Uk House Prices To Crash

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kathy
  • Start date Start date
K

Kathy

Guest
The next few months are going to be interesting with the much reported house price crash imminent being reported in many various newspapers and on the news this weekend. I wouldn't know if it is mentioned in The Daily Mail before the usual people ask.

As Gordon Brown is seen as such a hero by some on this forum, I will be watching to see how he will handle a housing crisis, should it of course actually happen. If it does, I wonder who he will blame shrug::

I am always prepared to be proved wrong (despite what many on here may think), but I think the next few months in the financial sector and housing market are going to be interesting.

If the crash does happen, I wonder which places in the UK will be affected the most. I know that house prices in Northern Ireland and Wales (200% rises rumoured) escalated very quickly - if prices do drop by how much?

Will the current problems with Northern Rock have a wider impact on the state of the economy? Will other banks reveal that they are also having problems?
 
There will be no house price crash.

I really wonder who's spreading these ridiculous rumours. The Portuguese police?

There might be a short-term blip and a slightly less short-term stagnation but the housing market in this country is extraordinarily stable.
 
Originally posted by Desert Orchid@Sep 16 2007, 11:10 AM


I really wonder who's spreading these ridiculous rumours. The Portuguese police?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the type of response I was expecting.

The ability to discuss certain issues on this forum is slowly becoming an uphill struggle.
 
The BoE has been trying to take the heat out of the housing market for several months. Their actions combined with the move away from sub-prime will curtail some of the excesses. However I think that BoE will reduce rates in the not too distant future.
In the long term there is a shortage of supply in the housing market ( blame the immigrants :rolleyes: ) which will result in continuing price increases.
 
In the long term there is a shortage of supply in the housing market ( blame the immigrants ) which will result in continuing price increases.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry about that :D
 
I hope there is a crash, prices are unrealistic and at the moment I have very few options for buying. I would like to see a drop of roughly 25% so that people on decent but not huge wages (£19500 for me) could afford a house in an area that isnt economically deprived.
 
Not sure I'd blame immigrants TS?

I'd start with Margaret Thatcher, who I source just about every ill in solar system back to. But she's the one who stopped Local Authorities from building new Council Houses and transferred stock into private ownership, thus forcing a generation into the merciless arms of the private sector market (where incidentally most immigrants also reside) and not untypically to be exploited by landlords from their own communities, which would indicate that this is more of an issue to do with capitalist exploitation as much as race.

I blame Blair too. But then Tony Blair PM, is an anagram of "I'm Tory Plan B" so we shouldn't be surprised.

That certain parts of the country over-heated is another example of free market failure, and the lack of remedial regional policy to compensate for where the pressure was being felt. People were being pushed into working and hence trying to live in areas of the country, where just about all their disposable income was being sucked out of them by extortionate rents, because they couldn't get on the property ladder. A horrible catch 22

Who else do I blame? Well not so much blame, but rather an observation about demographic trends and the rise of single person households, which has injected a demand into the market that neither the Tories, or the 'New Tories' have failed to match through supply-side provision.

Banks of course, who have leant money to allow home owners to buy up investment property using their own over-inflated house as collateral and thus flood the rental market further, and hence reduce supply even more. (which in turn pushes prices up).

Both Tory governments for failing to defend the interests of people in the face of this capitalist onslaught.

Property is theft!!!!

Nationalise the Banks - Vote Warbler for Central Party Chairman
 
As the economy stagnates due to the lack of incentive causing innovation to decline, will you use oppression to control the people uspet at the falling living standards when compared with their capitalist neighbours?

:P
 
Meant to say OB.

The problem you face itsn't massively removed from mine, but bear in mind that a fall in house prices will only be passed onto you by your landlord. Knowing how heavily they're mortgaged up to the hilt and borrowed would be useful. If the banks start to squeeze them, they'll only start to squeeze you down the line.

