House prices continue to accelerate

15 April 2014 Last updated at 11:32 House prices are 3.6% higher than their previous peak The rate at which house prices are rising has continued to increase, according to official figures.

Prices across the UK rose by 9.1% in the year to February 2014, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has reported.

That was a considerable jump from the annual rate of 6.8% in January.

More recent data from big lenders such as Nationwide and Halifax has showed house price growth moderating in the past couple of months.

The ONS said house prices in February were 3.6% higher than the pre-recession peak in 2008.

Prices in London rose by their fastest rate for nearly seven years. Over the last 12 months, the cost of houses in the capital increased by 17.7%, the highest inflation rate since July 2007.

Excluding London and the South East, prices rose by 5.8%.

Every nation in the UK saw a rise in prices over the last year, from 9.7% in England to 2.4% in Scotland.

Prices rose by 5.3% in Wales and 2.8% in Northern Ireland.

'Superbubble'

The news has once again prompted concern about a housing bubble, particularly in London.

"Forget talk of house price bubbles. In London, the market is well beyond that. What we're witnessing in the capital is a superbubble," said Oliver Atkinson of urbansalesandlettings.co.uk.

But the government was keen to play down such talk.

The Housing Minister, Kris Hopkins, said the amount of money being lent out in mortgages was still comparatively small.

"Mortgage lending activity in the housing market remains below the historic average and relative to earnings, median house prices across England are around the same level they were in 2005," he said.

More houses

The ONS figures also show that first-time buyers have been amongst those hardest hit by house price rises.

While the price of houses sold to first-timers rose by 10.5% in the year to February, those sold to everyone else rose by 8.6%.

Housing charity Shelter said the only solution was to build more houses.

"We need to see the government commit to concrete plans that will close the ever-expanding gap between the homes we have, and the homes we need," said Campbell Robb, Shelter's chief executive.

"This is the only way to put the brakes on our rollercoaster housing market, and give a generation of priced-out young people and families the chance of a stable home," he added.

In his March budget, Chancellor George Osborne announced plans for 15,000 new homes in Ebbsfleet in Kent.

He also extended part of the government's Help to Buy Scheme, which allows buyers to put down a deposit of just 5% on a new home.

View the original article here

File-sharing case 'must continue'

8 February 2011 Last updated at 17:24 Thousands of letters have been sent to alleged illegal file-sharers A controversial law firm that sent letters to alleged illegal file sharers has been told it cannot drop its cases to "avoid public scrutiny".

ACS:Law contacted thousands of people accusing them of illegally downloading movies and songs and demanding payments of £500 to avoid court action.

Cases against 26 of them proceeded, before the company attempted to pull out of prosecution at the last minute.

Now a judge had criticised the firm for its methods.

"I cannot imagine a system better designed to create disincentives to test the issues in court," said Judge Ian Birss at the Patents County Court in London.

The case stems from a letter-writing campaign by ACS:Law and its partner company MediaCAT, which sent an undisclosed number of notices to alleged file sharers demanding they pay a fine or face the prospect of costly legal action.

Some of those contacted paid up, but it later emerged that the two companies had been taking 65% of the fines collected, with the minority of the money being passed back to the copyright holders in question, most of whom remain anonymous.

Those tactics - known as "speculative invoicing" - had come in for heavy criticism from those who claimed that the action was unfair.

Consumer group Which? said it had found several instances where plainly innocent people had received the demands.

Campaign of harassment

The concerns stepped up last month when the head of ACS:Law, solicitor Andrew Crossley, suddenly told the court he wanted to withdraw all of the cases.

Mr Crossley blamed a campaign of harassment and threats that had "caused immense hassle to me and my family".

But the court said that the move was confusing and gave the impression that ACS:Law was attempting to avoid scrutiny.

Judge Birss added that the case could not be discontinued, since the copyright holders themselves should be given time to take further action if they wanted, but strongly criticised the tactics used by the two companies.

"Why take cases to court and test the assertions when one can just write more letters and collect payments from a portion of the recipients?"

Mr Crossley, who was not present in court, had said that he fully intended to prosecute the cases before pulling out.

The judgment, however, cast doubt on that - pointing out that one of the reasons given for discontinuing the cases was that crucial documents were in storage.

Continue reading the main story

Why take cases to court and test the assertions when one can just write more letters and collect payments.”

End Quote Judge Ian Birss "If true, it is extraordinary," said the ruling. "A party who keeps key documents which are cited in the particulars of claim in storage is not a party anxious to progress their claim in court."

ACS:Law announced that it was shutting down last week, and MediaCAT has also been wound up.

Mr Crossley is now the subject of an investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Lawyers acting for some of the 26 defendants said they were pleased the complex case had been treated properly.

"The judgment highlights a number of legal and technical difficulties with these case, which we had advised our clients of throughout," said Michael Forrester of law firm Ralli, which represented some of the defendants.

"We are dealing with cases where consumers have explained how they cannot possibly have uploaded or downloaded copyright protected material, but they are still pursued."

The court gave MediaCAT and the copyright owners in question 14 days to join the action before it faces being struck out.

A further hearing is set for 16 March, when applications to award costs are also likely to be discussed.

View the original article here