BTL Boom continues

wotsthat

Emy1501 wrote: »

If I want to sell my house to someone with a 10 percent deposit then the lender has to agree the price. Its the problem with newbuilds at moment. Lenders aren't prepared to agree the valuations so are not prepared to lend on them. Its nothing to do with price fixing more to do with underwriting risk.

There's a difference.

If you want to sell your house you don't enter into a separate negotiation with your buyers lender to agree what price the buyer pays.

What would you do if you were buying a house and the vendor and your lender decided what the price should be? I think you'd be, quite rightly, horrified.

The_J

Emy1501 wrote: »

Also I suspect new lending practises will curb HPI going forward as affordability will create as much a potential problem for borrowers going forward as deposits.

What are these new or impending affordability changes?

Bear in mind before you answer my experience in the market is greater than yours by a factor of several million and I already have three examples off the top of my head where lenders have increased their affordability calculations recently to allow greater borrowing than they did before.

Graham_Devon

Hey The J.

Being a financial advisor, I thought you would be able to answer the question as to how someone would save their "mortgage money" while paying rent.

You say you have more knowledge in this area by a factor of several million, yet it seems you are unable to figure out that if the "mortgage money" isn't going on a mortgage, it's going on rent.

Do we have another financial advisor who's only concern is telling everyone else how stupid they are?

The_J

HAHAHAHAHAHA Graham, I was trying to get you to find the answer but you have failed. Jesus Christ, there is no hope.

MORTGAGE PAYMENT = INTEREST + CAPITAL
INTEREST = NEVER SEEN AGAIN
RENT = NEVER SEEN AGAIN
INTEREST = RENT
MORTGAGE PAYMENT = RENT + CAPITAL
CAPITAL = SAVINGS

Get it?!

Emy1501

The_J wrote: »

What are these new or impending affordability changes?

Bear in mind before you answer my experience in the market is greater than yours by a factor of several million and I already have three examples off the top of my head where lenders have increased their affordability calculations recently to allow greater borrowing than they did before.

The potential amount I could borrow in 2004 was about 30 percent higher than it was in 2010.

Graham_Devon

The_J wrote: »

HAHAHAHAHAHA Graham, I was trying to get you to find the answer but you have failed. Jesus Christ, there is no hope.

MORTGAGE PAYMENT = INTEREST + CAPITAL
INTEREST = NEVER SEEN AGAIN
RENT = NEVER SEEN AGAIN
INTEREST = RENT
MORTGAGE PAYMENT = RENT + CAPITAL
CAPITAL = SAVINGS

Get it?!

You stated you could rent a nicer house, and save the money you would have spent on the mortgage.

You can shout and fluster all you like with the capitals, but seriously, from looking at your previous posts on the housing board, mostly what you have as ammo is abuse for anything who disagrees with you, but very VERY little substance.

In this case, you are completely and utterly wrong, so I guess it's gonna be a lot of shouting off again.

The_J

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You stated you could rent a nicer house, and save the money you would have spent on the mortgage.

You can shout and fluster all you like with the capitals, but seriously, from looking at your previous posts on the housing board, mostly what you have as ammo is abuse for anything who disagrees with you, but very VERY little substance.

In this case, you are completely and utterly wrong.

In my area rent on a nice house is cheaper than a mortgage at 90% on the same house (edit: should add, it's not even a fair comparison there, it should be a 95% mortgage at a minimum, really it's 100%!)

So, how am I wrong? You don't have the first idea of basic maths. It's embarrassing that you continue this charade. (further edit: love the irony about substance too, who's backing up their argument with facts and who isn't?)

Emy1501 wrote: »

The potential amount I could borrow in 2004 was about 30 percent higher than it was in 2010.

Nah, you've changed the goalposts but you're still wrong. This also reads like you think things have improved since 2010, in direct contrast to your original statement. Sort it out.

Why is it that HPCers come across as stupid? I'm on your side, I think houses should be cheaper (I think we should get there by kicking out a lot of people from our country) but why do you argue so stupidly? It's infuriating, makes us all look idiotic.

Graham_Devon

The_J wrote: »

In my area rent on a nice house is cheaper than a mortgage at 90% on the same house.

So, how am I wrong? You don't have the first idea of basic maths. It's embarrassing that you continue this charade.

£250 cheaper per month?

You read as yet another financial advisor who has taken the end of the boom as a personal insult, so have a gripe with everyone who doens't want it back.

The_J

Graham_Devon wrote: »

£250 cheaper per month?

You read as yet another financial advisor who has taken the end of the boom as a personal insult, so have a gripe with everyone who doens't want it back.

Where's £250 come from? Doesn't have to be cheaper, it has to be the same as the INTEREST element of the MORTGAGE PAYMENT.

You really didn't get it? I thought you were just being obtuse. Astonishing.

I thought you said end of the broom as a personal insult, :rotfl: wondered what the hell you were talking about. The end of the boom has wiped out the bad companies buddy, not sure what the latest stats are but there are way less financial advice companies around. Market has dropped but our market share has increased significantly. As a result I'm earning twice as much now than I did in 2007 so you're wrong again. Good companies soar during recessions.

Graham_Devon

The_J wrote: »

Where's £250 come from? Doesn't have to be cheaper, it has to be the same as the INTEREST element of the MORTGAGE PAYMENT.

You really didn't get it? I thought you were just being obtuse. Astonishing.

Where did the £250 come from? ......

The_J wrote: »

Scenario 2: don't buy, rent a nicer house for 5 years, save up the £15k that would have gone into a mortgage and buy at 160k with a mortgage of £125k.

£15,000 / 60 months (5 years) = £250 per month.

You suggest you can rent a NICER house while saving the money you would have spent on a mortgage to ahcieve this 15k.

Now, I'm going to end this now, as it's obviously getting your back up, but quite clearly, what you said (and say) is a complete load of hypothetical nonsense.