Which does nothing to refute the assertion that some countries are intrinsically more stable than others.
Hang onto your £200k house in the UK for another 10 years and it'll be worth £200k again, or maybe £250k or more.
Take a similar house in, say, Ukraine, and there's a good chance that, in that period, it might've been demolished by an RPG, riddled with bullets, burned to the ground, taken over by a local militia, demolished by a tank or, at the very least, it'll have been compulsorily purchased by some oligarch intent on building a mall or will be surrounded by tower-blocks or there'll be a power station or sewage plant next to it.
The whole "Eastern Europe is just as good as the UK for property investment" thing is just plain silly.
Totally agree. Yes of course we have seen property dips in this Country but as witnessed now, prices spurt and quickly catch up moving prices forward. This is not uniformed in pace across the Country, as factors such as local employment prospects and population pressures will vary.
Live and hang on long enough (try to stay alive,) I guess in any Country may show some rise but you are taking a gamble. In the meantime your quality and assurity of life will be?
Ah.....maybe the Daily Wail ran a header which is pretty much the same as whats whipped all this nonsense about the Chinese invasion too. The Wails hystrionics of the predicted 'invasion' of East Europeans turned out to be something of a damp squib so now they've had to look for something else to feed the lemmings.
Yes people have been buying property in this Country from abroad for years. The Chinese now with there new found wealth, need to find a safe bolt hold and that is why they are mentioned as an example, not of course that they are the only ones.
When builders deliberately build for investors abroad, deliberately market it first abroad to specific target Audiences, then we may have moved into a new Chapter. This twist is part driven by the Internet giving access and flow of money through Banking systems to corruption and political instability in the Investors home Country's.
BiB The lemmings get no say how ever you look at it. Perhaps that is why so many people have given up as they may as well be abused as "lemmings" for all the difference it makes?
I'm very lucky that I own my own home. My family wanted us on the property ladder and I am very grateful that they gave us a deposit to buy a house. It's crazy to think that our mortgage is £450 per month and the house next door was up for let recently at £650 per month and it's smaller. Renting is very expensive, but unless you have a huge deposit you can't buy a house.
I'm very lucky that I own my own home. My family wanted us on the property ladder and I am very grateful that they gave us a deposit to buy a house. It's crazy to think that our mortgage is £450 per month and the house next door was up for let recently at £650 per month and it's smaller. Renting is very expensive, but unless you have a huge deposit you can't buy a house.
I agree renting is very expensive. My old house was in a new housing estate with a 50/50 mix of private and HA properties. My mortgage was cheaper than the rent being paid on the HA properties, for exactly the same style of house.
I'm very lucky that I own my own home. My family wanted us on the property ladder and I am very grateful that they gave us a deposit to buy a house. It's crazy to think that our mortgage is £450 per month and the house next door was up for let recently at £650 per month and it's smaller. Renting is very expensive, but unless you have a huge deposit you can't buy a house.
If you wanted to get on the property ladder round here you would have to be very lucky to pay less than £1450 a month.
We are just in the process of moving to a bigger house costing a bonkers £420k for a 4 bed detached, and that's not in a particularly good area.
I think by the time my kids are grow up (1 & 5), it will be next to impossible to get on the ladder without a huge parental contribution and it will be very common for kids to live at home into their mid-thirties.
May be a bit off topic but why are adults in this country frowned on if they still live with their parents ? It's not a sin to be living with your parents as say, aged 30 etc....not in my eyes anyway,and I've had my own place.
Some simply can't afford to move out.
I don't think it is frowned upon it's just not as convenient as you have to follow the parents rules rather than the person.
Several years ago my neighbours house sold for £200k. The same house was on the market a couple of years ago and sold......for just £120k.
What goes up in the property market, can and does, come down.....irrespective of which country it's in.
Yes, but some countries have a higher risk factor than others. That means that as well as the market ups and downs you have to factor in the innate risks of that countries politics, geography, stability of landholding... as risk factors.
That's why although property is pretty cheap in Ukraine and Syria and Pakistan right now there aren't queues of investment buyers. It's also effects countries like Spain and Cyprus but less dramatically - simply because there are more "unseen" financial risks on landowners there. Possibility if charges and taxes being more suddenly imposed.
They tend to hoover up all the properties at the lower end of the market, which pushes prices up. This results in people not even being able to afford to get onto the first rung of the housing ladder.
Yes, but some countries have a higher risk factor than others. That means that as well as the market ups and downs you have to factor in the innate risks of that countries politics, geography, stability of landholding... as risk factors.
That's why although property is pretty cheap in Ukraine and Syria and Pakistan right now there aren't queues of investment buyers. It's also effects countries like Spain and Cyprus but less dramatically - simply because there are more "unseen" financial risks on landowners there. Possibility if charges and taxes being more suddenly imposed.
There's also the point that if the country manages, through the work of it's people, to start having a better economic outcome, it's the property those people need to live in to work that rises so much in price.
It's telling that it's London that is getting the overseas investment rather than the North East for example.
Which underlines the fact that investment here from overseas in property is all about feeding off the endeavors of those working.
The more successful the people are, the more they are hurt.
If rent relief was cut back, yes it would be painful. But if it could be managed, then money currently used to prop up Landlords rent demands (which contributes to inflated property values), could then be used to build affordable social housing by the Government
Landlords again! Does it really matter who actually owns a property? And if you're going to have a go at someone, how about letting agents for a change? Who take 10-20% of the rent before it gets to the Landlord (which means rents have to be 11 to 25% higher than they might otherwise be), to say nothing of the assorted charges they are so adept at thinking up.
Then there is the income tax the landlord has to pay on any profit, so there's a chunk of money going back to the government.
There /is/ a problem with houses being expensive, but that's been the case for as long as I can remember. It's partly to do with general inflation (you don't mind your wages going up each year, so why not houses?), and partly with people being greedy, trying to get a piece of the action. (Would you rather pay £50K for house with 0% growth, or £100K for the same house in an area where it might be worth £120K next year?)
These are ordinary people not just landlords. Look at the council houses being sold off cheap, whose new owners sold at a hefty profit at the first opportunity!
Please stop blaming all the problems of the country on landlords who are providing a valuable service supplying the capital assets need to procure property, keep it maintained, and take all risks for a volatile property market, which would otherwise cost the government hundreds of billions. And 70% of households are owner-occupied; private BTL accounts for a smaller fraction, while a percentage, that you believe to be social housing, might well be part of some investment portfolio that will help earn your pension!
Please stop blaming all the problems of the country on landlords who are providing a valuable service supplying the capital assets need to procure property,
No, they are using the banks money. Many of the landlords who were buying during the boom years had no more cash than the people they were renting to. they could get 125% mortgages, so the risk all lay with the bank
keep it maintained,
Are you serious? How many BTL's have you lived in?
and take all risks for a volatile property market
No they don't, because the market isn't volatile!! The Govt have made sure of that with countless props and schemes to keep the housing market afloat and prices high. It's been a one way sure fire bet for well over a decade.
Whenever there's talk of taking props away, the landlords start getting peevish and threaten to evict the DSS tenants!
There /is/ a problem with houses being expensive, but that's been the case for as long as I can remember
Well you can't be very old then. My friend bought a 2 up 2 down in 1994 for 30k (now triple the price). My other friend bought a 2 bedroom detached in 1998 for 65k (now circa 150k). General inflation has nothing to do with it. Their salaries haven't tripled.
House price inflation has been fuelled by easy credit for nigh on a decade and ridiculously low interest rates.
They tend to hoover up all the properties at the lower end of the market, which pushes prices up. This results in people not even being able to afford to get onto the first rung of the housing ladder.
The answer is to build enough houses, so there is no need for anyone to hoover them up.
Supply and demand, you can either limit the supply to ensure prices increase, or you can dampen demand, not sure how you would do that in the housing market.
The answer is to build enough houses, so there is no need for anyone to hoover them up.
Supply and demand, you can either limit the supply to ensure prices increase, or you can dampen demand, not sure how you would do that in the housing market.
That's only part of the answer. What's to stop more investors piling into the market?
The key is to 'dampen demand' and make investment highly unattractive and divert the parasitic little hands into stocks and shares or something. Housing is for living in, it's not a Casino.
Demand is governed by affordability, If the banks stopped lending altogether tomorrow, prices would collapse
The answer is to build enough houses, so there is no need for anyone to hoover them up.
Supply and demand, you can either limit the supply to ensure prices increase, or you can dampen demand, not sure how you would do that in the housing market.
The problem is not supply, it is the wrong type of demand. Speculative demand from financial investors is what is driving up house prices, fueling the bubble and keeping young couples looking to get on the property ladder from doing so.
That's only part of the answer. What's to stop more investors people piling into the market?
The key is to make investment highly unattractive and divert the parasitic little hands into stocks and shares or something. Housing is for living in, it's not a Casino
If you are talking about the foreign buyers that buy up property and then leave it empty as it makes a profit just by existing, then some controls and penalties are being brought in to make it more unattractive as an investment.
Some sort of long term plan to encourage the shift of wealth and activity from South to North, would have been more useful,I mean a proper plan over a couple of decades, rather than the short term,quick gain ones all parties tend to cling to.
If you are talking about the landlords that rent out property on a smaller scale, then where would the renters go?
