We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
looking to buy to let for 1st time ; advice appreciated
Comments
-
Why shouldnt the banks have to make up the shortfall, their the ones who were throwing money at anybody who was daft enough to take it so both partys are to blame so both should suffer the consequences.
it was the banks fault, but do you really think the governement will let the banks sink theyve already bailed them out with 850 billion.
how are the banks gonna thank them by making people homeless, i just dont think so.
with interest rates as they are the banks are making a nice profit to pay back the government and in return the base rate is kept low so people can keep their homes and not be made homeless as this would cost the government even more money.0 -
new_home_owner wrote: »the government have bailed the banks out, do you think by the government/treasury raising the boe rate, they will get their money back quicker?
if they do the banks will have to reposess houses and they will get a lot less of what they have leant out, we all know where going through a rough spell and its in the banks and the governments interest they keep people in their homes.
for example, family bought home in 2007 for 180,000 pounds, they borrowed from the bank 160,000 pounds.
goverenment bail banks out 2009 due to reckless borrowing.
Now in 2011 the house is worth 180,000 pounds but the main bread winner as lost his /her job, but they can afford it because interest rates are so low.
then fast forward 2012 they raise interest rates to 6% family miss payments and loads of other home owners out of work miss payments due to higher rates making house prices fall.
House prices fall drastically due to high interest rates, family have to sell house but its only worth 120,000 pound and after fees the bank they had their mortgage with will only get about 110,000 pounds.
now the bank owe the government but they have just lost 50,000 pounds from one property and theyve also made family homeless who will be living off the state.
interest rates are not going up amd house prices are not crashing until interest rates go up which i just can not see happeing has it wil cost the government billions.
Like i said why should i pay the price for banks being irresponsible, hopefully soon it will be time to pay the piper and i can stop being negatively affected by other peoples reckless actions0 -
new_home_owner wrote: »it was the banks fault, but do you really think the governement will let the banks sink theyve already bailed them out with 850 billion.
how are the banks gonna thank them by making people homeless, i just dont think so.
with interest rates as they are the banks are making a nice profit to pay back the government and in return the base rate is kept low so people can keep their homes and not be made homeless as this would cost the government even more money.
And in the process of this they are propping up house prices and im getting a lot less interest on my savings, so im paying the price for con men bankers and the people they conned, so as suggested ill stick to the debate forum as my views dont sit well with (some) sellers.0 -
Like i said why should i pay the price for banks being irresponsible, hopefully soon it will be time to pay the piper and i can stop being negatively affected by other peoples reckless actions
im sorry i think you might be waiting a long time, and the longer you leave it the more chance you have of missing the boat again.0 -
Yes lots do including myself. They priced out first time buyers and are a parasite on society. I will feel no sympathy as buy to let repossessions continue to increase over the next 2 years.
At least there seems to have been a huge plunge in new newbie "BTL my pension help" threads at MSE. I've not been visiting the forum as often recently (busy) but seems that way to me.
The Wilsons are successful? Still some Wilson BTL hero worshipping out there. They are another example. Should have been totally safe with money rolling in, a small portfolio of houses all mortgage free, seeing as they started so many many years ago. Except they continued buying some 700+ houses with leverage.
We'll see. They look like a worse greed case than the guy with 35 to me, and in all sorts of difficulty themselves from their buying of hundreds of houses.
If lenders could recoup their losses from money the Wilsons have stashed away over the years, and if interest rates hadn't been slashed, and if many of the Wilsons contractual interest rates hadn't been especially altered to help them survive... then I think I'd be financially wealthier than the Wilsons. Anyone with a few hundred pounds in their savings account would be in my opinion, but on my own, admittedly imperfect, estimation of their position. Research seemed to indicate they had developed 2 houses from land-to-build stage, which they were trying to sell for a long time at £750,000. I wonder why those were suddenly sold off at a more reasonable current market rate at just under £300,000?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1250821/The-buy-let-gurus-empire-crumbles.htmlFinancial Mail has learnt that at least one property has been put into receivership by a major lender. The couple also face action from a number of local authorities that are owed council tax on un-let houses. Last week, from their modest-looking home in Boughton Monchelsea, near Maidstone, Fergus Wilson insisted there were no cash-flow problems. He knew about a property being taken into receivership, he said, but blamed an 'administrative error' by the lender, Bank of Ireland.
And Kent's local authorities were also wrong in their demands, he said, claiming that the common name of Wilson meant 'we get mail for every Wilson in the county'.
Both the Bank of Ireland and Ashford Borough Council, where most properties are situated, said data protection rules meant they could not comment. But tellingly, Wilson told Financial Mail the properties were being clustered together in 'management arrangements', formed with the agreement of lenders, or even managed by lenders. Some of these deals were being finalised last week.0 -
And in the process of this they are propping up house prices and im getting a lot less interest on my savings, so im paying the price for con men bankers and the people they conned, so as suggested ill stick to the debate forum as my views dont sit well with (some) sellers.
your view is a selfish one and i would want the same if i was in your position, luckily im not but my children will have to buy houses when they are older.
hopefully they will be realistic and buy a low priced property and move theyre way up like myself and my wife have done.0 -
new_home_owner wrote: »your view is a selfish one and i would want the same if i was in your position, luckily im not but my children will have to buy houses when they are older.
hopefully they will be realistic and buy a low priced property and move theyre way up like myself and my wife have done.
i dont think it will be a long time because houses in my area have dropped an average of 20% in the last 6 to 12 months.
How can my view be seen as selfish ? I wasnt willing to pay a boom price when everybody else was paying it and now prices are going down i will buy once they drop to a level im happy to pay.
If i lose my home once i have purchased it then thats my fault, but as i have a large deposit and factoring a large interest rate rise into the equation i cant see it happening, yes i may lose my job and if this happens i will be safe in the knowledge that i would only have to find a small amount of money every month to cover my bills as opposed to a very large amount if i had payed a boom price for a house, plus i wont be buying anything till ive got 6 months wages saved as an emergency fund.
By the way i didnt miss the boat i chose not to get on it and waved at it from the dock as it set sail0 -
new_home_owner wrote: »are house prices really falling that fast, the facts are house prices will not drop until interest rates go up and im afraid interest rates are not going up just yet.
They are already been falling months at 0.5% interest rates.new_home_owner wrote: »would you expect the bank or the government to make up the shortfall the banks lost, just so you can get a cheap home?
No just an historically normal priced home rather than at present not being able to afford any home.
Has any first time buyer complained that they can't get cheap homes, no they just want a home at a normal price rather than highly overvalued as now.:exclamatiScams - Shared Equity, Shared Ownership, Newbuy, Firstbuy and Help to Buy.
Save our Savers
0 -
i dont think it will be a long time because houses in my area have dropped an average of 20% in the last 6 to 12 months.
How can my view be seen as selfish ? I wasnt willing to pay a boom price when everybody else was paying it and now prices are going down i will buy once they drop to a level im happy to pay.
If i lose my home once i have purchased it then thats my fault, but as i have a large deposit and factoring a large interest rate rise into the equation i cant see it happening, yes i may lose my job and if this happens i will be safe in the knowledge that i would only have to find a small amount of money every month to cover my bills as opposed to a very large amount if i had payed a boom price for a house, plus i wont be buying anything till ive got 6 months wages saved as an emergency fund.
By the way i didnt miss the boat i chose not to get on it and waved at it from the dock as it set sail
We've had 32 months of price stagnation.
Nationwide index:
Aug-08 328.5
Sep-08 322.8
Oct-08 316.9
Nov-08 316.1
Dec-08 305.3
Jan-09 300.2
Feb-09 294.7
Mar-09 301.1
Apr-09 302.9
May-09 307.2
Jun-09 312.1
Jul-09 316.9
Aug-09 319.6
Sep-09 322.8
Oct-09 323.2
Nov-09 324.7
Dec-09 323.4
Jan-10 326.1
Feb-10 321.8
Mar-10 328.2
Apr-10 334.7
May-10 336.0
Jun-10 336.0
Jul-10 334.0
Aug-10 330.5
Sep-10 330.9
Oct-10 327.9
Nov-10 326.9
Dec-10 324.7
Jan-11 322.4
Feb-11 328.0
Mar-11 330.9
good luck0 -
ruggedtoast wrote: »The last semi coherent debate there ended up with Julieq speculating insultingly about my wedding tackle and Graham ranting about horses.
By far the funniest thread post I've read tonight.
:rotfl:0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards