BTL Boom continues

The_J

How can you still not get it? Let me use those figures:

MORTGAGE PAYMENT (£1000) = INTEREST (£750) + CAPITAL (£250). WHY ELSE IS THE MORTGAGE APPROXIMATELY £15K LESS AFTER 5 YEARS?

The rent would be the same as the interest. £750 a month so your £250 comes from the capital. Please god, tell me you understand? I know I'm a rubbish teacher but this is not hard.

Why do you think the rent would be £1000 a month for the same property?

Emy1501

The_J wrote: »

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.

I'm not sure what your rants about to be honest. Personally I would like prices to fall in real terms and them stabilise so my kids can have chance to buy a house in the future.

I haven't changed the goalpost. Lax lending practises which started mainly in 2004 at about the same time homeownership started falling was a driver of price rises after 2004. These practises won't be around going forward so I don't believe prices will be able to rise much higher than wage inflation going forward.

Graham_Devon

The_J wrote: »

How can you still not get it? Let me use those figures:

MORTGAGE PAYMENT (£1000) = INTEREST (£750) + CAPITAL (£250). WHY ELSE IS THE MORTGAGE APPROXIMATELY £15K LESS AFTER 5 YEARS?

The rent would be the same as the interest. £750 a month so your £250 comes from the capital. Please god, tell me you understand? I know I'm a rubbish teacher but this is not hard.

Why do you think the rent would be £1000 a month for the same property?

I don't, you stated, in no uncertain terms, you could rent a NICER house. Not the same one.

Absolutely rubbish financial advice. Just rubbish.

Emy1501

wotsthat wrote: »

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.

When I have sold houses I have had an idea what the property worth and then asked an agent to value it. When ive sold I have then had to hope the valuer valued the property at the price sold. If the valuer had not agreed or the lender wouldn't lend at the price I wanted then I had the choice of reducing the price or hoping someone else came along who could get a mortgage at the price I wanted.

The_J

Certainly, things like self cert and no deposit mortgages have disappeared and that's a good thing but affordability is roughly the same. Currently I think house prices will rise because the number of people in this country is unsustainable, the successive socialist governments want to keep a large proportion of people on benefits in housing that isn't paid for whilst recruiting more from abroad and the land that we have is finite with restrictive laws in place to prevent widescale building projects.

Emy1501

The_J wrote: »

The price of new builds has nothing to do with lending at 90%. New builds lose some of their value as soon as they are bought which in a quieter market is not worth the risk to the banks if they need to repossess. That's why many don't lend at 90% LTV. Doesn't matter if the house is 60 or 600k.

New builds are not systematically being downvalued at the moment.

Builders could get away with the nonsense that a new build had premium of 10-20% pre 2007 when lenders and surveyors paid little attention to what properties were really worth.

Times have hanged now and builders attitudes need to change to. There is no reason why a builder can't build properties at prices that a well done up non new build would cost.

The_J

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I don't, you stated, in no uncertain terms, you could rent a NICER house. Not the same one.

Absolutely rubbish financial advice. Just rubbish.

Oh my god, this is infuriating. Is your IQ like less than 20? I really feel the need to educate you I can't have you going through life like this.

OK. Let's say you're looking in the Rotherham area (not sure why Rotherham, nice place, average house prices)

Lets say Rent is £750 a month on House 1 (http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-22026735.html). 4 bed detached.
Mortgage of £150k on House 2 (assuming you can get 5k off the purchase price http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-33860329.html). Boo, 3 bed semi. £750 a month interest only. £1,000 a month repayment.

Live in House 1 for 5 years. Save £250 a month.
Live in House 2 for 5 years. Knock £250 a month off your mortgage.

Please tell me you get that?

Bad luck getting thanked by Thrugelmir. That's the kiss of death.

Emy1501

The_J wrote: »

Certainly, things like self cert and no deposit mortgages have disappeared and that's a good thing but affordability is roughly the same. Currently I think house prices will rise because the number of people in this country is unsustainable, the successive socialist governments want to keep a large proportion of people on benefits in housing that isn't paid for whilst recruiting more from abroad and the land that we have is finite with restrictive laws in place to prevent widescale building projects.

I maybe wrong but if prices rise by say 20% over the next 5 years but wages only by 10% won't that have an effect on the countries ability to grow especially when mortgages rates are likely to go up any way. I can't see how people paying out more on housing costs will really help the economy now that mewing has ended.

Sooner or later a government will have to do something to keep prices in check and that probably why the housing minister said in an ideal world he would like to se wage inflation at 4% and HPI at 2% yearly.

The_J

You're talking about a capitalist market and that is exactly how it should be. But there's a problem, the !!!!ing socialist government gives out free housing and pays housing benefit/interest relief! That completely distorts a free market. If these people didn't get government help they'd a) have to work, b) work for less so c) wouldn't be able to pay as much rent therefore d) to get money landlords would have to charge less rent and so it follows that e) houses are cheaper.

House prices won't rise nearly as much as they have done but they will rise if we continue to explode our population and don't let the market correct itself by voting in successive socialist governments.

Of course, it's too late now. Britain is a nation of lazy work shy morons, I'm hoping we'll see a flu outbreak at some point in the future that will wipe a few million off the population numbers.

Thrugelmir

The_J wrote: »

Bad luck getting thanked by Thrugelmir. That's the kiss of death.

Hi Jacka***

Mortgage business must be bad the amount of time you are spending on here. Though hardly surprising with the way you market yourself.

See your trolling other people as well now.

Watch out as your may well fall in your own mouth. As its a darn sight bigger than your IQ.