House prices rose 7.3% this year, average now almost £250k

[Deleted User 298457]

Not letting Russian oligarchs buy everything sounds a lot like communism, my man.

Those flats would sell even if investors didn't buy them. It is a lot easier for first time buyers to nab them as they have many shared ownership schemes available, help2buy mortgages, LISA, etc...

Russian Oligarchs are undoubtedly pushing prices up but certainly not in the affordable housing segment

 

[Scam]

What costs do you think are involved in building something like Nine Elms? What return on your investment would you expect to see given the clear risks in developing these properties? How do you think these building firms get the balance sheet strength to build affordable housing? When would you expect to get paid from your investment? How are you going to cover interest payments on your loaned capital for such a massive development?

I'm not interested in answering those questions, they're not for me to answer. Property developers are doing absolutely fine; https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...ses-x2013-and-you-helped-pay-it-a7079696.html

The housing market is indeed nonsense but have you ever been to London?

I live in London. West London right now but I lived out in the docklands where the second biggest development was springing up and the prices for those were laughable. There's nothing there. No community, no shops, no pubs, just expensive flats that were mostly empty...

Not letting Russian oligarchs buy everything sounds a lot like communism, my man.

lol exactly. Silly me

Those flats would sell even if investors didn't buy them. It is a lot easier for first time buyers to nab them as they have many shared ownership schemes available, help2buy mortgages, LISA, etc...

Russian Oligarchs are undoubtedly pushing prices up but certainly not in the affordable housing segment

Yet if you read the link above, you'll see that HTB and other such nonsense is doing nothing but inflating prices at the taxpayers expense. The issue with oligarchs buying up luxury flats is that developers will do everything they can to wriggle out of providing social or affordable housing. They'd rather the cold hard cash. That's their prerogative, obviously. But it's up to government to enforce regulation that ensures housing developers are providing what's needed for the community and other sectors of society. Housing is a basic human right and the headline of this situation is that our government is letting developers put profit over everything else.

You're also conveniently forgetting that all of this bumps up prices across the board due to creating false demand. You know what would make it easier for FTBs to buy them? Developers not wasting money on infinity pools, car parks, luxury lobbies, overdone penthouses... and not letting them be sold to off-shore investors that have no intention of living there. It's funny you mention Singapore, they have some of the strictest housing regulation going. You have to be a citizen to buy over there, for starters..

 

[HACO]

The housing market is indeed nonsense but have you ever been to London? It is the capital of Europe. It is on par with Singapore, New York, Syndey. A financial and professional services power house. This attracts the absolute best talent from thousands of firms that pay millions to leaders who shape our global economy.

Using Singapore as an example, 80% of the population live in public housing in Singapore.

Over the decades, Singapore centralised the planning permission system and nationalised land that wasn't actively being developed, to build housing for their population. Government used that land alongside non-profit building to build public housing for the people. This not only increased quality of housing in Singapore, but property prices did not increase for about 20 years, and is now only 15% higher than what it was in 1995. Over the same period, UK prices increased by over 150%.

And the entire thing was determined to be cost-neutral to the tax payer over the decades. I'd be thrilled if we did the same thing but if I suggested we do the same, people call me a communist!

It's funny you mention Singapore, they have some of the strictest housing regulation going. You have to be a citizen to buy over there, for starters..

Foreigners can still buy in private housing Singapore (but not public), but they have to pay a 20% stamp duty. Citizen or foreigner, have to pay about an extra 12% stamp duty on second properties. Companies have to pay 25% stamp duty.

Beautiful.

 

[Scam]

Foreigners can still buy in private housing Singapore (but not public), but they have to pay a 20% stamp duty. Citizen or foreigner, have to pay about an extra 12% stamp duty on second properties. Companies have to pay 25% stamp duty.

Thanks for the info. I knew Singapore had done a lot of good things but I didn't know the details.

 

[FoxEye]

Using Singapore as an example, 80% of the population live in public housing in Singapore.

Over the decades, Singapore centralised the planning permission system and nationalised land that wasn't actively being developed, to build housing for their population. Government used that land alongside non-profit building to build public housing for the people. This not only increased quality of housing in Singapore, but property prices did not increase for about 20 years, and is now only 15% higher than what it was in 1995. Over the same period, UK prices increased by over 150%.

And the entire thing was determined to be cost-neutral to the tax payer over the decades. I'd be thrilled if we did the same thing but if I suggested we do the same, people call me a communist!

Foreigners can still buy in private housing Singapore (but not public), but they have to pay a 20% stamp duty. Citizen or foreigner, have to pay about an extra 12% stamp duty on second properties. Companies have to pay 25% stamp duty.

