going to be a crash. You sold, and there wasn't a crash. You are a Vested Interest. You want a crash so that you can buy a house for a lower price than you sold yours for, thereby making yourself a profit. You have presumably now paid so much in rent over the last 2 or 3 years that the crash will have to be quite sizeable to enable you to get your money back. You are an investor first and foremost, and you are behaving like, dare I say it, a bear with a sore head.

[Casual Observer]

It is naive in the extreme to trust much of anything this government has responsibility for. Tony Bliar and his cohorts have been guiilty of distorting facts and data for years. Anyone seriously believ the CPI figures? No. Does anyone really believe we are better off now than when they came to power? No. Does anyone really believ that their housing data is NOT manipulated to suit their agenda? I doubt it very much. Wake up and smell the coffee and come to grips with reality--Governments can and do lie.

Recently, when you thought that Q on Q figures were showing falls, you said that these figures can't lie. Now, when they tell a different story, you're implying that they do.

You make that bloke from Iraq, the propaganda spokesman who said they had won the war when we could see US tanks in the background, look sane.

You've missed the point -- no doubt deliberately.

Of course we are all interested in TRENDs. The question mark hovers over what constitutes a trend? When it suits your VI position, you say that a trend is reflected in a Q. When it doesn't suit you, you say that Y on Y is the one. Just as sometimes you say that detached houses are the stats to look for, while at other times (on the same day even) you claim that flats are the real indicator. When the stats say that prices are rising, you say that the stats are wrong because you've seen a house round the corner that is on the market for less than it once was. When the stats show a slow down in the increase, or even an actual drop, you crow about how the stats don't lie. You constantly illustrate your position with your own area in the West Midlands while at the same time admitting that your area is particularly vulnerable and unrepresentative because of the recent factory closures.

Here is the fact of the matter. You claim to be a tribune of the people but are anything but. I feel genuinely sorry for most people who use this site who find themselves priced out of the market. You are someone who has exploited, and continues to exploit, the market. You keep boasting about how much money you earned on the US property market. You brag about how you STR 2 or 3 years ago. The simple fact is that you sold at the wrong time. You STR because you were convinced that there was going to be a crash. You sold, and there wasn't a crash. You are a Vested Interest. You want a crash so that you can buy a house for a lower price than you sold yours for, thereby making yourself a profit. You have presumably now paid so much in rent over the last 2 or 3 years that the crash will have to be quite sizeable to enable you to get your money back. You are an investor first and foremost, and you are behaving like, dare I say it, a bear with a sore head.

Well said. He is a complete Charlatan who lies and spins to save face. God forbid anyone who is taken in by it all.

[Converted Lurker]

The favourite saying of Estate Agents .

In truth, rental payments often do not cover the cost of any mortgage that the landlord may, or may not, have.

If I were to take cash out of the bank and purchase the house that I'm currently renting, I'd be £5.000 PA worse off .

Interest only? No dent in capital re-payment, Repayment? No dent for 5 years