Do we fully understand mortgages?

Angry_Cat

GMS wrote: »

I was not suggesting that people should be told 'don't you worry your little head about that' at all.

I cannot see how understanding the complexities of the securitisation market can help people with their mortgages. The bigger concern is for lenders offering non-advised sales to customers who do not know the difference between mortgage types.

It is interesting I agree but like most complicated things it is best left to the experts.

Strange that people will walk into a car showroom and sign up for the finance for an item which will be worth 40% of its value in 3 years and not question how much the finance company paid for the funds, but when it comes to their home they claim to be experts who are being exploited by the greedy banks.

When the lender sells the mortgage I have read it also loses the right to possession

dunstonh

Angry_Cat wrote: »

When the lender sells the mortgage I have read it also loses the right to possession

Not in the way you are thinking though. Dont mix up the US with the UK.

Gary123456790

this has got legs.

we're off to a good start, might turn out even better than the "i need advice but i dont like brokers" thread...

Angry_Cat

dunstonh wrote: »

Not in the way you are thinking though. Dont mix up the US with the UK.

When SPML sold my mortgage, full payment was made to them by Eurosale.

So SPML have made no loss this must impact their right to sue me. How can you sue someone when you have not made a loss, what loss would they claim for ?

dunstonh

Angry_Cat wrote: »

When SPML sold my mortgage, full payment was made to them by Eurosale.

So SPML have made no loss this must impact their right to sue me. How can you sue someone when you have not made a loss, what loss would they claim for ?

Why would they want to sue you?

Angry_Cat

dunstonh wrote: »

Why would they want to sue you?

I presume if I default further, they will sue for possession

the_worm_that_turned

So after being thoroughly witch-hunted on this forum I thought I would take the time to provide an update. Not so much a "told you so" more of a WAKE UP PEOPLE, message.

Previously I made the heinous accusation that just maybe all is not as it seems with mortgages, only to be insulted to the point of feeling unwelcome. Nice!

So now, I am providing you a link to a discussion that was had in Parliament (Backbench Business) on Thurs 20 Nov 2014, called Money Creation and Society - go to 11:18 on this Hansard link (towards the bottom of the linked page).

The initial premise of the discussion was taken from The Bank Of England's Quarterly Bulletin (Q1 2014) article titled Money Creation in the Modern Economy.

Here it quite clearly states:

...Commercial banks create money, in the form of bank deposits, by making new loans. When a bank makes a loan, for example to someone taking out a mortgage to buy a house, it does not typically do so by giving them thousands of pounds worth of banknotes. Instead, it credits their bank account with a bank deposit of the size of the mortgage. At that moment, new money is created. For this reason, some economists have referred to bank deposits as ‘fountain pen money’, created at the stroke of bankers’ pens when they approve loans...

So there you have it, in black and white and incontrovertible proof that the bank did in fact loan you nothing because the money they "loaned" was created at the time of approving the loan.

I would go further to say that, the money is not created by the bank, it is actually by the person requesting the "loan" because without their signature in the first place there is nothing for the bank to approve.

Happy to debate it further once you have read through the links and picked your jaw up off the ground.