Property crash, just maybe it really is different this time (Part 3)

[sancho panza]

https://propertyindustryeye.com/property-transactions-hit-11-year-low-industry-reaction/

Property transactions hit 11-year low – industry reaction

The latest data from HMRC shows that there were 82,000 residential property transactions completed in January on a seasonally adjusted basis, which was the lowest level for the month since 2013.

The 11-year fall was despite a monthly rise from the 80,500 property transactions completed in December, which was also the first month-on-month increase since August 2023.

On a non-seasonally adjusted basis, residential transactions fell by a fifth month-on-month to 68,090. HMRC said this was typical for January as transactions tended to fall by between 20-30% compared to December.

Compared to last year, the non-seasonally adjusted residential transactions were lower than the 75,690 completed in January 2023.

[spygirl]

14 hours ago, sancho panza said:

https://propertyindustryeye.com/property-transactions-hit-11-year-low-industry-reaction/

Property transactions hit 11-year low – industry reaction

The latest data from HMRC shows that there were 82,000 residential property transactions completed in January on a seasonally adjusted basis, which was the lowest level for the month since 2013.

The 11-year fall was despite a monthly rise from the 80,500 property transactions completed in December, which was also the first month-on-month increase since August 2023.

On a non-seasonally adjusted basis, residential transactions fell by a fifth month-on-month to 68,090. HMRC said this was typical for January as transactions tended to fall by between 20-30% compared to December.

Compared to last year, the non-seasonally adjusted residential transactions were lower than the 75,690 completed in January 2023.

If they are to continue with running SA figures then they need to run the non SA figures as well.

SA figures only work when next year is like this year, which was last year ...n the year before etc etc.

UK property is showing massive swings, make SA adjustment pointless or, more likely, a scam.

 

[onlyme]

1 hour ago, spygirl said:

If they are to continue with running SA figures then they need to run the non SA figures as well.

SA figures only work when next year is like this year, which was last year ...n the year before etc etc.

UK property is showing massive swings, make SA adjustment pointless or, more likely, a scam.

 

Running SA and non SA (plus all the other indices with mix adjusting etc) gives the various interests more options to cherry pick data and run with the ones most heavily that best suit their narrative. Works both ways, in buble times they will pick more neutral ones to justify no ned for rate hikes and alike or the need to keeep props / giveaways in place.

Fall in transacions from 82K to 76K for Jan YOY is pretty damned bad, this is with all the hoopla pre December of rate cuts.

 

[spunko]

Not really in the spirit of this thread but would appreciate some advice please. A property came on last July that went under offer in October and it's still Under Offer. I contacted the EA asking if they can notify me if it falls through but didnt hear back.

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party? Not really my scene but they are dragging their heels clearly.

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

[spygirl]

13 minutes ago, spunko said:

Not really in the spirit of this thread but would appreciate some advice please. A property came on last July that went under offer in October and it's still Under Offer. I contacted the EA asking if they can notify me if it falls through but didnt hear back.

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party? Not really my scene but they are dragging their heels clearly.

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

I'd walk in the office, if they have one, and ask.

EAs can just be plain useless.

[Chewing Grass]

If you don't ask you don't get.

[AWW]

2 hours ago, spunko said:

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party?

Yes, you want to be going in there asking to pay the same but with the ability to actually complete.

[Wight Flight]

3 hours ago, spunko said:

Not really in the spirit of this thread but would appreciate some advice please. A property came on last July that went under offer in October and it's still Under Offer. I contacted the EA asking if they can notify me if it falls through but didnt hear back.

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party? Not really my scene but they are dragging their heels clearly.

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

How much do you want it?

if the sale falls through you could probably pick it up for 10% less on the rebound.

[jamtomorrow]

14 hours ago, spunko said:

Not really in the spirit of this thread but would appreciate some advice please. A property came on last July that went under offer in October and it's still Under Offer. I contacted the EA asking if they can notify me if it falls through but didnt hear back.

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party? Not really my scene but they are dragging their heels clearly.

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

Contact the EA by all means, but also put a well-crafted note through the letter box to tell the owner, in case the problem is in an area where the EA has a conflict of interest (e.g. in-house mortgage)

[CVG]

15 hours ago, spunko said:

Not really in the spirit of this thread but would appreciate some advice please. A property came on last July that went under offer in October and it's still Under Offer. I contacted the EA asking if they can notify me if it falls through but didnt hear back.

Is it cunty to now contact the EA again saying I will gazump the interested party? Not really my scene but they are dragging their heels clearly.

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

Check the LR data first. It may well have completed. My last home was listed on RM as SSTC for 7 months after completion.

[nirvana]

15 hours ago, spunko said:

It does seem like the ideal property and location, I wasn't considering the area it's in last year so hence didnt see it, but now want to move a bit further away.

go and knock on the door and say 'hi, I want to buy your house for cash, direct'.......fuk the EA

[spunko]

41 minutes ago, CVG said:

Check the LR data first. It may well have completed. My last home was listed on RM as SSTC for 7 months after completion.

I have done,  nothing listed. 

[belfastchild]

36 minutes ago, nirvana said:

go and knock on the door and say 'hi, I want to buy your house for cash, direct'.......fuk the EA

That was the trick here in 2007 with Dublin investors. They would bring a briefcase of cash, open it at the viewing and make a lowball offer. Mate had it done to him.

[nirvana]

30 minutes ago, spunko said:

I have done,  nothing listed. 

so get off t'internet and go knock on the door.......you've got nothing to lose, boss man

[spunko]

1 hour ago, belfastchild said:

That was the trick here in 2007 with Dublin investors. They would bring a briefcase of cash, open it at the viewing and make a lowball offer. Mate had it done to him.

Nothing dodgy about that

Did he accept?

Was he kneecapped a few days later?

[Butthead]

3 hours ago, CVG said:

Check the LR data first. It may well have completed. My last home was listed on RM as SSTC for 7 months after completion.

I think agents use it as a marketing tool, leaving desirable properties up online long after they've sold. When a potential buyer enquires they can say "I'm really sorry but that one has sold.... but we have this new instruction on a really similar place just down the road...!"

I don't think checking LR data is the solution it used to be though, because like all public sector depts I understand the LR are well behind on their updates.

[Errol]

 

[belfastchild]

3 hours ago, spunko said:

Nothing dodgy about that

Did he accept?

Was he kneecapped a few days later?

He would have bitten his hand off but the wife was the greedy one, accepted 20 grand more from a more 'conventional' route.
Taking proof of finances to the extreme really but was a very good motivator for a lot of people. Numbers can be very abstract but when someone opens a deal or no deal briefcase in front of you its hard not to be swayed.

[BurntBread]

49 minutes ago, belfastchild said:

He would have bitten his hand off but the wife was the greedy one, accepted 20 grand more from a more 'conventional' route.
Taking proof of finances to the extreme really but was a very good motivator for a lot of people. Numbers can be very abstract but when someone opens a deal or no deal briefcase in front of you its hard not to be swayed.

I can't imagine it would go well if you tried paying a suitcase of cash into a bank. I guess they would either refuse to take it, or at least call the police and open a money-laundering investigation. There's no guarantee they wouldn't find something dodgy with some of the notes, either.

It would be a much freer society if we could transact in cash, but in the West as it is now, I think you'd be in for a world of pain if you took the offer (even if you had a secure place to store the cash). Was it really possible to do this in Dublin in 2007?

[belfastchild]

1 minute ago, BurntBread said:

I can't imagine it would go well if you tried paying a suitcase of cash into a bank. I guess they would either refuse to take it, or at least call the police and open a money-laundering investigation. There's no guarantee they wouldn't find something dodgy with some of the notes, either.

It would be a much freer society if we could transact in cash, but in the West as it is now, I think you'd be in for a world of pain if you took the offer (even if you had a secure place to store the cash). Was it really possible to do this in Dublin in 2007?

FFS they werent buying the house with the cash. It was all a psychological ruse.
Its hard to envisage what 200 grand looks like if you are talking telephone numbers with your estate agent and imaginary buyers. When someone turns up and says, here, this is what it looks like and can be in your back pocket in 6 weeks when you accept my offer. You can hold on for 220 but this is what real, hard cash looks like.

I use the example a lot when people are quibbling over an extra 3k in their redundancy or 2k extra in a claim. If you get offered 25k before a tribunal but you think you can get 27k I say to people if they turned up with 25k cash in a briefcase and said 'sign here' you would bite their hands off.

Its all about making the theoretical, real.

[BurntBread]

6 minutes ago, belfastchild said:

FFS they werent buying the house with the cash. It was all a psychological ruse.
Its hard to envisage what 200 grand looks like if you are talking telephone numbers with your estate agent and imaginary buyers. When someone turns up and says, here, this is what it looks like and can be in your back pocket in 6 weeks when you accept my offer. You can hold on for 220 but this is what real, hard cash looks like.

I use the example a lot when people are quibbling over an extra 3k in their redundancy or 2k extra in a claim. If you get offered 25k before a tribunal but you think you can get 27k I say to people if they turned up with 25k cash in a briefcase and said 'sign here' you would bite their hands off.

Its all about making the theoretical, real.

(a) It would convince me I was dealing with someone very dodgy

(b) I wouldn't believe that cash wasn't counterfeit or fraudulent in some way.

Anyone thinking this added trust to the transaction is an idiot.

[belfastchild]

16 minutes ago, BurntBread said:

(a) It would convince me I was dealing with someone very dodgy

(b) I wouldn't believe that cash wasn't counterfeit or fraudulent in some way.

Anyone thinking this added trust to the transaction is an idiot.

Must have worked enough times as I heard similar stories a few times from different people.
All going through the normal buying process via solicitors etc so no different to any other offer.

[BurntBread]

Just now, belfastchild said:

Must have worked enough times as I heard similar stories a few times from different people.
All going through the normal buying process via solicitors etc so no different to any other offer.

Sorry for being a bit rude above, but the story didn't make any sense to me from any angle, so I started by criticising the obvious one of "just buying the house for cash".

I still don't know what the chap who turns up in the story with £200k is going to do with it afterwards (or indeed how he came by it), if he isn't going to spend it on a house. He is in the same position of having to deal with the banks, unless he has a good money-laundering business on the side.

Maybe it was £200k of movie-prop money, just to let the buyer see roughly what it would look like, and some of the buyers didn't spot the "Monopoly" logo? It would be slightly more visceral than showing them a photo of a suitcase of money, but not by much.

I guess it shows there's no accounting for folk. Did you hear it from anyone who had actually seen the cash, rather than second-hand?

[belfastchild]

1 hour ago, BurntBread said:

Sorry for being a bit rude above, but the story didn't make any sense to me from any angle, so I started by criticising the obvious one of "just buying the house for cash".

I still don't know what the chap who turns up in the story with £200k is going to do with it afterwards (or indeed how he came by it), if he isn't going to spend it on a house. He is in the same position of having to deal with the banks, unless he has a good money-laundering business on the side.

Maybe it was £200k of movie-prop money, just to let the buyer see roughly what it would look like, and some of the buyers didn't spot the "Monopoly" logo? It would be slightly more visceral than showing them a photo of a suitcase of money, but not by much.

I guess it shows there's no accounting for folk. Did you hear it from anyone who had actually seen the cash, rather than second-hand?

Ive told the story before in another thread so thought it was common knowledge around 2007.
What happened was the Dublin property market went ballistic which gave a lot of dublin property developers a problem until they found out the houses in Belfast were cheap. They started then bidding up things by phone and not turning up which never worked out. A few of them had cash burning holes in their pockets so heard the story and thought it was made up of one guy turning up outside a house for a viewing in expensive suit, high end merc and a briefcase. Did the whole Im going to make an offer thing but its under what you are looking (just) for a quick sale. Im a cash buyer and...
..heres a look at what 200 grand cash looks like.
Im assuming he also had acquaintances sitting nearby in case things went south.
I was telling this story later to one of my friends who said the exact same thing happened to him. Cash buyer, dublin businessman, wanted a quick cash transaction, his lawyers would sort it in 6 weeks or less.  Heres a look at how serious I am, opens briefcase. EA had a cash offer on the table (10% less than current) at opening the next morning. Said it was someone who had bought off them before and would be a quick transaction if they wanted to go that route.
This was around the time (and I was told this first hand) EAs were telling people/getting them to agree their houses were sold for x amount, and completing quickly. The house never left the market and went on again seamlessly selling to the next person with new carpets, painted walls etc. I knew a carpet fitter at the time who was flat out 24/7 just putting contract carpets in places, just so the photos would look different.
Solicitors were mentioned as flippers as they always had cash on their books etc.

It really was like the wild west and house prices were going up here weekly. The average house price back then touched 250k briefly and even at the height of the covid boom it only really just touched 175k.

[spunko]

3 hours ago, belfastchild said:

FFS they werent buying the house with the cash. It was all a psychological ruse.
Its hard to envisage what 200 grand looks like if you are talking telephone numbers with your estate agent and imaginary buyers. When someone turns up and says, here, this is what it looks like and can be in your back pocket in 6 weeks when you accept my offer. You can hold on for 220 but this is what real, hard cash looks like.

I use the example a lot when people are quibbling over an extra 3k in their redundancy or 2k extra in a claim. If you get offered 25k before a tribunal but you think you can get 27k I say to people if they turned up with 25k cash in a briefcase and said 'sign here' you would bite their hands off.

Its all about making the theoretical, real.

I wonder if this is why websites like BOTB love to roll out the briefcase filled with replica cash?