The new affordability restrictions on mortgages, will ensure very few qualify for a mortgage, that's even if they can get the deposit together.
That's only part of the answer. What's to stop more investors piling into the market?
The key is to 'dampen demand' and make investment highly unattractive and divert the parasitic little hands into stocks and shares or something. Housing is for living in, it's not a Casino.
Demand is governed by affordability, If the banks stopped lending altogether tomorrow, prices would collapse
That does need to happen and it will happen as the latest credit bubbles burst.
It should have happened after 07/08 but central banks have not allowed it to happen. There is a crash coming and you will be able to buy property in developed areas/nations for less than 100k.
The problem is not supply, it is the wrong type of demand. Speculative demand from financial investors is what is driving up house prices, fueling the bubble and keeping young couples looking to get on the property ladder from doing so.
Surely if enough houses were built, then prices will fall,I understand what you are saying, but young couples are less likely than ever to be able to get on the housing ladder altogether for the foreseeable future.
There will be an increased need for rental property, not less.
No, they are using the banks money. Many of the landlords who were buying during the boom years had no more cash than the people they were renting to. they could get 125% mortgages, so the risk all lay with the bank
125% would be highly unusual. Assuming they already lived in a property, a second or subsequent mortgage would be tougher. And the risks are real. But if it was apparently as easy as you say, why didn't everyone do it; why didn't you?
Anyway many landlords are cash buyers; they are genuinely risking their own money. (BTW where does the bank get the funds from which to lend out as mortgages? It could well be from your savings from which you profit in the form of interest, which in the past has been quite substantial, and virtually risk-free.)
Are you serious? How many BTL's have you lived in?
A couple of long-term bedsits, a flat, and than a house; nearly a decade in all. Never had any sorts of problems that weren't sorted out.
No they don't, because the market isn't volatile!!
Yes it is. I remember buying a house in 1990 that a couple of years later, had lost 45% of it's value. About the time your mate bought that bargain that later tripled in value. If price crashes of nearly 50%, followed by increases of 100%, don't represent a volatile marker, then I don't know what does!
My friend bought a 2 up 2 down in 1994 for 30k (now triple the price).
So £90K now? In other words, perfectly affordable. £30K in 1994 would have been a joke (a Range-rover would have cost more).
House price inflation has been fuelled by easy credit for nigh on a decade and ridiculously low interest rates.
So how old are you then?! In the eighties, some areas had 30% annual price rises, with interest rates at 12%.
And general inflation must be responsible for some of that increase, the same as it's responsible for everything going up (so a new car costs £15K now instead of £1K 40 years ago; obviously due to all those people buying up stocks of cars to hire out!).
Comments
Totally agree. Yes of course we have seen property dips in this Country but as witnessed now, prices spurt and quickly catch up moving prices forward. This is not uniformed in pace across the Country, as factors such as local employment prospects and population pressures will vary.
Live and hang on long enough (try to stay alive,) I guess in any Country may show some rise but you are taking a gamble. In the meantime your quality and assurity of life will be?
Yes people have been buying property in this Country from abroad for years. The Chinese now with there new found wealth, need to find a safe bolt hold and that is why they are mentioned as an example, not of course that they are the only ones.
When builders deliberately build for investors abroad, deliberately market it first abroad to specific target Audiences, then we may have moved into a new Chapter. This twist is part driven by the Internet giving access and flow of money through Banking systems to corruption and political instability in the Investors home Country's.
BiB The lemmings get no say how ever you look at it. Perhaps that is why so many people have given up as they may as well be abused as "lemmings" for all the difference it makes?
I agree renting is very expensive. My old house was in a new housing estate with a 50/50 mix of private and HA properties. My mortgage was cheaper than the rent being paid on the HA properties, for exactly the same style of house.
If you wanted to get on the property ladder round here you would have to be very lucky to pay less than £1450 a month.
We are just in the process of moving to a bigger house costing a bonkers £420k for a 4 bed detached, and that's not in a particularly good area.
I think by the time my kids are grow up (1 & 5), it will be next to impossible to get on the ladder without a huge parental contribution and it will be very common for kids to live at home into their mid-thirties.
I don't think it is frowned upon it's just not as convenient as you have to follow the parents rules rather than the person.
whats wrong with BTLers?
Yes, but some countries have a higher risk factor than others. That means that as well as the market ups and downs you have to factor in the innate risks of that countries politics, geography, stability of landholding... as risk factors.
That's why although property is pretty cheap in Ukraine and Syria and Pakistan right now there aren't queues of investment buyers. It's also effects countries like Spain and Cyprus but less dramatically - simply because there are more "unseen" financial risks on landowners there. Possibility if charges and taxes being more suddenly imposed.
