FTB's "Missing Deal Of A Lifetime"

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

that's the way i've always seen it - some see it as their right to be able to buy a property. i don't...

Neither do I, but I see it this way......

I think that anyone on a decent income should be able to aspire to buying a modest property to live in, without having to compete in the marketplace against fraud and deception. I think that the "average Joe", who simply wants to purchase a place to live in, should not have to compete with multiple property owning landlords, who have remortgaged many times over to build a highly leveraged "empire". I also don`t expect the banking system to fuel a property boom by taking part in loose lending practices. I would like to see financial regulatory bodies take action to prevent banks getting into trouble. And for what it`s worth, how about shutting down websites that offer replacement payslips ?

Sadly, much of this activity has been taking place over the past decade or so. I wonder if Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley, Halifax, RBS would have required "a little help" if these "nasty" tighter lending criteria had been in place all along ?

And what makes me :wall:, is after all that has gone on over the past 3 years, I still hear cries for more lending, smaller deposits and low interest rates.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

Neither do I, but I see it this way......

all fair points

DervProf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nothing. So long as rates for 10% deposits are competitive, whereas just now the banks are shamelessly profiteering on them.

Just like house builders, landlords, estate agents etc shamelessly profited form the 2001-2007 boom ?

The banks are recapitalising, having pumped out £££ to line the pockets of the parties I mentioned above.

If the banks dish out what I think you are calling for (10% deposit with Base rate +1.5% ?), then what do you think the outcome will be ? I`ll take a guess first.......


A resumption of the boom. More people will buy, prices will rise. The banks will have to lend larger amounts to keep this going. Haven`t we been there before ?

I`d say it`s a good thing that the lenders aren`t passing on the extremely low base rate. The more people that rely on low rates, the worse the effect when rates inevitably rise. a 0.5% rise when you are paying 2% is far worse than if you are paying 5%. If the property market gets fuelled by ultra low interest rates, it will soon depend upon them.

Losing_the_way

There is little doubt that FTBers are struggling, there has been no effort to expand our economic base to pay them the increasing salaries needed to support themselves in UK plc.

In any local authority area all that we’ve seen for the last twenty years is planning granted for housing in the vain hope that it might temper the costs of that element of living costs. Any employment created has been in the service sector which has been shunned by the indigenous population, instead drawing in migrant worker so creating a paradox.

Almost 5% of the habitable housing stock is not on the market, and that excludes second homes, we’d be better legislating to enable these homes on to the market. That alone would reduced the environmental cost of building stock, most of which are frankly unfit due to falling below the EU recommended sizes.

If we want to prevent a correction then every effort should be put into re-inflating domestic industry, the sad truth is the coalition having indicated we are unable to afford that.

nembot

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

House prices are rising at the minute, and have been for the last year or so.

Nah, maybe round your way

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Am I being talked about over on hpc again?

Oh yes, there it is.
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=148846

:rotfl:

That didn't last long, the hive mind mods deleted the entire thread!!!!!!

It seems this.....

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Oh look, another hpc-er..... Won't be long until that thread gets hidden in "about-hpc".

There's so few of you left these days, the mods will start to panic if more than half a dozen post over here.

Will the last one leaving hpc please turn out the lights.:D

...... hit the nail on the head.

Priceless.

allthingsmustpass

And why are the banks asking for larger deposits? Is it to put off first time buyers, so they lend money to fewer people and make less money?

Or is it that they are pricing in future house price falls? If a borrower stops repaying the loan the bank can reposses the house. They do this so they can then sell the house and recover the money they have lent. A higher deposit means they are lending less than the value of the house, because they suspect that when it comes to reposses the house to get their lent money back that the house will fetch less.

There is no other explanation. They are not turning away business for the fun of it. They are in the business of money lending to make money, and they employ more competent people than the likes of this sibley and hamish to determine where they think the market is going and request deposits accordingly.

Read between the lines. The banks expect falls.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

allthingsmustpass wrote: »

There is no other explanation. .

Except the obvious one......

Mortgage Rationing.

Banks are rationing a limited supply of funding by jacking up the price of retail mortgage money to record levels of margin above funding costs.

allthingsmustpass

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Except the obvious one......

Mortgage Rationing.

Banks are rationing a limited supply of funding by jacking up the price of retail mortgage money to record levels of margin above funding costs.

The 'price of retail mortgage money' has nothing to do with the size of deposit, that would be the interest they charge on the loan.

There was nothing 'obvious' about that answer, it just plain old didn't make any sense.

Seriously after reading the other replies you've written in this thread you should stop pretending you know what you're talking about, people could be misled and make expensive life altering mistakes.

Im not going to add anymore to this thread, good luck everyone, do your own research.

Entertainer

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Houses are at peak affordability. Absurdly high deposit requirements lock out many potential FTB's from the market.

With a mortgage payment cheaper than rent in 75% of the UK, of course houses are affordable. The limiting factor is the deposit requirement, which is now far too high due to mortgage rationing.

Paying a mortgage is no harder than paying rent. Saving a 40K or 50K deposit whilst you are paying rent that is as high or higher than a mortgage payment, is a ridiculous burden to impose on FTB's.

So investors are replacing FTB's once again, and many FTB's will lose out on their chance of buying.

However many times you repeat this piece of fiction it wont suddenly become true.