Industry leaders summoned to crisis meeting on first-time buyers

smeagold

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

So house prices back to 2006, and salaries back to 2005......

Remind me again why that's good news for the bears?

so everyones getting poorer, hold an asset for 5 years and it goes up by zero.

StevieJ

Percy1983 wrote: »

It does seem to be the way really, will be interesting to see what comes of this.

As it is at the current rate I will be buying at 28 (unassisted), but that is a mix of a sucessful career and cheap housing locally.

By all means all they could really do is push for lower deposits whicj will take months off my buying date but push up competition, so I am happy to wait.

Finally an admission

Conrad

I've taken this up with the FSA and my MP Oliver Heald has responded twice. Today I also forwarded to Grant Shapps. Here's my email to the FSA which my MP and also hoepfuly My Shapps will view (ps when I posted up my original email to my MP on this forum, many of you said he would not respond, but in fact he has been quite involved);



Hello again

Could you please forward the email which I sent to Sheila Nicoll, FSA Director of conduct policy) to Grant Shapps in view of the forthcoming summit on why first time buyer mortgagee levels have tumbled.

Here it is;
…………………………………………….

Hello Ms Nicoll,

Would you mind forwarding a copy of this to FSA chair please.



WHY AM I WRITING TO YOU?

In an attempt to make you realise the huge damage the FSA is doing to society in terms of the wealth gap opening up between those that can and those than cannot buy a home / remortgage.

Am I a vested interest?
No. In fact, tougher regulation benefits me as an experienced mortgage broker.



You recently responded to my MP, Oliver Heald.
I am not interested in the MMR, but in the regulation as it stands.

I note Grant Shapps has called a summit to discover why FTB rate has dropped from 73% down to 17%.


If you don’t mind I think this will easier as a series of dreaded bullet points!

• Although millions of souls are now unable to get a mortgage, the Banks do want to lend. I know this because they employ costly reps to visit me in order that they may attract as much business as possible.
• Your claim to making a more sustainable market place is not right. Millions cannot buy a home, yet even in the last recession less than 1.5% of owners were repossessed. IN OTHER WORDS REGULATION IS BARRING HITHERTO PERFECTLY CAPABLE WOULD BE OWNERS.
• This is forcing them to rent, making landlords rich – is this what you want for society?
• I have counted dozens of client category now unable to access a mortgage as the lender cannot SAFELY (that’s a crucial word) deem the lending to be SUSTAINABLE AND RESPONSIBLE and not safely say TCF principles have been met.

A few examples of real world HITHERTO good credit risks now barred;

• Agency nurses. It is common practice for many nurses to work for 1 or more agencies. Most if not all lenders will NOW decline these even though in the past they would have been able to lend. Always the reason is regulation only.
• Older people such as late in life divorcees (very common now). In the past a common sense approach and reference to low repo levels meant the majority of older applicants were accepted. But now lenders cannot SAFELY sign off many older applicants particularly the majority that will not have a very substantial pension. An out of touch middle class FSA employee will not realise that this causes lenders to limit the term which then means most applicants fail the affordability test
• London licensed cabbies. This has long been a route into relative comfort with a typical cabby taking home £1200 - £1600 per week but once the Accountant has finished with them this typically nets down to £18,000 pa. Such people in Hertfordshire where I grew up, nearly always had large houses and managed perfectly well. But now, thanks to the removal of self cert, they cannot buy a home.
• Firemen. Having dealt with dozens of them down the years, in all but 1 instance they had second jobs on their 3 – 4 days off per week. Lenders cannot take all of the second income now! Indeed, many are self employed for the second income and because self cert has been removed, they cannot now use their true earning potential to buy a home.

These are only 4 examples of many.

The Nanny knows best approach means erstwhile perfectly capable late 50 something’s (in the above example) are now treated like kids. In the past 99% of them would have muddled through, downsized, had an inheritance, carried on working or miracle of miracles, met a new partner.


I imagine you do not see the day to day mortgage declines that someone like myself does and the heartbreak this causes.

One last point. The UK economy will not recover until millions are given back control over their destiny.

I intend sending your response to Grant Shapps, if that is ok by you?

Please, please do not send me a stock standard FSA response about a sustainable market for all as such shows incredible ignorance of the coal face issues.


What society do you want to have help shaped?

20 years from now will you be happy that millions have been forced to rent that otherwise and hitherto would have built up their own asset base with all the benefit that brings?


PS – if in small part I by a miracle have any impact on FSA outcomes, let me know. I do this merely out of passion and not for any gain.


Kind regards

Percy1983

I have never tried to pretend houses in my area are expensive have I? I will say a lot is down to what you expect as with most areas I can buy in Oldham between £40k-£900k+, I am looking at £90k-£120k

I have a friend to which we went to school with who has much higher expectations than me and will be paying about £50k more than me for a similar house in a 'nicer' area. As I point out to him its only a matter of time before the chavs find there way down to him so why pay a premium?

Thrugelmir

smeagold wrote: »

so everyones getting poorer, hold an asset for 5 years and it goes up by zero.

Why poorer? Once a mortgage is paid off fully. Then the benefits are considerable.

Purchase price is only one part of the equation. The other is interest costs.

ILW

Conrad wrote: »

I've taken this up with the FSA and my MP Oliver Heald has responded twice. Today I also forwarded to Grant Shapps. Here's my email to the FSA which my MP and also hoepfuly My Shapps will view (ps when I posted up my original email to my MP on this forum, many of you said he would not respond, but in fact he has been quite involved);



Hello again

Could you please forward the email which I sent to Sheila Nicoll, FSA Director of conduct policy) to Grant Shapps in view of the forthcoming summit on why first time buyer mortgagee levels have tumbled.

Here it is;
…………………………………………….

Hello Ms Nicoll,

Would you mind forwarding a copy of this to FSA chair please.



WHY AM I WRITING TO YOU?

In an attempt to make you realise the huge damage the FSA is doing to society in terms of the wealth gap opening up between those that can and those than cannot buy a home / remortgage.

Am I a vested interest?
No. In fact, tougher regulation benefits me as an experienced mortgage broker.



You recently responded to my MP, Oliver Heald.
I am not interested in the MMR, but in the regulation as it stands.

I note Grant Shapps has called a summit to discover why FTB rate has dropped from 73% down to 17%.


If you don’t mind I think this will easier as a series of dreaded bullet points!

• Although millions of souls are now unable to get a mortgage, the Banks do want to lend. I know this because they employ costly reps to visit me in order that they may attract as much business as possible.
• Your claim to making a more sustainable market place is not right. Millions cannot buy a home, yet even in the last recession less than 1.5% of owners were repossessed. IN OTHER WORDS REGULATION IS BARRING HITHERTO PERFECTLY CAPABLE WOULD BE OWNERS.
• This is forcing them to rent, making landlords rich – is this what you want for society?
• I have counted dozens of client category now unable to access a mortgage as the lender cannot SAFELY (that’s a crucial word) deem the lending to be SUSTAINABLE AND RESPONSIBLE and not safely say TCF principles have been met.

A few examples of real world HITHERTO good credit risks now barred;

• Agency nurses. It is common practice for many nurses to work for 1 or more agencies. Most if not all lenders will NOW decline these even though in the past they would have been able to lend. Always the reason is regulation only.
• Older people such as late in life divorcees (very common now). In the past a common sense approach and reference to low repo levels meant the majority of older applicants were accepted. But now lenders cannot SAFELY sign off many older applicants particularly the majority that will not have a very substantial pension. An out of touch middle class FSA employee will not realise that this causes lenders to limit the term which then means most applicants fail the affordability test
• London licensed cabbies. This has long been a route into relative comfort with a typical cabby taking home £1200 - £1600 per week but once the Accountant has finished with them this typically nets down to £18,000 pa. Such people in Hertfordshire where I grew up, nearly always had large houses and managed perfectly well. But now, thanks to the removal of self cert, they cannot buy a home.
• Firemen. Having dealt with dozens of them down the years, in all but 1 instance they had second jobs on their 3 – 4 days off per week. Lenders cannot take all of the second income now! Indeed, many are self employed for the second income and because self cert has been removed, they cannot now use their true earning potential to buy a home.

These are only 4 examples of many.

The Nanny knows best approach means erstwhile perfectly capable late 50 something’s (in the above example) are now treated like kids. In the past 99% of them would have muddled through, downsized, had an inheritance, carried on working or miracle of miracles, met a new partner.


I imagine you do not see the day to day mortgage declines that someone like myself does and the heartbreak this causes.

One last point. The UK economy will not recover until millions are given back control over their destiny.

I intend sending your response to Grant Shapps, if that is ok by you?

Please, please do not send me a stock standard FSA response about a sustainable market for all as such shows incredible ignorance of the coal face issues.


What society do you want to have help shaped?

20 years from now will you be happy that millions have been forced to rent that otherwise and hitherto would have built up their own asset base with all the benefit that brings?


PS – if in small part I by a miracle have any impact on FSA outcomes, let me know. I do this merely out of passion and not for any gain.


Kind regards

So you want an MP to help out those that use rather aggressive tax avoidence techniques to buy houses.

ultrawomble

Percy1983 wrote: »

I have never tried to pretend houses in my area are expensive have I? I will say a lot is down to what you expect as with most areas I can buy in Oldham between £40k-£900k+, I am looking at £90k-£120k

I have a friend to which we went to school with who has much higher expectations than me and will be paying about £50k more than me for a similar house in a 'nicer' area. As I point out to him its only a matter of time before the chavs find there way down to him so why pay a premium?

When does the Metrolink arrive......;)

ILW

Percy1983 wrote: »

I have never tried to pretend houses in my area are expensive have I? I will say a lot is down to what you expect as with most areas I can buy in Oldham between £40k-£900k+, I am looking at £90k-£120k

I have a friend to which we went to school with who has much higher expectations than me and will be paying about £50k more than me for a similar house in a 'nicer' area. As I point out to him its only a matter of time before the chavs find there way down to him so why pay a premium?

It must be something pretty special in Oldham for close to a million.

smeagold

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why poorer? Once a mortgage is paid off fully. Then the benefits are considerable.

Purchase price is only one part of the equation. The other is interest costs.

because everything you buy; food fuel etc are going up, not a prob tho if you can eat your house

RDB

smeagold wrote: »

If there's nobody at the bottom of the chain, then there is no chain.

Exactly right. Doesnt matter how many people fancy buying a house all that matters is how many can raise the funds to buy it.