Carney vows to take action on the BTL sector

lisyloo

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How does someone aged 55 service a 20 year mortgage?

Perhaps he or she had a good final salary pension but can't or doesn't want to touch it until 60/65.

I would have though that income is more guaranteed than employment income.

ukcarper

lisyloo wrote: »

Perhaps he or she had a good final salary pension but can't or doesn't want to touch it until 60/65.

I would have though that income is more guaranteed than employment income.

They might not need to pay the mortgage beyond their retirement date as the lump sum part of thier pension migt be enough to pay it off.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

They might not need to pay the mortgage beyond their retirement date as the lump sum part of thier pension migt be enough to pay it off.

Might....if....maybe.....could.

Why don't we just give everyone however much money they want? They might pay it back. To hell with risk.

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Might....if....maybe.....could.

Why don't we just give everyone however much money they want? They might pay it back. To hell with risk.

That's not what I'm saying but I'm not surprised at your over the top post. I could have serviced my mortgage past retirement and the lump sum I received would have gone someway to paying it off. So why should a person of 55 automatically be refused a mortgage.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

That's not what I'm saying but I'm not surprised at your over the top post. I could have serviced my mortgage past retirement and the lump sum I received would have gone someway to paying it off. So why should a person of 55 automatically be refused a mortgage.

How does the lender know you will absolutely use that money to pay off the mortgage?

What's to stop you spending it on fast cars and lovely women?

Would you lend your money to someonecompletely random who said "I'll pay you back from my pension funds when I get them"?

It's simply risk management. The banks have to have a blanket policy for the differing loans. They can't have all manner of different risks on individual loans.

For a start, what you are suggesting is unlikely to get passed the regulatory guidelines. That's why i said, do we simply give money to anyone who says they can pay it back? If not, what exactly are you suggesting? Specialist loans for every individual?

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How does the lender know you will absolutely use that money to pay off the mortgage?

What's to stop you spending it on fast cars and lovely women?

Would you lend your money to someonecompletely random who said "I'll pay you back from my pension funds when I get them"?

It's simply risk management. The banks have to have a blanket policy for the differing loans. They can't have all manner of different risks on individual loans.

For a start, what you are suggesting is unlikely to get passed the regulatory guidelines. That's why i said, do we simply give money to anyone who says they can pay it back? If not, what exactly are you suggesting? Specialist loans for every individual?

basically yes give money to anyone who wants it so long as they have at least 25% down up front

Their reason to not default and keep up payment is their 25% and increasing equity

a suggestion was made by hamish a while ago that owners should be able to get loans covered by the possible rental income rather than their own income so long as a certain amount is put down. at the time i thought it silly but now i agree

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How does the lender know you will absolutely use that money to pay off the mortgage?

What's to stop you spending it on fast cars and lovely women?

Would you lend your money to someonecompletely random who said "I'll pay you back from my pension funds when I get them"?

It's simply risk management. The banks have to have a blanket policy for the differing loans. They can't have all manner of different risks on individual loans.

For a start, what you are suggesting is unlikely to get passed the regulatory guidelines.

Your getting even more rediculous people on defined benefit know exactly what they will get and if they default they will be repossessed. As I said I could have serviced my mortgage and that is without reducing it with my lump sum.

Graham_Devon

cells wrote: »

basically yes give money to anyone who wants it so long as they have at least 25% down up front

So self certification then - but without having to actually certify anything?

Good plan.

Graham_Devon

ukcarper wrote: »

Your getting even more rediculous people on defined benefit know exactly what they will get and if they default they will be repossessed. As I said I could have serviced my mortgage and that is without reducing it with my lump sum.

It's hardly ridiculous. You have to look at the banks perspective on this.

You want them to lend you money on the basis that you say you will pay it off from your pension once you can access it.

How do you expect banks to function in the world economy when they can't even quantify the risk of their own loan book? I suppose the next answer would be to parcel them up and sell the loans on?

ukcarper

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's hardly ridiculous. You have to look at the banks perspective on this.

You want them to lend you money on the basis that you say you will pay it off from your pension once you can access it.

How do you expect banks to function in the world economy when they can't even quantify the risk of their own loan book? I suppose the next answer would be to parcel them up and sell the loans on?

Perhaps you can explain the difference between paying a pension from a salary and a pension I would say my pension is more secure than your job.