One million homes face Interest-only remortgage threat

silvercar

The_White_Horse wrote: »

why the hell are the govt paying people's mortgages for them?????

Only the interest, which is the same as paying rent according to some on here.

IveSeenTheLight

chucky wrote: »

you see ISTL - in "all cases" and then claiming "not in all cases" is perceived as back tracking. Dervprof may not think so but it is...

Chucky, to be fair he said it isn't true in "all cases"
Bit of a cop out really as nothing is ever 100%, there will always be the odd few exceptions to the rule.

It was almost a waste of time prroving my statement as the "battle" of debate didn;t even get off with a bang but more a whimpered withdrawel

At least it's clear for those to see why property investment is a good investment and quashes the thought that it relies on HPI

movilogo

If 1 million homes facing this problem, then rest 25 million UK homes are not facing any issue. That means 97% homes are fine - which is not bad.

Just trying to be optimistic.

pawlala

amcluesent wrote: »

Could be some very attractive houses being sold at fire-sale prices soon!

Exactly how soon is "soon"?

Generali

RDB wrote: »

If its not an interest only mortg how does work?

The bank will generally agree to suspend capital repayments and move the customer onto an interest only basis for a time.

Cleaver

movilogo wrote: »

If 1 million homes facing this problem, then rest 25 million UK homes are not facing any issue. That means 97% homes are fine - which is not bad.

Just trying to be optimistic.

Indeed. And that's also based on the assumption that these 1 million homes are actually all up a creek without a paddle. We all know the reality will be that many of them will have plans and means to pay off their mortgage.

At the same time, many of the apparently fine 25 million people on repayment mortgages (or those that don't even have mortgages) may be living on a financial precipice and about to default on their payments.

So who knows?

treliac

Generali wrote: »

The bank will generally agree to suspend capital repayments and move the customer onto an interest only basis for a time.

Is there a time limit? What happens if the customer doesn't find a job?

DervProf

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Chucky, to be fair he said it isn't true in "all cases"
Bit of a cop out really as nothing is ever 100%, there will always be the odd few exceptions to the rule.

A cop out, I`d say fair enough, it is a bit of a cop out. However, I think the number of people that have lost money on property investment is fairly significant, and I expect the effect of their finances and lives can be quite devastating.

And thank you for pointing out what I did say, chucky seems to often tell me that I said things that I didn`t.

chucky

DervProf wrote: »

A cop out, I`d say fair enough, it is a bit of a cop out. However, I think the number of people that have lost money on property investment is fairly significant, and I expect the effect of their finances and lives can be quite devastating.

And thank you for pointing out what I did say, chucky seems to often tell me that I said things that I didn`t.

so you did cop out... not back track. fair enough, we'll agree that you copped out... you said one thing then [STRIKE]backtracked[/STRIKE] and changed it say 'not in al cases'.

as for Chucky telling you things that you didn't do, i've shown you already. if you choose to ignore it, that's up to you... you tend to run away from discussions that you don't like the look of and call them 'a tad childish'.

that's the spirit dervpro - keep it up

DervProf

chucky wrote: »

so you did cop out... not back track. fair enough, we'll agree that you copped out... you said one thing then [STRIKE]backtracked[/STRIKE] and changed it say 'not in al cases'.

as for Chucky telling you things that you didn't do, i've shown you already. if you choose to ignore it, that's up to you... you tend to run away from discussions that you don't like the look of and call them 'a tad childish'.

that's the spirit dervpro - keep it up

Here`s my reply to what I`ve highlighted above.

DervProf wrote: »

I might argue that this isn`t true in all cases.

In fact, yes, I will argue that fact.


And I`ll also debate the "without HPI" thing too, if you like.

Let battle commence.

Then a little while later, I was challenged to continue the debate, so I did, with this........

DervProf wrote: »

OK, I say "not in all cases".

I`m sure I have read about quite a few people that have lost money through property investment, even with HPI. I spoke to someone the other day who had done just that, as a matter of fact.

If HPI was 0% through someone`s lifetime, and they bought a property early in their life (with cash), they could rent it out. This would provide an income, let`s say a yield of 5%. Meanwhile, another person with the same amount of cash, sticks it in a savings account. May I suggest that they earn 3% ? OK, the landlord earns and extra 2% on his £££, but is that enough to cover maintenance costs on his property ?

Read the first line of both posts, then decide if I was backtracking. I don`t think I was. I first stated that I might argue "this isn`t true in all cases.", I later argued that very point. I may have changed the words that I used, but anyone with a fairly decent command of the English language would realise that I didn`t contradict myself **. I`ve spelled this out to you before, but you still seem to be in denial. I`ve even had a couple of other forum members verify that I didn`t backtrack.

As far a copping out is concerned, you will see that I have partially accepted that accusation, but then to made clear what I was pointing out. I didn`t "run away", or call IveSeenTheLight childish.


** If your point is that I changed the wording that I used, but not the meaning, then you are correct. If you still think that I "backtracked" on my original point, I think you should explain why.

I`m getting the feeling that you are trying to wind me up. If you are, it`s not working. I feel I`ve contributed a few reasonable points to this forum in the short time I`ve been here. Some people will agree with me, some won`t, but I do hope that I`ve put my points across in a reasonably clear and polite manner, and I certainly don`t think I`ve shown any signs of going back on my word or avoiding any awkward questions. I`ve asked Hamish to justify a couple of things he has stated, but have had no reply. I`m not going to hound him, and I`m not going to keep accusing him of avoiding the issue that I`ve raised. If he won`t answer, I`ll draw my own conclusion, I won`t keep going on about it. As much as Hamish and I have differing views, I hope we have a bit of respect for each other, something that I`m losing for you. I witnessed your arguments with Graham_Devon when I first started reading these threads. He stated earlier that you`re leaving him alone now, having turned you attention towards me.