Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » Buying and selling property

No Forecast Means More House Price Falls

Neil Faulkner
by Lovemoney Staff Neil Faulkner on 23 December 2008  |  Comments 38 comments

Nationwide, Halifax and the Council of Mortgage Lenders have chosen to be secretive with their annual forecasts, but by doing so they`ve revealed more than they intended.

Nationwide, Halifax and the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) make property-price predictions every year. Most years, they're hideously wrong. You can learn more about this on The Fool website, for example in the article Five Property Warning Signs To Watch, and in the podcast The Housing Market Will Not Crash.

When I was informed this morning that none of these organisations are doing forecasts any more I was overjoyed. I think these predictions receive far too much attention in the media and are given way too much respect.

Unfortunately, my informant was a little optimistic. The three organisations haven't given up on predictions; they've simply decided not to make forecasts this year. That makes more commercial sense. Nationwide and Halifax make predictions for one reason alone: to get their names in the papers. By not making a prediction this year they still get in the papers because it's so extraordinary, but next year or the following one they'll probably have to resume making predictions to make a decent story for the hacks.

We also must be cynical about the organisations` reasons. Here they are, as reported by The Guardian:

Halifax said that it's 'not appropriate' to make a forecast because Lloyds is due to take it over next year.

Nationwide said that the market was too volatile as the figure could change `very quickly early on next year`..

The CML simply said the market was too volatile.

If they'd all said the same story then it might have been more convincing, but Halifax's excuse was different (not to mention strange). That makes it an incredible coincidence that they all stopped predicting this year. You could argue that Halifax was just trying to save face; it didn't want to be found to be abysmally wrong. But that hasn't stopped them before. Nor has it stopped Nationwide or the CML, so why stop predicting now?

There must be another reason, and that is a very cynical one. I believe these organisations don't want to make predictions because they know that prices will fall further next year. They are also confident that prices will fall a lot further. By announcing such a forecast to the National Press and to television, it might have become self-fulfilling, because more people will choose to hold off buying properties till prices reach the levels that are being forecasted.

Consider also the wording of Nationwide's excuse for not forecasting this year. It says that the market is too volatile to predict as the figure could change `very quickly early on next year`. I read a lot of public-relations propaganda, so I know it when I see it. What they are hinting is that the market may rebound strongly within a few months. Of course, that is incredibly unlikely, which is why they said it like this, instead of making a full-on, outrageous prediction of house prices rising again.

Let's consider the last time that Nationwide refused to make a forecast. It was, according to The Guardian again, back in `92 and `93, during the property-price crash. But falling prices don't necessarily mean volatile prices any more than rising prices do. It seems a huge coincidence that Nationwide has only thought that prices were too volatile to call during the two times that prices have fallen since they began making predictions.

Even more strangely, now is actually one of the easiest times to predict at least the direction of the property market, even if it's not possible to predict how far it'll go. It's extremely rare that all data points overwhelmingly in one direction, as it is doing now. For clarity's sake - that direction is downwards.

These organisations - Nationwide, Halifax and CML - are declining to predict publicly because they are more certain of their forecast than ever - that prices are going to continue in a sharp decline. By being secretive they've said more than they intended. In my opinion, they would have been better off making a forecast showing a modest decline. That probably-wrong prediction would have been forgotten by most people in 12 months anyway, as usual.

Prices will continue to fall. It's just a question of how much. I'll leave forecasting the figure to PR propagandists but, as you can read in 40% House Price Rise Unlikely, you'll have a hard time finding one who'll get it right.

> Compare mortgages through The Fool.

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (38)

  • TMFHomer
    Love rating 0
    TMFHomer said

    I don't think its a bad thing there are no annual forecasts as you said in the article they never get it right anyway.

    Maybe the analysts who produce the data have been made redundant?

    Maybe they've changed career and moved into weather forecasting?

    Who needs them anyway. I predict the market will turn in 2009.

    No pain, No game.

    What goes up must come down.

    He who dares wins!

    Report on 23 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    Neil

    You say they won;t make predictions hence it must mean prices must fall ? What a load of tosh ! It's simply too volatile full stop !

    Didn't we establish you are a renter in previous articles ? Hence this may be what you want ? Personally i don't trust renters who discuss property, because most Brits want to own a home at some point. However renters want to buy in as cheap as possible hence their wish to talk the market down. My advice is they didn't do it last time round and by the time it turns around they will have missed the boat again.

    Weak pound, low interest rates, get into property it's the best bet long term !

    Report on 23 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • savedaclaypigeon
    Love rating 0
    savedaclaypigeon said

    Why, oh why must people whip themselves into an apoplectic froth when the possibility of a house price decline is mentioned.

    Granted the media has a large influence, and I believe as a collective we can talk ourselves into things up to a point.

    But every article which seeks to review the housing market, and reports that all indicators suggest prices have some way to come down before regaining viability, is met with howls of derision and allegations of some Machiavellian plot to engineer a collapse.

    Put a monkey in red braces, drop it in the Square Mile, and after roughly five minutes even it would be able to tell you that a large reduction in the average house price is coming and probably required.

    We were gorging in an orgy of credit. And the bubble burst. Correction required. End of story.

    We all have a mortgage. And for the benefit of those that don't, the word "renter" does not equate to "paedophile". People are entitled to hold an opposing view and should not face a Glitter-esque deportation for expressing it!

    As was quite rightly implied, property is a long term investment. If you lack the patience then you're in the wrong game.

    But please drop the bluster, it's tiresome...

    Report on 24 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • GeneralDownturn
    Love rating 1
    GeneralDownturn said

    Report on 24 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • GeneralDownturn
    Love rating 1
    GeneralDownturn said

    Staintunerider 23 Dec 2008 , 11:00pm

    Volatile? I define that as 'liable to change rapidly and unpredictably'. The market has been in freefall for a year and is expected to continue in the same direction in 2009. Is it volatile? No. Was it volatile when it went up year on year? No. It's steady as she goes, but the direction is downwards.

    And before you start screaming 'tenant!' I'm a homeowner with no mortgage.

    Great article by the way. The Fool at its best, pointing out that the Emperor is prancing around without his undies. More of the same please!

    :-)

    Report on 24 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • DAQ80
    Love rating 0
    DAQ80 said

    I think it's a reasonable article. At the moment anyone buying ought to be incredibly cautious and should be looking for significant (10-20% at least) reductions below asking price. It is absolutely inconceivable that there is going to be a house price recovery in the next 6 months as unemployment is rising rapidly, wage increases are going to be non-existent in the Q1 reviews next year and businesses everywhere are hunkering down for the storm in 2009. Repossessions and fire sales in advance of repossessions are rapidly rising, as are the number of people in arrears - it's simply make believe to think that prices are going to stage a recovery before 2010 at the earliest.

    As regards interest rates, it doesn't matter if they're low if banks can't lend anything like as freely as in the past and people can't afford to buy at current prices. When 100% mortgages were available everyone could get a loan on a house. Now you need a minimum 10% deposit and a spotless credit record to get a loan which restricts massively the market for housing, and as anyone even vaguely aware of economics knows, sharply reduced demand for an asset equals sharply reduced prices.

    Report on 24 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • uutasyw
    Love rating 7
    uutasyw said

    Nice article,

    Not mentioning anything that is not obvious, however, always nice to clarify that the predictions from the Nationwide, Halifax and the Council of Mortgage Lenders always had a not so hidden motive: maintain and expand the property market. When your PR will do more harm than good to your own business you stop your PR.

    As you mentioned they are given more credence than is justified by the press/public so keeping this semblance of respectability may also factor in their decision. If they were honest they might just add another nail to the falling property market while if they followed their normal quality predictions it could harm their future reputation (big differences between predictions and actual are really going to stand out at this point). They need their reputation with the gullible when the next property bubble kicks off.

    My own prediction: a further 20/25% fall from this point as the unemployment figure rise next year. I hope this is the limit of the fall as anything greater will mean the employment/economic situation will be worse than I fear. Fingers crossed for 2009.

    Report on 25 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • churchill123
    Love rating 0
    churchill123 said

    It makes me laugh to think that the media can 'talk up' a market any more than they can talk it down.

    What happened to the old fashioned theory of supply and demand? The fact is that it is now harder to get a mortgage than at any time in the last 15 years. If buyers don't get mortages, you can't sell the property. Low interest rates appear to have done nothing to stimulate the market, if anything it has done more harm than good.

    Report on 25 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    Hey Staintunerider

    You are an optimist, with lending drying up. jobs disappearing, buy to lets on the market house prices have only one way to go and it ain,t up!!!!

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • doomanic
    Love rating 0
    doomanic said

    I think house price falls of 20-30% are optimistic. In the time I have owned my house, 11 years, prices have risen threefold but wages have not. Locally a 2 bed starter home was £50K, now in the region of £150K, not a realistic proposition for a fist time buyer.

    These rediculoously high prices are not sustainable.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • daphnemcf
    Love rating 0
    daphnemcf said

    Does it really matter to people who own one house for themselves? If they wish to change houses the one they buy will rise/fall in much the same way as the one they sell.It's only those using houses as an an investment, or first time buyers who are really affected. The investors, like those in the stockmarket, just have to accept they made a bad investment. At least the house doesn't just disappear, like some of the stockmarket companies.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Supremeserf
    Love rating 0
    Supremeserf said

    I reckon that the housing market is anything but volatile. House prices either rise or fall steadiy with periods of stagnation in between. Unlike shares and other mediums of investment one cannot easily sell a house instantly, so the market assumes a kind of predictability.

    I have investor friends who are buying up property. They are currently discounting todays valuations by at least 10% - that says a lot and in my opinion 2009 will see a continued but lessening trend downward of around 10% with a period of stagnation following before the prices begin to rise again.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Imanaccountant
    Love rating 0
    Imanaccountant said

    daphnemcf,

    It does make a difference, yes:

    When a home owner decides to move when they have a child, they need an extra room in the house. They also might want to move to a more desireable school area with higher prices.

    Point is that in a low price market, the price difference between two houses, one with an extra room may be ( to pluck a figure out of the air) 20k. When house prices have trippled while wages have not, the cost of getting that extra room has trippled too, a pure 60k of extra borrowing required.

    And people have more than one child...

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • wthornton
    Love rating 0
    wthornton said

    For an even bigger laugh, can we ask Hfax soon to be Lloyds, Nwide and CML to predict when house prices will return back to the same levels they were at the peak of the speculative asset bubble in mid 2007, allowing for inflation too of course. Id take a punt at 2018, the peak of the next speculative asset bubble?

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • comptroller99
    Love rating 0
    comptroller99 said

    To extrapolate that "volatile" means "more house price falls" is facile in the extreme.

    Volatility could be up or down, similarly it could be small drop or a large drop, but to assume one direction as a given shows more the prejudice of the writer rather than the certainty of a (non) forecast.

    The article points out that in the past most, if not all, of the previous forecasts by these organisations have not been correct. Are they not simply saying that in benign times they cannot get it right so in turbulent ones they are not going to try?

    To say it is a conspiracy is to believe in the gunman on the grassy knoll i.e. it could be true but there is no more proof than the ravings of the mind!

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Beagle2Mars
    Love rating 0
    Beagle2Mars said

    Where was the article? If you're going to give other people's opinions, you should state your own. If you're middle-of-the road, that's fine but saying it's 'a question of how much' the market will fall, means you're sitting on the fence. I, for one, would like to read your opinion; I don't see it here.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Nickolarge
    Love rating 4
    Nickolarge said

    I know that folk who frequent this site are known as 'Fools' but some take it literally.

    There will be no upturn in the economy or the housing market in 2009. If we avoid a depression I will be very suprised.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • curedum
    Love rating 0
    curedum said

    As I recall, back in the swinging 60's you could only borrow up to two and a quarter (occasionally a half) times the gross annual income of the husband - and Building Societies often ignored any income from his wife. You also needed to save a significant deposit, often 10%.

    So today, assuming both partners are working and earning average wages, that would imply an average house price of around £120,000 compared to about £176,000 now. So if our property bubble is to be completely eliminated, it suggests a further fall in house prices of 30 to 35%

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Luniversal
    Love rating 47
    Luniversal said

    "Volatile" times are precisely when people most need forecasts. But have you ever known any organisation with a vested interest in the housing market predict a sharp, substantial fall in prices?

    If the possibility of such exists in the minds of the uncommitted, the vested interests first talk about a "pause", then a "sensible but limited correction". When the rout really gets under way-- as now-- they clam up.

    Today's deafening silence portends far bigger falls. So does the failure of this market to "crash", except rhetorically. It just hasn't happened for most players: all we have is a standoff between stubborn, prideful sellers and buyers who cannot borrow, amid a chorus of wailing in the media.

    The mentality of the bricks-and-mortar-besotted mob is telling. Round my way (prosperous outer London) not one estate agent dare admit yet, publicly, that he is making vendors slash asking prices to get results. Stiff upper lips are compulsory: properties have been languishing on the books unvisited, never mind unsold, since last summer in the belief that nice Messrs Browh and Darling will be getting us back to normal by spring.

    In the late-1980s crash, eventually such pretences and self-delusion were jettisoned. Estate agents shamelessly trumpeted price cuts. So far, not so much as a "try offer" or "OIRO" in most ads.

    Not until the facade cracks, and prices not only plunge but are openly admitted to be plunging, will we know that UK plc has exorcised the lunacy it was living in for the past 15-20 years.

    When the windows of estate agencies are covered in crossed-out prices and lower ones plastered over them-- that'll be the sign.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • TwoThousand
    Love rating 0
    TwoThousand said

    Thinking sideways on this discussion the answer for current and future home owners must be to hedge against future price falls. I recall this topic being discussed a couple of years ago. If you think prices will drop by another 10% then hedging on a 10% drop with a put option to cover your 'paper' capital loss. Don't know who is currently offer this option but I guess most of the major spread bet companies do, I guess the spread will be quite wide now things are moving towards the downside.

    Open to discussion

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • larry59gee
    Love rating 0
    larry59gee said

    I'm with "curedum" on this but probably a bit more pessimistic over the assessment of the current average wage which will vary drastically in different parts of the UK. It would therefore seem rational for property prices to fall more markedly in those areas where average earnings are lower especially in the North where the 2.5 times average income would be around £45K to £60K. In areas like the South West and most of Wales too first time property purchasers will be looking at the same price bracket. Curedum's forecast might hold for London and the South East and parts of East Anglia but even there I would predict prices to realistically need to come down to £60K to £85K before prices start to move slowly upwards.

    Next time property prices start to mushroom I think the government of the day might just be prepared to keep a tighter control on lending policy in this sector - if not the cycle will repeat itself and those with short memories will get carried away again.

    My theory on prices will alarm some and strike many as purely alarmist or overly pessimistic as too much debt will need to be factored into the housing sector which will keep borrowing at undesirably low levels. This is certainly going to have to be the case until savings start to breach the massive debt gap and allow some loosening in lending policy.

    Let's wait and see, but anybody who thinks property prices will rebound significantly before 2018 - 2020 is probably self delusional, or hopeful that the notional profit they feel they're sitting on right now will be sustainable in the shorter term.

    Buy to let is no longer the way to riches - talk to local authority housing department employees with pre-Thatcher ear experience and then think again.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • neptel
    Love rating 0
    neptel said

    Volatile market - what a joke!

    These societies (and journos, commentators like the Fool and his cohorts) have decimated property prices with their well paid for .... generalisations/research/surveys/finger in the air/make it up as you go along utterances about dropping house prices which has removed all confidence from the housing market but are we REALLY saying that affordability has come into the market as a result ?

    Not on ANY level, when rising unemployment, financial fear, repossessions, obscene mortgage arrangement fees etc are brought into the equation (assuming anyone can get a mortgage to arrange in the first place)

    Who are the winners - not first time buyers, not any other homeowner, seller or prospective buyer - only the society's and banks.

    Has no one copped on that the lower house price are, the greater is the percentage share owned by these vultures who caused the crisis which now involves us all.

    The only losers are home owners who's equity/wealth has diminished based on these speculative utterances which have made virtually all property unsellable at ANY price.

    I'm utterly fed up hearing about greedy homeowners, in most cases we are simply that, home owners who have struggled to buy, struggled to pay mortgages and house our families and now see everything falling about our ears through no fault of ours.

    It's the minority in this country who've had the surplus cash to speculate with 'buy to let portfolios', big mansions or estates.

    For the rest of us, the silent majority, our home has been just that - OUR HOME a place of sanctuary that we have poured heart, soul and money into to try to give our families a decent place to live with maybe something to leave them when we die.

    I do not believe anyone now seeking a home would not want the same - like sanctimoneous leeches they suck the value out now but will sit back and rub their hands together when prices rise again as they surely will. Utter hypocracy!

    For the majority in this country, we've not been stacking debts with credit cards or fancy living and I'm sick to death of comments from those such as the Fool which make me feel like I'm some sort of pariah, for wanting to see the value of my main asset which I've worked so hard for, my families home and their small inheritance, merit a fair price.

