Wednesday, Jan 30, 2008
The misery caused by an over-inflated market
Daily Mail: More than 1m people could lose homes in credit crunch, warns City watchdog
"More than one million families are in danger of losing their home over the next 18 months, Britain's financial regulator warned yesterday."
Posted by becky @ 08:08 AM (726 views) Add Comment
6 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. David Smith's Sub Prime. . . said...
Nonsense!
There is no Sub Prime...
Mr. Murdoch tells me to tell you this...
2. talking rot said...
The following line is interesting: "The biggest loser is the South-West, where prices fell one per cent in a month. The average price of a UK home is now £184,469." If I recall correctly, East Anglia house prices rose the fastest during 1987 until 1991 - when they had a sudden drop. For those who live in the SW, rather then those who have bought a second home, I hope the East Anglia experience means first-homes become cheap for locals.
This is another indicator that troubled-times are ahead but house prices, on an annual basis, are still rising. I am wondering if house prices by 2009 will be lower then in 2007?
3. planning4acrash said...
Lets hope that BTL idiots loose the most.
Oh gosh, the South West is totally overvalued. You would think it was Silicon Valley with its prices, when all it sells in many communities is beach huts and beer for adolescent holiday makers.
4. alan said...
"The factors are: putting down a deposit of 10 per cent or less on a home; taking a mortgage for longer than 25 years; or borrowing more than 3.5 times the customer's annual salary.
The FSA is particularly worried about 150,000 who have all three high-risk factors. They are the most likely to have their homes repossessed, the regulator said yesterday in its annual Financial Risk Outlook".
OK - useful analysis, but why didn't somebody do something about it 3 or 4 years ago, when the situation stsrted surfacing? How come Gordo kept quiet? Was it because it added "growth"? How come the "investigative journalists" said nothing - was it because their newspapers took a lot of revenue from EAs who were busy pushing up prices and commissions?
5. jack c said...
There was a 5 minute feature on the channel 5 lunchtime news today covering this headline - it's getting more and more prominent week by week - the odds at the bookies must be shortening on a possible HPC?
6. new user 2007 said...
What is interesting is that the 150,000 who meet more than two risk criteria is based in official figures...
there are some 500,000 self-certifieds out there. I suspect at least half of those lied about their income. They would therefore on paper not be in a risk group the FSA mentions, but I bet many are WAY above the *3.5 income multiple if their real salaries are used.
This latter group probably meets all three risk factors and is not even included in the 150,000 very high risk cases accepted by the FSA.