x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by rosalind renshaw

Stock for sale in London, already at a scarcity, is set to dwindle more.

Douglas & Gordon report that valuations are down by 20% compared with a year ago, with potential sellers put off by the cost of moving.

Director Ed Mead said: “Far fewer people are opting to move house, as the cost of moving has become prohibitive for many.”

The firm reports that supply has only been ahead of last year’s listings once this year, and that was back in February.

By contrast, demand has held up and last month, new applicant levels were ahead of those of September 2010.

Another London agent, WA Ellis, said there is such a shortage of both rental and sales stock, with the result that home-hunters at the very top end of the market are willing to buy or rent in order to secure the right property.

Richard Barber, partner at WA Ellis, said that the gap between the central London market and the rest of the UK continued to widen.

He said that recent sales at Britain’s most exclusive address, One Hyde Park, confirmed the view that London was ‘indestructible’.

Comments

  • icon

    Brit 1234, apology fully accepted for your errors and sorry, didn’t realise you are female.

    • 11 October 2011 13:33 PM
  • icon

    The mansion tax was a lib dem idea. However key Tories including the prime minster and chancellor have been flagging up the problem and they are going to clamp down on these stamp duty avoiders. Whether it is called a mansion tax or something else to appease the Tory right something is coming in. My bet is the spring budget with them working out the details this winter.

    As for where this comes from its numerous political interviews over the last month and certain trade publications. Any one watch the parliament channel, daily politics or newsnight?

    • 10 October 2011 18:29 PM
  • icon

    Whoops sorry all, I wasn't aware that "Tit" has a noun gender or that calling a female a "Tit" contravened Debrett’s. Please allow me to update my draft description in accordance with Property Misdescriptions Act 1991; Neurotic Lush.

    • 10 October 2011 18:01 PM
  • icon

    Says he that called a female a tit. Classy.

    • 10 October 2011 17:26 PM
  • icon

    So if your name is Paula why post as Leave name blank? Is there some little known rule of bravery that says that using any old name on the internet is braver than not bothering to fill in a box just because it is there?
    Your weekend in the Cotswolds sounds spiffing, but surely it is sad that you are celebrating getting away from your normal life to somewhere much nicer even if it is just for a weekend.
    Mine might be a sad and uneventful life with no consensual sex or friends but reading your post makes me very grateful I am not you. I think an analyst would make a great deal more out of your insecurities and your random cyber attacks on anonymous posters in the internet than they would out of my laziness.

    • 10 October 2011 17:22 PM
  • icon

    Jonnie: "Or has someone done a ‘PeeBee’ and started posting in your name?"

    Awww... shucks - I've never had anything named after me before!

    Cheers, mate! ;o)

    Leave Name Blank: "At least Britt1234 has the balls to leave a name, unlike some nameless and probably shameless cowards!" Yeah - and if you don't like what he/she/prefer-not-to-state says you can look "Britt1234" up in the phone book and harrass them... can't you?

    Chas: "As the article says, the demand is not there because far fewer people are opting to move house. That's fewer sellers AND fewer buyers"

    Erm... no it doesn't, exactly. It goes on to state "By contrast, demand has held up and last month, new applicant levels were ahead of those of September 2010."

    That's fewer sellers - MORE potential buyers.

    It's a funny old game. Pity you don't understand the rules...

    • 10 October 2011 17:09 PM
  • icon

    My name isn't Brit 1234. It's Paula S. There you go I'm out of the closet, are you going to come out! There's no shame nowadays you know.

    • 10 October 2011 16:23 PM
  • icon

    Is Brit 1234 your name then, sorry.

    • 10 October 2011 16:17 PM
  • icon

    Dear No Name

    I'm very happy thank you. Life is good. I had a lovely weekend away in the Cotswolds, got back yesterday. I'm a little jaded today from the weekends celebrations, but all worth it. You know how it is when you get carried away with friends having such fun. Oh sorry, you probably don't.

    How's life bearing up with you being so bitter? Here's a tip, get your partner a little tipsy and they may just consent for a change. If not, I hear Ann Summers do a good range of mood enhancers.

