Poor old Wilsons

MissMoneypenny

LittleMissAspie wrote: »

I'm sure their website said everything was interest-only .

Fergus stated that on the documentary Alan M is talking about, that their mortgages were interest only.

JayScottGreenspan

I don't like this argument that gets bandied about that anyone who criticises people like the Wilsons is jealous or resentful of their success.

Just because they are rich (maybe, anyway), doesn't mean they're not ars**les. It is possible to fall into both categories!

itsnever2lateisit?

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

<snip>
To buy up new-builds in bulk for BTL and to be the dominant owner/landlord in one town or area will inevitably distort the usual pattern of things- see the quote from the Ashford agent about young FTBers being unable to compete. The Wilsons can't be blamed for all of the ills of the housing market, but they do represent ugly, short termist greed, which I for one would be mildly amused to see come back to bite them on the bum.

I live not far from Ashford, price are low relative to surrounding villages and towns to the west. I doubt they distorted the market too much as John Prescott singled out Ashford as a growth town, and building had been going at a rapid pace until last year. The Wilsons purchasing 200 properties never caused a shortage, simply because of the pace of construction going on.

I have to say it was the Wilsons who sought publicity, they set themselves up on a pedestall, and should not be surprised if lots of others try to knock them off it, although I am not one of them

Dithering_Dad

mewbie wrote: »

I wonder if we watched the same documentary? The one I saw showed them bullying a needy seller into accepting far less than market value for their house. It was a take it or leave it offer, made with a great deal of show for the camera. So egotistical and nasty people, who priced out FTB's through their actions, and couldn't even offer a decent rate to someone who was desperate.

Pride goes before a fall would seem to be the expression that fits this situation best.

Yep, that's the bit that stuck in my memory too. Though what I don't understand is why the seller was bullied into selling to Fergus for far less than market value if there were a line of desperate FTBers outside the door willing pay the going rate?

mewbie_2

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

Yep, that's the bit that stuck in my memory too. Though what I don't understand is why the seller was bullied into selling to Fergus for far less than market value if there were a line of desperate FTBers outside the door willing pay the going rate?

Good point. Er. The 2 bedders they focussed on were already out of the reach of most people due to the HPI. However, investors playing the game of huge borrowings such as the Wilson's could apparently just keep on drawing down equity, and buying, in turn pushing up the prices of the properties they bought.
I think.

JanCee

I would have thought that any investor buying large numbers of houses in a small area to rent out would actually depress the property prices rather than drive them upwards.

Dithering_Dad

mewbie wrote: »

Good point. Er. The 2 bedders they focussed on were already out of the reach of most people due to the HPI. However, investors playing the game of huge borrowings such as the Wilson's could apparently just keep on drawing down equity, and buying, in turn pushing up the prices of the properties they bought.
I think.

but if Fergus was offering far below market then surely a FTB could have offered a bit below market value and picked up a deal?

I'm no fan of this couple, but they cant have simultaneously been responsible for undercutting the market when buying houses from desperate sellers AND for ramping up the market by pricing out FTBers?

Surely?

mewbie_2

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

have simultaneously been responsible for undersutting the market when buying houses from desperate sellers AND for ramping up the market by pricing out FTBers?

Yes they have. It worked like this. They got into property with vast amounts of borrowed money. Because house prices were inflating like crazy from 2003? onwards they were simply able to keep borrowing against the paper profit their already bought houses had made. It's a simple pyramid scheme. From around 2003 onwards the normal buyer disappeared, unable to buy in an ever inflating market. That is where the Wilson's and other investors perpetuated the HPI.

Move forward to whenever the program was made, and 'normal' people couldn't possibly afford what the couple selling their house expected to raise. The only buyers remaining were investors.

If the couple had waited they might have sold, but how I saw the program it was the Wilson's forcing them into making a hurried BMV sale to them.

Now I am sure you, or anyone else, can pick up contradictions in what I am saying - but my belief in it is good enough for me. It's how I read the HPI years, the BTL craze, and the victims - both those who bought and those who couldn't buy.

But I don't.. yet.. see the Wilson's as victims.

Dithering_Dad

mewbie wrote: »

But I don't.. yet.. see the Wilson's as victims.

I dont think anyone who watched that program will think of Fergus as anything other a nasty piece of work. I don't really have any feeling for them one way or another, just interested in how they (and that couple who did relocation, relocation) are held accountable (on here) for the whole sorry HPI mess.

I'd have thought it was more the BoE and Labour's fault, surely?

Graham_Devon

Dithering_Dad wrote: »

I dont think anyone who watched that program will think of Fergus as anything other a nasty piece of work. I don't really have any feeling for them one way or another, just interested in how they (and that couple who did relocation, relocation) are held accountable (on here) for the whole sorry HPI mess.

I'd have thought it was more the BoE and Labour's fault, surely?

I can't see anywhere on here that anyone has stated that the Wilsons are accountable for the whole mess of HPI?