Reposessions likely to hit 15-year high.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

rosa_luxembourg wrote: »

Out of interest, how far below the sale price do you think those auction properties in Aberdeen (lots 357-360) are priced?

Given the lack of condition information and no vacant posession, I'd guess they'll be cheaper than open market sales, but above guide price.

We'll know soon enough.

IveSeenTheLight

rosa_luxembourg wrote: »

Oh, I don't know...
There are some repo bargains to be had here:
(Lots 357 - 360 are in your neck of the woods)

Not what I'm after, but you might be interested...

Edit.

It's good to chat with you - nice to have advice from folk who're better informed about mortgages and repossessions than both the Council of Mortgage Lenders and the business pages of The Times.

It's not what I'd be interested in either.
I prefer a better area and a better standard of property.

By the way, who said I am better informed than the CML or the Times.
I merely pointed out that teir predictions have been wrong on the high side before, required to be revised and that the current expectation is not far from the level we saw in 2009 when house prices continued to rise.

My point is that a prediciton is just that and can be very wrong.
Much better to look at what actual figures are reflecting.

Still if you wish to continue to speculate on possibilities then feel free

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Still if you wish to continue to speculate on possibilities then feel free

The HPC multi-ID trolls are resorting to ever more desperate measures.

But you've got to admire the creativity in the ever changing bear story....

House prices are not rising.

House prices in my town are not rising.

House prices in my suburb are not rising.

House prices in my neighbourhood are not rising.

House prices on my street are not rising.

A half dozen dodgy reposessions may not be rising.....

rosa_luxembourg

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The HPC multi-ID trolls are resorting to ever more desperate measures.

But you've got to admire the creativity in the ever changing bear story....

House prices are not rising.

House prices in my town are not rising.

House prices in my suburb are not rising.

House prices in my neighbourhood are not rising.

House prices on my street are not rising.

A half dozen dodgy reposessions may not be rising.....

Good grief, I didn't know that The Times was 'a multi-ID troll'! I'll stop reading it immediately!

Or did you mean the CML?

dunstonh

What a stupid headline. When you see headlines like this they are just pointless. We had a sustained period of growth so anything bad happening now is going to be worse than anything up to the last recession, which happened to be around 15 years ago.

If you had 4 repossessions last year and this year had 8, the media would report it not as 4 or 8 but "repossessions increase by 100%."

The other one that was churned out a lot during the recession was "since records began". Making it sound really bad but on some occasions the records only began 10 years ago and didnt include any period of recession.

Plummet is another one they like using to describe a decrease that is negative. Things dont go down anymore, they plummet. !

dopester

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Kick a man when their down why don't you?
I hope you don;t find yourself out of work and finding life's commitments hard.

Actually a more responsable message to put out is that if you are facing difficulties, much better to discusss with your lender as there are a number of options that can be explored such as payment holidays, resetting the amortization period, going on to interest only etc etc.

If you've exhausted through all the assistance in the help/rescue schemes, or don't qualify for full assistance because you've MEWed on original small mortgage to spend on other things. Or haven't paid a penny in 2 year towards your mortgage owing £280K mortgage on a house worth £270K and defaulting on £30K of loans. Or equity released £150K before coming upto retirement and can't service the mortgage at retirement who are reluctant to sell now to downsize because they don't feel the market will pay them what they think their property is worth. Or taken on a massive mortgage in 2005-07 and are in deep negative equity and hopelessly can't afford repayments.

You really think it is right and proper to expect these people in hopeless financial positions, or in difficult circumstances to which they've contributed through their own actions, to never be repossessed? To be kept in homes they have little right to keeping, whilst there is good money in the market waiting to buy?

If one of your tenants has a change of circumstances ISTL, job loss or pay-cuts, finding their commitments to pay your rent impossible, I hope you won't kick them when their down. Let them stay on for years. It's not on expecting them to move out and be replaced by tenants who can pay the monthly rent. Surely it's not on expecting them to move to a cheaper property in a different area which they can afford, allowing those are in a stronger financial position to replace them in Aberdeen. I don't think you'd respond that way.

Generali

The interesting bit will be when interest rates start to rise which is inevitable. This is what has happened in Australia where the cash rate has risen to 4.5%, still pretty low by historical standards ('normal' would be about 7% in Aus):

http://www.smh.com.au/business/mortgages-set-to-eat-up-the-family-budget-20100504-u74w.html

Average borrowers are devoting 33 per cent of their after-tax income to repaying their mortgage, down from 43 per cent at the peak in 1989, ANZ says. But the bank's head of property research, Paul Braddick, expects the figure to increase to 40 per cent once interest rates reach 6 per cent late next year....
The chief executive of the property research firm Residex, John Edwards, painted an even bleaker picture. He said borrowers with an 80 per cent mortgage on a $641,000 property were siphoning off 62 per cent to meet their repayments....

$640,000 would buy you what an Aussie considers to be his birthright (1/4 acre with a house on it) in a pretty mediocre part of Sydney.

carolt

Oh but Gen, it could never happen here, you know.

Hamish and ISTL said so.

So that's like, the truth. Innit?

chucky

dunstonh wrote: »

What a stupid headline. When you see headlines like this they are just pointless.

a stupid headline and sensationalist story is always good to feed and excite the frothers on this board. logic or reality aren't their strongest points. :eek:

they love it

rosa_luxembourg

Revisionism.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article7125013.ece

The original article has been modified. The headline now reads:

Repossessions fall but lack of certainty holds back market.

And, as predicted by the brilliantly perspicacious ISTL, (who really does know best - this proves it) the CML hope to revise their repo forecast:

Michael Coogan, the CML director-general, said: “We hope, and expect, to be able to revise down our 53,000 forecast for repossessions in 2010, but we are acutely conscious of the beneficial influence that low interest rates and the package of support have played so far. The dampening effects on households and the wider housing market that fiscal tightening is likely to exert are still to be felt, but it should be a key priority to support borrowers most in need and maintain funding for the Government’s housing policies.”

He is bleating a bit, though, isn't he? It reflects what I said about extraordinary support measures keeping the figures down for the last year. This is a request by Coogan to the new administration to keep these measures in place. Can we as a country afford to keep supporting these folk who can't pay? Aren't they just the same as benefit scroungers?


Edit.

I've never actually noticed a newspaper revising an article and its headline once its been published. Maybe they took notice of what Chucky and DunstonH said. I'm sure the Times subbies don't like being called 'stupid' by smart guys like them! It must smart!