Trying to buy a house in this area is near impossible

[????]

Get a room (cheaper to get one in ED....probably)

[LondonMix]

We may just have to agree to disagree. Prices even within an area vary due to proximity to transport, schools, ammenities etc. So we can continue linking endlessly to properties that illustrate our respective points. For instance, here is a 4 bed house is SW4 that is 1,845 sqft asking 1.35m

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-42920359.html

Below is a 4 bed house is SE22 that is 1,776 sft that is under offer at 1.3m

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-29061372.html

However, my real point was not about like for like comparisons but rather the price psqm. 3 bed houses in ED cost on a psm basis about the same as large houses in Clapham. ED houses aren't better value for money but represent a chance to acquire something affordable because of the relative smaller sized homes available in the area. A 3-bed in ED costs circa 700 per square foot which about the same if not a little more as houses in Clapham.

[StraferJack]

this is like listening to politicians argue finer points of unrelated detail whilst missing the main point

it doesn't really matter (to most people) if a 4 bed house costs 1.5 or 1.25 million

[LondonMix]

Sorry if you missed (or don?t care about) the point I was making. I think Mick Mack and I (though we disagree) are trying to understand what is happening to house prices in ED and why. Is this just part of a broader increase in London (not really as ED is growing faster the London on average and faster than Central London statistically) or is ED catching up with other areas. If it?s a catch up is it just due to the area becoming more appealing or is the area relatively affordable due to the smaller homes. Is the demand driven by more families staying in London?

I know this isn?t as interesting as just moaning endlessly about how unfair it all is though?

[Mick Mac]

LondonMix Wrote:

>

> I know this isn?t as interesting as just moaning

> endlessly about how unfair it all is though?

Good point well made.

But it goes to the heart of the OP - the mention of "this area" as if its something special is just misguided - its the same everywhere, or worse.

If you have 20 pages of people implying a lie, then you have to show them the facts and the facts are that there are few areas in or close to zone 2 that are cheaper than ED.

[StraferJack]

implying a lie? who?

I agree that "there are few areas in or close to zone 2 that are cheaper than ED."

but that is the very point - when a traditionally cheap area is still at the bottom end of a price comparison table, but we are talking about the prices we are, where 2 income well paid professionals can't afford to buy, saying something is wrong is not the same as "moaning endlessly about how unfair it is"

amongst all of the explanations (of which I am quite capable of putting forward myself) few people seem interested in saying much beyond "well here are the reasons - some of which we disagree about"

But unless something is done to prick the bubble it will get very messy indeed (and a few people have put forward suggestions as to what might tame pricing)

[Saila]

I agree. Most ppl couldn't afford anything like these prices, if **they weren't selling in the first place**

What worries me is that we're getting to a stage where there are 'haves' and 'have nots' ie Land-owners and non-land-owners. Like olden times!

Scary. Even if youre on the ladder now, chances are your kids won't ever be... Sad.

All this is really only London

I'm still in the hope-camp that it pops soon

[StraferJack]

It's not so much about fairness or not - it's just untenable

If everyone saying "it's the market stupid, dems the rules" had to take their salary, and their partner (at whatever the peaks of boths salaries were) and genuinely had to compete in the market for a home now (now, not 12 months ago) , it would be very instructive. Saying you can buy a 4 bed in (say) Anerley for 350k is one thing but I'm pretty sure not many people would. It doesn't even remotely compare to ED 15-20 years ago

[Saila]

But you're looking at things on an absolute basis

When you look at the stats, borrowing levels are still lower than 2007.

Current house prices are showing a sort of catch-up trade.

Governments around the world have been printing masses of money. There's nowhere to put it.

Equities are flying and could go much higher. It's not just london. Its sydney, singapore, new york etc.

Money is cheap

Debt is cheap

This is the result

[red devil]

Saila Wrote:

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

> What worries me is that we're getting to a stage

> where there are 'haves' and 'have nots' ie

> Land-owners and non-land-owners. Like olden

> times!

>

> Scary. Even if youre on the ladder now, chances

> are your kids won't ever be... Sad.

I've thought this for a while. A generation of children waiting for their parents to snuff it...

[mikeb]

And hoping that they snuff it quickly and cheaply, otherwise it will all go on palliative care.

[Mick Mac]

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> It's not so much about fairness or not - it's just

> untenable

>

> If everyone saying "it's the market stupid, dems

> the rules" had to take their salary, and their

> partner (at whatever the peaks of boths salaries

> were) and genuinely had to compete in the market

> for a home now (now, not 12 months ago) , it would

> be very instructive. Saying you can buy a 4 bed in

> (say) Anerley for 350k is one thing but I'm pretty

> sure not many people would. It doesn't even

> remotely compare to ED 15-20 years ago

I bought my first house, a cottage, in Hither Green. Its what I could afford. Had to move from Clapham. Take from that what you like.

That house I bought had been valued in 1990 and was worth the same when I bought it in 1997. It hadn't moved.

After this price rise ultimately finishes, there will be a long period before confidence returns and there will at some stage be a buying opportunity when prices stagnate and wages rise.

It won't suit everyone's timing but I have no fears for the teenagers of today. They will probably pick up reasonably priced property again in 10 or 12 years time at the start of the next bubble.

[DaveR]

There is a real question as to whether the current market is 'untenable' or a 'bubble' (both words used above) but pointing to the price trend over a short period in one corner of SE London does not even begin to provide an answer.

Saying 'it's the market' is not an excuse not to probe further, but is useful insofar as the questions to be asked are about the fundamentals of market behaviour i.e. supply and demand. Supply in inner london is very limited, and in the case of period properties is essentially fixed or falling. Demand is high - London's stock as a desirable city has never been higher, and is bouncing back from a recession that we can now see impacted the UK economy outside London disproportionately. The real question is whether that demand is sustainable, and undoubtedly some of it is volatile e.g. overseas cash. But there is no evidence that I can see that demand is likely to just evaporate - credit is not that cheap for the majority of buyers and the trend towards inner city living (and the self-fulfilling prophecy that is gentrification) shows no sign of letting up.

So while I'm pretty sure that prices in ED can't continue to rise at this rate (Anerley is going to look increasingly attractive, even more so when people start to believe it's the next coming area) but I can't see them falling sharply either, absent some kind of substantial macroeconomic shock (UK leaving the EU would do it).

[LondonMix]

I think this sentiment is what I bothers me most about this thread. The underlying message is someone like me shouldn't have to live near poor people. My best friend just moved to Eltham-- it is really not the Greek tragedy some on here are making it out to be.

Regarding coming up with solutions to the problem-- call me simple minded but I tend to think understanding and exploring the issues comes before making proposed solutions. I agree the situation is untenable (not necessarily because its a bubble) but because allowing London to lose all of its economic diversity is bad for the city in numerous ways. Every major city in the world is wrestling with this. They need to keep the city accessible for young talented people so the city can remain dynamic (economically and otherwise). In both San Francisco and New York (which both have already adopted denser living / apartment living for families) the mayors have allowed for the creation of micro unit apartments for single young professionals.

And while I do have a lot of sympathy for those now priced out of ED (its happened to me elsewhere in the past) I most certainly would move some place cheaper if I couldn't afford to live here. I lived in ED before it was what it is and could comfortably live some place else similar to how ED was back when I first lived here.

StraferJack Wrote:

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

> It's not so much about fairness or not - it's just

> untenable

>

> If everyone saying "it's the market stupid, dems

> the rules" had to take their salary, and their

> partner (at whatever the peaks of boths salaries

> were) and genuinely had to compete in the market

> for a home now (now, not 12 months ago) , it would

> be very instructive. Saying you can buy a 4 bed in

> (say) Anerley for 350k is one thing but I'm pretty

> sure not many people would. It doesn't even

> remotely compare to ED 15-20 years ago

[StraferJack]

"I think this sentiment is what I bothers me most about this thread. The underlying message is someone like me shouldn't have to live near poor people. My best friend just moved to Eltham-- it really not the Greek tragedy some on here are making it out to be. "

Have to nip this in the bud. Nowt to do with neighbours income. Zero

All to do with "well that's the chores done, fancy a pint? Let's go to... Oh"

Some places just are deserts. And that has little to do with income. All through the badlands years hackney had stuff going on.

[LondonMix]

I get that. For some its the amenities, for other the commute and for some its the poor people. The point is, having to live somewhere without a lively pub is disappointing but its not the end of the world. Most slightly dull places are very near places with more going on. Friends who live in Eltham go out in Blackheath. Friends in Anerly go to Crystal Palace. Continuing to focus on how hard done by rich professionals-- because even people priced out of ED are pretty wealthy-- have it can only be banged on about for so long. East Dulwich while not the most expensive part of London is relatively expensive.

[Otta]

What gets me is the obvious opinion of the majority that a place is always improved bt gentrification. I live Sydenham but am starting to live it less.

I'm about to move to Penge, and keep reading comments like "we've moved to Penge and it's really on the up. some lovely kittke cafes opening and littke independent gems". All of which makes me think that in 5 years I'll feel like I don't even belong there anymore. I'm "middle class" by sone definitions, but I really don't want to live in a middle class paradise because I find them desperately bland.

Sorry for lazy use of "middle class" but it's an easy way to say what I meant.

[DaveR]

"The underlying message is someone like me shouldn't have to live near poor people"

It's a bit more subtle than that - more someone like me shouldn't have to live somewhere that appears destined to be forever unappealing to people like me. And it is true to say that there are certain things that make neighbourhoods attractive - like period housing (and the old Victorian pubs that go with it), nice parks, markets etc. - and areas with these features are becoming unaffordable for many, and fast. That's why Honor Oak Park is likely to get pricy and Thamesmead isn't. But, again, that's not evidence of market failure (or to put it somewhat more obscurely, that "something's wrong"). The market is working because people who are willing to pay for what they want, get it.

FWIW I do think govt (whether local or central) should be intervening to incentivise development of brownfield sites, particularly with well designed higher density housing, and to free up unused land from whatever source, with the explicit aim of stabilising house prices. But that's still not going to make ED cheaper.

[LondonMix]

Agree with all of that DaveR. The poor people jab (while certainly partially true) was an over simplification designed to provoke.

The issues facing London are complex. The changing demographics, the transformation of the housing stock via extensions, transport improvements, a cultural dislike of new builds and apartment living etc.

[????]

...you over play the cultural dislike of apartment living being a London/brit thing LM. Prime expensive central London + StJohn's Woods is chocker with them. Suburban families generally don't want them but my memories of Queens and New Jersey are rows and rows of standalone family homes, many detached!

[Mick Mac]

Otta Wrote:

----------------------------------------------------- I'm "middle class" by

> sone definitions, but I really don't want to live

> in a middle class paradise because I find them

> desperately bland.

Maybe it's a subject of a new thread but I often think those who do well is based upon the fact that society rewards the more interesting and capable people.

To some extent you will do well in business if you get on well with people and can interact on their level.

The middle class being bland is not how it is.

Disclaimer: I'm bland myself I guess, but that's my own issue.

[Otta]

This is why I shouldn't have used the term Middle Class. I just meant the gentrification of areas. It starts really well, then everything just gets samey.

[ratty]

Too many kids called Oliver. That's the start of it, look for the signs and sell up!

Round my way all the kids are called Paige. Even the boys. No gentrification here!

[LondonMix]

Maybe, but zone 2 of London really isn't comparable to Jersey. Most people who want to live in large global cities are much more comfortable with apartment living. I don't know a single English person who is happy raising a family in a flat. Whereas my French colleagues see it as entirely normal and part of city living. Ditto my American colleagues. As demographics in London are changing and more people are choosing to stay in the city to raise families, something is going to have to shift in terms of expectations.

???? Wrote:

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

> ...you over play the cultural dislike of apartment

> living being a London/brit thing LM. Prime

> expensive central London + StJohn's Woods is

> chocker with them. Suburban families generally

> don't want them but my memories of Queens and New

> Jersey are rows and rows of standalone family

> homes, many detached!

[PinkyB]

I have just bought a flat in Penge, the top end near Crystal Palace Park and the Bridge House. I feel very, very lucky, that I just bought it in the nick of time. It took me the best part of two years to buy, for various reasons (problems selling my late father's house, more problems when a flat I was buying last February fell through). I looked at over 40 places in total - I was a first time buyer, with less than ?200k to spend, and I was looking to buy in various areas that I didn't know very well. I looked at one-bed flats in Forest Hill, Sydenham, Crofton Park, Crystal Palace, Gipsy Hill, Beckenham, Kent House, Anerley, and Penge. During those two years, I was priced out of first Forest Hill, then Sydenham, and now if you look on the property websites, I have been pretty much priced out of Penge as well.

There is now (Feb 2014) very little on the market for under ?200k, and the flats that are usually have something wrong with them, need work done that you can't afford, are on the tenth floor, above a shop on a main road, auction properties with their own issues, etc. One year ago I could have bought one of several nice one bed Victorian flats near Penge East station (Mosslea Road) for ?185,000. Instead I decided to go for a 2 bed in a 1930s block for the same price, 15 minutes further away from the station. By the time that chain collapsed, not even 2 months later, those nice 1 bed Victorian flats near Penge East station were pushing ?200k. I was told at a viewing for one of them that if I didn't make an offer right then and there, I would not stand a chance, because they would get lots of offers at the asking price and over. By the time I had my offer accepted on the flat I eventually bought, in September, I had to offer nearly ?6,000 over the asking price, and they had six over-asking price offers. I had to borrow more money from the bank to be able to afford anything at all.

The flat I bought is in the same block, and the exact same size and condition, as the flat that fell through. I had to pay ?25,000 more, just seven months on. I was terrified the whole time that the purchase would fall through again and I wouldn't be able to afford anywhere in the area, and would have to start the whole process again somewhere else. In the New Year, another flat came onto the market in the same block - 2 beds, exact same layout as mine, not quite as good condition. It was on at ?300k. Now, that was Foxtons (who know nothing of Penge) chancing their arm/ taking the piss, but the way things are going, I don't think it will be long. There's now almost nothing on the market for less than ?200k in either Penge or Anerley. A lot of 1-beds are now pushing ?250k. Some are already on over ?300k.

It's nuts. This is Penge. *Penge.* The papers might be full of hand-wringing about foreign investors pushing up prices in Notting Hill and Kensington and Chelsea, but I have to explain where Penge is to my work colleagues who live in other parts of London. It's a far-flung suburb right on the edge of London. It's, to put it politely, "up and coming". How do first-time buyers get on the property ladder when they get priced out of places like Penge? How the hell do families afford to buy whole houses? It can't be long before there are no affordable areas left in London at all, but nobody can afford to move out and commute in either. It can't possibly be sustainable.