They are one of the major reasons why house prices are so high.
They tend to hoover up all the properties at the lower end of the market, which pushes prices up. This results in people not even being able to afford to get onto the first rung of the housing ladder.
There's also the point that if the country manages, through the work of it's people, to start having a better economic outcome, it's the property those people need to live in to work that rises so much in price.
It's telling that it's London that is getting the overseas investment rather than the North East for example.
Which underlines the fact that investment here from overseas in property is all about feeding off the endeavors of those working.
The more successful the people are, the more they are hurt.
Then there is the income tax the landlord has to pay on any profit, so there's a chunk of money going back to the government.
There /is/ a problem with houses being expensive, but that's been the case for as long as I can remember. It's partly to do with general inflation (you don't mind your wages going up each year, so why not houses?), and partly with people being greedy, trying to get a piece of the action. (Would you rather pay £50K for house with 0% growth, or £100K for the same house in an area where it might be worth £120K next year?)
These are ordinary people not just landlords. Look at the council houses being sold off cheap, whose new owners sold at a hefty profit at the first opportunity!
Please stop blaming all the problems of the country on landlords who are providing a valuable service supplying the capital assets need to procure property, keep it maintained, and take all risks for a volatile property market, which would otherwise cost the government hundreds of billions. And 70% of households are owner-occupied; private BTL accounts for a smaller fraction, while a percentage, that you believe to be social housing, might well be part of some investment portfolio that will help earn your pension!
No, they are using the banks money. Many of the landlords who were buying during the boom years had no more cash than the people they were renting to. they could get 125% mortgages, so the risk all lay with the bank
Are you serious? How many BTL's have you lived in?
No they don't, because the market isn't volatile!! The Govt have made sure of that with countless props and schemes to keep the housing market afloat and prices high. It's been a one way sure fire bet for well over a decade.
Whenever there's talk of taking props away, the landlords start getting peevish and threaten to evict the DSS tenants!
Well you can't be very old then. My friend bought a 2 up 2 down in 1994 for 30k (now triple the price). My other friend bought a 2 bedroom detached in 1998 for 65k (now circa 150k). General inflation has nothing to do with it. Their salaries haven't tripled.
House price inflation has been fuelled by easy credit for nigh on a decade and ridiculously low interest rates.
It's there, in those 3 letters
Buying a house on a mortgage, with the sole purpose of using it as a cash machine.
One less property on the market that anyone can buy.
It's already happened in the past
Supply and demand, you can either limit the supply to ensure prices increase, or you can dampen demand, not sure how you would do that in the housing market.
someone who wanted to buy rather than rent
That's only part of the answer. What's to stop more investors piling into the market?
The key is to 'dampen demand' and make investment highly unattractive and divert the parasitic little hands into stocks and shares or something. Housing is for living in, it's not a Casino.
Demand is governed by affordability, If the banks stopped lending altogether tomorrow, prices would collapse
The problem is not supply, it is the wrong type of demand. Speculative demand from financial investors is what is driving up house prices, fueling the bubble and keeping young couples looking to get on the property ladder from doing so.
Some sort of long term plan to encourage the shift of wealth and activity from South to North, would have been more useful,I mean a proper plan over a couple of decades, rather than the short term,quick gain ones all parties tend to cling to.
If you are talking about the landlords that rent out property on a smaller scale, then where would the renters go?
The new affordability restrictions on mortgages, will ensure very few qualify for a mortgage, that's even if they can get the deposit together.
That does need to happen and it will happen as the latest credit bubbles burst.
It should have happened after 07/08 but central banks have not allowed it to happen. There is a crash coming and you will be able to buy property in developed areas/nations for less than 100k.
There will be an increased need for rental property, not less.
Anyway many landlords are cash buyers; they are genuinely risking their own money. (BTW where does the bank get the funds from which to lend out as mortgages? It could well be from your savings from which you profit in the form of interest, which in the past has been quite substantial, and virtually risk-free.) A couple of long-term bedsits, a flat, and than a house; nearly a decade in all. Never had any sorts of problems that weren't sorted out. Yes it is. I remember buying a house in 1990 that a couple of years later, had lost 45% of it's value. About the time your mate bought that bargain that later tripled in value. If price crashes of nearly 50%, followed by increases of 100%, don't represent a volatile marker, then I don't know what does! So £90K now? In other words, perfectly affordable. £30K in 1994 would have been a joke (a Range-rover would have cost more). So how old are you then?! In the eighties, some areas had 30% annual price rises, with interest rates at 12%.
And general inflation must be responsible for some of that increase, the same as it's responsible for everything going up (so a new car costs £15K now instead of £1K 40 years ago; obviously due to all those people buying up stocks of cars to hire out!).