Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » House prices

Why house prices will rise over the next five years

John Fitzsimons
by Lovemoney Staff John Fitzsimons on 03 June 2011  |  Comments 40 comments

Homeowners are confident house prices will rise in the coming years. Are they right to be so positive?

Why house prices will rise over the next five years

Despite the stalled nature of the property market over the past year, those who are already on the property ladder are full of confidence that their biggest asset will grow in value by 2016.

A new survey by Your Move, an estate agency firm, found that almost 80% of homeowners expect house prices to rise over the next five years. Just 11% reckon that house prices will decline over that period.

This comes in the same week that a report by the Centre for Economics and Business Research suggested that house prices will jump by 16% by the end of 2015.

Where has this property optimism come from? And is it anything more than wishful thinking?

Turkeys voting for Xmas

Asking a homeowner whether their property is likely to rise in value is perhaps not the best way to work out the future of house prices. After all, for many of them to suggest their asset would lose value is akin to turkeys voting for Christmas.

However, the Your Move survey uncovered some surprising realism, at least in the short-term. The majority of homeowners expected house prices to fall over the next year or so, with just 37% forecasting house price growth over the next 12 months, compared to 75% this time last year.

Even on the long-term prospects for house prices, expectations have dimmed. The predicted house price growth over the next five years has dropped from 10.6% a year ago to 6.9% today.

A jump of 16%

In contrast, it’s the technical experts that are somewhat more optimistic, with the Centre for Economic and Business Research forecasting house prices will jump by a whopping 16% by the end of 2015.

Related how-to guide

Buy a property

Buying a property is a massive financial commitment. Follow these tips and it should all go relatively smoothly!

The CEBR reckons that despite the current lacklustre performance of the sector, things will stabilise by the end of the year and then pick up, with average growth of 4% a year thereafter.

Given the comatose state of the property market – a state it has been in for quite a while now – it seems almost perverse to be so optimistic about its immediate prospects.

The frozen mortgage market

The biggest factor that has held back both house prices and property transactions in recent months has been the difficulty in getting hold of a mortgage. In April, mortgage lending totalled just £9.8bn, down 14% from March and 5% from April last year, according to data from the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

What’s more, Bank of England figures show that just 45,156 mortgages were approved for house purchases in April, the lowest number since the Bank’s records began back in 1992.

Indeed, a whopping 75% of would-be homebuyers surveyed by Your Move pinpointed the lack of mortgage finance as the reason they have been unable to buy a home, up from 70% last summer. If house prices are to rise as the CEBR and homeowners expect, this situation needs to drastically change.

Things need to change

Indeed, if we are to have any semblance of a ‘normal’ property market, things are going to have to improve. The CEBR reckons that within the next 12 months the banks' balance sheets will stabilise sufficiently that they can start loosening up and lending more freely. Perhaps.

Related blog post

Another sign that lenders may soon be able to lend more is the recent awakening of the securitisation market. This is where a lender may package up a portion of its loan book and sell it on to investors, raising further cash for future lending, and was a big part of the plans of many lenders before the credit crunch.

Unsurprisingly it more or less came to a halt after the Northern Rock fiasco, but things are kicking up a notch. Last month, Santander managed to clinch a £3.75bn sale of mortgage-backed bonds, the largest securitisation since 2007. Both Northern Rock and Skipton Building Society have issued smaller deals in recent months, so the signs are positive.

Supply and demand

The other reason for house price optimism is an old one, but it’s one that won’t go away. There simply aren’t enough properties to meet demand at the moment.

House building totalled just 130,000 properties last year, nowhere near enough to address the undersupply that was already evident. We have already seen the impact that a lack of supply is having on the rental market, with rents regularly hitting new highs in recent months. The average rent in England and Wales stood at £692 a month in April according to LSL Property Services, another record high.

And that lack of supply will continue to push house prices upwards, once borrowers are in a position to actually access funding for property transactions. With Halifax research identifying that 77% of non-homeowners still aspire to buy, that’s an awful lot of demand for property.

Hello Generation Rent

Whether that is a good thing or not is debateable. After all, as an exhaustive new study by Halifax demonstrates, the UK is rapidly becoming a nation of renters who have given up on the prospects of owning their own home.

Nearly half of 20-45 year olds surveyed by the bank believe that the UK is moving towards a European model where renting is the norm, and that we will be a nation of renters within a generation. Two-thirds said they had no prospect of ever buying a home.

As the report highlights, such a phenomenon would have significant results. For starters, fewer people buying homes could mean a lack of funding to cover the costs of house building in the future. What’s more, there would be a widening of the wealth gap between those that own their own home and those that don’t.

More: Working out what a ‘good’ mortgage rate is | Fix your mortgage at 4% for five years

Use lovemoney.com's innovative new mortgage tool now to find the best mortgage for you online

At lovemoney.com, you can research all the best deals yourself using our online mortgage service, or speak directly to a whole-of-market, fee-free lovemoney.com broker. Call 0800 804 8045 or email mortgages@lovemoney.com for more help.

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (40)

  • bronxhat
    Love rating 1
    bronxhat said

    If house prices are going to rise , and ithe int rate is going to rise ,and wages are only rising by 2per cent on average, people can not afford to purchase a house ,or save the deposit needed,we all know the figures ,if the rates go up to 2.5% this will double the cost of a loan to the householder,at a time when we have high unemployment,also the banks have much better ways to invest there limited funds.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • andy44
    Love rating 8
    andy44 said

    House prices may go up but so do commodities and services, eg fuel bills, council tax, (decent) food prices etc. It is called inflation. How much will house prices rise (or fall) with respect to the RPI / CPI - that is the question.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • TPMAC
    Love rating 0
    TPMAC said

    JF.

    Are you saying property prices will rise 16% in real terms, on top of inflation?

    I don't think so, a property today valued as £100k, possibly will be worth £116K in 5 years.

    Lets see in 5 years time!

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    "that we will be a nation of renters within a generation. Two-thirds said they had no prospect of ever buying a home". The Triumph of the Labour Party. This party wants to keep the working class down. They opposed the biggest act of socialism since the founding of the National Health Service when they opposed Maggie's sale of council houses to tennents. A transfer of wealth on a massive scale. Why did they do that? To keep the proles in their place. How dare these oiks presume to ape their betters? How dare they aspire to own property? How dare they aspire to acquire capital and take part in the capitalist system? Don't they realise that the purpose of their existence is to be poor and become voting fodder for career politicians who've never done a proper job in their lives?

    Blair, Brown, Straw, Clarke, in their youth were all communists. What does that mean? Well back in the 70s when they were young there were two templates for a communist society, the Soviet Union, and Maoist China. And what were those templates that these characters thought so highly of? In both countries the ruling elites lived the life of Riley at the expense of the masses who were enslaved in poverty. Well we've seen the effect of Labour policy on the nation's and on individuals' finances, so they're well on target with the poverty bit, let us just thank goodness that they were turfed from office before they got to grips with the ID card and the enslavement bit.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  2 loves
  • gavinb
    Love rating 25
    gavinb said

    If property prices rise by even 5% in real terms by 2015 I'll eat my hat, boots, trousers, the lot.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • JRAY100
    Love rating 50
    JRAY100 said

    ...bearing-in-mind inflation will be at least 4% p.a!

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • yuppa
    Love rating 0
    yuppa said

    More propaganda for banks ...and wishful thinking from people who have houses as investments. Why can we not have sensible discussions about the ludicrous height the property market has achieved -

    No one ever points out that in a significant number of areas in uk the average house prices are an order of magnitude more in price than the average salaries for those areas...thats crazy! even with 2 people working on what are considered good salaries in uk means most houses in south east are not really affordable in real terms. So if the banks really did only lend appropriately then house prices have to come down or wages have to increase significantly ...it is in interest of big business and government that house prices do not implode...so we are continually bombarded with this propaganda

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • onthecomputer
    Love rating 80
    onthecomputer said

    To me (rightly or wrongly) houses prices for the best part will always rise - supply and demand - if the average Joe in the street can't afford them, then people with money will and then rent them out - people always have to have somewhere to live and the property market will always be on the move.

    My advice to anyone, stop spending on non essentials - and get on the property ladder - just a one bed flat to start - surely it has to beat paying rent any day and you are also master of your own destiny.

    Houses will go up, so will inflation and the cost of living and everything else apart from wages - its par for the course.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • supasap
    Love rating 19
    supasap said

    a whopping 15% rise over 5 years,and what does this look like after inflation is taken into account? Also rents can only rise in line with earnings, it is crazy to suggest that house prices are heading north given the state of the world economy

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    and a completely different opinion on house prices from LM, only 2 weeks ago.

    http://www.lovemoney.com/news/property-and-mortgages/house-prices/11950/if-youre-gonna-sell-sell-now

    So who is right? = Who knows.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kittzy
    Love rating 32
    kittzy said

    If History is to be beleived, House prices will double in about 10 years. Although i would be more likely to think 12 years with the economic anomoly we are currently experiencing.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • jonnie2thumbs
    Love rating 90
    jonnie2thumbs said

    If house prices rise from now on it will just be an indicator that the pound is crashing

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nickpike
    Love rating 270
    nickpike said

    Every other indicator points in the opposite direction.

    The free market would drive prices down, but this hasn't been allowed to operate (yet).

    Lets consider a very important point or two.

    The average age of the FTB is now about 40 (I bought when I was 24). Reports are now stating that the vast majority of younger people consider that they will be renting.

    If Mr and Mrs average cannot afford to buy, how in the hell are prices supposed to go up?

    The data from an estate agency is going to be biased. This prediction is nonsense.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nickpike
    Love rating 270
    nickpike said

    Sodit, well said.

    The Labour movement have to cultivate a poor strata of society, or they would cease to exist.

    Why don't people realise this?

    This is why the welfare state is so massive, amongst other things.

    Brown has cost me a lot of money in lost interest and extending my rental period by engineering high house prices. The man is a criminal to the average citizen.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • krustallos
    Love rating 39
    krustallos said

    Er, Nickpike, I think you're confusing cause and effect there. Or was there no poverty before the labour movement was created? Sheesh.

    Report on 03 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sandsoftime
    Love rating 2
    sandsoftime said

    Thatcher did the greatest disservice to this country by allowing council house tenants to buy their own homes at massive discounts, thus depleting councils of housing stock for future generations. And then what did these 'I'm alright, Jack' council tenants do but promptly sell them for the market value, pocketing the difference,and leaving succeeding generations to join an ever lengthening queue for social housing.

    Another point in the housing debate is that all the houses that first time buyers could afford and would buy are now being snapped up by cash rich property developers, and rented on the open market. You only have to see programmes like Homes under the Hammer to see how lucrative some of the landlords are finding this. A colleague's daughter at uni in Cardiff is renting a house where every room has been coverted into a bedsit each costing £60 per week, so generating the landlord a healthy £15k a year on this property alone. The rich get richer.

    And so what now for this generation, unable to afford to buy a property or rent in the social housing sector? Will your grandchildren ever be able to buy a house, a home? Some legacy from Thatcher and the loadsamoney generation!

    Report on 04 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MK22
    Love rating 142
    MK22 said

    Deary me! Were nickpike and sodit frightened by a campaigning Labour MP at a young age? What rubbish! Anyone who has been following what's been happening in this country over the last 6 or 7 decades (not years as in nickpike and sodit's cases) will realize what has caused our decline, and it started way before Blair-Brown were voted in by the majority of the Labour Party membership.

    Report on 04 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • wally144
    Love rating 26
    wally144 said

    sandsoftime

    If someone purchased their council house, then sold it for a profit, where were they now going to live? They would either have to rent, buy another home, or leave the country.

    The fact that they were able to sell to someone (anyone!) meant that the property was worth the price to someone; i.e. the market works.

    Simples!

    Report on 04 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    Sandsoftime, the problem was not the sale of social housing, the problem was that more social housing was not built to replace the properties that were sold. Why were replacements not built? Politics.

    The first reason is that the conservatives did not trust socialist local authorities to administer social housing without large subsidies (which the government wanted to avoid to balance the gov't budget... oh doesn't that seem such a 20th Century idea!!!)

    and secondly, at the end of the 1970s there was a lack of industrial discipline resulting in many politically motivated strikes, so that ordinary working people couldn't better themselves as they kept having to down tools because either their works or the works of a supplier had stopped production.[If you want to know how it all worked read Duncan Bannatynes autobiography... that's not Tory propapanda, Dunkie was advising people to vote Labour at the last election]. If people had to buy their houses, then they stood to lose a lot if they couldn't afford to pay the mortgage each month, and they had a reason to argue back against the left wing shop stewards when a strike was proposed. As a result it became government policy to force people into home ownership. That is why no more social housing was built at that time. Root cause of this... left wing politics.

    MK22... "what rubbish"... one knows that one has won the argument when one's detractors just make disparaging comments rather than provide specific examples to counter one's claims. Thank you MK22 for confirming that my post was absolutely correct and that I've hit the nail firmly and squarely on the head.

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    MK22 wrote... "anyone who's been following what's been happening in this country over the last 6 or 7 decades (not years as in Nickpike and Sodit's cases)". What is the implication of this remark? That my comment was of a short term nature, and that wiser persons with a longer perspective would know better (without specifying exactly what that better knowledge might be).

    I made the point about coucil house sales. They commenced in 1979 that is 32 years ago, that's 3 decades ago. Maybe my analysis didn't cover the last 60 years, but it covered the whole of the latter half of that. Notice how MK22 tries to pervert reality by suggesstion.

    MK22 wonders if I was frightened by a Labour politician in my early life. I was disadvantaged by a Labour government when young. Labour passed the 1975 Rent Act that distroyed the private rented sector and led to massive homelessness. Because of the time lag, this homelessness manifested itself after Labour left office, and the cynical Labour politicians foamed at the gob accusing the following administration for the lack of housing... something that they had knowingly engineered themselves some 5 years previously. [I write "knowingly" because the Association of Small Landlords told the government exactly what the result of this legislation would be in their submission at the white paper stage of the bill. The Labour government chose to ignore their advice].

    So now I've gone back 36 years in showing that Labour deliberately disadvantages the poor.

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    Krustallos, in fairness to Nickpike, he didn't say that Labour created poverty, he simply claimed that Labour have a vested interest in not eradicating it. Maggie T wanted to destroy socialism. How to do it? She chose to do it by lowering the ladder, so that people at the bottom of society could climb up under their own efforts. [To see how this worked read Duncan Bannnatyne's autobiography]. If they could do this, then they wouldn't need to collectivise. Many people from modest backgrounds took advantage of her reforms and became wealthy. She won 3 elections on the votes of the aspirant working class. This was such a threat to the Labour Party, that they "got rid of clause 4", and reformed themselves as "New Labour"... clearly they saw Thatcherism as a potent threat to themselves. [Additional evidence is that now, over 20 years after she left office, she is still used to demonise policies Labour don't like].

    In the 12 years after gaining power the Labour government systematically pulled up the ladder again. That is why they destroyed the pension system (Politicians weren't affected nor were their rich friends); they destroyed PEPs, which gave a tax free leg up to the working man, and replaced it with the ISA, which has no effective tax benefit for the basic rate taxpayer (but still has tax breaks for well paid politicians and their rich friends); they introduced university fees, which at £1000, or £3000 were small change to well paid politicians and their rich friends, but a substantial burdon to the basic rate taxpayer with a family to educate; that's why they created a housing bubble (which "no one saw coming" except everyone over 45, who recognised that mortgages over 100% weren't sustainable, and advances of over 2.5 times the first income plus 1 times the second weren't wise) to price the working class out of housing or to place in debt bondage those who bought a home; the list goes on and on.

    Once you realise that the central plank of all the last Labour government's activities was to push the aspirant working class back down into its place, then you see how all of their various policies have this common theme.

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    As an example of Maggie T being blamed for things that are none of her doing, Sandsoftime (above) wrote after complaining that young people were priced out of the housing market... "And so what now for this generation, unable to afford to buy a property or rent in the social housing sector? Will your grandchildren ever be able to buy a house, a home? Some legacy from Thatcher and the loadsamoney generation!"

    He's blaming Thatcher, whose been 20 years out of office, 12 years of which the Labour Party was in power!!! The current state of housing is not Thatcher's fault... it's Blair and Brown's fault. Face the reality, the Labour government deliberately inflated a housing bubble to price the aspirant working class out of the housing market and create a divided society for their own narrow sectional interest.

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • XrayEye
    Love rating 8
    XrayEye said

    It seems like most people posting here have more knowledge than whoever wrote this tosh.

    Let's re-write the title, 'Why house prices will NOT rise in the next 5 years'

    and let's start with a few basic reasons.

    1) Interest rates are almost certain to rise taking £billions of homeowners disposable income that could be paid off the actual initial mortgage loan amount.

    2) Doubtful any house price rises will keep pace with inflation and so in real terms be worth LESS.

    3) Pay rises have been stopped/controlled and incomes have been squeeezed meaning affordability has been reduced and not likely to make a difference in at least next 5 years.

    4) Govt/banks interference has stopped the natural balance of repossessions etc and the expected downward curve became a long drawnout dip which will continue for quite a few years of stagnant homebuying yet.

    5) Also due to govt/banks interference, many people whose savings would have grown nicely to catch back up with the previously overzealous housing market have had their savings interest cut to help out the homebuyers and therefor not received a growth on savings as would normally have been the case causing the value of their capital to be reduced.

    6) Hopefully people will have learned and will not get into the 'pyramid-scheme-type' cycle that the greedy and gullible homebuyers of the recent artificial boom did.

    All-in-all I believe the next five years will NOT see a significant rise in house price values. Possibly not even one that would cover their conveyancing costs.

    The Oracle has spoken. (I have yet to have been wrong in all my predictions!)

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • XrayEye
    Love rating 8
    XrayEye said

    One more point having reread the first line of the article.

    It's "homeowners" that believe this (tosh). That says it all.

    Wishful thinking me thinks!

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • supasap
    Love rating 19
    supasap said

    does anyone know about the demographics of the housing market? when will the housing boom sustain itself through inheritance............ ie those oldies who benefited from housing boom over last 40 years or so, when will they start dying and leaving the wealth to their offspring so they can start with a great deposit and sustain the housing market, if this phenomenon does not kick in then I can't see houses going up much, also the forces against this are some oldies having to fund old health or spending all of their equity on sustaining their standard of living

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • sodit
    Love rating 127
    sodit said

    The demographics of the UK is complicated by the influx of immigrants from eastern Europe. Will these people stay, or will they return to whence they came? The birth rate of UK nationals has fallen so there aren't as many young brits looking for housing as there were, but they've been substituted by immigrants. If they decide to settle, then there will be continuing demand, if they decide to return en masse to eastern Europe, then demand could fall dramatically.

