Property investor - how screwed am I?

Snazzy_Chazzy

Hi there

OK well heres my predicament from mid 2004 to early 2007 i bought 4 Apartments. 3 in Dublin Finglas and 1 in Carlow town. At the time i paid the going rate. I have been lucky the government are renting 3 of the properties to single mums so i have fixed income guarunteed (I live in one of the apartments). My question is with all this doom and gloom did i shoot myself in the foot here? My idea was to sell up most or all of them late 2010 and to buy a nice house with the proceeds but alas that didnt work out as planned. On each purchase i used the equity gained on the previous apartment(s) to fund the next purchase.
Was actually ridiculously easy at the time!
So am i caught for the next decade here? Will rent supplements from the gov come down? Property tax on landlords. Should i be worried? When would someone like me come back into positive equity again?
Cheers

Chazzy:eek:

seahorse

Snazzy_Chazzy wrote: »

Will rent supplements from the gov come down? Property tax on landlords.

I guess you'll have to wait till the budget to know what's going to happen with both of these issues, though from what I've heard both were recommended by An Board Snip.

mactheknife

Not really sure of the point of this post. You have the same information in the that everyone else has - which is most guess work. Its likely to be the best part of a decade before house came back to their high. If you have taken the equity out then yeah its likely that your not going to recoup this through rises in value. Your lucky that you have some of the properties occupied so it knocking something of the mortgages.
Your unlikely to get alot of sympathy from alot on the boards because its this type of property speculation that caused the high levels. But maybe thats why you are posting the subject. At the end of the day, rent allowance will go down as gov needs to cut spending, some sort of property tax will come in eventually, and rents will drop, so of course you should be worried. I'm not going to say you deserve it, but I'm not going to feel sorry for you.

patftrears

Snazzy_Chazzy wrote: »

When would someone like me come back into positive equity again?
Cheers

Chazzy:eek:

How can anyone answer that question for you.
How much equity do you have in each apartment, outstanding mortgage, cost of monthly repayments, running costs of apartments.
Is the rent paying the mortgage each month ?

Apartments in finglas and carlow, bought during 2004-2007, add in investor stamp duty, I'd say 15 years before you would start looking at any sort of return.

Doing the figures yourself, is the only way to find out.
factor in void periods, interest rate increases, rent decreases

D3PO

Id hardly call your position as untenable.

So you cant sell up to buy your big house in 2010 boo hoo. Investments should always be considered over the long term and not the short term.

The long term outlook for you provided the HSE / Council keep renting your 3 rentals is actually relatively decent

Kipperhell

It really depends on how much negative equity you are in.

The rent allowance will probably be cut further and a property tax is probable.

You took a risk but you knew that. How big a risk depends on if they are interest only mortgages. It is currently only a paper loss but it looks like you will be staying put for longer than you intended. Are you meeting your costs or is it a major struggle?

beeno67

Snazzy_Chazzy wrote: »

Hi there


So am i caught for the next decade here? Will rent supplements from the gov come down? Property tax on landlords. Should i be worried? When would someone like me come back into positive equity again?
Cheers

Chazzy:eek:

I am afraid you are caught for more than a decade. Appartment prices in Finglas and Carlow are going to fall by way above the average. You are looking at 70-80% falls in these areas from peak. If the fall is 80% that means prices will have to rise 400% for you to get back to purchase price. I can see very little chance of the prices of appartments in Finglas ever rising that much. (they will be knocked down first). If you have a 20 year mortgage you will be in negative equity for the next 17 years or so.

John Mason

depends on how much you paid for the apartments really, how many beds etc.

i bought in Finglasa, 5 years ago and i am still not in negative equity and houses are selling on my road.

the best you can do is get all properties valued now and see where you stand right now

quozl

With apartments bought at the peak of the boom, I'd guess it'll be much longer than a decade before you see those values again. In real, not nominal, terms I wouldn't bet that they'll recover to that point again inside 30 years.

