Property Market 2015

SarahMollie

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'd actually imagine the lenders presumed they'd be given some sort of a supplementary allowance for lending to people- when they went to the Central Bank and told them they had used up their annual quota. After they were told to take a hike- I'd surmise that they'd make a better effort to try and space them out going forward. Anyhow- time will tell.

Ha yeah possibly.

I got one of the said exceptions -and i didnt even ask for it. I'd been approved previously and it had fallen through. I'd then changed jobs and had to wait 6 months before reapplying, but the good thing was my salary had increased. I'd assumed i was just going to be offered 3.5 times my new salary (previously I'd been offered 5 times my old salary) and the outcome would have been much the same.

The mortgage adviser I spoke to over the phone said actually I think we can offer you €xxx, how about that? End result is I now have a mortgage of 4.4 times my earnings, drawn down in October 2015.

Note - I had more than a 20% deposit, and my job gives both a fixed and variable income, and they only assessed me on my fixed income, so in reality looking at my past P60's they could see that I was continually earning more than the headline amount.

handlemaster

The_Conductor wrote: »

I'd actually imagine the lenders presumed they'd be given some sort of a supplementary allowance for lending to people- when they went to the Central Bank and told them they had used up their annual quota. After they were told to take a hike- I'd surmise that they'd make a better effort to try and space them out going forward. Anyhow- time will tell.

Makes no difference to space it out. Business is business

The_Conductor

handlemaster wrote: »

Makes no difference to space it out. Business is business

Logistically- it would make more sense to space it out- though, you're right- business is business.........

April 73

Not all of the banks may do the same thing.
Suppose AIB decide to space out their exemptions & BOI go for growth in lending for the first quarter or the first two quarters.
Easy to see how BOI might nab extra customers in the first half of the year in this scenario.
I'm also guessing that those who get exemptions are those with high earning potential or high deposits - valuable customers to banks.

As with all meddling in markets, the exemptions could create bottlenecks & then dam-busting moments during the year.

handlemaster

April 73 wrote: »

Not all of the banks may do the same thing.
Suppose AIB decide to space out their exemptions & BOI go for growth in lending for the first quarter or the first two quarters.
Easy to see how BOI might nab extra customers in the first half of the year in this scenario.
I'm also guessing that those who get exemptions are those with high earning potential or high deposits - valuable customers to banks.

As with all meddling in markets, the exemptions could create bottlenecks & then dam-busting moments during the year.

If your talking in those terms. I dont see anyone but FG in government next time out. They have said AIB 25% will be sold next year if back in power. Therefore they would want to get more business in quickly early next year to bring the figures up....

April 73

handlemaster wrote: »

If your talking in those terms. I dont see anyone but FG in government next time out. They have said AIB 25% will be sold next year if back in power. Therefore they would want to get more business in quickly early next year to bring the figures up....

Yes it could easily be AIB who are out of the starting blocks early next year for exemption mortgages. What I wrote was just to illustrate a point.
The main point being that different banks could well do different things with the timings of their exemptions, which will complicate the market further.

Jake Stiles

www.myhome.ie/3439863

Not so sure its Dublin 16!!

The_Conductor

Jake Stiles wrote: »

www.myhome.ie/3439863

Not so sure its Dublin 16!!

Firmly Dublin 24 - its not even close to Dublin 16 (ok- Ballycullen road is a long road- however- they're at the wrong end of it........) This is the next road over from Oaklands...........

SarahMollie

The_Conductor wrote: »

Firmly Dublin 24 - its not even close to Dublin 16 (ok- Ballycullen road is a long road- however- they're at the wrong end of it........) This is the next road over from Oaklands...........

Thats depressing. Sad to think that such a good budget only gets you that.

However, since I spent most of 2015 househunting, I'm did see certain new builds dropping their prices from their original launch, so we'll see how it pans out.

MayBea

This can be confusing quite confusing. The buyers of this house in Glasnevin have probably never realised they had purchased in Ballymun.

The_Conductor

MayBea wrote: »

This can be confusing quite confusing. The buyers of this house in Glasnevin have probably never realised they had purchased in Ballymun.

Lol........



The vast preponderance of their neighbors, are understandably- insisting its Glasnevin.......

seamus

The_Conductor wrote: »

Firmly Dublin 24 - its not even close to Dublin 16 (ok- Ballycullen road is a long road- however- they're at the wrong end of it........) This is the next road over from Oaklands...........

Not entirely correct. The house which currently sits on this land (and will continue to do so) is in Dublin 16 (eircode D16 R3P6), and the Woodstown estate across the Ballycullen Road is Dublin 16. There's a bit of an anomaly with D16 where Everything east of the Ballycullen Road is D16, and everything west is D24 except for a small line of cottages on the south-west edge of the road, which are D16.

There is previous form for properties like this getting a D16 code (see D16 DX40), even when surrounded by D24 properties.

What's in a postcode though. I wouldn't pay the premium for having that postcode when it means nothing - you're still geographically in Firhouse/Ballycullen and for schools and elections you will be counted in that parish.

Rew

CSO out for Nov:

Down 0.5% nationally and 1.2% down in Dublin

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/rppi/residentialpropertypriceindexnovember2015/

Rew

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/property-prices-suffer-biggest-monthly-drop-in-nearly-a-year-1.2476094

Residential property prices fell at their sharpest rate in nearly a year last month with the decline in Dublin put at 1.3 per cent.
Despite the declines, the latest figures from the Central Statistics Office (CSO) show prices remain significantly up on the same period last year.
Nationally, prices of both houses and apartments fell 0.5 per cent in November, the first recorded decline since February.

dearg lady

MayBea wrote: »

This can be confusing quite confusing. The buyers of this house in Glasnevin have probably never realised they had purchased in Ballymun.

huh, now I would have thought of that as Glasnevin alright. They're huge houses too. It's a bit silly the way people get caught up in these technicalities anyway.

jay0109

Rew wrote: »

CSO out for Nov:

Down 0.5% nationally and 1.2% down in Dublin

http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/rppi/residentialpropertypriceindexnovember2015/

Keep her lit!

Saipanne

I remember a year ago when the new CBI rules were about to be implemented I suggested that this would result in a cooling and perhaps a decline in property prices in Dublin.

Some posters on here jumped on me for that, saying I didn't have a clue. You know who you are.

SarahMollie

dearg lady wrote: »

huh, now I would have thought of that as Glasnevin alright. They're huge houses too. It's a bit silly the way people get caught up in these technicalities anyway.

Yeah I'm no expert on Glasnevin but I'd tend to agree with you, I would think its just about within what could reasonably be called Glasnevin.

Barely Hedged

Saipanne wrote: »

I remember a year ago when the new CBI rules were about to be implemented I suggested that this would result in a cooling and perhaps a decline in property prices in Dublin.

Some posters on here jumped on me for that, saying I didn't have a clue. You know who you are.

What you said is house prices may go up and they may also go down?

Alter_Ego

Saipanne wrote: »

I remember a year ago when the new CBI rules were about to be implemented I suggested that this would result in a cooling and perhaps a decline in property prices in Dublin.

Some posters on here jumped on me for that, saying I didn't have a clue. You know who you are.

In the same boat, apparently I was 'clutching at straws' and 'making myself look silly'. Fecking estate agents:)

SarahMollie

Saipanne wrote: »

I remember a year ago when the new CBI rules were about to be implemented I suggested that this would result in a cooling and perhaps a decline in property prices in Dublin.

Some posters on here jumped on me for that, saying I didn't have a clue. You know who you are.

Easy to say now, but I swear I had that opinion last year too, not just jumping on the bandwagon.

I still bought this year as my aim was having my own home rather than capital gains. I don't think they'll fall in any substantive way, as least not where I've bought as there are good transport links and close to sandyford industrial estate with lots of bluechip employers, so I'm still happy enough.

Rew

My money is where my mouth is, sold in April specifically because of CB rules, so far i'm up but i'm so far down from 2008 purchase that not reasonable drops would ever see me even anyway!

Saipanne

Barely Hedged wrote: »

What you said is house prices may go up and they may also go down?

Not exactly, but when simplified like that... You need some extra help, that's ok, I'm sound like that.

By cooling, I meant the rate of increase would decrease, but the price might remain increasing, albeit at a much reduced rate. Or the rules would have an even larger effect, meaning the rate of change would be negative. Either way, the huge increases of 2014 were going to be a thing of the past.

I hope that clears things up for you. Let me know if you require further breakdown.

Saipanne

Alter_Ego wrote: »

In the same boat, apparently I was 'clutching at straws' and 'making myself look silly'. Fecking estate agents:)

I suppose their livelihood depends on prices going up and up and up. Sure what could go wrong there?

Barely Hedged

Saipanne wrote: »

Not exactly, but when simplified like that... You need some extra help, that's ok, I'm sound like that.

By cooling, I meant the rate of increase would decrease, but the price might remain increasing, albeit at a much reduced rate. Or the rules would have an even larger effect, meaning the rate of change would be negative. Either way, the huge increases of 2014 were going to be a thing of the past.

I hope that clears things up for you. Let me know if you require further breakdown.

Thanks for repeated the clarification. Youve reemphasized that prices may go up or down.

SarahMollie

Saipanne wrote: »

I suppose their livelihood depends on prices going up and up and up. Sure what could go wrong there?

Really their livelihood depends on a volume of transactions rather than just higher prices.

Volumes are still extremely low which again is largely due to issues on the supply side.

I'd rather be making 10 sales a month than 2, even if my commission per sale was a bit less.

Alter_Ego

Saipanne wrote: »

I suppose their livelihood depends on prices going up and up and up. Sure what could go wrong there?

The thing is, it doesn't. In a properly functioning market they would be better of because a volume of transactions would be higher. If house prices were more aligned with people salaries (as in lower than they are now, it's not New York, is it?) and supply was matching demand they would have higher incomes than in an unstable and volatile market we're in now.

Saipanne

Barely Hedged wrote: »

Thanks for repeated the clarification. Youve reemphasized that prices may go up or down.

No, you still seem to be having difficulty. I'll try again using metaphor.

In 2014, The Regulator of Baths noticed that the flow of water from the tap exceeded the flow of water out of the drain. As a consequence, there was a danger of the overall water levels breaching the top and spilling on to the floor.

The Regulator of Baths decreed that the rate of water flow from the tap be restricted. I came on to hear around then (now, this is the really important bit, so concentrate hard!) and suggested that these rules will indeed change the *rate of flow of the water*, which may result in the increase in prices slowing or prices decreasing. *Both results are the result of the same effect.* Have a good hard think about that one now. It's a toughie.

Now, the point here is that the *rate of flow* would change, which would over time affects the overall levels of bath water from Time A to Time B (i feel like I may have lost you already, but I can't "dilute" it any further).

The main point is this. A lot of people believed the bath would just continue to rise, *the same way it did before the rule change*.

But the floor is dry, my friends. Dry as a bone.

Sowwy.

q85dw7osi4lebg

SarahMollie wrote: »

Really their livelihood depends on a volume of transactions rather than just higher prices.

Volumes are still extremely low which again is largely due to issues on the supply side.

I'd rather be making 10 sales a month than 2, even if my commission per sale was a bit less.

All about volume.

90% of agents in Dublin charge 1% fees.

Say a property in Dublin sells for €500k, this year their gross fee will be €5000.

Say (somehow) the backside falls out of the market and there is somehow a 10% drop in values next year (to €450,000), the same house will gross a fee of €4500 for the agent.

I laugh when people talk about agents manipulating offers and prices, given they yield little to know financial difference to the agent.

Barely Hedged

Saipanne wrote: »

No, you still seem to be having difficulty. I'll try again using metaphor.

In 2014, The Regulator of Baths noticed that the flow of water from the tap exceeded the flow of water out of the drain. As a consequence, there was a danger of the overall water levels breaching the top and spilling on to the floor.

The Regulator of Baths decreed that the rate of water flow from the tap be restricted. I came on to hear around then (now, this is the really important bit, so concentrate hard!) and suggested that these rules will indeed change the *rate of flow of the water*, which may result in the increase in prices slowing or prices decreasing. *Both results are the result of the same effect.* Have a good hard think about that one now. It's a toughie.

Now, the point here is that the *rate of flow* would change, which would over time affects the overall levels of bath water from Time A to Time B (i feel like I may have lost you already, but I can't "dilute" it any further).

The main point is this. A lot of people believed the bath would just continue to rise, *the same way it did before the rule change*.

But the floor is dry, my friends. Dry as a bone.

Sowwy.

Let me take you back to your first quote as the property market is quite simple

Saipanne wrote: »

I remember a year ago when the new CBI rules were about to be implemented I suggested that this would result in a cooling and perhaps a decline in property prices in Dublin.

Some posters on here jumped on me for that, saying I didn't have a clue. You know who you are.

House prices rose in 2014 in Dublin. You then said:

Saipanne wrote: »

this would result in a cooling...in property prices in Dublin.

This explicitly states that you still expected them to increase, albeit not as fast.

Then,

Saipanne wrote: »

I suggested that this would result in...a decline in property prices in Dublin.

which explicitly states that you expected them to decline.

They either go up or down, you cant have it both ways and then claim otherwise.

The dog on the street knew that the central bank rules would dampen the rate of increase. It doesnt require knowledge of pompous metaphors or first order derivatives explain they go up or they go down.