Abandoned hope for all ye FTBs

SGE1

Thrugelmir wrote: »

As a nation we are heavily indebted on mortgages and credit cards. Our consumer debt as a ratio of savings is 150%. Things weren't better in the "good old days". But at least we couldn't end up in the mess we are now in.

Maybe but it's quite a jump from that to suggest that nowadays FTBs want think "handed to them on a plate", and aren't willing to work hard for a house - which is the comment I was replying to.

As a nation we are indebted - but this debt isn't just down to FTBs; the older and 'wiser' section of the population, that probably already owns property, is just as much to blame for this (probably more in fact), I don't think you can pin it all on the younger generation.

Thrugelmir

SGE1 wrote: »

Maybe but it's quite a jump from that to suggest that nowadays FTBs want think "handed to them on a plate", and aren't willing to work hard for a house - which is the comment I was replying to.

As a nation we are indebted - but this debt isn't just down to FTBs; the older and 'wiser' section of the population, that probably already owns property, is just as much to blame for this (probably more in fact), I don't think you can pin it all on the younger generation.

To save a sizable deposit for a property if you have an average job with average salary requires discipline and sacrifice. How many more recent FTB's rolled up their credit card debt onto Northern Rocks 125% mortgages. Too easy. In fact effortless.

To furnish the property get the credit card out again......

Now the rules have changed. Back to "normal" lending criteria with mortgage interest rates that reflect the risk.

It'll take some time for FTB's in general to adjust. As deposits take time to save.

dopester

Thrugelmir wrote: »

To save a sizable deposit for a property if you have an average job with average salary requires discipline and sacrifice. How many more recent FTB's rolled up their credit card debt onto Northern Rocks 125% mortgages. Too easy. In fact effortless.

To furnish the property get the credit card out again......

Now the rules have changed. Back to "normal" lending criteria with mortgage interest rates that reflect the risk.

It'll take some time for FTB's in general to adjust. As deposits take time to save.

No. It isn't just about deposits. I'm not sinking my deposit money in to any property which is insanely over-valued. It would just be a waste of money. Just like burning tens of thousands of pounds in cash.

Values have to fall. Fall by at least 50%, and probably 70%. House prices are just insanely over-valued.

FTBs should not have to sacrifice as much as you would like to keep asset values so much higher than they should be.

FTBs deserve a life beyond servicing a mortgage and being a slaves to crippling amounts of debt, in an economy where even what were considered very safe jobs may be under threat - with rising unemployment, pay-cuts, and much tougher to get a decent paying secure job, with lots of competition.

It was only the buyers since 1997, buying at ever higher prices, which rocketed up the value of property for all existing owners - even those who haven't moved since 1997.

Values for all property owners increased by the ever higher sums being paid, month after month, year after year, by active buyers. That is how markets work.



Now we need active sellers accepting lower prices from buyers to bring down values for all property owners.

treliac

penguine wrote: »

This "affordability" line currently being bandied about really amuses me. Really, it's just that "unaffordability" has slightly decreased, not that "affordability" has vastly improved.

And with the potential for further job losses, the threat of future interest rate rises (which will be massively distressing for many), the ongoing difficulty in getting a mortgage, there's no short term prospect of the situation improving.

There's still huge vulnerability. House prices are still too high and the prospect of economic stability way too far off in the future for a rise in confidence.

Lifestyle expectations have to change, people will have to save rather than spend; will have to work hard, without instant gratification, and keep fingers tightly crossed.

pickles110564

mewbie wrote: »

I think it means Graham is tired of the wind up merchant known as Pickles. It doesn't normally take this long.

So when I ask the same question as you I am accused of being a wind up merchant.
This just goes to sum you lot up, anyone that posts good news is a liar but when they back it up you just slither off and search for you next post tht you can spin on.:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

treliac

dopester wrote: »

It was only the buyers since 1997, buying at ever higher prices, which rocketed up the value of property for all existing owners - even those who haven't moved since 1997.

They can't be blamed for this though. We would all have done the same, in the same position, thinking that prices would only continue to rise.

1997 - 2007 buyers were led down the garden path big time. They've been let down and, for some, will inevitably have ruined their finances for a lifetime.

I feel hugely sorry for anyone left stranded by greedy, ruthless bankers and ineptly dishonest policitians?

lostinrates

SGE1 wrote: »

I think you'll find FTBs 'nowadays' are just as committed to saving, working hard, and going without certain luxuries, to be able to build up a deposit..

I know a lot of us do. But on Buying and Renting boards and here its possible to read many, many exmples of people who have in the past taken 125% or 100% mortages. So some people weren't saving: other wise these products wouldn't have existed, certianly not as relatively mainstream things.

In the ''good old days'' when my parents bought we, as a family, roughly worked out it was easier for my parents than it will be for us to buy, but also that expenditure for them was less. My parents had one car up until 1987. The one car they had before that was fairly tatty and old, even though they had fairly respectable jobs. They didn't ''have to have'' mobiles, or internet expenses, and time ws easier: they could afford to live closer to where they worked, in Central London. The differences ARE relevant because somethings were better then. Somethings are better now: seems to me the best thng is to try and work it so we as a society learn from both times and try and have the best of both.

Max_Headroom_3

dopester wrote: »

We just want the market to play out as it should.

That includes those who own their homes outright but can't get by on savings and then JSA, having to sell and downsize - if they can't find another job to beat JSA and can't keep up anything like their old lifestyles.

Not having JSA boosted to fancy heights to make them comfy to pay bills and car and whatever. I've never heard of anything so ridiculous. :mad:

Not whilst graduates are being told to take call-centre jobs or migrate and try and find work abroad - and UK house prices are so ridiculously expensive.

So just to be clear on this.

You don't mention people in rented accommodation being given help via benefits (housing benefit or whatever).

And you don't mention people with mortgages being given assistance to pay the mortgage interest (as the government are now doing).

So one must assume you're happy for those who rent or are paying mortgages (the former of which applies to you, the latter you'd like to apply to you) to be given financial housing assistance.

But anyone who owns a house and therefore actually has no need of financial housing assistance and finds themselves out of work should non the less be denied the most basic of living costs and forced out of their homes?

Interesting logic, anything to do with your desire for forced sales to help bring property prices down so that you can benefit per chance..?

mewbie_2

pickles110564 wrote: »

So when I ask the same question as you I am accused of being a wind up merchant.

That's about the size of it. Comes from having a reputation for basic honesty and truthfulness.. or not.

Graham_Devon

Max_Headroom wrote: »

And you don't mention people with mortgages being given assistance to pay the mortgage interest (as the government are now doing).

Could you tell me how many people / families thats actually helped, or even, applied to?