Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


New Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 57percent

  1. Where's the endgame? I expected something to give by now. Inflation, rising gilt yields and/or collapsing currency. The currency is down, but far from collapsed. Can they keep doing whatever they want? The MPC is meant to be 9(?) individuals voting each month, independent of the govt, so how can Carney make a long term rates promise? Why would a central bank block themselves in like that. If inflation took off, they'd have no response. Can gilt yields rise? At what point is there so much held by the BoE and the rest by banks as a regulatory burden that the market completely disappears? .... I'm thinking about buying!
  2. They're demolishing a lot of the old estates in Fulham / West Ken (?). Although there should be provisions for social tenants, I can't much wrong with replacing these ugly, cheap, outdated estates with something nicer.
  3. I haven't looked into it much, but are Wonga that bad? The APRs stated are a bit unfair for comparison. If you're lending £100 for a month, the admin's probably £30 (?), the default risk another £20 (?), so you'd want £150 in a month, before interest and profit. That would be APR of 1297% (I think). How do credit unions work? They said on the radio they're limited to 26% APR. Fine if you're lending 1000s for 1 year plus, but they must lose money on small, short term lending?
  4. Made me smile. Bloke on the radio was saying their pensions are very aggressively invested. Shorts, hedonistic stuff etc.
  5. Does anyone know how much of the 0.6% has come from imputed rent rises? (I can't see it in the spreadsheet).
  6. That's just part one, on new builds. Not sure if available with 80% deposit, but in theory, you could pay all the mortgage off early. Part two is not a govt loan. You still pay for the whole 95% mortgage from the start, but the rates should be lower and availability higher as the govt insure 20% of it.
  7. Investment in companies driven by low interest rates and money printing rather than actual growth!
  8. I'm inclined to agree. But then Moneyweek have been wrong so often, maybe this will finally be the crash?
  9. Retail banks offset risk all the time. Counterparty, interest rate etc, etc.
  10. If the bank was risk adverse, but had borrowers at 95LTV, they would charge the 6%, but then pay 2.5% of that to offset the risk. If the govt now charge 1% instead of 2.5% to offset the risk, then they *could* charge the borrower 4.5% and end up with the same profit and the same risk profile.
  11. They've still missed out the interesting bit: What will it cost the banks? If currently the banks are offering 95LTV @ 6% and 75LTV @ 3.5%, the implied difference in risk would be 2.5%/year of the whole loan. They could go out now and hedge this risk ... at a cost of 2.5%/year. The government are effectively covering this extra 2.5% risk, but what will they be charging the bank? This will be passed on to borrower. If they charge 2.5% (or above) the whole thing is pointless. My bet is less than 1%. At 1%, the mortgage is still 4.5%.
  12. If your mortgage goes from 6.5% to 3.5%, then the need should be less?
  13. As I see it, it will nearly all go to remortgaging. Those on high LTV will be moved as quick as possible to H2B. Win-win for the 'owner' and the bank. Big loss for the taxpayer. Slight loss for HPC as there will be less people needing to sell. Has anyone asked Gidiot how this helps with supply (not that I believe supply is an issue either). Have the opposition mentioned this? It's more of a Labour type policy. Madness. Any way to complain?
  14. But they're not the same scheme. Under phase 1, you're only paying interest on 75% of the loan (5% deposit, 20% interest free loan from govt). Under the second phase, you're still paying 95%, but 20% is guaranteed by the govt at a cost (still undefined). The rates will be lower, but not as low as phase 1 and all of the loan.
  15. Still no mention of the cost to the banks. I suspect it will be very cheap.
  16. Although I'm concerned about the market generally, I'm still not convinced this is anything but a token gesture. It's a guarantee of part of the mortgage (5% buyer, 20% govt, 75% bank). What would that product currently cost the bank? 10%? In which case this is £1.2bn of free products for the banks. We don't know what the charge will be, but at least part of that £1.2bn. It's nothing to do with FTB, or even buyers. Much like FLS/FFL, it's designed to bring down the mortgage costs for those with high LTV. It will kill the housing market as anyone on the fringes who might have to sell, probably won't have to now. It might support prices, but just a small addition to the massive QE, ZIRP and FLS. It's got absolutely nothing to do with building more houses.
  17. The powers that be had a real chance to even things out a bit. It wouldn't have been pretty, but we'd be through it now and mostly the right people would have felt the pain. They chose the opposite.
  18. Why can't they build another runway in the space they've got at Heathrow? Why are their proposals so complex and why on earth would it take 16 years!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23337754
  19. It doesn't make sense anyway. It's suppose to be a nine man vote based on up-to-date information. How can Carney speak for all nine in one or two years time?
  20. I don't think they're deliberately helping the banks or rich people. They're chasing growth as it's the only answer they can see. For growth they need debt and for debt they need banks and they need people to be confident enough to invest* * buy an overpriced home.
  21. Don't be silly. They'll probably buy all the existing mortgage debt from the banks. I find it amazing that a government and central bank would stop at nothing to keep some people rich and many poor.
  22. I dread to think what they'll come up with. But surely they have to continue buying gilts too. Otherwise who else would buy them?
  23. Would we expect him to vote for more QE on vote 1? Would look even worse if he voted for and everyone outvoted him from the start. They'll print.
  24. I was of the impression very few died after the initial event and wildlife has thrived in the area.
  25. I think the imputed rents within the GDP calculations are now unaffordable. Actual rents, including most of London are still quite affordable. I expect the benefit limits to start to reduce rents in London.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.