    Report on 05 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iamcoldsteve
    Love rating 311
    Iamcoldsteve said

    sodit,

    What you say is spot on. I constantly hear 'Thatcherite'... and think she's been out of power for 20 years. . . how odd to blame her after all this time for the countries woes when the red party (ok, slightly maroon) have been in for 13 years, wreaking social havoc whilst wracking up huge debts to pay for the large gov't machine they unleashed on us.

    Report on 06 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Dave29
    Love rating 0
    Dave29 said

    I think house prices will rise in the medium to longer term. When banks start to lend again which they will, people will rush to buy rather than rent as rent is dead money. People like to have their own place and spend money on it rather than on the landlord's property.

    With the state pensions being questionable in the future then the homeowner will take some comfort that he has paid his house off and will therefore require less money to retire on. If Generation Rent becomes a reality then people will be paying rent till their dying day and who knows what rental costs will be in the future under those circumstances.

    Report on 06 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • andrewjameshowar
    Love rating 25
    andrewjameshowar said

    Odd title for your article - because you haven't come near explaining why house prices will rise. Nor could you - since they may not!

    Report on 07 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Red monkey
    Love rating 1
    Red monkey said

    DREAM ON!!!! The only place house prices are going is down, down, down! The key question is how long can one of the biggest and most ludicrous economic bubbles EVER continue in the current economic climate in the face of likely rising interest rates. My bet is not long now......

    Report on 08 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • Philmo
    Love rating 2
    Philmo said

    Isn't it a mix of factors?

    House prices will all rise when the builders decide the time is right - when the cashflow rises! [The overall market follows the new-build.]

    The mortgage funds are there but the risk perceived by the banks [personal default, negative equity etc] isn't changing yet.

    Buyer confidence currently in balance awaiting the sun to shine!

    Report on 09 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • gonfishin
    Love rating 11
    gonfishin said

    One factor not addressed by the article nor by any comments so far is the exchange rate. The UK property market must be looking remarkably attractive for European investors.

    It would be sad if our younger generation are prevented from buying their own homes because they are being outbid by potential landlords from abroad and end up seeing the prospect of home ownership receding further as foreign demand and a healthy rental return push prices further out of their reach.

    By the same token, if we're just measuring uk house prices by their sterling value - that projected 15% rise may just reflect sterling devaluation.....especially with talk already of another round of QE.

    On the other hand, we may see the world wake up to the true extent of the problems facing the Eurozone coupled with the long-overdue rise in BOE base rate to a more realistic level - and dare we hope with mortgages then more readily available and at a more realistic premium to Base - like 0.5% - 1% . After all, with rental returns currently around 5%, it would still make sense to buy rather than rent providing interest rates don't skyrocket as they did in the 1970s.

    Report on 09 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    As a property developer and builder, I'd be delighted if house prices did not rise in real terms for the next ten years, or only rise to reflect the large increase in construction costs that housebuilders are facing with this push towards "zero carbon" homes (with no expectations at all being placed on existing homeowners, where the vast majority of energy and water wastage occurs - policymakers are obsessed with punishing new houses but do very little about the elephant in the room, namely the existing housing stock). Dramatic house price rises and falls play havoc with my business - rises simply increase the cost of land, as landowners become convinced they are sitting on a fortune, and falls have the potential to wipe me out, as has already happened with thousands of buiding firms.

    I say we should tax capital gains on private residences: that will help stop homeowners obsessively chasing themselves up the housing ladder. And we need to increase supply - not just planning permission handed out to the big construction companies to build huge estates, but also greater encouragement of the more efficient use of existing build land a.k.a "garden grabbing", which from the developer's perspective had nothing to do with grabbing - you never heard from the garden owners who made fat tax-free capital gains - and has everything to do with using land more intelligently and building in places where people actually want to live, in an existing built environment.

    Report on 10 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • subaruchick99
    Love rating 10
    subaruchick99 said

    Dear Matchmade - how terribly unfair for you to comment about the difficulties your business faces due to increasing property & land values and then you advise CPT for private residences to "stop homeowners obsessively chasing up the housing ladder". Most of us move not to make money but because our domestic circumstances change and we need a bigger house, or a house in a different area. CPT on private residences would make moving to a more expensive house so impossible for hard working families who are already taxed to the hilt, and doubtless would damage your own business severely as yet another stalling factor for the housing market.

    Report on 15 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • nickpike
    Love rating 270
    nickpike said

    krustallos said

    Er, Nickpike, I think you're confusing cause and effect there. Or was there no poverty before the labour movement was created? Sheesh.

    It didn't need Labour to abolish poverty. Modern affluence and technology has done that. In fact, Labour have probably hindered prosperity. Sheesh

    Report on 21 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • caketh54
    Love rating 8
    caketh54 said

    Having lived in the same house for over 28 years we now wish to downsize and move to a different area for retirement but are caught in the situation of not being able to sell. (I am extremely glad we are not in the position of having to move because of employment.) We've even looked at the possibility of renting out our current house and renting in the area we want to be but renting these days is horrendous - the amount of deposit required, the insecurity of being able to stay where you've rented, the unreasonable conditions placed on you as a renter - no smoking, no pets, etc -, the difficulty of getting back the deposit when you do want to move. Renting or buying - both have many problems these days and there does not appear to be anyone or any body in a position or willing to do anything to improve the situation for anyone.

    Report on 21 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • jamiecfc1
    Love rating 39
    jamiecfc1 said

    The housing market is still severely overinflated, now is the time that anyone foolish enough to buy in the noughties will have to come to the realisation that, just like in the early 90's, it's a choice of stay put or lose out - the difference between now and then will be the size of the loss. Its the price to be paid for creating a massive bubble which, as it turns out, was always likely to be unsustainable (apart from in certain areas i.e London). There will always be a market for overpriced houses though - it's a result of uncontrolled immigration-fuelled population growth, everyone has to live somewhere...

    Report on 23 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • eLJay
    Love rating 76
    eLJay said

    Hmmm not very insightful.

    4 years at 15% equates to what 3.75% a year? Whats the current interest and cost of living indexes?

    Report on 27 June 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • ewar69
    Love rating 0
    ewar69 said

    Most people are delusional about the value of their property in this country. However, there are plenty of people out there that have the ability to stimulate the market. Plenty of people that bought over five years ago and as a result have an equity buffer in order to let them move on price and and therefore move house.

    Those that can't afford to do this are those that have bought within the last four or five years and kept refinancing to buy new cars, holidays, pay off credit cards that they ran up debt on that they couldn't afford to service. If these people get real about their situations, pull their heads in and sit tight for the next few years they will see the light at the other end of the tunnel.

    House prices will always rise, and we all know the cycle is typically ever decade. Hey it may take another couple of years this time round but it will get there. For all those stressing about how much their property has dropped in value, so has everyone else's. So if you want to sell don't worry about the odd thousand here or there. In the scheme of things it is not a big deal and when your property has gone up again by another 10 or 20% will you really be worried about that £1000.

    Just get over yourselves and move on.

    Report on 19 July 2011  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • krustallos
    Love rating 39
    krustallos said

    @ nickpike It didn't need Labour to abolish poverty. Modern affluence and technology has done that. In fact, Labour have probably hindered prosperity

    The logic of your argument is that we should expect those countries with the weakest trade union movement to have a higher standard of living for the working class. In Sweden 95% of workers are in trade unions. In the USA 19% are (1990 stats). In Sweden the poorest 80% of the population own 67% of the wealth. In the USA the poorest 80% of the population own 15% of the wealth.

    I would say those statistics indicate that the reality is the exact opposite to the outcome predicted by your theory. Sweden has a higher per capita GDP than the US so you can't even argue that the US working class is better off in absolute terms.

    Report on 07 February 2012  |  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