DaftDrop UK is a UK-targeted branch of DaftDrop, the non-profit commercial property price tracker, bringing you an unbiased and impartial view of the England, Scotland & Wales property market, with the easiest & fastest price search engine online.

What does DaftDrop UK do?

DaftDrop UK is tracking over 1 million residential and commercial properties that were, or still are, for sale across the UK. DaftDrop UK provides an easy way to determine the market history of a property or area, and to gain insights into the overall property market throughout England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

Why use this?

As a buyer, one of the main things you're interested in are price changes, right? Right. Knowing a property's history gives you, the buyer, a much better idea of the mindset of a seller, which is very valuable knowledge before entering negotiations.

For example, if a seller has dropped their prices several times in the last few months, you can be sure they're eager to sell. On the other hand, if a house has been on the market for years without much activity, it's less likely that the seller is clued in to the current market and their expectations may be unrealistic.

DaftDrop UK can:

  • Show price drops/increases, that are otherwise forgotton
  • Allows lightning fast and flexible sorting and searching
  • Show the real time on market
  • Show similar properties
  • Detect previous listings of the same property
  • Show unbiased, up-to-date trends via graphing
  • Automatically notify you of price changes in property you're interested in

Price Drops »

Estate Agents often:

  • Modify the ad's 'entered' date to make a property seem like it's fresh on the market
  • Or, re-create a whole knew ad, having the same effect
  • Increase price above actual expectation, just so an initial offer will be high
  • Change a price to Price On Application, because of lack of interest in an overpriced property

Price Drops »

Many sign up with the household name believing costly work will go smoothly. It’s not always so<p>The thrill of Everest is adventuring into the unknown. Even the most doughty stamina and resolve can’t guarantee those who commit to the journey will reach their goal. Which is why Britain’s second-largest double-glazing company seems aptly named.</p><p>Everest was the second choice of Michael and Catrin Poole when its rival, Anglian, declared the arched doors and windows they required could not be manufactured in uPVC. The Everest salesman, in contrast, was apparently confident even though his computer resisted his attempts to produce a design.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/21/everest-home-improvements-contract-faults">Continue reading...</a>

Home improvements customers need stamina to conquer Everest

Apr 21, 2019 8:00

Many sign up with the household name believing costly work will go smoothly. It’s not always so

The thrill of Everest is adventuring into the unknown. Even the most doughty stamina and resolve can’t guarantee those who commit to the journey will reach their goal. Which is why Britain’s second-largest double-glazing company seems aptly named.

Everest was the second choice of Michael and Catrin Poole when its rival, Anglian, declared the arched doors and windows they required could not be manufactured in uPVC. The Everest salesman, in contrast, was apparently confident even though his computer resisted his attempts to produce a design.

Continue reading...

In Weston-super-Mare, as elsewhere in Britain, the poorest tenants are facing a stark choice between eating and paying rent<p>Tom Wall’s piece on housing poverty in Weston-super-Mare brought into sharp focus what many of us living here have known for a long time (“<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/13/trapped-britain-new-slums-poverty-austerity-social-housing" title="">Trapped in Britain’s new slums</a>”, Special report). The crisis is the fault both of central government, for replacing the system of rents being paid directly to landlords with universal credit, leaving the poorest tenants with the stark choice between eating or paying rent, and of North Somerset council. Landlords and tenants alike had security under the old system and it was naive of the government to think that everyone was capable of managing their finances unaided.</p><p>Councillor Elfan Ap Rees, a leading member of the Conservative cabinet within the council that makes all the big decisions, may speak blandly about there being no slum tenure but the facts belie this. He promises more inspections but who will do this, since council jobs have been cut and in some cases trading standards officers are having to act as environmental health officers? By refusing to institute mandatory licensing for landlords, North Somerset council has given carte blanche to rogue operators who, frankly, treat tenants as scum. </p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/21/letters-housing-poverty-moral-disgrace">Continue reading...</a>

Housing poverty is a moral disgrace | Letters

Apr 21, 2019 5:59

In Weston-super-Mare, as elsewhere in Britain, the poorest tenants are facing a stark choice between eating and paying rent

Tom Wall’s piece on housing poverty in Weston-super-Mare brought into sharp focus what many of us living here have known for a long time (“Trapped in Britain’s new slums”, Special report). The crisis is the fault both of central government, for replacing the system of rents being paid directly to landlords with universal credit, leaving the poorest tenants with the stark choice between eating or paying rent, and of North Somerset council. Landlords and tenants alike had security under the old system and it was naive of the government to think that everyone was capable of managing their finances unaided.

Councillor Elfan Ap Rees, a leading member of the Conservative cabinet within the council that makes all the big decisions, may speak blandly about there being no slum tenure but the facts belie this. He promises more inspections but who will do this, since council jobs have been cut and in some cases trading standards officers are having to act as environmental health officers? By refusing to institute mandatory licensing for landlords, North Somerset council has given carte blanche to rogue operators who, frankly, treat tenants as scum.

Continue reading...

<p>Researchers calculated that young adults save £8,000 a year by living at home – and worked out how much they should pay for board each month</p><p><a href="https://theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/20/the-boomerang-generation-still-living-with-their-parents">The ‘boomerang’ generation still living with their parents</a></p><p>Young adults should be paying at least £100 a month to their parents for living at home, according to a major academic study into the costs of the “boomerang” generation.</p><p>The main additional cost is food, say the <a href="https://www.lboro.ac.uk/media/wwwlboroacuk/content/crsp/downloads/reports/Family%20sharing%20%E2%80%93%20A%20minimum%20income%20standard%20for%20people%20in%20their%2020s%20living%20with%20parents.pdf" title="">researchers from Loughborough University and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation</a>. They found that on average parents spend an additional £15.86 a week on “cupboard food” and cooked meals for their returning offspring, while the extra gas and electricity added up to £4.78 a week.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/20/why-you-should-pay-your-parents-100-board-a-month">Continue reading...</a>

Why you should pay your parents £100 board a month

Apr 20, 2019 7:00

Researchers calculated that young adults save £8,000 a year by living at home – and worked out how much they should pay for board each month

The ‘boomerang’ generation still living with their parents

Young adults should be paying at least £100 a month to their parents for living at home, according to a major academic study into the costs of the “boomerang” generation.

The main additional cost is food, say the researchers from Loughborough University and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. They found that on average parents spend an additional £15.86 a week on “cupboard food” and cooked meals for their returning offspring, while the extra gas and electricity added up to £4.78 a week.

Continue reading...

<p>Soaring house prices leave millions of young adults unable to afford to move out</p><p><a href="https://theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/18/how-do-the-finances-work-for-boomerang-generation-families">How do the finances work for ‘boomerang’ generation families?</a></p><p>Would you want to move back into your parents’ home after university? How much rent, if any, should you pay? Can you survive socially into your 20s and even 30s living with your parents? Those are the dilemmas faced by millions of young adults as soaring house prices have forced millennials back into the parental home.</p><p>This major change to family life has happened shockingly fast. In 1997, around 25% of under-34s were living in their parents’ home, according to the Office for National Statistics. Today the figure is 32%. For men, it’s even higher; 37% of men aged 18 to 34 lived with their parents in 2017.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/20/the-boomerang-generation-still-living-with-their-parents">Continue reading...</a>

The 'boomerang' generation still living with their parents

Apr 20, 2019 7:00

Soaring house prices leave millions of young adults unable to afford to move out

How do the finances work for ‘boomerang’ generation families?

Would you want to move back into your parents’ home after university? How much rent, if any, should you pay? Can you survive socially into your 20s and even 30s living with your parents? Those are the dilemmas faced by millions of young adults as soaring house prices have forced millennials back into the parental home.

This major change to family life has happened shockingly fast. In 1997, around 25% of under-34s were living in their parents’ home, according to the Office for National Statistics. Today the figure is 32%. For men, it’s even higher; 37% of men aged 18 to 34 lived with their parents in 2017.

Continue reading...

<p>Hipster watering holes in formerly run-down neighbourhoods are the new cathedrals</p><p>The best place to live in Britain today is Salisbury. So says the Sunday Times. The Office for National Statistics disagrees. It says the best place is Farnborough. No, says the <a href="https://www.countryliving.com/uk/news/a26941872/winchester-happiest-place-to-live-royal-mail/" title="">Royal Mail, it is Winchester</a>. The Provident says it is Worcester. The Halifax says it is Stornaway. And so it goes. This is listicle season, and <a href="https://www.housebeautiful.com/uk/lifestyle/property/a26552176/best-places-to-live-uk" title="">not a magazine</a> is without some daft <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8284331/uk-50-best-places-to-live-revealed-pictures" title="">“survey” of topographical superlatives</a>. Each year groups of<a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/articles/britains-happiest-and-friendliest-cities-revealed" title=""> travel editors</a> get together over a good lunch, with a road atlas and contented sponsor to hand. </p><p>Salisbury’s award appears to be in compensation for last year’s novichok nightmare. To be free of novichok is clearly a marketing asset, but it is hardly a standout virtue. Other criteria include a low crime rate, good schools, transport links, air quality, nice buildings and friendly neighbours. The one thing these lists have in common is that nobody agrees. Apparently if you ask most people the best place to live, they say their home. Good for them. There is nowhere like home. But dig deeper and the trends in modern “liveability” are intriguing.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/20/great-place-to-live-hipster-cathedrals">Continue reading...</a>

What makes a great place to live? Answer: it’s not a shopping plaza | Simon Jenkins

Apr 20, 2019 6:00

Hipster watering holes in formerly run-down neighbourhoods are the new cathedrals

The best place to live in Britain today is Salisbury. So says the Sunday Times. The Office for National Statistics disagrees. It says the best place is Farnborough. No, says the Royal Mail, it is Winchester. The Provident says it is Worcester. The Halifax says it is Stornaway. And so it goes. This is listicle season, and not a magazine is without some daft “survey” of topographical superlatives. Each year groups of travel editors get together over a good lunch, with a road atlas and contented sponsor to hand.

Salisbury’s award appears to be in compensation for last year’s novichok nightmare. To be free of novichok is clearly a marketing asset, but it is hardly a standout virtue. Other criteria include a low crime rate, good schools, transport links, air quality, nice buildings and friendly neighbours. The one thing these lists have in common is that nobody agrees. Apparently if you ask most people the best place to live, they say their home. Good for them. There is nowhere like home. But dig deeper and the trends in modern “liveability” are intriguing.

Continue reading...

<p>‘I can imagine a rather fabulous Nordic-noir inspired TV detective series being set there’</p><p><strong>What’s going for it?</strong> It’s an odd place, Ely. For a start they have an annual eel-throwing competition on <a href="http://elyeelfestival.co.uk/eelday/eel-day" title="">Eel Day</a>. (That’s toy eels, animal lovers.) But that makes it all the weirder. I can imagine a rather fabulous Nordic-noir-inspired TV detective series being set there, under the flat, relentless Fen skies – possibly set in the 15th-century (Ely’s heyday); possibly starring Paddy Considine as a monk detective, with issues of course. (You can have that idea for free, scriptwriters.) It’s the city’s uncanny combination of isolation and exposure, brought on by its geography and history: all by itself high up on an island of clay, surrounded by marshes and miasmas. What an astonishing spot it must have been in medieval times, with its fantastic cathedral newly completed, the Ship of the Fens, and hooded clergy dominating this isolated, lonely place of gothic arches and misericords, eel traders and clay potters. Executive estates may now cling to the island, tour buses come to gawp at the cathedral, and Cambridge is only 15 minutes away on the train, but its intense past seems seeped into the stones, haunting the place centuries on.</p><p><strong>The case against</strong> Its unique sense of place won’t be for everyone. It remains, despite good train links, decent local culture and community, relatively alone, quiet and small.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/19/lets-move-ely-cambridgeshire">Continue reading...</a>

Let’s move to Ely, Cambridgeshire: still haunted by its past

Apr 19, 2019 16:30

‘I can imagine a rather fabulous Nordic-noir inspired TV detective series being set there’

What’s going for it? It’s an odd place, Ely. For a start they have an annual eel-throwing competition on Eel Day. (That’s toy eels, animal lovers.) But that makes it all the weirder. I can imagine a rather fabulous Nordic-noir-inspired TV detective series being set there, under the flat, relentless Fen skies – possibly set in the 15th-century (Ely’s heyday); possibly starring Paddy Considine as a monk detective, with issues of course. (You can have that idea for free, scriptwriters.) It’s the city’s uncanny combination of isolation and exposure, brought on by its geography and history: all by itself high up on an island of clay, surrounded by marshes and miasmas. What an astonishing spot it must have been in medieval times, with its fantastic cathedral newly completed, the Ship of the Fens, and hooded clergy dominating this isolated, lonely place of gothic arches and misericords, eel traders and clay potters. Executive estates may now cling to the island, tour buses come to gawp at the cathedral, and Cambridge is only 15 minutes away on the train, but its intense past seems seeped into the stones, haunting the place centuries on.

The case against Its unique sense of place won’t be for everyone. It remains, despite good train links, decent local culture and community, relatively alone, quiet and small.

Continue reading...

<p>I’m making a cash contribution to the purchase and paying half the mortgage</p><p><strong>Q</strong> My boyfriend is buying a house and I plan to make a cash contribution towards its purchase. The mortgage will be solely in his name as I already own another property (which I plan to keep and rent). The value of the property is £487,000 so I plan to contribute £48,700 plus £1,435 stamp duty in order to own a 10% share of the property. I will then be paying half of the mortgage with my partner every month. I queried whether this was fair as if we were to split I would only walk away with 10%. He will contributing £50,000, plus the remainder of the stamp duty and fees. He has two children and has been through a divorce and so is trying to protect himself as he has mentioned that I already own a home. It bothers me that this arrangement isn’t the fairest way to work this out. Any advice would be much appreciated.<br><strong>CL</strong></p><p><strong>A</strong> I’m with you on the arrangement not being the fairest, because it isn’t. Paying 10% towards the purchase price and then paying half the mortgage each month should make you entitled to share of more than 10% (because part of the monthly mortgage repayment goes towards paying off the loan, therefore increasing your equity). However, I can also appreciate that going through divorce proceedings may have made your boyfriend a bit once-bitten-twice-shy about jointly-owned property, but if that is the case, perhaps he should avoid joint ownership altogether. And perhaps you should too if you doubt the fairness of it all – not least because such a lack of trust can’t be great for your relationship. This might also make sense from a financial point of view. Because you already own a property which you will not be selling, the stamp duty land tax (SDLT) due on the whole purchase price of the new property would be at the higher rate (ie standard rate plus 3%) so your 10% share of the total SDLT bill would be £2,896 rather than £1,435. The higher rate of SDLT will also apply if your boyfriend’s erstwhile family home has not been sold and he still has an interest in it. However, if any agreement about the family home with his ex-spouse has been recorded in a consent order approved by the court, he will be exempt from paying the higher rate of SDLT.</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/15/im-buying-a-house-with-my-boyfriend-is-10-a-fair-share-of-the-equity">Continue reading...</a>

I'm buying a house with my boyfriend – is 10% a fair share of the equity?

Apr 15, 2019 7:00

I’m making a cash contribution to the purchase and paying half the mortgage

Q My boyfriend is buying a house and I plan to make a cash contribution towards its purchase. The mortgage will be solely in his name as I already own another property (which I plan to keep and rent). The value of the property is £487,000 so I plan to contribute £48,700 plus £1,435 stamp duty in order to own a 10% share of the property. I will then be paying half of the mortgage with my partner every month. I queried whether this was fair as if we were to split I would only walk away with 10%. He will contributing £50,000, plus the remainder of the stamp duty and fees. He has two children and has been through a divorce and so is trying to protect himself as he has mentioned that I already own a home. It bothers me that this arrangement isn’t the fairest way to work this out. Any advice would be much appreciated.
CL

A I’m with you on the arrangement not being the fairest, because it isn’t. Paying 10% towards the purchase price and then paying half the mortgage each month should make you entitled to share of more than 10% (because part of the monthly mortgage repayment goes towards paying off the loan, therefore increasing your equity). However, I can also appreciate that going through divorce proceedings may have made your boyfriend a bit once-bitten-twice-shy about jointly-owned property, but if that is the case, perhaps he should avoid joint ownership altogether. And perhaps you should too if you doubt the fairness of it all – not least because such a lack of trust can’t be great for your relationship. This might also make sense from a financial point of view. Because you already own a property which you will not be selling, the stamp duty land tax (SDLT) due on the whole purchase price of the new property would be at the higher rate (ie standard rate plus 3%) so your 10% share of the total SDLT bill would be £2,896 rather than £1,435. The higher rate of SDLT will also apply if your boyfriend’s erstwhile family home has not been sold and he still has an interest in it. However, if any agreement about the family home with his ex-spouse has been recorded in a consent order approved by the court, he will be exempt from paying the higher rate of SDLT.

Continue reading...

<p>I want to buy my sibling out, but we can’t agree on a price and now he wants to go to court</p><p><strong>Q</strong> My brother and I inherited a cottage from my father. The cottage is of great sentimental value to me and I would like to keep it as a holiday home. My brother just wants as much money as possible from his inheritance. I’d like to buy his share, but we are unable to agree on a price. I obtained a surveyor’s valuation on the cottage, which valued the property at £120,000. My brother claims that the cottage is worth £250,000 which is supposedly based on an estate agent’s estimate. The property needs about £45,000 of structural repairs and another £40,000 spending on modernisation.</p><p>My brother has refused to negotiate with me and now wants to take me to the county court to force a sale of the house and its contents on the open market. Will the property be auctioned or put through a normal estate agent if he is successful? Will I be able to bid for the property? Can I stop him artificially inflating the price with bogus bids via his friends and family?<br><strong>PN</strong></p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/08/can-my-brother-force-me-to-sell-our-late-fathers-cottage">Continue reading...</a>

Can my brother force me to sell our late father's cottage?

Apr 8, 2019 7:00

I want to buy my sibling out, but we can’t agree on a price and now he wants to go to court

Q My brother and I inherited a cottage from my father. The cottage is of great sentimental value to me and I would like to keep it as a holiday home. My brother just wants as much money as possible from his inheritance. I’d like to buy his share, but we are unable to agree on a price. I obtained a surveyor’s valuation on the cottage, which valued the property at £120,000. My brother claims that the cottage is worth £250,000 which is supposedly based on an estate agent’s estimate. The property needs about £45,000 of structural repairs and another £40,000 spending on modernisation.

My brother has refused to negotiate with me and now wants to take me to the county court to force a sale of the house and its contents on the open market. Will the property be auctioned or put through a normal estate agent if he is successful? Will I be able to bid for the property? Can I stop him artificially inflating the price with bogus bids via his friends and family?
PN

Continue reading...

<p>She hasn’t had a mortgage before, but I’m told she will need to pay stamp duty on a mortgage</p><p><strong>Q</strong> My two daughters and I are the joint owners of a property for which we paid cash (so there is no mortgage involved). One of my daughters lives in the house and is now in the process – with her husband – of taking out a £120,000 mortgage so that she can buy her sister and me out (the house is valued at £180,000). On the strength of the £60,000 that she will get from her sister for her share of the house, my other daughter is also thinking of taking out a mortgage to buy her first home. Although neither of my daughters has had a mortgage before – and so in my view are first-time buyers – we have been told that they will both need to pay stamp duty on their mortgages. Is this correct?<br><strong>JC</strong></p><p><strong>A</strong> No, it is not correct that your daughters will have to pay stamp duty land tax (SDLT) on their mortgages because SDLT is not charged on mortgages but on what is called “consideration given” for a property which usually means what was paid for a property (or a share of a property). It is also incorrect to think that your daughters should be eligible for first-time-buyer relief from SDLT – which lets first-time buyers off SDLT on the first £300,000 of properties costing up to £500,000 – because, strictly speaking, they are not first-time buyers because they have previously owned property. In the words of HM Revenue &amp; Customs (HMRC): “In order to count as a first-time buyer, a purchaser must not, either alone or with others, have previously acquired a major interest in a dwelling situated anywhere in the world.”</p> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/apr/01/my-daughter-is-buying-me-out-of-a-house-must-she-pay-stamp-duty">Continue reading...</a>

My daughter is buying me out of a house – must she pay stamp duty?

Apr 1, 2019 7:00

She hasn’t had a mortgage before, but I’m told she will need to pay stamp duty on a mortgage

Q My two daughters and I are the joint owners of a property for which we paid cash (so there is no mortgage involved). One of my daughters lives in the house and is now in the process – with her husband – of taking out a £120,000 mortgage so that she can buy her sister and me out (the house is valued at £180,000). On the strength of the £60,000 that she will get from her sister for her share of the house, my other daughter is also thinking of taking out a mortgage to buy her first home. Although neither of my daughters has had a mortgage before – and so in my view are first-time buyers – we have been told that they will both need to pay stamp duty on their mortgages. Is this correct?
JC

A No, it is not correct that your daughters will have to pay stamp duty land tax (SDLT) on their mortgages because SDLT is not charged on mortgages but on what is called “consideration given” for a property which usually means what was paid for a property (or a share of a property). It is also incorrect to think that your daughters should be eligible for first-time-buyer relief from SDLT – which lets first-time buyers off SDLT on the first £300,000 of properties costing up to £500,000 – because, strictly speaking, they are not first-time buyers because they have previously owned property. In the words of HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC): “In order to count as a first-time buyer, a purchaser must not, either alone or with others, have previously acquired a major interest in a dwelling situated anywhere in the world.”

Continue reading...

Switch regions:  Ireland | United Kingdom | Australia
Copyright © 2016  DaftDrop | Designed & maintained in Ireland