Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1 year later...

We traded up and completely fluked the timing of it (feb last year)

i had a flat and my partner didn't own a property

we used the equity in my flat to buy a 3 bed and effectively 'geared up' (sorry) using the second mortgage belonging to my partner

so in the resulting rise we should have benefitted more than if we had stayed put


i'm firmly in the 'double-dip camp' though but we chose to gear up for baby reasons


death,dole,divorce


edit to say - is it me or does that cat look very alive? ;)

I'm mystified. I bought my flat in East D 4 years ago and have just had it valued by 3 different estate agents, all of whom valued it above what I bought it for, which surprised me as I assumed it would have gone down or at the very best retained the value I paid. The highest valuation was 90 grand above what I paid 4 years ago - are they simply making it up to encourage me to put it on the market?
  • 1 year later...

???? Wrote:

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

> or, to put it simply, Buy to let is @#$%&, as is

> "this is my pension" (aimed at your house). Marky

> I reckon your right a 50%ish fall and a long slow

> recovery


50% you say. It looks to me like ED property is currently trading around 2007 levels. Dulwich Village is ahead of 2007 levels it seems.


Buy to Let is back in fashion.


Discuss.....


(Love this thread, had to bring it back)

Yes the top of the market has rebounded strongly - much more so in central London, where prices are more than 10% over 2007's peak (provided you ignore the fall in sterling).


I think it's all propped up by the record low bank rate. This supports house prices in various ways:

* holds back tide of repossessions

* improves affordability for buyers (particularly the equity rich, i.e. wealthy buyers at top of market)

* makes savings accounts useless & drives yield-hungry investors elsewhere

* makes inflation more likely and increases demand for assets like property & commodities (QE also had this effect)



All this could go into reverse if rates start to rise, but I think the BoE will hold them low for years as it's now targetting house prices in order to prop up our quango-banks, which would implode if house prices crashed again. It certainly isn't a free market.


Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> 50% you say. It looks to me like ED property is

> currently trading around 2007 levels. Dulwich

> Village is ahead of 2007 levels it seems.

>

> Buy to Let is back in fashion.

>

> Discuss.....

>

> (Love this thread, had to bring it back)

Another factor might be the wealthy Chinese buyers flooding into central London and buying almost everything in sight. Chinese investors made stacks in Beijing during the last Olympics and may be hoping for another Olympic bubble in London. That would obviously be a temporary boost for prices..



Mick Mac Wrote:

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

> 50% you say. It looks to me like ED property is

> currently trading around 2007 levels. Dulwich

> Village is ahead of 2007 levels it seems.

>

> Buy to Let is back in fashion.

>

> Discuss.....

  • 2 weeks later...

Agreed that BoE is targetting house prices or, more accurately, the continued (?) solvency of UK banks/PLc.

It certainly isn't bothered about inflation and probably prefers quite a high rate to erode Govt debt.

Borrow borrow borrow if you can...

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

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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