The time-bomb ticking under Britain's house prices

chewmylegoff

oh i see - i didn't know it was shared ownership.

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You are not missing anything.

You all know its shared ownership. Therefore the mortgage is tiny. However, that doesn't mean I have a decent LTV on my share.

If you consider your mortgage 'tiny' that (to me) infers that you could have afforded a full house, why did you choose shared ownership?

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

oh i see - i didn't know it was shared ownership.

I thought your problem was the inconsistency of his statements.

I won't be able to fix again. They will require that I have a LTV rate, but I don't. The house has fallen in value. I will have to stay on SVR.

It wouldn't be worth the fee's to sign up to products to fix.

chewmylegoff

StevieJ wrote: »

I thought your problem was the inconsistency of his statements.

yeah he seemed to be saying that he had a tiny mortgage but at the same time couldn't get a decent fix because he didn't have enough equity. if you don't know that it is shared equity, that doesn't make sense.

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

yeah he seemed to be saying that he had a tiny mortgage but at the same time couldn't get a decent fix because he didn't have enough equity. if you don't know that it is shared equity, that doesn't make sense.

On the one hand he is saying that he wouldn't fix because the fees are too high for his 'tiny' mortgage.

DervProf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Most houses that people buy don't cost more than 5 times their single or 3 times their joint income....

I bet that's a false statement.


FTBer. 130K house, Salary £25K, 30K deposit. 140K / 25K = 5.2 x income.

2nd time buyer. £220K house. Salaries £32K + £18K. 220k / 40k = 5.5 x income.

I don't think my example figures are unusual.

Although they are wrong. My brain is throwing an exception.

FTBer 130k / 25K = 5.2 x income. (Don't know where the extra 10k came from, maybe it was HPI).

2nd time buyers are indeed on £50, which makes the cost of their house 4.4x income.

the_flying_pig

DervProf wrote: »

I bet that's a false statement.


FTBer. 130K house, Salary £25K, 30K deposit. 140K / 25K = 5.2 x income.

2nd time buyer. £220K house. Salaries £32K + £18K. 220k / 40k = 5.5 x income.

I don't think my example figures are unusual.

not really important in the grand scheme of things but 18+32=50, i.e. 4.4 times in your example.

Thrugelmir

quantic wrote: »

So, currently paying 2%, saved £200 a month for 18 months, rate goes up to 4% (still lower than fixed), save £60 instead... sounds like a ticking time bomb to me.

Works in public sector. Pay frozen for 2 years.

Still saves? Or comes under ever increasing squeeze on disposable income.

JonnyBravo

DervProf wrote: »

I bet that's a false statement.


FTBer. 130K house, Salary £25K, 30K deposit. 140K / 25K = 5.2 x income.

2nd time buyer. £220K house. Salaries £32K + £18K. 220k / 40k = 5.5 x income.

I don't think my example figures are unusual.

Brilliant maths.

Example One. FTB. Cost 130k Deposit 30k leaves a mortgage of 110k not 140k.

As already pointed out example two 32+18=50 and where's their existing equity?


I tell you what, I'll bet Hamish is right when he says most houses have been bought with less than 5x single or 3x joint mortgages.

I realise the fact that Hamish has said it provides a problem for you though.

DervProf

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Brilliant maths.

Example One. FTB. Cost 130k Deposit 30k leaves a mortgage of 110k not 140k.

As already pointed out example two 32+18=50 and where's their existing equity?


I tell you what, I'll bet Hamish is right when he says most houses have been bought with less than 5x single or 3x joint mortgages.

I realise the fact that Hamish has said it provides a problem for you though.

OK, slight brain fade on the sums, I admit (combination of too much programming study and the start of a winter bug - nothing to do with alcoholic intake or lack of basic mathematical ability).

FYI, Hamish stated "Most houses that people buy don't cost more than 5 times their single or 3 times their joint income...."

If the cost of a house is 100K, and someone who buys it is earning 20K, that makes the cost of the house 5x their salary, no matter what their deposit is. The point I was trying (and slightly failed) to make is that Hamish didn't mention mortgages in the above quote, or existing equity for that matter.

You stated..........

"I tell you what, I'll bet Hamish is right when he says most houses have been bought with less than 5x single or 3x joint mortgages."

I agree with that statement (even though I didn't read it on this thread - maybe you could point it out to me), and try and brush up on the old maths.

I'm almost pleased I made that mathematical error now, as it has exposed your inability to understand simple English.