Options
House prices
CitySlicker
Posts: 10,414 Forum Member
✭✭
This automatically excludes some areas like London, but there is a definite trend I've noticed recently.
How many people say they can't afford a house, or look to overstretch on their mortgage (and I mean way overstretch), then you ask them where they want to live.
In my neck of the woods for instance, this would be like a first time buyer saying they can't afford a house and they're looking to move into Notting Hill or Finchley, when they could perhaps afford something in nearby not-so-affluent Cricklewood or Neasden. Okay many people cannot afford any area of London but this is an illustration.
I've noticed so many people though saying they can't afford their first home but they are doing something typical of the generation X'ers - trying to have it all at once. It's like living back in yuppie 80's without the politics (or money for that matter). Whatever happened to buying what is within someones budget then trading up later on?
I found someone saying they cannot afford a house on here recently as they need a mortgage of over £100,000 - yet within 5 miles of their 'wishlist' area houses existed for £50-60,000.
Or will generation X'ers just never learn, strangling themselves with over the top mortgages to balance on their already maxed-out credit cards? Not so many years ago debt was a taboo subject, something to be ashamed of. So why is it now people think a debt is something to be almost proud of?
I'm not displaying money snobbery at all - when I was younger, if I wanted it I saved for it. If I couldn't afford it I did without. It's paid off now because I have more financial freedom as a result of my earlier frugality, but some people just need to wake up I think and stop crying they can't afford housing in some areas as they clearly can - they just don't want the housing on offer.
How many people say they can't afford a house, or look to overstretch on their mortgage (and I mean way overstretch), then you ask them where they want to live.
In my neck of the woods for instance, this would be like a first time buyer saying they can't afford a house and they're looking to move into Notting Hill or Finchley, when they could perhaps afford something in nearby not-so-affluent Cricklewood or Neasden. Okay many people cannot afford any area of London but this is an illustration.
I've noticed so many people though saying they can't afford their first home but they are doing something typical of the generation X'ers - trying to have it all at once. It's like living back in yuppie 80's without the politics (or money for that matter). Whatever happened to buying what is within someones budget then trading up later on?
I found someone saying they cannot afford a house on here recently as they need a mortgage of over £100,000 - yet within 5 miles of their 'wishlist' area houses existed for £50-60,000.
Or will generation X'ers just never learn, strangling themselves with over the top mortgages to balance on their already maxed-out credit cards? Not so many years ago debt was a taboo subject, something to be ashamed of. So why is it now people think a debt is something to be almost proud of?
I'm not displaying money snobbery at all - when I was younger, if I wanted it I saved for it. If I couldn't afford it I did without. It's paid off now because I have more financial freedom as a result of my earlier frugality, but some people just need to wake up I think and stop crying they can't afford housing in some areas as they clearly can - they just don't want the housing on offer.
0
Comments
5 miles is a long way where houses are concerened. Near me, within 1/2 a mile of each other we've got million pound houses and a really rough council estate! I certainly wouldn't want to spend the 70-90k required to live on it just because it was near my ideal location.
You can't have it all at once, and have to be patient. To get to the good, you have to work your way through the bad first. Like living in a crap chav neighbourhood, with a lot of noise.
Whoever said life was easy ?
I have no debt and on what I would class an average wage for my area. I cannot afford a house and I am not willing to be in debt for the next 25 years to own a 1 bedroom flat that costs the same as a 3 bed house did only 4 years ago.
Simple fact of the matter is here in Northern Ireland if you are a first time buyer you are really going to have a struggle getting a mortgage as pay here is on average £100 less per week than the mainland, with a large majority of people being on or slightly above the min wage. Add to that the governments stupid ruling they brought out recently which states house can no longer be built in the country side chances of owning a house here are slim to nil.
I would not live in a flat because when I rented one I almost had a nervous breakdown due to the neighbours making a racket.
So, Mr JS and I are currently buying our first house which is going to cost over £100k. Yes we're going to overstretch ourselves a little bit BUT I think the benefits far outweigh the cons.
There is an estate I used to live nearby and a lot of people didn't want to be on the estate because it had a bad name. Yet I had a friend on the estate, I felt safe walking around it, my friend had a nice house and as far as I last heard he is still happily living there with no incidents at all.
That to me is snobbery - I live where I do simply because I can afford to, I have worked for it, I have not set out to live in an area just because more affluent people may be able to and I want to be seen as 'one of the Jones'. But there was a FM who I mentioned earlier who only wanted to live in one of three areas of a large city, and also dismissed the cheaper areas I found for them. To me that is the problem - wanting it all now, not working and getting it gradually.
No snobbery at all. You pick the area first, then the house second.
I'd much rather have a bad house in a good area as a good house in a bad area.
I don't think alot of people can be afford to be that picky at the min.
Exactly, and it's this group of people who are being picky that are at the highest risk of falling into negative equity. All back to my point about this being the live for today crowd, yet Black Wednesday was only 15 years ago as I'm sure anyone who was a homeoner here will remember.
I never received any help for the rent I payed before I went further north, yet if I was in a council house I would then have been allowed to buy it at a reduced price that bloody annoys me no end......
This is an interesting site if you want to find the price of a house sold in your street since 2000 .-
http://www.nethouseprices.com/index.php?con=sold_prices&first_search=yes&search_type=EW
PC
Indeed, and it's a proven fact that houses in bad areas stand to lose the most in housing market downturns whereas houses in good areas tend to hold their values much better. This happens as you get towards the end of a bubble the bad areas are the only ones that people can afford thus raising the prices up at the last stage. However, in a market downturn as house prices fall these areas are shunned as the more desirable ones become more reasonably priced.
In the last crash the ones that lost the most were flats and the shittiest low end £60k type houses in bad areas you linked to in your last thread as houses in better areas became more affordable. there will always be demand for good houses in decent areas, although, I do admit most people who have bought in the last two years will take a good beating if the market crashes like it did before.
That's how I got on the housing ladder as I bought a very cheap flat in 1994 whcih was at the lowest point of the crash as it was all I could afford. I now own a nice 4 bed semi 12 years later. If there is a crash it's the 1st time buyers who will benefit and they deserve a break. Anyway haven't we been told there's a crash coming for years now and the opposite just keeps happening??? Interest rates might rise a bit but it's those on 100% mortgages who lied about their incomes to get them who will be affected most.
It wouldn't be a bad thing, in my opinion, for a bit more shame to come into debt as it used to be years ago. And remember - the log cabin, the expensive cars et al - it isn't theirs for many, many years.
Yes, but I have known folk who could not get insured for possessions like TVs and video recorders - one bod had his stolen FIVE times! It isn't just a snobbery about a slightly less glam. area, sometimes it is about safety for self and home.
I totally agree. Even though houses do exist for £60 or £70 thousand, I wouldnt dream of buying one because I have a wife and soon to have a baby to think of. Theres no way I would dream of movin to a crime ridden area - I would be too scared for their saftey. Earlier in this thread, someone said they'd rather have the worst house in the best street, than have the best house in the worst. I totally agree with this, I wouldnt buy a house in the worst street anywhere, regardless of its condition, because I dont want my family having to liv in an area like that. You may consider this snobbishness, but I consider it looking out for my family, wanting the best for them, and to me that means not exposing them to unnecessary danger. I dont care if someone offered to give me the nicest house with golden furniture, but in a totally crime ridden area - because it wouldnt be nice and full of golden furniture in the morning.
The problem is that inflation is now low (whilst house prices keep escalating out of control) that it is fairly difficult, if not impossible for many to move up the housing ladder especially easily or quickly; the next 'step' up keeps getting more and more expensive since your wage over time isn't increasing by an equivalent amount.