Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Let's please stop posting low quality tabloid

> articles in the pretence that they have any

> value...


FT? It might be boring as heck to read, but it isn't a tabloid.

Plenty still offering 4x+ multiples.


Rates will be exponentially higher for higher LTV's, since the lender has to cover the increased risk of the property value decreasing in the current market and the increased risk of default due to job losses, lower future income etc. A 75% LTV will hedge the lender against a 25% fall in the property price at purchase if the borrower defaults and repossession is required (less time to sell, fees, legal costs etc). In the current market, a 25% fall is still feasible, so any LTV loan above this must be able to protect against this -- the only other way is to increase the rate (or to lower the loan expiry, but this is less likely). This has always been the case, but in the current market, I'd expect a similar 75% and 90% LTV mortgage to have a fairly wide rate spread. So if the 75% LTV is offering a rate of 5.5%, I'd expect the 90% to have a rate of at least 7%.

Hey Acedout,Jeremy,Ben


Northern Rock are offering expensive mortgages as they want their customers to go to other lenders so that NR can get money from that lender and pay back the govt. So far they have repaid 15billion out of a 26billions which is encouraging,in a way.


How long though until they get de-nationalised?


Any thoughts?

karter Wrote:

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


> How long though until they get de-nationalised?

>

> Any thoughts?


no idea, I'm afraid. NR have been extremely aggressive in pursuing repossessions since nationalization. Like rotweilers in fact, but then they've been under great pressure from the government to recapitalize and restore their balance sheets. The worry is that the newly nationalized banks could become equally merciless, but the government seems to be trying to pressure them into lending at 2007 levels again. very odd.


re 4x salary multiples still being available - that's not really significant. The average first-time buyer is only borrowing 3.2x salary (and that ratio is falling), so house prices are still falling.


In any case, mortgage availability is now old news. Recession and fear of unemployment are likely to soon become more significant drivers of house prices than mortgage rates.

A very prominent mortgage broker was telling me at the weekend that he has numerous NR clients saying they are not being offered a replacement mortgage at all....at the same time NR are contacting him telling him they are accepting NEW clients, no income details required at all, just as long as the client has a 30% deposit.

Job losses and lower incomes I agree will be the biggest factor in the near-medium term. Already today the job figures have been released, showing a large increase in unemployment.


I have a lot of friends that are in jobs that a year ago were seen as good, well paid positions. Right now, they are all fearing the worst.


It's very important that the Government's plan works. I am personally feeling rather positive out it, but it will have side-effects also, such as the weakening of the GBP against non-EU/USD currencies. This in turn will increase import costs quite considerably. As interest rates continue to get cut (which I believe is both required and expected), this will magnify the issue (although will improve native loan-paying affordability, such as mortgages). I predict the BoE rate will be 4% by year end.


If you've been following the second hand car market, you'll have noticed that prices have fallen significantly! Some of the top marques are now selling at crazy low prices. You can pick up a second hand Bentley Continental GT now for close to ?40k! There are a lot of people offloading their high-worth assets now. Fear is out there and even fear alone will drive down prices, regardless of the true state of the economy. Unfortunately this time around, fear is there for good reason and is only one of the factors.


Personally, being a first time property owner on a lifetime tracker mortgage, I'm not particularly concerned about house prices going lower. Assuming I can keep my job and maintain a similar income (a big assumption at the moment), my next property will be a trade-up. If prices come down uniformly over stock, then I'll be in a better position and it will actually cost me less in absolute terms.


The best thing people can do in a similar position is to hold on.


Oh and all the Government talk of there not being enough housing stock is absolute twaddle! The truth is that there are plenty of properties out there, but not necessarily enough for everyone to become an owner. Rental property is in abundance. It's wrong to think that everyone has a right to own their own property. It's these views that caused the problem over in the US in the first place! These people would never have been able to own their own property had the mortgage repayment not been made artificially cheap in the first few years.


In my view, a home doesn't necessarily mean ownership. Harsh perhaps, but that's my view.





(Disclaimer - these are all personal views and I may be completely wrong about all of them!)

i have a 5 year fixed rate mortgage with NR which expires in 2 years time (dec 2010) but I notice theat the early payback excesses carry over to 2011 so if 1 change mortgage provider - I will have to pay back over ?3000. Anyone else had this experience? the whole mortgage is for 25 years.

No question prices are going down further. Two bed garden flat on my road is on the market for ?310k (down from about ?335k), and is smaller than the one I am currently renting for ?1250pm.


At that price, the rental yield would be 4.8%. I am either not paying enough rent (highly doubtful!!) or the flat is still overvalued as I think you are looking at about 6% interest on a first time buyer mortgage (if you can get one). Not to mention 10% deposit, i.e. ?30k in hard cash at that price.


I reckon we should be looking at prices of flats falling to about a 6.5% rental yield at least. This would imply a 2 bed garden flat to be about ?230k - on 3.5x multiplier of joint income, this implies joint income of ?65k.


Too bearish? Who knows...

It's certainly uncharted territory for borrow-to-let landlords.


(1) Negative real yields

(2) Subsidising tenants' rents

(3) Carrying forward debt on a depreciating asset


I have wondered how many of the East Dulwich borrow-to-let properties are "owned" by people who do not live in East Dulwich.

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Couldn't agree more Macroban.

>

> I hope Alan Dale's reading this after our spat a

> year ago?


ah happy days... oh, Alan's messages have been edited!


http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,9773,9863#msg-9863

Some guide prices to auctions here.


http://www.auction.co.uk/residential/onlineCatalogue.asp?S=C&O=A&P=6


Real shocker is 479 Lordship Lane the modern wood decked apartments up near the BeefEater - ?90k !


Click on the online catalogue to view.

There are quite a few ED properties in there, some nicer than others, you shouldn't take too much notice of any guide prices they are always much lower than the reserves and there to whet the appetite. Although it could be different this time. I hope to go on Thursday and will report back on any ED lots if I get there.

ibilly99 Wrote:

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

> Some guide prices to auctions here.

>

> http://www.auction.co.uk/residential/onlineCatalog

> ue.asp?S=C&O=A&P=6

>

> Real shocker is 479 Lordship Lane the modern wood

> decked apartments up near the BeefEater - ?90k !

>

> Click on the online catalogue to view.


most recent comparable sales in that development were flat 2 (?235,000 in dec 2007) and flat 5 (?250,000 in dec 2007). The auction listing says 'by order of mortgagees', which means it's a repossession.


the moral of the story is never buy new build.

EDOldie Wrote:

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

> There are quite a few ED properties in there, some

> nicer than others, you shouldn't take too much

> notice of any guide prices they are always much

> lower than the reserves and there to whet the

> appetite. Although it could be different this

> time. I hope to go on Thursday and will report

> back on any ED lots if I get there.


.. though one of the houses on Colwell Road sold for well below the guide price at the last auction:

http://www.auction.co.uk/residential/LotDetails.asp?A=544&RQ=SR&MP=85&ID=544000120&S=L&O=A


some of these lots are clearly underpriced, e.g. lot 222, the 3-bed house on landcroft road with guide price of ?230,000. There have been queues of people waiting to view this house at weekends, all no doubt hoping to get a bargain. Chances are it will get bidded up a lot.


Am going to the auction myself, as I suspect will many other members of this forum. Though the bargains are likely to be a lot more tempting next year.

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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