I'm cautiously optimistic that my landlady's not too exposed :brows: Although stating something like this is guaranteed to lead to disaster, but since moving to Oxfordshire 2.5 years ago, she's never increased my rent :what: I'm hoping that she isn't going to get squeezed. It could also be of course, that she values my tenancy, as the house next door have had three rent increases in the same period, and has spent about 3 or 4 months empty in the process
 
Warbler, my personal view is that rents will be OK for now. I am renting too and we got a very good deal and absolutely no sign of my rent increasing. In our last rented house we had the same rental rate for over 3 years. I was convinced that it was because we were ideal tenants! :D

Many have predicted a fall in values of houses for the last few years. I wasn't fiully convinced then, but there are definite signs now that we may well have seen the best in profits being made from house purchases in certain price brackets and in specific areas. This government has a habit of propping up certain financial sectors but clearly they can only do that for so long before something has to give.

I for one will be watching the markets quite closely as we have wanted to buy somewhere to live for a couple of years now, but having missed the boat and having the possibility of renting very cheaply, I would like to think I may be in a position to buy somewhere in the next 12-18 months and pay less than we would have done if we had purchased earlier this year or last.

Time will, of course tell!
 
Originally posted by betsmate@Sep 16 2007, 03:41 PM
As the economy stagnates due to the lack of incentive causing innovation to decline, will you use oppression to control the people uspet at the falling living standards when compared with their capitalist neighbours?

:P
Click to expand...
No need to control the people, quite the opposite - agitate, and direct them to turn their guns on their own leaders, and pillars of the establishment that have kept them in bondage. :rolleyes:

The angry masses of an abandoned and disenfranchised property poor population turn on the landowning bourgoesie, forcing them to live behind gated communities (oh hang about, they've already started doing that in certain parts of most big cities). Eventually the property rich are forced into hiring their own security and forming private armies to protect the interests of the land owning classes. Sounds familiar? feudalism.

You see there's nothing wrong with my brand of Stalinism, because by now you must have realised, I'm Stalin. It's a detail admittedly, but in this context a very important one.
 
Originally posted by ovverbruv@Sep 16 2007, 02:21 PM
I hope there is a crash, prices are unrealistic and at the moment I have very few options for buying. I would like to see a drop of roughly 25% so that people on decent but not huge wages (£19500 for me) could afford a house in an area that isnt economically deprived.
Click to expand...
I agree that house prices have got beyond the average earner and the banks and building societies are largely to blame. However, some blame must also lie with those who knowingly allow themselves to overborrow, which has helped feed the market.

I feel genuinely sorry for people whose simple desire to own their own home has led to their being duped by institutions who have induced them to borrow more than they can genuinely afford while convincing them they can afford it.

O/b, do you have a good friend in a similar position?

Have you thought about combining your incomes and sharing a mortgage?

If you buy in the right area at the right time, you could both make enough in five or six years to allow you to go your separate ways.

The harsh reality is that the market will not crash.

(If it does I'll be in there buying up as much as I can afford. Property is the surest investment around, I reckon.)
 
Although I don't differentiate between Labour and Tory Kathy, as I believe they're essentially the same ruling class interests, pursusing the same capitalist driven objectives, in the name of supporting a mutually cosy establishment agenda, I do think that in order to propogate the myth that choice exists, it has become necessary to change governments periodically. To a large extent Thatcher didn't understand this, and that's why she played a massive role in consigning the Conservatives to opposition, (but that's another issue).

I do believe that there is such a thing as a 'good election to lose'. Not unlike 1992, this next one looks like being another. Not that I believe it will alter much materially, as both parties would follow the same agenda
 
Warbler, you seem conveniently to have forgotten that John Major WON the election subsequent to Thatcher's last win! So if anyone consigned the Tories to years of opposition, he did. Which he did : Black Monday and the Maastricht Treaty being the two principal things which turned off centre-right voters.

As to the question Kathy: if you go back through the archives you'll note I've been predicting an economic collapse for a long time: the country and most of its inhabitants are horribly over-borrowed and essentially insolvent. The baling out of a bank with a dodgy business approach is madness, imo, and will lead to more problems than it solves

As for immigration pushing up house prices: of course it does; that is not racist it's just common sense. And extra 100K or 200K people need somewhere to live! It's esp the case since you now only have to live in a council house for TWO years [New Labour change, that! brilliant] before you have the right to buy; and immigrants tend to be given council housing since they arrive homeless. You do the math!
 
