never rains but always pours - been turned down

Gorgeous_George

I would not rely on a FREE IFA. They need to be paid by somebody and they may as well be honest about where their funding comes from.

It really is about time people looked at lifetime deals for lifetime borrowing. I moved to a BR+0.74% lifetime, offset tracker years ago. Now, with an LTV of about 25%, I still won't be looking for a 'better' 2 or 5 year fix.

GG

Pez2

homer_j wrote: »

If you have no sub prime issues then LTV shouldn't be an issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-prime

"Prime borrowers have a credit score above 620 (credit scores are between 350 and 850 with a median in the U.S. of 678 and a mean of 723), a debt-to-income ratio (DTI) no greater than 75% (meaning that no more than 75% of net income pays for housing and other debt), and a combined loan to value ratio of 90%, meaning that the borrower is paying a 10% downpayment. Any borrower seeking a loan with less than those criteria is a subprime borrower by Fannie Mae standards."

Walter_J

DanBarrett wrote: »

Not im my area yet, pal.

I think this is what they call the 'denial' phase.

DanBarrett wrote: »

err....but lenders are still doing 125% mortgages. Including Northern Rock and BM Soultions (HBOS)

err.... but lenders have never done 125% mortgages - it's an impossibility. A mortgage is a charge taken over a property to secure a loan. What these lenders have offered is a 95% mortgage plus an unsecured loan. They may still be offering them but I rather suspect very few people will get accepted.

It is inevitable that as more and more people try to find a new mortgage deal thatl the LTV will become a bigger issue. Lenders will find their security being eroded or even non-existant and so will charge higher rates of interest - particularly for the portion of the loan that is unsecured.

Many people will find it impossible to find a new deal and so will be forced to pay their original lenders' standard variable rate.

I wouldn't want to have a big mortgage over the next few years!

DanBarrett

Walter_J wrote: »

They may still be offering them but I rather suspect very few people will get accepted.

Of course they are still offering them, they are big business. A couple I know got accept for about 110% LTV only last week.


You seem to have your crystal ball out again by stating that prices will fall 20%, and I noticed you even stated 40% on another thread. Even the expert predictions from Halifax and Nationwide have stated 0% for 2008.

dunstonh

I think focusing on the IFA is not the issue. Apart from the fact that IFAs are investment advisers and those IFAs also doing mortgages are doing it as a secondary role. The IFA being used isnt free. Union, trade association or employer provided IFAs provided "free" get paid by the product provider. Exactly the same as going commission basis with any adviser.

The OP is already on a sub prime mortgage. There is no way 9.09% is prime. So there has to be a history here that we are not being told. A rate of 8.08% suggests a more sympathetic lending decision but only a little and still tells us that a sub prime lender is being used.

Perhaps the OP would like to tell us why a subprime lender was used in originally as the problems are likely to be linked to that.

Walter_J

DanBarrett wrote: »

You seem to have your crystal ball out again by stating that prices will fall 20%, and I noticed you even stated 40% on another thread. Even the expert predictions from Halifax and Nationwide have stated 0% for 2008.

Well, they would say that, wouldn't they? They have a vested interest in talking up the housing market! They are moneylenders - therefore they are not to be trusted!

My credentials as an 'expert' come from having called the top of the market in 1989 when I sold to rent. That flat sold again at a price 40% lower in 1994.

The house price bubble has grown much bigger this time, and so the crash will be bigger too. My prediction of 40% falls over 5 years is probably on the optimistic side.

Murtle

chickster wrote: »

we are coming up for re-mortgaging, other halfs work has a free inderpendant financle advisor so he is looking

well he found one good deal to but they turned us down due to not meeting there criteria, other half got told any credit problems?? we said no, requested credit report anyway nothing on there!!

It would be useful to know what criteria you haven't met to see why they are offering you these deals around the 6% would be more realistic upto 7% but 8-9& is high.

Please discuss the fall in house prices on another thread!

donkeyman18

homer_j wrote: »

If you have no sub prime issues then LTV shouldn't be an issue.

Utter !!!!!!!!

silvercar

Its one thing when newbies come along and claim to know that house prices are going to fall. A step too far when they know, better than mortgage brokers working in this field day in and day out, exactly what sort of mortgage people can get.

homer_j_3

Walter_J wrote: »

That attitude is like SO last year!

House prices are FALLING now, you numpty!

Of course LTV is going to be an issue - who wants to lend 90% of the value of a house which is going to fall in value by 20% in the next year or so?

No sub prime issues?

High LTV is a sub prime issue!

I ain't coming to you for a mortgage, mate!

Im a numpty am I? Are you a mindless idiot? Does this conclude good open debate and discussion? No it doesn't so I would appreciate a bit of respect and ask that if you disagree with me, you look to discuss it in a way that doesn't include calling me and making assumptions when you do not even know me.

Please re-read what I said and understand that I was answering in the capacity of a mortgage adviser and my knowledge of the lenders will be somewhat more considerable than yours. More specifically, I was commenting on the comments that LTV would affect the rates being offered by lenders to prime clients.

My point to the OP is that if you went to a prime lender, I would generally expect that my client would attract the exact same rate normally whether you have a 20% deposit or 5/10% to put down.

You will get the odd lender like nationwide who will price differently at certain LTV in absence of a HLC and you will get some lenders who at 75% may price differently due to the lowered risk. However, I would say for there to be anything over a 1% differential to be odd - unless you are going to the 100%/self cert/100+% products.

So, you come on here claiming that we are going to say that house prices will drop by 20% this year? Where is your evidence of this?

Where is your evidence that a 20% deposit will generally mean better rates than a 5% deposit on prime status product?

Walter J, I would not want to deal with you in arranging a mortgage as I like to help people who are able to listen and discuss their concerns in an adult manner.

There is a separate board to discuss house prices and I feel that you should direct your rants of this to there. I also would suggest HousePriceCrash website but I am guessing you are already familiar with that anyway.

To those who have less that 20 posts and have called my opinion into question, I will take you more seriously when you are able to show that you are a member of this forum for the purpose of positive contribution.