NewBuy Guarantee Scheme

Graham_Devon

wotsthat wrote: »

Same for lenders. Alright they get some protection but there's a high risk that government guarantees when called upon would involve a difficult, convoluted and costly process. Why not just continue as they are? Average LTV 60%, low arrears, picking and choosing customers without government interference, increasing SVR's and low funding costs. Low risk and high margin - why rock the boat?

You appear to ignore the fact that building and lending bodies are asking for more government intervention.

Apart from that though I'm sure you are right. Honest.

Graham_Devon

"Anything that artificially props up house prices stores up trouble for tommorow. "

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17336664

But Grant Shapps states it's a "Win Win Deal". He states he doesn't think this will cost anything at all. Or "not very much".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17336662

brit1234

It's the main subject on wake up to money today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01d5rj3/Wake_Up_to_Money_12_03_2012/

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You appear to ignore the fact that building and lending bodies are asking for more government intervention.

Apart from that though I'm sure you are right. Honest.

I don't know if I'm right or wrong. I'm just giving a scenario whereby accepting government incentives might not be in the best interests of shareholders.

For example If I thought I was moving into sustainable profitability I'd prefer a cut in corporation tax. I'd still be bleating for government help but of the no strings variety.

shortchanged_2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

But Grant Shapps states it's a "Win Win Deal". He states he doesn't think this will cost anything at all. Or "not very much".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17336662

Scary. Schapps sounds uncannily like our resident McTavish.

Another person who fails to see that it is the high house prices that are the crux of all the problems we face in the housing market today.

Why is it that some of these people find it hard to understand the simple logic of smaller house price = smaller deposit and smaller mortgage, instead of this high house price and small % deposit cr&p and massive mortgage at unsustainably low interest rates = cheaper house :wall:

Graham_Devon

shortchanged wrote: »

Scary. Schapps sounds uncannily like our resident McTavish.

Another person who fails to see that it is the high house prices that are the crux of all the problems we face in the housing market today.

Why is it that some of these people find it hard to understand the simple logic of smaller house price = smaller deposit and smaller mortgage, instead of this high house price and small % deposit cr&p and massive mortgage at unsustainably low interest rates = cheaper house :wall:

Grant Shapps is just a spokesperson. He's been on every side there is, stating everything that every side want's to hear. He's stated previously that house prices are too high. Then he's stated it's deposits that are the problem. Then it's interest rates are going to hurt people. Then they won't. Then it's builders are not building enough. Then it's builders are building enough but the demand isn't there. Then it's the demand is there, but it's not affordable. Then it's actually affordable, just the deposits are the problem. Then the deposits are prudent due to the banking issues and we can't go back to the lending standards of the noughties.

It all depends on who he is talking to or on behalf of.

I remember not oo long back when he as up against shelter, and he agreed with everything they said, and would look into it. He then, later on, was up against the national federation of housebuilders, who opposed every item shelter had stated, and he agreed with everything they said.

Graham_Devon

Public opinion don't seem great.

BBC website is now allowing comments.

At time of counting, out of 27 comments we have:

For the scheme: 2
Against the scheme: 25

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17335711

CRASH_BANG_WALLOP

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Public opinion don't seem great.

BBC website is now allowing comments.

At time of counting, out of 27 comments we have:

For the scheme: 2
Against the scheme: 25

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17335711

If this was purely to help first time buyers, then the support wouldn't be limited to new builds.

this dude has a point

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Public opinion don't seem great.

BBC website is now allowing comments.

At time of counting, out of 27 comments we have:

For the scheme: 2
Against the scheme: 25

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17335711

Even Shelter would be embarrassed by a survey based on 27 comments on the BBC website.

Conrad

Haven't read whole thread, but I can't see the benefits of the scheme as the FSA's stringent 'treating customers fairly' and affordability tests will still need to be met by lenders. In other words only the best 95% risks will qualify, which is what we have already anyway.

It might have modest impact.

As I keep on saying (even to Schapps himself), lending is severly hampered by regulation, thus millions are forced to rent.