Mom? Can I borrow the car?
There’s an article in the Ottawa Citizen about a recent study sponsored by the Bank of Montreal that found a large number of people between the ages of 30-34 living with their parents.
Adult children are returning to their parents’ homes in unprecedented numbers, with rosy dreams of saving for their own first homes — yet few are socking away enough cash for an adequate down payment, according to a recent survey.
“These kids have to get a reality check,” says Cid Palacio, vice-president, BMO Bank of Montreal, which commissioned the poll of 1,205 people, conducted by Decima Research in six Canadian cities. Ottawa was not included.
“They have unrealistic ambitions and will be chasing this rainbow of homeownership without a tangible or practical plan on how to get there.”
The article goes on to mention that in those 6 cities: Halifax, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary and Vancouver the ’stay at homes’ have an average income of $43k and have been saving about 12% of their pretax income for about 18 months. The average expectation is to have a 25% down payment in just under 4 years.
No way, says Ms. Palacio. “They should be saving twice as much money or realize it will take them eight years, not four.”
Those not living at home are saving about 10% of their pretax income. The bank suggests that “with rising house prices” potential buyers should “consider that they won’t be able to save 25 per cent of a house price for a down payment”. There is no mention of the possibility that prices will stop rising or drop as they have in the past.
RSS 2.0 comments feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
April 18th, 2007 at 8:08 pm
They need to teach basic personal finance in schools
What’s wrong with kids learning it from their parents, like they always used to?
Guess the problem is that there are a lot of kids now who don’t have family members who remember the Great Depression or WWII.
April 18th, 2007 at 6:26 pm
That’s crazy… I just happen to fall under the description in the article. Late 20s, making >$43K (and increasing, slowly), still at home, paying some (minimal) rent but the difference is that I’m committed to saving.
Currently, I’m putting away 18% in RRSP (3% of that contributed by my employer), 10% in my 10% fund (as per the Wealthy Barber) and 24% in my downpayment savings acct.
Do I have a life? I try to, by doing things that don’t cost too much and by always looking for deals. I want to buy my first home (condo) but it’s looking harder and harder. What I think I can afford (under $175K) looks like the dumps to me unless I move to where there are bridges.
Anything new (or newish, say within the last 10 years) just seem so unattainable. Sometimes when I look at new condo ads and their pricing, it just makes me sick to my stomach how small (<400sq ft) and how expensive they are... I catch myself feeling despaired at certain times but I also know I'm moving in a positive direction by continuing to save as I do. I just wish in the near future that a price correction does come so it makes it possible for the average, hard working 20, 30 something to live in his/her own home. This is what I'm throwing out there in the universe (for those who has seen The Secret documentary).
April 18th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
That article is stupid on a few levels, as pointed out here. One thing that 30-34 year olds living at home and FTBs in Vancouver seem to have in common: lack of financial knowledge. They need to teach basic personal finance in schools.
I moved out to rent when I was 19, bought when I was 23. Its called life experience, and I don’t understand people who live at home until they are 30.. you just missed out on some prime years living your own life, and you aren’t getting them back. If you’re in school or otherwise financially hampered that’s one thing, but if you have a full time job, move out! Real estate ownership isn’t the be-all end-all of life.
April 18th, 2007 at 11:49 am
i’m in my late 20’s.. living at home.. it sucks i won’t lie to you, but i’m hoping by saving and waiting it out a bit longer i can get ahead in the long run… either that or i’m moving east.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:53 am
“These kids have to get a reality check,” says Cid Palacio, vice-president, BMO….
“They have unrealistic ambitions and will be chasing this rainbow of homeownership without a tangible or practical plan on how to get there.”
Unrealistic ambitions? I know three guys who stayed at home into their late 20s or early 30s, saved up a down payment and bought a place. Meanwhile I’ve been renting, saving much slower, and can’t afford to buy. If FTBs who are paying minimal or zero housing costs can’t save fast enough to catch up to the market, then no one can.
April 18th, 2007 at 10:29 am
I like how they just blindly assume that house prices will continue to appreciate at a faster pace than traditional investments indefinitely.
For god’s sakes you’d think the banks could hire someone who knew the basics of economics or mathematics.
The other option is they are lying through their teeth an an attempt to cash in on the last of the greatest fools. But they wouldn’t do that would they?
April 18th, 2007 at 10:01 am
Here’s another angle on this:
If one had to apply the same critical analysis to buyers in Vancouver, I’d bet that’d they’d also be found to have “unrealistic ambitions”, but, guess what, the Vancouver buyers are following through with those ambitions regardless, with the help of the banks.
We know that 25% down is rare currently, particularly for FTBs.
And $43K pa for live at home ‘kids’ is not a million miles from the $56K average Vancouver income, and disposible income is possibly greater in the former group if one takes into account living with Mom & Pop is often essentially rent free. So many of these 30-34 year olds are likely to be in more sound fiscal shape than many current Vancouver FTBs.
Who needs the “reality check” more?
April 18th, 2007 at 9:59 am
LOL! I like the title