AIG points finger at London branch for nearly bringing the company down.

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

As you may see it was tong in cheek.

But Sorry our sub prime lending is no where near comparible. Our idea of subprime was 100%+ Mortgage that totaled 5% of all mortgages.

America had 30% of its mortgage book at 125%+.

No one argues shody practices over here but nearly all will tel you it was not done anything like the excesses in the US.
By saying pointing of fingers 'Westward' (depends if you are facing north or south) you kind of forget what the post is about and what they invested in:)

Just Northern Rock had 24% of its mortgage book on 125% mortgages.

Not very far off the 30% you quote as being "nowehere near comparable".

The Northern Rock's half-year accounts, published last year, suggested that about 24% of its 800,000 mortgage holders had taken out a Together mortgage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7256903.stm

It totalled just 5% of all mortgages, yes. But it totally a FAR higher amount of newer mortgages, which is the same in America. I'd suggest the 5% you come up with for the UK is actually much higher?

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

Lending in general wordwide tends to have a element of sub prime (you borrow becuase you can not fund it outright without credit). I think it is unwise to think we were worse than any one else.

Our banks were crippled by wrapped up subprime debts we are now 18 month+ in and we do not seem to have a subprime time bomb sureley it should have shown by now.

Add to that people in NE can not just walk away from debt in the UK i think our lending is a lot less "risky"

What areas do you think we have acted riskier than other countrys?

Really, where did I say riskier than other countries? Are you trying to pick a fight with me?

Really2

lostinrates wrote: »

Really, where did I say riskier than other countries? Are you trying to pick a fight with me?

No I am just replying to what you have wrote. You seem to be of the opinion that pointing a fingure at america is not making us look at our own problems and that ours were possibly worse.

lostinrates wrote: »

I get a little scared with all this pointing of fingers 'Westward' that we ourselves will forget the shoddy practices here: and that bodes poorly for us.

lostinrates wrote: »

. But I do not agree our subprime lending is limited to mortages

I was just failing to see why you felt that.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Just Northern Rock had 24% of its mortgage book on 125% mortgages.

Not very far off the 30% you quote as being "nowehere near comparable".

The Northern Rock's half-year accounts, published last year, suggested that about 24% of its 800,000 mortgage holders had taken out a Together mortgage.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7256903.stm

It totalled just 5% of all mortgages, yes. But it totally a FAR higher amount of newer mortgages, which is the same in America. I'd suggest the 5% you come up with for the UK is actually much higher?

5% is the UK all mortgages...
30% is USA all mortgages...

I never came up with the figure Graham it is true.:rolleyes:

Also Graham they had taken out a motgage that could let them borrow up to 125% that does not mean they all had 125% mortages.
As northern rock not nearly paid back its debts?

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

5% is the UK all mortgages...
30% is USA all mortgages...

I never came up with the figure Graham it is true.:rolleyes:

Also Graham they had taken out a motgage that could let them borrow up to 125% that does not mean they all had 125% mortages.
As northern rock not nearly paid back its debts?

Northern Rock has only nearly paid back all of its debts, because of it's massive reposession strategy and government take over.

You got proof of the 30% figure, a link anywhere? I just find it hard to believe.

lostinrates

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You got proof of the 30% figure, a link anywhere? I just find it hard to believe.

Depends on number of OOs with no mortgage:......I believe it to be a credible possibilty

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Northern Rock has only nearly paid back all of its debts, because of it's massive reposession strategy and government take over.

You got proof of the 30% figure, a link anywhere? I just find it hard to believe.

It was discused on radio 5 about 3 months ago by a guy who worked for the equiverlent of the american FSA (I belive)
He was the one who also said the UK figures. Is he talking down is own country and trying to make us look good?

I think in value it was around 7% of value (in 2007, defults started 2006) of all outstanding mortgages so considering sub-prime houses would be cheaper (Genralization but likely to be true) I can see 30% as not far off as a total number of outstanding mortgages)

lostinrates

Really2 wrote: »

No I am just replying to what you have wrote. You seem to be of the opinion that pointing a fingure at america is not making us look at our own problems and that ours were possibly worse.



I was just failing to see why you felt that.

I would usually accept responsibilty for clarity, but I've re read and I think your comprehension is overshooting there.

chucky

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Northern Rock has only nearly paid back all of its debts, because of it's massive reposession strategy and government take over.

You got proof of the 30% figure, a link anywhere? I just find it hard to believe.

there have been links to it on here and HPC.co.uk the closest i could find was below.

it's probably not 30% but very close - the below is a 2006 figure, 2007 would have been higher as it accelerated from 2003.

"The value of USA subprime mortgages was estimated at $1.3 trillion as of March 2007, [11] with over 7.5 million first-lien subprime mortgages outstanding.[12] Between 2004-2006 the share of subprime mortgages relative to total originations ranged from 18%-21%, versus less than 10% in 2001-2003"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

It was discused on radio 5 about 3 months ago by a guy who worked for the equiverlent of the american FSA (I belive)
He was the one who also said the UK figures. Is he talking down is own country and trying to make us look good?

I think in value it was around 7% of value (in 2007, defults started 2006) of all outstanding mortgages so considering sub-prime houses would be cheaper (Genralization but likely to be true) I can see 30% as not far off as a total number of outstanding mortgages)

I don't disbelieve the 30% figure. But I do disbelieve that we, and the US have such a large gap between us, i.e. ours is a mere 5%.

Something just doesnt sit right there I don't believe, and would love to see actual figures, though that would be extremely hard to gain.

But considering 24% of northern rocks mortgages were over 100% mortgags, HSBC also had a lot (I remember them trying to push me into one) and most other lenders also had them, I can't see it just being 5% here in the UK.