Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There's definitely been a slowdown... but talk of

> negative equity? This seems rather premature.


Maybe not. In today's Times, the estate agent Savills has apparently stated that it expects central London property prices to be at best completely flat and are preparing for as much as a 5% downturn between the end of the month and the New Year alone!!! Simple maths shows that as being a decrease of up to 20% per annum if it continues! And that is coming from an estate agent whose livelihood depends on people buying!!!! If they are projecting those possibilities publicly I think we can assume that they are privately expecting much worse.

From Bloomberg today:


The buy-to-let market is in crisis as 40 per cent has been wiped off the value

of new purpose-built investment properties in the past year, a survey by The

Daily Telegraph has found.


Investors have been left facing losses of thousands of pounds on their

properties.


A study of nearly all the new-build flats that have come up for auction in

recent weeks shows they are selling for, on average, just 60 per cent of what

property investors paid for them.


While official figures suggest that the UK property market - including

buy-to-let - is in fair health, there are growing numbers of new-build flats

being repossessed in cities such as Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Norwich and

Nottingham.


The prices being achieved by the auction houses are invariably well below the

original prices.


Last week a two-bed flat in the canal side area of Bingley, West Yorkshire,

fetched GBP105,000 - a far cry from the GBP179,995 that it was originally sold for

in July last year. Others have been sold for similarly large discounts.


Many investors who have had their fingers burnt claim that they were duped into

paying too much.


Meanwhile, property experts warn that the problem could get worse, with local

authorities granting planning permission for hundreds of blocks of flats each

week and developers still offering generous incentives to potential investors.


Matthew Loades, an investor who is losing money from his buy-to-let properties,

said: "I think there are tens of thousands of people out there who like me

jumped on the apartment bandwagon thinking they were on to a winner. Now they

are feeling the pain."


Recent research also suggests that two-thirds of buy-to-let investors are not

making enough from their rental income to meet their mortgage payments.


This is because the interest rate hikes over the last year has left investors,

who generally take out variable mortgages, facing much higher monthly

repayments.


The Association of Residential Letting Agents, which represents buy-to-let

mortgage lenders, said 67 per cent of all landlords were making rental returns

of five per cent or less in August - much lower than the very best buy-to-let

mortgages of 5.5 per cent.


Supporters of buy-to-let say most investors should not be hit by the mortgage

squeeze because they are sitting on large profits made in the boom of the last

couple of years.


Official Government figures show that purpose-built flats have climbed in price

by 16 per cent over the last two years.


However, in Nottingham 10 flats are on sale in Brook Court, Nottingham for

GBP89,950 - a sharp fall on the GBP139,000 that the developer was selling them for

as recently as December last year.


Oh dear!

I believe some people have been duped. There are companies who sell buy to let investment property over the phone to lay-people using extremely aggressive sales teams.


the language used to sell them is confusing. 'You can buy a house for ?600' can mean that you can take ownership of a flat and a mortgage for slightly more than the value of the flat and all you have to pay is the ?600 arrangement fee. Oh and the monthly shortfall between the rent and the mortgage..


And the deal structures are intenionally complex. If someone offers a ?100k flat with a 15% discount on completion, guaranteed 6% p.a. rental yield for the first two years and a free plasma TV then it is quite hard to say how much the flat cost.


The chances are that the land registry will get it wrong and just log it as ?100k.


People may have been motivated by greed but I still can't get any enjoyment out of seeing them go bankrupt.

Neither can I. On the point of the 6% p.a. etc... I looked into one of these deals. Signed up at the roadshow (discount for that day only!) but afterwards read up on what it all meant and double checked the numbers. It didn't make financial sense so took back my deposit.


If you managed to get to the age of 21 without falling down a manhole or trying to swallow fire I assume you will have the commonsense to apply judgement in your day to day affairs. Expecially when you being asked to part with ?thousands. For those who have been 'duped' by their own greed or otherwise we can at least be glad that they will have learnt a lesson.

Sorry to sound like a harbinger of doom again here but we should be thinking about the implications for house prices in general. Current inflated prices have, to an extent, been driven by demand from the one-trick-ponies who think that house-prices only go up and that buy-to-let cookie-cutter businesses are a sure-fire way to riches. Once that business model is exposed as dubious, or at least far from a sure thing, a source of demand for housing could dry up with subsequent negative impact on all house prices. This, if it happens, will inevitably affect the value of the assets of those who have bought property to actually live in. I re-read a newspaper clipping I quoted from a few months ago in which ABN Amro economists predicted that the global housing market is set for a major price correction (inevitably downwards, I'm afraid). I had forgotten the fact that the same economist considered the UK housing market as over-priced by FIFTY PERCENT!!!! If there is a price correction reflecting even a fraction of that percentage there are many people who will end up badly burnt and that will not just be the buy-to-let crowd.


Incidentally, Alan Greenspan, until recently Chairman of the US Federal Reserve and a highly regarded central banker, went on record recently as stating that he thinks the UK housing market is in for trouble. Gordon 'Smoke and Mirrors' Brown was apparently entertaining him at Chequers last night. I am sure that was an interesting conversation.

I hear what you're saying but really real homeowners in the main will be unaffected. If it means making do with your current home instead of trading up then that's not so harsh a price to pay is it? One less room is much better than no room at all. Those who will be really affected by the depreciation are the private landlords to whom you alluded. I don't have much sympathy for the bulk of them. It is a much needed correction which because it has come so late has emant many of my friends and relatives have had to move more than 80 miles away just to get on the ladder.
I don't think so. It has the following in it's favouer - good primary schools, a good strip of shops and the fact that it is cheaper than much of SW London. However, I do think it will take a knock as many of the residents are now newbies i.e. they have homes with a mortgage attached and most tend to go for a variable rate therefore added pressure will be brought to bear on hosuehold expenses. Also, the commercial properties are all beholden to debt also so will be equaly fairweather. As said earlier, the mix of private and public employment will be another factor. Out of interest UBS is laying of 1,500 people as they have made their first loss in a number of years http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/10/01/bcnubs101.xml . A number of folk in ED are attached to the City beit front or back office and this sort of thing will continue. There are multiple pressures. ED will be affected but I can't see all the shops suddenly closing. It will be the usual flight to 'value for money' which is a self-defined term.
My observation would be that so many people have mortgaged themselves absolutely to the hilt in order to get on the property ladder just when the rungs are starting to crumble. In order to see any sort of upside or way out they have relied upon continuing house price inflation which may no longer continue. Increases in interest rates may well stretch beyond breaking point people who have already been encouraged to take on plain silly levels of debt. If people are struggling (or even if they are managing to get by but are in the negative mind-set of negative equity) then they may well tend to cut back on 'luxuries' and avoidable expenses. LL, in my view, sports many businesses that proffer exactly the type of businesses and services that people only really spend money on during the good times. I am not sure if they are likely to last.

> ED will be affected but I can't see all the shops suddenly closing. It will be the usual flight to 'value for money' which is a self-defined term.


> LL, in my view, sports many businesses that proffer exactly the type of businesses and services that people only really spend money on during the good times. I am not sure if they are likely to last.


Lordship Lane today looked very busy for a Tuesday morning. I can't see any signs of a recession except the marked drop in the number of "SOLD", "SALE AGREED", and "UNDER OFFER" stickers in estate agents' windows.

Indeed Asset - see also Northern Rock queues


It's not that Domitianus is factualy wrong - but to keep labouring the point might just tip teh balance. I'm not saying we all go around with fingers in our ears going "la la la" either but, you know...

Not really. I think people have been predicting a recession for the past 7-8 years now but so far it's not managed it. It can happen sometimes: stock markets are ultimately about the herd instinct and human psychology. But profits are profits and losess losses. If folk are being made redundant and they are not finding equivalent work then that will have an economic effect.


Now that's it from me on the subject...

I am chuffed to think I could have such influence, I must say. :)


Whilst I agree that there is the possibility that constantly discussing something can lead to it happening, there is also the danger of not facing adverse possibilities. I think that over the last number of years there has been an almost euphoric belief that property is inevitably going to make the owner money and that is equally dangerous. I think maybe some balance is needed.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...