    Regards

    • 10 October 2011 16:14 PM
  • icon

    Happy now?

    • 10 October 2011 15:37 PM
  • icon

    @Leave Name Blank

    Please Miss, Please Miss! Matey didn't put a name on his post on the internet! Tell him off or give him detention!

    Tit!

    • 10 October 2011 15:35 PM
  • icon

    At least Britt1234 has the balls to leave a name, unlike some nameless and probably shameless cowards!

    Such bitterness for a Monday, roll on Funny Friday hey Fun Boy Agent!

    • 10 October 2011 14:42 PM
  • icon

    Brti 1234 - when was the legislation passed for a Mansion tax?? Are you now in the government?

    Think not perhaps! you must be so far to the left you are nearly right wing? If you and your silly comments were ever in question you are now.

    • 10 October 2011 14:07 PM
  • icon

    @Chas

    'eventually' is the key word? The difficult one is 'when'.

    • 10 October 2011 13:55 PM
  • icon

    @PoTW

    How many transactions do you need at 20% VAT on the ancillaries to cover the 3-4% stamp duty.

    Typical south east example 1x 3 bed house @ £300,000 (figures plucked from thin air here).

    SDLT @ 3% = £9,000 - that's our target.

    Solicitor's bills (buyer & seller) = 2 grand? so VAT = £400.

    Removals x 2 = 3 grand so VAT = £600.

    Surveys x 1 = £500 so VAT = £ 100.

    Agent fee (1% typical) = £3000 so VAT = £600

    So that is a total of £1,700 claimed by HMRC so far.

    Leaving a total of £7,300 left.

    Which requires the new owner to spend a further £36,500 on refurbishment for HMRC to get it's money.

    That's a lot of money for a standard 3 bed basic clean up/ decorate.

    Your figures only work if each and every house sold is half way to being a decrepit wreck.

    Every house that I have sold this year has either been in good condition or a complete wreck.

    The middle ground ones have all been overpriced by foolish vendors and have not sold.

    It's a bit like the rudeness survey on the BBC website today.

    Kids and old people are much nicer than everyone thinks.

    It's the middle aged, middle classes that are the problem.

    Bit like the housing market really.

    • 10 October 2011 13:44 PM
  • icon

    …………………BRIT1234, is that really you? Or has someone done a ‘PeeBee’ and started posting in your name?

    Now ive been pretty horrid towards you in the past but my god boy that last comment was bang on the money and made you sound well informed.

    Of course there is a chance you just read it somewhere.

    Jonnie

    • 10 October 2011 12:44 PM
  • icon

    Blame rightmove, makes as much sence as the silly billys posting to date!

    • 10 October 2011 12:39 PM
  • icon

    I think you will find a lot of the central London properties are being bought by made up companies to get round stamp duty. That is why a mansion tax is being brought in to cover this tax avoidance.

    • 10 October 2011 12:04 PM
  • icon

    Dear anonymous coward

    I forgot to reply to your point about 'which tax would I like put up to pay for the lost stamp duty?'

    As I said, the increase in tax revenues from VAT on estate agents, solicitors and removal fees and all the tax generated from the new carpets, kitchens, DIY etc. etc. would more than cover it.

    • 10 October 2011 11:48 AM
  • icon

    Dear anonymous coward

    Your comments about stamp duty being a fair tax are, in my opinion, nonsense.

    I didn't ask for bog standard 3 - 4 bed properties in my area to cost half a million pounds. Yet, if I move, I have to pay 20k in stamp duty.

    I think you'll find that most people BORROW the money to pay the stamp duty in that, somewhere in the mix, it effectively goes on the mortgage. Great isn't it. Nation swimming in debt - consumer and government debt is causing problems allegedly worse than the 1930s and still the government keeps a tax that most people borrow money to pay.

    It's not just that it isn't a fair tax - it's sheer lunacy to impose it.

    Hey! Let's bring the housing market to a halt for a laugh. How will we do that? Simple - force people to borrow 20 grand to pay a tax when they buy a house. No-one will be stupid enough to do that.

    But, of course, Gordon Brown knew that people were that stupid.

    • 10 October 2011 11:45 AM
  • icon

    The cost of moving is NOT the price of buying.

    Or did I read it wrong.

    This isn't an article about house prices, but about the cost of selling and buying.

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with stamp duty.

    It affects people who have the money to pay it.

    Complaining about stamp duty is like owning a Rolls Royce and complaining about petrol prices.

    The average price in the UK is £160 odd thousand if memory serves, which (if you are a first time buyer) costs you nothing in stamp duty.

    In fact up to £250k works on that and it is only 1% for non-FTBs.

    It is a very fair tax, the less you have, the less you pay.

    Those who can afford to pay more, do.

    If you are LUCKY enough to be able to afford a mortgage to buy a house for £499k then you pay less than the price of a modest family car.

    BIG DEAL. £15k is a lot of money, but not THAT much.

    Removing stamp duty will not in any way affect the housing market, because it is not the root cause of our problems.

    It would be like using a sticking plaster on an axe wound.

    And tax revenue from property sales would nosedive to zero, rather than being half of normal.

    Would you like a rise in VAT to cover that, or in your basic rate of income tax?

    That affects everyone immediately, not house buyers that feel squeezed but can afford it if they want to.

    • 10 October 2011 11:13 AM
  • icon

    Yay! Market stall has hit London! It is just bollocks to say that selling costs are prohibitive and are the reason that fewer places are coming on the market.
    In order to sell vendors have to have somewhere to go, If the market above them is stretched beyond their own exaggerated sale price they won't be moving up in property value.
    If their property is a stretch too far beyond the folk below them there becomes no-where for them to move to, The folk below aren't moving and so the market stalls.
    All the elements are now in place for a perfect storm in property values.
    Big fat mortgages taken out on the back of artificially low interest rates coming to the end of their 2, 3 or 5 year fixed terms. A second round of quantitative easing hitting directly the only folk with any real equity and now "Market stall" hitting London. The only long term intelligent solution is for the bank of England to raise interest rates 2 or 3%. Armageddon is here for the London Market, get out while you can.! (that should boost instructions)

    • 10 October 2011 10:27 AM
  • icon

    And, just to labour the point - slashing stamp duty - or removing it altogether - would probably lead to an increase in tax revenue. Housing transactions would increase and the tax from VAT on the agents' bills and the house movers' and the solicitors' - plus the extra tax from all the new carpets bought, builders employed etc. etc. - would more than offset the loss in tax from stamp duty.

    Someone needs to have a chat with Grant Schapps

    • 10 October 2011 10:17 AM
  • icon

    I'm, as always, puzzled. Why isn't every estate agent, surveyorr, solicitor, and related associations - NAEA, Law Society, RICS etc. - screaming from the rooftops that stamp duty needs to be abolished (or at least changed to 0.5% only on sales above 250k). In the mess we are in a functioning housing market may, literally, help to save the economy?

    Our political leaders are like rabbits caught in the headlights. Someone needs to wake them from their trance.

    How about an e-petition on the Downing Street web site orchestrated by this site. Surely you could get 100,000 property professionals to sign it.

    • 10 October 2011 10:04 AM
  • icon

    Talking up the market? WHAT MARKET? Read the article.THERE IS NO MARKET. This is an EX MARKET.

    • 10 October 2011 09:52 AM
  • icon

    Theres not much opportunity for "talking up" the market at the moment. Have to grab every opportunity however spurious. I smell desperation.

    • 10 October 2011 09:49 AM
  • icon

    Not really Ray. As the article says, the demand is not there because far fewer people are opting to move house. That's fewer sellers AND fewer buyers. A net effect on prices of about nothing.

    10 out of 10 for your ramping attempt though.

    • 10 October 2011 09:15 AM
  • icon

    Mmmh.......

    A shortage of a product that is in demand, for any reason, means the price eventually goes up?

    • 10 October 2011 08:58 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal