People in thier 60's being forced to sell homes.

Graham_Devon

silvercar wrote: »

I would imagine that the court would allow the lady to remain in the property subject to continuing to make the same IO payments and agreeing to sell the property, so effectively forcing the lender to extend the term for a short time.

That stage takes effect before it gets to court.

She will have plenty of warning (which is seems she has, hence looking for suitable alternative finance).

It won't be the case that on the 25th year to the day, the lender starts posession proceedings without working with the client. And that's not what has happened here, obviously.

Remember that Conrad has stated she ENJOYS her income and has NO DESIRE to pay down the debt. He has not stated that she cannot. Thats HER choice. But she has to work and live within reality.

Can you really make a case here that a women who has no desire to move to repayment should be offered to do as she pleases? She's got plenty of options, but inheritance greed (my assumption) and enjoyment of her personal income means none of the options suit her personally.

You need to read the OP again.

julieq

To be honest it's beyond dumb to take this to court, because she will end up liable for significant costs on top of everything else.

silvercar

Can you really make a case here that a women who has no desire to move to repayment should be offered to do as she pleases?

When you see lenders applying TCF to those with massive arrears, negative equity and no job, delaying repossession, Working with their customers etc and then you compare it to someone who has no bad debt, who has regularly kept to commitments, and you say they should be forced out, when they could easily afford to stay put wiht an extension to their term.

Graham_Devon

silvercar wrote: »

When you see lenders applying TCF to those with massive arrears, negative equity and no job, delaying repossession, Working with their customers etc and then you compare it to someone who has no bad debt, who has regularly kept to commitments, and you say they should be forced out, when they could easily afford to stay put wiht an extension to their term.

I'm not saying she should be forced out.

I'm saying she should use her options. At least 2 of which will allow her to stay in her home. One which she appears to be using, her daughter.

It's only greed (maximal inhertance, and enjoying income to spend on other items) which is stopping her from what I can see.

silvercar

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Which seems to be exactly what is happening, hence the mortgage / financial advisor writing the OP.

However, the products don't exist that fit the requirements of this lady (and her daughter).

Sell and Rent back is perfectly suitable for her scenario where she wants to stay in the house. However, it's not suitable for inheritance issues. There would be a lot more inheritance to be had if the lady could just sit in the home making token interest payments to the bank....I believe this to be the nub of the issue, hence the daughter getting involved now to cover her inheritance. Nothing wrong with that like I say....they (and Conrad) simply don't like it and seem to find it unfair.

Sale and rent back is gone finished, shut down. You need to be registered to do it and all the big players left, finding it too onerous to comply with treating people fairly. The model only worked when they paid a knock down price on the "promise" of a long term let, then turfed the tenant out after 6 months. Once rules were put in place to stop that happening, it wasn't financially viable so its finished.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/99324204-4e62-11e1-aa0b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1pJ0D2bVc

Graham_Devon

silvercar wrote: »

Sale and rent back is gone finished, shut down. You need to be registered to do it and all the big players left, finding it too onerous to comply with treating people fairly. The model only worked when they paid a knock down price on the "promise" of a long term let, then turfed the tenant out after 6 months. Once rules were put in place to stop that happening, it wasn't financially viable so its finished.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/99324204-4e62-11e1-aa0b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1pJ0D2bVc

It's not finished. Theres concern, hence why I suggested I wouldn't reccomend it. But it does do everything she wants.

From the housing executive...
http://www.nihe.gov.uk/index/advice/buying_a_home/housing_executive/selling_and_renting_back.htm

GDB2222

A home reversion plan would be more suitable than sale and lease-back.

RenovationMan

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's only greed (maximal inhertance, and enjoying income to spend on other items) which is stopping her from what I can see.

YOu can't stop the froth can you Graham?

Where in the text does it imply greed on the little old lady's part?

You're doing the usual bear tactic of building a strawman argument and then railing against it, getting increasingly worked up and quite forgetting that you actually made it all up. Yourself and shortchanded are brilliant at doing this, leaving the rest of us completely bemused at your redfaced, spittlethrowing rage. :rotfl:

shortchanged_2

RenovationMan wrote: »

YOu can't stop the froth can you Graham?

Where in the text does it imply greed on the little old lady's part?

You're doing the usual bear tactic of building a strawman argument and then railing against it, getting increasingly worked up and quite forgetting that you actually made it all up. Yourself and shortchanded are brilliant at doing this, leaving the rest of us completely bemused at your redfaced, spittlethrowing rage. :rotfl:

OK Renoman I've got another one for you.

This is the situation 5 years down the line according to your ideas.

TV ADVERT......imagine the scene.

Man with powerful voice speaks;

"Did you take out an IO mortgage and not realise that you were supposed to pay the capital back? Are you now stuck with hundreds of thousands of pounds of debt?

Well don't worry...........at YouDon'tNeedToPayTheMortgageCapitalOffanInterestOnlyMortgage4YOU we are specialist solicitors who can get you out of your IO mortgage contract.

IO mortgage contracts are there to be abused and we can make sure YOU never need to pay the capital back regardless of if your mortgage term has expired.

We hope you'll never need us, but our business model is relying on your trade. So come on and let us sort your IO mortgage out for you and we'll only charge you a small fee."

Pimperne1

shortchanged wrote: »

OK Renoman I've got another one for you.

This is the situation 5 years down the line according to your ideas.

TV ADVERT......imagine the scene.

Man with powerful voice speaks;

"Did you take out an IO mortgage and not realise that you were supposed to pay the capital back? Are you now stuck with hundreds of thousands of pounds of debt?

Well don't worry...........at YouDon'tNeedToPayTheMortgageCapitalOffanInterestOnlyMortgage4YOU we are specialist solicitors who can get you out of your IO mortgage contract.

IO mortgage contracts are there to be abused and we can make sure YOU never need to pay the capital back regardless of if your mortgage term has expired.

We hope you'll never need us, but our business model is relying on your trade. So come on and let us sort your IO mortgage out for you and we'll only charge you a small fee."

Ha ha. If I could thank this twice I would! :T