Rural property values have been performing well since the beginning of the financial crisis, and have fared better than their urban counterparts. This is according to Halifax, which recently revealed that the average cost of a property investment in the countryside has dropped by 20 per cent since 2007, which is lower than the decline experienced in cities and towns of 22 per cent. In addition to this, the typical price of a property in rural areas is 17 per cent greater than those in urban locations, with the average value of a countryside home coming in at £201,191, compared with £171,709.
Martin Ellis, housing economist at Halifax, said this could be because living in the countryside remains an aspiration for many people in the UK. "The fresh air; the scenery; the slower pace; it all adds to the attraction," he said. However, Mr Ellis noted that one of the disadvantages of buying a property in remote areas is steeper costs with the "high prices [putting] rural homes out of their reach".
"The traditional British country pile has become less affordable, and it is proving more and more difficult to find fruitful results when foraging for houses in the country," the Halifax spokesman added. The most expensive rural location to live in was found to be Chiltern, with typical property prices at £427,647 in this Buckinghamshire area. This is more than four times the average cost of properties in East Ayrshire, which has the lowest real estate costs in the UK.
These findings come after the LSL/Acadametrics index showed that residential property values in England and Wales rose by 2.6 per cent in August compared with last year. This is an increase of 0.1 per cent from July. The report also predicted annual residential property prices will grow between 2.5 and three per cent annually.
- Friday 21 September 2012