Beautiful.

The trouble is, for any of that to happen you need a govt that genuinely cares about the common man, and isn't ideologically opposed to anything that the private sector CEOs wouldn't like.

So it won't happen here Can't see the Tories losing an election in the near future, sadly. A lot of people will vote against their own best interest if papers like the DM tell them to ("Nationalisation is communism!"). And of course the poor have nobody to blame but themselves; all public services are wasteful and inefficient; would you rather have decent roads and hospitals or extra money in your pocket? Call me cynical but a lot of Brits would rather take the money. I guess the electorate are ultimately to blame for continually being conned. The Tories don't want to help us, they never have. They want us to serve our masters and betters.

 

[inferno]

Doesn't Singapore also divide up the housing by ethnicity? I can understand it but never going to happen here, Singapore is also a small city, difficult to compare.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

lol@ people jumping on my Singapore comment. It is basically a police state. My point was the land is in demand. So much so they own it and decide who gets to use it. You think they are putting non-professional/service industry workers in the CBD?

 

[HACO]

Doesn't Singapore also divide up the housing by ethnicity? I can understand it but never going to happen here, Singapore is also a small city, difficult to compare.

Yeah that's unfortunate but ethnic quotas in building isn't the reason they solved their housing crisis. Land nationalisation and non-profit building was the reason. Learning a thing or two from successful project doesn't mean we need to replicate the worst aspects of them.

lol@ people jumping on my Singapore comment. It is basically a police state. My point was the land is in demand. So much so they own it and decide who gets to use it. You think they are putting non-professional/service industry workers in the CBD?

To be honest, we shouldn't do that either. I know some people believe people have a right to live where they want on tax payer's dime in social housing, that's absurd.

 

[413x]

It would be fantastic if house prices rose at level of inflation.

There must be a solution.
The other option is an eventual crash. And if you've just bought and there's a crash, you're screwed.

I don't expect or plan for my house to rise in price. It was a struggle getting this. And I have no kids, an OK wage etc.

 

[Karl]

For everyone that says building more homes is key to solving the housing crisis, yeah right https://www.theguardian.com/artandd...s-battersea-london-luxury-housing-development

They're going to be building 15,000 homes there, absolutely none of them will be for 'normal' people. Well worth a read.

This article amused me a bit, because yeah it's mental putting a swimming pool in mid-air, but Iqbal's livid about how his £800,000 apartment doesn't let him use the sky pool - He owns a quarter of that, and £200,000 will buy him something significantly nicer elsewhere in London. That's not class segregation, that's a poor choice of investment.

 

[413x]

This article amused me a bit, because yeah it's mental putting a swimming pool in mid-air, but Iqbal's livid about how his £800,000 apartment doesn't let him use the sky pool - He owns a quarter of that, and £200,000 will buy him something significantly nicer elsewhere in London. That's not class segregation, that's a poor choice of investment.

Have to agree.
No one forced that purchase on him.
That is a poor choice of purchase.

With a purchase like that you read every T&C.
This isn't buying a toy off the Internet and finding the warranty is only a year rather than 2.

 

[Scam]

This article amused me a bit, because yeah it's mental putting a swimming pool in mid-air, but Iqbal's livid about how his £800,000 apartment doesn't let him use the sky pool - He owns a quarter of that, and £200,000 will buy him something significantly nicer elsewhere in London. That's not class segregation, that's a poor choice of investment.

Absolutely agree. Shared ownership is a con that just happens to keep house prices artificially inflated. Anyone getting involved in that nonsense (especially at those prices) needs their head checked.

As I said, the whole point of that article is that behind all the government/developers bluster about building 15,000 homes, is the undeniable fact that all they've done is provide safety deposit boxes and money laundering tools for the wealthy. The whole project is a stain on the city, greed at its worse and people dismissing it as "well London's expensive innit" are totally missing the point. It's doesn't have to be this way.

 

[Karl]

Absolutely agree. Shared ownership is a con that just happens to keep house prices artificially inflated. Anyone getting involved in that nonsense (especially at those prices) needs their head checked.

As I said, the whole point of that article is that behind all the government/developers bluster about building 15,000 homes, is the undeniable fact that all they've done is provide safety deposit boxes and money laundering tools for the wealthy. The whole project is a stain on the city, greed at its worse and people dismissing it as "well London's expensive innit" are totally missing the point. It's doesn't have to be this way.

Yep gotcha, understood where you were coming from, I think my amusement was an aside on the people they chose to interview about it.

 

[Spiritwolf]

root of a lot of the current problem is hidden inflation.

All the world governments are busy printing money (or quantitive easing) and devalue all the currency as a way of devaluing debt, and that is set to get even worse due to Covid.

Forget houses, look at the price of gold, petrol hell even bread, and you will see solid assets has been rising way above official inflation over the last 10 years, double or triple in value. Official inflation has been kept low by including item that has strong depreciative values and things that can be mass produced, like Clothing, Cars, TV, Computers.

This is also one of the reason for the rises in stock market for blue chip companies (check Apple, Google share price etc)

It is a bad time to be someone with savings right now, and even worse as someone without a hard asset, as you will see your earnings and savings being eroded.

 

[krooton]

and £200,000 will buy him something significantly nicer elsewhere in London.

Would it?

We sold a 2-bed flat in Tottenham of all places for £400k, London is cray cray. Even my previous 1-bed ground floor flat in Morden (£150k in 2010) sold for £250k in 2015.

However I agree that shared-ownership on a £800k flat is insane.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

I've seen shared ownership work, for what it is worth, and I know I am preaching into a black hole here, but for young professionals who want to setup camp in London and have a clear trajectory to six figures/being a HNWI.

This allows them to get the property they want and then progressively acquire the rented elements. Alternatively they wait and then get priced out the market entirely, or have to join forces/get married.

Should be a much longer-term plan though.

I don't dispute it drives prices up. A lot of the 2 beds where I am magically hit the 450k number when LISAs were announced.

 

[neocon]

Prices in suburbia are rising faster than London. What's your sticking plaster solution when prices start rising so fast that investors start buying up all the properties (actually, they are already doing this) and making them unaffordable? Also, note the season ticket costs as noted. It's totally ridiculous for a couple to pay £10k+ on our trains.

You missed the point.

Exactly.

Do you know what number in this development exactly? As the article states, this was derelict ground ripe for any sort of project suitable to improve housing in the area. But no, they just built a few thousand safety deposit boxes for Russian oligarchs and further fuelled the problem. Like most developments in/around London and our cities.

I did like the quote where the guy said he'd rather buy a flat in Wuhan

If those apartments were "affordable" how would you decide who could buy them, a lottery system?

 

[HACO]

I've seen shared ownership work, for what it is worth, and I know I am preaching into a black hole here, but for young professionals who want to setup camp in London and have a clear trajectory to six figures/being a HNWI.

This allows them to get the property they want and then progressively acquire the rented elements. Alternatively they wait and then get priced out the market entirely, or have to join forces/get married.

Should be a much longer-term plan though.

I don't dispute it drives prices up. A lot of the 2 beds where I am magically hit the 450k number when LISAs were announced.

The problem with shared ownership, at least in London, is that it's just a scam.

• The property itself is overpriced by at least 20%.
• The rented portion of it is 1-2% above the average rental yields of the neighbourhood, even after the overpriced valuation of the place.
• You are responsible for 100% of the maintenance and insurance of the property, despite owning only a part of it. So you have all the costs of being a home owner, but none of the flexibilities or lack of responsibilities of being a renter.
• When you want to staircase, the property is also overvalued. Sometimes, they don't even allow you to staircase.
• Selling it is very hard, so not only you don't have flexibilities of renting, but you're even less flexible than a home owner who can just easily sell.

Like, if you're buying 25% of a shared ownership, you almost always can rent an identical property in the same area for less than the rented portion of that shared ownership.

It's a scam, on top of a scam, on top of a scam, on top of a scam. All so that some people can call themselves a homeowner in this country, when in fact, they're just paying overpriced rent and are responsible for all costs, while having none of the flexibilities.

 

[FoxEye]

If those apartments were "affordable" how would you decide who could buy them, a lottery system?

I think the more important consideration is who is eligible to buy them.

Remove foreign owners.
Remove shell/holding companies. I'd remove corporate ownership of residential property entirely.
Remove 2nd/3rd/20th home owners.
Remove BTL/ other "investors".

Require that the people who buy them actually live in them, ie are not resident somewhere else in the UK for more than (eg) 2 months a year.

I don't think any of those are unreasonable for a country facing a housing crisis like ours.

 

[krooton]

I think the more important consideration is who is eligible to buy them.

Remove foreign owners.
Remove shell/holding companies. I'd remove corporate ownership of residential property entirely.
Remove 2nd/3rd/20th home owners.
Remove BTL/ other "investors".

Require that the people who buy them actually live in them, ie are not resident somewhere else in the UK for more than (eg) 2 months a year.

I don't think any of those are unreasonable for a country facing a housing crisis like ours.

And pre-select actual FTB I guess.