We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Buy to Let - Further Proof that it is on its dying legs
Comments
-
FraudBuster wrote: »And how many Buy-to-Let businesses have been funded by Lie-to-Buy mortgages?
Very few I would have thought. BTL mortgages have always had more stringent conditions than residential mortgages, larger deposits and rents that are 125% of the mortgage repayments. The BTLers that are going to struggle are those who bought into schemes where the rental income was artificially inflated and guaranteed for a set amount of time. When the real market rental kicks in then they may not be receiving enough to cover the mortgage repayments. Caveat emptor.0 -
One of the worst things the Thatcherite Tories did was to deregulate mortgage lending. The building societies used to be fairly careful lenders, with a max of 3 x earnings, decent deposit, and so on. There was an informal cartel.
All the deregulation did was allow people to borrow more (with a lower deposit), which just pushed up house prices to utilise the finance available.No reliance should be placed on the above! Absolutely none, do you hear?0 -
Very few I would have thought. BTL mortgages have always had more stringent conditions than residential mortgages, larger deposits and rents that are 125% of the mortgage repayments.
However you have to take into count gift deposits, property clubs overvalued properties and other dodgy stuff. Landlords seem in the majority so highly geared in the last few years that the property falls will adversly effect them.
Buy to let investors are simpley more exposed to this house price crash. Even Paragon is now distancing itself from failed buy to let investors saying they are not proper buy to let but flippers.:D:exclamatiScams - Shared Equity, Shared Ownership, Newbuy, Firstbuy and Help to Buy.
Save our Savers
0 -
Some interesting reading can be found from the links on this page:
http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/Library/Communication/PR/2008/090.shtml0 -
They will live in houses and flats. Plenty of BTL around to choose from and quite a few trying to offload their non main properties.
But there is a shortage of properties to rent in some places - a quick check of Barnstaple (where I live, population about 35000) shows a total of 9 places to rent - including just 3 houses. Not many STRs needed to fill those up.
I know that some cities have been overdeveloped with flats and estates, but that doesn't mean that everywhere is in the same boat0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.5K Spending & Discounts
- 247.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.5K Life & Family
- 261.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards