Wednesday, 28 October 2015
House Price Index Report - October 2015
Today the Land Registry released its latest report on the House Price Index, that hallowed knowledge of all things property - the dread that fills the faces of clients when we start to mention it is palpable - the colour drains from their faces, but fear not! We bring good tidings.
The initial views of the report show that property has risen in value by an average of 5.3% bringing the national average house price in England and Wales up to £186,553. The South East saw prices rise by 0.7% since August, and prices have risen by an average of 8.5% since the same time last year.
Throughout Hertfordshire the average price is now £311,247 with Greater London showing an average of £499,997.
The data goes on to show that Sales volumes are significantly lower this year than at the same point in 2014 and even 2013, however still appear to be buoyant when compared to figures for 2011 and 2012.
The number of sales over £1million decreased by 9% from July to September. The bulk of sales took place in the £300,000 to £400,000 price range.
The home counties are leading the way in terms of house price growth according to the latest figures. The report also shows that repossessions are following a downward trend, showing that mortgagors are keeping on top of things.
The data seems to support the gruff and surly chorus of agreement in the press that the Stamp Duty changes have started to pinch at the heels of £1m+ market, with fewer would-be buyers willing to take a bite out of the sixty grand tax sandwich that will be fed to them if they go through with it.
It seems that while it is of course still possible to make deals happen at a higher level, the nomansland between the sub £935,000 properties and the £1m+ properties is set to widen with the latter becoming more cash heavy and thinning the herd. This is however great news if you're looking at going on the market for under £900,000 as you're suddenly going to have a lot of hungry buyers, and a larger proportion will be free of finance constraints, if lugging along a lengthy chain, but we can't all have our cake and eat it too.
The data also suggests a noticeable dip in stock levels, which I know has been felt by colleagues throughout the industry and has even forced some redundancies in local firms who are tightening their belts - the first thing to go is the staff. We keep getting CV's from highly experienced and qualified negotiators who are knocking at every door looking for a job.
Leading into the winter months with the family focus turning from School places and late summer breaks to Pumpkins, winter clothing and the panic buying of Christmas presents before the family comes to stay, the market is set to bed in for what could be a tough winter for Estate Agents (don't all laugh at once), yet still the prices are creeping slowly up which could mean a boon for anyone wily enough to take advantage of the huge demand and a marketplace with less and less competition.
Selling in Winter isn't something that only the brave can do, it's just a case of getting the presentation right. Think about what makes indoor and outdoor spaces appealing during winter - evergreens, red berries, a roasting fire, homely smells and a warm welcome. If you're stuck for inspiration and you need to get moving, drop me a line - 01582 346 111.
And remember, since we've got the Land Rover, when we get all that snow we can still bring people up for a viewing! You'll just have to put the duvet back upstairs and change out of your pyjamas.
Tuesday, 13 October 2015
Universal Credit, or Universal Nightmare?
The NLA Meeting at Three Rivers District Council in Rickmansworth was where we heard about the latest updates to the Deregulation Bill, the changes to Council stances on their 'Easy Let' program which operated as a council run Lettings Agent to house low income and vulnerable families and individuals, and an introduction to the Benefits system changeover from the current DWP cocktail to the all-encompassing Universal Credit.
The crowd is a good mix - even including NLA Chairman and experienced Landlord Carolyn Uphill (pictured) who offered a brief but enlightening introduction to the waiting Landlords on how Landlords are vilified by society as money-grabbing heartless mercenaries, painted by the media to seem stingy, ungrateful and cruel. She goes on to say that the media reports of awful Landlords are a thin minority who give the bulk of those earning a crust in the Private Rented Sector a bad name - and judging by the clientele I'd say she was right. Most were over 40, well dressed and came forth with a good degree of technical knowledge and questions for the panel of speakers for the evening - in some cases serving them a positive roasting.
The first of the panel to offer their view was a gentleman named Alan who represented Three Rivers and informed Landlords of the Housing Services Departments ability to locate tenants and place them in properties at no cost to the Landlord (excepting the fact that the quality of tenant and the amount of guaranteed rent is potentially a third of that which could be achieved through a qualified and experienced Letting Agent, but this wasn't mentioned) - it seems like a great deal on paper.
Backing this up however was the following dissemination of new practices as set out by the DWP when it comes to welfare reform. And this is where it all gets really interesting;
The new 'Universal Credit' is being rolled out piecemeal over several years and in specific distinct stages. The current phase of implementation is for single adults with no dependents. Once on Universal Credit, the individuals will receive 'benefit' by way of a monthly payment, and all of the former aspects of Housing Benefit, Income Based JSA, Income Support, Tax Credits and Child Benefit will all be rolled into one. The idea being that claimants will enjoy a 'simulation' of work until they can find sustainable employment - the support and methods sound almost utopian on paper, but there was one part which heavily rocked the boat with Landlords.
The matter of direct payment to a Landlord when a claimant encounters difficulty will be altered, and not in the Landlord's favour. Currently Landlords and tenants can elect for payment to be made directly into the Landlord's bank account, assuming the tenant has offered consent for the Landlord to be made aware, and therefore Landlords are notified immediately if there is a problem with payments.
Under the new Universal Credit, payments are automatically made to the individual claimant and the claimant must give express permission to send direct payment to the Landlord. Furthermore, the DWP will only pay arrears to a level of UP TO 20% of the outstanding monthly amount, each month, until the arrears are paid off.
The deadly combination of these two could mean that Landlords who previously accepted Housing Benefit Tenants and built their businesses around the existing DWP rules could find themselves losing up to three month's rent before they find that a tenant is experiencing difficulties. This hands a great deal of power to tenants who might be wise to the system.
The further problem here is that it introduces a higher barrier and more stringent checks for those in most desperate need of housing - tenants in arrears will be scrutinised more heavily, and if it weren't bad enough already, more Letting Agents will dumb down the idea of even considering Universal Credit applicants, and Landlords may begin to reject applicants from Councils, leaving both the public sector and the populace they are seeking to help in a dire situation - facing homelessness.
The feedback from the event seemed to be coloured by the notion that many in the room felt that the reforms were poorly thought out and the impacts had not been fully addressed. I'm inclined to agree.
The final (and in my humble opinion most enlightening) element of the evening was Debenhams Ottway's Howard Kent speaking on the finer points of the Deregulation Bill. I'll be releasing a video on this soon which you can see in due course on my company YouTube channel.
Howard really dug down into the effects of incorrect service of paperwork, and how the HHSRS contained within the Housing Act 2004 really starts to bite when tenants make reports concerning health and safety issues in properties and improvement orders are served. The legislation, amongst a myriad other tweaks, now prevents a Landlord from serving a Section 21 where such a notice is in force, or even where such a complaint has been made.
Landlords will now need to be even more vigilant about record keeping and understand the nitty gritty details of the law if they are to protect their financial interests - it might be time to consider speaking to a highly experienced, qualified letting agent who's already implemented this framework..........now if only there was somebody you could call..........
01582 346 111
(for those of you who haven't caught up yet, that's my number)
The crowd is a good mix - even including NLA Chairman and experienced Landlord Carolyn Uphill (pictured) who offered a brief but enlightening introduction to the waiting Landlords on how Landlords are vilified by society as money-grabbing heartless mercenaries, painted by the media to seem stingy, ungrateful and cruel. She goes on to say that the media reports of awful Landlords are a thin minority who give the bulk of those earning a crust in the Private Rented Sector a bad name - and judging by the clientele I'd say she was right. Most were over 40, well dressed and came forth with a good degree of technical knowledge and questions for the panel of speakers for the evening - in some cases serving them a positive roasting.
The first of the panel to offer their view was a gentleman named Alan who represented Three Rivers and informed Landlords of the Housing Services Departments ability to locate tenants and place them in properties at no cost to the Landlord (excepting the fact that the quality of tenant and the amount of guaranteed rent is potentially a third of that which could be achieved through a qualified and experienced Letting Agent, but this wasn't mentioned) - it seems like a great deal on paper.
Backing this up however was the following dissemination of new practices as set out by the DWP when it comes to welfare reform. And this is where it all gets really interesting;
The new 'Universal Credit' is being rolled out piecemeal over several years and in specific distinct stages. The current phase of implementation is for single adults with no dependents. Once on Universal Credit, the individuals will receive 'benefit' by way of a monthly payment, and all of the former aspects of Housing Benefit, Income Based JSA, Income Support, Tax Credits and Child Benefit will all be rolled into one. The idea being that claimants will enjoy a 'simulation' of work until they can find sustainable employment - the support and methods sound almost utopian on paper, but there was one part which heavily rocked the boat with Landlords.
The matter of direct payment to a Landlord when a claimant encounters difficulty will be altered, and not in the Landlord's favour. Currently Landlords and tenants can elect for payment to be made directly into the Landlord's bank account, assuming the tenant has offered consent for the Landlord to be made aware, and therefore Landlords are notified immediately if there is a problem with payments.
Under the new Universal Credit, payments are automatically made to the individual claimant and the claimant must give express permission to send direct payment to the Landlord. Furthermore, the DWP will only pay arrears to a level of UP TO 20% of the outstanding monthly amount, each month, until the arrears are paid off.
The deadly combination of these two could mean that Landlords who previously accepted Housing Benefit Tenants and built their businesses around the existing DWP rules could find themselves losing up to three month's rent before they find that a tenant is experiencing difficulties. This hands a great deal of power to tenants who might be wise to the system.
The further problem here is that it introduces a higher barrier and more stringent checks for those in most desperate need of housing - tenants in arrears will be scrutinised more heavily, and if it weren't bad enough already, more Letting Agents will dumb down the idea of even considering Universal Credit applicants, and Landlords may begin to reject applicants from Councils, leaving both the public sector and the populace they are seeking to help in a dire situation - facing homelessness.
The feedback from the event seemed to be coloured by the notion that many in the room felt that the reforms were poorly thought out and the impacts had not been fully addressed. I'm inclined to agree.
The final (and in my humble opinion most enlightening) element of the evening was Debenhams Ottway's Howard Kent speaking on the finer points of the Deregulation Bill. I'll be releasing a video on this soon which you can see in due course on my company YouTube channel.
Howard really dug down into the effects of incorrect service of paperwork, and how the HHSRS contained within the Housing Act 2004 really starts to bite when tenants make reports concerning health and safety issues in properties and improvement orders are served. The legislation, amongst a myriad other tweaks, now prevents a Landlord from serving a Section 21 where such a notice is in force, or even where such a complaint has been made.
Landlords will now need to be even more vigilant about record keeping and understand the nitty gritty details of the law if they are to protect their financial interests - it might be time to consider speaking to a highly experienced, qualified letting agent who's already implemented this framework..........now if only there was somebody you could call..........
01582 346 111
(for those of you who haven't caught up yet, that's my number)
Wednesday, 7 October 2015
Rope Ladders, Balconies and The Art Of Balance
Recently released figures from Halifax show that house prices nationally have dropped by an average of 0.9% between August and September 2015. The market is still suffering from a stark imbalance of short supply and upwardly spiralling demand, only restrained by the relative increase in difficulty associated with obtaining finance to purchase property in the form of mortgages.
Mortgage rates remain low, which fuels the demand further.
The typical price of a home however remains 8.6% higher than the same time in 2014. Halifax feel that at this time the market will remain strong with prices continuing to hold steady and rise over the coming months.
So, in light of this news, what could topple the house of cards? Something that everyone seems to continually avoid discussing - so in my typical style, I've decided to roll up my sleeves and plunge both hands into the sticky gooey mess. Lovely!
Interest rates (i.e. the cost of borrowing, or conversely the risk of lending - depending on which end of the seesaw you're sitting on) are, in my opinion, the elephant in the room - nobody seems to want to discuss rising interest rates in case by some force of magic they skip up to the horrifying levels of 12-14% that we saw in the early 1990's. A rise in interest rates would slam the door shut for many who are currently able to afford mortgage finance, assuming they can tick all of the boxes during the inevitable interrogation from the banks.
It's unlikely that the government will overlook areas that would cause uncontrollable rises in interest rates, since the nature of these changes is always symbiotic and higher interest rates usually herald reduced consumer confidence, less disposable income, a focus on saving rather than spending and a consequence of a slowly shrinking economy, effectively undoing any hard work that has gone into achieving growth in recent years.
The MMR (Mortgage Market Review) rules which were introduced last year have previously come under harsh criticism for making borrowing more difficult to achieve for those struggling to purchase their first property and those looking to move up to a larger home, but being too relaxed on lending can have catastrophic results as we all know. Suspending our knowledge for now of the fact that most of the funds we are living on is supported by little more than our belief in it's intrinsic value (i.e. it's Fiat, there's no Gold backing our national currency), to open the sluices and allow a flood of uncontrolled lending would sweep away our foundations and repeat the harsh lessons we learned in 2007. This time around however the public are likely to be much less forgiving of government and banking irresponsibility.
Indeed, last time this happened we bailed out the banks purely because if we hadn't there would have been what can only be described as anarchy - the banks effectively held the government to ransom so they had no choice but to prop the whole thing up to avoid civil unrest and all the fun of the fair that comes with it. The comedy of this is that the public end up getting clobbered no matter what happened, but that's another story - we digress.
The government is therefore currently throttling demand by restricting borrowing - and by throttling I mean controlling the flow of demand in the housing market, rather than suffocating it - the restrained growth we're experiencing very much feels like we're paying out the main sheet oh-so-carefully in a strong gust to prevent us from capsizing the whole yacht.
The other side of the coin is that more housing is required - any fool can see that this is an undeniable truth. This too comes at a price. Diluting the stock too quickly will ruin the gravy - if you build too much, too soon, then demand for 'second hand' property (i.e. houses that we are trying to sell today) will see a fall in demand. However slight this may be, it will have a knock on effect. When nobody wants to buy something you have two choices - stop selling it or make the price more attractive. The net result? Prices fall, equity is lost and the potential for a 'domino effect' of price drops and loss of confidence spreads like wildfire.
This also takes a tributary feed from the Buy To Let market; squeeze Landlords too much and they'll stop playing, pick up their ball and go home. There is absolutely no good reason for investors to put their money in an asset which doesn't generate significant capital gains or adequate cash flow. Some may criticize this, but in fairness it would be madness to let funds languish in investments that are no longer producing income. That door will shut and many Landlords may sell up, whether through necessity or choice, simultaneously generating a very welcome flood of stock for first time buyers, but utterly hammering the market position of anyone on the next rung up.
So we're playing a very careful balancing act - we can't lend too much, we can't build too much, we can't pinch too much with legislation and all the while prices are rising which is steadily making it harder and harder for people to buy and progress. Think of an M.C. Escher style scene where a man on a balcony is pulling a rope ladder further out of reach of the person below him - this is rising house prices in action. Now imagine a further balcony above, with another figure who is also pulling up their rope ladder - that's the widening gap between where he is and where he wants to go. Rising house prices are relative, and that explains why - the only way around a rope ladder that is out of reach is to compromise and aim for a different balcony.
The problem with this situation is that rising prices are great if you've got a string of balconies and ladders beneath you, but they're awful if you're standing on the ground desperately leaping for the bottom rung and you need to buy some stilts from the bank to do it (who incidentally also own all of the rope ladders and the penthouse balcony, but forgive me for being cynical).
