HSBC won't port our mortgage and we can't afford to stay here. Lowest point ever.

Lucy1982_2

jimmyay wrote: »

you should sell, rent and clear down your unsecured debts, then buy in, in 5 years, lesson learnt.

This is probably a very good point, but does anyone really know where the market will be in 5 years?

Before you ask I work in property and things aren't looking good at the moment, but this time 2 years ago everything was rosy. The market can and does rise and fall every month.

Panda - For what it's worth, if you have done the right thing for you and your family you have no need to worry!! Enjoy your new house and you know the game we all play with debt, so I don't see what the problem it...

I doubt they would even give me a mortgage, assuming I could even afford to rent!!!:rotfl:

pania

Panda. I have just read through the last pages of this thread and i am shocked.

I am a mortgage advisor, yes guys even before you pounce on me, with my debt.
Many advisors i know simply will not touch people in debt whether the debt is "good" debt or "bad debt". you and only you know your financial standing, hence the reason we all have to complete a full factfind of the clients circumstances prior to giving advice.

The people here are as you say looking at your debt and deciding how DARE you want a mortgage/move home with that level of debt, without the benefit of teh full facts to go with it, seeing a figure and judging instantly which is completely unfair, biased and wrong.

If everything is affordable, and the Halifax are a lender with one of the most stringent sets of criteria in the market place at the mo so if it wasn't they would know about it, then you go girl with a clear concience and do what is right for your family.

And to the above posters...

If you wish to criticise people then i suggest you find out the full circumstances behind a persons finances before jumping in and judging, And lets hope that you never try to do what is best for your family and get the amount of unfair judgement and criticism that you have subjected panda to along the way. Some of you are very lucky (abaxas) that your comments haven't been reported.

Lucy1982_2

Go Pania!!!!

pania

Sorry, had to be said

Lucy1982_2

I understand completely. This board is for support and helpful advice. There is a big notice saying it's non judgemental!!

I think some people miss that!

Rachman_2

pania wrote: »

Many advisors i know simply will not touch people in debt whether the debt is "good" debt or "bad debt". you and only you know your financial standing, hence the reason we all have to complete a full factfind of the clients circumstances prior to giving advice.

The people here are as you say looking at your debt and deciding how DARE you want a mortgage/move home with that level of debt, without the benefit of teh full facts to go with it, seeing a figure and judging instantly which is completely unfair, biased and wrong.

If everything is affordable, and the Halifax are a lender with one of the most stringent sets of criteria in the market place at the mo so if it wasn't they would know about it, then you go girl with a clear concience and do what is right for your family.

Hello, people lie on mortgage applications - you're a mortgage advisor, you know that - it's been going on in increasing amounts in the last few years, about income, about other debts, about where deposits are coming from, you name it, it goes on. And please don't be so pious as to suggest it's not happened to you - more likely you've not asked enough or you've not found out.

As for commenting on what we see, well, that's kind of obvious - to paraphrase the great man "Say what you see", not what the OP's not written or chosen to disclose.

As for Halifax criteria being stringent - you are having a laugh. They are less lax than they used to be, but that's not the same as stringent. My own mortgage is with the Halifax (and is for plenty more than the OP was asking for), they asked me for a payslip and for me to write down my income. And they pulled a credit search - like that's going to tell everything. That was it.

Nobody's saying, how dare anyone do anything - what we are saying is that it's entirely understandable why the lender is nervous - surely as an agent of the lender, you can see why too - tell me, have you worked in a down market as a mortgage advisor or ever dealt with what happens when the bad decisions come home to roost (ever had to check your professional indemnity policy ?). It's the bank's decision, but from what the OP has said, they have a negative net worth of tens of thousands of pounds, the overall housing market is looking less than rosy and she's paying out a grand a month in unsecured debt and has sprog #2 imminent - and you think we are being insulting to her to suggest maybe she looks at a little prudence.

How would you feel if you had concerns for the OP and their position, but said nothing and then 12 months later, the thread on MSE is "I lost my job and the redundancy insurance does not kick in for 12 months, the house is worth £50K less than we paid and we owe more than its worth - how do I get out of this and spend time with my children ?".

Part of some people's issue with MSE is the blind unwavering support and the refusal to entertain a less than positive (read gung ho or ostrich mentality) approach - you are proving why - anyone who does gets shouted down .....

heathcote123

pandapaws wrote: »

:eek: Good God, I'm so pleased some of you guys A lot of people have debts that are equal to their salary - we've got a combined salary of £80k, plus self-employed income of approx another £15k. Our monthly credit commitments are about £1000 a month - we choose to overpay them, so while all the figures are big numbers, they're all relative.

Do many couple have debts equal to thier gross joint salaries :eek: ! - on top of a 90% mortgage?. Yikes.

Best of luck with it all. Of interest, How much of the 80K outstanding debts did you have when you took out the mortgage? - this is probably a factor in the banks consideration.

silvercar

Lets forget the Halifax for a minute. Assume Panda's choices were to stay where she is or to move to the new house. Remember same size mortgage, same value property. Financial gain in the new place is reduced commuting time and Panda can return to work quicker after maternity leave.

So HSBC have the same risk in the new place and the customer has less expenses and saves £8k redemption charges.

So on paper decision is "computer says no"; I would then expect the underwriters to look at the case and make a reasonable decision. As the risk to the lender is unchanged I cannot see why they still say no.

I would guess that the "computer says no" meant that the paperwork was rejected and didn't go to underwriters, but I would have thought there could have been some human intervention.

jimmyay

it's not meant to be offensive. some people are over touchy. no one is entitled to credit, its not a human right and for someone so deep in the hole to be expecting further credit or more flexible terms / higher gearing to just drop from the sky - well its getting more difficult by the day to get this credit and who can blame lenders from tightening up.

one of the recent posters said "you all know the game we play with debt". Well sadly for many people - perhaps even those who don't think they are in dire financial straights like the OP, but have realised perhaps they're not as creditworthy as they thought- after many years, the game is nearly up. They should desperately try and pay off debt now, rather than expect what amounts to ever more favourable terms for loans which are unlikely ever to be paid off to be given. That party is over , and those who have had their lighbulb moment would do well to realise this is just the first stage of adjusting to a different way of life and act accordingly, or go bust.

Don't increase your gearing - reduce it, love. that's what paying off debt is all about.

It's not "judgemental" - its just a fact.

pania

Rachman wrote: »

people lie on mortgage applications - you're a mortgage advisor, you know that - it's been going on in increasing amounts in the last few years, about income, about other debts, about where deposits are coming from, you name it, it goes on. And please don't be so pious as to suggest it's not happened to you - more likely you've not asked enough or you've not found out.

Definately not, the computer systems used by advisors and the rigorous checking by the FSA does not make it worth your while to "not ask enough" or "not find out". Even when we do self certified mortgages, as a company we still hold a copy of the clients accounts, bank statements and other documentation on file, so if we ever did have the unfortunate situation that a borrower fell into arrears, we can prove we have done the best by the client.
Lieing on applications just is not worth it from an advisors or a consumers point of view. I for one HAVE to check everything, it is insisted on by my company, to refrain would result in discipline. Some cowboy advisors out there will lie on apps for the clients benefit. It's just not worth it.

Rachman wrote:

As for commenting on what we see, well, that's kind of obvious - to paraphrase the great man "Say what you see", not what the OP's not written or chosen to disclose.

But that has been the problem here. The OP has stated very clearly that she can afford the mortgage and has a comfortable life style, despite the level of debt. People here have judged the OP and knocked her down without knowing the true facts and figures the client is working with. Saying what you see has resulted in this with extremely unfair results for panda.
She shouldn't have to defend herself at all.

Rachman wrote:

As for Halifax criteria being stringent - you are having a laugh. They are less lax than they used to be, but that's not the same as stringent. My own mortgage is with the Halifax (and is for plenty more than the OP was asking for), they asked me for a payslip and for me to write down my income. And they pulled a credit search - like that's going to tell everything. That was it.

Nope not having a laugh at all. You dealt with Halifax as a one off. I deal with them day in day out. Good underwriters bad underwriters etc. They are as a rule very stringent indeed when it comes to 90% and above mortgages. At 95% they would require proof of income (payslips, P60's certified accounts etc, bank statements, Verified ID and proof of address along with a credit check.) If it doesn't fit within their criteria they would decline it or limit the loan to value the client can have. There is no way you could get away with lying on an app. Below 75% yes they are alot more Lax, because they know if the client is telling porkies and they repossess the house, their money is safe, not so much requirement to check.

Rachman wrote:

Nobody's saying, how dare anyone do anything - what we are saying is that it's entirely understandable why the lender is nervous - surely as an agent of the lender, you can see why too -

Yes, stringent checking would be required, but that still doesn't mean the OP deserves the amount of criticism levelled at her for wanting to do the best by her family.

Rachman wrote:

tell me, have you worked in a down market as a mortgage advisor or ever dealt with what happens when the bad decisions come home to roost (ever had to check your professional indemnity policy ?).

What does that have to do with the price of eggs? are you asking me to justify myself within my position? if so won't do, sorry. In answer to the second part though, No most definately not. Applicants that I don't feel comfortable with get politely advised to go elsewhere. As said above, it's just not worth my job.

Rachman wrote:

but from what the OP has said, they have a negative net worth of tens of thousands of pounds, the overall housing market is looking less than rosy and she's paying out a grand a month in unsecured debt and has sprog #2 imminent - and you think we are being insulting to her to suggest maybe she looks at a little prudence.

And do you not think the OP would have the savvy to do that herself BEFORE making these moves?

Rachman wrote:

How would you feel if you had concerns for the OP and their position, but said nothing and then 12 months later, the thread on MSE is "I lost my job and the redundancy insurance does not kick in for 12 months, the house is worth £50K less than we paid and we owe more than its worth - how do I get out of this and spend time with my children ?".

Thats the thing. I and many many advisors WOULD say something if we had concerns, It is the FSA requirement that people in lots of debt, wishing to borrow extra to consolidate due to financial difficulty are referred to the CAB prior to a mortgage application being written.
If they choose to ignore that advice then i for one would exercise extreme caution in dealing with them. Once again though i feel you are asking me to justify my position or my work ethic and that is NOT why I posted the above.

Rachman wrote:

Part of some people's issue with MSE is the blind unwavering support and the refusal to entertain a less than positive (read gung ho or ostrich mentality) approach - you are proving why - anyone who does gets shouted down .....

Not attempting to shout anyone down at all Rachman, but as is quoted here on numerous occasions. this board is not for judgement. Several of the posts on here have been incredibly judgemental and no doubt upsetting to the OP. That is not within the spirit of the boards. Things can be worded nicely.