The Auckland market led house prices down in December

compare to when?

Works both ways. You'd have been more correct to say ...

"Fools reject intelligent/balanced discussion and resort to cliche, innuendo and slurs in demonstrating their support for the twin pillars of arrogance and ignorance."

But even people who aren't fools lower their standards from time to time. ;-)

Stop slurring.. not an intellectual act..and bordering stupidity and arrogance 

As opposed to the vested interests/ticket clippers quoting endless "Im so great statements. Here's one of yours from yesterday  "Neither will the DGM get their much yearned for crash in house prices 💥 and ensuing economic havoc. 🤯". People disagree with you, as you do.

Summary, if you are happy to dish out the stuff you did yesterday, suck it up today.

Is ~1 month still the norm?

I ask because longer settlement periods aren't unusual when the people in a chain are struggling to sell, when developers are involved, etc.

Yeah the REINZ HPI was always touted as the "Gold Standard" of house price statistics on the way up.  

The REINZ data is a true index and adjusts for differences in the mix of properties sold of properties sold each month.

Both REINZ and Corelogic effectively revalue all properties in their analysis - as both take the sales data and compare with effectively rateable values.

 The Corelogic is based on three month rolling prices where as REEINZ is latest month. And as you say, REINZ often uses contract dates rather than settlement dates so is far more up to date.

REINZ is more volatile - but I think the market can bounce around a lot too.  It is excluding the seasonal factors as well.  For instance, end of the year always seems to have lower median values as I think a lot of young families (and therefore cheaper homes) buy and sell around year end so they are moving over christmas so as not disrupt kids' school year.

Nothing to steal keeps the others away?

?

😂

I have asked you a couple of times why YOU seem to be obsessed with it, that’s all

Never got an explanation 

Yeah, I don't see house prices going to the moon anytime soon, but nor are they going to fall off a cliff anytime soon.

Interest rates need to go down for prices to go up in any meaningful way. And even then it could be due to recession in which case prices still wont go up. 

No tears here, we're doing just fine, most of the mortgage is fixed for another 2.5years and we aren't struggling.

Their estimate of my property has gone up 300k in the last four months. If Homes was reliable I would be a rich rich man.

He’s crazy. I’d keep it high and let people think they got a bargain when they paid top dollar. 

And with so many different data sets, you can just report on the ones that went up that month and not on the ones that didn’t. 

The REINZ is the only data worth looking at. 

Win win win for the bank. They get more interest, don’t have to be the baddies forcing a mortgagee sale, and assuming they have lots of equity, they will still get their money back one day. 

"In the last few months I have become aware of two different situations where couples who are going through acrimonious separations have not made any mortgage repayments in over two years and the bank has simply ignored it. There has not even been any formal hardship application, repayment holiday, interest only period... They just have been unable/unwilling to pay and the banks have just looked the other way."



Interesting.  Can you tell us the LVR on the mortgages for each of the couples involved? 



The LVR may be sufficiently low and given the circumstances, the lenders are willing to add the unpaid interest to the mortgage - so their mortgage loan is increasing until

1) the mortgage breaches an upper limit of the LVR - e.g 80 - 90% OR

2) financial arrangements for the separation are finalised.

This kind of stuff is insane to me. If we have this level of soft fraud with mortgages we will never see the collapse coming. Can lower level mortgage managers hide this from their superiors (to meet targets) or something? There is no way this is small scale otherwise they would deal with this properly. (Could they be protecting the moral of the FHB and they get away with because they are of particular demographic???)

This kind of stuff is important, if true, not just an interesting story. If banks have been doing this for 2 years then what are they doing now? The property markets even more of a ponzi that we know. are our banks solvent if when they will have to eventually forced deal with this?(they may not control this moment)

"In the last few months I have become aware of two different situations where couples who are going through acrimonious separations have not made any mortgage repayments in over two years and the bank has simply ignored it. There has not even been any formal hardship application, repayment holiday, interest only period... They just have been unable/unwilling to pay and the banks have just looked the other way."



Which banks or non bank lenders are their mortgages with?



 

I looked at that reason. It was pure speculation from the usual sources.

While there was a very small number of chinese squirreling monies out of china, the numbers & values were so small there was no way they could have been driving prices prior to 2016. Prior to 2016 - in my view - it was a steady clime due to low'ish interest rates which fell in fits and starts since the GFC. Post 2016, supply increased and the flatline started. (On a side note - I see no reason, once inflation is under control, why those pre-covid level of interest rates wouldn't return, i.e. US prime mortgage rates with a smallish risk premium.)

I think it helped limit house price inflation but I also think it is overstated. My opinion is that the unaffordability created by the house price boom from 2014-2016 was probably more influential. Prices, by 2016, had got too high and there wasn’t interest rate relief until 2020 to re-stimulate the market.

Sorry. I can't read that. And won't pay for economic opinion hidden behind a paywall from economist I've seldom heard of.

But I will say, prices are affected by future constraints, or the perception thereof.

And post 2016 - those constraints are dead, buried, and hopefully, never to return!

From 2016, for most people, the perception is that 'bargains' will pop up more frequently. And they have.

The vast majority of buyers are looking for the basics. i.e. good locations with short commutes, good schools, public transport, close to entertainment and health services, walking distance, etc. The UAP of 2016 is enabling much, much more of these types of dwellings. And there is still much more available. Much, much more!

Only the very, very rich will be able to afford the same amenities with a 700-1000 sqm section and a single house. The younger (and smarter) will pull their horns in, pay way less, but get the same amenities but at a fraction of the cost ... and be debt free way, way earlier.

Yes, they are correct, and this is something I have pointed out myself numerous times over the years, especially supply as in enough to make housing more affordable.

It's simple maths, and the 'first principle' principle understanding of land use policies and the greater market.

The RUB is a restriction, the MUL a further restriction, and the Unitary plan an even further restriction. Yes that land may have been available quicker but it did three things. 1) it made that land fewer in number compared to casting the net wider, and 2) put the owners in a more advantageous monopoly position, 3) plus at the same time, like the 'Eye of Saron,' all developers' gaze was diverted onto that land as the only land council would consider allowing to be developed so created further demand relative to supply, even though the supply had increased..

The net result was it exasperated the supply and demand difference between landowners and developers, irrespective of any imbalance that might have existed already between developers and purchasers.

Thus the price of future development land was going up irrespective of what was playing out in the immediate market with existing and stuff already in the system.

My builder charged me $110 + gst p/h for a recent job, approx $250k per annum. That's $1m alone in labour for 2 builders working for 2 years - before council fee's, architects, sub-contractors, building materials etc etc. How do you build anything but a kitset for under $3m?

The quality of our housing stock will continue to deteriorate. 

Hi 1689, I think we're talking about different types of developments.

My view is looking specifically THAB and MHU zones (i.e. brown field). I.e. bowling (or transplanting) the existing house (or houses) and rebuilding to apartments and terraced houses. (My hobby area.)

Whereas you seem to be talking about taking bare land (i.e. green field), subdividing and either selling empty sections and/or building stand alone houses (or MacMansions). And I'd agree. Councils and central government policy is not in favour of further 'spread'. Hence quiet times for you folk.

Would I be right?

Re cost of building - please note I usually include 'in real terms' qualifier. And, as you'll know, building in existing areas does cost more due to the points you've highlighted. But not as much as you'd think once the costs are spread over multiple dwellings.

You make Oct21 three and a quarter years ago?

Including inflation? Today they would need to go up to $1,033,000 to match the $925,000 peak according to the RBNZ inflation calculator. 

HPI up in 6 of the last 7 months.

Auckland still ahead 4.2% from the low point.

Small reality check. Elections unsettle people, then they get on with it.

Or you could argue that +0.5% in the last 12 months is a more accurate annualised figure. 

re ... "The RBNZ will have to follow overseas reserve banks leads."

They didn't when they started raising.

The RBNZ was - if memory serves - the second central bank in the world to start tightening. Other central banks were months behind. Many were saying they'd look through inflation as it was supply constraint driven not demand driven. (Golly - perhaps they were right! Why Yes! They were. What they didn't figure on was greedflation and just how bad it would be. Central government could have stopped this by making it widely known that they'd use windfall taxes liberally and without consideration should suppliers gouge the market to line their pockets.)

It ain't brain surgery.....check out some the developments around Auck. 

The smart people people will be buying a property with potential and needing a makeover, not a box with no car parking and streets reduced to one-way because of all the cars parked outside.