Mortgage with CCJ

Simon_gloster

Conrad wrote: »

Yep you could put in wifes name only or maybe try a buy to let in her name but I find lenders have wised up to all this and often withdraw mortgage offers at the last minute when things come to light.

With 2 large adverse elements in recent time, the rate will be 8% or so.

Kensington wont touch it. No small prime rate BS will touch it. No mainstream lender will do.

GE Money are a possibility but I doubt it very much afterall they were hugely affected by the credit crunch.

If your wife is clean someone might suggest use her name and inflate her income, but beware many brokers and clients are getting caught out now. Broker in particular - all it needs is for FSA to get hold of clients and suggest they let those clients off if they all speak against the broker, and its game over, £125k fine.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Are SPML still lending?

Thought their ship sank with the demise of Lehmans.

Thankfully not for a few years.

The reality for the poster is that sub prime lendingbis hard to come by. Broker only business, restricted LTVs and higher rates as they are higher risk. Harsh I know but that is where we are today.

500,000 mortgage holders currently locked in sub prime and those who want money will have to go with whats available.

6 - 8% is not unrealistic for this situation.

Simon_gloster

andythewelder wrote: »

8% interest with a 50% deposit... I don't think so.

This thread has gone seriously downhill. Put in a wifes name only for a buy to let mortgage on a property that she would live in??

Unfortunately Andy, and in a nice way, if those kind of rates are not to your liking, you will have to serve your time until they finally drop off and stay put.

Thrugelmir

Simon_gloster wrote: »

Harsh I know but that is where we are today.

I prefer the term commercially viable. Lowly priced credit over a number of years has distorted peoples views to its true cost.

The total losses from reimbursing PPI claims will amount to one years profits in the entire UK retail banking at its peak of 2006. Cross subsidy by product selling is declining. A good thing in my personal view.

Dave_Ham

Not good people....

Way I read this thread and that has been totally unproductive from the OP persepctive now.

OP wants help, has some recent CCJ history.

Conrad ascertains no more information and flippantly declares 8% rates.

I then suggest that looking at the whole picture; Wife/Partner, Parents, Siblings there could be scope but without knowing more was unwilling to suggest more. And I confirm there are legitimate ways in which this can be done.

Sarcastically Conrad pipes back up and jumps to another conclusion that I was talking about inflating income or buy to let games.

Whilst I confirm that this is not the case and was seeking further clarity, OP comes back on and is unhappy with the 8% rates that essentially have been made up. 2 issues that the rates were "made up" and also with recent CCJ's why should you expect better - save for another day..

OP also mis-reads Conrads post and thinks Conrad is advising buy to let games and inflating incomes and does not feel this is a good solution.

Cue Thrugs and Simon wading in with don't do mortgage fraud - not a good call..

The OP (first time poster) then thinks the thread/site has gone downhill.

I think we all could have done better here eh?

Too often someone wants help and the thread turns into points scoring and sniping.

I for one do not believe we should be talking any rates or providers, without some snesible articulation around the why's, what's and whens.

Just my thoughts...

andythewelder

Dave_Ham wrote: »

Or alternatively (and hence why I do not loosely throw around figures or banks names) OP has a wife or partner who earns enough in her own name to justify such a solution.

Or alternatively, with just income being an issue use of a parent or sibling in addition to wife/partner may mitigate such an issue.

Hence my original post asking for more information.

Hi Dave. There is no issue with income. I'm not trying to move into a more expensive property here. The £70,000 is the equity I should have. The property I am in at the moment is valued at around £250,000. I could just stay here and continue to pay the mortgage off. The upside is the property I was looking at is much closer to work and the monthly repayments would be around a third what i'm paying just now.

Dave_Ham

Thanks Andy,

First step should be to talk to your exsiting bank and see if they will allow you to "port" the mortgage you have and reduce. The issue here is that they are likely to undertake a new application and therefore your credit score will be an issue due to the nature of the CCJ's. Given you are reducing the amount they may be more flexilbe, but they should definitely be first call.

Where I was going with income, is that by the nature of these recent CCJ's you (your name) is unlikely to get past the "computer says no" part of the credit scoring process and therefore your income is irrelevant.

I was seeking to clarify to get past this, if your partner/wife was working and if they could take the new mortgage. Subject to credit score/income and given the size of your deposit, preferrential rates would be achieved. This is all totally above board and most banks are happy with this all being declared and you can have a separate legal arrangement for protection of individual parties money documented.

I hope this makes some sense...