    I've worked hard for over 45 years to have a house, I've sacrificed and struggled to save for it and pay for and I see nothing wrong in not wanting it's value to drop by whatever finger in the air percentage some overpaid London based banker/building society chief/journo or commentator, living the life of Riley - pronounces (particularly knowing they have demonstrated utter incompetance in the financial management of so many sectors in this country)

    I'm starting my own pronouncements - your support would be welcome ......

    Building Society Chiefs, Banking CEo's, City crooks, Journos' & Commentators are not worth the over inflated renumeration they receive and it will fall therefore by 40% or more over the next 12 months. Ditto the Rolls Royces, Bentleys or other company cars they drive - I predict they will fall in value by at least 40%.

    So why not snap up a Bentley - do your bit for the country - get the guys in Crewe back to a 5 day week - Bentleys will be available from whatever finger in the air price you want to offer. Why you could even live in one!

    Ridiculous - yes, just as ridiculous as some of the comments we see daily from the Fools, based not on fact but their mercinary instincts.

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • OPeterO
    Love rating 0
    OPeterO said

    neptel - Your Bentley suggestion is rather too generous, IMO.... They'll be giving the like away with cornflake packets soon. The "system" is fundamentally working very well. There are lots of people and businesses that need CASH to service their debts, lines of credit, working capital, whatever euphemism you care to use. If you have CASH, then the world is your proverbial oyster.

    On a more general note... Plain simple facts are that unless you already have so much cash or instantly realisable assets that you probably don’t need credit/mortgages, you can’t get the damn things anyway.

    In the case of mortgages, if you can get them you’ll only be able to do so on reasonable rates if you can put up to 40% equity into the property yourself. That 40% equity is probably a fairly good indication of the level of risk that banks and building society’s are attaching to property purchases right now. i.e. If you default, of which they think there is a reasonably high risk, they’re reasonably confident that it’ll be you and not they that takes the financial hit and with only a 60% exposure on increasingly tight valuations they are they think assured of recovering their money. Ergo, they are I would suggest budgeting for a further 30-40% drop in property prices.

    As an aside, anyone seen anything interesting on new house prices? In Herefordshire at least the prices still appear to be the product of some fertile imaginations still suffering from the credit boom party excess of 2-4 years ago!

    Report on 27 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • debtwagon
    Love rating 6
    debtwagon said

    curedom, I assume you're basing your calc's on just the income of the "husband" (i.e. main breadwinner). I don't think that would ever happen now and therefore IMO your prediction is ill-founded because you're ignoring almost half of earned income. Furthermore, if "wives" did still remain at home, wouldn't "husbands" salaries be proportionately higher anyway? And just taking it a step further, haven't we all been conned into thinking we'll earn more if both partners work, i.e. the same salary pot has simply been shared out amongst all those working? [BTW I'm not speaking from a chauvinist viewpoint - my wife's worked all our married life and I'm proud of that. I'm just posing a wider question!]

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • TMFVertigo
    Love rating 0
    TMFVertigo said

    Thanks for all your comments, folks. Great stuff, as usual.

    Staintunerider, you said: 'Didn't we establish you are a renter in previous articles ? Hence this may be what you want ?'

    Yes, I am a renter - in Germany! ;)

    Neil (the author)

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nivaga
    Love rating 0
    nivaga said

    I think it is spot on to be sceptical about their reasons for not making the predictions and I suspect that this articale has those reasons right, but surely they would have escaped with much more credibility if they were a little more honest saying that in the present climate, publishing these forecasts would be likely self-fulfilling so they would refrain.

    Even nicer is if they were to say that they would abstain from ever doing so at any time in the future when they believe prices are to rise too as this is also self-fulfilling and clearly beneficial to them building their lending base and fuelling the vicious cycle between the debt and asset bubbles that we have just seen burst.

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    It's a great time to be a buy-to-let investor if you have the cash and are confident of finding tenants. The supply of tenants is likely to improve as more people lose their jobs and go onto Local Housing Allowance or generally retrench. With house prices falling so rapidly, investors can virtually name their own price to ensure high rental returns.

    All this makes me wonder if we are going to see a significant fall in the number of people owning their own home in the UK, and more renters as we find in Germany, Switzerland and so on. There is an argument that this would be no bad thing - it would improve labour market mobility, lead to greater numbers of professional landlords, and less house price volatility, because a lot fewer people think that owning a house is something that makes economic sense for them. Germany is sitting very nicely at the moment - no house price rises since 2000, a huge balance of payments surplus, improving unemployment figures and a relatively strong currency - contrast this with the UK!

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MrRee007
    Love rating 0
    MrRee007 said

    The house price falls I am experiencing (as a buyer) are quite staggering.

    Anyone saying otherwise is not in the market. There are plenty of overpriced properties, so don't be mistaken by those, you need to look at the properties actually selling - that is where the real prices are achieved and they are falling fast.

    We are in a new world order - I'm not sure how it will play out, but house prices will never again be what they were - or climb as they did ... in my opinion.

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • conway1945
    Love rating 0
    conway1945 said

    All my life, for some eighty years, I have followed the advice of elders which was to work hard and save for your retirement. That I have done. The Government now rewards and helps those who have borrowed and spent unwisely. Savers can go to hell, savings are now worthless. I think this crazy policy is a political ploy to make the future so impossible for the Conservatives that they will be unable to offer any tax concessions for many, many years. The policy is if we are going to loose, and the straw polls tells us that we will, then lets buggar those who take over with a financial nightmare. Am I too cynical? Roll on

    with the election before Brown and Darling can propose any more of their crap policies. Let those banks who only had an eye for the bottom line of profitability and executive bonuses go to the wall.

    Let the car companies sell all their stock at cost before getting anymore of the poor taxpayer's money.Lets have redundancies amongst the milliuons of uneccessary local authority and Government sector jobs. Put savings rates back as high as possible, for it is with invested capital that the economy will survive, not with ad lib and unvialble lending as we have all seen in the past ten years. Bring back all our troops and leave the European Union. Miliions of our relatives fought and died in two world wars to keep our island fortress safe. Lets make it our secure island once again and repel all invaders. Lets have our greatest Royal Navy back at full strength. God save the Queen.

    Report on 28 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • castath
    Love rating 0
    castath said

    Damned if they do, Damned if they don't.

    The forecasters do have a point. We are asking them to predict the amount of credit available, interest rates, employment and the average sale price of property during a period when volume is expected to be low and forced sales high. Its not like normal forecasting, there is high volatility to which their results probably show, the chances of being right or anywhere close are small. I bet they have made many forecasts and they don't have a clue which one to announce.

    If they did announce a forecast we would just ask more questions on how they reached this forecast, questions they wouldn't want to answer.

    Also, 29 comments on house prices and no one has mentioned that we are not building enough houses to cater for demand :)

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • casperro
    Love rating 0
    casperro said

    Just track the predictions on Nationwide's and others House Price Calculators. This is effectively their prediction NOW, else why available on their sites.

    If you take a look over a long period you can get a reasonable historic average from real data, calculating roughly what it is really be worth.

    Crucially in times of peak demand, you will have a more realistic figure to help prevent paying way more that a sensible price.

    Forecasting accurately without a value for what it is worth is simple: Falling - it will bottom and rise ( eventually ); rising - it will top and fall. Never met anyone that accuratly predicted WHEN either.

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Imanaccountant
    Love rating 0
    Imanaccountant said

    If the CoML had predicted any sort of decrease, its pretty sensible to assume that it in itself would contribute to the decrease, hence why they didnt forecast.

    However, we could consider another option: State its likely to fall going into 2009 (obvious!) but be vague, and then simply predict a date at which prices will be where they are now.

    This would be better in two ways:

    1) currently there is surplus supply, caused by those overstretched forced to sell, and those selling for fear of further losses. The CoML can do nothing about the former but could do something about the latter, by giving a light at the end of the tunnel to aim for for those who have only fear at the moment - ie if they could hold out until the end of 2009, their house would be worth the same as it is now - no further loss. This would reduce the quantity of housing on the market and reduce the excess of supply over demand, stabalising prices at least a little and give some hope to the market.

    2) Buyers would be incentivised to make a bargain while they can, increasing demand by defining a time limit to when the low will be.

    Given that the CoML is going to take a lot of flack for refusing to forecast, would it have been so much worse for them to say something along these lines? even if they were out by a little, trends would still have been affected, perhaps reducing the scale of the fall in prices.

    What is it that they were fearing by not taking this course of action? I can think of one thing: They have industry inside information, ie about future mortgage deals and rates from the lenders. These lenders must have an incredibly scary view of the next year or so (read bank's cashflow, profits and share prices - keeping rates and hurdles to get a mortgage high) for the CoML to take this course of action...

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • chasbmw
    Love rating 5
    chasbmw said

    If housing prices go down to 2001 values, then in real money terms, prices will not have increased since the end of the last house price boom in 1988.

    I would also guess that Staintune rider is a BMW owning property investor and might also have some sort of stake in trying to persuad the tides to retreat.

    Charles

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Delta112
    Love rating 0
    Delta112 said

    I think Neil's article is a good one, as it shows the previous predicters, Halifax, Nationwide and the CML, to be cynical in their lack of a forecast for the coming year. they say that the market is "volatile" when it is not really, the prices are just steadily going down at the moment.

    House prices were rising too rapidly in 2006 and the first part of 2007, and a 'correction' needed to take place, but I think that more than a further 10% fall would be too much and cause a recession or at least a greatly reduced confidence in investing in property (or even buying property to live in).

    Savedaclaypigeon, i'm not getting into an "apopleptic froth" but I don't think this country can afford to sustain house prices' substantial falls for too much longer. It is also bad that many members of the public cannot get more than 70% mortgages or about 60% secured loans now... One needs to have a sqeaky clean credit to get a 90% mortgage nowadays.

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • UpHillAllTheWay
    Love rating 38
    UpHillAllTheWay said

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • UpHillAllTheWay
    Love rating 38
    UpHillAllTheWay said

    Oops - sorry about that. I don't know how it happened. The cat was walking on my keyboard, but I don't know how he knew my user name.

    I'd like to comment on a number of other posts above.

    Doomaniac says "I think house price falls of 20-30% are optimistic"

    I'm optimistic about that too - I'm a renter, looking to buy - so there's /my/ cards on the table!

    Curedum calculates that a fall of 30-35% will be needed to correct the previous euphoria. Usually, however, when a market starts to fall (any market), there is a sort of panic sets in that causes things to over correct.

    Take a look at the graphs of house price history on

    http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/graphs-index.php and click "Average House Price"

    You see that we are still above the average price line, but falling towards it. However, in the previous corrections (visible on the graph), the market has always grossly over-corrected, so the decline could be more dramatic than many foresee.

    Or maybe Staintunerider will prove right, and the fall has already ended - but I doubt it!

    He asks Neil Faulkner "Didn't we establish you are a renter in previous articles?"

    Staintunerider, as the direction of your argument on house prices is always so predictable, you also seem to have an agenda. What is your position in the housing ladder? You argue your point as one who bought a house too late, or borrowed too much against it, and who finds the suggestion of negative equity extremely distasteful. It's the position of a lot of people, and does not indicate stupidity in any way, but is your argument driven by personal circumstance? You have asked Neil his. What's yours?

    As already stated, I /do/ have an agenda, but whether I want house prices to fall, or you want them to rise, neither of us will have any bearing on what the market does, so there's no disadvantage in showing your hand.

    And Neptel - if your home is just that - your home, does its value really matter? The way you speak, you seem to think that because the value comes down, your house will tumble down with it, and will no longer be your home. I hope for you that you are not in danger of losing it, but to be honest, while I owned a house, and was living an average, married life, I /wanted/ the value of my house to come down, because I figured that when it got down to £10, the one I wanted would only be £20, and I could afford the difference. Trading up is a good thing to do when prices are low; trade down when they are high.

    Matchmade said "Germany is sitting very nicely at the moment - no house price rises since 2000, a huge balance of payments surplus, improving unemployment figures and a relatively strong currency - contrast this with the UK!" I agree. France also seems to have a much more stable economy than ours. And who got us into this fiscal situation? And who are we looking to to get us out of it? Ironic, isn't it!

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • UpHillAllTheWay
    Love rating 38
    UpHillAllTheWay said

    Here's something to cheer you all up...

    http://www.ukpropertyshop.co.uk/news/803.shtml

    "Darling gets sums wrong as gloom deepens"

    Government ministers most certainly have an agenda - they will always say that things are better than they are - especially if they have presided over them getting to where they are. So when Darling, or Greenspan, says things are bad, you can bet, they're going to be dire!

    Report on 29 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • peepobaby
    Love rating 49
    peepobaby said

    Fall by 20% next year. 10% in 2010. End of discussion. Easy wasn't it. Owners lose but its irrelevant because the gains were not real, only paper ones that couldn't be realised.

    Report on 30 December 2008  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.9% to 3.5% (T&Cs apply).

NatWest Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).

Royal Bank of Scotland Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV1