They can't be.....can they?

Red-Squirrel_2

patman99 wrote: »

Under the current rules, the Govt. Will pay your interest based on a standard Apr of 8%.

Did you just pull that figure out of thin air?

The standard interest rate used to calculate SMI is 2.61%. That's from the gov.uk site today.

https://www.gov.uk/support-for-mortgage-interest/what-youll-get

moneyistooshorttomention

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

The big difference is that the mortgage interest loan is secured, there is nothing to secure housing benefit against.

In other words - the Government knows people can more readily "do a runner" from rented accommodation (so they might find it difficult/impossible to get any benefit back from them because it had now been re-named "loan").

Not so easy to pick up one's house/flat/whatever and run...:cool:. So they've got people by the "short and curlies":(

Murphybear

iammumtoone wrote: »

^^^ yet no one seems to have an issue with the government paying peoples rent for them. which as you point out is indirectly paying someones mortgage.

Via the rent money it is not only paying the interest but some/all of the capital as well. Much more than the amount previously given to home owners to help with interest only.

I don't see people demanding to make rent payments loans as well so when those people find work they also have to pay back what help they received with keeping a roof over their heads.

Most housing benefit goes to people who are working, not unemployed. Can’t see how they would be able to pay it back.

sammyjammy

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Errr...the whole point is that it's a change from mortgage interest paid = end of.

To = we'll loan you the money (ie put you in debt for money we are currently giving you and that's the end of it).

...and discriminating against people whose housing money is "mortgage" rather than "rent".

It means that those paying mortgage interest will land up having a debt imposed on them that they havent chosen to have.

If they chose not to have the loan then they can chose to sell up. Life is about choices, everyone has them, they just don't want to make them.

moneyistooshorttomention

sammyjammy wrote: »

If they chose not to have the loan then they can chose to sell up. Life is about choices, everyone has them, they just don't want to make them.

Not a very realistic view imo - as a lot of people won't have enough equity in their house to be able to sell it and buy a lower-value one without a mortgage and cover what I call the "swopover costs" (that would be the £9,000 approx it cost me to swop from last house to current house - stamp duty/removals/solicitor/etc).

Add that probably the majority of unemployed people, for instance, will be telling themselves "Perhaps someone will give me a job again next month. Nope - oh well maybe next month etc etc" and are hardly going to put themselves through all that upheaval and expense when they assume they will be back in work again soon anyway (but many will be assuming wrongly - as we know).

Personally - I cant see why being unemployed should affect the rest of someone's life - ie where they live/maybe even the area they live in/their relationships etc. I've had several spells of unemployment (two of them lengthy) and I made very sure that "temporary financial situation" didnt affect the rest of my life at all.

katebl

As the loan can be repaid at any time with a minimum payment of £100, I really don't see how this is so grossly unfair... get a job sorted, repay loan, problem solved.

I'm sure everyone would be principled enough to return the funds to the taxpayer as soon as was possible wouldn't they?!

Red-Squirrel_2

katebl wrote: »

I'm sure everyone would be principled enough to return the funds to the taxpayer as soon as was possible wouldn't they?!

Do you think all benefits should be repaid when possible then?

moneyistooshorttomention

katebl wrote: »

As the loan can be repaid at any time with a minimum payment of £100, I really don't see how this is so grossly unfair... get a job sorted, repay loan, problem solved.

I'm sure everyone would be principled enough to return the funds to the taxpayer as soon as was possible wouldn't they?!

Personally - this is where I think it's appropriate to know if you've ever been unemployed or worried you would be? As I find it inconceivable to think it's okay for what, presumably, are "other people" that this happens to.....:cool: