Are houses selling around here at all?

[flocker spotter]

yes it is usually relative

[James]

>>It's all relative isn't it?

>>If you lower yours down by ?100k then the one you buy should be lowered by ?100k.

>>Nobody loses and you are saddled with less debt.

This is utter nonsense. "Should" be lowered? Who says it "should"? The great God of the Housing Market in the sky above? Surely you know that this is not how markets work? If (like us) the seller is not happy with what they are offered, they simply won't budge. Which seems to be what is happening en masse at the moment. You are also forgetting that when the market changes it can affect different levels in different ways. From what I hear, one-bed flats are moving faster than two or three-bed houses.

It never ceases to amaze me how people who know nothing about a subject are so happy to hold forth as if they are experts. The everyday perils of the internet forum I guess.

[rendelharris]

I think you've misunderstood James, I'm sure Stephen meant if yours drops then others on the market will, not that there's any order in place that mandates it!

[flocker spotter]

.

[rendelharris]

flocker spotter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> .

Well done, this is very much to be encouraged from you. More please!

[ruthief]

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> First time buyers are OK (they get relief up to

> 500K) - it's 2nd home owners and expensive

> properties that are hit.

>

> 2nd home owners have been hit hard - and the

> government is looking for money for the NHS this

> autumn too.

Having been a first time buyer recently i can say with certainty this is not true in my experience - it is harder than ever for people in our situation. Firstly, the government scheme only allows up to 450k which, although a huge amount for first timers, will buy you virtually nothing in most of London. Certainly not in ED. Secondly, without the benefit of the huge increase in property values over recent years providing equity for a deposit you have to save incredibly hard to afford the outlay (even with the current sluggish market, assuming you didnt buy here very recently there will have been a significant increase in your property value). Finally, with the absurdly expensive and largely unregulated private rental sector, where does the disposable income come from for first time buyers to save a deposit plus stamp duty, as well as afford increasing cost of living in london?

I appreciate its hard for everyone, but to say first time buyers are okay is a bit of a stretch

[JohnL]

ruthief Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> JohnL Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > First time buyers are OK (they get relief up to

> > 500K) - it's 2nd home owners and expensive

> > properties that are hit.

> >

> > 2nd home owners have been hit hard - and the

> > government is looking for money for the NHS

> this

> > autumn too.

>

>

> Having been a first time buyer recently i can say

> with certainty this is not true in my experience -

> it is harder than ever for people in our

> situation. Firstly, the government scheme only

> allows up to 450k which, although a huge amount

> for first timers, will buy you virtually nothing

> in most of London. Certainly not in ED. Secondly,

> without the benefit of the huge increase in

> property values over recent years providing equity

> for a deposit you have to save incredibly hard to

> afford the outlay (even with the current sluggish

> market, assuming you didnt buy here very recently

> there will have been a significant increase in

> your property value). Finally, with the absurdly

> expensive and largely unregulated private rental

> sector, where does the disposable income come from

> for first time buyers to save a deposit plus stamp

> duty, as well as afford increasing cost of living

> in london?

>

> I appreciate its hard for everyone, but to say

> first time buyers are okay is a bit of a stretch

It depends what OK means and what your aspirations are.

I own 30% of my flat on shared ownership - I admit I should have brought more and could have but you do other things - the total flat value is just over 400K (I'm SE15 not SE22). I paid about 7K in deposit etc 10 years ago.

If you're talking about houses then totally agree it's almost impossible - but houses in London are not for first time buyers (although many people I knew lied about their salary to get on the ladder 15 or so years ago when you could do that unbelievably).

(self certification mortgages they were called - no wonder we had issues in 2008)

[Jules-and-Boo]

You can buy a flat for ?450k in London and the Help to Buy scheme is fantastic.

As with all first time buyers, you will start small and build up (I suppose, should you aspire to a bigger house).

[AbDabs]

I've just looked on Rightmove for flats in and around East Dulwich, up to the value of ?450K. There were five pages of them, and even included a few with 3 beds.

[gabys1st]

No probs selling ours.

[L16579]

We?re considering taking ?450k for our 2 bed conversion now the markets taken a tumble. Family situation otherwise we would hang on for a year or so and hope to get nearer the ?550k the estate agents were sure it was worth in March. I think there has been a lot of over pricing by the local estate agents which hasn?t helped.

[fishbiscuits]

L16579 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think there has been a lot of over pricing by the local

> estate agents which hasn?t helped.

This is what I can't work out. If the housing market has stalled, why haven't asking prices come down? Why are agents still putting on 2 bed flats at 550K, 3 bed houses at 950K?

[Mick Mac]

fishbiscuits Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> L16579 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think there has been a lot of over pricing by

> the local

> > estate agents which hasn?t helped.

>

> This is what I can't work out. If the housing

> market has stalled, why haven't asking prices come

> down? Why are agents still putting on 2 bed flats

> at 550K, 3 bed houses at 950K?

About a third of the rightmove added in last 24 hours properties on any given day are shown as "reduced" - surely thats a reduction in asking prices.

[JohnL]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> fishbiscuits Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > L16579 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > I think there has been a lot of over pricing

> by

> > the local

> > > estate agents which hasn?t helped.

> >

> > This is what I can't work out. If the housing

> > market has stalled, why haven't asking prices

> come

> > down? Why are agents still putting on 2 bed

> flats

> > at 550K, 3 bed houses at 950K?

>

> About a third of the rightmove added in last 24

> hours properties on any given day are shown as

> "reduced" - surely thats a reduction in asking

> prices.

Unless you're DFS House Sales.

[Blackcurrant]

fishbiscuits Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> L16579 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I think there has been a lot of over pricing by

> the local

> > estate agents which hasn?t helped.

>

> This is what I can't work out. If the housing

> market has stalled, why haven't asking prices come

> down? Why are agents still putting on 2 bed flats

> at 550K, 3 bed houses at 950K?

Estate agents don't much care what houses actually sell for. They just want the instruction. The business model is based on turnover, not high prices. So agents compete for instructions by inflating sellers' hopes with claims they can get a higher price than other agents. Then, when the house has languished unsold for 10 weeks, they hope the seller will cut the price to market value and get a sale. As a result, in a falling market most sellers end up stuck above high-tide mark, while the few buyers around only offer on the bargains.

[Mick Mac]

Unless you're DFS House Sales.

Yes - there is that....

[bsand]

Condition , location and price get all these in place and you will have a sale. My dad said buy the worse house on the best street if you can. Check out nethouseprices.co.uk to see what actual sales have been similar to your recently. Tis a buyer's market at the moment if you're not prepared to discount then buyers will look to sellers who will. When you see falling prices the market psychology goes into reverse. If I wait I might get it cheaper next month , year plus if you're mortgaged - valuers are starting to downvalue to protect the bank's equity interest in the purchase. Plus there is a vast oversupply of central rabbit hutches waiting to glut the market with help to buy, big discounts and freebies such as 'no stamp duty' free furniture , iphones and the like to tempt prospects.

[Mark]

L16579 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think there has been a lot of over pricing by the local

> estate agents which hasn?t helped.

I'll refer you to a classic EDF posts "Want to be an Estate Agent?" posted by MrBen http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1379816

It's a favourite because 2 days later an estate agents came round to ours and did exactly that (except number 5 as we didn't use them).

[ed26]

>

> Estate agents don't much care what houses actually

> sell for. They just want the instruction. The

> business model is based on turnover, not high

> prices. So agents compete for instructions by

> inflating sellers' hopes with claims they can get

> a higher price than other agents. Then, when the

> house has languished unsold for 10 weeks, they

> hope the seller will cut the price to market value

> and get a sale. As a result, in a falling market

> most sellers end up stuck above high-tide mark,

> while the few buyers around only offer on the

> bargains.

The percentage model is totally biased against customers and favours the agent. If you're charging 2% of a sale price (no idea what rates are around here at the moment) and the asking price is ?1m, an agent doesn't care whether they get 2% of ?1m or 2% of ?900K, as it's just the difference of ?18K in the bank or ?20K that may come later if they are fortunate.

A more equitable model would be to agree a listing fee for a price that any monkey could sell for (say ?800K in this example) and then, say, 10%-15% of every ?1 above this level. This way, the estate agent would be more realistic about the likely sale price and be incentivised to get the best price for their customer.

[Abe_froeman]

It's worse than that Ed, because the individuals who make the sale are competing against each other to earn 10% of that 2% commission.

So for the individual agents it's the difference between ?2000 that might never materialise and ?1800 cash this month that a colleague might take off you by closing the sale now at a lower price.

[Blackcurrant]

ed26 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Estate agents don't much care what houses

> actually

> > sell for. They just want the instruction. The

> > business model is based on turnover, not high

> > prices. So agents compete for instructions by

> > inflating sellers' hopes with claims they can

> get

> > a higher price than other agents. Then, when

> the

> > house has languished unsold for 10 weeks, they

> > hope the seller will cut the price to market

> value

> > and get a sale. As a result, in a falling

> market

> > most sellers end up stuck above high-tide mark,

> > while the few buyers around only offer on the

> > bargains.

>

>

> The percentage model is totally biased against

> customers and favours the agent. If you're

> charging 2% of a sale price (no idea what rates

> are around here at the moment) and the asking

> price is ?1m, an agent doesn't care whether they

> get 2% of ?1m or 2% of ?900K, as it's just the

> difference of ?18K in the bank or ?20K that may

> come later if they are fortunate.

>

> A more equitable model would be to agree a listing

> fee for a price that any monkey could sell for

> (say ?800K in this example) and then, say, 10%-15%

> of every ?1 above this level. This way, the estate

> agent would be more realistic about the likely

> sale price and be incentivised to get the best

> price for their customer.

That assumes the estate agent has some degree of control over the price achieved, but the truth is that the final price is determined by the market and not the effort the agent puts into marketing the house.

Where they do sometimes earn their fee is in keeping chains from falling apart, but that's not usually a huge amount of work.

There's a good reason that it's usually the manager that visits all the prospective sellers and the grunts that do the selling - getting properties signed up is the most important part of the business.

[bsand]

Rightmove and Zoopla have made the market more transparent than ever - couple with easily available land registry prices 'price discovery' isn't the black art it once was. If you have the time to intelligently and competently handling enquiries quickly and price appropriately to market I would be tempted to go with one of the online agents but be prepared to put the time in and realise they like to overprice to get the listing as there is a fee to pay sold or unsold. Agents will talk persuasively about cross marketing from different branches of the network but many are stand alone franchises with no incentive to to do so.

[DulwichLondoner]

ed26 Wrote:

> A more equitable model would be to agree a listing

> fee for a price that any monkey could sell for

> (say ?800K in this example) and then, say, 10%-15%

> of every ?1 above this level. This way, the estate

> agent would be more realistic about the likely

> sale price and be incentivised to get the best

> price for their customer.

I have tried to negotiate something like this this year (the higher the price, the higher the commission) and only 1 out of 4 agents contacted would accept it

[Mick Mac]

Blackcurrant Wrote:

>

> That assumes the estate agent has some degree of

> control over the price achieved,

They will in many cases. Once they have a genuinely interested party, they need to manage both the buyer and the seller to a price they are both willing to proceed at.

If you don't believe the agent has any impact on price, then use Purple Bricks. But although you save on commission you could well be losing much more than that on price.

[bsand]

Yes they are selling - May sold prices ...

112 Landcroft Road, East Dulwich, London, SE22 9JW

Terraced, Freehold, Non-Newbuild

?940,000 18th May 2018

265 - 267 Lordship Lane, London, SE22 8JG

Freehold, Non-Newbuild

?66,000 17th May 2018

49 Hindmans Road, London, SE22 9NQ

Terraced, Freehold, Non-Newbuild

?890,000 16th May 2018

Flat A 26 Crawthew Grove, London, SE22 9AB

Flat, Leasehold, Non-Newbuild

?625,000 11th May 2018

The Ground Floor Flat At 43 St Francis Road, London, SE22 8DE

Flat, Leasehold, Non-Newbuild

?470,000 11th May 2018

1a Crystal Palace Road, London, SE22 9EX

Flat, Leasehold, Non-Newbuild

?487,500 10th May 2018

158 Peckham Rye, London, SE22 9QH

Terraced, Freehold, Non-Newbuild

?1,150,000 4th May 2018

38 Shawbury Road, London, SE22 9DH

Freehold, Non-Newbuild

?12,900 4th May 2018

184a Lordship Lane, London, SE22 8LR

Flat, Leasehold, Non-Newbuild

?625,000 4th May 2018