How do I know what to offer for a house
RNZ's money correspondent answers your questions about buying a house.
Photo:
RNZ
We're trying to buy a first home and lots of places we look at are "price by negotiation" or deadline sales. How do we know what to offer?
I think there are a few things you can do to help give you a guide to what sort of offer might be appropriate.
It can help to look at other recent sales in the area, and work out how they compare. You can find these on sites like Homes.co.nz - if you see a place that looks a similar size and condition and in the same sort of area, it might give you a guide as to what might be reasonable.
This is where going to a few open homes before you start looking seriously can really help, because you'll get a sense of what represents good value.
Sometimes you see data going around about a certain suburb selling at a percentage above or below CV - this can give you a general guide but won't account for the specific features of the particular house you're looking at.
But Steve Goodey, who does a lot of this in his work as a property investor and investment coach said those sorts of data sites would not help for some of the factors that can make all the difference when you're buying a house to live in.
He said while an offer for a rental property was usually about making the numbers work, when it was an owner-occupied deal other facts were more important, like the vendor's motivation, how badly the buyer wanted a particular property, how soon they needed a house and how "special" a place was.
The price that a vendor might be willing to accept will also be influenced to a degree by their circumstances - someone who is just testing the market to see if they can sell will be less likely to take a lower offer than someone who needs to move.
If someone bought recently, they might also have less room to accept a lower price than someone who bought a long time ago.
Real estate salespeople should give you a guide as to what sort of price range the property might be in, but remember they are acting for the vendor.
You'll need to do your own research and offer a price that feels right for you. It's then up to the salesperson to present that offer to the vendor, and you can negotiate from there if it's appropriate.
I'm thinking about buying an investment property but how does it work to use the equity from my existing house?
It's quite common for property investors to get started by using the equity in their own homes. It works like this.
If you bought your house a while ago, and you've paid down your home loan, you might have built up extra equity in your property.
Say for example you bought your house 10 years ago for $500,000 and it's now worth $1 million.
If you had a home loan initially for $400,000, and you've paid off a bit of the loan over time, so you now owe $350,000, you've gone from having $100,000 equity to having $650,000.
The bank may let you increase your loan to $800,000, giving you $450,000 that can be used to purchase an investment property.
You can use that equity as a deposit and then get a loan for up to 70 percent of the investment property's value to complete the deal.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Defence heads face scrutiny week hearing, promise to be fiscally responsible
Defence secretary Brook Barrington. Photo: Ministry of Defence Defence heads have assured politicians their huge new budget takes into account soldiers actually having to fire their weapons. They fronted up to an even-tempered scrutiny week hearing with MPs at Parliament on Thursday afternoon. Greens MP Lawrence Xu-Nan asked whether the budget boost of $9 billion new spending over four years allowed for buying the likes of replacement Javelin missiles, which cost $400,000 each. Defence secretary Brook Barrington responded that the increased budget meant troops could now move past the approach from the last 50 years of being only partly equipped. "The defence force is actually being provided with funding to ensure that, if we upgrade the capabilty, we are also able to shoot things with it," he said. Along with defence force Chief Air Marshal Tony Davies, Barrington laid out a raft of measures they said would enable them to buy weapons and other systems faster and smarter. "The demand queue is growing," Barrington said. "The longer it takes us to lodge an order, someone else has got their place in the queue before us and some of this stuff takes three years. "You know, you lose your place in the queue... and you're losing time." They felt a sense of urgency, but also had to ensure quality thresholds were set, so that in 3-4 years he was not up before MPs again being told, "We knew we couldn't trust you folk to bloody get your way out of a paper bag", he said. "We've got to find a sweet spot between rigour, confidence and pace." He added defence had already met with 280 people from 174 companies, both last month and this month, and that an industry strategy would be put out soon. They would be fiscally responsible with the billions of taxpayer money, Davies said. Defence Force Chief Air Marshal Tony Davies. Photo: RNZ / Ashleigh McCaull To accelerate, they would drop the old approach of trying to get 30 years of life from gear and retreading it, and instead, look at getting a "minimum viable product" quickly out to the field, he said. "Simple... quick... lean." On the personnel front, they had to rebuild forces, he said. The budget and plan had "buoyed" personnel, but their thinned-back ranks still constrained how much notice they needed to deploy, how long they could deploy for and whether they could mount multiple operations. Personnel turnover had fallen to less than seven percent, but vacancy rates in February were about 30 percent, an Official Information Act request (OIA) showed. The army was short 1500 people, Air Force 660 and navy 630. Defence was "over-training" people to hit 100 percent, when it did not need to, so was reviewing how to speed training up, Davies said. The 15-year plan was to add 20 percent to combat forces - or 2500 people - and the only way to do that currently was to cut civilian jobs down, he said. "At the moment, we've got ships tied up that can't go to sea, because we haven't got