Support for mortgage interest benefit cut by thousands of pounds

ukcarper

Does anyone know the average time people stay on SMI?

Wookster

PasturesNew wrote: »

This mortgage support never used to exist. It was put in place hurriedly to help people out a bit longer. It's now coming to an end for those that have been receiving it for 2 years.... which is a lot of time for them to adjust their lives/get new jobs/sort themselves out or simply plan to downsize.

This is one of a big raft of expensive benefits that simply didn't exist before. So there's no need for an outrage when it comes to an end. It bought people time. For a lot it even paid off capital amounts as it was at a fixed rate.

It's coming to an end. It should. It did its job - gave people more time to adjust/try to get jobs/look at their options.

Effectively the prudent of us are being shafted twice. Firstly by paying through our taxes for this benefit, secondly by having to pay significantly higher for property than if the market was left to its own devices.

Time to stop meddling in the market and let prices adjust to the market defined level.

HOUSE_PRICE_CRASH_GHOULS

carolt wrote: »

Do we have classes? Are we still at school? How old are you?

Are you suggesting that social class division is a good thing, and that whether one should be entitled to own their own home should be based on what social class they happen to have been born in to?

Do you really think that is desirable? Were you born upper class? If not, how can your conscience square owning a house?

Confused. Very. Did we jump back a century without my noticing?

Of course I am talking about social classes. Are you so blind as to not being able to see them. Why do you think most working class turn to loan sharks - because credit card companies refused to loan to them. Why do you think being a renter affects your credit worthiness? These are clear and present class divisions. Ignorance is bliss in your world.

silvercar

olly300 wrote: »

In recessions houses take longer than 6 months to sell.

In the recession of the 90s I know people who walked away from their houses after trying to sell them for much longer than that.

Hence the period of 2 years is sufficient to either shift the house or sort something out with the mortgage company. I know people who can find tenants for their properties but can't sell them after having them on the market for a year.

I know houses to take time to sell, the point is that after 3 months waiting for SMI to kick in and 6 months of SMI, you should have an idea of how you are going to get out of your financial situation. Selling up could well mean arrears that have to be cleared from the proceeds of the sale. In the worse situation it could mean repossession. But the point is that the government/ taxpayer will have offered some help. Further help would be available in the shape of LHA to afford to rent. Over and above that costs the taxpayer too much.

Its a balance, between helping those through a difficult time and accepting that the difficult time is taking to long and costing too much to support long term.

I think its quite reasonable for someone made redundant to be supported for a few months, after that they need to look at their future earnings potential and make the necessary adjustments to their lifestyle. If this means being put in the same category as those who haven't yet been able to afford to buy, then that is fine primarily because their income/ savings now puts them in that category.

(For those who take pleasure in searching poster's previous posts, I know that my view has changed slightly.)

carolt

silvercar wrote: »

I know houses to take time to sell, the point is that after 3 months waiting for SMI to kick in and 6 months of SMI, you should have an idea of how you are going to get out of your financial situation. Selling up could well mean arrears that have to be cleared from the proceeds of the sale. In the worse situation it could mean repossession. But the point is that the government/ taxpayer will have offered some help. Further help would be available in the shape of LHA to afford to rent. Over and above that costs the taxpayer too much.

Its a balance, between helping those through a difficult time and accepting that the difficult time is taking to long and costing too much to support long term.

I think its quite reasonable for someone made redundant to be supported for a few months, after that they need to look at their future earnings potential and make the necessary adjustments to their lifestyle. If this means being put in the same category as those who haven't yet been able to afford to buy, then that is fine primarily because their income/ savings now puts them in that category.

(For those who take pleasure in searching poster's previous posts, I know that my view has changed slightly.)

Largely agree with your stance.

carolt

HOUSE_PRICE_CRASH_GHOULS wrote: »

Of course I am talking about social classes. Are you so blind as to not being able to see them. Why do you think most working class turn to loan sharks - because credit card companies refused to loan to them. Why do you think being a renter affects your credit worthiness? These are clear and present class divisions. Ignorance is bliss in your world.

I don't think renting has any impact on my social class. Does money = class in your world?

Also you seem to be confusing what is with what should be - we weren't debating whether those who own do get preferential treatment over those who rent - clearly they do - but whether this situation should be allowed to continue.

You have so far failed to provide any arguments as to why it should.

Very Panglossian of you - you clearly believe we live in the best of all possible worlds.

I don't - I believe things can and should be improved.

mitchaa

Woodbine, this slimey government? I take it you mean the coalition of Tories/Lib dems?

Forgive me, but as from the 1st January 2011 under Labour, SMI was due to drop to 2.08% was it not? The tories/LD's stepped in brought it forward by 3mths and upped this rate to 3.68%. Surely you should be grateful that you do have a tory government in charge as you are receiving 1.6% more than what you would have done under a labour government.

Or have i got the wrong end of the stick?

silvercar

I don't think renting has any impact on my social class. Does money = class in your world?

All the research shows that social class and economic status is linked to housing tenure.

carolt

silvercar wrote: »

All the research shows that social class and economic status is linked to housing tenure.

Show me some.

I'm middle-middle - tiny touch of upper middle (Oxford, aristos in family).

My social class doesn't change every time I move housing tenure. Like if I pop back home to stay with my parents I'd suddenly be a different class?

What about people like fc or a close friend of mine who both rent whilst renting out their own places in a different part of the country?

What a load of utter bobbins.

silvercar

Well the data is all here and available:

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Product.asp?vlnk=5748&More=N

Social Trends from the year dot.

Obviously it is not talking about one individual, its talking about the nation as a whole. People in higher social classes and higher economic groups are more likely to be home owners.