House prices down to at least 115K... Thans FSA! 3X here we come!

mitchaa

Hmm....3 x singular or 3 x joint?

3x joint and i think this will be a good move, 2 average Joes earning average wage being able to borrow £156k + 5% deposit seems reasonable to me.

The 95% mortgage idea will just be abused like it was done before with NR 125% mortgage. 95% secured 30% unsecured or in the terms of 100%, 5% unsecured.

Wouldn't read too much into this until stamped as approved

The housing market is going nowhere near these figures suggested with a GE in just a little over 12 months.

mbga9pgf

Mitch, its good to see you have your head buried up your @rse as usual today!

b0rker

I'm sot sure why so many bears on this site are in such a rush for house prices to "tank".

Surely if it is for the benefit of society as they claim and not for their own benefit then a slow and gradual decrease in house prices is of benefit to all. It will enable many who are facing negative equity to save their way out of it. All that it will do to the house desiring bears is make them wait a while. The bears go on and on about how people who bought in the last three years were greedy and impatient and should have seen the recession coming and should have waited. Surely patience is a virtue for all not just bulls?

I just love how the bears try to take the moral high ground as if anyone who dared buy a house in the past three years were doing the common man a massive disservice.

What they really mean is that anyone who has bought a house in the last three years have done the bears a massive disservice in assisting the slow gradual decrease in house prices rather than the tanking that the bears so desire.

Dan:_4

mbga9pgf wrote: »

So what do you suggest they regulate then? Because as we have seen, extra regulation is required.

Otherwise, we wouldn't have a hideous housing bubble, enormous personal debt and rocketing repossessions.

I would suggest they regulate the 100%-125% mortgages given to people on low incomes with poor credit history for a start.

This is what has caused the stupid HPI - i.e. any tom, !!!!!! and harry can get a mortgage regardless of their status.

Remember getting a mortgage is not a right.

lonestar1

Something tells me that rather than prices falling the governemnt will push for the difference being met by more Shared ownership schemes

3* Salary may not buy 100% of a FTB home but I bet it'll buy 50%

mitchaa

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Mitch, its good to see you have your head buried up your @rse as usual today!

Are military officers not supposed to be able to fight their own corner and reason their points of views diplomatically?

No of course not, you are too used to yes sir, no sir, 3 bags full sir.

You obviously have no debating skills, as if anyone that decides not to follow the flock, as in your opinion, they are dismissed as having their head up their ar*e

You're in for a shock sunshine when you leave your sheltered world for the real world where someone disagrees with your P.O.V;)

3x joint income....Great.....Next

WestonDave

I wonder if this will remain an unwritten rule.

I suspect in the long term some kind of restriction on lending to prevent a crisis of this nature again might be wise, however so far the Government has shown itself very reluctant to act in a way that would prevent such problems at the price of unpopularity.

It wasn't willing pre 2007 to intervene to stop lending getting out of hand, because doing so would have turned off the tap of debt fuelled economic growth that made their management of the economy look OK. It would also have triggered at least a slow down at that point, but rather than being able to point at dramatic problems in the banking industry the slower more gentle impact would seem entirely their fault.

It wasn't willing at the start of the crunch simply to let matters take their course and people feel the pain. Instead its been desperately trying to ensure further lending continues despite already high debt levels.

Coming out and stating this as a policy now will lead to an instant loss of property value at a time when Govt is desperately trying to make people feel confident enough to spend lots of money to rescue the economy. It will also lead to further damage to bank balance sheets, more bailouts etc.

I agree that long term we need a housing market which is not an inflationary bubble, but the route to getting there is going to be longer than a simple one day headline from the FSA. Part of the solution is going to be some pain whilst debt levels are paid down, part of it may be more restrictive lending practices and part of it will probably be increased property construction to deal with the supply/demand issues in the market. I strongly suspect that a Government with 12 months to run in office will not have the balls to take the short sharp shock route - certainly not now with 12 months for the impact to dawn on the electorate!

Graham_Devon

Dan: wrote: »

I would suggest they regulate the 100%-125% mortgages given to people on low incomes with poor credit history for a start.

.

Thats good.

So your suggestion is that they look into regulating a product that ceases to exist.

Get that man a medal!!! You sir, are genius!

wolvoman

ad44downey wrote: »

I agree. Excessive lending should be outlawed. You shouldn't be able to borrow more than 3 times your salary. And you've got to actually prove you salary not just make it up as before.

You're mad (or just a communist).

I bought my house on a 5x salary multiple. I have since made repeated overpayments, plus 2 small-ish payrises and am sitting at current 4.4 times income as a result of those.

Even at 8% interest rates I will still have more than £1k of spare income each month.

Why do you thibnk I should be prevented from buying the house I want that I can afford?

Graham_Devon

lonestar1 wrote: »

Something tells me that rather than prices falling the governemnt will push for the difference being met by more Shared ownership schemes

3* Salary may not buy 100% of a FTB home but I bet it'll buy 50%

Can you use shared ownership on the open market yet?

I know you could in the 90's. I.e. you could go pick a house on the open market, and so long as it was suitable for your needs, i.e. not over the top, the shared ownership people would purchase with you.

When I went for shared ownership it was limited to their own developments.