[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by andykn

But renting for a lifetime would have cost them more money, less money for goodies and holidays once the mortgage would have been paid off.

I basically agree but the problem is that the cost of renting is similar to the cost of having a mortgage. So while meeting the cost of renting it is impossible to put away that same amount of money for a deposit. It does not mean they cannot afford the mortgage it just means they cannot afford to raise the deposit. We survive quite happily on a very small income but our house is owned outright. If I had to rent on the same income it would be a severe struggle and we are experts at living cheaply.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

I basically agree but the problem is that the cost of renting is similar to the cost of having a mortgage. So while meeting the cost of renting it is impossible to put away that same amount of money for a deposit. It does not mean they cannot afford the mortgage it just means they cannot afford to raise the deposit. We survive quite happily on a very small income but our house is owned outright. If I had to rent on the same income it would be a severe struggle and we are experts at living cheaply.

When I was saving for the deposit on a 2 bed flat I didn't rent a 2 bed flat, I just had a room in a house.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by andykn

When I was saving for the deposit on a 2 bed flat I didn't rent a 2 bed flat, I just had a room in a house.

Oh I agree but then if you have a job that pays sufficient to consider a house purchase then the location of your residence will have a significant effect on your living expenses.
Just before we bought our house we shared a bungalow and had one bedroom at £40 a month that was about two thirds of what my subsequent mortgage was. I could have rented a house 10 miles away at half that cost but would have paid the savings out in travel costs. My options in the seventies both in terms of working and where I lived were much greater than the choices now when considering a tight budget. It was not particularly easy then so I can imagine it is even more difficult now.

[missille]

Originally Posted by andykn

When I was saving for the deposit on a 2 bed flat I didn't rent a 2 bed flat, I just had a room in a house.

Lol i have a family,2 kids and a mrs ,are we to rent a room in a house then and eat tins of mackerel so we can join the housing market...

I'm sorry but your talking a load of twaddle,lets get the interest rates upto to normal levels then we'll see who can afford to live in their properties with their inflated valuations...

Are we presuming an £100,000 terraced house is going to be worth £300,000 plus in tens yrs time,i dont think so do you..

[andykn]

Originally Posted by missille

Lol i have a family,2 kids and a mrs ,are we to rent a room in a house then and eat tins of mackerel so we can join the housing market...

You buy the house before you have kids.

People whine about the baby boomers having all the houses and forget how the baby boomers did it.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Blairdennon

Oh I agree but then if you have a job that pays sufficient to consider a house purchase then the location of your residence will have a significant effect on your living expenses.

Yes, but it will always be cheaper to rent a room in commuting distance than buy a house in the same area.

[What name??]

Originally Posted by Ed R.Marley

If you can afford to buy a property, you can afford to have Sky. Come on

It is about choses. Many of my friends were on similar wages in their 30s (when most people make the decision to buy or not). Some chose to do without Sky, holidays, flat screens, the latest mobile & save for a deposit & even after getting a mortgage to do without in order to pay it (as a lot of people overstetched themselves). Their houses for example were probably less impressive than those renting, most moved to smaller or more out of the way places in order to buy.

10 years down the line now they can afford those things easily whilst those who didn't buy are struggling with the rising cost of rentals.

The chose is between long term or short term gratification for most people ie whether someone choses to call cable, the latest phone, nicer car, clothes a priority or securing a home.

Having said that we need to build more social housing in the areas of demand, such as London and SE. Rent contols and laws encouraging longer term rental contracts would also be useful. If this is done housing and rent will become more affordable and more secure for those who rent - but there will still be some who chose not to buy even though they could because of short term goals and who complain when they later realise they have missed out. This happens in every generation.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by What name??

It is about choses. Many of my friends were on similar wages in their 30s (when most people make the decision to buy or not). Some chose to do without Sky, holidays, flat screens, the latest mobile & save for a deposit & even after getting a mortgage to do without in order to pay it (as a lot of people overstetched themselves). Their houses for example were probably less impressive than those renting, most moved to smaller or more out of the way places in order to buy.

10 years down the line now they can afford those things easily whilst those who didn't buy are struggling with the rising cost of rentals.

The chose is between long term or short term gratification for most people ie whether someone choses to call cable, the latest phone, nicer car, clothes a priority or securing a home.
Having said that we need to build more social housing in the areas of demand, such as London and SE. Rent contols and laws encouraging longer term rental contracts would also be useful. If this is done housing and rent will become more affordable and more secure for those who rent - but there will still be some who chose not to buy even though they could because of short term goals and who complain when they later realise they have missed out. This happens in every generation.

Heh, that is so totally true...

It staggers me watching friends of mine, who are on pretty decent money in their mid- to late twenties - say in the 18-22k pa range blow it all on that sort of stuff.

They *have* to have the city centre apartment near all the pubs and clubs kitted out with all the latest gadgets, and (probably) the boy-racer car bought on credit.

So, on a 1500 pcm wage after tax, 1k is out the window straight away on rent and loans. And what's left after food goes on partying...

I tell 'em they're just being reckless with their cash, that it would be much wiser to scale that all down and start saving for a deposit on a house.

You could easily find a house share further out of town, for <300-350 pcm all-in, use public transport, and save 500 a month at the very least. Two years down the line, you've got a nice 12k deposit for your own apartment. And, certainly in this city, you can get a lovely place for the 100k mark.

But, no they just can't live without their trendy-wendy, city-living lifestyle. Before they know it, they're in their mid-thirties with absolutely nothing to show for it.

I think this country has forgotten how to do 'prudence' - we just expect everything to be handed to us on a plate.

Regards,

Cypher

[Dave Hawk]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Heh, that is so totally true...

It staggers me watching friends of mine, who are on pretty decent money in their mid- to late twenties - say in the 18-22k pa range blow it all on that sort of stuff.

They *have* to have the city centre apartment near all the pubs and clubs kitted out with all the latest gadgets, and (probably) the boy-racer car bought on credit.

So, on a 1500 pcm wage after tax , 1k is out the window straight away on rent and loans. And what's left after food goes on partying...

I tell 'em they're just being reckless with their cash, that it would be much wiser to scale that all down and start saving for a deposit on a house.

You could easily find a house share further out of town, for <300-350 pcm all-in, use public transport, and save 500 a month at the very least. Two years down the line, you've got a nice 12k deposit for your own apartment. And, certainly in this city, you can get a lovely place for the 100k mark.

But, no they just can't live without their trendy-wendy, city-living lifestyle. Before they know it, they're in their mid-thirties with absolutely nothing to show for it.

I think this country has forgotten how to do 'prudence' - we just expect everything to be handed to us on a plate.

Regards,

Cypher

If only ... I'd be having a couple of 5* all-inclusive vacations per year . I'd be saving hard too with a view to quitting the UK once I'm 68. I was always good with money when I was working ; in fact, if my health improved to the point I was able to get back into employment, I could still see me living on what I do now

I don't miss pubs and clubs. Been there. Done that. Got the T-shirt. I can't see my day-to-day lifestyle changing whether thriving, which I'm not, struggling, which I am, or suffering

[GreatGodPan]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Heh, that is so totally true...

It staggers me watching friends of mine, who are on pretty decent money in their mid- to late twenties - say in the 18-22k pa range blow it all on that sort of stuff.

They *have* to have the city centre apartment near all the pubs and clubs kitted out with all the latest gadgets, and (probably) the boy-racer car bought on credit.

So, on a 1500 pcm wage after tax, 1k is out the window straight away on rent and loans. And what's left after food goes on partying...

I tell 'em they're just being reckless with their cash, that it would be much wiser to scale that all down and start saving for a deposit on a house.

You could easily find a house share further out of town, for <300-350 pcm all-in, use public transport, and save 500 a month at the very least. Two years down the line, you've got a nice 12k deposit for your own apartment. And, certainly in this city, you can get a lovely place for the 100k mark.

But, no they just can't live without their trendy-wendy, city-living lifestyle. Before they know it, they're in their mid-thirties with absolutely nothing to show for it.
I think this country has forgotten how to do 'prudence' - we just expect everything to be handed to us on a plate.

Regards,

Cypher

I suppose, on the plus side, they can hardly be accused of worshipping money for the sake of it- especially if they're earning about £20k p.a.

[Dave Hawk]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

I suppose, on the plus side, they can hardly be accused of worshipping money for the sake of it- especially if they're earning about £20k p.a.

My mother has been asked by my aunt ("What's it got to do with her?") who I'm leaving the house to. Its not mine yet (and God willing it won't be for many years to come) but I've no intention of leaving it to anybody .

[missille]

Originally Posted by What name??

It is about choses. Many of my friends were on similar wages in their 30s (when most people make the decision to buy or not). Some chose to do without Sky, holidays, flat screens, the latest mobile & save for a deposit & even after getting a mortgage to do without in order to pay it (as a lot of people overstetched themselves). Their houses for example were probably less impressive than those renting, most moved to smaller or more out of the way places in order to buy.

10 years down the line now they can afford those things easily whilst those who didn't buy are struggling with the rising cost of rentals.

The chose is between long term or short term gratification for most people ie whether someone choses to call cable, the latest phone, nicer car, clothes a priority or securing a home.

Having said that we need to build more social housing in the areas of demand, such as London and SE. Rent contols and laws encouraging longer term rental contracts would also be useful. If this is done housing and rent will become more affordable and more secure for those who rent - but there will still be some who chose not to buy even though they could because of short term goals and who complain when they later realise they have missed out. This happens in every generation.

Of course they can afford the payments whilst mortgage interest rates are so low....

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by andykn

Hmmm, so 40k is a 10% deposit for a 1 bed flat where you live? OK, so that's 400k for a one bed flat, mortgage repayments on the 360k mortgage at 6% (the minimum you must be able to afford) will be over 2,300 quid. At that rate 40k would take you 17 months to save up.

Good luck being a first time buyer and getting a large mortgage with a 10% deposit these days. Unless you have a perfect credit score - which few young people do - you will struggle to find many banks offering you that. A 20% deposit is more realistic. Things were different 5 years ago - but the availability isn't there anymore.

Where I live first time buyer one bed flats which are inhabitable cost around £200,000 - and that's in east London (not zone 1). So a 20% deposit is £40k.

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by TimCypher

Heh, that is so totally true...

It staggers me watching friends of mine, who are on pretty decent money in their mid- to late twenties - say in the 18-22k pa range blow it all on that sort of stuff.

They *have* to have the city centre apartment near all the pubs and clubs kitted out with all the latest gadgets, and (probably) the boy-racer car bought on credit.

So, on a 1500 pcm wage after tax, 1k is out the window straight away on rent and loans. And what's left after food goes on partying...

I tell 'em they're just being reckless with their cash, that it would be much wiser to scale that all down and start saving for a deposit on a house.

You could easily find a house share further out of town, for <300-350 pcm all-in, use public transport, and save 500 a month at the very least. Two years down the line, you've got a nice 12k deposit for your own apartment. And, certainly in this city, you can get a lovely place for the 100k mark.

But, no they just can't live without their trendy-wendy, city-living lifestyle. Before they know it, they're in their mid-thirties with absolutely nothing to show for it.

I think this country has forgotten how to do 'prudence' - we just expect everything to be handed to us on a plate.

Regards,

Cypher

Maybe they would rather have a life than become a mortgage slave to a bank? Most Germans don't own - and they have the strongest economy in Europe. Home ownership is a sad little obsession we have - and it hasn't served us well.

As they say - you only live once!

[ray.ray.returns]

Originally Posted by MARTYM8

Maybe they would rather have a life than become a mortgage slave to a bank? Most Germans don't own - and they have the strongest economy in Europe. Home ownership is a sad little obsession we have - and it hasn't served us well.

As they say - you only live once!

People are living longer

care is now provided at home as well as in hospitals and homes by home carers and district nurses

people are A LOT more materialistic

Your considered a failure if you haven't moved out by 30.

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by MARTYM8

Maybe they would rather have a life than become a mortgage slave to a bank? Most Germans don't own - and they have the strongest economy in Europe. Home ownership is a sad little obsession we have - and it hasn't served us well.

As they say - you only live once!

Hmmm, well, yes, I concur that there are certainly cultural difference between ourselves and Germany, but there are also sound economic grounds that pushes one towards home ownership.

I have a 3 bedroom apartment which I bought 7 years ago - I reckon, where I to rent out the whole unit, I could get 800 a month for it, maybe even 900 since I did it up a bit.

My mortgage is 600 a month.

So, from a month-to-month budgetary point of view, it works out better for me to own where I live. And, of course, it's all mine once the mortgage term elapses.

Regards,

Cypher

[TimCypher]

Originally Posted by GreatGodPan

I suppose, on the plus side, they can hardly be accused of worshipping money for the sake of it- especially if they're earning about £20k p.a.

IMHO, they try to live the 50k lifestyle on 20k.

Regards,

Cypher

[Raring_to_go]

Originally Posted by MARTYM8

Maybe they would rather have a life than become a mortgage slave to a bank? Most Germans don't own - and they have the strongest economy in Europe. Home ownership is a sad little obsession we have - and it hasn't served us well.

As they say - you only live once!

I would respectively suggest that Germany has got it wrong on home ownership.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/pe...home-ownership

[thms]

the scottish government recently got extra powers under the scotland act 2012.. from 2015 stamp duty will be no more

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-18358658

The finance minister will consult on his stamp duty proposal - which he wants to rename land and buildings transaction tax - and then report back to parliament.

[andykn]

Originally Posted by MARTYM8

Good luck being a first time buyer and getting a large mortgage with a 10% deposit these days.

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/mortgage...rs.htm?offer=3

Unless you have a perfect credit score - which few young people do

You have GOT to be kidding me. If you want to buy a house you have to SAVE money, not spend it and DEFINITELY not borrow any.

- you will struggle to find many banks offering you that. A 20% deposit is more realistic. Things were different 5 years ago - but the availability isn't there anymore.

Where I live first time buyer one bed flats which are inhabitable cost around £200,000 - and that's in east London (not zone 1). So a 20% deposit is £40k.

"inhabitable"? Fussy.

Try Ilford, loads of 1 beds for 125k:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...flats&index=70

[andykn]

Originally Posted by Raring_to_go

I would respectively suggest that Germany has got it wrong on home ownership.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/pe...home-ownership

The strength of their economy says otherwise.

One of the things that worries me about our property market is that too many people are making money they haven't earned. And businesses spend a lot more money in the UK for property than, say, their German counterparts.

[Raring_to_go]

Originally Posted by andykn

The strength of their economy says otherwise.

One of the things that worries me about our property market is that too many people are making money they haven't earned. And businesses spend a lot more money in the UK for property than, say, their German counterparts.

In the context of that there is a school of thought that homeownership increases unemployment.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...mployment.html

I would regard that as an attempt to keep the peasants down.

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by andykn

http://www.nationwide.co.uk/mortgage...rs.htm?offer=3

You have GOT to be kidding me. If you want to buy a house you have to SAVE money, not spend it and DEFINITELY not borrow any.

"inhabitable"? Fussy.

Try Ilford, loads of 1 beds for 125k:

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-...flats&index=70

Did I say there were no 90% mortgages available - no. But given the current credit crunch they will only go to those with good credit scores.

"Please note that opening a Save to Buy savings account does not guarantee acceptance for a Save to Buy mortgage.

Our mortgages are subject to underwriting and criteria."


PS Ilford is in Essex - not east London - as the addresses tell you! A common mistake - but who am I to argue with the Royal Mail

[MARTYM8]

Originally Posted by thms

the scottish government recently got extra powers under the scotland act 2012.. from 2015 stamp duty will be no more

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-18358658

The finance minister will consult on his stamp duty proposal - which he wants to rename land and buildings transaction tax - and then report back to parliament.

Isn't a land and buildings transaction tax - just stamp duty (but it says on the tin what it is?!). Sounds like they are going to make Edinburgh buyers pay - to subsidise everyone else by ending stamp duty on most homes.

[Blairdennon]

Originally Posted by andykn

Yes, but it will always be cheaper to rent a room in commuting distance than buy a house in the same area.

I agree. The whole point was however that it is not a straightforward comparison that if you cannot save for a deposit then you cannot afford a mortgage. Living expenses, as opposed to enjoying yourself expenses, still have to be met when you are trying to save. So the money you should be saving is the difference between renting and a mortgage which in many instances may take years to accumulate a reasonable deposit. Of course sometimes house prices were going up faster than people could save and some saw there target property becoming ever more unaffordable even while saving hard. I sympathise with some of them that is all.