Quarter of Brits on interest only mortgages

GavB79

Incredibly misleading thread title. A quarter of Brits are NOT on an interest-only mortgage, a quarter of mortgagees are. VAST difference!

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

OK, I'll give it one more go.

Graham, ask yourself what you are trying to prove. If it's something to do with the OP, then consider that of the 3.5M people with interest only mortgages, a tiny fraction will have taken them out between the dates you chose. So in the context of this thread your argument is questionable at best.

This is spin. The dates chosen were purely to prove the point, as I said when I proved the point. Nothing to do with when people took their mortgages as you well know. Therefore I don't see why you have chosen to imply this.

But there is close to zero possibility of negative HPI over a 25 year period under any reasonable set of assumptions. To get to a negative outcome under your assumptions you have to start from a very specific point in time and chain a number of hugely unlikely outcomes. This is a probability game and the probabilities combine to make the outcome the product of all the individual probabilities.

Ahhhh, so you are agreeing now that it's not guaranteed? I never suggested it was likely, infact I said HPI was likely as you well know. I was just talking about the guaranteed bit. So I'm not sure why you need to try and make out why I have said anything different.

So on the one hand you have something that's at very long odds - the outcome you are suggesting, and on the other you have something at very short odds, which is the outcome where there is HPI. But the condition for being worse off is that you have negative HPI over chosen period, AND you have no repayment vehicle. Very few people would be in that position anyway. Because of wage inflation over that period the amount lost on even negative HPI would be proportionately reduced. The conditions that cause a poor outcome are hugely unlikely, and less likely when combined. The downside is very limited, and the upside is large.

Yes. Thats why I said HPI is likely, but NOT guaranteed. Your kinda telling me what I was already saying.

Frankly your argument is similar to that of someone saying it's possible that a 500/1 horse CAN win, so it's worth putting all your money onto it . No-one who understands risk ever guarantees anything, but ultimately it's a numbers game. Anyone CAN suffer problems that makes them unable to pay for their accomodation, mortgaged or rented, but the likelihood of that happening is disproportionately small in comparison to the benefit.

It's not really, unless you spin it out of proportion. I never suggested you should take a gamble, I was merely stating that it's not guaranteed that that horse you mention will not win. Saying I have suggested putting money on it, is something entirely different.

You are clutching at straws. You are making ludicrous assumptions. You are cherry picking data, i.e to get to your outcome you have to carefully choose one set of dates from all the other possible set of dates. Posting in glib italics really doesn't change that, it's really just playing to the gallery.

Aye, ok. Maybe if you keep telling me this while spinning what I actually said, ignoring what I said and trying to imply something out of what I said, you'll convince people. You keep telling me I have cherry picked and chosen dates, no less than twice I have agreed with you, and that was the whole damn point. Yet yuor still telling me I cherry picked. I know!!!

Regardless of all your attempts to de-rail what was acually said, I think you are in agreement that HPI is NOT guaranteed over 25 years, which IS what I said.

Something so simlpe turned into all this, for what, for you to agree with me? I somehow feel because I said it, you have to argue it. A bit like that good trend line argument in which I was wrong to say it moved, but wrong to say it stayed static, and Julie was right to say it was static and right to say that it moved.

julieq

OK, that's it, I give up. You can lead a bear to water, etc etc.

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

OK, that's it, I give up. You can lead a bear to water, etc etc.

LOL

Petty insults don't add to your case, my points were perfectly clearly argued.

julieq

Graham_Devon wrote: »

LOL

Petty insults don't add to your case, my points were perfectly clearly argued.

Where was the insult exactly Graham?

(Just to remind you what led to the post you quoted back at me, you said I was having a "fit").

chucky

julieq wrote: »

Where was the insult exactly Graham?

(Just to remind you what led to the post you quoted back at me, you said I was having a "fit").

don't worry Julie - Graham does this often when he loses his point... to distract his lack of understanding...

he has this Saint Graham persona that he brings out, he puts a dig in, you comment back in the same way and then claims you've abused him...

it's not pretty when a grown man does this...

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

Where was the insult exactly Graham?

(Just to remind you what led to the post you quoted back at me, you said I was having a "fit").

Ahhhh, that wasn't an insult Julie. I also said I hope you are ok. I'm one of the most compassionate people on MSE and it must have come flooding out without me realising you may get all huffety about it.

As you asked though, constantly telling me I was doing stuff I quite clearly wasn't doing was about as annoying as your old neighbours terrier which hasn't had a wash for 2 years and 7 months taking a cling on position and humping your leg.

Pobby

House prices, massively over valued, suffering the consequence, Bovey going to the wall, Kirsty looking silly, Irs( imho only this low so we don`t all go belly up ) at a totally unsustainable level. Blur and Gordon McTaxish got it horribly wrong. Not a lot more to say really.

Graham_Devon

chucky wrote: »

don't worry Julie - Graham does this often when he loses his point... to distract his lack of understanding...

he has this Saint Graham persona that he brings out, he puts a dig in, you comment back in the same way and then claims you've abused him...

it's not pretty when a grown man does this...

Hey chuckles. If I have lost my point, perhaps you could explain how

I don't expect much from this post, let alone an explanation of your ramblings, considering you were actually thanking my points which I seem to have temporarily mislaid, so you have the opportunity to impress me. Use it wisely kid.

bluey890

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As you asked though, constantly telling me I was doing stuff I quite clearly wasn't doing was about as annoying as your old neighbours terrier which hasn't had a wash for 2 years and 7 months taking a cling on position and humping your leg.

Troll alert... Whoop Whoop!!