According to this Indo snippet about a [broken link removed] survey/report that is the case. Wonder if this is true and what divil might be in the detail? I can't see anything about this report on the CBRE website.
Indo: "One-third of householders enjoy a mortgage-free life"
- Thread starter ClubMan
- Start date
LDFerguson
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,695
I've never seen the report, but it strikes me as plausible for demographic reasons. I'd assume that most people have their mortgage paid off by the time they reach 65, so I'd guess that the bulk of the one third are over 65.
Plus add all the people who inherited thier home...
LDFerguson
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,695
Good point - plus all the people who inherited their original family home or a share in it, and the inheritance was sufficient to pay off their mortgage.
I was also just curious if when stats about "mortgage debt per capita" are bandied about are the heads counted those of (owner occupier) mortgage holders only or including mortgage free home owners? I guess it depends on who is talking and what their angle, if any, might be...?
LDFerguson
Registered User
- Messages
- 4,695
Yes, but wouldn't a couple buying at 25 be expected to trade up a few times when they're in their 30s or 40s, thus extending the duration?
Maybe LD and these days with so called "starter homes" and small apartments increasingly more so. My gut feel though is that 20 years ago a good mid size 3 bed semi in a reasonably accessable suburb was more the norm and a lot of people kept those for life. People were far less transient then. Nowadays FTBs cant afford a "proper house" in their 20s or even 30s.
R
rmelly
Guest
agreed. the 'starter home' phenomenon is something concocted in the last couple of decades.
X
xman
Guest
flats used to be things you rented for a while when you were young and couldn't afford a 'proper' house.
nowadays flats are called 'luxury apartments', you spend 40 years paying for one and you'll never afford a 'proper' house because the house will ALWAYS appreciate at a faster rate or depreciate at a lesser rate than the flat.
they are not starter homes, they are poverty traps.
I
irishlinks
Guest
The census in 2006 found that 28% of households were owner occupied with no mortgage outstanding. I would expect that figure to be similar now. The figures mentioned in the Independent for rented properties don't match the census figures though - the 2006 census showed that 28% of households are rented - the Indo article say sthat the report found that 19% are rented. I would trust the census figures more! More figures here http://www.towns-ireland.com/category/housing/
This is an odd emerging piece of "common knowledge", and I'd really love to know how true it is. I know that at least three generations of my family before me have traded up from house to house, with some renting but mostly through purchase. And since people's housing needs vary at different times according to family size, income, location and all sorts of odd other variables, it doesn't seem particularly unreasonable to me that people should trade up as their needs and means allow or dictate - I don't mean relying on ongoing capital appreciation ahead of normal inflation. The scorn heaped on "starter homes" baffles me when it's solely targetted at their being "starter homes" rather than entirely legitimate complaints about poor build quality / lousy size / bad design.