10 yr loan for a 64 year old?

John1993_2

bigadaj wrote: »

Surely the only irresponsible lending, assuming nothing ridiculous like not being of age, is that perpetuated by bankers to achieve targets/ bonuses to people who won't pay it back, but the victims are the bank shareholders, not the borrowers who then don't pay it back!

I've never heard the term "bankers" used to describe the guys on £20k a year who deal with arranging small personal loans or setting up direct debits. That would tend to be "a person who works for a bank".

"Bankers" tends to mean investment bankers, who deal in the hundreds of millions per deal, not the number of pounds.

We have our own scandals, please don't start blaming us for what a guy in Natwest Staines has done, too.

Rafter

Pip,

Unlikely you will get an unsecured loan for that amount and over that period.

As you own your property outright, you could get an equity release loan - but the setup costs and exit fees are likely to make this prohibitively expensive for your situation.

It would be helpful to know what you need the money for - it may be you can finance whatever it is you are buying rather than taking out a loan.

I would also question why you aren't using your savings as these are no doubt earning a lot less in interest than you would pay on any loan.

Good luck

R.

bigadaj

John1993 wrote: »

I've never heard the term "bankers" used to describe the guys on £20k a year who deal with arranging small personal loans or setting up direct debits. That would tend to be "a person who works for a bank".

"Bankers" tends to mean investment bankers, who deal in the hundreds of millions per deal, not the number of pounds.

We have our own scandals, please don't start blaming us for what a guy in Natwest Staines has done, too.

Don't seE why not, irresponsible lending is the same at all levels, whether you have to hand back your knighthood or not.

John1993_2

bigadaj wrote: »

Don't seE why not, irresponsible lending is the same at all levels, whether you have to hand back your knighthood or not.

Because it's not even vaguely the same job. Just about no-one in investment banking is in the business of making loans or taking deposits, and the ones that most people imagine when tey hear the term are people like me, traders, who are about as removed from that end of the business as it's possible to be.

It's like lumping in a train driver with the guy who delivers your pizzas, haranging the latter for Potters Bar, and then saying "you are all in transport".

I assume that you'd get a bit sick if people had a go at you for other people's crimes, in a different business, for a different company, when you'd done nothing wrong. I feel the same.

bigadaj

John1993 wrote: »

Because it's not even vaguely the same job. Just about no-one in investment banking is in the business of making loans or taking deposits, and the ones that most people imagine when tey hear the term are people like me, traders, who are about as removed from that end of the business as it's possible to be.

It's like lumping in a train driver with the guy who delivers your pizzas, haranging the latter for Potters Bar, and then saying "you are all in transport".

I assume that you'd get a bit sick if people had a go at you for other people's crimes, in a different business, for a different company, when you'd done nothing wrong. I feel the same.

Think you are over personalising this, if you want to then fine but not my intent.

If you check my reference it was to hbos and james crosby giving up his knighthood; this was another example of reckless lending that brought down hbos intially and subsequently Lloyds. You may be an investment banker and or a city trader, in which case my comments don't specifically affect you.

The interesting point is how financial services have so dramatically failed on so many levels, from Northern Rock to HBOS to RBS to Lehmans, all for slightly different reasons but in each case the individuals involved were originally so brilliant that they couldn't be wrong, and we now find it wasn't their fault at all, but due to poor regulation which was seen as being overly risk averse and intefering when times were good.

If you want to detail your specific area of banking expertise I can tailor my comments more accurately, after all my initial comments were very generic and you seem to have decided to make them both specific to yourself and then decided that they are not relevant.

By your definition then traditional banks aren't banks at all, only investment banks are, could we have a new definition of retail banking in that case?