The Wilsons are going under.

Emy1501

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

Only if they were on trackers? Their fixes prob didnt change?



Really? Transaction figures pretty low imo. Current scenario good for maintaining prices but not good for actually selling (esp if you've got a lot to get rid of? even more so if they're all in the same place?)

I remember Mr Wilson saying recently that he wanted to get out as he believed interest rates would rise soon. I therefore suspect many of the properties were sitting on SVR's you could be right though.

As for the other point I suspect your right to be honest whilst selling handful of properties early this year would not have been a problem I suspect trying to 900 in one area would have been problem

poppy10_2

They leveraged up, boasting about how they didn't need to put nay money down, as they would just pull the equity from one property to buy the next. Net result is that they were mortgaged up to the ax, and even a slight fall in house prices would turn them into net debtors. The figures in the Daily Mail article are probably conservative - they are likely in negative equity to a huge extent

the_ash_and_the_oak

I think even selling one or two in 2009 would not have been anywhere near as easy as 2007 or earlier. Obv there are people who have bought and sold this year and some who will have sold without any trouble at all. But if I had one to sell this year I would like my chances less than in previous years.

His real problem is that getting rid of 900 in one area at any time isn't going to be easy - even when volumes are high - as you are effectively flooding the market

HammerSmashedFace

the_ash_and_the_oak wrote: »

I think even selling one or two in 2009 would not have been anywhere near as easy as 2007 or earlier. Obv there are people who have bought and sold this year and some who will have sold without any trouble at all. But if I had one to sell this year I would like my chances less than in previous years.

His real problem is that getting rid of 900 in one area at any time isn't going to be easy - even when volumes are high - as you are effectively flooding the market

This is the crux of the matter as regards the housing market over the past months, sure there are people who can sell, and sell perhaps easily and this is the side that is constantly promoted when we here 'prices are rising' and 'mortgage lending is up' etc.....the issue is though for every house that is selling there are another 5 or 6 that have been on the market for months with no interest at all.

the_ash_and_the_oak

HammerSmashedFace wrote: »

This is the crux of the matter as regards the housing market over the past months, sure there are people who can sell, and sell perhaps easily and this is the side that is constantly promoted when we here 'prices are rising' and 'mortgage lending is up' etc.....the issue is though for every house that is selling there are another 5 or 6 that have been on the market for months with no interest at all.

Think this is kinda the idea tbh - to stop a severe price drop that could have become self-perpetuating. Although I don't think there would have been a "run on housing" the principle is kind of the same to a point imo

tommy75

From the Comments page:
Let's hope the lenders aggressively repossess the empty houses and take them to auction to be sold at a much reduced price to hard-working families that have been priced out of the market in recent years by this couple's behaviour.

Let's hope they end up with nothing. This couple has contributed nothing to the wealth and prosperity of this Country - all they have done is try to enrich themselves at other's expense. This couple had proper jobs before they became property pimps - let them go back to teaching and try and make a contribution to society before they retire.
- Steve, Leicester, 14/11/2009 08:15

What an excellent comment. That you StevieJ?

Emy1501

http://www.hip-consultant.co.uk/blog/the-buy-to-let-kings-secret-avoids-flats-123/

Only poor people buy flats you got to love him:eek:

Generali

dopester wrote: »

£34.4m / 177 = £194,350

I guess this is the sort of place they go for:

http://www.findaproperty.com/displayprop.aspx?edid=00&salerent=0&pid=4264499



It's on at 'from £160,000'.

Clearly the places in a state of disrepair would sell for less. No boiler = no mortgage AIUI so that would severely limit the market of potential buyers.

There is a discrepancy between what the journalist claims the lenders say (it's a final warning so 3 months arrears) and what Mr Wilson says (reminder notice).

Graham_Devon

What I find strange from the article is that he says he has received the warning letters, and bear in mind to get a final warning letter, you need to have received letters before that.

However, his cheques have not arrived.

He seems to be blaming the postal strike while at the same time saying he's received stuff regardless of the postal strike?!

HammerSmashedFace

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What I find strange from the article is that he says he has received the warning letters, and bear in mind to get a final warning letter, you need to have received letters before that.

However, his cheques have not arrived.

He seems to be blaming the postal strike while at the same time saying he's received stuff regardless of the postal strike?!

The guy is a tool, only a couple of months ago he was saying the reason he is selling his 'empire' is because when rates rise BTL is going to die on it's feet.

That's like trying to sell a car for top money, yet when a buyer turns up, you tell them the car is knackered and that's why you're selling it.:D