The 100% mortgage is back...

Conrad

Graham_Devon wrote: »

There a stronger argument that you are risking their inheritance, rather than giving it early, AND sending them into high cost products.

The facts are that most guarantor arrangments work out fine.
The facts are, a small minority of owners end up repossessed.

Graham your'e such a grim reaper. Did you know there are dozens of Pyschological studies which show over and again that people always (always) think tomorrow holds more trouble than yesterday, and that includes those conducted in the boom 1950's and 60's.

It's as if you suffer extended confirmation bias, ignoring the facts that do not fit your PRE - DEFINED world view (evidence to fit a view rather than evidence that FORMS a view).


Can you point us all to the statistics on repos on guarantor schemes that back up your 'purely evidendial' conclusions?

Pimperne1

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I have potentially earmarked money for my sons driving lessons / education fees / house / whatever else he wants.

Is that an early inheritance too then?

<rolls eyes>

Early inheritance, my fine rear.

There a stronger argument that you are risking their inheritance, rather than giving it early, AND sending them into high cost products.

Sorry, you posted this at the same time as I posted last night so I missed it. You are just so negative on houses its a wonder you will ever let your children ever own one if you are given a veto. And yes, providing for your children's education is a massive investment in their lives and as it comes from what you would otherwise leave them then it should be viewed as early inheritance.

almondsalty

100% mortgages are too risky, although there is some precautions in here as you pointed out so not technically the same. Even still, could end up getting messy!

Graham_Devon

Pimperne1 wrote: »

Sorry, you posted this at the same time as I posted last night so I missed it. You are just so negative on houses its a wonder you will ever let your children ever own one if you are given a veto. And yes, providing for your children's education is a massive investment in their lives and as it comes from what you would otherwise leave them then it should be viewed as early inheritance.

You mean you saw conrad's post and thought you would follow it up with pretty much what he just said?

You do realise conrad not only condones, but wants to promote tax fraud and therefore mortgage fraud, and is a mortgage advisor? Therefore, I take his opinions of myself as being negative with a pinch of salt.

Going4TheDream

Conrad wrote: »

The facts are that most guarantor arrangments work out fine.
The facts are, a small minority of owners end up repossessed.

Do you have statistics/percentages to substantiate these 'facts' ?

JonnyBravo

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You do realise conrad not only condones, but wants to promote tax fraud and therefore mortgage fraud, and is a mortgage advisor? Therefore, I take his opinions of myself as being negative with a pinch of salt.

I think you're negative as well Graham.
I'm not aware I've promoted "tax fraud and therefore mortgage fraud" and I'm certainly not a mortgage advisor. So what's my problem?

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I have potentially earmarked money for my sons driving lessons / education fees / house / whatever else he wants.

Is that an early inheritance too then?

<rolls eyes>

Early inheritance, my fine rear.

There a stronger argument that you are risking their inheritance, rather than giving it early, AND sending them into high cost products.

Surely you should consider paying down your own mortgage / buying the rest of the share before earmarking future dependant support.

The costs for those are realistically greater than 15 years away.

Have you considered the interest to be saved by paying of your mortgage earlier?

Granted interest rates are low for now and the foreseeable short term future, but this just makes it even better to clear capital, thus reducing the overall interest paid even more.

IveSeenTheLight

Going4TheDream wrote: »

Do you have statistics/percentages to substantiate these 'facts' ?

I think these quick reports should suffice.
Currently forecasting as 0.35% in 2011 and 0.4% for 2012

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2986

The number of properties taken into possession by first charge mortgage lenders in the first half of 2011 was 7% lower than in the first half of 2010

The current forecast is for a repossession rate of 0.35% this year, and 0.4% in 2012

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/2836

The Council of Mortgage Lenders today revealed that, at 36,300, the number of repossessions by first-charge mortgage lenders in 2010 accounted for just 0.3% of all mortgages

http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/filegrab/1RRR-h107.pdf?ref=5192

the number of mortgages 3+ months in arrears fell from 0.97% of all mortgages at the end of 2005 to 0.89% of all mortgages at the end of 2006

Graham_Devon

JonnyBravo wrote: »

I think you're negative as well Graham.
I'm not aware I've promoted "tax fraud and therefore mortgage fraud" and I'm certainly not a mortgage advisor. So what's my problem?

How long have you got?

Pimperne1

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How long have you got?

I've got loads of time so go for it.