the sailors. We've got people that are going on their fifth deployment overseas, because we don't have the number of soldiers. "We've got Joint Force headquarters out at Trentham with watchfloors that can't be filled, because we haven't got the uniformed people with those skills. "We need those. The money is tight, still, even with uplifts." An OIA response showed that, in March, a hefty 313 positions were vacant at Joint Defence Services, far more than in other sections. Defence Minister Judith Collins said the point was to be able to defend against anybody who "threatened our people, or our assets". "Our people are not going to have to wave a white flag anymore. They are going to be able to get out there and protect themselves." She said she had told "prime" multinational defence contractors their best bet for getting a share of the business was to involve New Zealand firms. The small firms would not be written "out of the equation", Barrington said. He added the business cases for two very large projects - replacing the 757s and the maritime helicopters - were well advanced. Other business cases would be made short and sharp. The fleet renewal planning was by far the biggest job, but the budget gave the ministry a couple of million dollars extra for teams to do that. "What happens in two years, if the world situation's got worse and we need to step it up again?" Davies said. "How are we going to accelerate our capability acquisition process. It might be that we need to double our efforts there, so we are constantly looking at ways to fine tune it." The budget set aside $155m over four years for new military allowances for deployments and hundreds of millions for more operations. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Former New Zealand PM Helen Clark Blames Cook Islands For Creating A Crisis
Article – RNZ Helen Clark says the Cook Islands government entered into a strategic partnership with a major power nation – China – without consulting New Zealand. Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific Presenter/Producer Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark believes the Cook Islands, a realm of New Zealand, caused a crisis for itself by not consulting Wellington before signing a deal with China. The New Zealand government has paused more than $18 million in development assistance to the Cook Islands after the latter failed to provide satisfactory answers to Aotearoa's questions about its partnership agreement with Beijing. The Cook Islands is in free association with New Zealand and governs its own affairs. But New Zealand provides assistance with foreign affairs (upon request), disaster relief, and defence. The 2001 Joint Centenary Declaration signed between the two nations requires them to consult each other on defence and security, which Winston Peters said had not been honoured. Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown both have a difference of opinion on the level of consultation required between the two nations on such matters. 'There is no way that the 2001 declaration envisaged that Cook Islands would enter into a strategic partnership with a great power behind New Zealand's back,' Clark told RNZ Pacific on Thursday. Clark was a signatory of the 2001 agreement with the Cook Islands as New Zealand prime minister at the time. 'It is the Cook Islands government's actions which have created this crisis,' she said. 'The urgent need now is for face-to-face dialogue at a high level to mend the NZ-CI relationship.' Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has downplayed the pause in funding to the Cook Islands during his second day of his trip to China. Brown told parliament on Thursday (Wednesday, Cook Islands time) that his government knew the funding cut was coming. He also suggested a double standard, pointing out that New Zealand has entered also deals with China that the Cook Islands was not 'privy to or being consulted on'. A Pacific law expert says that, while New Zealand has every right to withhold its aid to the Cook Islands, the way it is going about it will not endear it to Pacific nations. Auckland University of Technology (AUT) senior law lecturer and a former Pacific Islands Forum advisor Sione Tekiteki told RNZ Pacific that for Aotearoa to keep highlighting that it is 'a Pacific country and yet posture like the United States gives mixed messages'. 'Obviously, Pacific nations in true Pacific fashion will not say much, but they are indeed thinking it,' Tekiteki said. Since day dot there has been a misunderstanding on what the 2001 agreement legally required New Zealand and Cook Islands to consult on, and the word consultation has become somewhat of a sticking point. The latest statement from the Cook Islands government confirms it is still a discrepancy both sides want to hash out. 'There has been a breakdown and difference in the interpretation of the consultation requirements committed to by the two governments in the 2001 Joint Centenary Declaration,' the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Immigration (MFAI) said. 'An issue that the Cook Islands is determined to address as a matter of urgency'. Tekiteki said that, unlike a treaty, the 2001 declaration was not 'legally binding' per se but serves more to express the intentions, principles and commitments of the parties to work together in 'recognition of the close traditional, cultural and social ties that have existed between the two countries for many hundreds of years'. He said the declaration made it explicitly clear that Cook Islands had full conduct of its foreign affairs, capacity to enter treaties and international agreements in its own right and full competence of its defence and security. However, he added that there was a commitment of the parties to 'consult regularly'. This, for Clark, the New Zealand leader who signed the all-important agreement more than two decades ago, this is where Brown misstepped. Clark previously labelled the Cook Islands-China deal 'clandestine' which has 'damaged' its relationship with New Zealand. RNZ Pacific contacted the Cook Islands Ministry of Foreign Affairs for comment but was advised by the MFAI secretary that they are not currently accommodating interviews.
Scoop
a day ago
- Scoop
Former New Zealand PM Helen Clark Blames Cook Islands For Creating A Crisis
Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark believes the Cook Islands, a realm of New Zealand, caused a crisis for itself by not consulting Wellington before signing a deal with China. The New Zealand government has paused more than $18 million in development assistance to the Cook Islands after the latter failed to provide satisfactory answers to Aotearoa's questions about its partnership agreement with Beijing. The Cook Islands is in free association with New Zealand and governs its own affairs. But New Zealand provides assistance with foreign affairs (upon request), disaster relief, and defence. The 2001 Joint Centenary Declaration signed between the two nations requires them to consult each other on defence and security, which Winston Peters said had not been honoured. Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown both have a difference of opinion on the level of consultation required between the two nations on such matters. "There is no way that the 2001 declaration envisaged that Cook Islands would enter into a strategic partnership with a great power behind New Zealand's back," Clark told RNZ Pacific on Thursday. Clark was a signatory of the 2001 agreement with the Cook Islands as New Zealand prime minister at the time. "It is the Cook Islands government's actions which have created this crisis," she said. "The urgent need now is for face-to-face dialogue at a high level to mend the NZ-CI relationship." Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has downplayed the pause in funding to the Cook Islands during his second day of his trip to China. Brown told parliament on Thursday (Wednesday, Cook Islands time) that his government knew the funding cut was coming. He also suggested a double standard, pointing out that New Zealand has entered also deals with China that the Cook Islands was not "privy to or being consulted on". A Pacific law expert says that, while New Zealand has every right to withhold its aid to the Cook Islands, the way it is going about it will not endear it to Pacific nations. Auckland University of Technology (AUT) senior law lecturer and a former Pacific Islands Forum advisor Sione Tekiteki told RNZ Pacific that for Aotearoa to keep highlighting that it is "a Pacific country and yet posture like the United States gives mixed messages". "Obviously, Pacific nations in true Pacific fashion will not say much, but they are indeed thinking it," Tekiteki said. Since day dot there has been a misunderstanding on what the 2001 agreement legally required New Zealand and Cook Islands to consult on, and the word consultation has become somewhat of a sticking point. The latest statement from the Cook Islands government confirms it is still a discrepancy both sides want to hash out. "There has been a breakdown and difference in the interpretation of the consultation requirements committed to by the two governments in the 2001 Joint Centenary Declaration," the Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Immigration (MFAI) said. "An issue that the Cook Islands is determined to address as a matter of urgency". Tekiteki said that, unlike a treaty, the 2001 declaration was not "legally binding" per se but serves more to express the intentions, principles and commitments of the parties to work together in "recognition of the close traditional, cultural and social ties that have existed between the two countries for many hundreds of years". He said the declaration made it explicitly clear that Cook Islands had full conduct of its foreign affairs, capacity to enter treaties and international agreements in its own right and full competence of its defence and security. However, he added that there was a commitment of the parties to "consult regularly". This, for Clark, the New Zealand leader who signed the all-important agreement more than two decades ago, this is where Brown misstepped. Clark previously labelled the Cook Islands-China deal "clandestine" which has "damaged" its relationship with New Zealand. RNZ Pacific contacted the Cook Islands Ministry of Foreign Affairs for comment but was advised by the MFAI secretary that they are not currently accommodating interviews.