Rent allowance has already been reduced this year, as I'm sure you know. Considering the percentage that social is of our nation's out-goings, I'm confident it'll be lowered again. And then again, over the next few years.

Property tax I dunno. Lenihan has changed his tune to not this budget, which is him caving in to his back-bench colleagues, and the Taoiseach, I'd imagine. I'd expect to see it in the next few years, but I really don't know. You'd need to have a willingness to make very tough decisions to implement that, and FF don't have the courage, and I don't know if the opposition would either.

For me the key thing is, are you on interest only mortgages, and if so, when does that end?

If you're not, I'd be worried for you as rents will not cover the mortgages going forward. If you are, then i'd be VERY worried for you.

IMO all your apartments are massively in negative equity, unless you put >30% of equity into each purchase. I'd guess more like 40%+.

I got stung with my own purchase of a Dublin apartment, as a PPR, also in 2005. Which I sold this february, accepting a very painful hit on it. I was lucky to get out of it.

I'm being brutally honest because I think you need to know where you stand. Anybody suggesting you're not in massive NE currently (unless you put in a large equity stake of each purchase) is deluded sadly.

Personally, I'd be inclined to try and sell, taking whatever hit I could. If you can de-leverage by getting rid of 1 or 2, that might make things a bit more manageable. You would, imo, have to take a big hit doing this, and the banks will likely not let you sell for less than the out-standing mortgage, unless you make up the difference immediately yourself.

I don't know. You're in a very difficult position.

It might be worth remembering that the very worst that can happen is you lose the properties and become bankrupt. You would survive that, and you will not stand out for it, there are going to be plenty of people struggling over the next few years.

The very best of luck with it.

D3PO

quozl wrote: »

It might be worth remembering that the very worst that can happen is you lose the properties and become bankrupt. .

yeah like thats not a bad thing :rolleyes:

jimmycrackcorm

As long as the OP has a job to pay his own mortgage and fixed income to cover the other 3 apartments then all well and good. However as other poster have mentioned the properties will likely by in negative equity and won't turn positive for the best part of a decade. But it's also likely that interest rates will rise and rent reliefs will come under pressure to be reduced. The outlook is not really favourable.

jmayo

mactheknife wrote: »

...
Its likely to be the best part of a decade before house came back to their high. ...

Pretty optimistic I would say.
For anybody that doubts that opinion check out where the Japanese property market is today relative to their peak almost 20 years ago.
Of course Japan doesn't have a proper economy likes ourselves :rolleyes:

beeno67 wrote: »

I am afraid you are caught for more than a decade. Appartment prices in Finglas and Carlow are going to fall by way above the average. You are looking at 70-80% falls in these areas from peak. If the fall is 80% that means prices will have to rise 400% for you to get back to purchase price. I can see very little chance of the prices of appartments in Finglas ever rising that much. (they will be knocked down first). If you have a 20 year mortgage you will be in negative equity for the next 17 years or so.

+1
although change the 17 to 27 or maybe even 37.

irishbird wrote: »

depends on how much you paid for the apartments really, how many beds etc.

i bought in Finglasa, 5 years ago and i am still not in negative equity and houses are selling on my road.

the best you can do is get all properties valued now and see where you stand right now

How do you know you are not in negative equity ?
Also how do you know that the properties being sold on your road are actually selling for advertised prices, are not being sold way below your places supposed value ?


As regards OP it is nice to know my taxes are going to pay for your investments :rolleyes:

quozl

D3PO wrote: »

yeah like thats not a bad thing :rolleyes:

Way to miss the point D3PO.

My point is, that while it's a bad thing, it's not the end of the world and that the OP needs to try and remember that.

In situations like the OP is in, depression, or other similar problems can rear their heads. It's important to try and keep things in perspective. And if someone can't in that situation, it's important to get whatever help they need.

D3PO

jmayo wrote: »

Pretty optimistic I would say.
For anybody that doubts that opinion check out where the Japanese property market is today relative to their peak almost 20 years ago.
Of course Japan doesn't have a proper economy likes ourselves :rolleyes:

Really if your comparing what is happening here to what happened in Japan you dont have a proper grasp of what happened over there :rolleyes:

jmayo wrote: »

+1
although change the 17 to 27 or maybe even 37.

Do you actually understand the concept of negative equity ? You think he will be in negative equity for 27 or 37 years when the max mortgage term he could have on the properties is 40 years.

Seriously think about what your saying ...

jmayo wrote: »

How do you know you are not in negative equity ?
Also how do you know that the properties being sold on your road are actually selling for advertised prices, are not being sold way below your places supposed value ?

maybe she had the property valued ? Maybe she had a low LTV starting off.

Frankly its none of your business how she knows. Stop trying to make people look stupid with comments that hold no substance

beeno67

jmayo wrote: »

+1
although change the 17 to 27 or maybe even 37.

In fairness with a twenty year mortgage, which is what I said, you won't be in negative equity longer than 20 years

jmayo

D3PO wrote: »

Really if your comparing what is happening here to what happened in Japan you dont have a proper grasp of what happened over there :rolleyes:

Ok then oh wise one fill me in.
BTW did Japan have a massive property bubble ?
Did we have a massive property bubble ?

D3PO wrote: »

Do you actually understand the concept of negative equity ? You think he will be in negative equity for 27 or 37 years when the max mortgage term he could have on the properties is 40 years.

Seriously think about what your saying ...

Yes I do, but I guess I phrased it wrongly.
She won't bve in negtive equity if she has paid off most of the mortgage I know.
What I was trying to point out is that looking at our current economy, looking at what happened to far better economies than ours that experienced bubbles and looking at the history of house prices in Ireland since foundation of the state, then IMHO it is unlikely that house prices will bounce back for decades.

Do you seriously believe that property prices are going to bounce back to 2007 levels in the next 20 odd years ?

D3PO wrote: »

maybe she had the property valued ? Maybe she had a low LTV starting off.

Frankly its none of your business how she knows. Stop trying to make people look stupid with comments that hold no substance

Why if I ask legitimate questions am I trying to make someone appear stupid ?
Try analysing your own comments. :mad:
I picked hoel in someones comments that went to highlight how positive the market was.
Is that not allowed ?

The poster tried to highlight how she wasn't in negative equity and she bought 2004-2007 in Finglas.
She did not quantify if she had indeed only taken out a low mortgage or not.
But looking at the way the sentence was written it was of the opinion that everything was rosey in the garden, she was not in negative equity, properties were selling on her road and thus property was moving.

Due to the way our house selling information is not available, she is probably only going on advertised prices and not what they actaully went for, unless of course the sellers are very open and frank or she is the EA.

And yes you are right it is none of my or your business about someones mortgage position.

And frankly I couldn't give a c*** about anyones mortgage, unless of course I am inadvertently through no choice of my own, paying for someones mortgages through my taxes.

John Mason

jaysis, you make a simple comment.

one of the houses a few doors down from me went for €249k last month - heard from the horses mouth, so to speak.

last christmas, there was a house again my road which could not be sold at €210k,


so from my personal experience of what i am seeing things are being to move upwards slightly - i am not listening to experts or stats, i am on going on my experience in the real world.

if i solld my house for €249k (which i have no intention of doing) i would be making a heifty profit

all i suggested was the OP gets his properties valued now to find out exactly where he stands at this moment in time. there is no point in speculating about what is going to happen this time next year or in 15 years time.

sheesh

D3PO

jmayo wrote: »

Ok then oh wise one fill me in.
BTW did Japan have a massive property bubble ?
Did we have a massive property bubble ?

You seem to believe that all property bubbles are the same. Quite frankly that couldnt be further from reality.

1. Japans property was WAY more overpriced than the crazy prices we had here. Some property in the capital was going at over a $1 Million per square meter !!

2. The Yen was way overpriced in the currency markets and when the adjustment came it meant they went through years of deflationary activity also driven by the drop in interest rates to virtually zero for 6 years and the enivetible drop in property prices. There is no possibility of the same thing happening in the Eurozone.

3. Japan's banks had no liquidity and most of the money pumped into them by the japanese government was farmed backout to insolvent companies to service their old debts better know as unrealized losses preventing banks from lending pretty much.

4. There wasnt a massive employment problem there, but their economy suffered as it couldnt mantain such a high GNP output rate (a country its size was never going to remain the second biggest world economy) It just wasnt sustainable.

The facts are that we dont have liquidity problems in the banking system to the degree they had them in japan,

our property wasnt as overpriced as theirs

we dont have a currency that is overvalued in the global markets

we have a large youth population that will over the short to medium term use up excess housing stock (despite current emigration)

Dont get me wrong Im not saying property will recover overnight but to even compare us to what happened in japan is ill informed

jmayo

beeno67 wrote: »

In fairness with a twenty year mortgage, which is what I said, you won't be in negative equity longer than 20 years

Fair enough my numebrs were used incorrectly I tacked them on meaning how long I expect house prices (and quantify by saying most) to be before they recover.

irishbird wrote: »

jaysis, you make a simple comment.

one of the houses a few doors down from me went for €249k last month - heard from the horses mouth, so to speak.

last christmas, there was a house again my road which could not be sold at €210k,

so from my personal experience of what i am seeing things are being to move upwards slightly - i am not listening to experts or stats, i am on going on my experience in the real world.

if i solld my house for €249k (which i have no intention of doing) i would be making a heifty profit

all i suggested was the OP gets his properties valued now to find out exactly where he stands at this moment in time. there is no point in speculating about what is going to happen this time next year or in 15 years time.

sheesh

I was only questioning how you knew you were not in negative equity and how other houses being sold on your road told you this.
It is good advise to get the properties valued, but then to even cut a percentage off this valuation, since EAs appear to overvalue most property at present.

I don't think prices are on the way up, your example is the first I have come across of this, if anything prices are stagnant at best or dropping.
The whole NAMA thing, and lets not forget the postponement of current expenditure cuts, means there is a phony market at present.

Very little if anything is shifting and most people who do want to buy or can actually afford to buy are just sitting and waiting.

There is a huge stock pile of unsold property, there is a fair few people with mortgage repayment problems due to unemployment, there is a big chunk of investors who may be coming to the end of their interest only mortgage term, the economy is in tatters and most people are not going to buy something they reckon will be worth less in 6 months.

D3PO wrote: »

You seem to believe that all property bubbles are the same. Quite frankly that couldnt be further from reality.

1. Japans property was WAY more overpriced than the crazy prices we had here. Some property in the capital was going at over a $1 Million per square meter !!

2. The Yen was way overpriced in the currency markets and when the adjustment came it meant they went through years of deflationary activity also driven by the drop in interest rates to virtually zero for 6 years and the enivetible drop in property prices. There is no possibility of the same thing happening in the Eurozone.

3. Japan's banks had no liquidity and most of the money pumped into them by the japanese government was farmed backout to insolvent companies to service their old debts better know as unrealized losses preventing banks from lending pretty much.

4. There wasnt a massive employment problem there, but their economy suffered as it couldnt mantain such a high GNP output rate (a country its size was never going to remain the second biggest world economy) It just wasnt sustainable.

The facts are that we dont have liquidity problems in the banking system to the degree they had them in japan,

our property wasnt as overpriced as theirs

we dont have a currency that is overvalued in the global markets

we have a large youth population that will over the short to medium term use up excess housing stock (despite current emigration)

Dont get me wrong Im not saying property will recover overnight but to even compare us to what happened in japan is ill informed

And on the other side, Japan is the home of some of the largest corporations in the world which bring in export earnings year on year.
They did not based big chunk of their economy on foreign owned entities which can move elsewhere as can be seen form Motorola, Ericsson, Dell, etc.
Even though they had a huge property bubble they did not base a huge percentage of the male employment on said property industry.
They didn't base another huge chunk of their employment on increased retail consumer spending due to cheap credit availability.
They continued to manufacturer and export.

Are we now not entering a phase we our decreased birth rate over certain time period is now catching up with us and thus we have to wait for the next wave i.e. the toddlers and primary school children to enter the market in say 20 years time ?
There has been debate about this on another thread somewhere recently.

During the period that the Japanese property market hasn't recovered the world has gone through two major bubbles.
Firstly the technology telecoms dot com bubble and then the cheap credit availability bubble, yet AFAIK their property didn't ever really recover ?
It is not as if Japanese industry and economy did not benefit from these bubbles.

The liquidity of our banks and their ability to lend is not under question ?
At the moment it looks like we have a couple of zombie banks, well one anyway.

I know you cannot compare totoally like for like, but I use it as a pointer to how we, with our totally f***ed up current expenditure deficit and banking system, cannot hope to recover house prices within the next two decades.
If a major economy like Japan can go so badly wrong then where does that leave us ?

D3PO

jmayo wrote: »

If a major economy like Japan can go so badly wrong then where does that leave us ?

Yes but that doesnt mean we cant learn from their mistakes. The fundamental difference between Ireland & Japan in terms of their bubbles is that the ECB will not let us get into a long term deflationary position like Japan did.

Their big problem was they should have devalued the yen to put the breaks on things when they didnt bam massive deflation over a prolonged period, not helped by their use of quantitive easing and the falling property prices.

I bet if they could have rolled the clock back in terms of handling the bust they would have done it differently.

Dont get me wrong I have ZERO faith in our government to have any kind of positive influence in getting us out of this mess. (Trying to tax their way out of a recession if beyond words)

Im just happy that the skillsets we have available to us from in terms of our SME sectory and financially from the ECB will actually drag us up.

beeno67

jmayo wrote: »

Are we now not entering a phase we our decreased birth rate over certain time period is now catching up with us and thus we have to wait for the next wave i.e. the toddlers and primary school children to enter the market in say 20 years time ?
There has been debate about this on another thread somewhere recently.

According to CSO census 2006 there were:
864,449 children aged 0-14 years or 61,746 per year
632,732 children aged 15-24 years or 63,273 per year
1,345,873 adults aged 25-44 years or 67,293 per year

Our population is not changing as dramatically as you think.

jmayo

D3PO wrote: »

Yes but that doesnt mean we cant learn from their mistakes. The fundamental difference between Ireland & Japan in terms of their bubbles is that the ECB will not let us get into a long term deflationary position like Japan did.

Their big problem was they should have devalued the yen to put the breaks on things when they didnt bam massive deflation over a prolonged period, not helped by their use of quantitive easing and the falling property prices.

I bet if they could have rolled the clock back in terms of handling the bust they would have done it differently.

Dont get me wrong I have ZERO faith in our government to have any kind of positive influence in getting us out of this mess. (Trying to tax their way out of a recession if beyond words)

Im just happy that the skillsets we have available to us from in terms of our SME sectory and financially from the ECB will actually drag us up.

I do whole heartedly agree that the ECB and Eurozone membership has saved us and could be our only saving grace from complete homegrown ineptitude.

Some anti EU people (posters on here or on politics.ie) even have gone as far as to blame the EU for the fact that we had cheap credit and thus made bags of things.
Of course it never dawned on them that it wasn't the EU's fault that we misused it and they don't grasp the fact that without ECB we would be Iceland part deux. :rolleyes:

The reason I have little faith is that even though Japanese screwed up they had a lot more going for them in terms of the resilience of their economy.
We don't have that, we are too dependent on outsiders be for investment or markets.
Both are hampered by our loss of competitiveness which was as a result of our government authorities and banks love affair with all things property.

Our cost base is way too high and a few things should already have been done to alter it.
What have the government actaully done to cut the cost of doing business and to aid struggling enterprises, particualrly homegrown ones, that are offering employment and adding to the nations exports ?
The government and the dept of finance have yet again tried to pass the buck to consultants or consultatory bodies be it the commission on taxation or an bord snip.
Can anyone make a decision and bloody well stick to it ?

Senna

OP, are the rents covering the mortgages?
What interest rate are they on?
Are you on interest only?
By using a mortgage calculator, you can find out what situation your in.
E.g. if rates move up 4%, will the mortgage be covered. If rent is reduced by as 5% 10% 15% etc will the mortgage be covered.

Only you can work out the situation your in, negative equity wont be a problem if your covering the mortgage and can continue to, allowing for both rate rises and possible rent drops.
Of course, you wont be able to sell but the investments were un wise for you 2010 plan, but may not be disaster.

DJDC

jaysis, you make a simple comment.

one of the houses a few doors down from me went for €249k last month - heard from the horses mouth, so to speak.

last christmas, there was a house again my road which could not be sold at €210k,


so from my personal experience of what i am seeing things are being to move upwards slightly - i am not listening to experts or stats, i am on going on my experience in the real world.

if i solld my house for €249k (which i have no intention of doing) i would be making a heifty profit

all i suggested was the OP gets his properties valued now to find out exactly where he stands at this moment in time. there is no point in speculating about what is going to happen this time next year or in 15 years time.

sheesh

This makes no sense whatsoever. So while every other house in the country has lost about 10%+ in value since Christmas 2008, houses in Finglas have managed to gain 20% in value? Also a hefty profit on a house bought in 2004??.. Absolutely no chance, lucky to break even unless your street is a magical microcosm where words like 13% unemployment, higher taxes etc. do not apply.

beeno67

DJDC wrote: »

This makes no sense whatsoever. So while every other house in the country has lost about 10%+ in value since Christmas 2008, houses in Finglas have managed to gain 20% in value? Also a hefty profit on a house bought in 2004??.. Absolutely no chance, lucky to break even unless your street is a magical microcosm where words like 13% unemployment, higher taxes etc. do not apply.

Every other house in the country has not gone down 10%. The average house has. Some have dropped way more than this, so logically some have dropped a lot less and so it is possible some have gone up. Really depends what the original price was.

iguana

DJDC wrote: »

Also a hefty profit on a house bought in 2004??.. Absolutely no chance, lucky to break even unless your street is a magical microcosm where words like 13% unemployment, higher taxes etc. do not apply.

It would be possible if she bought with a heavy discount in the first place.

JMJR

Snazzy_Chazzy wrote: »

Hi there...................

Property tax on landlords. ................

Chazzy:eek:

é 200 per property, due by 31 October ( due to extension having been granted). é 20 per month fine levied after that
https://www.nppr.ie/

The_Conductor

beeno67 wrote: »

Every other house in the country has not gone down 10%. The average house has. Some have dropped way more than this, so logically some have dropped a lot less and so it is possible some have gone up. Really depends what the original price was.

The average house has gone down by 27%. Some have gone down by far less- some may even have increased slightly in value, but for every house that has done so, there is a reciprochal house that has fallen by an even higher amount.

I think he was talking about theoretical peak prices, and theoretical current market prices- as oppossed to actual examples though.......

It looks like the rate of fall in house prices has slowed considerably (but the rate of fall in commercial property prices is in fact continuing to increase).

S.

The_Conductor

JMJR wrote: »

é 200 per property, due by 31 October ( due to extension having been granted). é 20 per month fine levied after that
https://www.nppr.ie/

Its for everyone who owns a property and is not living in it. If I have to rent for work purposes and my PPR in Dublin is vacant- under the legislation- I have to pay the EUR200 (and have done so). It was actually designed to try to catch holiday home owners, rather than landlords- but as a cost on ownership- will be an added downward pressure on prices of certain dwelling types.

beeno67

smccarrick wrote: »

I think he was talking about theoretical peak prices, and theoretical current market prices- as oppossed to actual examples though.......


S.

He was commenting on price falls since Christmas. The reason I replied was that he basically said someone was talking nonsense because their house had not fallen this 10%.

DJDC

I stand by my assertion that no Irish houses have risen in value in the last 8 months, it just doesnt make any sense in an environment of oversupply, higher taxs, tighter lending and higher unemployment. And we are talking about actual prices achieved not selling quotes from auctioneers. So if someone put their house on daft for €20 last christmas for the laugh that doesnt count. Auction results are the only transparent price indicator here, not fallacious word of mouth stories. I look forward to anyone proving me wrong with real facts.

beeno67

DJDC wrote: »

I stand by my assertion that no Irish houses have risen in value in the last 8 months, it just doesnt make any sense in an environment of oversupply, higher taxs, tighter lending and higher unemployment. And we are talking about actual prices achieved not selling quotes from auctioneers. So if someone put their house on daft for €20 last christmas for the laugh that doesnt count. Auction results are the only transparent price indicator here, not fallacious word of mouth stories. I look forward to anyone proving me wrong with real facts.

I am not saying they have gone up, just that every house has not gone down 10% in last 8 months. This is simply an average figure. Some will have dropped a lot more, some a lot less and possibly some gone up. So for example if you bought a house 8 months ago and manage to screw the seller totally, knocked an extra 20% off its value then your property will have gone up.

The only way to proove it is to look at all houses bought 8 months ago and sold this month. I cannot imagine there are many of those. You are asking for real facts, well, why don't you prove you are right with real facts:rolleyes:

am i bovvered

I am surpised this thread http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055620650 didn't attract more attention, I liked it because it was not about opinions but the facts of what people know regarding the selling price.

John Mason

well my house value has fallen more then ten percent.

i had it valued 2.5 years ago at excess €450k and they now selling for €249k


there are a lot of "facts" floating around, and these "facts" are making people think the market is a lot worse then it is. this forum is intent on scaring the living daylights out of people trying to buy houses or asking questions about their house value.

the market will never improve with all this scaremongering going on.

at the end of the day, i have no intention of selling my house but if something happened and i had to, i know i would still be walking around with a nice little profit.

oceanclub

irishbird wrote: »

there are a lot of "facts" floating around, and these "facts" are making people think the market is a lot worse then it is. this forum is intent on scaring the living daylights out of people trying to buy houses or asking questions about their house value.

I'm just wondering did you complain during the bubble when people were urging to buy and get on the "ladder" at any cost, as if they didn't, they'd never be able to afford a place?

P.

bangersandmash

irishbird wrote: »

there are a lot of "facts" floating around, and these "facts" are making people think the market is a lot worse then it is.

As opposed to the "facts" being floated by certain interests in the media to make people believe that the market is in a better state than it actually is?

Prime example - Frank Fahey telling us the market is already rebounding :rolleyes:

Shepherd3

irishbird wrote: »

well my house value has fallen more then ten percent.

i had it valued 2.5 years ago at excess €450k and they now selling for €249k


there are a lot of "facts" floating around, and these "facts" are making people think the market is a lot worse then it is. this forum is intent on scaring the living daylights out of people trying to buy houses or asking questions about their house value.

the market will never improve with all this scaremongering going on.

at the end of the day, i have no intention of selling my house but if something happened and i had to, i know i would still be walking around with a nice little profit.

Read some of the old posts and see some of the attitudes to prices falling, that's scary.