benmorg

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Several places have sold recently in the area, > including a place I was watching on Oakhurst > Grove. It's just a question of pricing your > property realistically. However, the agents > presumably want to keep prices as high as they > can, and seem to be marketing properties at prices > which they will never possibly acheive. Agents aren't responsible for setting unrealistic prices - it's the vendors. They look at similar properties on rightmove (inevitably browsing all the overpriced stuff that hasn't sold) and set their prices accordingly. Result: they end up stuck on the market as well. Only those vendors who undercut the competition are getting sales. Agents are now in the business of talking down prices in order to get things moving, as they're much more interested in maintaining volume of sales rather than prices. Though saying that, there are doubtless a few agents who encourage silly pricing in order to get the instruction, only to let the property languish on the market for six weeks or so before telling the vendor they need to cut the price by 10%. Some places are selling at the moment, but only if they are priced low or the vendor has no choice about moving and has to accept a low offer. In a housing market crash, people keep buying all the way to the bottom of the cycle, but prices fall anyway because there isn't enough demand to erode the growing supply.

judging from this article, the Tunisian man stabbed on OKR got into a row with a gang of young black males: http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/3379

it's not true that these stabbings happen everywhere. They are most common in inner-city london and most are black-on-black assaults. Peckham, Walworth, Hackney and brixton are hotspots. On average Kings College Hospital treats one stabbing or gunshot victim every day. Guns and knives are now carried by a very large number of people, particularly young males, who are the most inclined to lose their heads and use them. There's a cultural dimension to this problem that needs to be addressed by community leaders. Relying on the police isn't going to solve it.

Far from "bucking the trend", the Beanied houses on this thread have yet to go under offer and both and come down in price quite a bit: upland road down 75,000 http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-21832673.rsp?pa_n=1&tr_t=buy melbourne grove down 45,000 http://www.woosterstock.co.uk/Detail.php?id=5209 judging from propertysnake, flats in SE22 are being cut in price proportionately more than houses.

Grotty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you are going North/North-West, by far the > fastest way we have found to get out of London is > to back street up to Elephant and Castle, cross > over Blackfriars Bridge, keep going straight up to > Kings Cross and left onto A40....used to be a > nightmare but the last few times we have done this > traffic flow was constant and the hellish > roadworks around St Pancras seemed a thing of the > past. We have got out and back into London faster > than any time we have tried coming in on the > M4/earls court/vauxhall way... this can work well if you're lucky with traffic on marylebone road and later on A40 (which is much slower than M4 out of london in my experience). Though crossing blackfriars & going through the City is usually very quick at the weekend. A variant is to cross waterloo bridge and go through the underpass to kingsway and russell square, then wiggle through small roads from russell sq to euston road and then west all the way to A40/M40. But you still have to brave the A40 bottleneck. I've given up on the A40 after finding M4 much quicker once you pass chiswick.

i've lost count of the number of times I've driven from East Dulwich to Manchester (via M4 usually), trying south of river, earl's court to M4, through greenwich & A12 towards M25, up through islington to A1 M1, across hammersmith & acton to M40 etc. etc. I can confirm that the quickest and easiest route at any time is camberwell, oval, Vauxhall Bridge, Embankment, Earl's Court, M4. then connect to M40 to go north. You can try and avoid heavy traffic up to Earl's Court by wiggling through Fulham, and joiningg talgarth road via baron's court of North end road (not sure which), but if you end up getting sucked into fulham palace road you can be stuck in a traffic jam for an hour (as happened last time I drove to manchester). Best advice is to drive when there's little traffic. Saturday morning before 9 a.m. is ususually a breeze. Friday evening is the worst possible time of the week and also the most dangerous, as it's the most common time for road accidents.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > heath Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Canary Wharf. So near yet so far by public > > transport. Is is just me or are the public > > transport links between here and e14 (or > anywhere > > really) the very worst in london? Today I took > > two hours to get home. It would have been 25 > > minutes by any road based transport except bus > > (meandering all over the place!). > > The Canary Wharf commute has been a topic of much > conversation in the past... generally takes me > about 35-40 mins using the train to London Bridge. > I used to drive in for the occasional 6:30 start, > and that would take about 25-30 mins. I've no idea > how you could do it in 25 mins at any more > civilised hour. you can also get to canary wharf by taking train to lewisham (from denmark hill, peckham rye or nunhead) then jumping on DLR. Advantage of this route is no long walks through London bridge crowds or sitting on sweaty tube trains.

Strand. 22 minutes cycling

Ms B Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you look at the pavement there are some big > humps where the old trees were so I'm guessing the > roots were starting to encroach on the foundations > of the houses. it's not encroachment of the roots that causes damage. It's the combination of subsoil london clay and large vigorous trees that suck water out of the ground in summer. The suction dries out the clay, which then shrinks and subsides. In winter the clay reabsorbs water and expands, causing "heave", which is the opposite of subsidence - i.e. the ground bounces back. Droughts magnify the effect. Typically you would see cracks in masonry widening through summer and closing up in winter. Thiss happens to a lesser extent in very many houses, but if the cracks get wider than half a centimetre or so, then the house might need underpinning to strengthen the foundations, so a subsidence claim would be made by the owner on their building insurance. It's a very common problem in east dulwich and norwood, which have one of the highest rates of subsidence in the UK. There has also been major landslip subsidence where the clay layer "flows" down steep hills and pushes whole rows of houses over, which happened on dunstans road under dawson's heights before before dawson's heights was built.

jollybaby Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > benmorg Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > you must have priced it low enough to attract > > interest. Just goes to show that you can always > > sell if the price is correct. My advice would > be > > take the money and run. > > Very, very tempted . sounds to me like you've already made up your mind. go for it!

big trees cause subsidence, which is v. expensive to put right. Might seem harmful to the environment to cut them down, but the growth a new tree will take as much carbon out of the air as killing the old tree released.

you must have priced it low enough to attract interest. Just goes to show that you can always sell if the price is correct. My advice would be take the money and run.

for a contrast to the beautifully presented hansler road flat, have a look at the living room here: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-17175793.rsp?pa_n=18&tr_t=buy I sometimes think estate agents deliberate post pictures like this to appeal to all the would-be sarah beenies out there. Originally marketed at 450K, then listed as sold subject to contract, now available again at 400.

danrees Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A 2 bedroom garden flat on my road originally came > onto the market at ?350k, and went SSTC. Obviously > didn't complete as it is now back on the market at > ?332k. I would imagine that the purchaser either > couldn't get a mortgage, or couldn't sell their > own smaller 1 bed flat. > > I estimate that prices in East Dulwich have to > fall about 30%. that must be the winkworth flat on hansler road: http://www.rightmove.co.uk/viewdetails-16837108.rsp?pa_n=25&tr_t=buy I've been to view this. It's a nice flat, though has a cramped, pokey feel in the corridor around the small bathroom (the bathroom door practically touches the opposite wall when it opens). Good garden. It was on at 350 when I saw it, which I thought was ludicrous. Is probably worth about 280, though if it stays stuck on the market for long enough then the 250 stamp duty threshold could bring it crashing down a lot more. It's easy to gauge the state of the east dulwich market by doing a count of properties for sale on rightmove. Currently nearly 470, which is 200 more than last year. Prices won't stabilize until stock levels fall back down under 300, which is unlikely to happen until 2009 (at the most optimistic) as this year's spring-summer selling season only has a few weeks left to run. East dulwich got very overheated, and vendors are perfectly understandably stilll hoping to achieve peak 2007 prices, which is why so many properties have got stuck on the market.

ratty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have a 2 bed in St Francis Place that I will be > looking to sell in the near future. Gutted at dip > cos they were worth just over 300k not long ago. > Dunno how much now but my dream of a 3 bed in > Sevenoaks is looking a long way off now! :( though 3-beds in Sevenoaks will have fallen in value as well, maybe more, so you could be a net gainer.

Emma Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I put my house on the market about 5 weeks ago. I > have had about 7 viewings. Pretty much all of them > came back and said they were unprocedable as they > had a property to sell. Estate agents then said I > should lower the price after about a week!! But I > am not sure whether it is a bit early to do that, > especially as I went with the price they said > initially. I totally accept that I won't get my > full asking price and am happy to lower if > necessary but can't keep lowering every few weeks. > Also I think if people are interetsed they will > try their luck at a cheeky offer and then I can > take a view. Not stupid know I need to be > flexible. Getting a bit disheartened with the > estate agents as I think they are so unused to > this market they don't seem to know whether they > are coming or going!. i think you'd get more interest if you priced low but then held out for nearer the asking price and ignored the cheeky offers. The challenge is to get enough people through the door to have a good chance of finding a serious buyer, but that's very difficult if you start with price well above what you're actually hoping for. The main danger at the moment is getting stuck on the market, which could be an expensive mistake. I sold two flats in the last year and in both cases priced low in order to attract buyers who were sure they had a bargain and would hold on through thick and thin while lease extensions etc were done. I didnt regret it as I got out of the market quickly, while the buyers got good deals - so seemed liked a win-win situation.

SCSB79 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We bought in October 07. Probably the worst time > to buy. Ignored a few things on the survey which > in hindsight we should have raised with the vendor > back then... god knows how much has come off our > value. Not worth thinking about!! > > Plus, we've now just spotted some penetrating damp > in the bedroom. Not happy. doesn't really matter if you take a long-term view. You're in a good area and that won't change - east dulwich has transformed so much that it's extremely unlikely to become down at heels again for a long time. as for your damp - can have many causes, most of then trivial. Have a look at your gutters when it's raining.

Amelie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I was doing a bit of research about prices in my > end of East Dulwich on the various estate agent > websites, so far it seems that the average price > for a good-size 1 bed sans garden is ?250K, avec > garden ?270K. So things don't seem to have > changed that much, and Ludlow Thompson is sending > out emails asking for properties to sell. Bear in mind you're just looking at asking prices and that final agreed sale prices will be significantly lower - nobody is paying full asking at the moment, except in very rare cases. 270,000 effectively means 249950 as nobody wants to go over the stamp duty threshhold.

there are some whopping reductions on propertysnake, but bear in mind these reflect silly valuations from estate agents competing for business or unrealistic expectations from vendors as much as they reflect a falling market. Saying that, prices in East Dulwich went so ballistic in 2006 and 2007 that I think there is a lot of froth to blow off. Whether being a part of the London market protects East Dulwich from a crash or makes it worse remains to be seen. In the 1988-1995 crash, London was hit much harder than the rest of the UK, but who knows if things will be the same this time round.

The problem is that more properties are coming onto the market than coming off, so supply is rising. When I started house-hunting in SE22 last year there were 260-ish properties listed on Rightmove. The number is now up to 467 (though partially swelled by a couple of estate agents starting to list on rightmove since last year - foxtons and bushells). But some properties are definitely disappearing off the market, though I'm not sure if they are selling or being rented out after failing to sell. House prices are determined by balance of supply and demand above all else. It's clear that the situation we had a year or two ago (limited supply and high demand) has now reversed, and that means prices will go down, though probably slowly as there aren't many "forced sellers" (respossessions etc).

xone262 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's definitely a great time to buy. Property is a > long term thing and that's what a lot of people > seem to forget. To many TV programs have > brainwashed people into the buy and turn around > quickly plot. That's the only risky strategy right > now. Long term investment is better now than it > was 12 to 18 months ago as there are some good > deals around. it's in the nature of a falling market that prices look like bargains all the way down to the bottom. Buying now is still a risk because the bottom could be a long way off. The last crash took 5 years to go from peak to trough, but it was steep and dramatic. The current slowdown looks to be shallower but longer. Mervyn King claims it will last 10 years, so you really do have to take a VERY lonterm view if you're buying at the moment.

biggerearrings Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi ho, > > So glad I found this forum. I'm doing the london > to brighton bike ride this June and although I > love cycling, I haven't done so in a while. I need > to try routes away from central london, so maybe > from dulwich village - where I live, to wimbledon > or sutton? I've cycled to clapham already a few > times but need something more challenging. Can > anyone help? > > Cheers there aren't any many scenic bike rides through the suburbs around Dulwich. I'd recommend taking your bike on the train from East Dulwich to Wimbledon and then exploring Wimbledon Common and Richmond Park by bike, or if you're feeling ambitious cross Richmond Park and pick up the Riverside path north around Kew Gardens - it's the nicest stretch of the thames in London. Further afield, I very very strongly recomment the Thames Valley bike path from Barnes to oxford, or at least the first half of it to Runnymede. It's the most beautiful bike ride I've ever done in the UK, takes you past endless fantastic houses with gardens down to the river with little jetties & boats moored at the bottom under willow trees. It's idyllic, best in May or June. You can get a map here (http://www.sustransshop.co.uk/index.php?f=itemdetl.php&p=nn5a). Doing the whole trip to Oxford takes 2 days and is harder than London to Brighton. For the London to Brighton you need to work on those leg muscles - the hill up to Ditchling Beacon at the end is quite something!

andyng - do you work for an estate agent?

dc Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually the opposite - I was trying to introduce > some sense of proportion through a not very subtle > use of irony. It might just be a 'difficult' or > 'challenging' time to be buying houses, but 'very > dangerous'? I think not. I'm surprised you took "very dangerous" to mean physically dangerous. I'd meant "financially dangerous", i.e. there is a real danger of negative equity/losing a great deal of money. From a financial point of view, it's a dangerous time to buy - like playing roulette with your financial future. You can argue over the "very" if you like.

Andyng Wrote: > So your saying the intro of the new transport > links (tube) to areas such as dalston > will have no affect on prices at all,and they will > continue to drop 40%? > No need to beware of anything only first time > buyers will small deposits,bad credit,facing > higher > costs of living ,and finding it harder to get > mortgage approvals?Are my not right? Andyng - please point out where I mentioned either the tube line to Dalston or claimed house prices would drop 40%. I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth. Anyone buying a house at the moment is likely to lose a significant amount of money in the short to medium term. That's why I used the phrase "buyer beware".