£1 trillion wiped off the value of UK homes
Let’s not get too worked up about the £40 billion loss by RBS – those foolish bankers that went into a bidding war to buy ABN Amro at peak.
If the Nationwide figures are any reflection of the true value of houses in the UK then we have just witness about £1 trillion wiped off the value of the nation’s housing stock in the same time it has taken for the full lunacy of the ABN Amro deal to be realised.
We certainly hope the full lunacy has been realised.
The latest house price figures from Nationwide step smartly on a large bunch of those few delicate green shoots spotted in the economic garden.
A further drop in February of 1.8% means that house are on average worth more than 20% less than they were at peak in October 2007, just when the champagne corks were popping in the flash new RBS headquarters in Gogarburn.
(I was amused to see the press release welcoming the opening of those new offices with the health warning “This item was published during the term of a previous administration that ended in April 2007” at the head of the page. I wonder would it be the same if the bank was still flying high? Still I digress.)
So the average house on the Nationwide measure is worth about £147,746 against the £186,044 in October 2007. That’s a drop of £38,300. Which if projected across the 26.5 million or so homes in the land that comes to more than £1 trillion.
OK you might quibble and want to take off a bit for the poor state of some of the 2.6 million local authority housing stock. But we could also quibble about the actual price Nationwide puts on the average house – lower for instance than the Halifax average.
So the trillion pound figure – give or take a couple of RBS losses – is probably about right, given that the national statistics put the total value of housing stock outside the public sector at £4,077 billion.
I am not sure if that makes you feel any better about the RBS £40 billion financial fiasco or not. Probably not.
But we live in rather surreal times and the picture has been getting a lot more wobbly as we have breakfasted on the latest batch of news.
14 thoughts on “£1 trillion wiped off the value of UK homes”
How can 1 trillion be wiped off UK homes.
1 trillion can only be reduced if everyone wanted to sell their home at the same time and wanted to release any vaue in their homes. How can that ever be possible.
People need to wake up to stupid comments like this headline and think about their homes as homes and not monolopy money assests.
get real and wake up!!!!
they are not saying we have lost £1 trillion they are saying that the overall value of the homes in britain has decreased by £1 trillion, so IF everyone decided to sell their house £1 trillion less would be recieved, that is viable information, just not for homeowners, it is however, useful for estate agents who’s potential market has decreased by £1 trillion duh! maybe not everyone is in a position where they can just think of their ‘homes as homes’ as they rely on its value to increase to support themselves in the future!!!
Is there any value in valuing housing?
I thought it might be worth responding to the comment from Gerry. I don’t get many comments and he raises a good point. My first reaction is to say that I couldn’t agree more that people should see homes as…
So Conor, my children & grand children should be saddled with ever increasing amounts of DEBT just to keep a few spivs in business ? This WHOLE economic crisis has been caused by speculators and vested-interest rampers driving up asset prices to spectacularly unprecedented bubble levels. The estate agents / mortgage brokers / property show presenters / wannabe BTL tycoons, and everyone else on this sorry bandwagon deserve all that is coming, as THEY have been the “street pushers” selling the Banks drug of debt to the UK, whilst the Government sat idly by. House prices would NEVER rise forever. It was unsustainable. What you are describing is a Ponzi scheme. A pyramid selling scam that relies on an ever increasing supply of naive, desperate first time buyers to keep the bubble inflated just to
Well said Tom. Unfortunately, the nation was supposed to start viewing ‘houses as homes’ rather than cash machines in 1992 – but then look what happened.
The great thing about history is that we never learn from it.
Both of your points are relevant, but nothing to do with what I said. All I said was that the article was relevant to business’s today, which gerry claimed was pointless information, however as you have proved, it is very relevant information to the ‘estate agents / mortgage brokers / property show presenters / wannabe BTL tycoons’ who increased their business values by billions (albeit ignorantly), and subsequently lossed billions. If i was them, I would want to know the amount of money which has been wiped off the business accounts, due to their stupid investing and price ballooning, i wasn’t defending what they have done, and you like every other person has just jumped on the blame bandwagon rather than doing something about it!!!. Property prices go up, FACT! it got out of control I agree, but that is economics, basic ecomonics – demand goes up, price goes up, then it falls again, boom and bust, deal with it! Otherwise, go to university, become a banker or a property tycoon and do something about it, rather than sitting there and complaining.P.S although the banks shouldn’t have lent the money in the first place (sub prime’s), i cant stand ignorant idiots who sit there and say you shouldn’t have loaned it to me, they are as much to blame for defaulting all the money they owe. live the life you can afford!
All I said was that the article was relevant to business’s today Not true. What about this bit “maybe not everyone is in a position where they can just think of their ‘homes as homes’ as they rely on its value to increase to support themselves in the future!!!”?
“and you like every other person has just jumped on the blame bandwagon” – glad to hear my views are held in such wide regard.
rather than doing something about it!!! Last time I checked I wasn’t Gordon Brown or Mervyn King
Property prices go up, FACT! True, (except when they are going down – and don’t forget that little tinker inflation that can really misrepresent those long term figures)
demand goes up, price goes up Property prices going up were NOTHING to do with demand (or supply). It was cheap credit. Pure and simple. The demand hasn’t changed in the last 12 months. The availability of money has.
Otherwise, go to university Already been
rather than sitting there and complaining I like complaining
nice to see your mature side tom, i actually thought we could have a good old debate about the situation.
But again your argument is pointless,
‘All I said was that the article was relevant to business’s today Not true. What about this bit “maybe not everyone is in a position where they can just think of their ‘homes as homes’ as they rely on its value to increase to support themselves in the future!!!”?’
I note you don’t dispute this fact, because it is true.
“and you like every other person has just jumped on the blame bandwagon” – glad to hear my views are held in such wide regard.
Your correct, for a change. they are held in wide regard. By the 70% of the population on minimum wage or the doll. They have no knowledge of the situation, nor do they bother to learn about the situation, all they do as i said previously is sit and complain.
rather than doing something about it!!! Last time I checked I wasn’t Gordon Brown or Mervyn King
I didn’t say solve the situation completely, i said do something about it. that can done on any level in society, the difference being the contribution gets smaller the lower down into society you go, for example even the lowest of the low can at least attempt to get a job (which although many try to and fail, many also don’t even bother). Gordon Brown and mervyn king are at the top i agree, but if your trying to claim they are the only people who can make a difference, your wrong. In the words of Tesco, ‘every little helps’.
Property prices go up, FACT! True, (except when they are going down – and don’t forget that little tinker inflation that can really misrepresent those long term figures)
you haven’t even read the end of the sentence . . . come on!! and inflation, unless your in zimbabwe, wont overrule the increased value on your house as you so call it ‘in the long term’, except in the once in every 20 year slump that we are currently experiencing, and for those poor people with negative equity who can’t cover the mortgage, then fair enough, i feel for them, but everyone else just has to wait it out.
and your last point, which im not even quoting . . . hahaha. Of course it goes up because of demand, look at Sandbanks in Dorset, highest real estate in the world at one point. BECAUSE OF DEMAND, look at London, high demand high prices. Cheap credit just made it easier for people to get into the market. as you said, the availability of money increased. Thus Increasing demand!!! All that did was allow people who couldn’t before, get into the market. And we’ve been in the credit crunch for the more than 12 months, whats that could to do with anything, prices have been decreasing since December 07.
I like a good debate, and although you raise some admirable points, some of them are weak, uninformed, and boring. You should read more of the articles on this website, rather than criticizing them.
ps, You obviously wasted £3000 at uni, unless of course you were studying to become a politician in which case, you have nearly mastered the art of spin . . . well done!
Conor, unfortunately most of that is just a meaningless rant to try and deflect from the absurdity of your original post, especially this bit:
“maybe not everyone is in a position where they can just think of their ‘homes as homes’ as they rely on its value to increase to support themselves in the future!!!”?
It would certainly help if I could tell where some of the sentences start and finish. I find cApItAl letters do the trick nicely. (I learnt that at University). Strange that you also make the spurious claim that I have criticised “articles on this website”…
Dear Tom and Conor
I am delighted to see a passionate debate on the blog. I wish there were more, so please continue.
The issues around the “value” and “valuation” of homes and the views on “investment” versus “home” are ones that I have learned to recognise do create quite a heated argument.
And I for one like a heated debate.
But I sense that the arguments above are drifting towards the personal and I certainly wouldn’t want to be obliged to red card any comments for showing too much of the studs in a tackle.
