It’s a story we’ve seen time and again here in Phoenix- small investors decided to purchase homes at the top of the market, the market cooled, and now the investors can’t sell or rent out their property.
We knew Phoenix wasn’t alone in it’s misery- you can hear the same story in Las Vegas, Miami, and other cities across the nation. The story is not a uniquely American one however. How familiar does this story sound from across the pond in Manchester, England? [Hat tip to our Liverpool reader for the link!]
Like so many young professionals hoping to cash in on Britain’s property boom, Paula Collins, a 26-year-old recruitment consultant from London, thought her money would be safe.
The buy-to-let market was booming and the deal from a Manchester developer seemed too good to pass on.
The two-bedroom flat in the Castlefield area was valued at £175,950, but the developer was offering a 15 per cent discount, taking the price down to £149,500 – and best of all, no downpayment was required.
He would pay the 15 per cent deposit. Paula simply needed to cover her legal costs and stamp duty. If it sounded too good to be true, it was.
After 18 months, in which Manchester, like many northern cities, has seen a massive oversupply of new city centre apartments, Paula’s flat is now worth just £140,000.
Her mortgage costs her £900 a month, but she receives only £600 a month in rent. That’s when she could find a tenant. Now the flat is lying empty, so Paula has to stump up £900 a month just to cover costs.
So why is the fate of investors in the U.K. a concern to us in the U.S? Consider these comments from U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson on the U.S. market:
Mr Paulson said the housing downturn would "continue to adversely impact our economy, our capital markets, and many homeowners for some time yet." He added that the "ongoing housing correction is not ending as quickly as it might have appeared late last year".
Mr Paulson said he believed the US economy remained healthy and would continue to grow, but added that housing could still produce surprises.
"Despite strong fundamentals, the housing decline is still unfolding and I view it as the most significant current risk to our economy. The longer housing prices remain stagnant or fall, the greater the penalty to our future economic growth."
While our housing market is still in the relatively earlier stages of its correction, the U.K. housing market is by comparison an even more recent newcomer to the world of housing doldrums. Slowdowns in other markets such as the U.K. and New Zealand [which is also under a lot of downward pressure] not only will put additional strain on a global financial system still reeling from U.S. market problems, but the time lag will assure that the pressure on the market continues for sometime to come.
The credit crisis is global, and we are seeing the effects in markets around the globe. The problem won’t be gone after auctioning off a few condos in Miami or Las Vegas, or having a fire sale on a few stucco McMansions in California and Arizona. The market is going to have to stabilize in places like Manchester as well, before we can hope to see real improvements in the housing and lending industries.









I read somewhere that 70% of all UK wealth is in RE. If that is true they are screwed.
Why would anyone get into an investment to lose money every month?
When I lived in the Bay area a few years ago, the wisdom was to buy a house, rent it out and lose $1,000 a month. That was OK, because homes had been appreciating by $10,000 a month. So you were really making money by losing money. Now they are turning south by the rate of $5,000 a month, I would like to hear what those folks are saying now.
AZMiller – They are saying, wait, you’ll see, it’ll turn around next year and we’ll be right back to 20% a year appreciation – you should buy quick while prices are down a little bit!
However, it appears that along with those of us who have been paying attention for a while, Goldman Sachs now disagrees…
Jeez, now the CEO’s and the big shots are starting to whine. The impact seems to be that it’s not as easy to screw the little guy today as it has been the last few years. Or maybe the little guys are tapped out.
I just saw this story…and didn’t see it on the sidecar.
Some sellers ar becoming very *creative* in their desperation to sell right now:
“Bob and Ricki Husick came up with a more creative twist: Whoever buys their four-bedroom, 31/2-bath home on Fountain Hills Drive in Pine would get their money back after the Husicks die.”
And in other news, I have a bridge to sell anybody that is interested!
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07302/829344-30.stm
MikeC –
That is an interesting article!!
I’m not sure how that would fit on a HUD-1 form!?!?
I know I can’t be the only person on earth that has asked: “What could they possibly do for a living at 25 to afford that house?” My point to this is that in most cases (not all) “they” can’t afford the $700k note… or whatever it may be. We have reached a considerable threshold. Actually, we broke way beyond the home price threshold and now must come back to the real world. People simply do not afford enough to sustain current prices.
This is/will continue to be very painful until people let go of their pride, admit their mistakes and let the market correct accordingly like it will regardless.
If you are in a similar situation with a liability that was supposed to be an asset, hang on tight. If you are young and have the time you will break even someday….maybe.
However, if this was all supposed to be simple business to make quick cash, you have much more difficult decisions to make. Evidently, we are supposed to live in these so-called homes sometimes.
Don’t get me wrong, I have colleagues doing VERY well in this market (without screwing anyone). However, it’s their only business and they can stick a very long time in a downturn (they call it operating costs). Most of them are very uncertain of how this mess will turn out, but the common verbiage is always “supply and demand.” Demand will be low until more people can afford and qualify for a home. Perhaps I’m oversimplifying.
MikeC-
I thought I’d seen all the incentives out there- I gotta admit, this is a new one on me.
I’ve seen deals where they’ve included TVs, cash or cars, but this is the first deal I’ve seen that you can get a set of grandparents with the purchase.
I don’t think it’s that original. I think I saw a 60 minutes bit on the oldest person in the world who at the time was a French lady. Some middle aged doctor bought her apartment from her in some sort of reverse mortgage where the house would convey to him after her death. That was when she was a spry 80-something. Decades after the doctor’s demise, the old lady was still in the apartment enjoying her cigs and chocolate, and the doctor’s money.
TC-
I remember that- didn’t she end up being one of the oldest people in the world- well into her 100s as I recall?
The gentleman in the photo did look rather healthy, didn’t he? At 55, he could be around a long time.
Twist&tc:
In the article, the guy claims that he’ll let the buyer write his will, and then he and his wife will be happy to sign it.
What the…?!?!
I mean, what is to stop him from secretly writing up a new will the minute after he sign’s the buyer-written will? I believe that in the case of multiple wills, the last will that has been written and signed is the one that counts!
I guess this guy is getting a lot of attention – which I suppose is what any seller wants.
Asset Hunter:
>>I’m not sure how that would fit on a HUD-1 >>form!?!?
Very small print?
What does it matter what they’re willing to put in their will anyway? If they spend it all, which they certainly will, knowing any remaining will go for the benefit of a stranger, you get zip (and that’s putting aside the possibility of a new will!).
What’s stupefying is that a newspaper went to the trouble to print this “offer” as a story.