huge property price cuts in Lewis & other Scottish islands?
John Nagelson
market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
£150K and then at £135K. These prices were considered "realistic", and
based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
It has just sold for £99K.
Not privately but at auction, knocked down to the party willing to
offer the highest price for it. Nobody was willing to pay any more.
Source:
http://www.countrywidepropertyauctions.co.uk/media/Results-Scotland-
September08.pdf
Doubtless the owners were unhappy, but in the end they recognised
market realities and eventually got some money for their house.
A large proportion of properties advertised in Lewis and Harris (and
also a few other places in Scotland) have been on the market for 1-2
years at prices that obviously nobody is willing to pay.
The only houses that will sell will be those where people take price
cuts of 30, 40, or 50 percent.
Many will take their houses off the market. A few will stubbornly
persist that "they know how much their house is worth", going by the
top-of-the-head opinion of some ruler-wielding surveyor a couple of
years ago.
I think we are about to witness a large fall in the price level of
houses that actually sell, though.
John
John Nagelson
> A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
> market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
> £150K and then at £135K. These prices were considered "realistic", and
> based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
>
> It has just sold for £99K.
Correction - the agents in Stornoway were Ken Macdonald, not Anderson
Macarthur.
The following link goes to the page at Ken Macdonald's site:
http://tinyurl.com/lewisproperty
John
tim.....
"John Nagelson" <johnna...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ad7d4f74-df07-4310...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
based on a professional "valuation" of Ł140K.
It has just sold for Ł99K.
Not privately but at auction, knocked down to the party willing to
offer the highest price for it. Nobody was willing to pay any more.
Source:
http://www.countrywidepropertyauctions.co.uk/media/Results-Scotland-
September08.pdf
Doubtless the owners were unhappy, but in the end they recognised
market realities and eventually got some money for their house.
A large proportion of properties advertised in Lewis and Harris (and
also a few other places in Scotland) have been on the market for 1-2
years at prices that obviously nobody is willing to pay.
The only houses that will sell will be those where people take price
cuts of 30, 40, or 50 percent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't think the situation in Lewis can be representative of elsewhere.
It's a pretty constricted market.
I'm not saying that I disagree with you, just that you need more
representative examples.
tim
Derek Geldard
<johnna...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
>market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
>£150K and then at £135K. These prices were considered "realistic", and
>based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
>
>It has just sold for £99K.
>
<snip>
>I think we are about to witness a large fall in the price level of
>houses that actually sell, though.
ISTR the Highlands and Islands were the focus of a big initiative in
the dot.com era to provide homeworking jobs. Given the exporting of
software, web designing, and call centre jobs to India etc, all in all
I don't suppose that worked out real well.
Travelling in the UK is disproportionately expensive The H & I is a
remote destination for most of the UK and Swainbost is about as remote
as it gets, so I don't suppose tourism is doing that well either.
It's not clear how the money is going to come in to support houses in
the £150k - £250k bracket. Maybe eventually the houses will still
fetch £150k but each of the pounds will be worth less. That seems to
be the governments favoured alternative
It's a pity, but a lot of cities in the UK face the same future having
been riding on a bubble for about 10 years now.
Derek
John Nagelson
> "John Nagelson" <johnnagel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:ad7d4f74-df07-4310...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
> market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
> based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
>
> It has just sold for £99K.
>
> Not privately but at auction, knocked down to the party willing to
> offer the highest price for it. Nobody was willing to pay any more.
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.countrywidepropertyauctions.co.uk/media/Results-Scotland-
> September08.pdf
>
> Doubtless the owners were unhappy, but in the end they recognised
> market realities and eventually got some money for their house.
>
> A large proportion of properties advertised in Lewis and Harris (and
> also a few other places in Scotland) have been on the market for 1-2
> years at prices that obviously nobody is willing to pay.
>
> The only houses that will sell will be those where people take price
> cuts of 30, 40, or 50 percent.
>
>
> I don't think the situation in Lewis can be representative of elsewhere.
> It's a pretty constricted market.
>
> I'm not saying that I disagree with you, just that you need more
> representative examples.
Fully agreed, it's not representative of elsewhere, except maybe other
similarly remote places in the UK, e.g. Shetland, but I don't know
much about them!
John
John Nagelson
> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:35:11 -0700 (PDT), John Nagelson
>
> >A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
> >market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
> >£150K and then at £135K. These prices were considered "realistic", and
> >based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
>
> >It has just sold for £99K.
>
> <snip>
>
> >I think we are about to witness a large fall in the price level of
> >houses that actually sell, though.
>
> ISTR the Highlands and Islands were the focus of a big initiative in
> the dot.com era to provide homeworking jobs. Given the exporting of
> software, web designing, and call centre jobs to India etc, all in all
> I don't suppose that worked out real well.
True. On Lewis, there were just a couple of scams with a dozen or so
"jobs" and big grants to the "Enterprise" etc. Nothing real. Tell the
local movers and shakers about anything from the internet to climate
change to "changing the energy mix", and they'll be able to scam some
money out of it one way or the other, and get a few stories in the
newspapers too. Practically all of the money in the local economy is
public-sector grant money, whether you are talking about big employers
such as the council and the hospital or sectors such as building or
information technology.
> Travelling in the UK is disproportionately expensive The H & I is a
> remote destination for most of the UK and Swainbost is about as remote
> as it gets, so I don't suppose tourism is doing that well either.
There has never been any tourism to Lewis to speak of. A few people
get off the ferry each day in June, July and August (and if it's
August and the midges are out, they probably don't come back!), some
hippies at midsummer (the best of luck to them!), that's about it.
(I'm not sure who mentioned Swainbost!)
> It's not clear how the money is going to come in to support houses in
> the £150k - £250k bracket. Maybe eventually the houses will still
> fetch £150k but each of the pounds will be worth less. That seems to
> be the governments favoured alternative
>
> It's a pity, but a lot of cities in the UK face the same future having
> been riding on a bubble for about 10 years now.
And still there's the loony message between the lines of so many news
reports, suggesting that everyone's prosperity depends on soaring
house prices. The truth is that an average house costing about £200K
could be built for about £60K. Less, now that Polish building workers
have underpriced British ones. In fact, considerably less if people
were OK, with, say, wooden walls and metal roofs, which are perfectly
OK but public relations for "the industry" (the construction/bank
alliance) has swamped them out.
High house prices are a result of
a) HIGH DEMAND, via a successful and huge drive by the banks for
decades, peaking in the past few years, to get as many people as
possible as deeply into debt as possible (that was the reason, for
example, for replacing mass youth unemployment with the expansion of
higher pseudo-"education" - most people who go to "uni" nowadays learn
little other than how to chuck their money away), and
b) RESTRICTED SUPPLY, by means of laws on "planning permission". This
didn't exist prior to 1918. Around that time, some bright spark had
the idea of buying some land outside Brighton, at a place that came to
be called Peacehaven, and chopping it up into small bits to be given
away as prizes in a competition, to working class people. Then if they
wanted, they could get a house built on their patch, for cheap. This
was the beginning of working class house ownership in the UK. The rich
went absolutely livid, and introduced "planning permission" laws in
response.
Then 4 decades later mortgages really took off, not (as had previously
been the case) as a state into which a landed estate could fall when
the owner had gambled himself into mega-debt, but as a way to make
sure the proles didn't get ideas above their station.
Then in the nineties and noughties, when prole power of any kind was a
thing of the past, the banks made it "normal" to get into big debt at
the age of 18 (the youngest a person can legally do so), and stay in
debt for the next 40 years of their lives.
It's an absolutely dreadful, appalling situation, and recognising the
above doesn't even suggest a way out. Understandably, people don't
want to be tenants in the private rented sector if they can help it.
But I'm afraid that a lot of people are going to realise, within the
next few years, that no, the government and the bankers don't have any
care for their interests whatsoever.
And the above applies to even greater extent in Ireland, where to
quote a recent report, Scandinavian levels of expenditure coincide
with Mediterranean levels of productivity. I.e WATCH OUT!
(End of rant)
John
Derek Geldard
<johnna...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Travelling in the UK is disproportionately expensive The H & I is a
>> remote destination for most of the UK and Swainbost is about as remote
>> as it gets, so I don't suppose tourism is doing that well either.
>
>There has never been any tourism to Lewis to speak of. A few people
>get off the ferry each day in June, July and August (and if it's
>August and the midges are out, they probably don't come back!), some
>hippies at midsummer (the best of luck to them!), that's about it.
>
>(I'm not sure who mentioned Swainbost!)
>
I think that was me, the one property ‘Taigh Calum’, on the Ken
Macdonalds website with a vaguely attractive price at the low end
(£60k for a 3 bed detached house) was located there, there are more in
the 5 & 6 bed category but they probably won't sell unless divided
into multi occupation, that's what has happened in the cities down
south, but there's a lot of cost in doing that. Fine if the local town
has 5 or 6 so-called "universities" (formed from the technical
colleges, colleges of FE, teachers training colleges of all religous
flavours etc.and the Uni proper).
Derek
Jonathan Bryce
> I don't think the situation in Lewis can be representative of elsewhere.
> It's a pretty constricted market.
>
> I'm not saying that I disagree with you, just that you need more
> representative examples.
There's examples in the likes of Glasgow, Liverpool and Thamesmead of much
greater falls.
Rusty Hinge 2
from Jim <j...@scotfree.eu> contains these words:
> The days of cheap travel, food, housing, fuel are over.
Bicycle; grow your own food; you might be right about housing, but keep
an eye on tumbling prices, and, peat is still abundant on Lewis.
--
Rusty
Direct reply to: horrid dot squeak snailything zetnet point co period uk
Separator in search of a sig
Rusty Hinge 2
from Derek Geldard <im...@miniac.demon.co.uk> contains these words:
In the 1970s I was going to buy the improvements on a seven acre croft
for £400. This included a 2-up, 2-down house with a large
almost-room-sized cupboard on each floor.
True, one was in danger of falling through these...
And a stone-built barn, ditto byre, and a weaving-shed abutting the
north-east gable-end, fencing, access to common grazing, mini-harbour
beside the croft, and a 'well'.
Due to circumstances beyond the control of the vendor he had to continue
living there.
Bazzer Smith
"tim....." <tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6j504nF...@mid.individual.net...
>
> "John Nagelson" <johnna...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ad7d4f74-df07-4310...@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> A large 4-bedroom house on Lewis has finally sold, after being on the
> market with Anderson Macarthur in Stornoway for 2 years, advertised at
> based on a professional "valuation" of £140K.
>
> It has just sold for £99K.
>
> Not privately but at auction, knocked down to the party willing to
> offer the highest price for it. Nobody was willing to pay any more.
>
> Source:
>
> http://www.countrywidepropertyauctions.co.uk/media/Results-Scotland-
> September08.pdf
>
> Doubtless the owners were unhappy, but in the end they recognised
> market realities and eventually got some money for their house.
>
> A large proportion of properties advertised in Lewis and Harris (and
> also a few other places in Scotland) have been on the market for 1-2
> years at prices that obviously nobody is willing to pay.
>
> The only houses that will sell will be those where people take price
> cuts of 30, 40, or 50 percent.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't think the situation in Lewis can be representative of elsewhere.
> It's a pretty constricted market.
>
> I'm not saying that I disagree with you, just that you need more
> representative examples.
Basically we are talking about some sh*thole where nobody wants to live, so
I
think that adaquately covers most of the UK.
>
> tim
>
>
>
>
Bazzer Smith
"Jim" <j...@scotfree.eu> wrote in message
news:qnusc49jln2fo84p0...@4ax.com...
Still that is somewhat compensated for by free porn, so it's not all bad
news is it? :O)
>
> --
>
> Jim.
>
> Reality is just one person's perception
> of events.
tim.....
"Jonathan Bryce" <jona...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
news:bo6dnbR6IeMYVFPV...@eclipse.net.uk...
of "normal" houses or of luxury city centre flats?
I'm looking to see one of these "inappropriate" properties this week.
Locally, there's an island of high quality apartments surrounded (on all 4
sides) by a sink estate. They sold new 18 months ago for 149 (less than
comparable flats in better areas). One of them has been up for rent for 6
months with no takers and was put on sale by the owner at 132. It's now
been repo-ed and the BS is selling at a guide of 99.
I was thinking of offering 70, but one of my colleagues said "you don't want
to live immediately next to that estate however cheap it is" I will
probably go along to see if I can get any useful info out of the EA about
the market.
TBH this apartment doesn't suit the BTL market, at any price. It is far too
nice to be let to the sort of person who's prepared to live in the area.
There are another 200 people who bought into this estate who are going to
get a shock in the near future.
I am sure that there are lots of other examples of large falls on properties
that were inappropriately sold, this doesn't prove anything about the rest
of the market IMHO.
tim
John Nagelson
> "Jonathan Bryce" <jonat...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
> I'm looking to see one of these "inappropriate" properties this week.
> Locally, there's an island of high quality apartments surrounded (on all 4
> sides) by a sink estate. They sold new 18 months ago for 149 (less than
> comparable flats in better areas). One of them has been up for rent for 6
> months with no takers and was put on sale by the owner at 132. It's now
> been repo-ed and the BS is selling at a guide of 99.
>
> I was thinking of offering 70, but one of my colleagues said "you don't want
> to live immediately next to that estate however cheap it is" I will
> probably go along to see if I can get any useful info out of the EA about
> the market.
Have you confirmed that the 'owner' actually paid 149 for it? (Not
that it would be surprising if they did. Many debtors don't realise
that surveyors work for banks in more ways than one).
In several areas I've heard of, the properties that are selling at say
30-40% lower than recent asking prices are being sold by banks. Just
as it's the banks who made prices rise by creating demand through
debt, it's the banks who are making them fall by actually meeting the
market rather than waiting around indefinitely, claiming 'we know how
much it's worth', waiting for Father Christmas. I'm beginning to think
auctions of repo'ed stock are about the only sensible place to buy
properties at the moment.
John
tim.....
On Sep 16, 6:28 pm, "tim....." <tims_new_h...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Jonathan Bryce" <jonat...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
> I'm looking to see one of these "inappropriate" properties this week.
> Locally, there's an island of high quality apartments surrounded (on all 4
> sides) by a sink estate. They sold new 18 months ago for 149 (less than
> comparable flats in better areas). One of them has been up for rent for 6
> months with no takers and was put on sale by the owner at 132. It's now
> been repo-ed and the BS is selling at a guide of 99.
>
> I was thinking of offering 70, but one of my colleagues said "you don't
> want
> to live immediately next to that estate however cheap it is" I will
> probably go along to see if I can get any useful info out of the EA about
> the market.
Have you confirmed that the 'owner' actually paid 149 for it? (Not
that it would be surprising if they did. Many debtors don't realise
that surveyors work for banks in more ways than one).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the price reported to the land registry for Stamp Duty purposes. I
doubt anybody would inflate the amount of tax that they had to pay.
Jonathan Bryce
> That's the price reported to the land registry for Stamp Duty purposes. I
> doubt anybody would inflate the amount of tax that they had to pay.
There is is the issue of "gifted deposits". A lot of them are overstated at
the land registry, resulting in them paying too much tax.
John Nagelson
> "John Nagelson" <johnnagel...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:5d801b2f-315a-4d99...@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 16, 6:28 pm, "tim....." <tims_new_h...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > "Jonathan Bryce" <jonat...@localhost.localdomain> wrote in message
> > I'm looking to see one of these "inappropriate" properties this week.
> > Locally, there's an island of high quality apartments surrounded (on all 4
> > sides) by a sink estate. They sold new 18 months ago for 149 (less than
> > comparable flats in better areas). One of them has been up for rent for 6
> > months with no takers and was put on sale by the owner at 132. It's now
> > been repo-ed and the BS is selling at a guide of 99.
>
> > I was thinking of offering 70, but one of my colleagues said "you don't
> > want
> > to live immediately next to that estate however cheap it is" I will
> > probably go along to see if I can get any useful info out of the EA about
> > the market.
>
> Have you confirmed that the 'owner' actually paid 149 for it? (Not
> that it would be surprising if they did. Many debtors don't realise
> that surveyors work for banks in more ways than one).
> That's the price reported to the land registry for Stamp Duty purposes.
That's what I meant.
> I doubt anybody would inflate the amount of tax that they had to pay.
Some people do inflate prices when completing the SDLT1 - mainly in
respect of deposits gifted by builders, but also for other (more
clearly unlawful) reasons.
John
Alasdair
<rusty...@gruel.invalid.co.uk> wrote:
>Bicycle; grow your own food; you might be right about housing, but keep
>an eye on tumbling prices, and, peat is still abundant on Lewis.
I am surprised no big company has bought up all the peat rights and is
exporting it.
--
Alasdair.
Alasdair
<jona...@localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>There's examples in the likes of Glasgow, Liverpool and Thamesmead of much
>greater falls.
I thought Scottish house prices were supposed to be going up in
contrast with most of England.
--
Alasdair.
Rusty Hinge 2
from Alasdair <ma...@bobaxter.coo.uk> contains these words:
Watch this space...
Rusty Hinge 2
It's almost certain to be covered by covenant, where it is on common
grazing. Besides, a lot of the peat on Lewis is quite shallow. Our
peat-bank was about five feet thick, so the good black peat was close to
the subsoil. At another location the bank was only three feet deep and
there was very little black peat at all.
Another thing to bear in mind is that Lewis (and presumably, many other
islands) is littered with rocks and would make large-scale extraction
financially unattractive.
Remember, there has only been a comparitively short time for a build-up
of peat: virtually the whole of Lewis and Harris was forested until Eric
the Red burnt it. (Because the best and strongest galleys were made
there, and harried and hampered his expeditions.) Lewismen never
bothered to replant - surprise-surprise!
We often unearthed (unpeated?) charred tree stumps while digging.