Now here’s a poser. When do you think the Halifax non seasonally adjusted index will get back to the peak of 2007 and would that make us as a nation £1 trillion richer again?
I am genuinely interested in the mood on this one.
If you could post your views without a sneak peak at the futures market. I’d be interested to see how your views compare with those of the punters in the market.
All the very best
Brian
Brian, quite frankly I hope we never see a quick return to the peak 2007 prices. We mistakenly talk of
Dear Brian,
I am happy to see that the author of Briconomics agrees that at one point the nation was £1 trillion pounds richer, and that it wasn’t ‘imaginary fantasy money’, as it has been so called.
I cannot predict the rise to 2007 levels as it will depend on so many factors throughout the world, not just government actions. However I do believe it will reach them again, and probably exceed them also, however much time it takes. And then once again, as has just happened, property will be a key source of value added to any economy.
Mr Howard, do you not feel you ignore the amount of money inputted into the system in mortgages payments, and therefore re-balancing the ever ‘poisoning chalice’. My father has paid his mortgage in full. In 18 years, I will have paid my mortgage in full. The only poisoning is people who can’t afford what they buy.
Further, you label the whole economy with one badge. An example is your continuing referral to my initial comment. Yet I rightly stated; ‘some people’ don’t view their home as home. Equally ‘some people don’t’. I view mine as an investment, a poor one, but still an investment. You force your point, rather than arguing it, with no basis of evidence. For this you would receive zero on any work you did at University.
Brian never said a ‘quick’ return to 2007 prices, he stated how long would it take?. You generalise on what the Government will and won’t do? Who are you to make these claims? Without any evidence or basis for them? If the Government put the same consideration and evidence into their economic proposal, then surely we are doomed.
If the markets were allowed to correct themselves naturally, we would be back to 1920’s recession, what good would that do apart from set us further back than we were was then.
Innovation, new markets, and ingenuity will take us out of this recession. Not generalisations, pessimism and idiocy.
And I would further like to point out, I learnt to use capital letters at primary school, not university. The difference was my passion in the argument which overuled my thought as to whether Dr. Howard would give me full marks punctuation and spelling.
Guys,
Do you really think that the Government, the Hub of the British Economy have just sat back over this period without knowing the consequences of what is goin on?
Bad Economy = More Sustainability = less use of oil
During these times people will stay in their homes longer (currenlty 7 years average) and yes view thier homes more as homes as moving will not create any financial benefit.
This will allow a new eco-refurbishment market to flourish so that in the near future, the percieved value of a home is more attributable to how ‘green’ it is(eventually).
More evidence of this is Gordon Browns proposals of 25 year fixed morguatages to create longevity.
27% of UK carbon emmissions are generated from the existing housing stock
in about 5 years it is expected that we will be buying our oil from politically unstable coutries like Russia and within Africa which poses a major risk as international relations has been damages with our allegiance with america.
So while you two are bickering on hear about the loss of ‘value’ which actually is irrellavent as the bigger picture suggests that the housing market is currently anti growth and anti-investor. Therefore when the economy does again pick up, high carbon industries like housing and automobile may be left behind somewhat.
I dont think that the governments around the world simultaneously planned the credit crunch , or sat back and let several banks creep to the verge of collapse, and subsequently have to invest billions to keep the banks affloat. Just so that this would cause people not to sell there homes and thus use less oil, to then in turn ignite the eco rufurbishment market. (Thats a long shot)
Surely they could have just invested the billions they invested into the banks, into making homes more eco friendly, and not risk the world economy, thus subsequently massively reducing the problem of 27% carbom emissions produced by the existing housing stock.
Are you sure you didn’t think you were writing on conspiracytheory.com. The automobile and housing industries are both working to becoming zero carbon/ low emission industries, and if they perfect the technology to do so, they will remain high value industries. But if the technology isn’t invented, you are suggesting that the car and housing industry will just die away, which won’t happen either. They will just find, non carbon methods of producing the products, such as zero carbon (producing) homes (already available) or hydrogen powered vehicles (already available. Or improve public transport so it is so effective, that cars will no longer be neccesary.
as for the ‘equation’ im not so sure its that simple.
ps this blog has gone so far off point, its hiliarous.
Comments are closed.