We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. 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!
Quick question if I may.
Comments
-
OMG!!! Using that link i have discovered that just by adding my name and changing nothing else, the amount "we" could borrow would be 36k LESS than just him on his own. What the HELL is that all about?
That's because the lender thinks that if there is only one borrower there is only one set of outgoings - the other person does not require clothing, feeding etc! I would dearly love to understand the lenders' twisted logic in this sort of case. Anyone able to explain why this is?RICHARD WEBSTER
As a retired conveyancing solicitor I believe the information given in the post to be useful assuming any properties concerned are in England/Wales but I accept no liability for it.0 -
I would imagine that, given it is an online calculator, it uses various assumptions rather than the bank's full criteria.Richard_Webster wrote: »I would dearly love to understand the lenders' twisted logic in this sort of case. Anyone able to explain why this is?
Therefore it would be reasonable for the calculator to assume that where there is a single borrower they are single.0 -
I don't think that there is a twisted logic. It is just a matter of assumptionsRichard_Webster wrote: »That's because the lender thinks that if there is only one borrower there is only one set of outgoings - the other person does not require clothing, feeding etc! I would dearly love to understand the lenders' twisted logic in this sort of case. Anyone able to explain why this is?- Single Applicant - assume no dependents, allow higher affordability
- Joint Applicant - allow for both to eat and be fed
You might as well ask the Wizard of Oz to give you a big number as pay a Credit Referencing Agency for a so-called 'credit-score'0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.9K Spending & Discounts
- 244.5K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.2K Life & Family
- 258.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards