Who saw bbc panarama britians hidden housing crisis

vivatifosi

John_Pierpoint wrote: »

She got picked up in a large 4 x 4 that could have been "down sized" but my wife remarked that it was probably on the "never never".

I wound that back because I thought the same. It looks though like she's being picked up in a Sierra or something similar, then when she get's there it looks like a 4x4. I've watched that 3 times now and think she parked in the space in front of the big 4x4. In the other scene where she's travelling by car it's a Ka. If she's in Dagenham, chances are there are car plant workers in the family somewhere.

michaels

I wondered if the family paid her anything for the child care she was providing. Unless she had mewed a lot I wouldn't have thought that it would have taken much for the family to help with the mortgage.

Now a question - is it likely that if you have lots of equity the banks will be quick to repossess but if you have none then they will try and accommodate?

Another question - surely this one and the ones who bought 10 years ago should have had some equity and so financially wouldn't they have been better trying to find a private sale rather than going down the repossession route?

Better_Off_1983

I doubt the 4x4 was the daughter in laws, because I am sure she was picking up the cancer victim in a black Mondeo, the 4x4 was a cut to the next scene when they were at the hospital car park.

I think Kevin should have put away some savings because you cannot guarantee you will be in a secure job like that until retirement age.

The woman with the 4 kids anyone notice she had an iphone and the kids had an xbox... clearly they have not had their lightbulb moment!

dunstonh

Yes they had contributed, but I felt so sorry for the lady with cancer. A £180,000 house repossessed over £9k arrears.

Yes. Very sad and makes good television but a mortgage is a risk based transaction. People are recommended to take out insurance to cover themselves for death and illness. If they dont it means they are taking a risk. Risks are risks because they will happen at some point to some people.

Many other people have been in the same situation who paid their monthly premiums and have had pay outs and others pay who will never get pay outs as the risk doesnt hit them. So, yes you can sympathise but at the end of the day, this is what can happen.

Moby

dunstonh wrote: »

Yes. Very sad and makes good television but a mortgage is a risk based transaction. People are recommended to take out insurance to cover themselves for death and illness. If they dont it means they are taking a risk. Risks are risks because they will happen at some point to some people.

Many other people have been in the same situation who paid their monthly premiums and have had pay outs and others pay who will never get pay outs as the risk doesnt hit them. So, yes you can sympathise but at the end of the day, this is what can happen.

I'm sure she would feel better with that advice!

DecentLivingWage

There was a lot of debate about that programme afterwards - and very many comments seemed to be from Ukip supporters, and now we see a possible jump for them in the polls today... interesting!

flashnazia

I must say this thread is a stark contrast in comparison to the one in DT:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4343753
E.g:

Mara69 wrote: »

I watched this and had very little sympathy for most of the people on the programme. The family with the four children had a council home. They failed to pay the rent and also failed to provide the necessary documents in order to be awarded housing benefit. It is actually quite difficult to be evicted from a council home but they managed it. They were given several chances - why should they then be given another council home? I did feel sorry for their kids though.

Another couple bought a house for half a million - and had a 100% mortgage! Insanity. When they were finally evicted they drove off into the sunset in their two modern, expensive cars.

Another person on the programme mentioned that that they had sold one of their cars as they were struggling - and spent the money on Christmas. !!!!!!.

The woman with cancer owed the bank £9k and had long term arrears accrued before she got cancer and the homeless guy in the street had been living in the US. He wasn't even capable of getting to the soup kitchen on time.

All the people on the programme had more than contributed to their own downfall - yet all the blame was on the banks or the council. Not one person said, I screwed up.

vivatifosi

michaels wrote: »

I wondered if the family paid her anything for the child care she was providing. Unless she had mewed a lot I wouldn't have thought that it would have taken much for the family to help with the mortgage.

I think the issue is that she didn't have a lot of family and her husband who was also a named party on the mortgage had left her. Bear in mind that even if the family had savings, £9k is quite a lot of money to lend someone with cancer. You don't know if they are going to get better and when you will get it back. If those are your only savings you'd worry about losing your own job in the meantime and then putting your whole family out of a house if your mum couldn't pay you back. I would hope they were helping with child care though.

Norman_Castle

the homeless guy in the street had been living in the US. He wasn't even capable of getting to the soup kitchen on time.

From memory, he failed to get to the soup kitchen because he was busy trying to find somewhere to live.

dunstonh

Moby wrote: »

I'm sure she would feel better with that advice!

She should have taken the advice in the first place.