Mortgage fraud cases soar to a 22-year high

julieq

nearlynew wrote: »

Yet according to you, it was similar numbers of american mortgage holders which triggered the credit crunch and nearly brought down the global banking system.

Do you still believe this?

Yes and no.

There was and is nothing structural in the UK mortgage and housing market that was going to do anything more than cause stagnation or modest deflation.

The shock to the system was unknown levels of bad debt in "securitised" products mostly derived by criminally reckless lending in the US - the lenders never expected to be paid back, they were generating packaged debt to sell on, and therefore they had no interest at all in levels of default. This isn't the same thing as self cert mortgages in the UK.

That destroyed global confidence in the banking system, but fortunately for all of us the doom was overplayed by people wanting to hype up expectation to Armageddon levels. Whatever happened to the Option ARM timebomb anyway?

So when the ripples from the big rock being thrown into the pond subsided, we returned more or less to the previous state. Albeit now somewhat distorted by the measures needed to cope with the crisis. The August 2010 outcome might well have been worse for the UK housing market had interest rates risen a little from the levels they were sitting at, because we'd still be looking at a poorish economic output and a large government deficit. Perversely we may well be better off because of the banking crisis, certainly it's focused attention on government spending in a way that hadn't been politically possible before.

To be fair I've saying this throughout this year, and it's the only explanation that fits events. The bears were so exercised about expecting a UK specific crash that they were blindsided by the unexpected event from the US. And from that point they misinterpreted the progression of events by nailing things onto their model, which didn't apply. And that's why they have been so spectacularly wrong.

DervProf

julieq wrote: »

And that's why they have been so spectacularly wrong.

So far.

Spectacularly ? Depends which bear you listen to.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

So far.

Spectacularly ? Depends which bear you listen to.

i'm sure Dr Bubb and Bruce Spanner must be claiming yet another Dead Cat Bounce - it's about the 22nd one that they've claimed is happening...

and let's not mention the ones on here... :whistle:

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

i'm sure Dr Bubb and Bruce Spanner must be claiming yet another Dead Cat Bounce - it's about the 22nd one that they've claimed is happening...

and let's not mention the ones on here... :whistle:

I believe they have.

As I said though, it depends which bear you listen to.

I think you may find evidence (although you don`t need to, because I will tell you), that I thought that we`d be looking at an average house price fall of around 30% by now, since I made that prediction in 2006. I was wrong, but not spectacularly. I must admit I didn`t expect the lengths that the government and the BoE would go to to prevent such a fall. Without such intervention I still think I would have been wrong, as I reckon we`d be looking at steeper falls.

It`s good to know that despite a huge financial crisis, UK property prices will never fall by much. Just when you think that economic fundamentals will cause a crash, along comes something to prevent it. So come on folks, fill yer boots !

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

that I thought that we`d be looking at an average house price fall of around 30%

i reckoned 25%-30%. does that make me a bear too?

julieq

Sorry, unless there are bears who predicted a short sharp drop followed by a sustained recovery to a plateau point just below previous peaks, then they have been spectacularly wrong. That's why it's poor sport dredging up old threads, they are all almost embarrassingly wrong. And they're wrong because they were applying an incorrect model (the celebrated HPC graph with bull traps and so on).

At about this point usually Graham pops up breathlessly and explains that no-one got predictions right 100% therefore all predictions are equally invalid. Which demonstrates a poor understanding of forecasting. The fact is that the "bull" predictions (where the bulls are defined as those people who wouldn't be allowed to post at HPC, rather than the traditional definition of people who expect perpetual increases) have been far closer to getting things right (within an error band) than the bears.

And then there's a discussion about distortions in the market due to they tiny percentage total of people who have avoided repossession, and the idea that anyone paying the same rates that existed in 2007 would now AUTOMATICALLY have been forced onto the breadline.

As a demonstration of faulty logic and a blind adherence to a failed model, you'd hardly do better. But spectacularly and consistently wrong, right up until the point they panic and bail out by making the worst financial decision of their life. And in fact that may well be the first thing they have right, because to a cub they've all bailed just at the point where rises have stopped and stagnation set in.

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

The fact is that the "bull" predictions (where the bulls are defined as those people who wouldn't be allowed to post at HPC, rather than the traditional definition of people who expect perpetual increases) have been far closer to getting things right (within an error band) than the bears.

Show me one of these predictions.

The only "bull" who predicts anything, is Hamish. He's got some things right, he's got some things wrong, within that error of margin you talk of.

But where are these other bull predictions you talk about? How about some examples? Cus I sure as hell don't know any. Lot's of talk house prices will rise, but thats it.

Where these predictions of how, where, and within what timeframe these bulls have been correct on, are, is beyond me.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

But where are these other bull predictions you talk about? How about some examples? Cus I sure as hell don't know any. Lot's of talk about why house prices will rise, but thats it.

Where these predictions of how, where, and within what timeframe these bulls have been correct on, are, is beyond me.

My you have some short memories,
I've made some predicitons, a 22% correction requirement to be accurate.
Let me get the search facility out again

[edit]
Here we go
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=12813653&postcount=6
[/edit]

chucky

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

My you have some short memories,
I've made some predicitons, a 22% correction requirement to be accurate.
Let me get the search facility out again

[edit]
Here we go
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=12813653&postcount=6
[/edit]

he get's shown these types of things each and every time and still pretends he's never seen it. it looks like his obsession with bulls is getting to him...

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

My you have some short memories,
I've made some predicitons, a 22% correction requirement to be accurate.
Let me get the search facility out again

[edit]
Here we go
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=12813653&postcount=6
[/edit]

I've just looked at every single one of them. Not one of them has a prediction in it. You are merely responding to other people, mainly talking about current graphs.

Show me a prediction. One which states "I believe house prices will be at x value at x time, my reasons are Y".