Most Expensive and Least Expensive Properties in Harpenden

It's been a little while since I wrote about this topic so I thought I'd review it to see if anything had changed since my last article which you can find here.

First I'll look at the list of the most expensive streets in Harpenden.

Most expensive 

Clearly the data is sparse for West Common Close but it shows that, with an average transaction value of £3.6m this is the number one most expensive place to buy property in Harpenden.

Park Avenue South tops Park Avenue North by just over £170,000 in capital value, on average. Swiftly following on their heels are Cross Lane and Oak Way. Interestingly these areas are split between the avenues in Central Harpenden and roads set to the south of Harpenden around East and West Common, which may come as little surprise to many but it's worth noting that a significant number of properties in the avenues areas are easily competing and surpassing the East and West Common neighbourhoods which formerly were, according to many, the ‘Holy Grail’ of Harpenden living – perhaps we will see more of this balancing with further building of luxury property in central Harpenden in years to come.

For a bit of fun, the mortgage payments for a property on West Common Close would come to approximately £7,753 per month at 3% over 30 years, and that's if your LTV is 50/50. How do you feel about spending £93,000 per annum just on your mortgage? Of course, these property purchases work differently at this level, but even still it's a considerable investment and fascinating to put into real terms. It would be a bad day indeed if interest rates change for the worse!

Least expensive

 

Moving on to the least expensive roads in Harpenden, the latest data shows that the lowest priced development in Harpenden is Reed Place on Bloomfield Road, being flats this is to be expected. The remainder of the roads are generally centred around Westfield and Batford in the Northern and North East side of Harpenden, save for Loire Mews which lies off Cravells Road.

An interesting matter to note is that, while these are merely average values and do not show the lowest priced property, it does show that even the most affordable areas in Harpenden are close to the national average house price. This perhaps isn't good news for those moving within the town, or for those moving in, but for anyone imminently moving away from the area, any equity gained here will stand you in good stead for purchasing more land and more space elsewhere in the country.

Again, in terms of mortgage payments and following the same figures as before although this time using a 10% deposit, (3% interest rate and a 30 year repayment term) the monthly payments would be a far more manageable £817pcm or £9804 per annum - although do bear in mind this is likely to be a once or two bed flat or starter home. Food for thought!

Highest turnover

Now moving on to the highest turnover streets (where properties change hands most frequently) we see that Station Road tops the chart for properties with a large number of families moving in and out of homes on that road. This data is a little predictable in so much as the roads concerned are either main roads or long roads with higher numbers of residential properties on them, but still it's an interesting metric to note to those looking to move locally or those looking to move into the town (budget permitting of course) as these may be roads to keep an eye on as properties are likely to come up in these locations more often.

I hope you've found this useful, interesting, informative, or even just a bit of a fun insight into the Harpenden market as it currently stands. If you're interested to know more, please go ahead and get in touch on info@hawkandchadwick.co.uk

Sorry about the Silence!

Ok so I'm going to first apologise for not writing anything on here for ages, I've just been so busy that I haven't had a moment where I've either had the time or the energy to write a long post.

But anyway, here it is - What I'm going to try and do from now is record videos and write less so you might want to look at the Youtube channel for Hawk & Chadwick and see what comes up on here as you might find it interesting.

I'll try to write a few more blog posts about the local markets and what's happening on a national scale, and how that affects us locally.

Please share this blog as more readers means I'll write more posts!

Thanks for reading so far.

Alasdair

The Great Estate Agent Cull??

Bit of Friday fun. Well, it made me laugh anyway.

 "Estate Agent culling in the United Kingdom is being trialled as a way to reduce Estate Agent numbers in a set area, in the hope of controlling the spread of smarmy overused adjectives. Humans can catch the flagrant overuse of superfluous adjectives, but public health control measures, including the English Language education vaccine mean it is not a significant risk to human health. 

The disease affects car salesmen and other high street conmen (including bankers, a small subsection of letting agents, double glazing salesmen, insurance salesmen, and llamas), and some species of town based wildlife including Estate Agents, mortgage brokers and a few members of the general public. Geographically, the use of pointless adjectives has spread from isolated pockets in the late 1980s to cover large areas of the west and south-west of England and Wales in the 2010s. Some people believe this correlates with the lack of Estate Agent control.

In October 2013, culling in England was controversially trialled in two pilot areas in Birmingham and in Hertfordshire. The main aim of these trials was to assess the humaneness of culling using "free shooting" (previous methods trapped the Estate Agents in cages before shooting them). The trials were repeated in 2014. In August 2015 it was announced culling would be rolled out across the Greater London Area with a target of 615 to 835 Estate Agents being culled there, while also being continued in Birmingham and Hertfordshire. 

Licences were granted to allow six weeks of continuous culling in the three counties until 31 January. In December 2015, HMRC released documents confirming the Estate Agent cull had "met government targets" with 756 muppets culled in Greater London, 432 in Birmingham and 279 in Hertfordshire. As of December 2015, there is no UK-wide policy of Estate Agent culling, however due to public pressure the government is currently reviewing its standpoint on the issue." 

Adapted from the Wikipedia page on the controversial (and serious) issue of Badger culling. St Albans could certainly nominate a few candidates I'm sure.

Fire Safety in Properties

When it comes to property, there are definitely risks - most of us look at the financial aspects when it comes to looking at our homes and investments, but the physical risks are quite obviously a factor as well. We've all seen the adverts and the promotion about house fires and the importance of alarms in recent years, and anyone who has seen a burned out house may think it's something that can never happen to them.

The fire statistics published by the Home Office on the 29th June 2016 covering the reported cases in 2014/2015 amass to roughly 496,000 incidents, of which six percent were related to dwellings - which equates to 31,300 homes affected by fire.

The most dangerous room in your house for a fire?  The living or dining room, believe it or not! And you're most at risk if you smoke in the property or if you're over 60, according to the statistics on fatalities in house fires during this period. Perhaps unsurprisingly, misuse of cooking appliances accounts for a huge number of casualties and fire related incidents every year. The most common time of day for a fire to break out?  The evening, between 4pm and 10pm. There were 7,600 casualties attributed to fire related incidents in England in 2014/2015.

We need to take note of this information, and assist our fire departments in reducing the number of fires that break out - their work has seen a massive reduction in the number of fires and fire related deaths since 2003, but there's still more we can do to ensure our homes and investments are fire safe. I spoke to Ben Cornish from Red & White Fire Protection to get the inside track on what we need to look out for to not only stay compliant, but more importantly stay safe;

"There are several important pieces of legislation which impact on fire safety within dwellings" says Ben.

"Some affect all dwellings irrespective of the layout or how it is occupied. Some legislation only applies to dwellings which are occupied by tenants who are unrelated or only applies to certain parts of the building."

Ben offered a list of legislation, which we'd like to share with you below. 

"Depending on the type of property and how it is occupied some or all of the following will apply."

A. Building Regulations 2010 Part B.

Application - all dwellings where any significant building work is carried out.

B. Housing Health & Safety Rating System ("HHSRS")

Fire is included in the 29 hazards covered by the system introduced by Housing Act 2004.

Application - this applies all dwellings, rented or private.

C. The Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm (England) Regulations 2015

This applies to all rented dwellings.

D. Fire Safety Order - [The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order2005]

See the guidance on Fire Safety in purpose-built flats.

See the guidance for common parts of bedsits and converted flats in LACORS guide.

Application - common parts (i.e. the shared areas including shared stairways, landings, kitchens, bathrooms etc.) of dwelling buildings containing in bedsits and flats both converted and purpose built.

Ben goes on to add a little further information regarding smaller dwellings;

"If a flat is occupied as bedsits there are two sets of common parts within the building. The first is the shared access route to the flat front door and other is the shared areas within the flat e.g. hallway, shared kitchen, bathroom etc - in that instance, both areas would require risk rating."

"But, remember it does not apply to shared houses let on a joint tenancy, unless it's an HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) in which case it does apply"

We've linked above to the relevant documents so you can read for yourself - as you can see, it's a minefield of legislation and while the danger may be slim, as a landlord or a property owner it is your responsibility to ensure the property, it's fixtures and fittings and contents are fire safe - in the event of a fire, you'd need to be able to prove that you took all the necessary steps to prevent it.

If you're confused or unsure of your obligations when it comes to fire safety, our recommendation is that you do not take chances and do everything you can to make sure you're compliant, and part of that should be contacting either myself directly so that I can put you in touch, or go straight to Ben to conduct a comprehensive fire safety review.

Stay stafe, and make sure you're compliant.

How times have changed...

Inspired by a post I saw on Facebook where a Lettings Agency colleague shared an article about the cost of living in 1974 published by The Guardian, I was spurred on to have a look at the differences between then and now, particularly in terms of housing.

In a recent radio interview with BBC Three Counties on the Roberto Perrone show, I was part of a panel of property experts discussing the state of the British housing market, and in particular how it affects the local area.  We were on air on the day of the Brexit vote, and so we couldn't discuss that particular elephant in the room, but one thing came up with didn't sit right with me - "When I bought my first house, it was just as hard as it is now." It seemed tinged with pomposity and self righteousness, and seemed to belittle the struggle of anyone who might be pushing forth toward their dream of owning their own home, no matter how modest that may be.

At the time, I didn't have the figures to hand, and statistical analysis is a tough game to be in - as they say, you can say anything with facts - and indeed many factors go into comparing one period in time with another, however I've wanted to look at this for a while and this article gave me the impetus to do a little research.

Recently an online battle between Baby Boomers and Millenials (personally I sit between the two in terms of generational age so I get to see the whole debate from a unique viewpoint) as to whether it really is just as hard now as it was then has erupted with each side slinging accusations at the other. The younger generation feel that their elders managed to get rich on a booming housing market, and had an easy route in to generating great wealth, which they're now enjoying in their golden years, some in great luxury. And the older generation feel they had to work hard, and live on very little in order to get where they are, and they sometimes view the younger generation with scorn and disdain for being idle thrillseekers with little concept of what hard graft really means. Who is right here? It's true to say that not everyone agrees with either camp, but the bitter aftertaste is there - the younger wondering why they cant have what their parents and grandparents enjoy, and sitting in baffled bemusement about how they're supposed to get there, and the older generations scoffing at the impetuous comments of coasting millenials.

Here are the facts I managed to dig up - bear in mind i'm not a member of MENSA or some kind of mathematician, but I think you'll agree the results are certainly interesting. The Guardian Article cites the average house price in 1976 as £12,704 and the average wage of £72 per week - that works out to £3,744 per annum. Based on that, the average wage made up 29.47% of the average house price. The annual average interest rate was 6.8%. Fast forward to 2016, the average wage is £27,600 and the average house price is £211,230 (Land Registry, May 2016) which means the average uk wage is now just 13.06% of the average house price. Interest rates are 0.5%.

That's a decrease of 55.68% in the purchasing power of modern wages against those of the populace in 1976. Yes, borrowing is far cheaper when you isolate interest rates, however access to borrowing is much tighter than it has been for years thanks to the banks ruining the economy in 2007/2008. Not only this but look at the population figures - 56.21 million people lived in the UK in 1976, versus 65.11 million in 2016 - an increase in population of 15%. When you add in to the mix a scarcity of property, you end up with inflated house prices.

That all seems to point to the fact that todays first time buyers have got it far harder than those who went house hunting back in 1976 - more competition, harder to get a bank to lend to you, larger mortgage payments and greater in terms of length to keep those payments down. It's a frightening set of statistics, but it's important when looking at statistics like these to understand that 'averages' don't paint the whole picture, and the ease/difficulty will have differed depending on where you lived, what work was available, infrastructure, transport, daily living costs - all of these things play a part. It has to be noted that the country had over 1 million people unemployed, the economy was in the toilet and there were massive public sector strikes, as well as one of the hottest summers on record. Incidentally, it was also the year that Ford Fiesta was first produced - hence the picture.

Anyway, perhaps the sad reality is that owning a home now is something that will simply never happen for a lot of people without making some heavy sacrifices elsewhere in their lifestyle, and they may find themselves renting for life. It's up to us all to work to change the tide away from 'generation rent' if we think it's important to us as a nation. It does have severe implications - young families renting won't be in a position to remortgage to cover nursing home costs, or take in elderly relatives. If you're wise and invest in property now and push to become a Landlord, you can probably rest assured that you won't be short of tenants - or nursing home funds - for a long time yet.

You can read The Guardian article by Viv Gorskop here

Photographical science, dear Watson

 Since I started Hawk & Chadwick I’ve always had a bee in my bonnet about Estate Agents and their god awful pictures. Just go look on any major portal right now and I’m willing to bet my left kidney that within the top 10-15 listings you’ll find photographs that appear to have be taken by somebody who forgot their orthopaedic shoes when they left for work that morning. 

 It’s infuriating because when you think of the service you expect when marketing your property with a local professional, you’d be well within your rights to be outraged if they can’t even operate a camera and show up without a tripod. Equally you should be outraged by third party image manipulation with clearly false blue skies being pasted into the background of dreary images. 

 I know I might sound like a grumpy old man, but the fact of the matter is we are now working in an environment where the first thing a potential buyer or tenant is going to see is a photograph of the front of your house, or possibly one of the internal rooms. They will make a split second decision on whether to view your property based on that image, and so it has to be bloody good to catch their attention.

 Let me explain why that is the case. When our eyes our open, our vision accounts for two-thirds of the electrical activity of the brain. Approximately 40% all nerve fibres connected to the brain are linked to the retina, and more of our neurons are dedicated to vision than the other four senses combined. And as if that’s not nearly enough, your brain processes visuals and images 60,000 times faster than it does text. Now you know why an image is worth 1000 words. 

 When you extend this biological predisposition for visual stimuli into the screen-ruled social media world we live in with far more people walking into lamp posts than ever before, it starts to really add up. Recent studies found that nearly half of all Internet users have re-posted a photo or video they have found online, and Tweets with embedded images receive 150 percent more retweets – same for Facebook posts that are image rich. Agents who post social media content with relevant images get 94 percent more views than content without images. 

 The bottom line is that strong imagery elicits an emotional response in the viewer. So to be all dandy about it, what I do as a photographer of your home is to convey that homeliness and that sense of warmth, comfort, attraction, safety and the welcoming nature of home to the observer (who hopefully will later become an enquirer, a viewer and then a tenant or buyer) – of course, there is a large amount of that which depends on who that person is and their purposes and mindset when viewing the photograph, but looking at the scientific data mentioned earlier it absolutely stands to reason that putting in the effort required to present your home smartly and professionally and with the absolute best quality images available is what I like to call a No Brainer.  
 And listen, I’m not about to fly into some uber-technical tirade about the Rule of thirds, The Golden ratio, the Fibonacci sequence or something else that sounds like a Dan Brown novel. Yes, those techniques exist and yes they’re relevant but the main thing to take away from this is that just having images is good, but it’s not enough. High quality and attention to detail within your images, and how they are presented to the general public (i.e. the people who ultimately will be the key to your financial advancement) is VITAL to succeeding in a marketplace where you’re trying to attract the buyer that’s thinking of buying your neighbour’s house across the street. You need Every. Single. Competitive. Advantage. 

 Start with excellent pictures. Then pick an agent who has a verified track record of success in using them.

I'll just do my own inventory

Let me start by just telling you what an incredibly bad idea that is.  No, really - it's the worst idea you've had, ever. Doing your own inventory for your property can only be compared to attempting skydiving without instruction, or attempting to fly a helicopter after a heavy absinthe binge - possibly even lion taming while blindfolded and wearing a meat coat.

The problem is, you might be lucky and have a situation where nothing happens - you might even have ran tenancies for years without any problems, but to coin a term - one swallow does not a summer make.

For those who haven't a clue what I'm on about, let me explain something. When a tenant agrees to rent a property, the landlord will often make a reasonable effort to give the property to their new tenant in a good condition - clean, freshly decorated and in a generally operable and liveable condition. Many tenants do their best to look after this and return things in a pretty good state, but there's always been this grey area - is it like a hotel room, or do i treat it like my own house?  Hmmmm....

Now without getting into the legal semantics and boring the pants off everyone lets just say that the way it works in 2016 is that a tenant pays a deposit (usually between 1-2 months worth of rent) to the landlord who holds the money against any damage and returns it at the end of the tenancy - the deposit has to go into an approved scheme and be properly protected.

"So who decides what's damaged and what isn't? Surely things wear out over time?"

Exactly, young gwasshopper. That's what the inventory is for - you have to hold some kind of record of what it was like at the start, in order to be able to prove that there is a difference at the end - savvy?

So what happens if you write your own inventory on the back of a fag packet - well, besides obviously missing things out and ending up with a huge tangled mess when you get to the end and your tenant turns out to be a qualified solicitor or a housing officer....or worse a letting agent....the other problem you have is impartiality (which, incidentally, is why getting your letting agent to do your inventories is equally daft) because you can be accused of twisting things in your favour.

So what's the solution? Well, as usual being the author of this article I get to have the pompous self righteousness to dole out advice as I see fit, but in all sincerity the best option you have is to approach an AIIC qualified inventory clerk and have a robust detailed inventory carried out on your property.

The level of detail will ensure that far from having to resolve disputes at the end, there simply won't be any - if you leave no margin for error and no grey area, then there can be no argument and everything will be fully signed and squared away meaning you and the tenant can walk away at the end without a bad word between you.

An inventory clerk also takes note of things such as meter readings, ensuring you and your tenant aren't paying more than you should be for utilities and bills when tenancies change. It keeps everything in the open, documented and very fair.

Having a hyper detailed inventory also compels the tenant to look after your property and to report and problems promptly. It's just one of the many ingredients that go in to making managing property a breeze rather than a headache.

Another hidden benefit is if you are able to file away your inventories you can look back and create budget projections for the replacement of larger items, meaning you can really nail down your cash flow and start thinking very clearly about allocating budgets which will allow you to expand your portfolio.

For every tenancy I put in place, I insist on using a fully qualified inventory clerk - yes, sometimes our clients choose to save money and do their own, and yes sometimes it goes without a hitch and they escape any bad weather - but it's a risk I certainly wouldn't take if I had the option, and in the property game where risks should be eliminated, it would seem counter intuitive to adopt more exposure.

So there we are, don't be an inexperienced lion tamer - and don't let pride come before a fall (sorry, that was a terrible pun) - it's only going to cost you money if you don't use a professional, and for the sake of less than £150.00, that's not a lot to protect you from deposit disputes at the end of your next tenancy.