Property Market 2016

El_Dangeroso

The_Conductor wrote: »

Have a look at Propertypriceregister - thats where I was getting figures from........

I hate to nitpick but on the PPR it ranges from 190k-211k in the past year for Aisling Court. In terms of houses there are 4 beds in Lurgan Park that sell for 260..

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

audi12

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I hate to nitpick but on the PPR it ranges from 190k-211k in the past year for Aisling Court. In terms of houses there are 4 beds in Lurgan Park that sell for 260..

Lurgan Park ideal for students rent for life two. And Aishling Park are the really nice apartments.

The_Conductor

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

1.8 billion is burning a hole in their pockets- thats what they've been given by the government to try replenish some of the disposed of social housing stock.........

Angel2016

I have just been looking up the property price register for houses in the Kingswood area D24 where I currently rent and its very interesting to see the price the houses sell for although being advertised at the 270k-290k mark they are actually selling at the 240k-260k mark some need work doing which is not a big deal but I was thinking that when I am ready to buy I would not be able to afford in that area but if prices were to stay like that I would be as I think alot of EA are overpricing houses or am I wrong?

Bob24

Angel2016 wrote: »

I think alot of EA are overpricing houses or am I wrong?

It really depends on the agent and what they think is the best way to sell a particular property.

Sometimes they might think it makes sense to advertise below market price to attract more viewers and trigger bidding wars.
Other times they might thin it make sense to advertise slightly above market rate (or be pushed buy sellers to do so) so that they have some margin to negotiate in case someone is bidding below advertised price.

I think the first technique makes sense in areas with high levels of transactions and the second one is more appropriate in areas were the market is very slow and quiet.

Angel2016

I've been viewing a few houses the past couple of months and they all seem overpriced to me I have been looking in the D24 area as I am from there and currently rent there and own a one bed apartment which just went on the market two weeks ago so when viewing I am saying that house is not worth ex amount

TiNcAn

Angel2016 wrote: »

I think alot of EA are overpricing houses or am I wrong?

It really depends on the agent and what they think is the best way to sell a particular property.

Sometimes they might think it makes sense to advertise below market price to attract more viewers and trigger bidding wars.

This is sometime I am curious in. If you are the highest bidder with maybe one other below your highest, is there any situation where it would be acceptable to climb back down a bit? Like if you had discovered sometime (e.g. dampness) that might take a bit more work. Or is your highest bid fixed and going nowhere except for up?

Hombre Lobo

TiNcAn wrote: »

This is sometime I am curious in. If you are the highest bidder with maybe one other below your highest, is there any situation where it would be acceptable to climb back down a bit? Like if you had discovered sometime (e.g. dampness) that might take a bit more work. Or is your highest bid fixed and going nowhere except for up?

If you had a structural survey done and it spotted a major problem then there is nothing stopping you going back to the seller and renegotiating the price, highlighting the estimated cost of repair. There's also nothing to stop the seller saying no and putting the house back on the market either though.

If I'm not mistaken, I've read several threads here before where people have pulled out of a sale due to concerns highlighted on the structural survey, and the EA would tell the next potential buyer in line that the person who had gone Sale Agreed had financing problems.

quadrifoglio verde

draiochtanois wrote: »

Plus local authorities are approaching developers who have work in progress to buy up complete developments. Which is great if you are on the housing list but less so if you are not.

Indeed, long term it will help increase supply, but at a cost to the private buyer as well as future purchases of stock by the council.
The councils need to get back building houses, but instead of only letting the lowest earners in society live there, anyone who wants to should be able.
Cheaper houses for all and prevents ballymun, neilstown or jobstown mk2 from happening.

If you put the ABC1s into Neilstown, none of the social problems that occurred would have.

Cuddlesworth

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Indeed, long term it will help increase supply, but at a cost to the private buyer as well as future purchases of stock by the council.
The councils need to get back building houses, but instead of only letting the lowest earners in society live there, anyone who wants to should be able.
Cheaper houses for all and prevents ballymun, neilstown or jobstown mk2 from happening.

If you put the ABC1s into Neilstown, none of the social problems that occurred would have.

They would move out and eventually it would turn into another crap hole council estate and take 40-50 years to get back on track. The reasons are obvious, few people with money want to live in council estates. So they move and are replaced. Eventually the number of problem tenants grows to untenable levels and anybody that can move, does. Leaving only the assholes, the destitute and the stupid.

The_Conductor

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

They would move out and eventually it would turn into another crap hole council estate and take 40-50 years to get back on track. The reasons are obvious, few people with money want to live in council estates. So they move and are replaced. Eventually the number of problem tenants grows to untenable levels and anybody that can move, does. Leaving only the assholes, the destitute and the stupid.

Younger buyers might be quite happy to live there- if it was seen as a stepping stone to moving out to the suburbs- to ye 3 bed detached with a garden- rather than as a 'forever-house'.........

Sleepy

Honestly, I think once kids are involved, you do whatever it takes to avoid living in such areas.

Angel2016

The_Conductor wrote: »

Younger buyers might be quite happy to live there- if it was seen as a stepping stone to moving out to the suburbs- to ye 3 bed detached with a garden- rather than as a 'forever-house'.........

The price you would sell the houses in the less desirable areas for would not get you what you want for a house in another area I don't think, I am from D24 and currently live in Kingswood renting and trying to buy a house at the moment whilst also sell my one bed apt and I have friends in West Tallaght and some of them would never move out of the area they love it and alot of their friends and family who grew up there have now purchased houses in the area but I also have one friend who moved to West Tallaght as a stepping stone to another house and 10 years later she is still there and does not like it at all and wants to move out but her house is not worth enough to enable her to sell and move to her forever house.

The_Conductor

Angel- in all fairness to your friend- if she bought in Tallaght 10 years ago- she bought at peak prices- and even now, its worth at least 20% than she paid for it 10 years ago- even taking recent price rises into account.......

The point I was making- was that if there was supply to open up covering all strata- i.e. small 1-2 bed apartments, larger apartments, houses in the burbs with gardens etc- that people could buy a smaller 1-2 bed- save like crazy for 8-10 years, and then sell and upscale to a property that better suited their changing needs (for example if they had children in the intervening period of time etc).

I'm not denigrating West Tallaght, Kingswood, D24 (Clondalkin etc)- hell, I went to school in the area when I was a kid- I'm just trying to say that some people might use it as a launchpad for something else- some not so.

Its best to not hold the happenings of the last 10 years up as any kind of an example of what is likely to happen in future- we've never had a residential property burst like that- nor a recovery- if we can get on a road to sustainability- which has to include incremental release of supply onto the market- that is what we should aim for.........

Askthe EA

Hombre Lobo wrote: »

If you had a structural survey done and it spotted a major problem then there is nothing stopping you going back to the seller and renegotiating the price, highlighting the estimated cost of repair. There's also nothing to stop the seller saying no and putting the house back on the market either though.

If I'm not mistaken, I've read several threads here before where people have pulled out of a sale due to concerns highlighted on the structural survey, and the EA would tell the next potential buyer in line that the person who had gone Sale Agreed had financing problems.

Thats a minefield. Like anything else, often engineers reports are subjective. Ive had propertys fail and my clients (or subsequent purchasers)have gotten a second opinion and its passed. There isnt much point if the issue is major as the EA is only wasting their time as it will arise again and again.

Carrotcrunch

We're buying what we hope is our "forever house" at the moment, using the sale from our starter home as deposit. We were lucky and bought when prices weren't frightening. We have a buyer, we're sale agreed but the estate agent for the house we're about to buy is being awful. Starting to wonder are we being played. The owners of the house we want to buy wouldn't go sale agreed til we were sale agreed - fair enough. Then they wanted a reputable solicitor - which we got. Then they wanted to make sure the title deeds were in order - they are. They then wanted contracts all set up before they'd go sale agreed - apart from the MUDs, our solicitor has everything. (We're waiting on an insurance doc before the MUDs docs can be sent over). They still won't go sale agreed - we have got everything they want, we are begging them to take a huge amount of money from us and for what? I feel drained and a bit bullied by them to be honest. It's a shame we love the house so much as we would love to tell them all to go to hell at this point. Anyone else ever have this problem?

bren2002

There probably isn't much you can about this. The vendor has the position of strength, if you pull out they will still likely make or exceed the current bid. If they're not in a hurry they've no incentive to take the house off the market.

You could threaten to walk away if it isn't taken off the market, but as above if the vendor isn't in a hurry it doesn't make any difference to them.

Carrotcrunch

bren2002 wrote: »

There probably isn't much you can about this. The vendor has the position of strength, if you pull out they will still likely make or exceed the current bid. If they're not in a hurry they've no incentive to take the house off the market.

You could threaten to walk away if it isn't taken off the market, but as above if the vendor isn't in a hurry it doesn't make any difference to them.

Weird thing is that the estate agent is saying the reason they're dragging their feet is coz they want a quick sale - once everything is in order they want it closed in a matter of weeks. They're not living in the house. It's been sale agreed twice in the last year and both times they've fallen through. So we're wondering if they want to sell at all...either that or the estate agent is the reason both other parties have pulled out, she's a witch lol

At this rate, our house will be sold and we'll have nowhere to live. Very stressful!

Uriel.

Carrotcrunch wrote: »

Weird thing is that the estate agent is saying the reason they're dragging their feet is coz they want a quick sale - once everything is in order they want it closed in a matter of weeks. They're not living in the house. It's been sale agreed twice in the last year and both times they've fallen through. So we're wondering if they want to sell at all...either that or the estate agent is the reason both other parties have pulled out, she's a witch lol

At this rate, our house will be sold and we'll have nowhere to live. Very stressful!

Don't believe what the EA tells you, and not just because they may be lying to you directly, but also because their client is lying to them.
Our "urgently quick sale" took 5 months all because the vendor didn't really want to urgently sell at all, despite repeating it ad nauseum..

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Carrotcrunch

I really hope this is the reason because we're not messing around. We love the place! Thanks for reply

draiochtanois wrote: »

I'm guessing they have been burned by buyers twice so far and don't want it to happen a third time

Askthe EA

Carrotcrunch wrote: »

I really hope this is the reason because we're not messing around. We love the place! Thanks for reply

Out of interest, have you asked the EA why 2 buyers pulled out? I'd be concerned at that. Once happens, twice is suspicious.

VW 1

So we have gone sale agreed as of last week and the EA has asked us to provide our approval in principal which only arrived via post today.

Is there any risk in allowing the EA to see the full amount we are approved for as we have an extra 15k at our disposal to borrow compared to what we need at our sale agreed price less our deposit?

Askthe EA

VW 1 wrote: »

So we have gone sale agreed as of last week and the EA has asked us to provide our approval in principal which only arrived via post today.

Is there any risk in allowing the EA to see the full amount we are approved for as we have an extra 15k at our disposal to borrow compared to what we need at our sale agreed price less our deposit?

If you're sale agreed it's hugely unlikely they'll come back for more. If they do, u tell them to jump. Unfortunately, nothing is binding till u sign the contract though.

It's 99% just the EA making sure u can cover your bid.

Bob24

VW 1 wrote: »

So we have gone sale agreed as of last week and the EA has asked us to provide our approval in principal which only arrived via post today.

Is there any risk in allowing the EA to see the full amount we are approved for as we have an extra 15k at our disposal to borrow compared to what we need at our sale agreed price less our deposit?

Better to avoid showing the full amount to the EA if you can (if you are sale agreed already they probably wouldn't play dirty tricks, but you never know, and of for some reason the sale falls through and you are interested by another property advertised by the same agent they will know how far they can stretch you). What you can do is to ask your banker/broker if they can confirm in writing to the EA that you do have an approval which is sufficient for the exact amount you agreed on.

Askthe EA

Bob24 wrote: »

What you can do is to ask your banker/broker if they can confirm in writing to the EA that you do have an approval which is sufficient for the exact amount you agreed on.

Hmm, not sure I'd take it from a broker. Certainly from a bank though. If it's a receivership sale, they'll only take the letter in full.

Hazydays123

VW 1 wrote: »

So we have gone sale agreed as of last week and the EA has asked us to provide our approval in principal which only arrived via post today.

Is there any risk in allowing the EA to see the full amount we are approved for as we have an extra 15k at our disposal to borrow compared to what we need at our sale agreed price less our deposit?

We just blanked out the AIP amount in marker and sent the letter on that way. It's none of their business what you were approved for and just gives then an advantage over you.

Carrotcrunch

Askthe EA wrote: »

Out of interest, have you asked the EA why 2 buyers pulled out? I'd be concerned at that. Once happens, twice is suspicious.

They said the first buyer was a "cash buyer" and this fell through - no reason given. They then went sale agreed with the second buyer for 5K less than what we offered because they were a "first time buyer" and we were selling to buy, they felt that the first-timers would be more likely to go ahead. They apparently agreed to a 5-week closing and when the first time buyers couldn't uphold that, they came back to us. And are still making our lives hell. This house has been on the market for a year now, according to Daft. What are they playing at? It's empty, nobody is living there.

Barely Hedged

Carrotcrunch wrote: »

They said the first buyer was a "cash buyer" and this fell through - no reason given. They then went sale agreed with the second buyer for 5K less than what we offered because they were a "first time buyer" and we were selling to buy, they felt that the first-timers would be more likely to go ahead. They apparently agreed to a 5-week closing and when the first time buyers couldn't uphold that, they came back to us. And are still making our lives hell. This house has been on the market for a year now, according to Daft. What are they playing at? It's empty, nobody is living there.

They are making your life hell by asking you to have all your documentation in order?