FSA review confirms NO RESTRICTIONS on Loan To Value/Income...

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

Um..... Then again I wasn't referring to corporate defaults :rolleyes:

This is mainly due to the riskier property exposure in HBOS's corporate lending book, which booked a £6.6 billion charge last year after the bank's new owner took a more conservative view of its debts.

No, both B&B and HBOS are responsible for majority of 5 times plus self certified mortgages or liars loans as they are commonly refered to.

StevieJ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

No, both B&B and HBOS are responsible for majority of 5 times plus self certified mortgages or liars loans as they are commonly refered to.

So what! HBOS main problems are in the corporate area.

michaels

I find it sad that so many feel that it is the govt's role to 'nanny' us and not allow us to enter in to whatever arrangement that two parties decide suits them. Surely it is like food (or smoking should be) - the govt can advise us on the likely consequences but it should be for us as adults to decide what we want to do with our lives? I might choose to have more caffeine than statistics would suggest is optimal or borrow more money than the average person would on my salary because I spend less than average on alcohol - shouldn't it be my choice?

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

So what! HBOS main problems are in the corporate area.

So what? A loss is a loss.

Are we discussing mortgage lending or corporate lending on this thread? :rolleyes:

Thrugelmir

michaels wrote: »

I find it sad that so many feel that it is the govt's role to 'nanny' us and not allow us to enter in to whatever arrangement that two parties decide suits them. Surely it is like food (or smoking should be) - the govt can advise us on the likely consequences but it should be for us as adults to decide what we want to do with our lives? I might choose to have more caffeine than statistics would suggest is optimal or borrow more money than the average person would on my salary because I spend less than average on alcohol - shouldn't it be my choice?

In a word no. This isn't so much as restricting what people can borrow. As clamping down on the lenders. The free market didn't work in this instance. A lucky few have walked away with their millions while the rest pay the price.

Lets hope mortgage brokers fall under the control of the FSA also. As they too need proper regulation.

StevieJ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

So what? A loss is a loss.

Are we discussing mortgage lending or corporate lending on this thread? :rolleyes:

Exactly my point mortgages, but it was you who quoted HBOS losses as proof of a high very high incidence of mortgage defaults :rolleyes:

Unless you forgot.
Um...... The write offs for bad lending at both HBOS and B&B would suggest otherwise.

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

I find it sad that so many feel that it is the govt's role to 'nanny' us and not allow us to enter in to whatever arrangement that two parties decide suits them. Surely it is like food (or smoking should be) - the govt can advise us on the likely consequences but it should be for us as adults to decide what we want to do with our lives? I might choose to have more caffeine than statistics would suggest is optimal or borrow more money than the average person would on my salary because I spend less than average on alcohol - shouldn't it be my choice?

The only question I have is, what if your rights to do something have negative effect on other people rights? e.g. smoking in pub/home.

Conrad

If self cert is removed, there will be many unintended consequences that will negatively impact on the have not's the most. As ever the Government generals are'nt in touch with these folk, so are blissfuly unaware.

Whilst some self certers are of course liars, there are many that have a genuine need.

1 example - the single mum working 2 or 3 jobs. LENDERS ONLT TAKE ONE JOB AS MAIN INCOME AND TYPICALLY IGNORE OR REDUCE THE MULTIPLE ON SECONDARY JOBS.

This will hit Labour voters most.

StevieJ

Conrad wrote: »

If self cert is removed, there will be many unintended consequences that will negatively impact on the have not's the most. As ever the Government generals are'nt in touch with these folk, so are blissfuly unaware.

Whilst some self certers are of course liars, there are many that have a genuine need.

1 example - the single mum working 2 or 3 jobs. LENDERS ONLT TAKE ONE JOB AS MAIN INCOME AND TYPICALLY IGNORE OR REDUCE THE MULTIPLE ON SECONDARY JOBS.

This will hit Labour voters most.

I think a possible self cert ban will be watered down after consultation with lenders.

baby_boomer

How many single mums working 3 part time jobs are going to be able to afford a house?

Weren't the banks supposed to avoid risky loans?

Children are the biggest drain on our finances, and a single mum has the additional disadvantage of being a one income household.

I was impressed by the Chief Executive with nine children featured in the Times today. But she did employ a house husband to help .