'Second wave' repossession threat

dopester

Doesn't it depend on the individual's particular circumstances Heyman?

Do you have lots of equity in your home Heyman? You might want to 'put it off for as long as humanly possible' whilst you 'tried to get some money coming in any way you could', but what if that delay rolled on and things didn't turn for you.

The lender might get possession, have to deal with taking over the property, and may let it go at auction for a price you'd be unhappy with. Also with repossession I believe you are liable for lender's costs involved, which get added to mortgage, and they could be significant.

If you had lots of equity but fought lender for time in order to sell on the open market.. then you'd keep more control, and might be able to go into rented or trade down to a mortgage free property.

The guy below had a skirmish with repossession last year.. but could just about raise the cash, through policies maturing and help of his now adult children. If he felt he had 'plenty of equity' in his home then he was making the same mistake as he did with the value of his shares. House prices don't have to trade in some narrow band. At auction the lender gets what the property sells for if they don't put a reserve on it.. which in time to come who knows. Plus costs.

Hi,i am 62 wife 61
15yrs ago my company i worked for was involved in management buyout.with reult that when company floated on stock market the value of my shares was worth over 100k,rather than sale shares[major mistake in hindsight] i borrowed extra on mortage and credit cards,for extention to house ,hols.help youngest thru uni etc,always with the thought that when the time came i would sell shares,pay off debts and have a small lump sum on retiring.Company got involved in `irregular accounting` shares fell freefall,then suspended. got about £2500 in the end.
i have contacted my unsecured creditors and come to an imformal arrangement with all of them,thus i only have a limited amount left in my monthly pot.
should have concentrated on my secure debts first ie mortgage,easy to say now,still like they say never to old to learn
thanks trevor

Added to which, I think Allied Carpets saw a lot of store shutdowns and job losses just today.

Hi,i am in full time employment carpet estimator with allied 27 yrs
my wife is not employed gets oap pension of £179 per month
both have bus passes!!!!

dopester

andygb wrote: »

The money which has been given to the banks, should have been channelled into reducing mortgage debt, on a proportionate scale.

So in your world those who took the risks with taking on bigger debts should get their mortgages paid off for them now.

Cautious people like myself who refused to buy when price were bubbling ever higher, didn't get any years of precious HPI as they saw values were, can forget about the concept of free and open market in your world. Just protect the values for those in the 'property ownership club'.

As you are so keen to channel money towards those with mortgages to pay off their debts .... what about paying similar money into my FTB deposit fund? There are angry people already. A number which is growing, who don't much care for the thought of taking care of all those who indulged in debt during Labour's 1997+ house price party, when they are expected to pay ridiculous amounts to own a house as an FTB.

Now expected to become a FTB at 40 years old if they don't have any family help according to one recent report.

mewbie_2

dopester wrote: »

Now expected to become a FTB at 40 years old if they don't have any family help according to one recent report.

That is ridiculous. What a mess the last ten years has created.

bluey890

dopester wrote: »

Now expected to become a FTB at 40 years old if they don't have any family help according to one recent report.

dopester, who should be ejected from their homes to make way for the new homeowners?
I am genuinely interested in your viewpoint.

Graham_Devon

bluey890 wrote: »

dopester, who should be ejected from their homes to make way for the new homeowners?
I am genuinely interested in your viewpoint.

If you are so genuinely interested in the viewpoint, why have you taken it completely and utterly out of all context?

bluey890

Graham_Devon wrote: »

If you are so genuinely interested in the viewpoint, why have you taken it completely and utterly out of all context?

Because it is important the bears recognise the difficult questions.

I answered your question. Perhaps you'd like to answer mine...?

Graham_Devon

No one would be forced out of their homes. We just need tougher rules on BTL's feeding greedily off HOMES.

Simple really.

bluey890

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No one would be forced out of their homes. We just need tougher rules on BTL's feeding greedily off HOMES.

How so? Do you wish to take all the new build flats from BTL owners to give to potential FTB's?

ETA: I am a little tired of bears whinging without suggesting solutions.

mewbie_2

bluey890 wrote: »

How so? Do you wish to take all the new build flats from BTL owners to give to potential FTB's?

ETA: I am a little tired of bears whinging without suggesting solutions.

Shoot the Wilsons - there's 900 homes freed up. Obviously the renters will have to live somewhere else, maybe share with the new buyers.

Graham_Devon

Bluey, I can't be bothered if your going to take things out of context all the time.

Really simple for you so you understand.

Implement tougher rules now on BTL's, so they don't pray so much on the homes of first time buyers.

It's that simple. It won't happen, because the government do not want this problem to be fixed. They want it to continue.

But that is one of the biggest reasons FTB's are above 35 on average now. Property speculation. NOT home buying by people wanting homes.

Feel free to take that as far out of context as you see fit.