One in Five could not afford food if payments rise

Graham_Devon

ILW wrote: »

Why is there less fuss about rising rents?

There is. Just not so much on this board, which appears to be contaminated with BTL chancers.

ILW

SirRee wrote: »

Indeed. And in more cases than not the homeowner is more likely to have settled, put down roots, and contributed to the local society than a renter. why should they have to uproot their family and children disturbing their schooling etc?

The reason they should move is that they are living in a house that they cannot afford.

Are you saying that renters don't tend to send their children to school?

alleycat`

ILW wrote: »

The reason they should move is that they are living in a house that they cannot afford.

Are you saying that renters don't tend to send their children to school?

Whilst i don't disagree about this point it still doesn't change the fact that selling a house is, to me anyway, more expensive and complicated than a renter moving house.

They aren't the same and to pretend they are is a bit, well, silly to be honest.

StevieJ

wotsthat wrote: »

Some of these surveys really are crap. Have 25% of mortgage holders really told Which that if their mortgage went up by £50 they'd be unaffected and wouldn't need to cut back on spending, reduce saving and would continue to have enough to spend on essentials?

What are they going to do? Magic £50 out of thin air?

Maybe they are the ones that bought a long time ago or bought more recently when base rate was 5.75% and still think they are getting a good deal.

Caveat_Mortgagor

If the mortgage payers had smaller mortgages they would be better able to afford an increase in mortgage payments.

But they needed a big mortgage because houses are expensive.

And yet the media spent many years trying to convince us all that continual increases in the price of a house were not only a good thing..... they would make us all rich!

In reality, tens of thousands of families are crippled by mortgage debt and live hand to mouth, and the additional money they would have if they had smaller mortgage payments could have been spent on the high street and contributed to economic growth

Epic fail.

alleycat`

Caveat_Mortgagor wrote: »

If the mortgage payers had smaller mortgages they would be better able to afford an increase in mortgage payments.

But they needed a big mortgage because houses are expensive.

And yet the media spent many years trying to convince us all that continual increases in the price of a house were not only a good thing..... they would make us all rich!

In reality, tens of thousands of families are crippled by mortgage debt and live hand to mouth, and the additional money they would have if they had smaller mortgage payments could have been spent on the high street and contributed to economic growth

Epic fail.

That is assuming the majority of them haven't spent the money on "tat from the high street" that they could have saved when mortgage rates dropped like a stone.

It also assumes the people making money from these poor suckers (as we'd believe they all are) haven't put that money back into the economy and have mysteriously stuffed it under the mattress.


I don't know the truth of any of it but i hate over simplifications of a complex issue to push a single point or agenda.

Graham_Devon

alleycat` wrote: »

Whilst i don't disagree about this point it still doesn't change the fact that selling a house is, to me anyway, more expensive and complicated than a renter moving house.

They aren't the same and to pretend they are is a bit, well, silly to be honest.

It's more expensive, of course it is.

But that's the avenue the purchased DECIDED to go down. if they really cannot afford £100 extra a month on their mortgage, it was a poor decision and they have no one to blame but themselves. THEY made the choice to buy instead of rent, and they made that choice based on their financials.

Buying instead of renting doesn't automatically give you a moral right over the renter to extra protection.

chucky

ILW wrote: »

Anybody who is that close to the edge with rates where they are at the moment, really does need to re-evaluate whether they can truly afford to be buying the house they are in.

Where are mortgage rates at the moment compared to the last few years?

alleycat`

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's more expensive, of course it is.

But that's the avenue the purchased DECIDED to go down. if they really cannot afford £100 extra a month on their mortgage, it was a poor decision and they have no one to blame but themselves. THEY made the choice to buy instead of rent, and they made that choice based on their financials.

Buying instead of renting doesn't automatically give you a moral right over the renter to extra protection.

I didn't say it gave you any more rights.
It isn't as easy to move is my only point with regards to what i said

Graham_Devon

alleycat` wrote: »

I didn't say it gave you any more rights.
It isn't as easy to move is my only point with regards to what i said

Yes, I'd agree.

I assumed you were suggesting something, rather than just making an obvious statement.