Commentators

Showers (AM and PM) 5° London Hi 10°C / Lo 5°C

Hamish McRae: It's back to the world of proper saving and borrowing for homes – and the better for it

Wednesday, 9 April 2008

We all knew it was going to happen but yesterday it did: an evident sudden lurch downwards in house prices. The fall of 2.5 per cent in March as recorded by the Halifax follows several months of softness in the housing market but it always takes a while for prices to respond to market forces. Not everyone has to sell and people don't like dropping their price. But eventually prices reflect supply and demand. Suddenly, there is the spectre of negative equity, that beast of the early Nineties, again stalking the land.

This fall is different in character to the falls of that era. Then, as now, it followed an extraordinary boom, with double digit rises for several years, but there the similarities stop. Some things were worse then. Then the UK was in recession, whereas now it isn't, at least not yet. Then there were sustained high interest rates associated with the need to keep sterling within the bands of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. Now rates are low and falling – there will probably be another cut this week and further reductions later in the year.

Then unemployment was soaring, whereas now it is low, with employment at record levels. However, some things are worse now. There is a higher level of indebtedness, higher house prices relative to incomes and more of a squeeze on mortgage availability. And there are many more buy-to-let properties and some of those landlords may find themselves stretched.

Still, there are enough similarities and enough of a folk-memory of the early Nineties for the news to send a shiver through the country. Sky-high house prices have been a social disaster, pricing young people out of the market, transferring wealth to the "haves", making it impossible for lower-paid workers to live near their work and so on. But a housing crash would be a disaster too. We can see the economic, financial, social and human misery that this can cause by looking across to the United States right now.

So are we going to have a price crash, and depending on what does happen there, what are the implications for the economy as a whole?

It would be mad to try and give any definitive answer to either question. Think of all those pundits who said three years ago that prices would fall 40 per cent. Think of the mighty Halifax, who until today was predicting that house prices would not fall this year. We all get house prices wrong. But I do think there are some things that can sensibly be said about both prices and the economy as a whole. There are some things we know with reasonable certainty and we just have to be honest about what we cannot know.

We know, as a starting point, that UK house prices are very high relative to incomes by historical standards; higher in fact than at the peak of the Eighties property boom. Nationally, you would expect them to be perhaps three or four times average earnings, not over five times as they are now.

We know too that mortgage terms became unduly lax during the final years of the past boom. It cannot be sensible to lend more than 100 per cent of the value of a property. We know now that such lending practices have come to an end, with the standard loan now being for 95 per cent maximum. That would have been the normal terms for most of the post-war period and indeed before. The whole idea of a building society was that people saved in the society for their deposit and those savings financed the loans of other people who were buying. Then when your deposit was big enough, you got your mortgage. And you borrowed to buy your house; you did not borrow against the value of the house to pay for your holiday.

So the present tightening of mortgage terms is really just going back to what was normal good practice in the past. Never say never, but I expect that for a decade at least, the flow of lending will be much more disciplined than it has been for the past few years.

Put these two points together and it does seem likely that prices will adjust downwards over the next few years, falling in real terms and maybe – this is much less certain – also falling in money terms. Anyone can do the sums. If inflation averages 3 per cent a year, stable nominal house prices would mean a fall of around 15 per cent over five years, more like 30 per cent over 10. If there is a fall of, say, 5 per cent in money terms this year and next then stability thereafter, there would be a real fall of 25 per cent over five years.

You see the issue. What matters will be what happens to real house prices, prices relative to other prices and in particular prices relative to incomes. The issue is whether the necessary, and I think inevitable, downward adjustment takes place suddenly and savagely or whether we have several years of flat or flat-tish prices so that inflation and rising incomes gradually whittle down the present disparities.

If we have a crash, which I would define as a fall of more than 20 per cent over the next two years, then there is a huge problem. There would be an obvious difficulty for people with negative equity and for people who could not service their debt. There would be an even more substantial problem for the economy as a whole because that sort of hit would cut consumption and in all probability push us into recession. That is what is happening in the US.

On the other hand, if the adjustment is gradual there is no reason why we should not work our way out of the problem. That is what many families had to do in the Nineties. I have been looking at some data and house prices went negative at the end of 1989, staying more or less flat or down a little right through until the early months of 1996. So there was a period of more than six years of price stagnation.

I find it very hard to think that anything worse than that will occur this time, largely because we do now have flexibility in monetary policy. We can drop our interest rates. We can also drop sterling and in the past few months the pound has fallen by as much as it did after Black Wednesday. That all helps.

So the odds are that there will be a drawn-out adjustment over several years rather than a sudden crash. Let's hope that proves right because, for the economy as a whole, the steady state is much better than the big bang. The prospects for the economy are determined by forces other than house prices but house prices are hugely important. The problem is that we are in the early stages of some sort of global slowdown but we cannot know how long and how deep that will be.

My own view remains that this year will not be the real problem because there is still plenty of momentum behind our economy; it will be next year that is likely to be more troublesome. Both those Halifax numbers are chilling. If prices were to carry on falling at that rate, things would get very tough indeed.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Comments

25 Comments

People don't pay high prices because they want to. They pay them because they have to when there are a lot of people after a few houses. For many years the vested interests have not let us build enough houses to meet the demand, so high prices are the inevitable result. Its the greatest robbing of the poor to give to the rich in modern times.
Don't let them tell you there isn't enough room. You only have to look around to see that isn't true. Look at the cost of agricultural land in the South East. Add on building costs and you could build an estate of good 3 bedroom detached houses for around £80,000 each - if you could get planning permission for them. But you won't because they will say its Green Belt - Wild Bird Habitat, or some other excuse.

Posted by Peter | 10.04.08, 20:11 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Supply and Demand is NOT the major factor in house prices, it is the availabilty of credit.Credit is contracting everyday, house prices will fall over the next 2-3 years.
And it will be a welcome sight for millions that have been priced out by the obscene and repugnant rise in prices over the last 10 years.

Posted by R Moseley | 10.04.08, 19:23 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Japan had lower unemployment than us in the early 1990s. Its rates rose by less and the effective mortgage rate was around the same as many here will have now. It also has a higher population density and had more people added to the population. The US has lower unemployment and has cut rates sharply. YET both did or are suffering from massive price falls. Based on your analysis that should not be happening there.

Prices rose sharply as there was excess credit. They fell/ are falling as this reversed. The same is happening here. The credit pyramid scheme is crashing. High income multiples and low equity mean SVRs i.e. 7%. Even the lucky getting 5.8% are paying on 3 times more debt than they had in 1990 (PLUS there is more unsecured debt). There is no MIRAS relief this time. Prices are falling and repossessions rising even before the recession.

Last time unemployment followed the crash. A fall is good for everyone but BTL and lenders. Who cares.

Posted by Raj | 10.04.08, 00:00 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The Federal Reserve is trying to save its owners - The Banks.

Posted by scousekraut | 09.04.08, 23:34 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Supply and demand is what determines house prices. You mention things that affect the demand. But you forgot the things that determine the supply, especially the amount of new builds, still greatly restricted by planning constraints.
If the vested interests who run this country wanted to make housing more affordable, they would simply let us build more houses - there is still plenty of room!

Posted by Peter | 09.04.08, 22:29 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

My husband and I are currently in the process of buying a house which would basically result in us doubling our mortgage. For some time I have been getting increasingly nervous about going ahead with the purchase for obvious reasons. The comments in response to this article have reassured me in a way - by making me more certain that to continue would be stupid at this point in time. The way I now see it we have nothing to gain but potentially a hell of a lot to lose by going ahead. If we stay put we could still see a decline in our property's value but a 20% drop on £250k is a much smaller number than a 20% drop on over £400k. Plus we would still be left with £50k equity if we stay here, if we move and the drop materialises we would be left with no equity at all. Added to this we are about to start shelling out for our baby's nursery fees of over £600 per month! I think the contributors here have helped me to make my decision - thanks for the words of wisdom!

Posted by Louise | 09.04.08, 20:18 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Let's simply check the data. They tell us the Halifax index dropped by 15% in nominal (money) terms between 1989 and 1996. In real (inflation-corrected) terms that is obviously a much steeper fall, given the higher inflation at the time.

To call that 'broadly stable' in my mind is an overly liberal interpretation of the data. I am therefore inclined to read the rest of this article as wishful thinking.

Posted by Michael | 09.04.08, 14:46 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

'The Federal Reserve Bank is not even a bank and certainly is not Federal despite the name. You won't find it listed in the yellow pages as a bank. This private banking concern however is allowed to print the money (notes that is), arrange the interest rates and yes bail out BANKS. It is the antics of this entity that has caused all the financial problems of the world. It is now left to National Banks in all countries to do the same, that is try and stem the blood letting. It really does not give a hoot about Joe customers mortgage, but it does care about the Banks (it's own) welfare. The irony is that Joe customers taxes are being used to assist this scam. His money and now his assets are being screwed and he has no where to go. And the winner is... The Banks! Rate cuts? So what . If your future financial and job prospects are on a line, it matters not! It's called survival. Conserve do not spend it's gonna take a long time.

Posted by Alan | 09.04.08, 14:02 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Hamish, did you get the rose tinted spectacles from Specsavers?

I think that Ian | 09.04.08, 10:44 GMT has got it right.


Posted by Morvan | 09.04.08, 13:53 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

'staying more or less flat or down a little right through until the early months of 1996.'

I must of been on another planet then, I am a property investor, have been for 25 years. Typical was a 1 bed flat bought in South Croydon London in 1990 for 65k, by 1993 valued at 35k. 2 x 7 bed detached Properties in Auction in St Georges hill & Wentworth Surrey failing to sell for 270k each. The list is endless.

Property will or now can I say is crashing, wake up and smell the coffee. Commercial property down 20% from its high and guestimated to fall a further 10% this year.

I would not think of buying for at least two years if then. Anyone buying now is a fool, it will end in tears, but at these highly inflated prices, what did people expect. Nothing goes up for ever, it had to crash, batten down the storm hatches.

Posted by T Miller | 09.04.08, 13:26 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

25 Comments

Columnist Comments

steve_richards

Steve Richards: Damian Green will soon be forgotten

Cameron’s speech, though good, was upstaged by Brown’s mortgage coup.

matthew_norman

Matthew Norman: A written constitution is the answer

Jacqui Smith is Brown’s lightning rod when it’s the PM we should be frazzling

john_rentoul

John Rentoul: Thanks Queen, but it's about the Budget

The Queen's Speech never has a theme, New Labour has never fabricated one.