Noticed some changes? You can read all about the improvements we've made on the Forum in our latest announcement. We also have a new set of Forum rules so please take the time to give them a read and familiarise yourself.

5% government mortgage guarantee

Will the 5% government guarantee mean that interest rates will be lower now there is less risk for the lender? Not really a good deal of interest rates are high, it seems this is actually aimed at the rich getting richer than helping youngsters.
«1345

Replies

  • ThrugelmirThrugelmir Forumite
    81.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    It's not whether you're right or wrong that's important, but how much money you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong." — George Soros
  • lonibralonibra Forumite
    226 Posts
    100 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    Genuine question, how do you mean?

    Are you referring to the taxpayer and the absence of a magic money tree? 

    Or the interest rate premium on 95% LTV mortgages paid by the borrower?
  • 2021BJ2021BJ Forumite
    307 Posts
    100 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭
    lonibra said:
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    Genuine question, how do you mean?

    Are you referring to the taxpayer and the absence of a magic money tree? 

    Or the interest rate premium on 95% LTV mortgages paid by the borrower?
    I can't see the taxpayer being particularly happy about subbing bank profits, or house buyers, so I can only see the cost being borne by the borrower.
  • ThrugelmirThrugelmir Forumite
    81.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    lonibra said:
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    Genuine question, how do you mean?

    Are you referring to the taxpayer and the absence of a magic money tree? 

    Or the interest rate premium on 95% LTV mortgages paid by the borrower?
    On the basis that it's a scheme to encourage lenders to advance money.  Participating lenders pay a levy to the Treasury on business underwritten. A pooled fund to cover the defaults incurred will need to be created. The taxpayer won't be exposed to any losses. 
    It's not whether you're right or wrong that's important, but how much money you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong." — George Soros
  • Penguin666Penguin666 Forumite
    44 Posts
    Fifth Anniversary 10 Posts Combo Breaker
    I mean:  House prices are so high and if you can only afford a 5% deposit, then you are unlikely to be able to afford repayments with current interest rates.  Therefore, this seems like only the well-off can use it, which defeats the point of the scheme. 
  • lonibralonibra Forumite
    226 Posts
    100 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭
    lonibra said:
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    Genuine question, how do you mean?

    Are you referring to the taxpayer and the absence of a magic money tree? 

    Or the interest rate premium on 95% LTV mortgages paid by the borrower?
    On the basis that it's a scheme to encourage lenders to advance money.  Participating lenders pay a levy to the Treasury on business underwritten. A pooled fund to cover the defaults incurred will need to be created. The taxpayer won't be exposed to any losses. 
    That's great then isn't it. Borrowers decide if they want to pay the price.
  • Mickey666Mickey666 Forumite
    2.8K Posts
    1,000 Posts Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    I mean:  House prices are so high and if you can only afford a 5% deposit, then you are unlikely to be able to afford repayments with current interest rates.  Therefore, this seems like only the well-off can use it, which defeats the point of the scheme. 
    That makes no logical sense.  Deposits and repayments are in no way related.  There must be many people living in rented houses paying MORE rent than the repayment on a 95% mortgage but who are not able to save for a deposit faster than house price inflation.

    Also, the 'well-off' are not likely to be the ones struggling to find a deposit are they?

  • SpiderLegsSpiderLegs Forumite
    1.7K Posts
    1,000 Posts Second Anniversary Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭
    Mickey666 said:
    I mean:  House prices are so high and if you can only afford a 5% deposit, then you are unlikely to be able to afford repayments with current interest rates.  Therefore, this seems like only the well-off can use it, which defeats the point of the scheme. 
    That makes no logical sense.  Deposits and repayments are in no way related.  There must be many people living in rented houses paying MORE rent than the repayment on a 95% mortgage but who are not able to save for a deposit faster than house price inflation.

    Also, the 'well-off' are not likely to be the ones struggling to find a deposit are they?

    Agreed. High deposit requirements are the problem, not monthly repayments.


  • ThrugelmirThrugelmir Forumite
    81.5K Posts
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Photogenic
    ✭✭✭✭✭✭
    lonibra said:
    lonibra said:
    The guarantee will have to be paid for. There's no free lunch. 
    Genuine question, how do you mean?

    Are you referring to the taxpayer and the absence of a magic money tree? 

    Or the interest rate premium on 95% LTV mortgages paid by the borrower?
    On the basis that it's a scheme to encourage lenders to advance money.  Participating lenders pay a levy to the Treasury on business underwritten. A pooled fund to cover the defaults incurred will need to be created. The taxpayer won't be exposed to any losses. 
    That's great then isn't it. Borrowers decide if they want to pay the price.
    Normal underwriting criteria still applies. 
    It's not whether you're right or wrong that's important, but how much money you make when you're right and how much you lose when you're wrong." — George Soros
Sign In or Register to comment.