• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Notmegov said:
I have no idea at all how this stuff works or if the money comes back to Spurs or whoever, but some fag pack calculations show the average one-bed flat in Tottenahm to be around the 400k mark so with 558 homes at full value that comes to £223,200,000 and that's on the low side of valuations.

It will be interesting to see where that money goes.
Click to expand...

1 bed flat in Tottenham is on avg £400k? Wow I must have fallen through time and the regeneration is complete with crossrail 2 open.

Shows there are no bargains to be had in London regardless of the postcode.
 
AjaxDeSuperYids said:
1 bed flat in Tottenham is on avg £400k? Wow I must have fallen through time and the regeneration is complete with crossrail 2 open.

Shows there are no bargains to be had in London regardless of the postcode.
Click to expand...
1 beds are as cheap as £150k and 2 beds are as expensive as £725k which is a madness for N17 (I grew up there). Average is probably the 250k-400k mark.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
 
Bishop said:
1 beds are as cheap as £150k and 2 beds are as expensive as £725k which is a madness for N17 (I grew up there). Average is probably the 250k-400k mark.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

Absolutely, its no different to near where I am, all these new builds built with gyms and community space but adding on 100-150k to the price, seeing them go up you wouldn't buy them. But loads of international investment in taking them off the market and driving up the price too.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Absolutely, its no different to near where I am, all these new builds built with gyms and community space but adding on 100-150k to the price, seeing them go up you wouldn't buy them. But loads of international investment in taking them off the market and driving up the price too.
Click to expand...

Friend of mine got a flat in wembley in one of those luxury builds. Concierge, on suite bathroom. £1700 a month rent. She doesn't pay though as she is a single mum with a part time job as a barmaid. Housing association and council cover it.

What happens when you stop building social housing in the 70s.
 
Lilbaz said:
Friend of mine got a flat in wembley in one of those luxury builds. Concierge, on suite bathroom. £1700 a month rent. She doesn't pay though as she is a single mum with a part time job as a barmaid. Housing association and council cover it.

What happens when you stop building social housing in the 70s.
Click to expand...

I've seen a few of them advertised on the tube. Tipo or something, the prices are insane.

I think at least with Spurs development there is a emphasis on social housing and jobs, I know there will be cynicism levelled towards it but the whole Destination Tottenham project is important for the area.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I've seen a few of them advertised on the tube. Tipo or something, the prices are insane.

I think at least with Spurs development there is a emphasis on social housing and jobs, I know there will be cynicism levelled towards it but the whole Destination Tottenham project is important for the area.
Click to expand...

Affordable housing isn't social housing. By social housing i mean owned by the council themselves.
 
Lilbaz said:
Affordable housing isn't social housing. By social housing i mean owned by the council themselves.
Click to expand...

True, I think affordable is still important though, especially given the UC caps for rents, so if they can be accessed by social means or they are more affordable to youngsters getting on the ladder, that's important IMO. I obviously recognise its not the same thing though
 
Grays_1890 said:
True, I think affordable is still important though, especially given the UC caps for rents, so if they can be accessed by social means or they are more affordable to youngsters getting on the ladder, that's important IMO. I obviously recognise its not the same thing though
Click to expand...

Affordable is better than unaffordable. Agreed lol.
 
Of course with higher commercial finance costs coupled with high rates and uncertainty for mortgage seekers.,throw in housing market uncertainties, inflationary material costs, then usually these projects get put on go slow as the housebuilder/construction companies sit on their landbanks.
 
Lilbaz said:
Affordable housing isn't social housing. By social housing i mean owned by the council themselves.
Click to expand...
Affordable housing isn't even affordable. No disrespect to anyone who has one but shared ownership is scam. Allowing people to own a partial share helps prop up the insane prices. Yet the buyer does not have full control of their situation. You have a mortgaged portion up to 75% but then pay a rather expensive rent on the remainder that does not staircase to ownership. Instead you haver to pay whatever mortgage amount, plus the rent and then as an aside save up to purchase the remainder. So if we have a situation where someone can not afford to purchase 100% why would they be able to afford to pay a smaller mortgage a not low rent amount and then on top save up to buy the remainder? If they can afford all of that, then they likely could have afforded a bigger mortgage than what the banks are willing to loan LTV wise. The reality is if housing prices are too high for the market to support then those properties are actually overpriced and the market will set a new figure which is achievable. Shared ownership helps stop the market from correcting itself.
 
Bishop said:
Affordable housing isn't even affordable. No disrespect to anyone who has one but shared ownership is scam. Allowing people to own a partial share helps prop up the insane prices. Yet the buyer does not have full control of their situation. You have a mortgaged portion up to 75% but then pay a rather expensive rent on the remainder that does not staircase to ownership. Instead you haver to pay whatever mortgage amount, plus the rent and then as an aside save up to purchase the remainder. So if we have a situation where someone can not afford to purchase 100% why would they be able to afford to pay a smaller mortgage a not low rent amount and then on top save up to buy the remainder? If they can afford all of that, then they likely could have afforded a bigger mortgage than what the banks are willing to loan LTV wise. The reality is if housing prices are too high for the market to support then those properties are actually overpriced and the market will set a new figure which is achievable. Shared ownership helps stop the market from correcting itself.
Click to expand...

Absolutely depends what products are attached to the development though. Some classed as affordable are provided for social housing, shared ownership or intermediate rents. I can only talk for my local area again and not all affordable developments have been packaged as part mortgage, although many have.

I can't speak to this development though, i have no idea how closely they see working with the council or local housing associations.

I can't speak for the majority of the country either that's one for the politics thread haha
 
Last edited:
Bishop said:
Affordable housing isn't even affordable. No disrespect to anyone who has one but shared ownership is scam. Allowing people to own a partial share helps prop up the insane prices. Yet the buyer does not have full control of their situation. You have a mortgaged portion up to 75% but then pay a rather expensive rent on the remainder that does not staircase to ownership. Instead you haver to pay whatever mortgage amount, plus the rent and then as an aside save up to purchase the remainder. So if we have a situation where someone can not afford to purchase 100% why would they be able to afford to pay a smaller mortgage a not low rent amount and then on top save up to buy the remainder? If they can afford all of that, then they likely could have afforded a bigger mortgage than what the banks are willing to loan LTV wise. The reality is if housing prices are too high for the market to support then those properties are actually overpriced and the market will set a new figure which is achievable. Shared ownership helps stop the market from correcting itself.
Click to expand...

Also only building 30-40k houses a year when the population is rising by 300-700k a year doesn't help.
 
Bishop said:
Affordable housing isn't even affordable. No disrespect to anyone who has one but shared ownership is scam. Allowing people to own a partial share helps prop up the insane prices. Yet the buyer does not have full control of their situation. You have a mortgaged portion up to 75% but then pay a rather expensive rent on the remainder that does not staircase to ownership. Instead you haver to pay whatever mortgage amount, plus the rent and then as an aside save up to purchase the remainder. So if we have a situation where someone can not afford to purchase 100% why would they be able to afford to pay a smaller mortgage a not low rent amount and then on top save up to buy the remainder? If they can afford all of that, then they likely could have afforded a bigger mortgage than what the banks are willing to loan LTV wise. The reality is if housing prices are too high for the market to support then those properties are actually overpriced and the market will set a new figure which is achievable. Shared ownership helps stop the market from correcting itself.
Click to expand...
Part/shared ownership is generally a poor deal...the conditions attached are nonsense.

....and as for houses being sold as leasehold.... despicable.
 
DubSpur said:
Need to take out the cost of purchasing the land and building the homes out of that. Still should be a nice little earner.
Click to expand...
I know nothing is ever 'typical' but a reasonably standard rule of thumb for property is to calculate in thirds. One third land cost, one third build cost, one third gross profit.
 
Finney Is Back said:
I know nothing is ever 'typical' but a reasonably standard rule of thumb for property is to calculate in thirds. One third land cost, one third build cost, one third gross profit.
Click to expand...
That's the usual simple calc...

all the amateur developers have been nicely protected by rising property/land asset prices.....ie you could balls up and still exit smelling of roses.

That's probably changing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back