People talking about houses dropping 30%

[ayvian]

AIBU to think they should shut up.

Banks are still lending, furlough has saved millions of jobs and no one is going to sell their biggest asset at a 30% loss. It just won't happen all it will create is a mexican standoff that will freeze the market until buyers get a sense of reality. We want to move, but not that desperate to accept a loss of what something was worth a few weeks ago. We'll hold on. It's wishful thinking that anyone can get a bargain right now

@LisaSimpsonsbff Do you know anyone in law or investment banks or fintech? Lots of my friends work in these industries & have been told they will be doing so for the end of the yr. In the future they are looking at much more wfh. It's also a good way for big companies who spend millions on swanky offices to lower their bills in the future recession. Of course they still need a presence & personally I like a mix of wfh & in the office but they can definitely scale down. Obviously this has a knock on effect on industries that support office working eg DHs firm has 3 restaurants, a shop & 2 delis in the building.

I also think there is a generational shift & a lot of younger people expect some remote working (where jobs can facilitate it). 2 yrs ago my brother went travelling & handed in his notice (tech), they asked him to work remotely for 6 months which he did. My sister's assistant moved back to France last yr & they kept her on remotely.

I know lots of people who work in those industries. I've also been told in my job that we'll work at home at least until the new year and then there'll be much more home working after that. I just think that a lot of this remains to be seen whether it really happens. There has been nothing stopping those companies having more WFH before, and yet they've developed cultures that are often highly reliant on presenteeism, on personal contacts and on big prestige offices they can show clients. I'll believe that all that is dead when I see it.

I also, by the way, know quite a few lawyers who already worked from home one or two days a week - all women, post-children. They have all found it disadvantages you because people don't think of you when you're not there. I don't think that will go, either, and I think that'll drive people back to the office - that's not happening now, while everyone is at home, but it'll creep back.

I'd like to be wrong about this, and maybe I am, but I just wouldn't buy a house on what a company is saying they'll do in the long-term now, a couple of months into an unprecedented situation. I also wouldn't bank on what my current company was saying they'll do just before what's likely to be a huge recession. That's why flexibility can be golden handcuffs - if you build your life around what one company lets you do you're essentially stuck there.

Well like I said everyone I know already works part of the time remotely anyway.

The difference is now it's a big issue to socially distance at work & people will be on rotas so it's probably more productive & cheaper to keep people at home than configure everything differently. It's bottom line they care about not necessarily people's well-being.

Of course there will still be HQs, I never disputed that.

basicbeetch

It means I don’t want to be too far away from London.
It means I want to be able to pop on the tube network (I know there are some stations outside the M25 but I want to be able to walk to the station)
Dp and dc need to be accessible for work. No point in living in Oxfordshire or Northamptonshire if they get a call to fill in for someone and work starts in 30 minutes.

Sometimes dd works till 3or4am so being able to get in her car and not have a long drive home is a must.

Nothing wrong with the Surrey part within the M25 and could work depending on transport links

LisaS yes I agree with your last post

Maybe it depends on the firm but at DHs firm its pretty much mandatory to wfh 1 day a wk from home & I know a couple of barristers who already do 2-3 days a week from home.

Obviously you have details stipulated in your contract before you make a big jump (we are looking at Surrey so not a big jump). Since dc I've worked for 3 different companies, all with wfh flexibility. I would never take a job without some form of remote working even my friend who is a detective can wfh if needed. I'm happy going to the office just not daily.

I absolutely disagree that flexibility is like handcuffs as normally what one firm does the others then have to follow to keep & attract new workers eg changing NQ salaries to 100k at one firm forces the others to do similar. Or if one bank raised bonuses then the others have to.

What I'm trying to explain though is that there will be a TREND towards working fewer days in the office. Which will mean that there is a trend towards tolerating a longer commute

But not everyone works in an office.

nomoreq
I am in zone 6 and yes I have done up places before. Not necessarily in London.

Still don't get it @Oliversmumsarmy very few stations in Zone 6 get you into London in 25-30 minutes & for the ones that do you need to factor in walking to the station & the destination at the other side.
I can get into Zone 1 in 12 minutes but that's just the tube journey, I still need to walk to the tube, wait for one, & reach my destination.

There are places like Ashford or parts of Essex that have similar commutes.

Living either side of the m25 is unlikely to make much difference so don't understand why you would have panic attacks. Although living in Zone 5/6 would give me panic attacks 🤣

Just think it's odd that you class it as London living.

We are looking at moving to Reigate & surroundings, wouldn't ever class that as London.

I didn’t realise a London postcode wasn’t considered London and only zone 1 is

Are you directing that at me? I class Reigate as Surrey, certainly the estate agents do & have told me lots of people leave London for there.
I don't think London is just zone 1. I don't really think zone 6 is though & it's definitely not what most people refer to when talking about "London lifestyle" or whatever you want to call it.

Ive also known lots of people who live in or around Croydon & really hold onto the fact they live in "Surrey". Come to think of it I've heard people from Mitcham argue they are in Surrey! Works both ways I guess.

@Oliversmumsarmy I appreciate you answering but I think you have a vested interest hence why you're always all over property threads disputing price drops. Plus you have an interest only mortgage so may financially lose out.

Well interest rates can only go one way atm, and we are going to hit a recession, that is known or redundancies repos and a drop in the market.
I think 30% may even be a conservative estimate. If you don't need to move then surely you wait until more stable times.

Can I just ask you lot in London, is Wanstead still considered London, I have it on old census records?

It means I don’t want to be too far away from London.

It takes 15minutes to go from Croydon to London Bridge, but it doesn't sound that "posh"

Ive also known lots of people who live in or around Croydon & really hold onto the fact they live in "Surrey".

well, they are.

That house price crash forum is madness.

People sold in 2003 to rent. If they had of bought a 100k house then it would now be worth 400k and they'd of paid way less in mortage and be close to paying off the mortgage by now!

That "If [people] had of bought a 100k house then it would now be worth 400k" is the madness.

madness that investments increase in value?

nomoreq how would I have more of a “vested interest” than other London homeowners

Also as far as I am aware I have never said that there won’t be a decrease in house prices.
Although like other posters I don’t think it will go down 30%+

madness that investments increase in value?

I think that it's not prudent to think of your primary residence as an investment when you've really bought it to meet your shelter needs.

From the house price crash forum: some stopped clocks.