Is there snobbery in house buying?

[Cyclone]

I'm not a snob. Just honest. I've never lived in a terrace then moved out to a more expensive detached once I was earning more. The only reason why Cyclone didn't move sooner was because he got lucky with neighbours. But as soon as that baby started crying, he was gone like a shot. Like I said, nobody would choose to live in a terrace for life, they are noisy and cramped with few amenities. It's not snobbery to want to move from a cheap area to a more expensive one just affordability. People who can't afford to move are the only ones who say, 'I'd never move'.

 

But many people DO choose to live in terraces houses for life.

My grandparents did, as did their neighbours, they were all perfectly happy there. They could have moved, but they didn't want to.

 

I've posted you linked to massive terraced houses, so they clearly aren't all cramped. Given their locations they generally have access to better amenities than detached houses in the suburbs.

And you keep pretending that all terraced housing is cheap. Except for where it's not of course, like Pimlico.

 

---------- Post added 02-06-2015 at 13:35 ----------

 

Terrace houses are mostly situated on narrow roads which are very annoying to drive on and are terrible for parking. Imagine having to navigate a road like that on a daily basis just to get home or leave for work. Pure hell. You have no garage or private parking space so can't even consider having a nice car due to the high risk of vehicle theft or vandalism.

Your speaking from a position of ignorance. We don't have to imagine.

I had a terrace with a drive, my neighbours had a terrace with a garage. I lived there for 10 years and know all about the parking.

 

Noise from a semi is bad enough if you don't have good neighbours let alone being positioned between 2 terraced houses.

You've lived in a semi then?

Terraced houses are cheap especially in S6 and S2 so there are much higher levels of anti-social behaviour

Not true, as I've demonstrated.

check those crime stats that cyclone posted for S6, both had very high instances of anti-social behaviour and burglary.

Both had similar levels, which are not at all high, that's why you declined to post the postcodes to allow a comparison... But feel free to provide them now.

One of those areas has NO terraced housing. So your claim that terraced housing means higher crime is clearly nonsense.

If it's like that in S6 imagine the even cheaper areas, would be like living in medieval times. The crime stats prove this. Go check, the reports of anti-social behaviour are in the multiple of hundreds just in a small area.

In a large area actually. And with no difference between two areas that have totally different housing stock.

 

Terrace houses have small narrow gardens with absolutely no privacy. On a hot sunny day you will be sunbathing next door to Biff and his BBQ munching friends who all like to get drunk and rowdy, smoke dodgy substances and listen to base line at full blast until 4am. Terrace houses are awful places to bring up kids, no play area, not very safe as the road is next to the house etc. Many terrace houses have covered alleyways down the side accessible by anyone so a very high security risk. I could go on and on.

Your prejudice is showing.

 

And just so that you know, they absolutely DO have outdoor toilets. Ghastly.

 

A joke? Or just your ignorance again?

[Bonaparte]

But many people DO choose to live in terraces houses for life. My grandparents did, as did their neighbours, they were all perfectly happy there. They could have moved, but they didn't want to.

 

It makes financial sense to move if you can afford to. Standing still when you can afford to move is pure laziness or stupidity. Might sound harsh but that's how it is. If you can read, bother to do the smallest research, moving up the ladder on your main residence every few years for 2 to 3 decades would out perform ANY pension when it comes to downsizing. If you care about your financial future, you'd move up the ladder, no excuses.

 

And you keep pretending that all terraced housing is cheap. Except for where it's not of course, like Pimlico.

 

We are on Sheffield Forum Cyclone! OF COURSE I've been referring to terraced house prices in sheffield, which you know perfectly well. There are terraced town houses in Manhattan for $3,000,000, I've not been talking about those either. Jesus, this guy! Labours such obvious points.

 

I lived there for 10 years and know all about the parking.

 

Hell on earth right! Exactly, you know, you lived that nightmare for 10 years. I'm happy you got out. And lets face it, you'd never move back to a terrace from your detached ivory tower now would you? Come on, admit it. Don't feel ashamed, it's not snobbery, which is what I'm getting at.

[Nem88]

I live in a terrace house.We bought a few years ago, we only got a mortgage out for around half of what the bank would actually lend us.

 

I would say I can afford more but choose not to. My house is functional, I'm not lacking space and I don't have any crime concerns. Most of the Terrace conns first listed are not applicable to my location for one reason or another.

 

I do however, have lots of disposable income because I don't spend it all on paying for some bricks. I see some think I should have spent the absolute maximum on the bestest bricks - I know lots of people who have done so, and I pity them, they can hardly afford to do the bit where you know, LIFE.

[Cyclone]

It makes financial sense to move if you can afford to. Standing still when you can afford to move is pure laziness or stupidity. Might sound harsh but that's how it is.

It doesn't sound harsh, it sounds stupid. I couldn't disagree more.

If you can read, bother to do the smallest research, moving up the ladder on your main residence every few years for 2 to 3 decades would out perform ANY pension when it comes to downsizing. If you care about your financial future, you'd move up the ladder, no excuses.

If you plan to move back down the ladder to fund your retirement then this would be a valid strategy.

But there are many reasons not to move, all of which you are ignoring.

 

 

We are on Sheffield Forum Cyclone! OF COURSE I've been referring to terraced house prices in sheffield, which you know perfectly well. There are terraced town houses in Manhattan for $3,000,000, I've not been talking about those either. Jesus, this guy! Labours such obvious points.

You keep making claims without qualifying them.

 

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-51929663.html

 

There you go, terraced house in Sheffield for half a million.

 

Doesn't appear to be cramped, certainly isn't cheap.

 

Are you going to provide these postcodes to prove your point or what?

 

Hell on earth right! Exactly, you know, you lived that nightmare for 10 years.

Nope, I was perfectly happy living there.

We outgrew it, and at some point decided that having a garden would be nice. Not everyone will do those things.

I'm happy you got out. And lets face it, you'd never move back to a terrace from your detached ivory tower now would you? Come on, admit it. Don't feel ashamed, it's not snobbery, which is what I'm getting at.

 

It's not what you were getting at all. You've been telling people that they're wrong to not want to move and that moving to a detached house is an end in itself, rather than a means to achieve some end.

 

I certainly wouldn't mind that property in Rivelin. I bet you wouldn't either, although I doubt you'll admit it.

[L00b]

It makes financial sense to move if you can afford to. Standing still when you can afford to move is pure laziness or stupidity.

It makes more financial sense to either clear any debt (i.e. mortgage) secured on the asset doubling as one's residence as early as possible, particularly if the asset is still appreciating through market dynamics regardless, and/or -subject to the level of risk one is happy to live by, and the amount of equity in the asset- borrow more (temporarily) against that asset to invest (e.g. buy a second BTL asset) while interest rates are still at rock bottom.

 

Trading up that asset solely because one can afford it, only to eventually trade down to realise a portion of the asset (at a time when the market may well be dead-cat-bouncing after a slap., e.g. 2007-2011 at least) is just daft: you've no choice but to trade down to release any equity, and you have zero control on the market dynamics.

 

Nem88 has it right, as do many others in here. And whatever Mark Carney says next about the base rate, I bet they'll still sleep like babies at night.

Edited June 2, 2015 by L00b

[Onthetyne]

I live in a terrace house.We bought a few years ago, we only got a mortgage out for around half of what the bank would actually lend us.

 

I would say I can afford more but choose not to. My house is functional, I'm not lacking space and I don't have any crime concerns. Most of the Terrace conns first listed are not applicable to my location for one reason or another.

 

I do however, have lots of disposable income because I don't spend it all on paying for some bricks. I see some think I should have spent the absolute maximum on the bestest bricks - I know lots of people who have done so, and I pity them, they can hardly afford to do the bit where you know, LIFE.

 

Very good point, well made

[Bonaparte]

If you plan to move back down the ladder to fund your retirement then this would be a valid strategy.

 

Well, It's not just a valid strategy Cyclone, it's the ONLY strategy. These days you'd have to be very stupid to plan and rely on the state or a pension to actually fund your retirement. Those who do will certainly regret that decision when they're old and poor. Rich people should also do this with their main home, but they don't need telling, because they already know as rich people tend to like lots of tax free cash even if just sat in equity which they can release for BTL or whatever should they wish, funded all the while with the banks money.

 

Using your home to move up the ladder is a great way to ensure financial security especially by retirement age and for many people it's totally doable. Sure, you might have to sacrifice a little inconvenience if you don't particularly like moving but you will reap the huge rewards in the future, so much so you won't give a toss about past inconveniences. You decide when you move depending on the market, you can't lose.

 

The higher you move up the ladder, the less you have to fall if and when you choose to downsize in the future. It's very simple. Buy, renovate and extend, enjoy for a few years, sell for a massive profit, move up. Keep doing that on your main residence and happy days await. So simple. Childs play. So all those of you with emotionally fuelled excuses to stay in one house at a certain level forever, time to man up and move up! Oh that's right Loob, you don't like lots of tax free cash because you want to help people. Fetch me a bucket.

 

There you go, terraced house in Sheffield for half a million. Doesn't appear to be cramped, certainly isn't cheap. I certainly wouldn't mind that property in Rivelin. I bet you wouldn't either, although I doubt you'll admit it.

 

Ok Cyclone, if we really must. That as you know fully well is not a starter home terrace house which we are talking about. Stop being silly. I would never buy that property or ever want to live there. Firstly, because it's in the middle of nowhere. You might not agree with this but you certainly would come the winter. Better have a seriously powerful 4x4 to live in that development. Even though it's a house, I've got a feeling it's still subject to a monthly service charge as it's located within the main development so uses some of it's amenities. It's also surrounded by a lot of land, who knows what that will become in future. And of course, it doesn't look like a property which can be extended or have value added. £500k for S6, hell no. £300k for S6, hell no.

 

We outgrew it, and at some point decided that having a garden would be nice. Not everyone will do those things.

 

Like I said, once you realised you wanted more, (NOT snobbery), you bailed because you could afford to.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Bonaparte

[L00b]

Oh that's right Loob, you don't like lots of tax free cash because you want to help people.

"Tax free cash" obtained on the back of realising appreciation on a main residence, you say...

 

...have you heard about capital gains tax, perchance?

 

The availability of Private Residence Relief is getting ever stricter (and fails for anything an acre or more - careful with the moving up, there's a ceiling ), safe financial planning means you shouldn't rely on it remaining there forever.

 

As the first-hand sufferer of politically expedient (targeting non-doms) 'exceptional' taxation in years gone by, and which turned a 'safe' rental income and RoI in low double digits to less than 5% overnight (voted 31 Dec, implemented 1 Jan...bar stewards ), I'm particularly averse to relying on tax reliefs long-term.

 

I love me some tax free cash alright, my SIPP has been gaining 27% annually for the past 5 years (not all of it down to the Gvt's tax (-free cash) relief on contributions, of course...but every little helps, including that). Now, which properties in Sheffield (or around, I'll be generous) can demonstrate a matching appreciation over the period?

 

Your trolling powers are weakening

Edited June 2, 2015 by L00b

[Bonaparte]

"Tax free cash" obtained on the back of realising appreciation on a main residence, you say...

 

...have you heard about capital gains tax, perchance?

 

I love me tax free cash alright, my SIPP has been gaining 27% annually for the past 5 years (not all of it down to the Gvt's tax (-free cash) relief on contributions, of course...but every little helps, including that). Now, which properties in Sheffield (or around, I'll be generous) can demonstrate a matching appreciation over the period?

 

Your trolling powers are weakening

 

The powers are strong in this one.

 

You don’t pay Capital Gains Tax when you sell (or ‘dispose of’) your home if all of the following apply:

 

You have one home and you’ve lived in it as your main home for all the time you’ve owned it. You haven’t let part of it out - this doesn’t include having a single lodger. You haven’t used part of it for business only. The grounds, including all buildings, are less than 5,000 square metres (just over an acre) in total. You didn’t buy it just to make a gain.

 

You don’t need to do anything. You’ll automatically get a tax relief called Private Residence Relief.

 

Of course if you buy and move every 6 to 24 months, you could be accused of buying just to make a gain, but as it's your main residence and you lived in it for a few years, no tax is payable.

 

Hopefully you've learned something Loob. Learned the huge mistake you've made all these years.

[L00b]

You don’t pay Capital Gains Tax when you sell (or ‘dispose of’) your home if all of the following apply:

Yes, I am familiar with these rules, thx - I suggest you see the edits.

 

We are, after all, discussing long term investment, are we not?

Hopefully you've learned something Loob. Learned the huge mistake you've made all these years.

Waiting for the Sheffield housing stock appreciating 27% annually since 2009. That would teach me something I don't know Edited June 2, 2015 by L00b