Nationwide +1.3 (-6.2 YoY)

GSXRCarlos

Edale wrote: »

Can I ask why you used the Nationwide, their rates seem so uncompetitive compared with HSBC, Britannia, Chelsea, First Direct. This is for fixed and tracker rates, you can't take out an SVR with them.

Have I missed a trick?

Hi,

I've recently purchased a repossessed property, i was advised that i needed to be able o complete within a month, my Financial Advisor advised that Nationwide could complete in time, i've agreed 6% for 3 years and this is based on my 15% deposit.

Abbey were more competitive, but i actually only lose £250 over the three years (after fees etc), and abbey are slow to respond due to good mortgage rates and a lot of people applying (in the normal 2-3 month periods) i needed to secure a mortgage quickly and this was the best one for me.

Plus i know i can afford the monthly repayments, so (short sighted i may be) i know this mortgage is right for me

Plus, when my three years is up, i'll be looking to secure a better deal and move if necessary, after all, i've bought this product for 3 years, after that it's fair game :j

Edale

Makes sense GSXRCarlos, as a repo your purchase would not be part of their statistics as well. Sorry if I appeared nosy but I have been wondering how Nationwide are writing any new business at the minute. Me and the missus are looking to borrow quite a chunk sometime soon and would like to fix it for 5 - 10 years. These rates have gone through the roof recently. To give you an example you could get 3.99 back in april fixed for 5 years. The best 5 year fix I can find now is 4.8% with chealsea and the nationwide is at 5.68%, we are looking to borrow around £300k so it would cost us £12k more over the first 5 years than back in April and Nationwide currently would be over £13k more than the best deal over the next 5 years. I do think part of the increase in activity was down to the very low rates that were available over the last few months. Fixed rates for medium terms now seem higher than 12 months ago and this might impact on buyers now and in the next couple of months, it is certainly making me think before making a purchase.

the_ash_and_the_oak

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Any products worth is what in finally transacted.

If I go into a shop and see a jumper I like marked at £50, I can try and negotiate and say "I can only get £30 out of my bank account, would you accept that amount".

If the seller agrees then the worth of the jumper is £30, if not, just because the funds are not available to the tune of £50, it does not mean it is worth less, just a disagreement as to what it is valued at.

this only works if another person comes in with 50. but in this case we are not talking about the misfortunes of one person that cannot afford

if the bank machines only dispense 30, then the customer cannot buy at 30 and the shop cannot sell at 50. the jumper remains unsold and the shop goes out of business

IveSeenTheLight

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

this only works if another person comes in with 50. but in this case we are not talking about the misfortunes of one person that cannot afford

if the bank machines only dispense 30, then the customer cannot buy at 30 and the shop cannot sell at 50. the jumper remains unsold and the shop goes out of business

I thought it was a simple analogy, clearly not.

I didn't say the ATM only discpensed £30, I said that was only what that person could get.

Of course another buyer could get access to the £50, go in and buy the jumper.

the_ash_and_the_oak

Then in that case you are correct the jumper is worth 50. and the house is worth 200. because the bank was prepared to lend the higher figures to the second person.

if there are enough people that the banks are willing to lend higher figures to, then the worth of the jumper and house are 50 and 200.

the worth is not set by the seller. it is set by the lender

the_ash_and_the_oak

or to go back to the original post. the seller wants 200. the bank will only lend to a value of 145 (to me they actually only would lend 120 and to 6 others between 130-140)

IveSeenTheLight

See, I woudl say the valuation is whatever agreement is made at the time of the sell.

The jumper could go on sale for £45 and be bought for that.
The house could be sold for £185k.

My point was, it was not what the lender sets, its what is agreed between the buyer and the seller.

If there is no agreement because lack of available funds, then there is no sale and the valuation is not set at what the lender was prepared to give.
There are soo many other factors for that i.e. size of deposit

GSXRCarlos

Edale wrote: »

Makes sense GSXRCarlos, as a repo your purchase would not be part of their statistics as well.

Ah, i didn't know that, why's that???

Sorry if I appeared nosy

I don't mind, if anything that i've experienced over the last month can help someone else then i'm happy to share my story

Edale wrote: »

Me and the missus are looking to borrow quite a chunk sometime soon and would like to fix it for 5 - 10 years. These rates have gone through the roof recently. Blah Blah Blah

That's partly why i'm on 6% fixed for 3 years, due to instability it would seem everyone's looking for long term fixed, but that means you have to pay for the priveledge

Please also bare in mind that my figures are based on a property sub £100k

Ingsy

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Then in that case you are correct the jumper is worth 50. and the house is worth 200. because the bank was prepared to lend the higher figures to the second person.

if there are enough people that the banks are willing to lend higher figures to, then the worth of the jumper and house are 50 and 200.

the worth is not set by the seller. it is set by the lender

So how long does it take to cook a chicken?

ad9898_3

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

boats sailing right now not got so many people on them imo (if you believe transaction figures)

With the economy in the state it's in and all pointers getting worse, I would say the boat that is being missed is the borrowed money boat, it will sail for maybe 6-12 months then sink out of site, it's best that it's missed.

Massive government borrowing is giving the many people the illusion of a genuine recovery, not so. Borrowing to invest is a good thing, borrowing for illusionary/changing sentiment reasons will be catastrophic, FatherTime will show us.