The property drought is tightening its grip on the housing market, the RICS reported this morning. Meanwhile Halifax this morning reported house prices up 8.5% on a year ago, but 0.2% down on the month, to stand at a “seasonally adjusted” £177,648 in April.
The Halifax and RICS both said that the gap between demand and supply is continuing to grow. The Halifax said that the number of new instructions went down for the third successive month, while the RICS said that supply of new property listings fell for the fourth consecutive month in April, and warned that the dearth is widespread.
At the same time, the average number of homes sold per RICS estate agent office – 23 in the last three months – hit the highest level since February 2008.
The RICS said that the combination of weak supply and high demand is pushing prices higher.
The RICS said that there was also a shortage of property in the rental sector, although tenancy demand had fallen away.
It said that the Help to Buy scheme had dented appetite to rent.
Simon Rubinsohn, chief economist, said the trend in new instructions was “disappointing”.
He said: “House prices in general look set to remain firmly on the upward trend.
“The critical issue for the market remains the lack of second-hand supply with our numbers suggesting that the picture is, if anything, getting worse.”
* LionHeart, the benevolent fund for RICS members and their families, has launched a two-minute video aimed at demonstrating to RICS members how LionHeart might be able to help them in times of trouble.
LionHeart provides a variety of support, from financial grants to work-related support and counselling, and can also make referrals to partner organisations such as employment specialists and legal advisers.
Karen Higgins, partnership and development manager of the charity, said: “We have found that very often RICS members do not think about contacting us when they are facing a problem, because they either think it’s too small a problem, or that we can’t help with bigger issues.”
The video portrays two characters, John, 54, and Matt, 33. John has just been made redundant, while Matt is going through a stressful divorce.
“No problem is too big or too small” is now available to watch on the homepage of the LionHeart website.
Comments (10)
OPEN MESSAGE TO MR PETER HENDRY.
Sir – on 'The Other' site, you mistakenly suggest that I posted a comment under an alias, aimed at yourself.
PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING:
1. I ONLY post under the 'pen-name' of PeeBee. UNLIKE yourself, I do not swap my multiple identities, or make up a new one when the credibility of the others is shot to pieces.
2. I NO LONGER post on that site. I do not agree with the way it is now operated – although I have to admit to still frequenting it to see what is being said. It IS (or at least, 'sells' itself as…) an Industry News information site therefore I try to gain industry related information from it – difficult though it is. IF, at some point in the future, I resume posting there, I will do so under the mane of 'PeeBee'. Why wouldn't I?
So, Sir, as I have said MANY times previously…
GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT before posting.
However, in your case, I appreciate the difficulty I have just put you under by suggesting that.
See you when you next have a bogpost to prostitute around, no doubt…
Well I have to say Mr Hendry despite me opening this discussion where you insisted it was opened you haven't really made any effort at all.
I can see you are here and posting on other subjects but for some reason on a subject that is very dear to your heart you have very little of any substance to say.
ampersat
Sorry but it looks like Mr Hendry/Realising Reality/PropertyWhassname has yet again deserted us.
I see that he has today returned his attentions to 'The Other One' – and that site lets him post links to his woeful bogsite (oops, typo – I mean BLOGsite… actually, on reflection, I want my original description to stand…) – so I doubt we will hear from him for a while.
Nothing changes there, then… 😉
Over 'there', he will enjoy the added comfort of not having me chewing his ankles any more. Who knows – that may keep him there permanently.
I hope not – his ankles are delicious!
Slam dunk! When I had cause to complain to Ros Renshaw about his nonsensical arbitrary trolling and self promotion I said I suspected he would run back to the other place.
ampersat – you've got it all wrong, matey.
It is ME who is the "troll", apparently – at least according to the man himself. As is ANYONE who cares to dispute his rantings.
That would be YOU as well, no doubt… 😉
I am happy to be considered a Troll, if I were rude and nasty in my posts I wouldn't be proud of that but I freely admit to posting stuff that requires a reaction.
Ros, Nick need a bit of help so the more active and engaging the stories and comment streams the better.
Peter, those buying at the top of the market do not inherit negative equity, they buy it and are allowed to buy it with help, advice and guidance from their, lender, surveyor and their conveyancer who are being paid to provide professional advice to their client. Negative equity is, as with any investment, one of the risks of investment. Anyone wishing to avoid negative equity has the opportunity to avoid it by renting. Same property no risk no opportunity for gain or loss. You can not blame Agents for pulling the wool over the eyes of lending, surveying and legal professionals all of whom have every opportunity of halting an over inflated purchase. If there is a failure of the duty of care to a client in my opinion I know who is more guilty.
If you can remember standard deviation curves from school there is a market price for every property, the standard distribution curve for any property means some can afford more than others, that is the nature of the market. An Agent is paid to assess the supply and demand for each property and convince the best purchaser to buy. The best purchaser is not necessarily the one who will pay most; at the top end of a market cycle it can be the purchaser who completes at an acceptable price before the market drops away leaving the new owner with hopefully short term negative equity. That isn't a flaw in Agency that is the job and the law of Agency to advise and act in the best interest of the client. Those that fail to sell are either greedy or getting bad advice.
I am afraid you lost me after that, I agree that choice of agent is important cheap, generally means cheap and inexperienced advice. If an investor wants to save money on fees knowing the risks of not achieving best price or a timely sale whether it is stocks and shares or property that is a choice the investor makes.
These flies you want to look at in depth are they all Estate Agents, some or a few?
Proper dialogue between the operators? who are they?
There are things wrong with the housing industry Peter but you haven't worked out actually what they are.
It is certainly never dull, but it is painful.
Painful for those buying-in at the peak of price increases only to find they have inherited negative equity for several years to come. Painful for those who ordinarily, would be able to buy either their first or their next house, but over exuberant pricing meant that others, able to flash more cash (unwisely as it will turn out for them), get to buy the house currently on offer at a price that will prove to have been 'toppy', to say the least. Then there are those who fail to sell, primarily because of their asking price.
It's just supply and demand, I see you keep writing but hey, hang on a minute, there are significant imperfections in our housing market and dare I say, the way houses are marketed by those intrepid individuals calling themselves 'estate agents'.
The fly in the ointment is; the imperfections in the marketplace and the damage these are doing to both asking prices, and throughput.
In an attempt to describe these 'flies', we need to look deeper and then focus with determination on the objects to be investigated. Having seen for myself, first hand, the vagaries of the disjointed housing market, over a time-span bridging the peaks and troughs themselves, these 'flies in the ointment' as I have just called them, and their characteristics, become seeable or knowable. Ways of reducing and even illuminating the effects of their presence are thus available now.
However, these issues can only be dealt with if there is proper dialogue between the various operators in the marketplace. Writing comments alone, won't achieve this.
I therefore call for those interested in improving the function of the housing market, as well as improving its business environment (that includes mortgage lenders of course), to come together and discuss the way forward.
The one alternative to this is, the status quo.
Its not rocket science is it? We are either crying out for instructions or sales so this is nothing new. Issues of simple supply and demand, as rightly stated by ampersat, are the issue and are compounded by lack of construction and the virtual impossibility to borrow. With talk of a "correction" on the horizon, which we are already starting to see, the inevitable rise in interest rates will then also have a part to play in this ever changing market place…its certainly never dull!
Sorry all, I am posting here as requested by Peter Hendry, he doesn't want to have the debate he started to other day but for some reason has requested I comment on this story.
Simple supply and demand, interest rate fears, over extended market, Investors creaming out starter homes.
Please could you now provide us all, RICS included a detailed explanation of why I am wrong. (hopefully without reference to your blog)