[JayCT]

Originally Posted by ctguy87

My parents tax bill in Oxford is now north of 7K and has gone up 50% in 15 years. It's a much larger house than they need though now that the kids are gone.

To each their own. I'm glad you found the perfect house, and yes, there are non-monetary benefits to living in a house that you described. I have checked it out with my partner and I know how difficult it is to find the PERFECT house at the right price. I will probably end up buying at some point, just super hesitant about it with the current economic climate in this area.

I hate to say it but there really is no perfect time to buy. If you wait until the economy improves home prices will go up and you could be forced to buy a lesser home than you want at a higher interest rate. As long as you and your partner have fairly stable jobs, I would recommend buying while the economy is less than booming. That way you can get a nice home at a reasonable price with a mortgage rate that is low by most standards. Jay

[Lalalally]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

IMO one of the biggest advantages of renting is you can up and leave any time you want. Get a job offer in California ? Sure I can be there next month. Not so easy to do when you have sell a house.

True.

[ctguy87]

You all make good points. I may have a fear of commitment.

[SeaDoo342]

Originally Posted by ctguy87

You all make good points. I may have a fear of commitment.

So did I……then I bought a house AND she moved in…….

[ctguy87]

Originally Posted by SeaDoo342

So did I……then I bought a house AND she moved in…….

lol

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by Lalalally

X1000. We bought our first house right after we got married, almost 20 years ago, and the real estate market in northern Fairfield county was soft then too (in 1996/1997 it had still not fully recovered, or maybe it was just at the cusp of leveling off from the real estate boom/bust of the late 1980s - early 1990s). We paid $170K for a small colonial on a main road, with not much of a backyard. And we lived in that house for the next decade and two kids later. We definitely lucked out with the market when we decided we had grown out of that house, and that it was time to go. We sold at the height of the next boom for $430K, and walked away with a nice chunk of change to add to the down payment on our current home, which we would not have had if years ago we decided we wanted to be renters instead of homeowners. Fwiw, even after the horrible real estate bust, our little old house just sold again for $325k. So while it's still way below what we sold for, had we stayed until now, we would be ahead by $155k over what we paid, plus at this point 20 years later, we would have pretty much paid down our mortgage completely. So yup, we would have exactly the ~ $300k equity you mention above

You can't always count on that though. My house is worth about what I paid for it in 1990. At least it's not below, but it would be nice if it appreciated a bit more.

I'd still rather own than rent, and I'd be hard pressed to find a rental at the same cost of my mortgage (SFH with yard/garage etc)

[Lalalally]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

You can't always count on that though. My house is worth about what I paid for it in 1990. At least it's not below, but it would be nice if it appreciated a bit more.

I'd still rather own than rent, and I'd be hard pressed to find a rental at the same cost of my mortgage (SFH with yard/garage etc)

Definitely, no you can't count on it ever, and I did acknowledge that we lucked out when we sold (and lucked out when we first bought for that matter -- i.e. we bought after the early '90s New England Bust when prices fell a lot; and we sold during the Nationwide Boom.) That said our old house just sold again recently for about $155k more than what we paid in early 1997 (albeit for $105k less than what we sold for in 2006). I feel bad for the people who bought it from us though, because they're the ones who took a really hard hit, but I also feel bad for myself lol! Our neighbor, directly across the street from us now just sold their house which is almost identical to our current one - but with an inground pool which we don't have! -- for $75k less than we paid in '06. But since we have no plans on moving in the foreseeable future, any depreciation that we've experienced to date is thankfully just on paper at the moment...

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

You can't always count on that though. My house is worth about what I paid for it in 1990. At least it's not below, but it would be nice if it appreciated a bit more.

I'd still rather own than rent, and I'd be hard pressed to find a rental at the same cost of my mortgage (SFH with yard/garage etc)

Where the heck did you buy??? You do not have to answer that but I find it hard to believe that any home bought in 1990 here in Connecticut is worth the same price today. I bought in 1987 and then in 1994 and both properties are worth a lot more than back then. The 1987 property is a condo bought at the height of the late 80's boom and is worth about 30% more while the 1994 property is worth 75% more and that is without considering significant upgrades recently made to it. Seems a bit strange to me. Jay

[lvs2393]

Originally Posted by ctguy87

I know exactly what my monthly expenses are with no surprises. I get a gym and a pool. I invest a good chunk of my take home pay. I get hours of my time back by not having to do lawn maintenance or waste time waiting for repair crews. How am I wasting my money by renting?

Investing with profit over 30+ years is sooo much more YMMW than paying fixed monthly payment towards equity.

It is working out for you which is great. But I don't think there are many people who are very diligent to save/invest the different between lower rent amount and higher cost of RE ownership.
And last item also varies. I can say just the same -we managed to guy very large apartment in Stamford at the bottom. And now our total mortgage payment (which includes high RE taxes of $5k) and enormous CC of $830 ends up less that what people are renting for somewhat similar apartments in Stamford (and I must add all similar apt for rent still smaller in sq.ft. that our place). So with that math I pay less for owning than renting something similar and invest the difference.

There is good in owning if you make it right just like in renting. It works for some but not for others.

[newerabuzz]

I live in Vernon

I bought a townhouse new in 1992 for $89,000. The small complex was started in 1987- with four units being built. units have two bedroom, 1.5 baths, with attached garage, Gas heat, central air, skylights, vaulted walls and ceilings. Self managed. 1088 square feet. When first built in 1987, the first 6 units sold for 114K each. In 1991-92 10 more units where built and sold- selling from 85-89K

So 6 years later the price had dropped about $25,000 per unit. Throughout the 1990s prices continued to drop- with resells going for $66K in 1996- The complex was completed in 1997 with 8 new units bringing the total to 24. Prices for these last units was around 70K. The market slowly improved just after the turn of the century- with units now selling for around $110K circa 2001.

By 2003 prices where up to 133K, peaking for a unit selling for $178K in the summer of 2006. All these units are alike. Some are end units which differ slightly. Today the 'average' price for one of these units is around $116K. So in many ways we have seen no appreciation since 1987-even though prices for that era where inflated.

Prices locally for real estate are undervalued by at least 20%. In fact housing prices in New England, but especially in Connecticut are curiously undervalued.