UK house prices increased by 0.6% in January, according to the latest survey from the Halifax.

The change means that the average cost of a house was £160,907 last month, the bank said.

House prices are 1.8% lower than a year ago, according to the Halifax's measure.

The bank said prospects for the housing market over the coming months depended on whether the debt crisis in the eurozone would affect the UK economy.

"If the UK can avoid a prolonged recession, we expect broad stability in house prices in 2012," said Martin Ellis, Halifax's housing economist.

The Halifax, now part of Lloyds Banking Group, said that the price of the average home in the UK was very similar to the average value in the middle of 2011.

This had held up owing to the low level of interest rates, the lender said.

And Tracy Kellett, managing director of UK buying agent BDI Home Finders, said: "House prices are being held artificially high by two key factors - an extreme lack of stock and historically low interest rates.

"Throughout 2012, we are likely to see a further widening of the north-south divide. Prices will be hit hardest where the economy is feeling it the hardest."

House prices in the three months to January fell by 0.9% when compared with the previous three months, the Halifax said. This three-month on three-month comparison is often thought to be a better measure of underlying conditions in the market.

Last week, the latest survey from the Nationwide building society valued the average home at £162,228. It said that prices fell by 0.2% in January compared with December.

The Nationwide said the annual rise in house prices in January was 0.6%, notably different to the 1.8% fall recorded by the Halifax.

However, the year-on-year comparison is calculated slightly differently by the two lenders. The Halifax compares the previous three months with the same three months a year earlier to give a smoother comparison, rather than a direct comparison of the equivalent months.

It will be actress Letitia Dean's third comeback to Walford since the show began in 1985.

The 44-year-old, one of the soap's original characters, was last seen on the square in 2006, when her husband Dennis Rickman died.

A key character in the BBC One show, she is best known for her relationships with the Mitchell brothers.

The former Queen Victoria landlady was married to Grant Mitchell, but later had an affair with Phil, which prompted her first departure from the series in 1994.

'Thrilled'

In 2001 she returned for three years, during which time she took over the pub from her adoptive parents, Angie and Den Watts.

The character's last return was in 2005, but she bowed out after Dennis was stabbed to death.

The storyline surrounding Sharon's return has not not been announced, but Dean said she was "looking forward to being part of the EastEnders team again".

She added: "It has always been very close to my heart. I cannot wait to work with my old colleagues and see what is in store for Sharon."

Executive producer Bryan Kirkwood said: "I'm thrilled that Letitia is coming back home to Albert Square where she belongs.

"Sharon is a real favourite amongst EastEnders' fans and I for one can't wait until she arrives back in the summer."

The government has failed in an appeal against a decision which blocked its attempts to reduce solar subsidies.

The Court of Appeal case involved the government's move to halve the payments made to households with solar panels, which it says are unsustainable.

However, the government has said it will seek leave to take the case to the UK's Supreme Court.

Under the feed-in tariffs programme, people in Britain with solar panels are paid for the electricity they generate.

The rulings will not affect households that have installed panels before the changes on 12 December.

Solar businesses and campaigners had warned thousands of jobs could be lost as a result of the proposed tariff cut.

"We want to maximise the number of installations that are possible within the available budget rather than use available money to pay a higher tariff to halve the number of installations," said Energy and Climate Change secretary Chris Huhne.

Employers' group the CBI said the government should abandon its legal battle.

"The judgement should be used to draw a line under this saga, which saw the government scoring a spectacular own goal and confidence in the renewables sector undermined," said director general John Cridland.

Confusion

The decision, and the government's intention to launch a second appeal, will lead to widespread uncertainty for consumers and installers.

It means consumers cannot know what subsidy they will receive for any panels installed since 12 December.

The previous tariff was just over 43p per kilowatt-hour generated.

The new tariff of 21p per kilowatt-hour had been expected to come into effect from 1 April.

But in October, the government said the cut would take place ahead of schedule, with the reduced rate paid to anyone who installed solar panels after 12 December.

The government announced a consultation on the proposals, which closed on 23 December - 11 days after the decision was to have been implemented.

The High Court ruled that changing the tariffs in this way was "legally flawed", a decision the Court of Appeal has now upheld.

The change had particularly upset industry, as it affected projects which may already have been commissioned, but not installed.

"This decision has very important implications for the whole renewable energy sector in the UK," said Ben Warren, a partner at Ernst and Young.

 "It is a clear message that retrospective adjustment of support is not acceptable,"

The government has put a contingency plan in place which would see the current tariff, of 43p, remain in place until the start of March, when the tariff will reduce to 21p.

This means consumers can have certainty that any installations past 3 March will attract the lower rate.

However, the Supreme Court appeal means people installing panels now, or who have installed panels since 12 December, will not know what rate they will get until the legal process is over.

The government claims paying the higher rate between December and March would cost the scheme £1.5bn over 25 years.

The tariff for surplus electricity exported to the national grid remains 3.1p per kilowatt-hour paid in addition to the tariff, and is unaffected by the changes.

There is also uncertainty about the sustainability of the reduced rate - as a rush of installations now may use up the scheme's remaining budget.

"The future of the feed in tariff beyond April 2012 is now hugely uncertain. Government and industry now need to work together to create a sustainable solar industry in the UK," added Mr Warren.

The Renewable Energy Association has called for the overall budget to be increased.

"The government's action and the subsequent court case had together thrown the solar industry into a state of extreme uncertainty," said chief executive Gaynor Hartnell.

"We now want to put this behind us as swiftly as possible, and work with government and supporters to secure a larger budget for small-scale renewable energy generation," she added.

UK house sales fell just 1% last year to 869,000, one of the lowest totals on record, HM Revenue & Customs has said.

It means the property market has been in a three-year slump, with sales roughly half the levels recorded in the run up to the banking crisis in 2007.

Sales have been depressed by a combination of mortgage rationing by lenders, and rising unemployment.

The record low was in 2009, when just 848,000 homes were sold, the fewest since modern records began in 1978.

Geoff Meen, professor of economics at the University of Reading, said the fall reflected several factors.