Skip Navigation
 

House Price Falls: The Winners And Losers

<%=_author %>
By Donna Werbner | 21 May 2008

There was more bad news about the housing market this week.

The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has warned that the number of property sales could fall as much as 40% this year.

The announcement came just days after the Housing Minister, Caroline Flint, inadvertently revealed that the Government believes there will be a 5% to 10% drop in prices this year "at best".

Meanwhile, here at The Fool, David Kuo predicts prices will fall by 20% by the end of the year. Others - mostly economists at banks and building societies - believe the falls in prices will be limited to low, single digits.

But while the jury's still out on whether there is going to be a crash or a modest decline, there does now seem to be a broad consensus among the ‘experts' that house prices will be lower at the end of the year.

So, is it finally time for first-time buyers to crack open the champagne and celebrate? If you're a homeowner, should you be crying tears into your pillow? 

Who are the real winners and losers when house prices fall?

The Obvious Winners

The most obvious winners, you might assume, are first-time buyers.

Not only are prices becoming more affordable, but it's a buyer's market now, with properties taking 50% longer to sell than this time last year and asking prices dropping, on average, around 7% before a sale can be agreed.*

First-time buyers are in a particularly strong position because they are chain-free buyers.

So far, so good. But are all first-time buyers winners when house prices fall?

Since the credit crunch, it has become much more difficult to get a mortgage, with lenders pulling deals left, right and centre.

Even if you can find a cheap mortgage deal with a low rate, you may not be eligible for it. It all depends on the size of your deposit. Due to the increased risk of negative equity when prices fall, mortgage lenders are becoming increasingly wary of lending to borrowers with small deposits.

While you can still get a mortgage with a 5% deposit, you'll have to pay a higher rate. According to RICS, the average two-year fixed rate (taking into account the fees) is now almost 7%, compared to 6.3% last July.

By contrast, competition for ‘safe' borrowers has increased. So buyers who can put down a 25% deposit have seen rates fall from 6.4% at their peak in November last year, to just under 6% today (and right now, some of the best rates for these borrowers are on offer via The Motley Fool Mortgage Service).

Unfortunately, to buy the average home (at a price tag of more than £189,000) using one of these cheap mortgage deals, the typical first-time buyer would need to be able to put down a deposit of nearly £50,000.

And with Winkworth estate agents claiming rents have risen by as much as 8% and the cost of living rising almost daily, it is becoming increasingly difficult for first-time buyers to save up for that crucial deposit.

On the plus side, those that can save are benefiting from rising savings rates, as banks compete desperately to lure in your cash during this economic downturn.

First-Time Buyers

So, in summary, if you're a first-time buyer and prices fall:

You're a winner if you can afford to save for a 25% deposit and negotiate money off the asking price.

You're a loser if you're on a tight budget with very few savings, and you cannot afford to save.

The Obvious Losers 

The most obvious losers, you might assume, are homeowners.

After all, when prices fall, they lose money.

...Or do they?

Over the last 10 years, house prices have at least trebled in nearly half of all UK counties, according to Halifax - with some areas, such as Country Tyrone in Northern Ireland, seeing prices soar by as much as 315%.

This should put the fact that prices are falling at an annual rate of 1%, into perspective. Even if prices do decrease by 20% this year, the vast majority of homeowners who bought in the last 10 years will only lose the money they gained in the good times through price increases.

Most will still be better off because they got on the housing ladder and will not lose the money they invested as a deposit.

Of course, first-time homeowners who have bought in the last year or six months are a different story. They will not have seen any price increases and, if falls in prices eat up their deposit (which may well happen if prices fall by 20%), they could find themselves in negative equity - where they owe more to the mortgage lender than their home is worth.

The same goes for homeowners who have effectively used their home as a piggy bank by repeatedly consolidated their debts into their mortgage or remortgaging to release equity.

Then again, as long as these homeowners can afford to meet the repayments on their mortgage, they should be OK.  After all, their losses will only be crystallised if the property is sold during the current slump. If they can sit tight for now, over the long-term, prices are likely to start to rise again.

And price falls are actually good news for homeowners wishing to move up the ladder. Yes, they stand to lose £30,000 on their £150,000 property if prices fall by 20%. But they will gain a discount of £40,000 on the £200,000 home they are looking to buy.

By the same token, price falls are particularly bad news for downsizers: homeowners who wish to move to a smaller property and enjoy the proceeds from the sale of their home.

Homeowners

So, in summary, if you're a homeowner:

You're a winner if you want to move up the ladder.

You're a loser if you plan to downsize.

You're also a loser if you have a large mortgage and you need to sell your property soon.

Celebrate Or Cry?

So it seems, when it comes to falling house prices, the winners and losers are not so clear-cut after all. There are reasons for both homeowners and first-time buyers to celebrate with champagne - and drown their sorrows....

*According to property valuation company Hometrack.

More: A Complete Guide To Buying Your First Home | How To Rent Out Your Home

> Use The Motley Fool's award-winning mortgage service to compare the whole of the mortgage market and find the best deals available.

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool.

At 12:59 on May 21 2008, sstudent said:

Well this articale does give me some hope. My girlfriend & I are looking to buy & with the average price for a house in my area being a round £150 - 160,000 I doubted we would even be considered!

Fortunately we have a little more than 5 % deposit so that at least is a start :)

At 14:26 on May 21 2008, Enzyme76 said:

But if they do fall, the investors will be in there before the first time buyers.

And prices will be back up again.

At 08:17 on May 22 2008, JoePattinson said:

The Council of Mortgage Lenders say prices will fall by 7% this year but their previous report said that prices would rise by 1% this year so why would you take any notice of them! Many builders have stopped buying land and have mothballed current sites. The reason prices went up so much over the last few years was because supply did not match demand. At around 170,000 new homes being built a year the shortfall was estimated at 40,000. Who knows how many houses will be built this year - not much over 100,000 I would guess. It will then take a while to get back to 170,000 and the government are syphoning off even more houses from the open market for "affordable housing". (Don't forget that "Affordable housing" is mainly subsidised rented housing dished out to people on houisng association lists so the more properties that go to this area the less come to the market - in my part of the world you won't get planning unless you give 40% to housing associations) When confidence returns the supply side will get worse especially as builders will be reluctant to buy sites for flats which are the only area of over supply in the market and have particular funding problems. The price of flats are dropping rapidly but in the rest of the market people are sitting tight as evidenced by the extremely low number of sales. Last time it was the rapid rise of interest rates that meant people couldn't stay put. It isn't quite like that this time. The banks and building societies will have money in their coffers in a few months time and they will have to lend it somewhere. It won't be new businesses or companies expanding so they will return to the housing market with a little more caution but less restrictive than they are now. Enzyme76 says the investors will be in before the first time buyers, which is right but keep a close eye on the market when the media stops talking about it. There are great deals to be had in the market right now but it will probably get worse before it gets better.

At 08:31 on May 22 2008, mikefourgates said:

If rents are on the rise, surely this should give some underpinning ( sorry for the pun )to house prices, as the difference between monthly mortgage and rents costs will shrink.

The main housebulders, who have become very adept at sales and marketing over the last 25 years, should be working on some financial bridging scheme to cure this problem. After all,this was mainly caused by dodgy sub prime lending abroad and the creation of a market trading in packages of dubious debt heavily disguised as valuable investments, by financial institutions.

Just where have all the billions gone? Who has eaten all the pies? Time to get rid of the weakest links!

At 08:54 on May 22 2008, LandOfConfusion said:

>Enzyme76 said:
>
> But if they do fall, the investors will be in
> there before the first time buyers.

Most investors need to equity-release (re-mortgage) their existing assets to buy new ones. In the current climate and with more and more BTL-loans being removed, this seems unlikely for at least the near-term.


> JoePattinson said:
> Many builders have stopped buying land and
> have mothballed current sites.

This is because they are having major problems shifting their existing stock. I'm not just talking about 'luxury flats' ether - 2 and 3 bed new build are not moving and this is causing the house builders major headaches.

> he reason prices went up so much over the
> last few years was because supply did not
> match demand.

Most non-vested intrest commentators have pointed out that this situation has been caused by Buy-To-Let'ers (BTL'ers) buying up and then renting out large numbers of houses. Given the recent increases in the LIBOR rates which causes increases in mortgage rates, this is unlikely to continue and may in fact go into reverse.

> The price of flats are dropping rapidly but
> in the rest of the market people are
> sitting tight as evidenced by the extremely
> low number of sales.

Right now there is a standoff between buyers and sellers. At the moment, buyers have the upper hand (IMHO) as mortgage rates are rising and buyers usually don't have to buy now. In any case who wants to buy in a falling market?

> Last time it was the rapid rise of interest
> rates that meant people couldn't stay put.

This time it might well be a repeat of the 70's as the cost of living is already pushing some people over the brink.

> The banks and building societies will have
> money in their coffers in a few months time
> and they will have to lend it somewhere.

Will they? Some how I don't think that they will be too willing to lend to over-burdened home owners in a falling market. Let's not forget that a (the?) key reason for the recent increases in house prices has been the availability of cheap credit. This is no longer the case but the debts still have to be paid. Somehow...

IMO, a mix of 70's style inflation with a serious loss of credit availability will cause our economy to go the same way that it has in the US. If this happens then we will see a significant correction in house prices.

- Loc

At 10:37 on May 22 2008, Milsonman said:

This is a technical correction. The fundamental imbalance between supply and demand is still in favour of supply as demand is still greater. In the long run that will come through.
Peopple still need somewhere to live.

M

At 10:47 on May 22 2008, LandOfConfusion said:

> mikefourgates said:
> If rents are on the rise

From what I've read, rents have risen *slightly* after being more or less stagnant. Compared to the rocketing rises in mortgage rates they're pretty insignificant.

What's more there are now more rental properties coming onto the market as people struggle to pay off their debts (mortgage included).

> The main housebulders [...] should be
> working on some financial bridging scheme
> to cure this problem. After all,this was
> mainly caused by dodgy sub prime lending
> abroad

US sub-prime lending isn't the cause but rather the trigger. This situation has been brewing for some time and what happened in the US basically burst the housing bubble.

As for house builders, they are at least partially to blame what with liar loans and other forms of developer-assisted mortgage fraud.


> Just where have all the billions gone?

The same place as your pension: the Caymen islands.

At 10:53 on May 22 2008, LandOfConfusion said:

> Milsonman said:
>
> The fundamental imbalance between supply
> and demand is still in favour of supply as
> demand is still greater.

There will always be demand in the housing market. If houses cost just £1 how many would you buy? The point to remember is how much demand is there for houses at their current prices? The fact that house prices are falling suggests very little.

Supply and demand are always tempered by price.

At 10:57 on May 22 2008, chasbmw said:

Rents are not rising where i live, i have just renewed my lease for a further 12 months and the rental increase of £10 a month works out at around 1.8%.
What I have noticed is a large increase in the number of properties available to rent, local rag has 8 pages now, doubled over the past 12 months,looks to me if vendors are trying to ride out the storm by renting out, but I have doubts that in my area there are enough tenants to go around. I would be very wary of information from Estate agents or Paragon, hyping up rentals as their business models depend on a expanding rental market.

I'm also not sure about the supply and demand arguement, when property values stop rising then occupiers of properties might make more sensible use of property, downsizing out of larger homes when the running costs get high in relation to incomes. What has caused the shortage in 'supply' has been lack of affordability coupled with speculative investment and hoarding, 20% drop in values should help to increase supply.

Charles

At 10:58 on May 22 2008, apss36 said:

You have missed out on one group Donna - the "Sell to Renters". I bought a property in London for £186k in early 1996 and sold it in August 2007 for £700k. I am now renting having got a fantastic deal on a 5 bed house, with no rent increases for 3 years. People selling-to-rent last year were laughed at by the "property-goes-up-forever" fools. No who's laughing? As soon as the market looks like bottoming, I'm in again. I predict I'll still be renting in 2010...

At 11:55 on May 22 2008, ascentium said:

At first glance, first time buyers would (because they are chain free) look like a good potential buyer.

Sadly, we're seeing that these people are also trying to Gazunder in higher numbers, and I know that some (professional investor) property owners are now trying to deliberately find buyers who ARE part of chains, since these people are less likely to put the chain at risk by chancing things.

At 13:43 on May 22 2008, Rob394 said:

It may seem like the current situation is ideal for first time buyers (as long as they has a deposit and can raise mortgage) but, at least where we are looking, people appear to staying off the property market and with few houses coming onto the market it is quite difficult to find what we want. So although it may sound like a great situation, in practice it is not as good.

At 14:07 on May 22 2008, van12345 said:

Hysteria!!! you can either believe the papers or not. The banks have caused the problems. they were lending 6 times salary over 10 years ago yes the market was fine and prices increased. They were earning vast amounts of money and share holders were happy. They just couldnt help themselves fixed rates, buy to lets the more the better. Northern rock were fools to themselves, a time bomb waiting to happen. I have been in Estate Agency for 20 years. Rock were lending 125-135% of the value of the property. I had buyers come in who hardly spoke English, NR then had to borrow more money at a higher rate.Make sense! Other banks were taking cases from unregulated/fraudulent advisers using other peoples IFA tags this was on a large scale. I had some customers who didnt speek english at all buy houses and were too old. Add to this the huge amount of morgage fraud from buy to let buyers and you have a false market place ready to fall (well readjust). Who was to blame well the banks lend the money and their quest for greed has caused the problems. What do they do now. You can only have interest only. We all know your morgage will not reduce by a penny for 10 years, more profit. Bank charges upon charges unpon charges. There are now more funds available and 5% and 10% are back in the market place. Drops this year 5-10% maximum. Yes if the market went down by 20-30% of which it wont investors will be right in there 1st no question. Gordon Brown is also to blame for this slight down turn on comments he made a few months back. The papers will soon give up the ghost when new news comes through and the price of oil stablises and prices come down which i predict will be in the next 6-8 weeks. But price crash never will happen. Rics who say 40% have a harder enough time getting their registered surveyors to value correctly in the first place. so a £200.000 house will be picked up for £120,000 at the end of this year. You can see it wont happen.

At 18:09 on May 22 2008, LandOfConfusion said:

One unreported effect of the bank bailouts is the impact of inflation on food and energy prices. In order to bail out the banks who, you have quite rightly pointed out have acted recklessly, Gordon Brown has had to print more money.

This increase in the money supply has caused the effective value of sterling to fall against other currencies which means that their food and oil appear to us as more expensive. Factor in fix 3-year pay deals and Government-manipulated inflation figures (running at only 3% ?!?!) and you have a population which is progressively getting poorer in real terms. Under these circumstances it's difficult to see how people will be able to possibly afford any further increases in house prices.


To put it another way: House prices WILL have to fall.

At 08:08 on May 23 2008, MelissaUK said:

We are looking at buying a new build and fortunate in not having to sell in order to buy however the new build will not be completed until Jan 09 at the earliest and I'm being rather hesitant in putting a reserve on the property incase house prices continue to fall....who knows what the new build would be worth in Jan 09! Anybody been in a similar position?

At 08:59 on May 23 2008, chris280 said:

Motley fool, you are becoming as bad as the rest, why? "The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) has warned that the number of property sales could fall as much as 40% this year".

At a brief glance that looks like property prices will fall by 40%.

When will you all realise that the majority of people buy houses to live in as the family home.

It is time to stop talking ourselves into a recession. We need to be prepared for harder times but we don't need scare mongering from every angle.

At 13:56 on May 23 2008, TMFDonna said:

Thanks for all your comments - it's interesting to see so many different points of view. Chris280, I take your point if you read the article quickly, but you have to admit the RICS data was accurately reported. And I'm not scaremongering - far from it. I'm emphasising why a fall in house prices may not be such a bad thing for many homeowners after all...
Foolish regards
Donna (the author)

At 12:01 on June 03 2008, paintitblack said:

rog15: but what happens if the company who bought your house goes bust or sells it on? Do you still have the right to stay in your old house?

At 13:51 on June 03 2008, LandOfConfusion said:

> At 08:17 on May 22 2008, JoePattinson said:
>
> The reason prices went up so much over the
> last few years was because supply did not
> match demand.

And demand was high because of the availability of cheap credit, which is no longer the case.

> the government are syphoning off even more
> houses from the open market

They're taking about 2000 according to my figures. Hardly significant.

> Last time it was the rapid rise of
> interest rates that meant people couldn't
> stay put.

This time it's the rapid rise of mortgage rates, lack of cheap credit and rising cost of living which has meant that people are having problems staying put.

> The banks and building societies will have
> money in their coffers in a few months time
> and they will have to lend it somewhere.

Maybe they will use this money to pay back the loans that the Bank of England has made to them. The reason why mortgage rates are so high is because the banks have a funding problem. This isn't going to go away any time soon (see Bradford & Bingley as a more recent example of why those that say the "credit crunch is nearly over" know nothing).

> Enzyme76 says the investors will be in
> before the first time buyers

You may be right but with so many Buy-To-Let'ers currently going into arrears (see B&B above) there won't be many of them.

Also thanks to New Liebour we now have seriously high levels of inflation which will almost certainly send us into a recession.

I wouldn't like to be a BTL'er right now...

Join the conversation

Hello stranger. Please[log in]to comment.

Not yet registered? Register now.