Northern Rock Mortgage Calculator

zappahey

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

The median salary where we live (Wokingham Council areas) is £29.3k according to ASHE

mean salary is £34.8k

and you can buy nothing for 3 times median salary.

property is not particularly cheap

This particularly gets my goat. There will always be a section of low earners who will never be afford to buy a house so the whole 3 (or whatever) times median/mean/average salary thing is nonsense as the average salary of home owners will almost certainly be higher than the average salary of the general population.

chucky

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

The median salary where we live (Wokingham Council areas) is £29.3k according to ASHE

mean salary is £34.8k

and you can buy nothing for 3 times median salary.

property is not particularly cheap

hopefully without sounding patronising and aloof in any way - would FTB's not be asking themselves that this area may not be the right area for them and find somewhere more affordable?

ad9898_3

zappahey wrote: »

There will always be a section of low earners who will never be afford to buy a house

Not in Clown's debt fuelled 8x,9x,10x salary boom there wasn't.

ad44downey

chucky wrote: »

correct and this basic salary thing is assuming that these buyers ONLY have their deposit and have not benefited from a bonus, inheritance etc...

by the above logic only people on £300k a year will buy a £1m property

SHOCKING NEWS chucky agrees with Dan:

ad44downey

twirlypinky wrote: »

It's so frustrating being single, it really sucks. I'm going to be waiting forever to buy a house, I earn £26k.

I don't think these things should be based on xyz times your salary, it's not a fair calculation. They should base the figure on the amount of money you have left a month after bills that you can afford to pay back on a mortgage. So if I can afford £650pcm on a mortgage, that's £7,800 a year, over 25 years is £195,000 total repayment. If the rates are 6%, they can lend me £130k. Ish. That's a lot more than my salary x 3.5.

What you really need is not the facility to borrow shedloads of money which you may or may not be able to pay back. But for house prices to fall to a sensible level.

baileysbattlebus

zappahey wrote: »

This particularly gets my goat. There will always be a section of low earners who will never be afford to buy a house so the whole 3 (or whatever) times median/mean/average salary thing is nonsense as the average salary of home owners will almost certainly be higher than the average salary of the general population.

We live a relatively high priced area, it's in the Thames Valley and it's an easy if expensive commute to London.

I think FTB's have struggled for 20 years or more here.

One of our own children bought a house 3 years ago with her partner - 2 bed semi the cost was £195k, a 10% deposit and an "affordability" mortgage from Nationwide. The joint income was £50k. There was no other debt - which made a big difference to the amount they could borrow.

But people do manage to do it and manage to pay their mortgages in general with out being repossessed.

Rents are quite expensive too, a 2 bed flat or house will set you back between £750 and £900.

I guess people are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

twirlypinky

ad44downey wrote: »

What you really need is not the facility to borrow shedloads of money which you may or may not be able to pay back. But for house prices to fall to a sensible level.

Well yes, that would be the ideal, as i would just borrow less (although i know people that would borrow just as much and get a bigger/better house, which is perhaps part of the reason we're in this situation now).

I want a small 2 bed house, I can't afford that anywhere round here. come on houses prices, down you come, you know it makes sense.

Graham_Devon

ad9898 wrote: »

Glad to see the second persons income used as only .5, when I first bought it was 3.5x single + 1x spouse, or 2.5x joint. Using that calculation, the sh*t didn't really hit the fan with repo's in the early '90's until interest rates were well into double digits.

Yet because of the reckless lending (and borrowing) that has happened, repo's this year are likely to exceed the early '90's, with interest rates at 1% and dropping, go figure, it's not rocket science. I would like to see capping at the historical multiples, it may help stop the sorry mess we are in now, that's set to get worse throughout the coming year.

It seemed to be earlier as I tried it! But like pasturenew says, it's not.

It doubles what you can borrow. So its 3x (approx) for both wages.

Meaning that if one person is out of work, it falls back to six times the one persons wage. Maybe they are starting to update the site and this is part of clowns package aimed at "hard working families" and keeping people indebted?

The calculator states a couple earning 30k betwen them (15K each) can have (in theory) a loan for 84k. Thats £450 a month at a moderate 4% interest rate, repayment.

Imagine trying to pay £450 a month in mortgage only on 15k gross a year if one loses their wage.

Now imagine it when interest rates are at 7% and your mortgage at 10%. Suddenly the rate is £763 per month. Thats nearly the entire wage of one person.

Clown at it again!?!

shop-to-drop

I filled in the calculator and 46K + 10K no loans can borrow £183,500. When we remortgaged summer 2008 HSBC said they would lend us £185,000. So looks like NR are now in line with the big banks now.

The_White_Horse

the best thing the govt could do is assess everyone's house and give it a price. That price should be the MAX amount it can sell for for the next 10 years.

Then the govt should pay off people's mortgages in certain percentages, depending on when the bought. So, they will pay off 60% if you bought in 2007 and 50% if you bought in 2006 and 40% in 2005 etc.

the paying off will help the banks recapitalise.

that will help stabilize everything and get everything abck to how it should be, as if this stupid bubble never existed.

the above idea is truly genius.