Will Mortgages Get Back to 95 or 100%

shortchanged_2

I've said it before on numerous occasions that the way forward to a more realistic, sustainable housing market is to remove interest only mortgages and to maintain strict lending criteria.

GMS

brit1234 wrote: »

Sorry where on earth will buy to let get the fiance for this especially with the buy to let lending clampdown.

Widespread repossessions, rising interest rates, access to credit and falling prices suggests BTL will not fill the gap.

Remember buy to let is seen as the Achilles heel of the housing market as widely reported in the Treasury Select Committees.

Housing benefit cuts, rising unemployment and the end of interest only mortgages will make BTL even harder.

As for the accidental landlords their consent to let is limited and will have to go on more expensive buy to let mortgages eventually.

Buy to Let lenders are happy to lend at present. The market is enjoying a return at present with lenders returning to the market.

The finance is there for applicants meeting criteria.

As forthe end of Interest Only, the FSA have stated they have no plans to do this. Buy to Let will continue to be a justified Interest Only transaction.

Loss of jobs will if anything increase rental properties due to people being unable to get mortgages.

FSA proposals will take so many people out of the mortgage equation that rental will become the norm for millions of aspiring homeowners.

Jowo_2

Yes - the housing boom and bust is very cyclical and there's always a big ground hog day or amnesia about the last bust. Next boom is due in the next 10 years and the bust about 20 years after...

jcbl

My point is that BTL being seen as the 'achilles heel of the housing market' will need to be translated into HMT action for the cycle to be broken. Select committees are largely ignored! As GMS surmises, FSA rules will hurt ftb and o/o sector far more than btl. For those that currently have equity, the fsa rule changes will pass them by. I am duly vindicated by the views of the professional broker!

Returning to the original topic, surely a natural balance is a greater accessibility and more reasonable rates at 90%, with limited access for vanilla applicants at 95 (without which some city centre housing markets will stagnate entirely?)

mcc100

Jowo wrote: »

Yes - the housing boom and bust is very cyclical and there's always a big ground hog day or amnesia about the last bust. Next boom is due in the next 10 years and the bust about 20 years after...

The bust that has been put on hold for the past 3 years is due in the next 10 years ...... any boom will be 20 years after that.

brit1234

jcbl wrote: »

My point is that BTL being seen as the 'achilles heel of the housing market' will need to be translated into HMT action for the cycle to be broken. Select committees are largely ignored! As GMS surmises, FSA rules will hurt ftb and o/o sector far more than btl. For those that currently have equity, the fsa rule changes will pass them by. I am duly vindicated by the views of the professional broker!

Personally being vindicated by a professional broker doesn't hold much water in my book.;)

I think Macro Economics are a far more important influence than what deals are on the table today. Sovereign debt crisis's, killer inflation and huge further bank bailouts are going to have an significant effect over the next decade, far more so than the brief return of Paragon who is likely to go bust again like it did last recession.

So far it is the likes of the Austrian School of Economics which is getting predictions right not brokers.

Below is the link to the famous 2003 episode of Panorama on high percentage of fraud committed by brokers in West London.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8482518243122067675&hl=en-GB#

jcbl wrote: »

Returning to the original topic, surely a natural balance is a greater accessibility and more reasonable rates at 90%, with limited access for vanilla applicants at 95 (without which some city centre housing markets will stagnate entirely?)

So we should lend 90-95% mortgages so overvalued city centre homes don't have to drop the price. Where is the economic sense in that?

Prices will fall and buy to let will continue to incur a higher percentage of repossessions than ordinary owners.

House prices are still extremely overvalued caused by mass fraud, irresponsible lending and too low interest rates.

Prices will fall.

Turnbull2000

brit1234 wrote: »

So we should lend 90-95% mortgages so overvalued city centre homes don't have to drop the price. Where is the economic sense in that?

Prices will fall and buy to let will continue to incur a higher percentage of repossessions than ordinary owners.

House prices are still extremely overvalued caused by mass fraud, irresponsible lending and too low interest rates.

Prices will fall.

Since when does government policy have to make economic sense brit? Labour or Tory, policy will be driven towards propping up house values and making the market accessible through looser mortgage lending, not lower prices.

It's already been proven that our housing minister is in thrall to the developers, so pushing more lending on city centre apartments and easing builder losses will no doubt be a key Tory concern.

Gwhiz

I think high deposits, forcing people to really have to work over a few years to save up and understand the financial sacrifices that home ownership entails, will be a a good thing long term.

GMS

brit1234 wrote: »

Personally being vindicated by a professional broker doesn't hold much water in my book.;)

I think Macro Economics are a far more important influence than what deals are on the table today. Sovereign debt crisis's, killer inflation and huge further bank bailouts are going to have an significant effect over the next decade, far more so than the brief return of Paragon who is likely to go bust again like it did last recession.

So far it is the likes of the Austrian School of Economics which is getting predictions right not brokers.

Below is the link to the famous 2003 episode of Panorama on high percentage of fraud committed by brokers in West London.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8482518243122067675&hl=en-GB#



So we should lend 90-95% mortgages so overvalued city centre homes don't have to drop the price. Where is the economic sense in that?

Prices will fall and buy to let will continue to incur a higher percentage of repossessions than ordinary owners.

House prices are still extremely overvalued caused by mass fraud, irresponsible lending and too low interest rates.

Prices will fall.

brit Paragon returning with funding being provided shows a confidence in the sector. I am sure these investors have done their research far more thoroughly than you or I and to a level which is far superior to my knowledge.

You may well be correct regarding higher percentage of repossessions. If this porves to be correct then these families will need to live somewhere, and unless the government embark on the biggest house building project ever seen there will be a need for private landlords. This may well be the reason Buy to Let is seen as the sector to invest in.

My own view is that we will not see the doom and gloom predicted by the media. Merely a personal view.

poppysarah

We shouldn't ever return to the days where people can get a mortgage without proving they can save responsibly.

The whole economic system is so messed up though that it's beyond belief.

Lib-con government is drowning in their attempts to make the slightest dint on the national debt.
No one wants cuts but we need a braver government than this to get us through this monstrous mess.

The media is so biased it's sickening.

Breakfast politic thing this morning has shadow minister on. Next weeks has another shadown minister on.
Why are the politicians running the place not being given equal airtime?