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

Generali

A return to lax mortgage lending?

carolt wrote: »

You are not a FTB. End of.

Yes I am. I don't own a property and haven't for more than 6 months. That is the definition of an FTB traditionally in the UK.

In Australia it is someone that hasn't had a First Home Owners Grant and doesn't own. I qualify there too.

undetterred

A return to lax mortgage lending?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As I have not bought a house fully, I classed myself as a potential FTB, and voted accordingly

??? well you've either bought or you have'nt,whether its 5% or 80%,so rules you out.

carolt

Cheaper house prices

Generali wrote: »

Nor does yours or anyone else's on here by extension.

House prices are set in the market by buyers and sellers, interest rates are set in the market by borrowers and lenders, mortgage lending standards are set by banks and other financial companies depending on their attitudes to risk, wish for a greater market share and (potentially) regulatory restrictions.

I disagree - I posted a poll precisely because this week ceertain vested interests eg Council of Mortgage Lenders (and of course our very own Hamish and Conrad - not quite the same clout though, I suspect, whatever their fond imaginings may be ) wrote widely arguing that the FSA's eminently sensible propsals to limit lending to those who could actually afford to repay it were dangerous, and that what the market (incl FTBs) wanted and needed was laxer lending.

eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11390764

"...the mortgage industry has been alarmed at the prospect of excessive new formal restrictions, such as being obliged to demand that borrowers prove they can pay. :eek: "The unintended consequences of new mortgage regulation are likely to stifle innovation and opportunity," said Mr Coogan.


"Whether for first-time buyers, movers, borrowers who want to access their equity, those whose personal circumstances are different to the 'norm', private investors in residential property or funders of social housing," he said.



Mr Coogan argued that if prices fell again, undermining the security houses gave lenders for loans already made, then mortgage rationing would continue and many more people would be locked out of home ownership."


Or see:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/8037437/First-time-buyers-forced-to-pay-higher-premium-for-mortgages.html

I posted my poll to show that far from this view being supported by FTBs, the very people it purported to represent, ordinary FTBs, actually welcomed tighter lending, and hoped, rather than feared that this would indeed bring lower house prices.

I think it is important for the real opinions of FTB's to be represented, rather than misrepresented by those whose real agenda is keeping house prices high at any cost.

Cleaver

A return to lax mortgage lending?

carolt wrote: »

ssss5sss, Sapphire and the stupidly-named House Price Crash Ghouls - none of you are FTBs either, so will you please stop trying to skew the poll.

I'm not a FTBer either, but I don't like the bold in your post, so now I'm going to vote too. Nyah nyah.

Edit: I was hoping to vote for a return to more lax / flexible lending and cheaper house prices, but you can only vote for one. How come you can you only pick one option?

HOUSE_PRICE_CRASH_GHOULS

A return to lax mortgage lending?

Oh dear it seems as if the bears are no arguing amongst themselves what's officially a FTB. Poll over. Initiate lock down please Mods.

carolt

Cheaper house prices

Generali wrote: »

Yes I am. I don't own a property and haven't for more than 6 months. That is the definition of an FTB traditionally in the UK.

In Australia it is someone that hasn't had a First Home Owners Grant and doesn't own. I qualify there too.

You may well qualify in Australia. You don't in the UK because you are not a potential FTB, don't live here and as such would never qualify for a residential mortgage.

To be a potential FTB, you have to be planning to buy here - you're not, so don't count.

You know that perfectly well - also, not clear why you're so keen to vote, if, as you say, our opinions are irrelevant anyway?

carolt

Cheaper house prices

Cleaver wrote: »

I'm not a FTBer either, but I don't like the bold in your post, so now I'm going to vote too. Nyah nyah.

Feel free to comment, but don't vote - can I suggest vote in Hamish's poll, if you have the voting urge, or start your own?

Cleaver

A return to lax mortgage lending?

carolt wrote: »

I posted my poll to show that far from this view being supported by FTBs, the very people it purported to represent, ordinary FTBs, actually welcomed tighter lending, and hoped, rather than feared that this would indeed bring lower house prices.

But your 'poll' isn't a 'poll'. It's got three options, all of which have very emotive and loaded language and you can't vote for more than one option. Where, for example, is the option to vote for banks and lenders to have a more flexible and considered approach to lending for FTBers?

You're so similar to Hamish that it's almost funny. The two of you are just two sides of the same coin.

Graham_Devon

Cheaper house prices

Generali wrote: »

Nor does yours or anyone else's on here by extension.

House prices are set in the market by buyers and sellers, interest rates are set in the market by borrowers and lenders, mortgage lending standards are set by banks and other financial companies depending on their attitudes to risk, wish for a greater market share and (potentially) regulatory restrictions.

Has Chucky hacked your account?

It's a simple poll. Why you are being so stupid about it I have no idea.

carolt

Cheaper house prices

Cleaver wrote: »

I'm not a FTBer either, but I don't like the bold in your post, so now I'm going to vote too. Nyah nyah.

Edit: I was hoping to vote for a return to more lax / flexible lending and cheaper house prices, but you can only vote for one. How come you can you only pick one option?

Fair point, because largely I think one rules the other out. I think if we flood the market with credit, house prices will inevitable rise.

So I don't think those two views are compatible.

It would be lovely if they were, I agree - but I think the boom and bust of the last decade has taught us the hard way that they are not.