Jump to content

Go on... sell me 2 bed+ flat in East Dulwich for dirt cheap???


Recommended Posts

MattOliver Wrote:

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

> 26 year old resident... just dawned on myself and

> my girlfriend that after the recent boom in prices

> we will be renting forever.


I get your drift but whilst its harder than ever to get on the ladder at 26 years old, back in 2001 I couldn't either. Even with a second similar income. And at that time ED was much more affordable and not the area it is now.


You can get bitter about it or if it really matters to you to be able to buy here, work out a way of earning more money than you are at present. At 26 your income will rise for sure....or start a business....there are ways and means if you really want it and are motivated to get there.


Or move to an area thats like how ED was to me when I bought here ten years ago? Penge is your friend and offers similar value.


Edit: 2001 I couldnt...2002 prices ran away from me....2004 I could finally.....but only after moving jobs

We bought in East Dulwich in our late 20s, and like others it was because it was more affordable than other areas at the time. Brockley, Penge, Catford, even parts of Forest Hill are cheaper and bound to be a good investment in the long run.
Of course everything's got harder, but it's a similar principle, surely? I appreciate a one bedroom flat in Catford isn't what most people dream of, but the same time, probably attainable for most young professionals living as a couple.

How do people who get enough for a flat In catford move on to buy a house


The complacency of SOME of the already purchased is what's astonishing. The principle isn't what it was ten years ago


Just sit down and do the sums. Give yourself a decent ish family income. Buy the flat in undesirable part of London and then what? You think your income will rise enough to buy a house, as it has done in the past? Dreeeeeeaming


Mrben suggests there are ways. And of course there are a few ways. But not open to general, salaried families. Not every can or should become entrepreneurs

"It's also extraordinary how often people on here that got on the housing ladder an aeon ago sow seeds of wisdom, wisdom won by (essentially) their good fortune to be born earlier. "Hey, I couldn't afford Wandsworth in 1998, so I bought in East Dulwich, what's the problem with living in a shoe, the old lady did"."


You're missing the point. Property in London has got proportionately more expensive because of rising demand and static supply, and inner London even more so because demand for the 'urban' life has outstripped that for the 'suburban'. What is stopping people (on even pretty good incomes) from buying in places like ED is people with even more money stumping up for houses, not people who bought years ago when it was cheaper. It may be an unpleasant fact to face when you're 26 and looking for urban cool but affordable places now are not ED, nor even Catford, but Ilford, or Bexleyheath, for example. It might not seem fair, but until we start building (maybe in some ED back gardens?) that's the way it is.

miga - apology not necessary... I guess I agree with bits of what both you and DaveR say. Most of us have to compromise when buying somewhere, it was the case 10-15 years ago and it's still the case now. But the compromises you might have to make these days might be a little less palatable, and the level of earnings you need to buy anything at all is dangerously high.


SJ - I'd suggest the move from the one bed flat in Catford to a family home would probbaly have to be something along the lines a move out to Essex or North Kent... and I'm not saying that's all fine and dandy... but people on a reasonable household income should still be able find a way..

RE Income increasing.


Between 25 - 30, my income did go up by about ?11k. It's barely moved in the last 5 or 6 years, and that ain't gonna change anytime soon.


At the same time we've had kids, so my wife's income has halved.


We've got a fingernail hold on the bottom of the ladder only because my father in law helped up with a deposit and because of the help to by scheme (which came with SHIT mortgage deal).


Without our parents dying and leaving stuff to us, we will never afford anything else in London.


And we live in Penge, which is comparable to Catford price wise.

It's not all just 'luck' If you were brave you could get a deal in the not so distant past of 2009ish but most people didn't want to. Ditto 1991-95 for the older ones (or mid/late 70s for the even older). Where we are sitting now most non-owners looking to buy in SE22 need a big salary job or parental help or on a macro-level some decent general inflation or a crash or ...neither of which look especially likely in the short to medium term. But those of us who sat in unsellable flats that at halved in value in a year in 1991 do remember something very different.......

"But it seems that we agree that options for young people in terms of affordability in (very, very loosely) central London are bloody awful, in a way that is very different to even a decade ago."


I definitely agree with that, but one of the reasons for it is just that London appears to keep on getting more desirable and (in aggregate, and comparatively) richer, whilst not really increasing the density of population in the most popular bit i.e. Inner London.. My comment about building in back gardens was only partly tongue in cheek - there is a thread on that topic where someone says 'what we love about this area is the space, and peace and quiet etc." Well, fair enough, but that comes at a cost.

???? Wrote:

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

> It's not all just 'luck' If you were brave you

> could get a deal in the not so distant past of

> 2009ish but most people didn't want to. Ditto

> 1991-95 for the older ones (or mid/late 70s for

> the even older). Where we are sitting now most

> non-owners looking to buy in SE22 need a big

> salary job or parental help or on a macro-level

> some decent general inflation or a crash or

> ...neither of which look especially likely in the

> short to medium term.


This. I said as much on one of the property threads and got shot down by frustrated sheep buyers in 2014 lamenting the crazy prices. I argued that many of those who were lucky enough to have the means to buy in 2009-2011 didn't through fear.


I wont be popular for saying this but surely we're all ultimately responsible for the choices we make in life, whether it's career (and salary), timing of a house purchase whatever. That's not to say that the current situation isn't messed up, inequitable and out of kilter for people on average salaries - it clearly is.


But luck you cant do much about, personal choices you can. And the implications of the choices we make often last a lifetime....

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...