Earning over £100,000 a year and can't get a mortgage?

moanymoany

ginvzt wrote: »

We had a fish tank and sold the house... I think if it is kept clean that there is nothing wrong about it!!!! Why would a fish tank be a 'no no'????
The only problem with a big fish tank is moving it to the new house!!!!

Please accept my apology as I did not in any way wish to cast nastursiums on fish or fish keepers. It was a flippant remark. I do like fish and nice fishtanks are fascinating.

In the programmes I mentioned where there was a fish tank it was either badly situated or huge and in a small room. The clip showed only a little of the woman's house and I did not think it looked very attractive. Andrew Winter did re-site a fishtank and it looked very much better than where it had been.

ginvzt

moanymoany wrote: »

Please accept my apology as I did not in any way wish to cast nastursiums on fish or fish keepers. It was a flippant remark. I do like fish and nice fishtanks are fascinating.

In the programmes I mentioned where there was a fish tank it was either badly situated or huge and in a small room. The clip showed only a little of the woman's house and I did not think it looked very attractive. Andrew Winter did re-site a fishtank and it looked very much better than where it had been.

I am not offended, not to worry, just found it strange. I just think that if you keep it clean and tidy it will actually make you room look cosier/nicer/more welcome.
I agree that dogs/cats should be kept outside during the viewings. I don't mind either and I like them , but a big dog can be scary - especially if you don't know him! Even a small one might be annoying if it keeps going around around with you and you have to make sure you don't step on him. And the cat leaving hair on my trousers/skirt is not that welcome either!

Pobby

I think they should pop over to the old style board, do some batch cooking and stock up with Star Drops. Soon have them in a nice overpriced new build flat!

IveSeenTheLight

Trollfever wrote: »

The average age and affordability for first time buyers can be found in the CML statistics ML2:

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/statistics

It's interesting that the

• Median age of FTB is 28 (lowest was late 70,s early 80's at 26)
• Median Income is 35,000:eek:
• Median income multiplier is 3.30

also worth looking at http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/25_07_08Affordability.xls for mortgage to earnings and house price to earnings in the different regions

dopester

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

What a load of rubbish. Why doesn't he have a deposit? Have they only just started earning that level of income and so can't prove it's sustainable? Can they prove the income at all?

Agreed. Also the BBC is distorting the meaning of language in calling them `victims'.

He wants to buy and she wants to trade up. Not even candidates for repossession. Not exactly victims when people are losing their jobs and greater numbers increasingly at risk of losing their homes. A real dumbing-down piece.

And in case you missed it, Danny/Daniel Zargel supposedly wants to buy the house he currently rents, which he is standing in front of at the beginning of the VT, which half-looks like it could use new windows.

Can't make out the make or model of the car on the drive, but it doesn't look high performance in that burgundy colour, so doubtful he is wasting his money there.

My immediate thought was who, perhaps in his business field, is he trying to impress with his £100K and apparent solvency, but there seem to be quite a few Daniel Zargels including one company director.

Annando

I'm no expert on this but I think he is lying about the 100k income. He makes a slight pause before mentioning the figure. I think he wants to impress us :-)
Also have a look at the house, the car and the furniture... unless he and his wife spend all that money on vacations, hair + beauty treatments etc... I don't see where it could be going... I mean he doesn't seem to spending a fortune on clothes, doesn't look like a drug addict...
You are all right seems fishy...

TDS_2

Yet again another sensationalist story from the BBC.

Wrt to couple - how about they start saving a deposit like evrybody else. I would not lend to anyone, regardless of earnings, if they couldn't scape together a deposit.

LittleMissAspie

They earn 100k between them - that's more take home pay than one person earning it. If we say 50k each then that's between 5000 and 5800 per month, depending on pensions and student loans.

Living costs for my boyfriend and I are £1000 a month, so this couple could probably save 4k a month. That's 96k after two years, plus interest. Couldn't buy a house with that, but the mortgage needed for a modest home would be peanuts.

Dithering_Dad

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Even with this high earnings, 100k will probably mean a take home of around 60k after income tax, nat insurance and pension.

Even with no other outgoings, this is only 90k after 18 months.

Do you expect to buy outright properties for 90k (Well it can be done but I doubt someone on 100k a year wants to buy a 90k property)?

Even then, what do they live on in the 18 months

Actually, it's often the case that the more you earn, the less tax you pay. I paid myself £83,686.00 last year but only paid £11,755.97 in tax and £662.75 in National Insurance. If this chap has a decent accountant, then perhaps he'll be doing the same?

How he manages to have no money for a deposit is another story, so I agree that this doesn't seem to add up.

EDIT: Oops, actually I paid myself £88,911.00, I was looking at the figure with my personal allowance (£5225) deducted.

lostinrates

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Actually, it's often the case that the more you earn, the less tax you pay. I paid myself £83,686.00 last year but only paid £11,755.97 in tax and £662.75 in National Insurance. If this chap has a decent accountant, then perhaps he'll be doing the same?

How he manages to have no money for a deposit is another story, so I agree that this doesn't seem to add up.

wow. Seriously want your accountant.