2 million homeowners and 500,000 BTL'rs in NE if price falls hit 30%

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Kenny4315 wrote: »

The cause of this is continual 100% mortgages (or more) and a continual remortgage cycle, without the requirement to hold equity. This is the reason why mortgage deposits and the equity held should be increased and enforced. See my post below for my full thoughts.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=1570041&page=3

Rubbish!

100% mortgages have been around for decades. They aren't the cause of the current problems. IMO it's the availability of unsecured loans and credit cards that has ballooned over the last 10 years or so.

Kenny4315

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Rubbish!

100% mortgages have been around for decades. They aren't the cause of the current problems. IMO it's the availability of unsecured loans and credit cards that has ballooned over the last 10 years or so.

100% mortgages are not and never will be a good thing, and neither is tons of credit card debt. Negative equity is the result of a falling market with insufficient deposit. So you are talking RUBBISH.

Remortgaging to 100% and then releasing equity and MEWing is a major cause of the sh8te everything is in. Many of those who are 100% are also those that have the CC debt.

If it were not for this there would be alot less dinner party BTLers around.

Time2Go_25

Kenny4315 wrote: »

100% mortgages are not and never will be a good thing, and neither is tons of credit card debt. Negative equity is the result of a falling market with insufficient deposit. So you are talking RUBBISH.
.

There is nothing at all wrong with 100% mortgages if you can afford the repayments. Let's suppose Wayne Rooney, or Steven Gerrard wants to buy at 100k house on a 100% mortgage, why should they not be allowed to, after all it's less than 1 weeks wages.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Kenny4315 wrote: »

100% mortgages are not and never will be a good thing, and neither is tons of credit card debt. Negative equity is the result of a falling market with insufficient deposit. So you are talking RUBBISH.

Remortgaging to 100% and then releasing equity and MEWing is a major cause of the sh8te everything is in. Many of those who are 100% are also those that have the CC debt.

If it were not for this there would be alot less dinner party BTLers around.

Not many people were able to remortgage to 100% LTV! Most may have been to 90/95% max. Many people also paid off more expensive credit with the money they raised from the equity in their house and reduced their outgoings dramatically at the same time. The problem was when these same people then went out and borrowed again ON UNSECURED LOANS AND CREDIT CARDS!

Kenny4315

pdel61 wrote: »

There is nothing at all wrong with 100% mortgages if you can afford the repayments. Let's suppose Wayne Rooney, or Steven Gerrard wants to buy at 100k house on a 100% mortgage, why should they not be allowed to, after all it's less than 1 weeks wages.

Get real. :money:

Kenny4315

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax wrote: »

Not many people were able to remortgage to 100% LTV! Most may have been to 90/95% max. Many

Only 95%. :rolleyes:

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Kenny4315 wrote: »

Get real. :money:

Is that all you can say? I thought it was a good example actually.

Ian_Griffiths_Halifax

Kenny4315 wrote: »

Only 95%. :rolleyes:

MAXIMUM!

There would be very very few which were at 100% and I can't think of a single one I've done in nearly 20 years.

chopperharris

pdel61 wrote: »

There is nothing at all wrong with 100% mortgages if you can afford the repayments. Let's suppose Wayne Rooney, or Steven Gerrard wants to buy at 100k house on a 100% mortgage, why should they not be allowed to, after all it's less than 1 weeks wages.

cos they have some guy telling them not to do it in the first place.

Only the stupid footballer player doesnt have a f.a now.

Your agument is to put it bluntly quite daft after the first sentence , up to then it is spot on.:beer:

dopester

amcluesent wrote: »

>what have people been doing with the equity in their home to be NE if prices only drop by this modest amount ?<

MEWing. How else did they get the cottage in France, luxury 4*4 and a 'track day' Lotus Elise, Jocasta's pony, the swimming pool in the basement, plasma TV in every bedroom, 3 holidays a year, her-indoors boob-job and facelift, ...

With a home worth about £ 1.7million, Cheryl is worried what might happen if they don't act now, although the value they have added to the house by expanding it means they will not lose out.

'There have been times when work was slow and I increased our mortgage to pay some debts,' says Cheryl, 'but you can't go on adding to your home loan for ever.

'We also increased it to fund some home improvements, but now we owe a massive £600,000 - that's a lot of money if interest rates were to go back up.'

Of course you can. Treat your home like a cash-generating machine.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-1164097/Im-making-mind-sell-How-Cheryl-Baker-selling-properties-beat-crunch.html