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

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well there you go then.

You are talking about excesses in the US. Then stating that our excesses were not as bad. But this is all based on a lending practice that is wildly different, yet we have our own version of it, which you are basically saying doesnt count as it's not the same as what you are talking about.

It is pretty much the same, but it can't be described as sub prime.

Graham you have lost me I have said we had subprime but not to the extent of the US.
I have not said it did not matter and ours.

Read my posts i have not said anything does not count.
I have said total subprime US mortgages total 30% of all (ish) UK equiverlent was less than 5% (ish)

I have then said the exposure was even greater in the US as people can walk away from the debt when they hand the keys back.?

Am i evil or have I spat at the queen for quoting such wild (but true acording to american standards) of their own mortgage markets and ours.

Would you like it to be worse than it really is in the UK?

ninky_2

Really2 wrote: »

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

self-cert mortgages (aka make up your own earnings), high income multiple mortgages, 125 % equity deals...

i don't think these were available in many other countries hence our over-inflated property prices.

the only reason the subprime bubble hasn't burst is the lowering of interest rates to 1 percent. although not everyone has seen this reflected in their mortgage at least they haven't seen their mortgage go up. if interest rates start rising as alarming there will be a massive increase in repos.

Really2

ninky wrote: »

self-cert mortgages (aka make up your own earnings), high income multiple mortgages, 125 % equity deals...
.

That would fit in with the american example of subprime. that would fit in the 5% quoted.

anything over 100% in reality is sub-prime.

I don't know why i am arging it as it is plain to see we do not have the forclosure problems etc. the American market as (what were tha American IR rates.)

SUB-PRIME RATES WOULD HAVE NOT COME DOWN TO 1%

Or am I living in a different country?

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

That would fit in with the american example of subprime. that would fit in the 5% quoted.

anything over 100% in reality is sub-prime.

I don't know why i am arging it as it is plain to see we do not have the forclosure problems etc. the American market as (what were tha American IR rates.)

SUB-PRIME RATES WOULD HAVE NOT COME DOWN TO 1%

Or am I living in a different country?

Your living in a country that hasn't caught up with America yet, I believe.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Your living in a country that hasn't caught up with America yet, I believe.

Wow not far off 2 years down the line and it as not shown up.;)

It was subprime that set America off and the "credit crunch"

You may be waiting too long on that one Graham as I said even if they do hand the keys in they still owe the money in the UK.;)

StevieJ

Count_Dante wrote: »

I see some @rse covering by AIG here. When some US politician asks why AIG are in the excrement, they can simply blame 'the Brits'.

I suppose AIG let this team get on without much oversight when profits were good. I imagine they were doing the financial equivalent of betting on Man Utd to beat West Brom and collecting good returns month after month until the unthinkable happens and West Brom beat Man Utd and ruination beckons.

As long as they keep coughing up the sponsorship

StevieJ

Really2 wrote: »

Graham you have lost me

Not an uncommon feeling on this board

StevieJ

Any overvaluation in the UK market could have been gently inflated away if not for the US induced credit crisis, Yaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwnnnnnnnn.

Thrugelmir

ninky wrote: »

self-cert mortgages (aka make up your own earnings), high income multiple mortgages, 125 % equity deals...

i don't think these were available in many other countries hence our over-inflated property prices.

the only reason the subprime bubble hasn't burst is the lowering of interest rates to 1 percent. although not everyone has seen this reflected in their mortgage at least they haven't seen their mortgage go up. if interest rates start rising as alarming there will be a massive increase in repos.

The majority of the best mortgage deals (trackers and fixed rates) were available up to 2 years ago and are now starting to come to the end of their terms. People who will be looking for a new deal will find that as their LTV has fallen, the best rates won't be available to them. Not good in light of the news of pay cuts and pay freezes. A number of lenders are maintaining high SVR's that don't reflect the reduction in the BOE base rate.

So the threat of an increase in repo's is still real even without an increase in interest rates.

Really2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The majority of the best mortgage deals (trackers and fixed rates) were available up to 2 years ago and are now starting to come to the end of their terms. People who will be looking for a new deal will find that as their LTV has fallen, the best rates won't be available to them. Not good in light of the news of pay cuts and pay freezes. A number of lenders are maintaining high SVR's that don't reflect the reduction in the BOE base rate.

So the threat of an increase in repo's is still real even without an increase in interest rates.

Confused on that point sub prime would have been around a 1/4 more than SVR two years ago.

They have paid for a house for the last two years and are fairly likely to see their payment drops. Who as a SVR higher than two years ago?
Base rate was 5.5% in june 07.