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

Graham_Devon

wolvoman wrote: »

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?

Because part of living in the UK means you have to fit in with other people. Like it or not, thats a democratic civilised country.

YOU may be able to afford it. PLENTY of others haven't been able to. It's called for the greater good.

wolvoman

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Because part of living in the UK means you have to fit in with other people. Like it or not, thats a democratic civilised country.

YOU may be able to afford it. PLENTY of others haven't been able to. It's called for the greater good.

So you don't think each case should ever be taken on individual merit?

You believe that we should all be treated the same?

What sort of democracy is that?!!

b0rker

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Because part of living in the UK means you have to fit in with other people. Like it or not, thats a democratic civilised country.

YOU may be able to afford it. PLENTY of others haven't been able to. It's called for the greater good.

You sir are a Marxist!

Sadly for you we live in a capitalist country.

Maybe you should learn Mandarin and emigrate?

Graham_Devon

wolvoman wrote: »

So you don't think each case should ever be taken on individual merit?

You believe that we should all be treated the same?

What sort of democracy is that?!!

How would YOU be treated differently exactly? If you explain that one, I will be happy to discuss it with you.

What you are asking, is for a lender to give YOU 5x your income, because you say you can pay it.

But they should taylor it for say, me, and give me 4x?

Say I say "yer but I can pay it". Do they instantly give me 5x my wage?

So explain a bit further what exactly you mean by tailoring and how that would work, when they look at you, and then look at me. Both of us are saying "i can pay it".

Then tell me what the difference is with self cert mortgages, and could you also tell me how succesful in terms of reposessions they have been? You simply seem to be saying "I can pay it, so they should give it". Well sorry, but so is everyone who wants a house!!! That is exactly why we are where we are now. People have realised actually, oops, I can't pay it if I lose my job.

Dan:_4

Graham_Devon wrote: »

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!

Don't be a plonker for the rest of your life, Rodney!

Just because banks aren't offering this product at the moment, does not mean they won't be in the future.

RabbitMad

Banks should be able to lend what ever they like to whom ever they like, if they lend £200,000 to wayne and waynette chav who live entirely off benefits then they should have to take the loss. Ultimately if banks did that over and over (HBOS, NRock and B&B) they would fail and should be allowed to.

Banks deposits should be protected up to a specified amount but bove that there should be no protection and therefore if a bank failed any depositors would lose any money in excess of this limit.

this would mean a return to those treasured "3.5 times" income mulitples for most banks but if I want a nicer / bigger house I can go to a more specialist lender and get a bigger mulitple but would pay for the privilage.

Time2Go_25

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So explain a bit further what exactly you mean by tailoring and how that would work, when they look at you, and then look at me. Both of us are saying "i can pay it".

Because everyones situation is different, the more you earn the smaller the part of your income is taken up in normal day to day expenses, therefore you may well be able to afford a larger multiple.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

That is exactly why we are where we are now. People have realised actually, oops, I can't pay it if I lose my job.

Then maybe they shouldn't lend to anyone, after all we can all lose our jobs.

piggeh

RabbitMad wrote: »

Banks should be able to lend what ever they like to whom ever they like, if they lend £200,000 to wayne and waynette chav who live entirely off benefits then they should have to take the loss. Ultimately if banks did that over and over (HBOS, NRock and B&B) they would fail and should be allowed to.

Banks wont be allowed to fail.

Why are people having to overcommit themselves in the first place?

What's wrong with making house prices affordable?

We may live in a capitalist, market economy, however the Government still has a social responsibility to the people of the country to ensure they are able to house themselves, eat etc. Surely regulations like these will make that easier?

I think the banks failing is a secondary issue as a lot of their problems came about from selling debt and redressing their balance sheets with credit default swaps etc. If the FSA impose a 3x multiplier here it wont stop Banks buying US debt again. All it will do is help people afford their homes.

I guess it will limit builders' wages though.

Graham_Devon

Dan: wrote: »

Don't be a plonker for the rest of your life, Rodney!

Just because banks aren't offering this product at the moment, does not mean they won't be in the future.

Oh right. So your suggesting REALLY is to start regulating the 125% mortgages that don't exist, because they may do in the future, and this will make a start on our problems now?

Yer, I must be the plonker!

Maybe we should start regulating the 200% mortgages too, just in case they arrive?

And once that is all done, we oculd look at todays problems and regulating the actual products on the actual market?

lostinrates

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How would YOU be treated differently exactly? If you explain that one, I will be happy to discuss it with you.

What you are asking, is for a lender to give YOU 5x your income, because you say you can pay it.

But they should taylor it for say, me, and give me 4x?

Say I say "yer but I can pay it". Do they instantly give me 5x my wage?

So explain a bit further what exactly you mean by tailoring and how that would work, when they look at you, and then look at me. Both of us are saying "i can pay it". .

May I have a stab at an answer? Its affordabilty. Its considering other debts you have or don't have, and considering a 'living wage' from what you earn decreases in proportion from wage as the wage goes up.

People have differnt priorities in spending, even if all treated the same. Lots of people are happy to live in small houses, and consider their house 'somewhere to sleep at night'and instead want to put a higher percentage of income on something else...holidays, technology, cars whatever. some people prioritise education and children. Some can aford to do it all and STILL over pay a 4 or 5 x mortgage. To restrict people on a purely 3 x wage means that some people are still overstretched if their other outgoings and lifestyle isn't commited (and I question if for some buying is the right optuion for them) and that some people are paying less than they could for housing. These lucky people would have increased spending power in other places, but then people will complain they have too much disposable income after paying their mortgage and this too is unfair.