We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Lender forbearance becoming “a sick joke”

1101113151629

Comments

  • Graham_Devon
    Graham_Devon Posts: 58,560 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ukcarper wrote: »
    If it is just paying your interest how is it helping you to buy when you come of smi you will be in the same position you were when you first went on it.

    Ok, were going to have to go back to basics.

    Say for instance someone had a mortgage of £600 a month. They find they can't afford that payment.

    SMI comes along, removes all the interest, amd makes the payment £200 a month.

    They can now afford £200 a month. However, they are at an obvious advantage to everyone else on their street who still has to pay their interest. Therefore SMI means they keep their home, their equity and any future equity, and the taxpayer chips in month after month.

    I'm getting a little aghast and starting to lose patience on this thread. I honestly don't believe people can't see the difference between SMI paying for a PRIVATE ASSET and housing benefit paying for a SERVICE.

    I'm bowing out, as it appears we could just be at arguing for arguments sake point here.
  • ukcarper
    ukcarper Posts: 17,337 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Ok, were going to have to go back to basics.

    Say for instance someone had a mortgage of £600 a month. They find they can't afford that payment.

    SMI comes along, removes all the interest, amd makes the payment £200 a month.

    They can now afford £200 a month. However, they are at an obvious advantage to everyone else on their street who still has to pay their interest. Therefore SMI means they keep their home, their equity and any future equity, and the taxpayer chips in month after month.

    I'm getting a little aghast and starting to lose patience on this thread. I honestly don't believe people can't see the difference between SMI paying for a PRIVATE ASSET and housing benefit paying for a SERVICE.

    I'm bowing out, as it appears we could just be at arguing for arguments sake point here.

    How do you find the £200 if you have lost your job.

    I get fed up with people who want people who have worked hard and then fallen on hard times thrown out of their homes in the hope it will cause a crash. While they are ok with people who have never worked getting their rent paid indefinitely.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    ukcarper wrote: »
    How do you find the £200 if you have lost your job.

    I get fed up with people who want people who have worked hard and then fallen on hard times thrown out of their homes in the hope it will cause a crash. While they are ok with people who have never worked getting their rent paid indefinitely.

    The point is that the person should have taken out insurance or put away some savings whilst they were working to cover such eventualities. It's called taking responsibility for oneself.
  • RenovationMan
    RenovationMan Posts: 4,227 Forumite
    edited 13 August 2012 at 10:50AM
    Generali wrote: »
    I don't see what is special about houses as an asset class that they should be treated separately.

    As is so often said on here, housing is a necessity but home ownership is not.

    More often than not, IO mortgages are cheaper than rents, so it's cheaper forthe state to keep people in their homes than have them repossessed and put families into bedsits and BTL properties. If they ever do look at getting rid of SMI then I'm going to become a BTL landlord.
  • Graham_Devon
    Graham_Devon Posts: 58,560 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    ukcarper wrote: »
    How do you find the £200 if you have lost your job.

    I get fed up with people who want people who have worked hard and then fallen on hard times thrown out of their homes in the hope it will cause a crash. While they are ok with people who have never worked getting their rent paid indefinitely.

    Why does it matter how they find it?!

    Does it alter the point?!

    This isn't about wanting people thrown out of their homes for pities sake. I wish it would stop reverting to that spineless little argument every single time.
  • Joeskeppi wrote: »
    It only pays the interest. I thought having an interest only mortgage was the same as renting?

    This is where the 'bears' tie themselves in logic knots. They will argue till tey are blue in the face that IO mortgages are just 'renting from the bank' right up until it undermines their SMI argument and then they flip-flop and undermine their whole previous argument. Then they forget it all when the next IO mortgage discussion comes up.


    It's amusing to watch. :)
  • This isn't about wanting people thrown out of their homes for pities sake. I wish it would stop reverting to that spineless little argument every single time.

    What is it about then?
  • Graham_Devon
    Graham_Devon Posts: 58,560 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    What is it about then?

    http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=55094425&postcount=26

    Just one of the many posts detailing what it's about that you appear to have missed?
  • System
    System Posts: 178,373 Community Admin
    10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    This is where the 'bears' tie themselves in logic knots. They will argue till tey are blue in the face that IO mortgages are just 'renting from the bank' right up until it undermines their SMI argument and then they flip-flop and undermine their whole previous argument. Then they forget it all when the next IO mortgage discussion comes up.


    It's amusing to watch. :)

    Indeed.

    Having an IO mortgage = renting.

    But

    Someone paying your IO mortgage is different to someone paying your rent.

    Mind = blown.
    This is a system account and does not represent a real person. To contact the Forum Team email forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com
  • Joeskeppi wrote: »
    Indeed.

    Having an IO mortgage = renting.

    But

    Someone paying your IO mortgage is different to someone paying your rent.

    Mind = blown.

    LOL. Did you notice that Devon is now desperately trying to focus on other things than your IO = renting post. Classic Devon. :rotfl:
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.4K Life & Family
  • 258.8K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.