Are house prices on the rise?

by Mortgage Matron Tuesday 10 February, 2009

Picture 025 So UK house prices were up by 1.9% last month, according to the Halifax.

Really? Maybe we should just forget that Nationwide just said that house prices dropped 1.3% in the same month?

If Halifax’s figures are true, then it would be the first time in well over a year that prices have not fallen on a monthly basis, and contrary to most market expectations.

The UK's biggest mortgage lender said that the rise last month offset December's fall of 1.6%; and the average house now costs £163,966, the Halifax said.

But the Halifax, whose survey is among the most carefully watched indicators of market confidence, did warn against paying too much attention to just a single month.

Look at the Halifax house price index for January 2009 here

Martin Ellis, the Halifax's housing economist, said:

"There are some very early signs that market activity may be stabilising, albeit at quite a low level. Nonetheless, continuing pressures on incomes, rising unemployment and the negative impact of the dislocation of the financial markets on the availability of mortgage finance are expected to mean that 2009 will be a difficult year for the housing market."

The survey from the Halifax comes shortly after the Bank of England cut interest rates for the third month in a row in a desperate effort to stimulate the economy.

- Check out some of the most popular mortgage lenders

- Get impartial mortgage advice

- Claim back your mortgage exit fees

  • Is it good news?

Although Halifax’s figures could be seen as good news, their figure doesn’t tell the full story. House prices have still fallen by 5.1% over the last three months and have dropped by 17.2% over the previous 12 months.

Maybe recent cuts in interest rates, (which have made mortgage payments more affordable for new homeowners), have tempted a few of you into dipping a toe in the housing market water.

After all, on average we pay 21% of our gross monthly earnings towards our mortgage, compared with 31% in the first half of 2008, says the Halifax. What’s more, the house price-to-average earnings ratio has dropped to around 4.5 times in December from 5.84 at its peak in July 2007.

But let’s put that into some context; that’s still 10% higher than the long-term average ratio of 4 times (going by the Halifax’s figures).

  • Have prices bottomed out?

Equally telling is the fact that mortgage lenders still require you to have deposits of ­15%-20% before they lend to you as a first-time buyer. Why? Because they believe property prices will drop by at least 10%-15% in 2009. Only when mainstream mortgage lenders start offering 95%-100% mortgages again, should you start believing prices have bottomed out.

The biggest factor that hangs over the housing market is unemployment. If it heads towards 3 million this year, then it’s not just the number of job losses but the fear of job loss that will prevent millions of us from even contemplating buying a new house.

So, while house prices may have risen slightly in January, is the start of an upward trend?

Here are few questions worth asking:

  • Have we hit the very bottom already? Have loads of us, having decided that prices just can’t go any lower, suddenly jumped back into the market?
  • Is government economic policy, with its focus on trying to force the banks to throw credit at us again, finally having an effect?
  • Or is this a brief respite in a long downward spiral, down only to a ‘post Christmas bounce’ as many of us decide we can’t wait for the inevitable house price falls to reach their inevitable conclusion?
  • Or this is just a statistical anomaly, from an industry already drowning in pointless stats but starved of any real business?

What do you think of the latest house prices stats? A reason to be cheerful or just a temporary aberration in a falling market?

Let us know in the comments below.

- Try again for that lower rate remortgage

Bookmark and Share

Categories for this post: More Money Stuff

Sponsored Links

Comments

Rick Pearson says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 12:13

The "rise" in house prices is most likely a temporary blip. However, we have definitely become a nation of herd animals and if enough "experts" say house prices are rising again - panic will break out and people will rush into buying again. It's like the "Woolworth's effect" all over again. People thought they would scoop up bargains, so they waited for the shop to open everyday and rushed in, buying anything as long as it was a bargain. The fear of missing out driving them into a buying frenzy. With lots of people sitting on the sidelines waiting for the prices to fall "to get the best bargain", any sign of a bottoming out will result in a buying surge.

Neil says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 12:25

I have just bought a large Victorian house ( needing a lot of work ) but with bags of character and potential for 155 k. I took a chance as prices could continue to fall but we thought it was good value for money and probably around 50 to 60  k less than it would have been a year ago. My advice is if you find a property at the right price in a good location go fot it. Prices could fall but they will go back up again eventually. If your not selling it doesn't matter. I agree with Rick when the buying surge starts again  prices are going to increase rapidly as a competive market is re- established and the gazumping starts all over again  

Darren says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 12:39

I personally welcome a house price rise as it's what we need to get the economy moving again.
In my area of Gwynedd house prices barely dropped if at all during the slowdown. In fact some types of property have even risen slightly.

billy says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 12:49

i Have just had a look at the Halifax data and the standardised ave price for a house  is now around the same price as it was in Nov 08.
It took a big drop in Dec08.
I suggest that the  vendors who sold were more willing to sell prior to christmas and shaved off more to seal the deal.

Then in Jan 09 as interest rates plummeted to 1% an increase in activity was noted as 31,000 new mortgages were issued as compared to 27,000 the month prior.

Looking at the general trend though I do not see any hope of a continued rise in house prices this was just a blip.
You can bank on further 10-20% drops as the recession starts to really bite
So the ave price of 163k will look more like 153-130k in the next 6-18 months.

Cheers

Claire says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 12:56

The power of the press is huge, a few more positive stories like this for the housing market will for sure create a surge in buyers and stimulate the market. May be just a blip month but let's hope not! Maybe not rock bottom yet, but hopefully a slow down on these huge falls in house prices! Buyers should definately be looking now at good value properties and not waiting for moer falls, a few good mortgage deals coming out too now, providing you have a deposit!

Sanjay Bhabuta says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 14:15

Have to take issue with some of the statistics in this article. The main one that concerns me is.... "..the house price-to-average earnings ratio has dropped to around 4.5 times in December.."
REALLY??? According to this article, the Halifax said the Average house price has dropped to £163,966.  
Using these two statistics, the average income is £163966/4.5 = £36,437.
NOT according to national Statistics it isn't. £23,764... So the ratio should be £163966 / £23764 = 6.9

If you go back 10 years or earlier, the ratio has always been 3.5 to 5 times.
At the peak of this reckless boom, the ratio was almost 10 times income.
For the benefit of the country, and future generations, house prices need to keep falling until we get back to about 5 times average salery. (Just think about it, If ever greater proportions (percentage) of our salery are just paying the mortgage, then is it any wonder when families are stressed out with financial problems. Both parents working all ours just to pay the mortgage. Family time gets hit. Social breakdown starts to occur...etc.)

A Drop in prices will hurt a lot of people (me included) but maintaining them at an artificially high price will just hurt future generations.

BTW.. Looking at it a different way, Actuall HOUSE prices haven't gone up much above inflation...BUT the LAND they are sitting on has sky rocketed. My estimate is that land has more the quadrupled in value ABOVE inflation, over the last 10 years.
Cost of building (other than the land) has pretty much gone up with inflation.

Think about your buildings insurance, it is based on "if your house burned down to the ground, how much would it cost to rebuild it on the SAME PLOT OF LAND.!!??

At the peak of the market, my cousins house had a market Value of £300,000. But a rebuild cost of £100,000. Therefore a ratio of two thirds land, and one third building. And this ratio is not a isolated statistic, it was common place across the country. (Check it out if you don't believe me)

If you go back 10 years or more, the ratio, was always the other way around.. One third land and two thirds building cost.

If this ratio was the case today my cousins house would have a market value of just £150,000 (As the rebuild cost would still be £100,000)

As there is no real COST of land, (As opposed to a market value of land) (The Land has always been there, and always will), The market value of land is based purly on supply and demand.

Unlike the COST of a house, (There is a real cost of buying bricks, labour etc.)

So the Market value of any parlicular new property (Building and land) is based on the COST of the building, plus the MARKET VALUE of the land.

Another words, the building cost is more stable, but the land value is driven by supply and demand.

If we ever get to the stage where market values of properties as a whole (Land & building), drop below the building cost, Then we will be in real trouble...BUT we are a LONG LONG way from that.

I believe that average property should (Actually 'needs to') drop to at least £120,000, and wouldn't be a problem for the long term future if they even dropped to about £90,000

BUT Gordon Brown wouldn't listen to me (Or many other economists) when, over the last 10 years, I was saying, that, far from having REAL strong growth and prosperity, the whole economy was built on the weak foundations of debt. (Government Debt and Personal Debt).

In the housing market, most of the damage was done because of this crazy, herd like attitude that "House prices will allways go up" and "The sooner we all get on the band wagon, the better"  WRONG.

Now the danger is that the new group attitude is that "This market down turn is a short term blip, and we should all buy now, while the market is "LOW"".
1. This could become the new self fullfilling prophesy. We all rush out and start buying, which increases demand, and therefore price, we all say, "See it was a short term blip, and prices are increasing again, lets all get on the bandwagon again", Back to the old boom and bust... Will We ever learn!!!
2.The market needs to drop buy at least another 30% before we can say prices are low

Anyway, Gordon Brown wouldn't listen to the voices of reasen then, why would he listen now. He still thinks it would be a good thing for house prices not to drop any further. (For a some, true, but not for the future)

All that will happen is a repeat boom bust, but with even more dept and pain next time.

It's better we feel the pain of 10 years of economic stupidity now, rather than save (and grow) the pain, for the future. BUT mark my words... THE DAMAGE HAS BEEN DONE, THE PAIN MUST BE FELT, EITHER NOW, OR EVEN MORE GREATLY IN THE FUTURE.



It isn't LOW,

Sanjay Bhabuta says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 14:18

PS Sorry about the awfull spelling.

JODIE says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 14:35

I am just buying a 4 bed detatched that was up for 250 a year ago for 175. we our first time buyers and know the market may only get worse but are just looking at it from the view point were buying this house for the long term and have jumped the ladder due to price falls and feel the type of property we want might be gone if we wait for the bottom and who really knows the bottom ?

TINA says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 15:15

We were lucky enough to find a buyer for our large house, and have been renting ever since, waiting for the right home to turn up.  So, as cash buyers, we should be in demand.  However, there is so little on the market to choose from.  Also, our cash has lost about 60% in interest, due to the low bank rate.  We feel in a bit of a cleft stick.  On the one side, cash in the bank, on the other side, no houses available, and having to pay a lot of rent.  I hope that people regain their confidence soon, and, as the housing market is said to be an indication of how well the country is doing, that prices will soon stabilise.

Steve says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 18:56

Agree with Clare, the power of the media has a huge influence on the economy. They are largely to blame for the present circumstances being as bad as they are. If you visit a financial adviser he has to be qualified, record the advice given and answer to it in future if challenged. The media sensationalise every scrap of potentially bad news for increased sales and ratings and answer to nobody. This needs to be addressed.

Michael O'Toole says:

Thursday 12 February, 2009 / 23:46

I understand what Sanjay is saying, but I have to say I'm glad Gordon Brown isn't listening. The bulk of the Construction industry exists on economic growth. It is vitally important that the things we build today will be worth more in, say 3, 4 or 5 years time. This how people pay for the buildings we live, work or shop in.
There is a need for affordable housing, but the way to do this is by providing funds to developers to build them without an eye to profit. We have thousands of skilled tradesmen out of work at the moment, with a growing number of architects and engineers joining them. Wouldn't it make sense to pay these to design and build Social Housing, thus helping the Government achieve their goals as well, rather than paying dole? Yes of course it would and indeed this will happen, which is exactly why Gordon Brown's Government will pull us out of this mess. We just need to believe it (yes I know, I've seen pigs fly too).
There is too much in the media about how bad things are. Every time we get good news, we are told what the pessimists think. If there are any green shoots of recovery, there will be a heavy frost soon to kill them off. You may think I'm naive, but it is a fact that if enough people believe in something, no matter what the evidence shows, things will change. This is my third recession, believe me it's true.

steve says:

Friday 13 February, 2009 / 10:12

I believe this is a little premature, but i still feel the market will bottom by march. Where i am prices have dropped by 30% but this calculation is based on repossessions 99% of which are exrentals. But as the banks are only lending to the cleanest of buyers and with high deposits required this is a false figure of the true market.

Yan says:

Friday 13 February, 2009 / 11:59

Too many cooks spoil the broth - the more you read (opinions) the more confused one gets;  it is difficult to predict the future the rate things are going; personally I feel situations can be manipulated & it is the very top people who holds the key to all these manipulaitons. Yes the media does have huge impact on our daily living - I wish they stop hyping up situations/news & convey the truth

Joe says:

Friday 13 February, 2009 / 13:41

Yan

The truth is we are in a recession. There is no hiding that i'm afraid!

J

stk says:

Saturday 14 February, 2009 / 17:05

Sanjay Bhabuta, very well written… you say you are an economist and Gordon Brown dosnt/haven’t been listing to you ‘guys’…where were all the economists in 2006? My guess is probably enjoying the BOOM, even setting up their own mortgage brokerage offices…

As for land price, and building or brickes cost… if there was major shortage of bricks around the globe..most people would knock their walls down to sell the brickes (replace it with say render etc) as , up to and beyond this day and age, shortage means high prices…shortage of LAND IN THIS COUNTRY, especially in London. People don’t want to live with their parents until 30s in this country, unlike say Germany or France…

You want things to go back 10 years..that’s not evolution…economist should know that financial systems have changed rapidly (not far from evolution of your mobile phone or blackberry), and so has population and immigration….so we have to evolve and deal, in an intelligent manner with the idea of BORROWING/DEPT.

IF YOU CAN AFFORD YOUR MORTGAGE IN THE LONG RUN, BUY YOUR HOME AND ENJOY LIIFE. DON’T WORRY ABOUT “CORRECTING THE MARKET”….ITS TOO INTERNATIONAL NOW and TOOOOOO MANY OPINIONS!!!

IGNORE THE PRESS IF YOU CAN, THEY MAKE VERY GOOD MONEY BY MAKING NEWS BAD OR GOOD.

LOOK AFTER NUMBER 1…..your family, get that home if you can, and enjoy life…

Baar Finn says:

Sunday 15 February, 2009 / 19:48

"Have prices bottomed out?

Equally telling is the fact that mortgage lenders still require you to have deposits of 15%-20% before they lend to you as a first-time buyer. Why? Because they believe property prices will drop by at least 10%-15% in 2009. Only when mainstream mortgage lenders start offering 95%-100% mortgages again, should you start believing prices have bottomed out."

When 95%-100% mortgages start to happen again, run for cover, because the sound you will hear will be that of an inflating balloon stiffening before it bursts.

It's shocking you have already forgotten why the UK economy is in this mess.

"So, while house prices may have risen slightly in January, is the start of an upward trend?"

One data point, disputed by yourself, and not really quantified : -1.3% of what? Or 1.9% of what? does not a trend make. Even economists won't try to fit a curve or a line through a single point.

At the beginning of the article, you say: "So UK house prices were up by 1.9% last month, according to the Halifax. Really? Maybe we should just forget that Nationwide just said that house prices dropped 1.3% in the same month? "

Indeed! So at this point you should have decided if there was a fall or a rise. Perhaps look at the volume (not percentage) of deals done that were used to come up with those price changes. Next, consider the standard deviation over the period considered for which you do the comparison (12 months was it?). Then look at the expectation value for the same. Finally, ask if a spread of -1,3% to +1.9% is statistically significant.

"    * Or this is just a statistical anomaly, from an industry already drowning in pointless stats but starved of any real business?"

My money is on this one.

Andrianna pantelli says:

Monday 16 February, 2009 / 14:44

The total estimated world market in all categories of financial instruments based on mortgage securities is a cool 35 trillion USD. The recorded level of mortgage debt as of
2008 November 1st, inclusive of US and UK  mortgages is just over 6 trillion USD.
Allowing for the unknown quantity of mortgage debt in China, India and the Middle East
this still leaves a massive hole of some 27 trillion USD used as mortgage security floating around the financial markets and propping up balance sheets evrywhere.
If there is anyone out there who understands the real implications of this masive gap then they will understand why this financial crash will not be getting better any time soon.

Chris says:

Thursday 19 February, 2009 / 12:53

Right, This is my opinion, House prices need to come down. 3-4 times the average annual salary. (£23.5K)  = £60 - £95k (Im talking here, standard 2-3 bedroom house.)  
The damages has been done with everyone trying to become a property investor. Houses are for living in, not making money on. If you want to invest in property, then maybe flats are the way forward. But leave the average family home alone. I want to buy a house, but I have not got £30k deposit for a silly 2 bedroom flat on the 3rd floor. I want a garden, so I can grow plants, have a cat that can come in and out through the cat flap, somewhere safe to bring my future children up....

Well thats my opinion!!

Maggie says:

Wednesday 25 February, 2009 / 18:54

Who really knows?. It's all speculation. Houses are meant to be for people to live in. The houses available at present are too expensive for new couples to start families,which doesn't seem fair. I had to live in a nurses home, until I qualified and could afford to rent and share a house. Then I saved through long hours and didn't buy my house until I was 28, then I started a family. Houses were affordable then, working hard and waiting was ok because having my own home was achievable.House prices today price so many people out of the market it isn't fair, and is no incentive  for people to work hard and get on in life. I would benefit from prices going up,but I hope they don't so there is a future for our younger ,and single ones in the community

Add comment




biquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading






Sponsored Links

Recent comments