Skip Navigation
 

How Big Was The Housing Boom?

Cliff D'Arcy

By

Cliff D'Arcy

From the Fool blog

How To Bag A Bargain This Christmas

Published in Property and Home on 6 February 2008

Which parts of the UK were the biggest winners and losers in the house-price explosion? We dig up the data and find out.

Last month, I looked at over twenty years of house price data from the Halifax House Price Index (HPI) to find out just how bad the Nineties housing crash was. I revealed my findings in How Bad Was The Last Housing Crash?

These articles showed that prices dropped by an average of an eighth (-12.5%) across the UK as a whole. However, there were far steeper plunges in previous hotspots, such as East Anglia (-33.9%), the South East (-30.7%), the South West (-29.3%) and Greater London (-27.9%).

Anyway, that's the gloom, now let's look at the boom!

Across the UK overall, house prices turned the corner in the second half of 1995 and have been rising ever since. Then again, different regions bottomed out at different times, and price rises have varied across the nation. So, let's begin by looking at the UK at the top level and then move on to analyse each of its twelve regions in A-Z order:

The UK house-price boom, from bottom to top

Based on the Halifax House Price Index, here's the UK's twelve-year surge:

High/Low

House price (£)

Q3 1995

61,115

Q3 2007

198,664

Increase (£)

137,549

Increase (%)

225

Annual increase (%)

10.3

Thanks to the ongoing crunch in world credit markets, house prices in the final quarter of last year were 1% lower than the previous quarter.* Thus, the peak for the UK as a whole came in the third quarter of 2007.

From 1995 to 2007, house prices rose by a compound 10.3% a year, and more than tripled over this period. Like many others, I predict that prices are set to soften for some time yet, so we may not regain the Q3 2007 peak for some time.

Now let's take a tour of the UK's dozen regions:

East Anglia House Prices

High/Low

House price

Q1 1993

£57,200

Q3 2007

£193,574

Increase (£)

£136,374

Increase (%)

238%

Annual increase (%)

8.8%

The recovery began much earlier in East Anglia and ran for a total of 14½ years. Over this period, prices rose by an average of 8.8% a year, underperforming the UK as a whole. Having dived hard during the slide, the fens rose more slowly in the upswing.

East Midlands House Prices

High/Low

House price (£)

Q3 1995

£52,618

Q3 2007

£167,314

Increase (£)

£114,696

Increase (%)

218%

Annual increase (%)

10.1%

Although the East Midlands fared worse in the crash, it recovered at a similar rate to the rest of the UK, with house prices rising by more than 10% a year for twelve years.

Greater London House Prices

High/Low

House price (£)

Q1 1993

£75,832

Q3 2007

£320,364

Increase (£)

£244,532

Increase (%)

322%

Annual increase (%)

10.4%

London crashed harder than the rest of the UK last time around, but turned the corner quicker. It then set off on a 14½-year climb, with prices rising slightly quicker than the UK average of 10.3% a year. But in 2007, according to Halifax, the pace of annual price rises slowed to just 4.5% overall and the average price fell of a London home actually fell by over £20,000 (over 6%) in the last quarter. So much for well-off London being immune to a housing downturn!

Northern Ireland House Prices

As I explained in my previous article, Northern Ireland has never suffered a housing downturn since 1984 -- yet, that is! Even so, here's how NI prices have performed since the UK market hit rock bottom in Q3 1995:

High/Low

House price (£)

Q3 1995

£44,624

Q2 2007

£228,200

Increase (£)

£183,576

Increase (%)

411%

Annual increase (%)

14.9%

As you can see, property prices in the Six Counties have skyrocketed since late 1995, more than quadrupling thanks to a gravity-defying rise of 15% a year. Then again, Northern Ireland peaked halfway through last year. Since then, the average price has dropped by almost £12,000, or 5%.

Given that wages are much lower in NI than on the mainland, I expect property prices to continue to dive as Northern Ireland crashes harder and faster than the rest of the UK. Fasten your seatbelts for a rough landing, folks!

