Scottish house prices up by four per cent in 12 months
The UK House Price Index Scotland: May 2016 found that the average home during the month was worth £141,142, an increase of 2.8 per cent when compared to the previous month.
This compares to a UK average of £211,230, which was an increase of 8.1 per cent over the year, and an increase of 1.1 per cent when compared to the previous month.
The volume of residential sales in Scotland in March 2016 was 11,017, an increase of 45.4 per cent on the previous year. Changes in Land and Buildings Transaction Tax that came into effect on 1 April 2016 for additional dwellings, such as second homes and buy-to-let properties, are likely to have contributed to this increase. The city of Glasgow showed the biggest volume of sales in March with 1,579 sales.
The biggest price increase over the last year was in East Renfrewshire where the average price increased by 7.0 per cent to £201,282. The biggest decrease was in the city of Aberdeen, where prices fell by 9.2 per cent to £176,394.
The average price for a new build property in May 2016 was £200,554, an increase of 12.2 per cent on the previous year, while the average price for an existing resold property was £138,700, an increase of 3.6 per cent on the previous year.
The average price for a property purchased by a former owner occupier was £167,494, an increase of 4.1 per cent on the previous year. The average price for property purchased by a first time buyer was £115,428, an increase of 4.0 per cent on the previous year.
The average price for a cash sale was £130,169, an increase of 4.0 per cent on the previous year, while the average price for property purchased with a mortgage was £146,214, an increase of 4.1 per cent on the previous year.
Registers of Scotland’s director of commercial services, Kenny Crawford, said: “The new UK HPI Scotland has been well received by our users so far. There have been queries about the differences in published average house prices when comparing the HPI with the Registers of Scotland quarterly statistics. These differences were expected and reflect the different methodologies used in these publications. We have published charts on our website to allow comparison between the two publications and to explain the key differences.”