Recession.

[Digit]

To buy a house i needed cheap money

I'm not qualified to agree or disagree with that but some observations I can make.
Firstly building land has increased very considerably in terms of the labour time necessary to acquire it.
Secondly the same has applied to the structure once erected due, amongst other things to more being in a house than of yore.
An example is the situation before the present slump and before WW2. Before WW2 a decent house could be afforded by a skilled man on his wages and he could afford a family as well. Now it requires, in most cases, two people's wages to make the purchase.
The idea of carbon neutral houses etcetera is likely to make the situation even worse.
In addition the insistence on the construction of dwellings using minute blocks of burnt clay as as building materials is frankly stupid.
The Scandinavians can put a house up very much more rapidly than we do, perhaps the time has come to review our methods.

Roy.

 

[Rich]

I recall seeing on Grand Designs, a German engineered house made from wood going up in 8 days and that included the services as well, that to me is efficiency personified, all the building needed was furnishing, absolutely amazing and I was very impressed, had I the means right now I would commission one tomorrow on the Gower peninsula overlooking 3 cliffs bay, I live in hope...........

Rich.

 

[Digit]

Any form of factory construction Rich must reduce the site wage content of the purchase. Building in brick is not only time consuming it is the end product of a lot of pollution.

Roy.

 

[Rich]

The pro's are obvious, the cons......... well, a lot of tradesmen would be out of work, but I think it may come to it eventually.

Rich.

 

[Shultzy]

Rich, I think you are referring to a HOFF house.

 

[Rich]

Rich, I think you are referring to a HOFF house.

That's the one Shultzy, it took 7 german men 8 days to erect, it would have been quicker but they were let down by the crane firm, the crane turned up 4 hrs late to unload the lorry, german efficiency held back by british tardiness

Rich.

 

[Shultzy]

german efficiency held back by british tardiness Rich.

I quite agree. I certainly think we should build more wooden houses but do they last as long without maintenance?

 

[Digit]

Depends where you live Shultzy. In recent years the weather where I have lived has seen mild winters, in the past where I saw bitter winters the spalling of bricks during frosty weather could be considerable.
My timber house was constructed in 1938 and receives a fresh coat of Creosote every three years. Beats re-pointing etc hands down.

Roy.

 

[Rich]

german efficiency held back by british tardiness Rich.

I quite agree. I certainly think we should build more wooden houses but do they last as long without maintenance?

Every building needs maintenance be it brick or wooden, they seem to do alright in Switzerland, Norway, Sweden etc, but as I say the price to pay will be unemployment in a BIG way, are we prepared to accept that price?
It's a big price to pay and a choice I would not like to have to sanction in a wholesale manner, I fear the immediate need for cheap, quick housing solutions may bring this about purely by market forces, I know these Hoff houses are rather expensive at the moment but it won't be long before some entreprenurial chap comes along to mass produce these units and the price comes down to affordability maybe even doing away with the need for a mortgage? anything is possible and market forces will determine the outcome.

Rich.

 

[Maia28]

Interesting discussion this. I live very near where Scandia Hus make timber frame houses for erection on site. I'm also very involved in a campaign to try and stop Tarmac putting in a large quarry in an AONB. Putting two-and-two together, it seems sensible that rather than building predominantly from limited mineral reserves (gravel, sand) that are expensive and energy hungry to process and transport, we should instead grow more trees for timber house construction. It should be quicker, lighter and less energy intensive as well as encouraging biodiversity and land management. At the weald and downland museum (singleton) near me there are many examples of timber framed houses, one or two 450 years old. There are plenty of examples of timber frame houses that age that are still occupied.

Andy

 

[Maia28]

german efficiency held back by british tardiness Rich.

I quite agree. I certainly think we should build more wooden houses but do they last as long without maintenance?

Every building needs maintenance be it brick or wooden, they seem to do alright in Switzerland, Norway, Sweden etc, but as I say the price to pay will be unemployment in a BIG way, are we prepared to accept that price?
It's a big price to pay and a choice I would not like to have to sanction in a wholesale manner, I fear the immediate need for cheap, quick housing solutions may bring this about purely by market forces, I know these Hoff houses are rather expensive at the moment but it won't be long before some entreprenurial chap comes along to mass produce these units and the price comes down to affordability maybe even doing away with the need for a mortgage? anything is possible and market forces will determine the outcome.

Rich.

Agree Rich that taking employment out of the construction industry may not be entirely beneficial. However, I really question whether we really do need as many new houses as we have been told. I looked into a Scandia Hus house and they do stock designs as well as bespoke. The problem was not construction costs which were very reasonable, but land cost. I contemplated demolishing my current house and building anew, but decided that if we wanted to build like that we would want a better location that we couldn't afford. A 2-bed basic kit was around £40 000 upto £250 000 for a large 5/6-bed.

 

[Digit]

Possibly not a valid assumption Rich. During the last major recession the building trades were slaughtered. Before they could return to work in numbers others had to be in employment, the result was that many tradesmen had by then taken other employment and never returned to building work. Hence the archetypal Polish plumber.

Roy.

 

[dicktimber]

In Scotland timber built new homes are the norm, and very efficient, cost effctive and can be built for a fraction of brick built homes.

This government talk about starter homes but in reality a starter home should be priced IMO, at arrd £100,000, and if built in the terrace form I believe this could be achieved.
I just can't comprehend how, when all our homes have lost value, and the majority of us have mortgages, how anyone can move home at all?

And just on a final not.....and I am not a racist but...

In the photo in todays papers, taken during the first moments of opening,
At the Selfridges Sale, I couldn't see a single, first generation white face, everyone seemed to be chineese, asian or african........or do my eyes need testing?
What happened to the white British, were they the ones worried about next year?
Anyone else notice that aspect of the photo?

Cheers
Mike

 

[Digit]

I played the same game last year at the sales ****, same observation I'm afraid.

Roy.

 

[p111dom]

In Scotland timber built new homes are the norm, and very efficient, cost effctive and can be built for a fraction of brick built homes.

This government talk about starter homes but in reality a starter home should be priced IMO, at arrd £100,000, and if built in the terrace form I believe this could be achieved.
I just can't comprehend how, when all our homes have lost value, and the majority of us have mortgages, how anyone can move home at all?

That a little missleading. Timber homes aren't common at all (as in log cabbin style). Timber framed houses are, which just means they are water tight within as few days, essential up here because the weather's so crap. The bricks are then build around the timber frame. The saving is in the lack of days lost for labour due to inclement weather but most of the houses up here are then rendered which looks good for a year or two then goes a horrible dirty grey colour making even the poshest estate look rough as hell. £100000 for a starter home, you must be joking. :shock: The banks are all going back to lending only three times your salary so if you say a young person just starting out who is luck enough to earn the nation average of about 20k that's 60k tops plus a small deposit.

As one in the often slagged off age range of 30-35 I'm luck enough to have been about to buy before the boom really took off in around 2000. Hence my mortgage is relatively cheap and I'm not yet in negative equity but that's not to say I won't be. The smallest houses on my estate were selling 6 months ago for £189000. One round the corner has just sold for £126000. I really feels for them. I have many friend who got suck off the ladder when the prices took off. At one time the house I way living in was increasing in value per month by more then the cost of my mortgage. How can anyone save for that? I agree that many went OTT wih the credit and spending but to be honest I kind of angry I didn't. With a low mortgage and nothing on credit cards I only buy something when I have to money for it so my finances are fine yet the only benefit I'll see is the vat reduction for the year. After that since I'm in a higher tax band I'll no doubt be one of the hardest hit when it comes to paying off the national debt. I know people that ran up huge amounts of debt over the last few years, have gone through a company that has arranged for them to be declaired bankrupt, debt free and the courts at the moment are bringing people out of bankrupsy within 12 months. They have even kept all their posessions just lost the house, rented and will be buying again shortly. Not too bad when you consider they were in massive negative equity and can just walk away, £275000 worth of debt just dissapearing. Anyway I have to go and start another rant thread about my favourite ranting topic "Festool". :evil:

 

[Karl]

I know people that ran up huge amounts of debt over the last few years, have gone through a company that has arranged for them to be declaired bankrupt, debt free and the courts at the moment are bringing people out of bankrupsy within 12 months. They have even kept all their posessions just lost the house, rented and will be buying again shortly. Not too bad when you consider they were in massive negative equity and can just walk away, £275000 worth of debt just dissapearing. Anyway I have to go and start another rant thread about my favourite ranting topic "Festool". :evil:

Up until a few years ago you were not released from Bankruptcy until after 3 years (2 if your unsecured debts were less than £20k). But as part of the Enterprise Bill, this was changed and all people are released from Bankruptcy within 12 months, sometimes less, depending on how quickly the case is dealt with (as little as 3 months), unless the Official Receiver dealing with the case deems that you deserve to be bankrupt for a longer period. Unlikely in the vast majority of cases.

As for Bankrupts losing their house - unlikely if they are in -ve equity, although they may choose to let the mortgage provider sell the property and any shortfall would simply be a claim in the Bankruptcy. Keeping "other assets" - depends on what they are really. And what is declared as an "asset".

As for the bankrupts "buying again shortly" - maybe. But not at the sort of high street rates you or I could get. The Bankruptcy will remain on their record for 6/10 years (can't remember which), and will seriously affect their ability to get a mortgage at a sensible rate.

Cheers

Karl

 

[p111dom]

It's five years then you're all clear. As for the house many people think they can declare themselved bankrupt and then just walk away but mortgage lender can come after you for I think 7 years so even after bankrupsy you'll owe them unless you go bankrupt in a devious way hence the company asistance. Basically with them it was a case of them borrowing against their home to the max based on unrealistic valuations ie 200k plus. Then the guy across the road's house got reposessed and the bank just couldn't sell it. It went to auction and made (and I kid you not) 80k. Faced with a mortage of £1500 per month and struggling when an identical house sells across the road for what would be £550 per month on a mortgage just made them give up the financial fight. Even when they are charged an large premium on the interest rate for a new mortgage £550pm becomes more like £700 but thats still less than half what they were paying for the same house.

 

[Karl]

It's five years then you're all clear. As for the house many people think they can declare themselved bankrupt and then just walk away but mortgage lender can come after you for I think 7 years so even after bankrupsy you'll owe them unless you go bankrupt in a devious way hence the company asistance.

Not true.

The "five years" you refer to would probably be a Voluntary Arrangement, not Bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is over within 12 months. But will remain on your credit record for 6 or 10 years.

If you are declared bankrupt and your property is sold, the mortgage lender CANNOT pursue you for the shortfall. In essence, you can walk away from -ve equity by declaring yourself bankrupt.

Cheers

Karl

 

[p111dom]

Sorry that what I meant. It only stays on your record now for 5 years. I think you'll find the mortgage issue is not true they can persue you. It's not well known and many fall foul of it. The rules differ on whether it was secured or un secured debt. The way around this is transfering the liabilitly of secured debt onto someone else (ie the banks) so it effectively becomes an unsecured debt. That way the debt dies with the bankrupcy. The problem is that with the period of the housing boom, when people have gone bankrupt there has often been enough money from the sale of the property to cover all the money owed. That's not the case now. I've read many a tale about people who got to their five year post bankrupcy date thinking they were all clear only for a letter to arrive from the bank telling them that they still owed money (ie the difference between what they owed and the price the bank got for the house). There was a programme about it all on either radio 4 or five live I forget which. It's all rather convoluted. The trick apparently is not to give up your house which the banks will ask you to do but you have to engineer a situation where the bank takes it off you. They are then taking over the asset and own the security on which the debt it owed. If you voulentee to give it up the debt stays on your name for which your're still liable. It something like that anyway. Not as straight forward as you might think. These companies charge about £5000 to make sure you do everything the correct (at least legally if nor morally) way. Having never gone through it I'd be lying if I said I were an expert. I just know two people going throught this right now and it's all rather convoluted.

 

[dicktimber]

Sixty grand mortgage plus a small deposit seems a good deal for a starter home and isn't beyond most young peoples income.........so what are you trying to say?

When we talk about saving we talk about a being disiplined enough to put away some of our disposable income, and sacrifice part of the lifestyle for the inconvenience of doing so.
It's impossible to plan for economic disasters, I agree, however we can make informed decissions and take actions, that will help us in future situations.
One of the interesting observations has been that many who moaned about not being able to get on the housing ladder, just did not save, because they were not prepared make any sacrifices.

The big problem with home builders, like industry and retail has been the bottom line for share holders.
They talk about affordable homes but have little intention of compromising
profit.....but wait......
as things go down the tubes some entrepeneur will exploit this avenue....after all after ww2 no one had anything and prefabs were the starter home for millions of people.

mike