Lender that is not too strict on affordability criteria?

wrkactjob

'Stuck' on benefits?

I don't think your username helps.

stuckonbenefits_2

@ ACG - I appreciate what your saying, but what he's entitled to hasn't been decided by him, but by the government. How many kids he has is really his business and so long as he's working I don't see any problems here. He still has to pay for kids school meals, full council tax etc, so any extras are really what the government of this country entitles you to. Also that 15k, includes his disability entitlement too.

@ Shortchanged - Agreed. He works full-time.

@ wrkactjob - I guess your right, but how can I change my username?

HappyMJ

stuckonbenefits wrote: »

uess your right, but how can I change my username?

You can't you'll be stuckonbenefits forever you can create a new one though

stuckonbenefits_2

LOL! ok, thanks

Thrugelmir

stuckonbenefits wrote: »

I'm aware that all lenders are different and I know that most lenders have now changed their rules regarding the affordability criteria, but which one in your experience is so far the least strict?

The key issue is that lenders now have are now being regulated to assess affordability properly. So the days of selling mortgages like tins of baked beans are over. There's no benefit in lenders taking any degree of risk, not least that profits made on mortgages are far lower than other forms of lending.