North West House Prices

High/Low

House price (£)

Q4 1995

£52,158

Q4 2007

£153,979

Increase (£)

£101,821

Increase (%)

195%

Annual increase (%)

9.4%

The North West has bounced back more slowly than the rest of the UK: at 9.4% a year, the annual rate of growth is almost a full percentage point less than the 10.3% recorded nationally. However, property prices did almost triple in twelve years and, significantly, prices in this region were still rising at the end of 2007. Still, falls may occur in early 2008.

Northern House Prices

High/Low

House price (£)

Q3 1995

£48,750

Q2 2007

£155,158

Increase (£)

£106,408

Increase (%)

218%

Annual increase (%)

10.4%

Again, house-price trends in the North broadly followed that of the UK as a whole, with prices rising by 10.4% a year over 11½ years. Note that prices have come off the boil since the summer, falling by 2.4% since halfway through 2007.

That's house prices in the six regions of the UK dealt with. In Part Two of this article, I review the remaining regions: the South East, South West, Scotland, Wales, the West Midlands, and Yorkshire & Humberside.

More: Get a marvellous mortgage via the Fool | Buying A Home In 2008 | House Prices And The Double-Edged Sword

*According to latest Halifax house price data

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

DP1111 07 Feb 2008, 7:13am

The last property crash was almost THREE TIMES WORSE than your misleading article suggests. It also lasted several months longer. In real terms, the Halifax index fell 33.8%. A lot more painful than the "12.5%" fall that you seem to think was so bad. On this basis, prices didn't stop falling until JANUARY 1996, rather than the third quarter of 1995. Prices didn't regain their 1989 level until as late as MAY 2002.

stephenwolff 07 Feb 2008, 7:15am

Hey Cliff, how about the South West? You've not mentioned it in either your boom or bust articles. I guess i should check the Halifax index to see if they include us down here.

capetownpeter 07 Feb 2008, 7:34am

Hello Cliff, The figures go back to the last boom and maybe a future article could offer some context. It would be interesting to link this housing cycle to the economic and policital cycles to explain the change in prices and to compare this to cost-of-money (interest rates & inflation) and competing investment opportunities (stock markets, savings accounts).

quelquod 07 Feb 2008, 8:43am

I bought a house in Kent in 1988 for £160k. Three years later it was valued at £99k (a price my neighbour sold for). I sold it in 1998 for £165k so almost a 40% drop in the market with about 7 years to fully recover.

Siwan1963 07 Feb 2008, 9:32am

Hi Cliff I have never believed that the household income versus house purchase price link was broken. In other words the move from the multiple of 2-3x joint household income to 'affordability' criteria when applying for a mortgage was non-sustainable in the long term. Eventually average house prices must return to the long term trend which is about 3-4x average wages. This will either be uncomfortable with a 30-40% drop in average house price in the short term or a slower stagnation in house prices while real inflation (RPI or real inflation not CPI)allows wages to catch up. I think it is most likely it will occur with a combination of both. However it will be painful and I would not be surprised with house purchase prices falling by 30% or more.

debtwagon 07 Feb 2008, 9:33am

Where are the other six regions?

FAZERSIX 07 Feb 2008, 9:58am

I must say contratulations to Cliff D'Arcy for this article, this shows the reality and regional price differences and how buying a house pays off long term. The other calculation needs appying is renting a house and the financial loss from that over a long term,so in my opinion buying your own home is the way to go. As I remember the big difference now is interest rates are low,early ninties peaking at around 16% and market bust. I think its important for people not to get mixed up with the current market climate and the early ninties with very high interest.

anneder 07 Feb 2008, 10:03am

On the street where i live, houses that are now valued at £120000.00 were sold for as little as £22000.oo, this was in the late nineties. I definately remember it being much worse than your article say's!!! ps i live in norfolk

FAZERSIX 07 Feb 2008, 10:08am

Can I add,the current so called credit crunch is a fallacy cos the financial bodies will claw back the bad debt from people who continue to pay, as on the news today the rate cuts are not being passed on straight away to the customer.

FAZERSIX 07 Feb 2008, 10:17am

anneder, I live in Nottingham where a nice semi reasonable area can still be purchased for around £120,000, when you write in the cost of renting buying is still the best option in my mind,I think to many buyers over Stretch themselves, instead of buying a house within their Budget.

burgdorf 07 Feb 2008, 11:03am

Statistical data can provide a different picture according to the dates in your comparison. You show house prices have increased at an average annual rate of 10.3% over the past 12 years (since 1995). But your start point was at the bottom of the last housing recession. If you start from the top of the last housing boom (mid 1989) then the average annual rate of increas in house prices over the past 18 years was 6%. This can hardly be described as excessive or even in bubble territory. In fact it virtually correlates with the average rise in the FTSE 100 Index which trebled over that period which also represents an annual average increase of 6% too !

geedoubleu 07 Feb 2008, 11:25am

Figures, figures, figures. All I know is that I sold my East London flat I bought in 1989, in 2000, for exactly the same price I paid for it in 1989. I also bought a flat in South-East London in 2000 for £65,000 that is now worth £165,000 according to my building society.

Boshdadosh 07 Feb 2008, 2:08pm

I think that you will find that since the peak of August 2007, house values are dropping by an average of £471 per month. It takes on average about 2-3 months for the majority of property valuations to be reported and turned into the many doom and gloom reports we are now getting. I think a huge crash is en-route. I live in Surrey study the local markets like most people with a vested interest. The properties that have been on the market for months, some are being removed and some have dropped the asking price by about 5-10 per cent and are still not moving. I have followed Mr D`Arcy and sold up in August and banked the money. I make on average 6% int and with house prices falling I would like to state that renting may not be dead money as some may say. My money is safe, I am happy in my rental and can move at anytime taking advantage of any future bargains, I must admit though this may take a few years and I hope to be as savvy about my timing to jump back in as I was getting off. It`s a game!!

dickbush 07 Feb 2008, 2:09pm

Calling a 6% per annum peak to peak gain hardly excessive completely misses the point. House prices at the previous peak were about as overvalued as in the 3rd quarter of 2007. Try running a 6% per annum gain through the last LOW and you'll get a better idea of where house prices can get to in the current decline. Ditto the stockmarket.

FAZERSIX 08 Feb 2008, 9:31am

The housing boom was late eighties and crash due to very high interest rates and government tinkering early ninties. I dont see how selling your house, rent then think you are saving money, look at long term statistics. AST tie in for six/twelve months,if you leave the house in bad order your deposit is lost,there is a set up fee from the letting agents. 12 month let £650pcm loss in rent £7,800 set up fee deposit around £950 min, after 2 years loss £15,600+the set up fees. Suppose it depends how much cash is on deposit at 6% to offset, still think the credit crunch is a fallacy they will get there money back from lenders and the housing market has low interest rates so wait till the media find another topic.

Boshdadosh 08 Feb 2008, 2:20pm

Fazersix, Your points are valid, it works for me as I was fortunate enough to pay off my mortgage and we intended to move within the next four years for school reasons. The property I sold has already de-valued by some 30k according to local agents. I actually make in excess of 11k per year when you take rent from interest earned. I intend to leave the house in a good state when leaving. I admit that this will not work for everyone but it all adds up for us. Take into consideration my belief ( Could be wrong) that house prices will crash then this enable us to climb the ladder further at a time when I am ready, with the knowledge that I will be a cash buyer. If no crash then I will still be able to move knowing exactly what I have and the longer we rent the more I will save. I agree it does depend on what you have to offset. Regarding a crash I believe storms are caused by many differing factors and I was not willing to sit back and see my worth shrinking monthly with little or no chance of getting where I want or need to be in four years. We can all tell a story and mine is coming across a bit boring now so I bid you farewell and trust you have a brolly to hand.

Join the conversation

Instructions

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: <b>bold</b>, <i>quoted text</i>. All other tags will be removed from your post.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.