A generation are being priced in order to keep the value up of their parents assets.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What do you mean then?

I have asked you to state what mortgage lending you would like to see, if mortgage lending is the problem.

You stated maybe there are not enough 90% deals for those who want them.

I assumed you were suggesting that you would like to see more 90% mortgages given to people who want them? No? Maybe a misunderstanding, but just responding to the answer you gave to my question.

If that's not the case, what mortgage lending would you like to see, that isn't 2007 levels, but is easier than 90 / 95%?

Yes I would if they meet lending criteria I wouldn’t object to more 95% loans in right circumstances but I can see that is a risk in present housing market so stricter criteria would need to apply.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Yes I would if they meet lending criteria I wouldn’t object to more 95% loans in right circumstances but I can see that is a risk in present housing market so stricter criteria would need to apply.

The people who meet the lending criteria get the loans. That's whats happening today.

You are left with those who don't meet the lending criteria. That's the problem today.

But you are saying it's lending thats the issue, not the price. So you'd have to lower the criteria (risk) and move back towards 2007 style lending, which you took offence at me suggesting.

I think this discussion is exahusted and don't think were gonna get anywhere, so with respect, I'm out!

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

The people who meet the lending criteria get the loans. That's whats happening today.

You are left with those who don't meet the lending criteria. That's the problem today.

But you are saying it's lending thats the issue, not the price. So you'd have to lower the criteria (risk) and move back towards 2007 style lending, which you took offence at me suggesting.

I think this discussion is exahusted and don't think were gonna get anywhere, so with respect, I'm out!

You don't know that and you don't know what criteria they are using.

Mr._Pricklepants

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I have one. Though thanks for your concern buddy

Really? Did you buy the other half then?

Percy1983

I really don't see the problem getting a 90% mortgage.

The wife and I have an average income and bought an average house.

I will say the interet rate wasn't amazing at 90% and a £995 fee wasn't the best but we had no problem getting it.

I do wonder how much is it people can't get the deals and how many don't want the deals and keep saving for a 85-80% mortage.

I will add our finances where in good order with no missed/late payments etc, but thats not exactly hard is it.

moneyinmypocket

Graham - you didn't answer the question fully - why I'd you own a home do you want prices to crash and post do passionately about house prices?

ukcarper

It is possible to buy a brand new 2-bed house in Manchester for £100k according to ONS median full time salary in Manchester is £20k, which rises to £25.7k for a male, female part time is £8.4k. A couple consisting of a male earning median full time earnings and woman earning part time median would earn £34k so with a 10% deposit would require a 2.65x earnings mortgage.

moneyinmypocket

^ good points.

I often think people expect to much - a lot of my friends stared off in v small dingy places and built up from there

Percy1983

moneyinmypocket wrote: »

^ good points.

I often think people expect to much - a lot of my friends stared off in v small dingy places and built up from there

I am not so sure, I know in our case we looked at it as there is a good chance we could end up stuck in the house we bought for a good few years, so we saved a little longer and went to the 3 bed semi.

The game has changed, when prices where booming it made sense to buy a small dingy place and after a few years it would gift you a deposit for the 3 bed semi due to magical hpi.

Now you buy small and dingy you could end up stuck in small and dingy for quite some time.

When it was booming hpi helped you up the ladder, now its more sensible to decide which step you want on the ladder jump straight to it and hold on tight.

ukcarper

Percy1983 wrote: »

I am not so sure, I know in our case we looked at it as there is a good chance we could end up stuck in the house we bought for a good few years, so we saved a little longer and went to the 3 bed semi.

The game has changed, when prices where booming it made sense to buy a small dingy place and after a few years it would gift you a deposit for the 3 bed semi due to magical hpi.

Now you buy small and dingy you could end up stuck in small and dingy for quite some time.

When it was booming hpi helped you up the ladder, now its more sensible to decide which step you want on the ladder jump straight to it and hold on tight.

I’m not sure that’s the case so long as you have a repayment mortgage over say 25 years after 5 or 6 years you would have paid off quite a large chunk of capital. With say a £100k mortgage at 5% you would owe £86k at the end of the 6th year.

Remember if prices have stagnated or fallen slightly the bigger house and therefore the extra required will be less than if prices had boomed.