We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
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!
"Affordability" - the new endowment?
meanmachine_2
Posts: 2,624 Forumite
So last year the Alliance and leicester would lend me X amount, based on affordability.
Let's say, for simplicity's sake £200,000.
Interest rates were at 4.5%
TODAY, interest rates are at 5.75%. My personal "affordability" is much worse.
And yet, lo and behold, A&L are now prepared to offer me £205,000.
Nothing to do with my personal ability to pay - and everything to do with A&L desperately wanting to lend more money.
It's a scandal. AM I right brothers and sisters?
Let's say, for simplicity's sake £200,000.
Interest rates were at 4.5%
TODAY, interest rates are at 5.75%. My personal "affordability" is much worse.
And yet, lo and behold, A&L are now prepared to offer me £205,000.
Nothing to do with my personal ability to pay - and everything to do with A&L desperately wanting to lend more money.
It's a scandal. AM I right brothers and sisters?
0
Comments
-
meanmachine wrote: »So last year the Alliance and leicester would lend me X amount, based on affordability.
Let's say, for simplicity's sake £200,000.
Interest rates were at 4.5%
TODAY, interest rates are at 5.75%. My personal "affordability" is much worse.
And yet, lo and behold, A&L are now prepared to offer me £205,000.
Nothing to do with my personal ability to pay - and everything to do with A&L desperately wanting to lend more money.
It's a scandal. AM I right brothers and sisters?
Why? Noone is putting a gun to your head and making you take out a loan?
It's always someone elses fault isn't it?0 -
-
meanmachine wrote: »Oh do one, you vile little troll.
Again, another personal insult, I have a different viewpoint therefore I'm a troll?
Who made you the police of internet?0 -
Why? Noone is putting a gun to your head and making you take out a loan?
It's always someone elses fault isn't it?
It isn't an either-or case, where the fault is solely that of the lender or the borrower. Both can be at fault where an inadvisable loan is made. But the lender is in the business of making loans and should be expected to know what they are doing more than the typical borrower.0 -
It isn't an either-or case, where the fault is solely that of the lender or the borrower. Both can be at fault where an inadvisable loan is made. But the lender is in the business of making loans and should be expected to know what they are doing more than the typical borrower.
The lender is in the business of SELLING loans, which they package up and sell to the bond market...
Caveat Emptor, besides most people don't listen to advice that's in their best interests anyway...0 -
I agree with eatmyfish - people need to take personal responsibility for their actions. IMHO. I also don't see why someone who has bothered to reply to your post, albeit with a different response from what you were hoping for, should be a troll? Am happy to know why you consider that to be. Your posting did ask for answers!
Regards
Jen0 -
PLEASE don't feed the troll, folks.
EATMYFISH is just a wind up merchant. He gets his kicks by casting the bait and watching people bite. Just have a look at his previous posts.
If no-one responds, he will be starved of attention and hopefully go and play on some other forum.I'm a retired employment solicitor. Hopefully some of my comments might be useful, but they are only my opinion and not intended as legal advice.0 -
The lender is in the business of SELLING loans, which they package up and sell to the bond market...
Caveat Emptor, besides most people don't listen to advice that's in their best interests anyway...
We often see this opinion, that sellers should be allowed to sell anything, and anythng that goes wrong is the fault of the buyer. Why? As far as I can see, the lender and the borrower are entering into a contract, and they both should be reponsible for the contract thereby created. So, can you construct an argument saying why the lender should have less (or no) responsibility if the loan is ill-advised? I've never seen one.0 -
The lender is in the business of SELLING loans, which they package up and sell to the bond market...
Caveat Emptor, besides most people don't listen to advice that's in their best interests anyway...
I'm talking about how high street lenders *claim* to use a complex system of affordaiblity criteria to work out the MAXIMUM someone can afford.
Clearly that is total nonsense since this particular lender is prepared to offer me more this year than last even though I can afford to borrow much less.
It really isn't that difficult to grasp.
In truth banks will now saddle you up with as much debt as they can get away with - before bad publicity and bad debts hit home.
What I object to is that they make claims, and still give the appearance of being patriarchal organisations when of course they're mercenary profit machines.0 -
Jennifer_Jane wrote: »I agree with eatmyfish - people need to take personal responsibility for their actions. IMHO. I also don't see why someone who has bothered to reply to your post, albeit with a different response from what you were hoping for, should be a troll? Am happy to know why you consider that to be. Your posting did ask for answers!
Regards
Jen
Er, because all their other posts have been troll bait?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards