Mortgage Lending Falls 10%

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Ok.

If remortgaging is already at subdued levels, as we all know it is. It would take one BIG fall in the smaller number (remortgages) to make a fall which totals 10% of all lending.

I.e. remortgaging in one single month would have to fall off a cliff to bring all the other totals down to give a total fall of 10%.

No doubt I will now be told I don't understand etc.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1219797/Lending-29-cent-year-remortgaging-falls-half.html

October but graham just to prove it is more than possible.

But remortgage figures fell by 22 per cent compared with the previous month to just 32,000, 57 per cent down on a year earlier, according to the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML).

PS are you sure remortgaging is the smallest number in terms of value with over 11,000,000 mortgages out there?

Really2

bernard_shaw wrote: »

Having said all that, the commentary does list (and then sort of hand-wave past) a number of downside risks to the housing and mortgage markets. The commentary does not detail any upside prospects whatsoever.

I would argue forseing stability is an upside compared to the last 2.5 years.

The housing and mortgage markets remain in a stable state with little in the Pre-Budget Review to change the outlook for next year, although the end of the stamp duty holiday could cause a modest fall in underlying activity in the early part of the year. But seasonal drivers are likely to dominate the market in the coming months and it will be some time before clear trends emerge.

As much as they are seeing no positive they are not predicting prices to drop below levels seen earlier this year. But then that can be dismissed as VI.

bernard_shaw

Really2 wrote: »

I would argue forseing stability is an upside compared to the last 2.5 years.

Fairenoughski. Similarly, I would argue that foreseeing stability is an upside compared to the last 9 years.

Really2

bernard_shaw wrote: »

Fairenoughski. Similarly, I would argue that foreseeing stability is an upside compared to the last 9 years.

I would be happy for it to be foreverski.

bernard_shaw

Really2 wrote: »

I would be happy for it to be foreverski.

Likewise. Unfortunately, I don't believe that a prediction of stability is credible without an open-ended commitment from government to intervene to make it so.

While 'bearded Trot' Darling is ideologically pre-disposed to such activities, I can't see the Dave 'n' Gideon show providing us with counter-ideological entertainment like that. Or can I?

Harry_Powell

chucky wrote: »

top bombing Hamish!!!!

ps. it's "Stop being beastly to Graham day" - so please control yourself today. Thanks

Can everyone please stop picking on Graham? It's not his fault he's slow.

Cannon_Fodder

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Lending for new purchase is what impacts prices. True or false?

Remortgaging is irrelevant to prices. True or false?

Does 'porting' count as a re-mortgage? No explanation found in the CML methodolgy so far.

If it does, could some movers be doing so without needing a "top-up" like they might have previously needed, so perhaps flat or reducing re-mortgaging figures could be indicative, for those sales involve porting, of flat or reducing prices?

Really2

Looks like the times have cut through it a bit.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article6961469.ece
Is 10% that unusual for Nov? Apparently not.

The CML said that it was normal to experience a seasonal lending slump. In November 2008, mortgage lending fell by 15 per cent, and by 11 per cent in 2007.

Could it be down to remortgaging still falling?

However, the group added that the underlying story was one of market conditions, and that continued low interest rates were dissuading people from remortgaging their homes ., bringing the overall figure down and contributing to a “two-speed” mortgage market

If rates carry on this low how low could remortgaging get. Even though I know some are saving in the short term I do hope they keep an eye on what rates are going to be doing in the future for their own sake.

Really2

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Does 'porting' count as a re-mortgage? No explanation found in the CML methodolgy so far.

If it does, could some movers be doing so without needing a "top-up" like they might have previously needed, so perhaps flat or reducing re-mortgaging figures could be indicative, for those sales involve porting, of flat or reducing prices?

No, as you are not re-mortgaging just allocating your mortgage to a different property.
To re-mortgage you pay back the loan and take out a new loan.

But if you ported and increased the increase could be seen as a new mortgage I presume as you apply for a new mortgage product.
There are a few definitions for remortgaging http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:Remortgage&ei=YZErS4bsIou7jAea7KicBw&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title&ved=0CBQQkAE

But without taking out a new loan nothing can be seen as a re-mortgage, otherwise you are not re-mortgaging.
To me re-mortgage always means redemption and taking out a new product.

Too add to that.
Officially it looks like a remortgage is classified only on moving lender (so changing product with the same lender does not seem to be classified as a re-mortgage)

Cannon_Fodder

So if porting is neither new nor re-mortgaging, where is it covered in the stats??


Not saying you are wrong, but I'd have thought porting was fairly common. So could be statistically significant. So should not be accidentally excluded or overlooked.