Oh my god, we've been turned down!

grey_lady

So discriminating against people with children is ok?

ILW

MissMessy wrote: »

What do you mean how much did we owe previously? We are renting however our last property we owed 200k...

We have seen a whole of market broker and we know the best deals but it clearly its more about the lending criteria... clearly the broke didnt know they would knock 50k off as he wouldnt have recommended the product surely?


Im sorry but I do not see how allowing someone a £900 a month mortgage on an income of £2550 a month is irresponsible??

We have no debts at all, no credit cards, no store cards and up until today excellent credit rating. God knows what we would buy round here for 170k as its would not even buy a 2 bed flat!!

The reason I am cross is it appears other lender take into considertaion the nunmber in household simply on their mortgage calculators but N&P have waited right until now?? Why dont they warn you that they may lend 4.3x BUT this figure could be dramtically less if there is more than one person in the house hold??

I have just done the nationwide calculator where they DO ask about dependants and it says it will lend 186k..

They are probably considering what would happen if the rate was considerably higher at the end of your fix.

ILW

grey_lady wrote: »

So discriminating against people with children is ok?

They do tend to rather hammer ones disposable income.

opinions4u

moneysaymoneydo wrote: »

next time dont declare the kids

trevorsminted wrote: »

MissMessy i know someone who did just that said no kids and actually have four who all reside with them and they got the mortgage they wanted, their theory was there were single couples getting a bigger mortgage but there expenditure could have been a lot higher for instance eating out, holidays etc whereas they lived quite modestly, fraud?? yep just like noone lies on their cv, good luck!

Lying on a CV is also fraudulent, and gives an employer major grounds to sack you, even years later.

Lying on a mortgage application form? A criminal record and a potential prison sentence isn't out of the question.

Really stupid advice. Sorry.

grey_lady wrote: »

So discriminating against people with children is ok?

Lending too much to a family who eventually discover that they cannot maintain the payments on a mortgage would create an absolutely shocking set of circumstances to put anybody through. The impact of losing a home on children can be massively distressing and scar them for years.

It's not, by any stretch of the imagination, discrimination.

(Your name suggests you may be of the older generation. The amount of discrimination in favour of over 50s and the retired baffles me ... but that's another story).

firstaspect

We recently got a mortgage from Nationwide. They gave 4x salary which we required and no problems whatsoever. Went from application to offer in under 2 weeks.

southantrim3

ILW wrote: »

They do tend to rather hammer ones disposable income.

I agree with this posting. The more kids you have the more money you have to fork out on food, electric, heating, water - everything goes up. It's obvious that you're going to have less of a disposabile income and this needs to be taken into account when they are calculating what they think you can afford.

It's not discriminating against. It's common sense, the more kids you have, the less money you have.

MissMessy_2

Haven't had a chance to read all the comments yet but just to let you know at midnight last night we did Post Office calculator and they would lend us 202k..... Over 60k more and that's with the dependants declared.

We applied for AIP and we got a yes within no more than 20 seconds. This morning we did the full application and got an immediate yes!

I have since been told that N and P are ridiculously tight so feel less of a leper now lol

Already paid for survey and they have said they will be in touch within 48 hours...

Weird because every broker said they could take weeks just for a decision

blueberrypie

southantrim3 wrote: »

I agree with this posting. The more kids you have the more money you have to fork out on food, electric, heating, water - everything goes up. It's obvious that you're going to have less of a disposabile income and this needs to be taken into account when they are calculating what they think you can afford.

It's not discriminating against. It's common sense, the more kids you have, the less money you have.

Not necessarily. The biggest child-related cost is either the loss of one income (if one parent stays at home to care for them) or the cost of childcare (if that parent returns to work). Childcare costs are per child, but a parent staying at home hasn't lost any more income because there are two children rather than one.

We have six children, and although our child-related costs are higher now than they were when we had four, it's not the two youngest who are costing us more - it's the two eldest! They cost us more in food, activity-costs, clothes, etc. The little ones don't cost much extra at all - what they add to the grocery-bill is minimal, and we'd be heating the house etc anyway. Certainly having more kids *can* cost more money - but I suspect quite a lot of families find the financial impact of a third or subsequent child isn't that great. On the one hand I do understand why lenders take the number of children into account. On the other hand I do think that for many families that's too simplistic. And on the third hand* I can see that that thinking the whole thing through like this is probably more complex than most lenders would be willing to do.

*That third hand: useful when you've six kids ;-)

koexelek

ILW wrote: »

They do tend to rather hammer ones disposable income.

From a lender point of view, it makes little sense to stick purely to income multiples if lending sensibly.

Two blokes could be doing the same job on exactly the same wage, but where as one of them might be single with no kids, the other might have a dependent wife and 6 kids.