When are going back to 10% or even 5% deposits

iandury

Thrugelmir wrote: »

If someone is buying a second property then they are not FTB's . Also your friend is either a contractor or self employed so this will impact on the choice of lender.

Public ownership of some of the banks doesn't mean that lending rules are relaxed.

Yes that is the case, he is self employed, and the offer i have mentioned really is the best going after a lot of research and calling in favours.

The only bit i am unclear about is the one years accounts bit, as i never had to go down that road.
Will they go through the Inland Revenue of will a letter/summary of years accounts from the accountant do.

If so then we are still where we were with self cert in part, the only big difference being that you have to get hold of the deposit now.

Conrad

iandury wrote: »

The only bit i am unclear about is the one years accounts bit, as i never had to go down that road.
Will they go through the Inland Revenue of will a letter/summary of years accounts from the accountant do.

Nearly always 2 years figures will be required, but not allways from the IR, but beware all lenders can and do ask for IR backup ona random and not so random slection of cases they recieve - indeed the FSA insists on these 'reality checks' as do the people that lend money to lenders, afterall the reason we got the credit crunch was that lenders were not making such reality checks so investors in mortgage securities ended up with 'assets' of dubios quality, hence why the money markets froze over night).

Often an Accountant can come to the rescue in situations like this with a bit of creative BUT LEGAL accounting.

The first issue you will have is this - all the main lenders have a question along the lines 'how long have you been trading'. If you answer 1 year, it will fail.

noodle

krisswilliams wrote: »

Ive just recently got a 90% LTV mortgage with Natwest fixed for 2 years, rates are high but we can afford it and are now on 'the ladder'...

5.69%?

That might seem high relative to people currently on sexy variable and tracker rates.. but it's not high relative to any kind of normal time.

ferox666

krisswilliams wrote: »

Ive just recently got a 90% LTV mortgage with Natwest fixed for 2 years, rates are high but we can afford it and are now on 'the ladder'...

"Ladders" can go down as well as up, remember

Seriously though, I'd strongly advise anyone thinking of buying at the moment to think carefully - the banks are wanting high deposits because they're expecting further falls, and all the other evidence points to property still being vastly overpriced. You should be using online to find out what the property sold for in 2005ish and definitely not pay above that and aim for less.

Henry_P_Chester

krisswilliams wrote: »

Ive just recently got a 90% LTV mortgage with Natwest fixed for 2 years, rates are high but we can afford it and are now on 'the ladder'...

Hahaha. Funny :rotfl: I can't believe anyone still thinks the property "ladder" still exists. Still as long as you can afford it and don't want to move anytime in the next decade I'm sure you'll be very happy in negative equity.

ferox666 wrote: »

"Ladders" can go down as well as up, remember

Seriously though, I'd strongly advise anyone thinking of buying at the moment to think carefully - the banks are wanting high deposits because they're expecting further falls, and all the other evidence points to property still being vastly overpriced. You should be using online to find out what the property sold for in 2005ish and definitely not pay above that and aim for less.

Good advice.

krisswilliams

Henry_P_Chester wrote: »

Hahaha. Funny :rotfl: I can't believe anyone still thinks the property "ladder" still exists.

Its only a term which some please still use... In case you can't believe anyone still think it exists...

krisswilliams

ferox666 wrote: »

"Ladders" can go down as well as up, remember

Seriously though, I'd strongly advise anyone thinking of buying at the moment to think carefully - the banks are wanting high deposits because they're expecting further falls, and all the other evidence points to property still being vastly overpriced. You should be using online to find out what the property sold for in 2005ish and definitely not pay above that and aim for less.

We got a good price on it, the surveyor report come back as pretty much a clean bill of health, no worrying signs. Sold in 2004 for £135,000 and we got it for £118,000 when listed for £125,000. The report did say if we spend £10,000 on modernisation then the value would reflect the 2004 selling price.

Ste.._2

ferox666 wrote: »

"Ladders" can go down as well as up, remember

Seriously though, I'd strongly advise anyone thinking of buying at the moment to think carefully - the banks are wanting high deposits because they're expecting further falls, and all the other evidence points to property still being vastly overpriced. You should be using online to find out what the property sold for in 2005ish and definitely not pay above that and aim for less.

I don't disagree with you, but some people have been banging that drum for years, promising financial armageddon and houses for 2x salary nationwide

Meanwhile, the years continue to pass......and some of us who want to own our own homes have to take the plunge at some point

History is full of proclamations that now is not the right time to buy

The reality is, lenders aren't really asking for big deposits. 90% LTV is very common now across all sorts of mainstream lenders, they've just tightened their acceptance criteria accordingly

Falls from this point will be hidden by inflation IMO, so buying now won't necessarily hurt if your salary broadly keeps up with inflation

Believe me, I was a total housing market bear ala hpc.co.uk, and in some ways still am, but you need to raise your head above the trees at some point, there are an awful lot of VI's on either side, and the bearish camp have a huge number of people who sold up years ago specifically hoping to cash in on a nominal house price crash

m00m00

salary keep up with inflation ?

good luck with that one

Typhoon2000

Banks are required to to hold more much more regulatory capital on 95% LTV mortgage compared to a 75% mortgage. Hence not many 95% deal abound as banks dont have enough money as capital, rather than because banks are expecting house prices to crash.
I would expect as bank finances to recover over the years and they will have enough capital to support lending at 90 or 95%. Otherwise those that haven't bought already may never be able to get on the ladder (which I always assumed was start with a small place and move to a bigger one after a few years) without the help of relatives etc.