So will everything blow up in our faces? It's unlikely when the government is quite deftly playing puppet master to keep the strings and pulleys in motion while this all plays out, and while the show must go on, the curtain will fall eventually and one of these levees will break - will it be interest rates? Population growth? Economic growth? Too far one way and it all grinds to a halt - everyone will be at stalemate, and too far the other way and we'll face a runaway train with one final destination.
To wipe away the ash from this gloomy prediction - and I will always admit that I could be very wrong, after all I'm just saying what I see, I'm not a soothsayer, clairvoyant or a mystic - the key thing for any of us to do is assess the risk as it presents itself to our personal circumstances. Will buying or moving create a level of risk that you could not handle if things were to change? If the risk is something you can't bear, then stay put and wait unless pushed. But if you're smart and you can see a way through the jungle, then take the leap and swing from vine to vine (or climb from balcony to balcony) - remember that nobody ever got anywhere by standing still.
Mortgage rates remain low, which fuels the demand further.
The typical price of a home however remains 8.6% higher than the same time in 2014. Halifax feel that at this time the market will remain strong with prices continuing to hold steady and rise over the coming months.
So, in light of this news, what could topple the house of cards? Something that everyone seems to continually avoid discussing - so in my typical style, I've decided to roll up my sleeves and plunge both hands into the sticky gooey mess. Lovely!
Interest rates (i.e. the cost of borrowing, or conversely the risk of lending - depending on which end of the seesaw you're sitting on) are, in my opinion, the elephant in the room - nobody seems to want to discuss rising interest rates in case by some force of magic they skip up to the horrifying levels of 12-14% that we saw in the early 1990's. A rise in interest rates would slam the door shut for many who are currently able to afford mortgage finance, assuming they can tick all of the boxes during the inevitable interrogation from the banks.
It's unlikely that the government will overlook areas that would cause uncontrollable rises in interest rates, since the nature of these changes is always symbiotic and higher interest rates usually herald reduced consumer confidence, less disposable income, a focus on saving rather than spending and a consequence of a slowly shrinking economy, effectively undoing any hard work that has gone into achieving growth in recent years.
The MMR (Mortgage Market Review) rules which were introduced last year have previously come under harsh criticism for making borrowing more difficult to achieve for those struggling to purchase their first property and those looking to move up to a larger home, but being too relaxed on lending can have catastrophic results as we all know. Suspending our knowledge for now of the fact that most of the funds we are living on is supported by little more than our belief in it's intrinsic value (i.e. it's Fiat, there's no Gold backing our national currency), to open the sluices and allow a flood of uncontrolled lending would sweep away our foundations and repeat the harsh lessons we learned in 2007. This time around however the public are likely to be much less forgiving of government and banking irresponsibility.
Indeed, last time this happened we bailed out the banks purely because if we hadn't there would have been what can only be described as anarchy - the banks effectively held the government to ransom so they had no choice but to prop the whole thing up to avoid civil unrest and all the fun of the fair that comes with it. The comedy of this is that the public end up getting clobbered no matter what happened, but that's another story - we digress.
The government is therefore currently throttling demand by restricting borrowing - and by throttling I mean controlling the flow of demand in the housing market, rather than suffocating it - the restrained growth we're experiencing very much feels like we're paying out the main sheet oh-so-carefully in a strong gust to prevent us from capsizing the whole yacht.
The other side of the coin is that more housing is required - any fool can see that this is an undeniable truth. This too comes at a price. Diluting the stock too quickly will ruin the gravy - if you build too much, too soon, then demand for 'second hand' property (i.e. houses that we are trying to sell today) will see a fall in demand. However slight this may be, it will have a knock on effect. When nobody wants to buy something you have two choices - stop selling it or make the price more attractive. The net result? Prices fall, equity is lost and the potential for a 'domino effect' of price drops and loss of confidence spreads like wildfire.
This also takes a tributary feed from the Buy To Let market; squeeze Landlords too much and they'll stop playing, pick up their ball and go home. There is absolutely no good reason for investors to put their money in an asset which doesn't generate significant capital gains or adequate cash flow. Some may criticize this, but in fairness it would be madness to let funds languish in investments that are no longer producing income. That door will shut and many Landlords may sell up, whether through necessity or choice, simultaneously generating a very welcome flood of stock for first time buyers, but utterly hammering the market position of anyone on the next rung up.
So we're playing a very careful balancing act - we can't lend too much, we can't build too much, we can't pinch too much with legislation and all the while prices are rising which is steadily making it harder and harder for people to buy and progress. Think of an M.C. Escher style scene where a man on a balcony is pulling a rope ladder further out of reach of the person below him - this is rising house prices in action. Now imagine a further balcony above, with another figure who is also pulling up their rope ladder - that's the widening gap between where he is and where he wants to go. Rising house prices are relative, and that explains why - the only way around a rope ladder that is out of reach is to compromise and aim for a different balcony.
The problem with this situation is that rising prices are great if you've got a string of balconies and ladders beneath you, but they're awful if you're standing on the ground desperately leaping for the bottom rung and you need to buy some stilts from the bank to do it (who incidentally also own all of the rope ladders and the penthouse balcony, but forgive me for being cynical).
So will everything blow up in our faces? It's unlikely when the government is quite deftly playing puppet master to keep the strings and pulleys in motion while this all plays out, and while the show must go on, the curtain will fall eventually and one of these levees will break - will it be interest rates? Population growth? Economic growth? Too far one way and it all grinds to a halt - everyone will be at stalemate, and too far the other way and we'll face a runaway train with one final destination.
To wipe away the ash from this gloomy prediction - and I will always admit that I could be very wrong, after all I'm just saying what I see, I'm not a soothsayer, clairvoyant or a mystic - the key thing for any of us to do is assess the risk as it presents itself to our personal circumstances. Will buying or moving create a level of risk that you could not handle if things were to change? If the risk is something you can't bear, then stay put and wait unless pushed. But if you're smart and you can see a way through the jungle, then take the leap and swing from vine to vine (or climb from balcony to balcony) - remember that nobody ever got anywhere by standing still.
Thursday, 1 October 2015
What impact will the St Albans Sink Hole have on Property Values?
What impact will the St Albans
Sink Hole have on Property Values?
Everyone will have heard about
the huge sink hole which opened at 1.30am this morning on Fontmell Close in St Albans.
The huge hole has led the evacuation of many residents with approximately 40
homes without electric, gas and water, and a rapid response from authorities to
assess the damage and fill the hole to restore the foundations of the street.
The big question on everyone’s
lips though is how this will affect the residents in the road. Obviously
besides the impact to their daily lives and a ‘how long is a piece of string’
answer to any deadline for fixing the hole, the spectre of having potentially
lost acres of equity in their home has the capacity to leave some owners sick
to the stomach with worry.
Several sink holes have carved
gaping holes in the ground across the country in recent years, leaving many
scratching their heads and asking questions about why houses were built on such
sites in the first place. The geological history of this part of St Albans
shows that many areas in and around St Albans were extensively used to mine
sand, gravel and clay – this area notably being used for many years as a brickworks
where the brickmakers dug huge ‘bowls’ to mine the clay for bricks from the
soil. This mining activity (which was later filled in) and bedrock instability
due to acidic groundwater eroding the limestone bedrock could be a contributing
factor to the potential for more sinkholes across the Bernards Heath area
including Seymour Road, Beech Road, Marshall Avenue, Watson Road and the land
underneath local amenities such as The Pioneer Skate Park and two local schools.
Pretty much every other article
you can find on the sink hole will tell you where it is, how big it is, how it
formed, what caused it and the science behind sink holes. Though I may know a
little about sink holes, I won’t tout myself as an expert on that front – best
to ask a geologist.
The main focus of this piece is
the impact on pricing. So, is it going to affect house prices?
Well, if I told you that a house right next door to a sink hole will be worth
the same today as it was yesterday before it appeared, would you call me a
liar? Probably.
And would you buy it? Probably
not.
That’s addressed the question of
perceived value, so yes – arguably there will be less buyers interested than
there were before, which means that values may potentially drop on that road.
The other factor to take into account however is the repair methods employed in
rectifying the damage caused by a sink hole. Many are fixed using foamed
concrete to allow water to pass through into the limestone bedrock whilst
reinstating a solid foundation for construction of buildings, roads and
infrastructure on top. This is the method that was used in Hemel Hempstead last
year.
The problem, as far as I can
see, is that nobody really knows where the eroded caves in the bedrock actually
are, and therefore we have no current method of predicting where the next
sinkhole will appear.
This sounds like scaremongering
– and while I’m not a statistician (I can barely even say statistician without
a lie down afterwards) – and although there HAVE been incidents where
properties in the area have suffered from subsidence, and indeed one sinkhole
opened up behind the Pioneer Club which has been monitored by the council for
some time, I should imagine that the probability of another sink hole opening
up right underneath your house or your child’s school is low. Many of these
buildings have been here for quite some time without any major incident, so I
shouldn’t be too concerned.
The best and most recent case
study of how this geological nightmare can impact on housing is with the sinkhole
which appeared in February 2014 underneath Oatridge Close in Hemel Hempstead.
In March, a local agent was selling a 4 bed property on that road just feet
from the hole for £420,000 which is in line with asking prices at the time, if
a little under the norm, but many of the properties on that road belong to
Hightown Praetorian and Churches Housing Association, with many of the flats
being shared ownership. What is really encouraging is that sales haven’t slowed
down by a huge amount, and the prices seem to have retained a somewhat positive
trend, which contrasts the expectation that suddenly all prices on that road
would plummet into the hole as well.
Some properties on the site did
require demolition and have been replaced by town houses on newly replaced
foundations. Many mains connected services called for extensive works to be put
in place to support any future building work, but this to me just highlights
the need for an extremely robust buildings insurance policy which covers
residents in the area for such eventualities, particularly if you know about
the possibility of sinkholes or geological activity.
All of this does raise the
question of whether issues that have a geological or structural impact, whether
a present factor or a calculated risk, have as much of an impact as social
problems such as poor schools, high crime rates and lack of community – it
seems that the latter drag prices down at a much higher rate than the former.
I any event the ultimate price
the owners and residents of Fontmell Close will pay will be determined by the
buyers who look to own homes on the road in the future. The biggest factor to
bear is ensuring that any remedial works and geological surveys are carried out
and the paperwork is retained by the owners to pass on to buyers in the
interests of transparency and cementing trust.
Under the new Consumer
Protection Regulations the concealment of a sinkhole nearby could give rise to
a lawsuit from the buyers (assuming they somehow manage to not hear about it on
the news, which would be a miracle in itself) if it was later proved that the
agent and the owner had omitted this information from the sales particulars –
the principle of caveat emptor (buyer beware) is not as much of a solid
foundation as it once was, if you’ll excuse the pun.
Roundly speaking, homes directly
on the rim of the crater may experience some depreciation, but on the whole the
impact will be minor due to the huge demand for St Albans property and the
massive national demand for housing. I advise that owners ensure that buyers
are confident in the steps taken to rectify the problem, and that some
assurance can be given to them on ensuring the property is not at risk. The
best way to do this is through producing paperwork from the council and
specialist contractors concerning the work undertaken to plug the hole.
Undoubtedly, some buyers will
run a mile, but in a market where demand outstrips supply to such a degree that
open days can attract tens of buyers, an upfront approach and a realistic but
keen price will see vendors walking away without too much of a limp.
UPDATE EDIT: 01/10/15 19:28 GMT. Credit to Andy Kilvington for offering extensive local knowledge on previous issues with the area which was not reported in the press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)