FTBs, make your voice heard. Would YOU prefer lower prices/rates/laxer mortgage rules

chucky

Cheaper house prices

DervProf wrote: »

My advice, wait 8 months. You`ll probably get a better mortgage rate for the lower LTV and you`ll borrow less, so your repayments will be at least £30 per month lower.

And who knows, property prices may have fallen a little by then. I know that`s a bit far feteched, but you could be lucky.

if property prices fall nominally by 'a little' then it certainly will be very sound advice.

if prices nominally rise 'a little' by then it could be terrible advice.

i'm not qualified to give advice on this forum btw.

DervProf

MoneyMiser wrote: »

Yorkshire Bank offer a 95% LTV with a 3 year fixed rate of 6.99%

Natwest offer a 90% LTV with a 5 year fixed rate of 6.89%

I know which one I would rather go for.

MM

Try HSBC. They seem to be offering 90% LTV @ 5.09% on £100K.

IveSeenTheLight

A return to lax mortgage lending?

DervProf wrote: »

You have completey torn apart my suggestion. I now realise that it was completely ridiculous for me to make the suggestion that the FTB`er "wannabe" (your use of the word sounds a little patronising, if you don`t mind me saying) might want to save for a little longer to meet the deposit requirements.

I think it`s likely that a lot of potential FTB`ers who really are serious about buying their first home are living with their parents (or with "mummy and daddy" as another patronising forum member put it the other day) at the moment. A potential FTB`er who is renting will surely have less to save for a deposit, hence the call for lower deposits.

Apologise for the FTBer wannabe, it was in reference to the op only wanting FTBers to respond and me pointing out that they would have needed to have bought to be a buyer.
It was pedantic of me and I apologise. I suppose 'potential' FTBer is better.

I was fortunate to buy my first property with a 100% mortgage.
I could have obained a 95%, however I used that 5% to pay the solicitor fees and start refurbishing the property.

Otherwise it would have taken a bit longer.

The market set's the prices, but the restriction of lending reduced the oppertnities for people to own.

I think it gives more people the oppertunity to own if lending was relaxed and see this as a positive for any potential FTBer.

Prices being lower and lending being tighter may simply mean that fewer people get to buy, many are still locked out and this increases rental demand making investment property a better prospect.

DervProf

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The market set's the prices, but the restriction of lending reduced the oppertnities for people to own.

I`m not so sure about the just the market setting the price.

Sure, the more money people earn, the higher property prices will tend to be. I still think that price and availability of credit has a very large effect on property prices, especially when credit is flowing freely. I agree that currently, tight lending conditions may limit the number of people to own, but with the reported property shortage, theres`s only so much to share anyway.

Loosen lending, and prices will rise. Unless salaries rise, people will need to borrow more to pay for higher prices. The only way to keep the property market moving will then be to loosen lending further. Something`s got to give. I say keep lending conditions fairly tight, and let the market adjust accordingly. It might not suit everyone, but neither will loosening lending. We have recently witnessed the effects of allowing banks too much free reign.

DervProf

And according to this......

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/uk-on-cusp-of-second-banking-failure-skynews-5809d3acd179.html?x=0

It seems the banks aren`t in any position to start dishing the dosh.

What a lovely mess they`ve got themselves into. The hangover that I predicted from the pre-2007 credit binge seems to be kicking in.

IveSeenTheLight

A return to lax mortgage lending?

DervProf wrote: »

I say keep lending conditions fairly tight, and let the market adjust accordingly. It might not suit everyone, but neither will loosening lending. We have recently witnessed the effects of allowing banks too much free reign.

I'm not advocating a totally loose reign on lending, but feel there is room for manouver on the current position

DervProf

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I'm not advocating a totally loose reign on lending, but feel there is room for manouver on the current position

I know what you mean, but the problem comes after that manouver is made. There will be calls for another manouver when the new lending conditions have be "used up".

In a country where property is in limited supply, the loosening of credit is a dangerous path to take. There needs to be a controlling factor.

neas

Cheaper house prices

Theres what I want and what I get.

carolt

Cheaper house prices

neas wrote: »

Theres what I want and what I get.

To which I can only say that if you don't state what you want clearly, how can you expect to get it?

That's what this thread is for, so that no-one can be under any illusions about what FTBs actually want most in house-buying terms - lower prices matter more than lower interest rates or easier lending criteria.

chucky

Cheaper house prices

people forget that when house prices fall or are at their lowest levels in the house price cycle less people are able to buy.

not only because many can't afford to because they've lost their job or are on reduced hours but because the banks won't lend them money.

take any HPC you like to prove it...