22 year average wait for FTB's

Le_Chuck

wotsthat wrote: »

People taking home £20k can't afford to buy a house - no s**t. They are NEVER going to be able to afford them - they need to earn more - there's no way round this.

The proposed benefits cap is more than this income group.

nonsense...

Le_Chuck

Le_Chuck wrote: »

A couple earning just over £20k should be able to save a 20% deposit on a £125k house within 3-4 years, if they're living with parents before buying & put off having kids until such time that they can afford them.

actually i misread that it was 20k net & not gross, should be able to save a deposit in 2-3 years

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So you want to see 100%+ mortgages back do you?

I realise you are just trying to create a holier than thou point to try and create an argument, and then moan that the discussion has gone down hill. And not a very good one at that. But come on. No one is moaning about lending practices, and to try and suggest I am is rather stupid, as all I would need to do is ask you for evidence of your assertion and you'd dissapear.

I didn't say I wanted anything back, 100% mortgages included, and I never pointed any fingers at any individuals and I never said lending practices had been mentioned on this particular thread. You seem to be trying to build a strawman argument based on things I never said.

So lets move forward and look at what I did say. I stated that lax lending practices have been bemoaned by many on this board and that the same people are also bemoaning that low paid workers have to save up for years to get a house. I merely observed that both points are at odds with each other.

Do you disagree with my observation?

Graham_Devon

RenovationMan wrote: »

I didn't say I wanted anything back, 100% mortgages included, and I never pointed any fingers at any individuals and I never said lending practices had been mentioned on this particular thread. You seem to be trying to build a strawman argument based on things I never said.

So lets move forward and look at what I did say. I stated that lax lending practices have been bemoaned by many on this board and that the same people are also bemoaning that low paid workers have to save up for years to get a house. I merely observed that both points are at odds with each other.

Do you disagree with my observation?

Do I disagree? Yes.

Who is moaning about saving up who is also moaning about lower lending?

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Do I disagree? Yes.

Who is moaning about the lower paid having to save up for years and years and who is also moaning about lax lending?

Well which are you moaning about?

(I changed your text to what we are actually discussing as you seem to be deflecting)

Old_Git

I bought my first house in 1991 .I paid a 5% deposit and got my mortgage from The Halifax .
The interest rate was around 11%.

Graham_Devon

RenovationMan wrote: »

Well which are you moaning about?

(I changed your text to what we are actually discussing as you seem to be deflecting)

So creating a thread about an article is now considered as moaning about lending restrictions? Even though you add purposely that the article mentions house prices being one of the big factors?

I'll remember that. You do try desperately hard.

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So creating a thread about an article is now considered as moaning about lending restrictions? Even though you add purposely that the article mentions house prices being one of the big factors?

I'll remember that. You do try desperately hard.

Well, are you going to answer the question or not? Or do you hope to avoid it with your, rather obvious, diversionary tactics? It's a simple question.

Graham_Devon

RenovationMan wrote: »

Well, are you going to answer the question or not? Or do you hope to avoid it with your patented diversionary tactics? It's a simple question.

I'm not moaning about lending restrictions. Infact, I'm not moaning about anything.

So railroading me into answering a question, giving me 2 possible answers, none of which apply, won't really work.

So I guess you can accuse me now of either:
- A) Obfuscation
- Not answering and running away
- C) Flouncing
- D) Anything else....as clearly you will make things up to suit your next accusation.

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm not moaning about lending restrictions. Infact, I'm not moaning about anything.

So railroading me into answering a question, giving me 2 possible answers, none of which apply, won't really work.

So I guess you can accuse me now of either:
- A) Obfuscation
- Not answering and running away
- C) Flouncing
- D) Anything else....as clearly you will make things up to suit your next accusation.

How about we just say "if you don't to discuss something, don't comment on it in the first place". I made an observation in an open forum and you decided to jump all over it. I've been reasonable in the discussions on it and you've responded with strawman accusations and aggression.

Why do you feel that the forum was set up just for you, Graham?