If you predict an economic collapse for long enough, you'll eventually be proved right.

Usually you just have to wait for the Tories to get back into power...
 
Thatcher was all about conflict and saw it as her mission to try rid the country of Labour and it's supposed socialist leanings. What she didn't realise is that both parties shared the same establishment interests and were essentially on the same side working for the same capitalist interests. The old Tories were happy to rape and pillage and introduce legislation that made their already wealthy benefactors and to a less extent supporters even richer, but knew that to keep society ticking over. Therefore the established order required the country, have its other principal capitalist party to occasionally take the reins in order to rebuild the public infrastructure which they'd failed to invest in. Afterall, in the interests of maintaining essential services, they recognised this needed rebuilding from time to time if harmony was to be mainatained. It was quite a cosy little relationship, especially as it could be presented as choice in the name of democracy.

What Thatcher did however, was to force Labour through her attempts to squash it, into becoming the new Tories, and thus electable, and a damn sight more potent for it. There is a theory of course that some Tories who understood how the game worked even put Major into the 1992 campaign purely because he "wasn't one of us" - dispendable - he wasn't meant to win.

By the time 1997 came around and the 'new Tories' had invented themselves, the old model by virtue of clinging on to long, and forcing the new brand into adopting a policy line that might mean they could win more than just one term, had overtaken the deadwood that was the William Hague, IDS and Michael Howard unholy trinity.


I'm afraid your ideas about how a local authority housing allocation scheme works is equally wrong, though it is a popular myth that gets pedalled around.

In the first case LA's don't have the stock available. It's the principal reason why we've had to include sections typically called "private sector housing" or recently re-dubbed "housing needs" in the more politically correct environment. What it means is that we now have the job of trying to liaise with private landlords into taking up the supply. As I mentioned in another post, it is often the case that these landlords originate from the same communities and are far from averse to cramming people into poorly maintained accommodation and charging exhorbitant rents. Our job is to try and regulate the worse cases of abuse. It owes nothing to race, and much more to capitalist exploitation. Indeed economic migrancy has been a much bigger strain on the infrastructure of the South East than immigration (come to think of it, I'm a product of just that now).

When a council house is made available, it's normally the case that it's been available for some time. The reason being, everyone else has rejected it. You will occasionally get a story where someone's landed on their feet so to speak, and these are the ones that a rabid right wing media seizes on. They are rare however, and it's far more likely that immigrants will end up in;

* The worst council housing in the worst part of a city, that everyone else has rejected
* A private setcor slum landlord
* or a B&B
 
Well it was certainly struck a chord with someone.

Unfortunately, what needs to be appreciated (and Headstrongs overlooked this) is that migration, is a flow. Something which the Daily Mail often overlooks too, as it obsesses on just one side of this input - output equation. The UK's population has been very stable in the last 10 years, and certainly managable. Growth has been in line with that of many advanced Western economies associated with ageing populations and living longer etc. Indeed, only last month it was widely reported that the number of people leaving the country had reached record levels. Clearly you can't check a house onto a flight to Spain, so the idea that a wave of immigrants is preventing a generation from acquiring affordable housing is just plain disingenious and pandering to some baser instincts amongst people.

When someone leaves the UK they don't take their house with them. Neither do they demolish out of spite. In that respect, the supply remains the same. What they will do however, is rent it out at UK prices in order to finance their purchase elsewhere. This of course injects further supply pressures into the market, and forces prices ever higher as houses are effectively removed from the market.

The answer is to reduce inflationary pressures by increasing supply
 
DO, unfortunately my job dictates where I live and all my friends live elsewhere, I have moved house 7 times in 4 years across a wide geographic area.
As it happens I could get a 3 bed house in Gainsborough where I am now for £60k, the problem is that I already know I will be moving in March, I just dont know where I will be moving to.
 
Your sense of irony is appreciated Simmo, these people are indeed the modern day Kulak and will be dealt with accordingly. You obviously have an appreciation of these things. Although I had Phil Waters pencilled in as my head of the NKVD I think you'd make an extremely effectively regional governer, reporting to my Supreme Soviet. Consider yoursef appointed.
 
Back
Top