»

MSE News: RBS and Natwest demand £50k salary for interest-only mortgages

New Post Advanced Search

Coronavirus: The latest from MSE


The MSE team is working extremely hard to keep the info we have about your travel rights, cancellation rights, sick pay (and more) up to date.
The official MSE guides: NEW MSE Coronavirus Guides

NEWSFLASH 31/3
RESCUE FLIGHTS FOR STRANDED BRITS * SCHOOL MEALS VOUCHERS * BRIGHTHOUSE COLLAPSES

MSE News: RBS and Natwest demand £50k salary for interest-only mortgages

edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Mortgages & Endowments
36 replies 4.3K views
Former_MSE_HelenFormer_MSE_Helen
2.4K posts
edited 30 November -1 at 1:00AM in Mortgages & Endowments
This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

"The pair are the latest in a long line of providers restricting access to interest-only mortgages..."
«134

Replies

  • alinwalesalinwales Forumite
    321 posts
    surely it doesn't matter how much someone earns, if they don't have a repayment vehicle then they are still a bit on the irresponsible side. Someone earning 50K can still overstretch themselves, and the consequences probably worse if they lost their job.
  • The_JThe_J Forumite
    1.3K posts
    Interest only lending is finished. 12 months tops.
    The J is a Financial Advisor-This site doesn't check anyone's status and as such any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice. Always seek professional advice.
  • tifotifo Forumite
    1.2K posts
    so they want to give interest only mortgages to their bonus earning staff only, and that's by using taxpayer money in the first place ??

    these days, what first time (youngish) buyer is earning £50k or more?
  • The_JThe_J Forumite
    1.3K posts
    Well for one, FTBs cannot get interest only with them regardless of income.

    Bonuses are also not factored into the 50k. It needs to be 50k basic. I would guess that >95% of RBS employees earn less than 50k basic a year.
    The J is a Financial Advisor-This site doesn't check anyone's status and as such any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice. Always seek professional advice.
  • The trouble with this article http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/mortgages/2012/03/rbs-restricts-access-on-interest-only-mortgages is that it says:
    Some consumers, especially first-time buyers, prefer interest-only loans as the repayments are much lower than for a standard repayment mortgage.
    The whole point is that there are no repayments on a IO-mortgage. There are just interest charges to meet, until the capital is due at term.

    Misusing the word "repayment" in the way that the article does is just going to confuse readers.

    Warmest regards,
    FatherAbraham
    Thus the old Gentleman ended his Harangue. The People heard it, and approved the Doctrine, and immediately practised the Contrary, just as if it had been a common Sermon; for the Vendue opened ...
    THE WAY TO WEALTH, Benjamin Franklin, 1758 AD
  • edited 28 March 2012 at 5:50PM
    jamesdjamesd Forumite
    23.9K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited 28 March 2012 at 5:50PM
    Seems daft to have a £50k minimum income when what matters is income compared to loan amount and having a repayment vehicle. No point at all in a £50k income minimum for say a 25 year £50k mortgage or one where the repayment vehicles are already enough to reduce the uncovered balance to £50k.

    Better to pay attention to repayment vehicle, regular monitoring and affordability than use a fixed income minimum. The income threshold seems to be saying that those on less can't do prudent financial planning.
  • The_JThe_J Forumite
    1.3K posts
    Well I can see the logic, a loaf of bread costs the same whether you are on 10k or 50k so someone who earns more has more disposable income to be taking a risk on complex investment products.

    However, that would be to suggest that they are being prudent when in fact it's purely because they are being threatened by the FSA as being responsible for the interest only.

    That in turn is ridiculous, people need to start taking personal responsibility for their decisions. That article does not help, no client of mine would EVER take an interest only mortgage because it is "cheaper" or a "way to get on the ladder", it's irresponsible to even suggest that.
    The J is a Financial Advisor-This site doesn't check anyone's status and as such any posts on here are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as financial advice. Always seek professional advice.
  • regbrownregbrown Forumite
    71 posts
    hmm. not so good. I know a few of us have interest only mortgages to give us some flexibility while having little kids.

    We are FTB and had a 25% deposit and over pay the heck out of it when we can, only falling back to interest only when maternity pay kicks in etc

    surely its the amount you borrow, not your wages. (and your ability to understand what you are taking out)
  • ThrugelmirThrugelmir Forumite
    69.4K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    regbrown wrote: »
    surely its the amount you borrow, not your wages. (and your ability to understand what you are taking out)

    Even with the best intentions. Relying a policy of paying when you can. Is fraught with downside risks. Part of the reason we have the problem now.

    Interest only does little more than push house prices higher in any event. So of benefit to all with a more conservative approach.
    "Markets have been so good for so long. That many investors are trivialising the advantages of actively managing portfolio risk." - Gervais Williams
  • ThrugelmirThrugelmir Forumite
    69.4K posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    jamesd wrote: »
    Better to pay attention to repayment vehicle, regular monitoring and affordability than use a fixed income minimum. The income threshold seems to be saying that those on less can't do prudent financial planning.

    I've asked you many times but you've yet "to prove" your argument. What works for you (at the moment) , may not for many people.

    Assets prices are only high due to QE (on a global scale). The prop will be removed at some point.
    "Markets have been so good for so long. That many investors are trivialising the advantages of actively managing portfolio risk." - Gervais Williams
This discussion has been closed.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support