Best option finically

Sarah1Mitty2

sim2335 said:

 what’s my best options

I can get about 100k from bank to borrow I’m first time buyer.

I have about 16k saved and can borrow 15k from my mum if needed for house total 30k

1. Still keep saving but then when will I be able to afford my own property I’m already 35 living with others stills,  as prices will keep going up.

1. Do buy to let, and rent it out, then lose first time buyer benefits

    3. Gets leasehold flat and move in, really want freehold

What’s finically best option for me?

Have you decided what you will do?

Sarah1Mitty2

Schwarzwald said:

sim2335 said:

    3. Gets leasehold flat and move in, really want freehold

I pretty much live by the principle that "progress is more important than perfection", sure a free hold is always better than a leasehold, so is a 3 bedroom over a 2 bedroom, a detached than a terrace, but if all you can afford right now / foreseeable future is a nice and decent leasehold flat then GO AHEAD and make it a reality rather than dreaming of this perfect property for the next years and staying put and staying stuck.

the detached freehold house might come one day, but for now, make a move if sensible

Diving into mortgage debt just now wouldn`t be progress, there is nothing more stuck than negative equity.

MobileSaver

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Your second point misses the point that I made, ... property is not a safe asset class for parking cash

No, you are the one missing the point and it's the same mistake the HPC crowd have been making for almost 20 years...For the OP and most people here, a property is not an asset class, it's their home! Until you understand this fundamental truth you will keep making the same mistake over and over again.

they were advised that values would likely drop so they should wait

Wait for how long? How long should people remain in a less-than-ideal home life when they could just get on with living their own life and independence? A year, five years, fourteen years perhaps and then realise what a monumental mistake they've made?

The OP's problem is exactly why choosing to wait is such a bad idea; currently house prices are continuing to rise and yet still their lender has dramatically changed the lending criteria making it much harder if not impossible for the OP to buy.

History tells us quite plainly that when prices are falling it's harder than ever to buy your own home.

But you have just told us that prices are still going up, but the OP`s bank have more than halved the amount they are willing to lend, how do you think that fits with your theory?

Er, because the two are not mutually exclusive?!?!

Just because it's harder to buy when prices are falling doesn't mean it can't be hard to buy when prices are rising. I'm not privy to the OP's personal financial situation or Halifax's particular lending criteria or any changes either have made in the last six months so can't give you a more detailed answer than that.

In the OP's case waiting has proven to be disastrous and as the OP themselves said a few days ago, "I should have bought before".

But if they bought before with a 110k mortgage plus 30k savings and borrowings and then the banks turned round and said "Sorry, everyone who could borrow 110k can now only borrow 50k" you must see how the OP loses money on their purchase in that scenario?

Um, no, you'll have to explain that please?

If the OP bought in May with a mortgage with a five-year fixed rate deal like most people, and today the Halifax changes its lending criteria, how do they "lose money on their purchase in that scenario"? I don't follow that at all.

New borrowers can borrow less for the same house, smart cash money sees the trend and also offers less than the OP paid..

The OP only bought in May and is planning on staying there at least 5 years so no-one is offering anything for their house right now, so they haven't lost any money on their purchase - what a silly thing for you to say.

The reality of course is that if they sell in five years they will probably sell for more than they paid so using your strange logic that must mean that they've actually made a profit already - well done OP, perhaps celebrate with a bottle of bubbly tonight?

No, that isn`t how the market works, similar houses that sell nearby set the value not someone trying to pretend that their purchase price isn`t exposed to market fluctuations because that isn`t a nice or comfortable idea.

Yes that is how the market works and five years from now "similar houses that sell nearby" will probably also be higher than they are now.

A short while ago, contrary to all the publicly available evidence out there, you claimed house prices have dropped by 29% over the last year so I'm not sure many people have much confidence in your understanding of how the market works...

No, valuations are done using recent sales, doesn`t matter if the OP is selling or not. On the other thread you seemed confused by base rates V mortgage rates, base rates are only really relevant once they translate into higher mortgage rates and then into prices, that can take many months to show up in the stats. The stats are showing transactions from before the mini-budget and you also have to consider that sales are falling, the point I`m making is that unless you sold and banked the money BEFORE the changes started to hit the mortgage market the money isn`t going to be there any more as banks will be telling new borrowers to offer lower than previously. It should all become clear as more up to date statistics become available.

Keep digging that hole.

Both the BoE base rate and mortgage rates started rising in December 2021, over a year ago. Are you seriously claiming house price changes from then have still not appeared in the official stats and so that is why you are unable to prove your ridiculous claim that 29% paper gains have vanished already?

Sarah1Mitty2

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Your second point misses the point that I made, ... property is not a safe asset class for parking cash

No, you are the one missing the point and it's the same mistake the HPC crowd have been making for almost 20 years...For the OP and most people here, a property is not an asset class, it's their home! Until you understand this fundamental truth you will keep making the same mistake over and over again.

they were advised that values would likely drop so they should wait

Wait for how long? How long should people remain in a less-than-ideal home life when they could just get on with living their own life and independence? A year, five years, fourteen years perhaps and then realise what a monumental mistake they've made?

The OP's problem is exactly why choosing to wait is such a bad idea; currently house prices are continuing to rise and yet still their lender has dramatically changed the lending criteria making it much harder if not impossible for the OP to buy.

History tells us quite plainly that when prices are falling it's harder than ever to buy your own home.

But you have just told us that prices are still going up, but the OP`s bank have more than halved the amount they are willing to lend, how do you think that fits with your theory?

Er, because the two are not mutually exclusive?!?!

Just because it's harder to buy when prices are falling doesn't mean it can't be hard to buy when prices are rising. I'm not privy to the OP's personal financial situation or Halifax's particular lending criteria or any changes either have made in the last six months so can't give you a more detailed answer than that.

In the OP's case waiting has proven to be disastrous and as the OP themselves said a few days ago, "I should have bought before".

But if they bought before with a 110k mortgage plus 30k savings and borrowings and then the banks turned round and said "Sorry, everyone who could borrow 110k can now only borrow 50k" you must see how the OP loses money on their purchase in that scenario?

Um, no, you'll have to explain that please?

If the OP bought in May with a mortgage with a five-year fixed rate deal like most people, and today the Halifax changes its lending criteria, how do they "lose money on their purchase in that scenario"? I don't follow that at all.

New borrowers can borrow less for the same house, smart cash money sees the trend and also offers less than the OP paid..

The OP only bought in May and is planning on staying there at least 5 years so no-one is offering anything for their house right now, so they haven't lost any money on their purchase - what a silly thing for you to say.

The reality of course is that if they sell in five years they will probably sell for more than they paid so using your strange logic that must mean that they've actually made a profit already - well done OP, perhaps celebrate with a bottle of bubbly tonight?

No, that isn`t how the market works, similar houses that sell nearby set the value not someone trying to pretend that their purchase price isn`t exposed to market fluctuations because that isn`t a nice or comfortable idea.

Yes that is how the market works and five years from now "similar houses that sell nearby" will probably also be higher than they are now.

A short while ago, contrary to all the publicly available evidence out there, you claimed house prices have dropped by 29% over the last year so I'm not sure many people have much confidence in your understanding of how the market works...

No, valuations are done using recent sales, doesn`t matter if the OP is selling or not. On the other thread you seemed confused by base rates V mortgage rates, base rates are only really relevant once they translate into higher mortgage rates and then into prices, that can take many months to show up in the stats. The stats are showing transactions from before the mini-budget and you also have to consider that sales are falling, the point I`m making is that unless you sold and banked the money BEFORE the changes started to hit the mortgage market the money isn`t going to be there any more as banks will be telling new borrowers to offer lower than previously. It should all become clear as more up to date statistics become available.

Keep digging that hole.

Both the BoE base rate and mortgage rates started rising in December 2021, over a year ago. Are you seriously claiming house price changes from then have still not appeared in the official stats and so that is why you are unable to prove your ridiculous claim that 29% paper gains have vanished already?

The serious rises started after the mini-budget, that was when the public started to be aware that the bond market is much more powerful than the UK government who until recently appeared to have been able to keep mortgage payments down, it is an illusion though and can change very quickly as we are now seeing. I know you don`t want people to be able to afford property but lets see how the news from Japan affects things before we get too far ahead of ourselves in cheerleading un-affordable housing.

mi-key

Lenders advertising today they started to drop prices on fixed term mortgages....

MobileSaver

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Your second point misses the point that I made, ... property is not a safe asset class for parking cash

No, you are the one missing the point and it's the same mistake the HPC crowd have been making for almost 20 years...For the OP and most people here, a property is not an asset class, it's their home! Until you understand this fundamental truth you will keep making the same mistake over and over again.

they were advised that values would likely drop so they should wait

Wait for how long? How long should people remain in a less-than-ideal home life when they could just get on with living their own life and independence? A year, five years, fourteen years perhaps and then realise what a monumental mistake they've made?

The OP's problem is exactly why choosing to wait is such a bad idea; currently house prices are continuing to rise and yet still their lender has dramatically changed the lending criteria making it much harder if not impossible for the OP to buy.

History tells us quite plainly that when prices are falling it's harder than ever to buy your own home.

But you have just told us that prices are still going up, but the OP`s bank have more than halved the amount they are willing to lend, how do you think that fits with your theory?

Er, because the two are not mutually exclusive?!?!

Just because it's harder to buy when prices are falling doesn't mean it can't be hard to buy when prices are rising. I'm not privy to the OP's personal financial situation or Halifax's particular lending criteria or any changes either have made in the last six months so can't give you a more detailed answer than that.

In the OP's case waiting has proven to be disastrous and as the OP themselves said a few days ago, "I should have bought before".

But if they bought before with a 110k mortgage plus 30k savings and borrowings and then the banks turned round and said "Sorry, everyone who could borrow 110k can now only borrow 50k" you must see how the OP loses money on their purchase in that scenario?

Um, no, you'll have to explain that please?

If the OP bought in May with a mortgage with a five-year fixed rate deal like most people, and today the Halifax changes its lending criteria, how do they "lose money on their purchase in that scenario"? I don't follow that at all.

New borrowers can borrow less for the same house, smart cash money sees the trend and also offers less than the OP paid..

The OP only bought in May and is planning on staying there at least 5 years so no-one is offering anything for their house right now, so they haven't lost any money on their purchase - what a silly thing for you to say.

The reality of course is that if they sell in five years they will probably sell for more than they paid so using your strange logic that must mean that they've actually made a profit already - well done OP, perhaps celebrate with a bottle of bubbly tonight?

No, that isn`t how the market works, similar houses that sell nearby set the value not someone trying to pretend that their purchase price isn`t exposed to market fluctuations because that isn`t a nice or comfortable idea.

Yes that is how the market works and five years from now "similar houses that sell nearby" will probably also be higher than they are now.

A short while ago, contrary to all the publicly available evidence out there, you claimed house prices have dropped by 29% over the last year so I'm not sure many people have much confidence in your understanding of how the market works...

No, valuations are done using recent sales, doesn`t matter if the OP is selling or not. On the other thread you seemed confused by base rates V mortgage rates, base rates are only really relevant once they translate into higher mortgage rates and then into prices, that can take many months to show up in the stats. The stats are showing transactions from before the mini-budget and you also have to consider that sales are falling, the point I`m making is that unless you sold and banked the money BEFORE the changes started to hit the mortgage market the money isn`t going to be there any more as banks will be telling new borrowers to offer lower than previously. It should all become clear as more up to date statistics become available.

Keep digging that hole.

Both the BoE base rate and mortgage rates started rising in December 2021, over a year ago. Are you seriously claiming house price changes from then have still not appeared in the official stats and so that is why you are unable to prove your ridiculous claim that 29% paper gains have vanished already?

The serious rises started after the mini-budget,

Right, I see, so now you have realised how inaccurate your initial claim was you want to move the goalposts. Originally you claimed "paper gains vanished as soon as rates started going up" but now you're changing this to "paper gains vanished as soon as serious rises started after the mini-budget"?

So presumably when the latest house price statistics are released in January we'll see a 29% drop in house prices will we?

Sarah1Mitty2

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Your second point misses the point that I made, ... property is not a safe asset class for parking cash

No, you are the one missing the point and it's the same mistake the HPC crowd have been making for almost 20 years...For the OP and most people here, a property is not an asset class, it's their home! Until you understand this fundamental truth you will keep making the same mistake over and over again.

they were advised that values would likely drop so they should wait

Wait for how long? How long should people remain in a less-than-ideal home life when they could just get on with living their own life and independence? A year, five years, fourteen years perhaps and then realise what a monumental mistake they've made?

The OP's problem is exactly why choosing to wait is such a bad idea; currently house prices are continuing to rise and yet still their lender has dramatically changed the lending criteria making it much harder if not impossible for the OP to buy.

History tells us quite plainly that when prices are falling it's harder than ever to buy your own home.

But you have just told us that prices are still going up, but the OP`s bank have more than halved the amount they are willing to lend, how do you think that fits with your theory?

Er, because the two are not mutually exclusive?!?!

Just because it's harder to buy when prices are falling doesn't mean it can't be hard to buy when prices are rising. I'm not privy to the OP's personal financial situation or Halifax's particular lending criteria or any changes either have made in the last six months so can't give you a more detailed answer than that.

In the OP's case waiting has proven to be disastrous and as the OP themselves said a few days ago, "I should have bought before".

But if they bought before with a 110k mortgage plus 30k savings and borrowings and then the banks turned round and said "Sorry, everyone who could borrow 110k can now only borrow 50k" you must see how the OP loses money on their purchase in that scenario?

Um, no, you'll have to explain that please?

If the OP bought in May with a mortgage with a five-year fixed rate deal like most people, and today the Halifax changes its lending criteria, how do they "lose money on their purchase in that scenario"? I don't follow that at all.

New borrowers can borrow less for the same house, smart cash money sees the trend and also offers less than the OP paid..

The OP only bought in May and is planning on staying there at least 5 years so no-one is offering anything for their house right now, so they haven't lost any money on their purchase - what a silly thing for you to say.

The reality of course is that if they sell in five years they will probably sell for more than they paid so using your strange logic that must mean that they've actually made a profit already - well done OP, perhaps celebrate with a bottle of bubbly tonight?

No, that isn`t how the market works, similar houses that sell nearby set the value not someone trying to pretend that their purchase price isn`t exposed to market fluctuations because that isn`t a nice or comfortable idea.

Yes that is how the market works and five years from now "similar houses that sell nearby" will probably also be higher than they are now.

A short while ago, contrary to all the publicly available evidence out there, you claimed house prices have dropped by 29% over the last year so I'm not sure many people have much confidence in your understanding of how the market works...

No, valuations are done using recent sales, doesn`t matter if the OP is selling or not. On the other thread you seemed confused by base rates V mortgage rates, base rates are only really relevant once they translate into higher mortgage rates and then into prices, that can take many months to show up in the stats. The stats are showing transactions from before the mini-budget and you also have to consider that sales are falling, the point I`m making is that unless you sold and banked the money BEFORE the changes started to hit the mortgage market the money isn`t going to be there any more as banks will be telling new borrowers to offer lower than previously. It should all become clear as more up to date statistics become available.

Keep digging that hole.

Both the BoE base rate and mortgage rates started rising in December 2021, over a year ago. Are you seriously claiming house price changes from then have still not appeared in the official stats and so that is why you are unable to prove your ridiculous claim that 29% paper gains have vanished already?

The serious rises started after the mini-budget,

Right, I see, so now you have realised how inaccurate your initial claim was you want to move the goalposts. Originally you claimed "paper gains vanished as soon as rates started going up" but now you're changing this to "paper gains vanished as soon as serious rises started after the mini-budget"?

So presumably when the latest house price statistics are released in January we'll see a 29% drop in house prices will we?

The serious wake up for the public regarding mortgage rates came after the mini-budget, but why do you care, are you trying to sell a house?

MobileSaver

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

MobileSaver said:

Sarah1Mitty2 said:

Your second point misses the point that I made, ... property is not a safe asset class for parking cash

No, you are the one missing the point and it's the same mistake the HPC crowd have been making for almost 20 years...For the OP and most people here, a property is not an asset class, it's their home! Until you understand this fundamental truth you will keep making the same mistake over and over again.

they were advised that values would likely drop so they should wait

Wait for how long? How long should people remain in a less-than-ideal home life when they could just get on with living their own life and independence? A year, five years, fourteen years perhaps and then realise what a monumental mistake they've made?

The OP's problem is exactly why choosing to wait is such a bad idea; currently house prices are continuing to rise and yet still their lender has dramatically changed the lending criteria making it much harder if not impossible for the OP to buy.

History tells us quite plainly that when prices are falling it's harder than ever to buy your own home.

But you have just told us that prices are still going up, but the OP`s bank have more than halved the amount they are willing to lend, how do you think that fits with your theory?

Er, because the two are not mutually exclusive?!?!

Just because it's harder to buy when prices are falling doesn't mean it can't be hard to buy when prices are rising. I'm not privy to the OP's personal financial situation or Halifax's particular lending criteria or any changes either have made in the last six months so can't give you a more detailed answer than that.

In the OP's case waiting has proven to be disastrous and as the OP themselves said a few days ago, "I should have bought before".

But if they bought before with a 110k mortgage plus 30k savings and borrowings and then the banks turned round and said "Sorry, everyone who could borrow 110k can now only borrow 50k" you must see how the OP loses money on their purchase in that scenario?

Um, no, you'll have to explain that please?

If the OP bought in May with a mortgage with a five-year fixed rate deal like most people, and today the Halifax changes its lending criteria, how do they "lose money on their purchase in that scenario"? I don't follow that at all.

New borrowers can borrow less for the same house, smart cash money sees the trend and also offers less than the OP paid..

The OP only bought in May and is planning on staying there at least 5 years so no-one is offering anything for their house right now, so they haven't lost any money on their purchase - what a silly thing for you to say.

The reality of course is that if they sell in five years they will probably sell for more than they paid so using your strange logic that must mean that they've actually made a profit already - well done OP, perhaps celebrate with a bottle of bubbly tonight?

No, that isn`t how the market works, similar houses that sell nearby set the value not someone trying to pretend that their purchase price isn`t exposed to market fluctuations because that isn`t a nice or comfortable idea.

Yes that is how the market works and five years from now "similar houses that sell nearby" will probably also be higher than they are now.

A short while ago, contrary to all the publicly available evidence out there, you claimed house prices have dropped by 29% over the last year so I'm not sure many people have much confidence in your understanding of how the market works...

No, valuations are done using recent sales, doesn`t matter if the OP is selling or not. On the other thread you seemed confused by base rates V mortgage rates, base rates are only really relevant once they translate into higher mortgage rates and then into prices, that can take many months to show up in the stats. The stats are showing transactions from before the mini-budget and you also have to consider that sales are falling, the point I`m making is that unless you sold and banked the money BEFORE the changes started to hit the mortgage market the money isn`t going to be there any more as banks will be telling new borrowers to offer lower than previously. It should all become clear as more up to date statistics become available.

Keep digging that hole.

Both the BoE base rate and mortgage rates started rising in December 2021, over a year ago. Are you seriously claiming house price changes from then have still not appeared in the official stats and so that is why you are unable to prove your ridiculous claim that 29% paper gains have vanished already?

The serious rises started after the mini-budget,

Right, I see, so now you have realised how inaccurate your initial claim was you want to move the goalposts. Originally you claimed "paper gains vanished as soon as rates started going up" but now you're changing this to "paper gains vanished as soon as serious rises started after the mini-budget"?

So presumably when the latest house price statistics are released in January we'll see a 29% drop in house prices will we?

The serious wake up for the public regarding mortgage rates came after the mini-budget, but why do you care, are you trying to sell a house?

No, like most homeowners I'm perfectly happy in my own home with no need or plans to sell in the foreseeable future.

You didn't answer my question, are you still claiming the last five year's 29% paper gains have now vanished or do you need to move the goalposts on that claim too?

sim2335

I did put down offer on flat 125k, but withdraw it

The reason I withdraw is lots of steps, didn’t want to keep climbing up and down and one fall is too dangerous.

Also afterwards I was like I will only live their a few days.

I know as first time buyer I’ve been advised against buy to rent, but doesn’t a lettings estate agent do all the hard work for you 

What do I actually want to do, is either keep saving until I find someone then we move in together or buy a house now or really nice flat but can’t afford either or do buy to rent if I’m gona make profit why not.

_Penny_Dreadful

sim2335 said:

I did put down offer on flat 125k, but withdraw it

The reason I withdraw is lots of steps, didn’t want to keep climbing up and down and one fall is too dangerous.

Also afterwards I was like I will only live their a few days.

I know as first time buyer I’ve been advised against buy to rent, but doesn’t a lettings estate agent do all the hard work for you 

What do I actually want to do, is either keep saving until I find someone then we move in together or buy a house now or really nice flat but can’t afford either or do buy to rent if I’m gona make profit why not.

Being brutally honest I don’t think you can afford to be a landlord. Many BTL lenders require you to already own your own home and/or have minimum income of £25,000 a year and you have neither. Even if you somehow managed to get a BTL mortgage the mortgage is just one of the many expenses you’ll face as a landlord. 

In my experience as a landlord, letting agents are fairly useless and certainly don’t do all the hard work for you, sometimes they make the work even harder for you.  Plus the letting agency’s fee will cut into your margin so I’d be interested to see your sums where you’d actually be making a profit as a reasonably highly geared landlord using a letting agent. 

If your goal is to move out of home, and at the age of 35 I can understand why you would want to, purchase a property to let is not going to help you achieve that goal. You need to be realistic and as much as you don’t want to buy a leasehold property to live in it might be the most realistic option with your budget. How many steps is too many?