Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
where's the £127k 3 bed property in 'real' Headingley?
NO URLS IN SIGNATURE.
|
| |
|
|
The thing I find so TWO-FACED about Kirsty is the fact that she has been on TV and said that the prices are madness and its impossible for FTB's to get on the ladder.
She then goes on to RAMP BTL furthermore pricing out the FTB's!!!!
There is a word for this but somehow I think I would get anned if I used it. This program is just another attempt to get the last of the mugs to buy into BTL.
For the past 6 years of so - 99.99% of BTL's have made money becuase of UNUSUALLY high HPI. So it looks like a banker everytime.
I just hope that when prices FALL significantly and BTL is seen as a RISK that this RAMPING will stop.
Can see it now.....
Kirsty & Phil - Where's best to rent.
And at Number 1 - Southampton.... expect 36% increase in the last 5 years but it actually went down 22%. There are now loads of BTL landlords losing money hand-over-fist.
This flat used to cost £1200 p.c.m. you can get it now for just £625 pcm.
On next weeks show we will show you how you can buy properties at BMV. We look at the insolvency register and jump on our prey....
<to the theme tune of "Love dont live here... anymore">
Bit of jest there but it CAN happen! I just think these programmes need to be clear about the risks.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Simulcra: The thing I find so TWO-FACED about Kirsty is the fact that she has been on TV and said that the prices are madness and its impossible for FTB's to get on the ladder. She then goes on to RAMP BTL furthermore pricing out the FTB's!!!! There is a word for this but somehow I think I would get banned if I used it.  This program is just another attempt to get the last of the mugs to buy into BTL. For the past 6 years of so - 99.99% of BTL's have made money because of UNUSUALLY high HPI. So it looks like a banker everytime. I just hope that if/when prices FALL significantly and BTL is seen as a RISK that this RAMPING will stop. Can see it now..... Kirsty & Phil - Where's best to rent. And at Number 1 - Southampton.... expect 36% increase in the last 5 years but it actually went down 22%. There are now loads of BTL landlords losing money hand-over-fist. This flat used to cost £1200 p.c.m. you can get it now for just £625 pcm. On next weeks show we will show you how you can buy properties at BMV. We look at the insolvency register and jump on our prey.... <to the theme tune of "Love dont live here... anymore"> Bit of jest there but it CAN happen! I just think these programmes need to be clear about the risks.
|
| |
|
|
"The thing I find so TWO-FACED about Kirsty is the fact that she has been on TV and said that the prices are madness and its impossible for FTB's to get on the ladder."
She should be ashamed of herself. And the political party she so publicly supports begrudges the miniumum wage but I suppose those earning £5 an hour don't count in her privileged, moneyed world. They don't deserve a nice place to live, I suppose.....
If these presenters really werewere professionals, they'd set themsleves the challenge of finding homes for people earning £15,000 a year but i suppsoe that would mean acknowledging the mess that they and their ilk have created.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by bridgette:
If these presenters really wereprofessionals, they'd set themsleves the challenge of finding homes for people earning £15,000 a year but i suppsoe that would mean acknowledging the mess that they and their ilk have created.
Indeed. Get them to find an average house for an average family earning an average wage. Oh and no Share Equity/Ownership housing either - it doesn't work period!!! |
| |
|
|
I said a few days ago that a "where's best for FTB" show would be far more worthy and interesting. It is a real shame, as though I loathe and detest 99% of folk on TV (where do I start? Declan Curry and then upwards), I've always liked the Phil & Kirsty double act. This pile of opportunist, badly researched, irresponsible pap appealed to the lowest common demoninator - P & K should say "sorry - it was an aberation" and get back to what they do best. I would say C4 should know better, but we all know it doesn't.
------------------------------
35% constitutes neither a majority nor a mandate
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by reverand: quote: Originally posted by bridgette:
If these presenters really wereprofessionals, they'd set themsleves the challenge of finding homes for people earning £15,000 a year but i suppsoe that would mean acknowledging the mess that they and their ilk have created.
Indeed. Get them to find an average house for an average family earning an average wage. Oh and no Share Equity/Ownership housing either - it doesn't work period!!!
I've said before - our first house 1935 semi bought in 1999, with the same financial situation we were in them, we could not afford at todays prices. We had a MIP for £80k - what would that buy today for a family of four? Even now with OH new better paying job we would be struggling. We were 'lucky' that we sold our house for more than double what we paid and moved up the property ladder. I don't think they could find a average house for an average family on an average wage unless they had tens of thousands for a deposit. |
| |
|
|
If I was first stepping onto the property ladder now I couldn't afford to buy the 1 bed flat I have just moved out of, never mind my new 2 bed house that is costing over half as much again (hope that makes sense.) In fact I'm not sure I know anyone that could afford to buy any of the houses they live in.
|
| |
|
|
Our first house cost £50,000. What can you buy for that today? We sold for £133,000. The house next door to our old one is now on the market (for the second time - took it off for Xmas) for £152k, two more on the same road are on for £165K and £170k (all 3 bed semi's). The £170k has been on the market for about a year and a half now. We could not afford our old house if we were in the same position as we were in 1999 - MIP £80k and £5k deposit.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by bridgette:
"The thing I find so TWO-FACED about Kirsty is the fact that she has been on TV and said that the prices are madness and its impossible for FTB's to get on the ladder."
She should be ashamed of herself. And the political party she so publicly supports begrudges the miniumum wage but I suppose those earning £5 an hour don't count in her privileged, moneyed world. They don't deserve a nice place to live, I suppose.....
If these presenters really werewere professionals, they'd set themsleves the challenge of finding homes for people earning £15,000 a year but i suppsoe that would mean acknowledging the mess that they and their ilk have created.
Been there done that. It does wind me up that these two do not live in the real world. There are very few property location agents who cater to the first time buyers market because of their minimum fee excludes them from using the "service" |
| |
|
|
One big YAWN  , these two have resorted to scraping the barrel. What has Phil done to his chest?  noticed in bath it looks like a fur singlet (vest) |
| |
|
|
My Grandparents bought there hosue for 4 and sixpence in 1946, I mean what can you get for that these days.
|
| |
|
|
On a lighter note, I didn't watch the show as I was watching House Doctor on 5, though I did catch a few moments during ad breaks... and what I can't believe is that no-one has mentioned THAT HAT!
|
| |
|
|
This is slightly OT but may give the issue a different slant.
By the mid eventies much of former industrial Britain was knackered. Worn out plant, decaying mills, tumble down housing. Even London, where I went to college in the late seventies and lived for some years after was a grey place and nothing like the 24hr society we know today.
I thought it was a disgrace that wonderful buildings in the middle of cities were lying empty just because no-one could think of anything to do with them.
I had big plans for affordable housing, fancy penthouses and exuberant nightlife to revitalise them but was young, broke and not overly confident and I could see the city centres being bulldozed and a lot of heritage lost.
At the time you could pick up huge Victorian Gothic mills with Delft fireplaces, stained glass and as many gargoyles as you fancied for tuppence (okay about thirty grand) but people, from the local council to your old dear thought you mad. It was an uphill struggle and in the end I gave up.
Within a few years the same places were going for a million plus and often a lot more.
Bully for me.
The point I'm making in a very roundabout way is the BTL boom is the tail end of an impulse going back to those days, where there was no money to re-develop run down housing, no pride in cities and whole areas were going nowhere fast.
It's remarkable to me that people now take pride in hitherto abandoned areas and how post-industrial Britain has become a place with value again. Things may have gone too far with every last inch snapped up or under development but it's good to remember that not all the initiatives were entirely mercenary. The fact that housing used to be cheap, bemoaned by so many now, is that nobody wanted it.
Kirsty and Phil represent the populist, tinkerbell in the wake, mercenary impulse to buying property but it's not such an obvious choice between that and dead end streets of my youth as some would make out.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by My Name is Luca:
My Grandparents bought there hosue for 4 and sixpence in 1946, I mean what can you get for that these days.
Difference is, that money was probably 2x your grandads salary. Now you need 8x 1 person salary! No wonder the 2.4 average family has shrunk to 1.5 |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by reverand: quote: Originally posted by My Name is Luca:
My Grandparents bought there hosue for 4 and sixpence in 1946, I mean what can you get for that these days.
Difference is, that money was probably 2x your grandads salary. Now you need 8x 1 person salary! No wonder the 2.4 average family has shrunk to 1.5
And that the average age of a first time buyer has risen to over 31 |
| |
|
|
Yes, but clothes and cars and other items were probably far more expensive.
Go home and tell your grandparents, or even parents, how much easier their lives were than yours, and how much more discretionary spending they had compared to you now.
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by My Name is Luca:
Yes, but clothes and cars and other items were probably far more expensive.
Go home and tell your grandparents, or even parents, how much easier their lives were than yours, and how much more discretionary spending they had compared to you now.
They lived in years of high inflation. Their debt on housing and everything else was soon wiped out by high inflation. That no longer exist (at least its covered up) so no high wage inflation anymore. Meaning todays mortgagees will be worse off in real terms. |
| |
|
|
I wouldn't dare Luca! Even going back to the seventies I remember cold mornings with condensation on the windows and being able to see my breath in the air. And we had no money worries. Just wasn't deemed necessary to keep a house at a tropical temperature. Times, they do change!
*It is not necessary to understand things in order to argue about them. -- Pierre De Beaumarchais
|
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by reverand: quote: Originally posted by My Name is Luca:
My Grandparents bought there hosue for 4 and sixpence in 1946, I mean what can you get for that these days.
Difference is, that money was probably 2x your grandads salary. Now you need 8x 1 person salary! No wonder the 2.4 average family has shrunk to 1.5
And the reason we now need to borrow more is because the rules on borrowing money have been relaxed to such an extent that borrowing 8 times salary is not too difficult to arrange. When my parents bought their house the absolute maximum monthly mortgage payment was one week of my father's pay - in 1964 £16 a week! and 75% of teh house cost was the maximum you could borrow - no argument and no leeway - other household incomes weren't even considered. This restriction in the amount which could be borrowed kept house prices at a sensible level. We need to get back to seeing houses as somewhere to live and not as an investment vehicle (non residential properties can cover that investment route). |
| |
|
|
I remember when my parents were moving house in the '70s we lost one purchase, and then had to wait months to get another mortgage approved!
Am I right in thinking only building societies gave mortgages back in the day, and you had to have been a saver for quite a while before they lent?
Certainly easy credit has had a lot to do with price inflation - but there is surely a limit to how much people can raise for a purchase...
|
| |
|
New Member
|
BTL investors cause more problems then simply pushing up prices. Most landlords do the bare minimum to keep their property looking good (well, it eats into their profits otherwise doesn't it!) so if you have an area where there are lots of these properties it soon starts to look very shabby and neglected.
Let's face it, there's always going to be a demand for rented accomodation, but a lot of people renting now are only doing so beacuse they can't afford to buy, not because they actually want to rent!
|
| |
|
|
quote: BTL investors cause more problems then simply pushing up prices. Most landlords do the bare minimum to keep their property looking good (well, it eats into their profits otherwise doesn't it!) so if you have an area where there are lots of these properties it soon starts to look very shabby and neglected.
Let's face it, there's always going to be a demand for rented accomodation, but a lot of people renting now are only doing so beacuse they can't afford to buy, not because they actually want to rent!
It becomes a problem as BTL takes over blocks of flats. When I moved into my flat, 10 were owner occupied, 2 BTL. When I moved out 3 were owner occupied and 9 BTL. I had no problem with the renters, it was the landlords that weren't seen from one year to the next that were the problem. |
| |
|
|
