Clear majority of people support Help To Buy

oz0707

FTB rates for higher ltv's are 5/6%. They were at this level before the credit crunch when base rate was 5%. The base rate and mortgage rates are completely different tbf. Trackers could obviously go up, but should the base rate get back to 5% do you think Mortgage rates will be 10% or 6/7% (2 points higher than at present).

DervProf

oz0707 wrote: »

FTB rates for higher ltv's are 5/6%. They were at this level before the credit crunch when base rate was 5%. The base rate and mortgage rates are completely different tbf. Trackers could obviously go up, but should the base rate get back to 5% do you think Mortgage rates will be 10% or 6/7% (2 points higher than at present).

OK, see where 2% rates for FTBers with high LTVs gets us.

oz0707

I'm just agreeing that they're detached. I don't think the margin between the two will be the same should the base rate rise.

Graham_Devon

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Absolute Nonsense.

The percentage of after tax income being used to service mortgage payments is currently 28%, at near record lows, versus the long term average of 37% and peak of 68% in 1990.

As you just mentioned destroying an argument, I thought I'd chip in.

As usual, you'll ignore this and ove on.

But again...

According to nationwide, the average mortgage payments as a percentage of mean take home pay is no where near what you state it is. It's also no where near record lows, but you keep banging on, clinging on to it.

So, how on earth do you explain this table?

It completely goes against everything you said. Mortgage payments for FTB's are no where near record lows.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=20&ved=0CIEBEBYwCTgK&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationwide.co.uk%2Fhpi%2Fdownloads%2FFTB_Affordability_Indices.xls&ei=a2FPUZDnEeWf0QXryYDIDw&usg=AFQjCNHLkWPUw5RxuwocDqL70BielW42rw&bvm=bv.44158598,d.d2k&cad=rja (excel file)

It's from Nationwide too....your favourite data suppliers...

For those who can't be bothered opening the excel sheet, were at 33.7% of wages to service a FTB mortgage today. In 2005 it was 42%. In 2003, 30%. 2001, 26%, 1997 20%.

So ,Hamish, what were you talking about again?

grizzly1911

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The peak was in 1990.

You think that was "stupid mortgage provision"?

Not surprising on the back of a mad rush into housing, lots of gazumping to chase prices up, followed by a spike in interest rates.

Certainly at around that time or maybe slightly after 95% mortgages were being banded around with MIGS too as providers bent over backward to chase market share. At around that time there were also caps on certain types of lending by the Banks, as a requirement of the BOE in the residential market supply and purchase too I believe.

Luckily we brought our first house in 87, 80% LTV and had factored in an increase in rates, as it wasn't unknown.

grizzly1911

Graham_Devon wrote: »

As you just mentioned destroying an argument, I thought I'd chip in.

As usual, you'll ignore this and ove on.

But again...

According to nationwide, the average mortgage payments as a percentage of mean take home pay is no where near what you state it is. It's also no where near record lows, but you keep banging on, clinging on to it.

So, how on earth do you explain this table?

It completely goes against everything you said. Mortgage payments for FTB's are no where near record lows.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=20&ved=0CIEBEBYwCTgK&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationwide.co.uk%2Fhpi%2Fdownloads%2FFTB_Affordability_Indices.xls&ei=a2FPUZDnEeWf0QXryYDIDw&usg=AFQjCNHLkWPUw5RxuwocDqL70BielW42rw&bvm=bv.44158598,d.d2k&cad=rja (excel file)

It's from Nationwide too....your favourite data suppliers...

For those who can't be bothered opening the excel sheet, were at 33.7% of wages to service a FTB mortgage today. In 2005 it was 42%. In 2003, 30%. 2001, 26%, 1997 20%.

So ,Hamish, what were you talking about again?

The record lows come from only the top70% of incomes buying houses and therefore affordability ratio is lower- apparently. Apparently people on "low" pay don't buy even when that low income may be a second/dual income.

claire16c

shortchanged wrote: »

Well it will all go into the saving for house deposit fund.

You joke but I'm up to £50 on yougov now, going to put the cheque in my isa which is for saving for our deposit

We won't be buying for a while. It's cheaper to rent here than buy, even though renting is expensive a mortgage is just unaffordable for us as we'd want to buy something bigger, so we may as well save as much as we can.

And I am certainly not about to buy an over priced new build!

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Graham_Devon wrote: »

the average mortgage payments as a percentage of mean take home pay is no where near what you state it is. It's also no where near record lows, but you keep banging on, clinging on to it.

Here you go Graham.

Was doing it form memory so a percent or two out, but close enough.

Max 65.5%

Min 23.6%

Average 36.3%

Current 28.1%

http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/media1/economic_insight/house_price_tools_page.asp

As I said, well below long term average and at near record lows.

In fact, buying a house has only been cheaper in a handful of the last 32 years.

ukcarper

The Nationwide figures are FTB and LLoyds are all to me that says it's only more affordable if you are not a FTB.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

The Nationwide figures are FTB and LLoyds are all to me that says it's only more affordable if you are not a FTB.

Yup, also worked out in two different ways.

Note how the figures Hamish linked too instantly wipe off 30% of the house price as they assume a 30% deposit. It then uses sub 70% mortgage rates to do the calculation on full time MENS wages. Sweet.

The one I linked too uses a 90% LTV, using ALL full time wages, not just mens, which seems a bit more realistic.

Little bizare that Hamish screams for higher LTV's when it comes to lending, but uses data based on the very LTV's he moans bitterly about to prove higher affordability.