Telegraph: Bring Back 100% Mortgages--Best Way to Wealth

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

One of the best financial decisions I ever took was a 100pc mortgage for about five times my salary 25 years ago. No such loans are available today. Without such ‘irresponsible lending’, I might still be renting a bedsit in Kilburn rather than owning a home in Highgate.

That’s not intended to sound like bragging but to demonstrate why people who fail to understand the importance of credit – and, dare I say it, house price inflation – in the creation of wealth are either very naive or perhaps living under hedges on a diet of roots and berries.

They have certainly missed one of the simplest ways to accumulate tax-free gains available in our lifetime – at least until now.

Will today’s bedsit tenants thank the regulators for freezing them out of home ownership and condemning them to years of throwing cash away on rent? I doubt it.

The Government should call off the FSA, slash Stamp Duty and give young homebuyers a fighting chance.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100003921/how-increased-tax-and-regulation-hurts-young-homebuyers/

And so it begins.....

Mark my words, the backlash against discriminatory lending practices requiring stupidly high deposits that only the rich can afford, and blocking access to homeownership for the masses, is going to get ever louder.

The Personal Finance Editor of the Torygraph states it clearly, and no doubt Conservative HQ is listening closely. I would be amazed if we don't see 100% mortgages return with acceptable rates within the lifetime of this next parliament.

We are not a nation of renters, by choice. The UK mentality is to buy, buy, buy, and this will never change. Anyone dreaming of the Tories making lending harder, or raising the costs of ownership, or in any way discouraging HPI, is going to be very disappointed indeed.

DaddyBear

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100003921/how-increased-tax-and-regulation-hurts-young-homebuyers/

And so it begins.....

Mark my words, the backlash against discriminatory lending practices requiring stupidly high deposits that only the rich can afford, and blocking access to homeownership for the masses, is going to get ever louder.

The Personal Finance Editor of the Torygraph states it clearly, and no doubt Conservative HQ is listening closely. I would be amazed if we don't see 100% mortgages return with acceptable rates within the lifetime of this next parliament.

We are not a nation of renters, by choice. The UK mentality is to buy, buy, buy, and this will never change. Anyone dreaming of the Tories making lending harder, or raising the costs of ownership, or in any way discouraging HPI, is going to be very disappointed indeed.

The definition of insanity is repeating the same task and expecting a different outcome.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

DaddyBear wrote: »

The definition of insanity is repeating the same task and expecting a different outcome.

What, like this task......

One of the best financial decisions I ever took was a 100pc mortgage for about five times my salary 25 years ago. No such loans are available today. Without such ‘irresponsible lending’, I might still be renting a bedsit in Kilburn rather than owning a home in Highgate.

I would agree.:D

ruggedtoast

The Telegraph would like 100% mortgages to return because the vast majority of their readership are home owning baby boomers who have got quite used to the idea that they are going to sell their houses for about 30 times what they paid for them; and they are going to use this to fund a nice retirement.

Most of them are well aware that this isn't going to happen unless there are first time buyers coming in at the bottom taking on large debts (much larger than they had to take on) to do so.

This doesnt change the fact that this isnt going to happen. The UK no longer has the wealth, the asset base, or the global financial support to return to this financial model.

The boomers will drop their prices to the level the market can sustain, or they will not sell until they are dead and their children auction their home off.

Dont expect that editorial line to be widely represented in the Telegraph.

abaxas

You can fix the problem with the problem.

Garry Glitter isn't eduction minister.
Fred West for justice.
Gordon Brown for bullying tzar.

etc etc

DaddyBear

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

What, like this task......




I would agree.:D

Let me think....

Unregulated lending, risky mortgages, financial collapse, recession.

What I find funny is these 'experts' dress it up as trying to help first-time buyers.
As you have rightly pointed out Hamish. If you can't afford a house, then you can't afford it.

Jonbvn

Does anyone actually believe the Financial Editor of the Torygraph ever had a 100% mortgage?

100% mortgages were only available very recently. The norm used to be 10-20% deposits and a mortgage from a BS who you had been saving with since you were a kid!

To state that a lenders requirement for a deposit is in any way discriminatory is disingenuous.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100003921/how-increased-tax-and-regulation-hurts-young-homebuyers/

And so it begins.....

Mark my words, the backlash against discriminatory lending practices requiring stupidly high deposits that only the rich can afford, and blocking access to homeownership for the masses, is going to get ever louder.

The Personal Finance Editor of the Torygraph states it clearly, and no doubt Conservative HQ is listening closely. I would be amazed if we don't see 100% mortgages return with acceptable rates within the lifetime of this next parliament.

We are not a nation of renters, by choice. The UK mentality is to buy, buy, buy, and this will never change. Anyone dreaming of the Tories making lending harder, or raising the costs of ownership, or in any way discouraging HPI, is going to be very disappointed indeed.

I think you are getting confused Hamish.

The mortgage and housing market survived for decades without 100% mortgages.

They were a very recent phenomenon.

I am amazed that you have used the word "discriminatory" in relation to this. I think you need to go google the definition of the word, and then tell me who's being discriminated against.

The answer is no one, as everyone is on an even keel. You are only using that word because YOU would like to see 100% mortgages back to sustain your HPI dream. As I said, the market worked for decades without these products, and they can work today too (and are doing).

lending practices requiring stupidly high deposits that only the rich can afford, and blocking access to homeownership for the masses, is going to get ever louder.

Hypocrisy again Hamish.

One minute you are saying houses are more affordable now than they have ever been. The next you are saying this. I can't believe a word you say anymore as it will change back to houses being more affordable then ever once you have got bored with this thread.

However, only the rich can afford the deposit because of the high house prices.

Can you not see the gaping hole you are digging yourself between all these threads you create and take a different tact dependant on what you believe will sustain HPI this time?

DaddyBear

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I think you are getting confused Hamish.

The mortgage and housing market survived for decades without 100% mortgages.

They were a very recent phenomenon.

I am amazed that you have used the word "discriminatory" in relation to this. I think you need to go google the definition of the word, and then tell me who's being discriminated against.

The answer is no one, as everyone is on an even keel. You are only using that word because YOU would like to see 100% mortgages back to sustain your HPI dream. As I said, the market worked for decades without these products, and they can work today too (and are doing).



Hypocrisy again Hamish.

One minute you are saying houses are more affordable now than they have ever been. The next you are saying this. I can't believe a word you say anymore as it will change back to houses being more affordable then ever once you have got bored with this thread.

However, only the rich can afford the deposit because of the high house prices.

Can you not see the gaping hole you are digging yourself between all these threads you create and take a different tact dependant on what you believe will sustain HPI this time?

But Graham, houses are more affordable than they have ever been! :rotfl::rotfl:;)

Graham_Devon

DaddyBear wrote: »

But Graham, houses are more affordable than they have ever been! :rotfl::rotfl:;)

We'll have the same old figures in a minute no doubt which completely ignore the interest rates.

Generali

I'd be perfectly happy to see 100% mortgages offered by any bank which didn't have an implicit or explicit Government guarantee, that is to say they and their creditors take on 100% of the risk.

If you want a Government underwriting of the system then buyers should bring something to the table, say a 5% deposit with MIG or 20% without.