News RSS Feed


Property is beyond buyers' budgets


OWNING your own home in Oxfordshire is just a dream for most people living in the county, according to a report published this week.

The National Housing Federation report, Home Truths 2009, found that last year the £293,128 average cost of a house in the county was 13.2 times the county’s £22,246 average wage.

In Oxford the wage to price ratio was even worse at 15.4, based on figures of £334,000 and £21,653.

Federation spokesman Peter Jones said: “Even though prices have dropped over the past year they are increasing again now.

“The recession has increased housing need because fewer houses are being built and credit is hard to come by.”

The report found Oxford was the most unaffordable place in the county in which to buy a home, while the most affordable district was Cherwell, where the average house cost £233,644 — or just 10.8 times the average wage.

Earlier this year a report commissioned by the Local Government Association called Cities Outlook 2009, based on 2007 prices, found that a house in Oxford was 13 times the average salary.

At that time Oxford City Council leader Bob Price said: “The jobs are available in Oxford, but the homes aren’t.”

He added: “Oxford continues to face severe challenges in terms of the provision of affordable and appropriate housing for all sections of the community.”

Now the federation is calling on the Government to continue injecting high levels of funding into social housing despite threatened public-spending cuts.

The report said: “Social housing is part of the solution to the housing and economic crisis.

“Even as public spending tightens, the Government must remember this crucial fact.”

In West Oxfordshire, the average price of a house last year was £258,927 or 11.3 times the average wage of £22,864, according to the NHF report.

In South Oxfordshire, residents would have to find 15.2 times their £22,781 wage to meet the average price of £346,417, while in the Vale of the White Horse it was 12.5 times the average wage of £23,842 to meet a price of £297,425.

Frank Webster, of the Summertown office of letting agents Finders Keepers, said: “It is fair to say that many of our tenants are frustrated house-hunters — frustrated due to the lack of stock and frustrated due to the lack of available finance and the ever increasing prices.”

Stuart Wallworth, of estate agents Thomas Merrifield, which has branches in Witney and Oxford, added: “First-time buyers must have money behind them these days – perhaps from their parents – or they have got a problem buying a home.

“Buyers need a 10 or 15 per cent deposit these days or it is impossible to get a mortgage.”

He said shared equity schemes were becoming increasingly popular, although buyers still needed a small deposit.

He said: “At the Aspire estate in Witney where there are 143 apartments over the shops at the new Marriotts Walk shopping centre, housebuilder Linden Homes will take a 15 per cent share in the property and this can act as the deposit.

“And the money is not repayable until the property is sold.”


Your Say YourBicester

oval yellow, says...
5:49pm Wed 11 Nov 09

I think these figures are open to interpretation.

Firstly, does a person on an "average" wage expect to buy the "average" house? I earn significantly more than the figures quoted - but wouldn't dream of buying anything at those prices at the moment.

Secondly, someone seeking to buy an "average" house would in many cases be buying it with someone - hence the burden shared.

Thirdly if you knock off the deposit then the actual mortgaged value as a multiple of salary is reduced.

I don't deny Oxfordshire is expensive for property - but I don't believe it's quite as bleak as those figures suggest.

LadyPenelope, Oxford says...
7:27pm Wed 11 Nov 09

"In Oxford the wage to price ratio was even worse at 15.4, based on figures of £334,000 and £21,653. "

- Not convinced by this maths. Firstly, it would be 2 people buying together, so an "average" wage of £43,306. Also, you'd be expected to put down a 10% deposit, so £33,400. This makes it 6.9x the joint salary.

That might be quite a large multiple still, but surely a first time buyer would be going for a starter home, not an "average" one?

Andrew:Oxford, Oxford says...
9:15pm Wed 11 Nov 09

LadyPenelope wrote:
"In Oxford the wage to price ratio was even worse at 15.4, based on figures of £334,000 and £21,653. "

- Not convinced by this maths. Firstly, it would be 2 people buying together, so an "average" wage of £43,306. Also, you'd be expected to put down a 10% deposit, so £33,400. This makes it 6.9x the joint salary.

That might be quite a large multiple still, but surely a first time buyer would be going for a starter home, not an "average" one?
It would be quite rare at the moment to find a 90% ltv mortgage, and very few people would be starting in the "middle" for a house so will have traded up with equity from a smaller home. So better to go for 75% mortgage and two incomes. That brings the figure down to £250K (Still a lot of money), again using the £44K joint income we have a multiple of 5.7x Whilst this will still "shock" many of the "Daily Mail" readers... Other people balance it off with the ability to buy within walking distance of work and do without 2 cars instead.

GaryOxford, Oxford says...
9:52pm Wed 11 Nov 09

Both previous commentators have argued that that the average first time buyer is unlikely to buy an average house, they are more likely to get something cheaper. However this arguement is invalid because it is also likely that the first time buyer will earn less than the average wage, as the average wage is for all age groups whereas younger people tend to earn less than older people.
LadyPenelope also argues that you need two salaries to buy these days, what about single people? Or people with children? Either one parent gives up work, or they both work and send the children to nursery, but childcare costs are even more extortionate than Oxford house prices. A lot of people I know have done their sums and as a family are better off one of them giving up work to look after the kids.
In addition LadyPenelope states that one would need a £33,400 deposit minimum, but doesn't mention how one goes about getting the deposit. On the average salary of £21,653, that's approximately 2 years take home pay, just for the deposit.

LadyPenelope, Oxford says...
8:02am Thu 12 Nov 09

Gary, the saving up for the deposit would be done by TWO people. If they earnt £21,653 each, then that's £33.5k a year after tax between them. Allow £10k for rent, and another £10k for other expenses, then they could easily save over £10k a year, thus only taking 3 years to save the deposit, which is quite reasonable.

GaryOxford, Oxford says...
8:53am Thu 12 Nov 09

LadyPenelope wrote:
Gary, the saving up for the deposit would be done by TWO people. If they earnt £21,653 each, then that's £33.5k a year after tax between them. Allow £10k for rent, and another £10k for other expenses, then they could easily save over £10k a year, thus only taking 3 years to save the deposit, which is quite reasonable.
Assuming that a couple have saved for three years to get a 10% deposit of £33,400. If they both earn £21,653 and their monthly expenses are £833 (£10k a year), the most they could borrow would be £90,000, giving them a grand total of £123,400, which is approximately a third of what they would need.
As you pointed out this needs TWO salaries. What about single people? Or Families?
Historically the average home cost approximately 3 times the average salary, crippling house prices are a fairly recent event.

Sid Hunt, says...
9:47am Thu 12 Nov 09

If it is such an expensive place why are there so many undesirables around?

LadyPenelope, Oxford says...
9:54am Thu 12 Nov 09

Sid Hunt wrote:
If it is such an expensive place why are there so many undesirables around?
25% of tax money goes to benefits. Perhaps the "undesirables" don't actually have to pay rent?

Single people didn't used to buy houses. Now they do. Perhaps that has added to the increase in house prices?

Supply and demand. Prices are high because people want to live here. Why not move up north? £90k will get you a 3 bed semi.

GaryOxford, Oxford says...
1:08pm Thu 12 Nov 09

LadyPenelope wrote:
Sid Hunt wrote:
If it is such an expensive place why are there so many undesirables around?
25% of tax money goes to benefits. Perhaps the "undesirables" don't actually have to pay rent?

Single people didn't used to buy houses. Now they do. Perhaps that has added to the increase in house prices?

Supply and demand. Prices are high because people want to live here. Why not move up north? £90k will get you a 3 bed semi.
The price increases of the last 10-15 years haven't been solely due to supply and demand. The huge increases have been due to property speculation financed by cheap credit. If the local or national government genuinely wanted affordable housing their policies would change substantially. The national government would have set a sensible interest rate based on RPI not CPI which would have taken some of the air out of the housing bubble. They could also have removed the tax benefits from Buy-to-Let, and ensured that all mortgages had a planned form of capital repayment, i.e. no interest only mortgages which are solely reliant on rising house prices.
Our local government could have fulfilled their duty of care and adequately provided enough private and public housing to satisy demand. When new housing went for planning permission they could have insisted it met the Parker Morris size standards and that it was reasonably serviced by shops, libraries, public transport etc.

Sid Hunt, says...
6:00pm Thu 12 Nov 09

LP, are you saying I should move up north?

tanchris, oxford says...
7:12am Fri 13 Nov 09

Andrew:Oxford wrote:
LadyPenelope wrote: "In Oxford the wage to price ratio was even worse at 15.4, based on figures of £334,000 and £21,653. " - Not convinced by this maths. Firstly, it would be 2 people buying together, so an "average" wage of £43,306. Also, you'd be expected to put down a 10% deposit, so £33,400. This makes it 6.9x the joint salary. That might be quite a large multiple still, but surely a first time buyer would be going for a starter home, not an "average" one?
It would be quite rare at the moment to find a 90% ltv mortgage, and very few people would be starting in the "middle" for a house so will have traded up with equity from a smaller home. So better to go for 75% mortgage and two incomes. That brings the figure down to £250K (Still a lot of money), again using the £44K joint income we have a multiple of 5.7x Whilst this will still "shock" many of the "Daily Mail" readers... Other people balance it off with the ability to buy within walking distance of work and do without 2 cars instead.
Whats wrong with with "Daily Mail" readers? I live in Cowley, own my own Property and a substantial investment portfolio. But i work, pay my taxe's and abide by the Law, if thats a "Daily Mail" reader then i'm proud to be one.

LadyPenelope, Oxford says...
8:19am Fri 13 Nov 09

Sid Hunt wrote:
LP, are you saying I should move up north?
Yes! Move up north! It's great!

(obviously this depends on your current employment position, but those who earn low wages might as well move up north, earn the same wage, and benefit from rent and house prices that are half what they are round here).

Adrian1, says...
10:27am Fri 13 Nov 09

Ow! my house is substantially below average price! I'm guessing the quoted figures must include all the manors and such round these parts as well?
If the average wage is pre tax then at least I come in above average. I think that holds up the argument that property prices are rather out of the average citizens price range.

Sid Hunt, says...
12:35pm Fri 13 Nov 09

My house is also below the average value but my salary is above, I think that simply proves that I bought sensibly and with room to manoeuvre when circumstances (e.g. mortgage rates) changed. Not sure why LP thinks that single people never bought houses but I did and I know plenty of others who did too.
I don't think I will be moving up north just yet but who knows....

The Rockabilly Red, Halfway To Memphis says...
3:29pm Sat 14 Nov 09

Just the usual bleating from the lefties....'how unfair it is that thickies and deadbeats can't afford to live in the nice places'.....'how terrible it is that the idle can't afford Bentleys to in'.....blah, blah, blah.

Look, get an education. Then get a job doing something of value. You'll soon find you can buy a house, even in Oxford.

GaryOxford, Oxford says...
7:10pm Sun 15 Nov 09

The Rockabilly Red wrote:
Just the usual bleating from the lefties....'how unfair it is that thickies and deadbeats can't afford to live in the nice places'.....'how terrible it is that the idle can't afford Bentleys to in'.....blah, blah, blah.

Look, get an education. Then get a job doing something of value. You'll soon find you can buy a house, even in Oxford.
Thanks for bringing out this old tired lie that the only people who can't afford to buy are thick, deadbeats, idle and uneducated. Anyone with even half a brain knows this is total rubbish. If you bother to look you'll find that house prices trebled over the last 10 years whilst salaries only went up by 50%. This was to the benefit of older people and the detriment of younger people.
If you were starting out now, you couldn't afford a home.
I'd recommend you take your own advice and get an education.

Petr mcvey, Barton says...
4:44am Tue 17 Nov 09

Tancris. You may own a large portfolio of property but obviously neglected to learn English. TAXE'S not sure that excists mate

Petr mcvey, Barton says...
4:54am Tue 17 Nov 09

P.S. Tanc. Watch the film I'M ALRIGHT JACK.

Comments are closed on this article.

Frank Webster Frank Webster

Stay with Prague Hotels | Visit Spain with Barcelona Hotels

Local Advertisers

Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »