Armed Forces Finite age mortgage problem

amnblog

thecyclingqueen wrote: »

But it is not taking into account the 9 years of 45,000 income, only my 20,000 pension @ 15 years? Not logical!

Many things we have to deal with are not logical.

The Lender is more concerned with proving their approach within the regulations.

You don't get fined by the FCA for being illogical.

JustinR1979

Your repayments would be about £1000 a month?
Must leave plenty spare?
I am paying similar on 30k, is manageable for me
I understand your frustrations, saying you may or may not work after 55 can't have helped

Mortgage_Mark_2

thecyclingqueen wrote: »

Ok lots of mortgage advisors - so if I were employed say by British Aerospace with a permanent position @ 45,000pa with no guarantee of not being made redundant, would you lend me 90,000?

Lenders have to satisfy themselves - and the FCA - that you can afford a mortgage for the full term.

If you can't prove you earn enough in retirement to pay it, why would they lend you money that they don't know you can afford to pay back?

Your example is flawed as if you were a permanent employee of British Aerospace, they wouldn't automatically turn around at 55yrs old and kick you out the door. They couldn't legally. That's a big difference.

thecyclingqueen

So as members of a Firm (MOD) with a finite empolyment age we are being disadvantaged?

thecyclingqueen

JustinR1979 wrote: »

Your repayments would be about £1000 a month?
Must leave plenty spare?
I am paying similar on 30k, is manageable for me
I understand your frustrations, saying you may or may not work after 55 can't have helped

Dead right, of course I can afford it (actually you were £17 out in your assumption!! ha) but because I have 2 lump sums coming my way, ie endownment and pension I didn't want a third of my income going on paying my mortgage off when I don't have to, other funds I have spent 23 years paying will?

JustinR1979

thecyclingqueen wrote: »

Dead right, of course I can afford it (actually you were £17 out in your assumption!! ha) but because I have 2 lump sums coming my way, ie endownment and pension I didn't want a third of my income going on paying my mortgage off when I don't have to, other funds I have spent 23 years paying will?

Not bad!
I know I'm no help with a solution, just try and look on the bright side - Many people would love to be able to afford to take 90k over 9 years.
I'm surrounded by people on decent forces pensions, and no mortgages, and earning decent wages - I'm not at all jealous!

Mortgage_Mark_2

thecyclingqueen wrote: »

So as members of a Firm (MOD) with a finite empolyment age we are being disadvantaged?

No, if you worked for British Aerospace and had a mandatory retirement age of 55 then you'd be dealt with in exactly the same way...

Funny_old_game

The problem here us the age you told them you CAN retire. This is your fault not theirs.

They are basing you retiring at 55. You need to be black and white with mortgages now.

As Mark Saud, whoever anyone works for and whatever job they do the same principle is applied.

thecyclingqueen

I have managed to get in touch with a Natwest Intermediary and they have said this should not be held againt me and they should allow me to borrow up until age 70, they are looking into my application.

Funny_old_game

Not if you say you'll retire at 55. Without steering you, you should now reconsider your responses.