Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Papitogrande

  1. Most of them are funded by getting a mortgage which is larger than the purchase price of the property. This used to be quite easy. Bradford & Bingley got into so much trouble (GE Money loans aside) because their BTL arm, Mortgage Express, was very aggressive in targeting the 'next day remortgage'. Buy a house valued at £100k for cash (or bridging loan) at a pp of £65k, then remortgage for £85k - pocket £20k tax free. I personally know people who have made over £2M this way. It's now much harder because lenders have stopped doing this and the only people left in the market are sailing rather close to the wind, but it's still possible (legally) To address another point though, not all of these businesses aim to kick people out and sell it on, and many of the tenants end up having a much lower monthly outgoing. A typical case is something like this: Joe bloggs gets his right to buy in 2002, £60k house bought for £40k. A mortgage broker arranges a £50k loan so that he can charge a big fee and Joe gets a couple of grand to blow on crap (allegedly it was for home improvements). 3 years later his original (sub-prime mortgage) is at an end and the house is worth £100k. Mortgage broker comes back round and because house is now worth £100k he wangles a self-cert, sub-prime mortgage for Joe, only 9.5% but Joe pockets another £15k - cue expensive holiday, plasma TV and 2yr old mondeo. Now Joe owes £80k (more fees added) and the £850 a month only ever felt comfortable when he had all that cash in the bank, now it's gone he gets behind, repossession looms. Enter the BMV vulture in 2006, he offers to clear Joe's £80k and bung £3k to fritter away on his beloved crap, even though the house is worth £120k it makes sense, the BMV gets a £96k mortgage (pockets £10k after fees) and as his mortgage is 6%, he can charge Joe £550 pcm and still clear a few quid. This is much more affordable (especially as Joe can now get housing support). Now how much sympathy should we extend Joe in this scenario? He has been shafted I agree, but it was initially by the broker, then by the lender and then by his own lack of financial education. By the time the BMV guy comes along he looks like a hero - he will allow Joe to go back to his status circa 2002, kids aren't affected, they don't suffer the humiliation of being kicked out and he has the memories that came of free money and a slightly battered ford.
  2. Just after lunchtime on the 7th October 2011, before 4pm though.
  3. Er sorry but what do you mean by 'one of those vulture companies' Do you mean someone prepared to pay them a price that they were prepared to accept in order to save themselves from a worse fate? To answer your question though it is certainly the lower of the two prices that appears on land reg, and will be used by mouseprice, rightmove etc when they calculate an automated valuation.
  4. To give you an idea on the industry reaction, this email from mortgage introducer http://www.mortgageintroducer.com/mortgage...nnouncement.htm Apologies if this has been said before, I don't have time to read everything, but if someone has a sale going through at say £180k, can they expect a call from their solicitor to say the vendor wants a drop to £175 or they pull out?
  5. Does anyone have a Zanussi washing machine? A ZN1100. I have and the symbols have worn off the wash cycle selector, could someone let me know how many clicks (clockwise) it would be from prog. A to get to the wool cycle. PS Has it gone cold or is it just me, shall I shut the window?
  6. It may well be good to know, however it is not accurate. CCJs can't really follow someone who moves around often, doesn't pay council tax, doesn't vote, doesn't have a profession, a credit card (any form of credit really). The underclass basic, one step from a hobo. If you live like that then you've got far bigger problems that the price of houses. As for what you are suggesting regards not paying rent. Like many others, I can't see the point of the discussion. Of course anything is possible but the act amounts to theft, you are happy to receive the services but not pay the agreed costs, for no other reason than you have an almighty chip on your shoulder and you want change.
  7. I posted my last reply before I saw this, my apologies because you have supplied something to back up your claim. I don't have time to look at the site now as I am going out, however I will read it with great interest later. Thanks, I like this kind of thing.
  8. Hitler was the captain of the german team, little fella with a tache - got sexually mutilated by his mother, a dirty bugger by all accounts. You must know what I am on about. Maybe I was incorrect to have personified it in such a way but you new exactly what I meant, stop being pedantic. If they had invaded straight away we'd have been fcked - agree, totally. I don't think there is a military historian or anyone else who would disagree with that point of view, it is wholly accepted. Thanks for giving us your opinion though. I originally asked you if you had any evidence to back up the claim that the poles were almost entirely responsible for saving us in the BoB. This is not a view I have heard expressed before, is it only yours (like our inevitable defeat had the Germans invaded) or is it shared with others, backed up in any way? PS your view on Ruperts is fair enough, most of the fighting ranks of the army share that view, just like most workers think the managers are incompetent, most teachers think the board of governors are fools etc. However military history is littered with 'toffs' who were very competent, brave officers. It does not follow that upper-class automatically means shit soldier/pilot.
  9. This is an interesting take on events, I do lose you a little in the middle of your statement but I'm interested in the end bit. It seems that you are saying that during the Battle of Britain, the only positive contribution was by the polish, us brits would have been better off staying on the ground and just like chilling and sh1t like on Armstrong and Miller yer know like totally. I was aware that lots of poles and other nationalities fled to Britain and assisted in the stand against Hitler but I've never heard it suggested that they were solely responsible for defeating the luftwaffe. Do you have anything to back up your view?
  10. I don't see that it would be a problem if you wanted to get a mortgage at 50. Lenders will look more closely at affordability into retirement if the term goes beyond 65. As a matter of policy though Abbey, for instance, allow lending up to age 85 and there's a general approach in the industry that you shouldn't discriminate on age alone, it's about affordability.
  11. When you are talking about recently built properties you need to factor in the discount or incentive at the time of the original sale. Commonly it's 20 - 25% so if they 'sold' for £160k, the first buyer would get a hefty kick back meaning a net price of £128k. They have probably priced this to just cover what they paid, only losing fees, stamp etc.
  12. Hell yes, their business development managers were always coming round and pointing out that if you stuck £X in as a salary then everything would be fine as long as they had a deposit. I have been specifically asked by an underwriter to inflate someone's income so it would go through the online application and he could pick up the case (this isn't as dodgy as it may sound, ultimately the underwriter's knew of the lower income, it was done to bypass an automated system)
  13. I haven't had chance to read 16 pages of this thread but my first thought was that it was slavery. Unless I'm wrong, what is being proposed is that claimants have to do a full time job, but they won't be paid any more than JSA; they will not get what the government regard as the minimum wage. JSA is subsistence only, it will just about allow you to eat, if all you receive in return for your labour is the bare amount needed to survive, it is slavery. When people own slaves they generally feed, clothe and house them as it is in their own interest, all we are doing here is introducing a brief period where we allow the slave to handle the money and allow them to 'choose' what food/clothes etc, in addition we are allowing them their liberty, such as it is in modern Britain. On the whole, it's slavery, and it will be a hell of a slap in the face to those who currently work by choice in unskilled manual areas because they will lose their job, go on the dole, then be forced to do the same work for a third of the money.
  14. That was a 100% deal was it? Interesting and if so I stand corrected. I've never really been involved with 100%ltv but on reflection you could get 2 yrs at 3.29%, five or ten years at 3.89% back in 2002. Up to 90%LTV, so it's feasible to have been 4% with no deposit.
  15. A small point but I'm fairly sure there has never been a 100% mortgage available for 4%, I think about 5.25% is the lowest 100% that has ever been around, but I may be wrong. On the overall theme of the post, speaking as someone in the industry, it is embarrassing for one's colleagues to celebrate 'turning the corner' on the back of a few token rate cuts. They will go up again, then they will go down and this cycle will be repeated just as it has been for the past 10 years, because the cost of funding fluctuates. The only thing that matters is the trend, which has clearly been a rising one.
  16. I'm glad the OP has not been ridiculed for raising this question as there is a potentially good debate to be had. I would say that we absolutely do need banks, were they to be removed then what took their place would be far worse. People are never going to go to a situation where they don't need to borrow money. If you remove banks and (by implication) outlawed credit it would instantly become the number one black market activity. If the question is more 'should we radically curtail the banking and finance sector' then I think this is going to happen, the only question is to what extent.
  17. Don't call my mum unfit, or fit come to think of it. Not sure which is worse. In all seriousness I wouldn't sell from under her. The way I see it is I'll end up inheriting everything one day and hopefully she'll be around for quite a while yet. No matter how bad things get they will both be worth more in 20 years, although a mars bar will cost £200. The only shame for me is that she should be feeling comfortable and spanking money on her grandkids instead of watching the pennies so much.
  18. They are changing on monday, quite a few other lenders will also lower rates next week.
  19. I bought a house in July 2007, some what against my wishes, for my mum. I managed to talk 15% off the (reasonable) asking price and I was dragging it out towards the end and trying to convince my mum it was a bad idea to do this until she sold the old family home. Neadless to say she has not sold the lovely old mortgage free 3bed semi I grew up in and we've resorted to renting that out, which at least covers the mortgage I had to take out. As she was downsizing the idea would be that she has a tasy lump sum to enjoy into retirement and I have gently brought her around to the idea that the house will not sell for as much as she still believes it to be worth (based on a 2006 sale a few doors away) and would probably just about cover the cost of her new smaller home. The original idea was that she sells that place and buys the new one from me, hence I took a more expensive mortgage with no ties. I'm not looking for anyone's sympathy (this would be the last place I tried) but it's pretty unpleasant that my mum has to struggle and more so that she feels so bad about the inconveniance to me, even though I've assured her that it's ok.
  20. A couple of the big lenders are dropping rates, by a reasonable margin IMO. Halifax have lowered the 2yr fixed by 0.57% and the fees are lower too. C&G have launched lower rates and the feeling is that most lenders will follow suit. Eternal optimists are applauding 'turning the corner', although it's probably shortlived. Also very notable is how much the margin on tracker rates is dropping, usually a clear sign that lenders think the base rate will rise.
  21. Pace of house price falls slows in June House prices fell by 0.9% in June, less than half the rate of the previous month Prices are 6.3% lower than this time last year, but remain 4% higher than 2 years ago House purchase transactions remain subdued across the UK Northern Irish and Scottish activity levels stand out at each extreme Headlines June 2008 May 2008 Monthly index * Q1 '93 = 100 342.3 345.5 Monthly change* -0.9% -2.5% Annual change -6.3% -4.4% Average price £172,415 £173,583 *seasonally adjusted Commenting on the figures Fionnuala Earley, Nationwide's Chief Economist, said: “The pace of house price falls slowed significantly in June. House prices fell by 0.9% during the month, less than half of the rate of the 2.5% fall recorded in May. Prices in June are now 6.3% lower than this time last year and have fallen 7.3% from their peak last October. The price of a typical house is now £172,415. This is over £13,500 less than it would have cost at the top of the market and over £11,500 less than this time last year. However, the strength of house price growth up until last year means that prices are still 4% higher than two years ago and 9% higher than three years ago. For further information and to see this month's full report please click here Edit : to attempt to post a link http://cslb.creatormail.co.uk/sites/nation...June%202008.doc
  22. Their email about is entitled 'house price decline slows' EDIt: To add that I posted this in some haste, I didn't see anything about it on the first two pages of HPC but I apologise if it's already been posted
  23. There's no mistake, he didn't describe it to me, I have a letter from Edeus in front of me right now - it's addressed to me. I called the client up and he confirmed he'd been sent the offer, I then called Edeus up to see how it works and they said that £10,300 would be credited to the account on repayment.
  24. I received a letter this morning informing me that a BTL client of mine was to be offered £10,300 if he redeemed his mortgage within the next 2 months. Outline: Takes out a 90%LTV loan on a purchase of £115k, there is a 2 year tie-in (£5400) and the rate is BBR+ 0.49%. He completed in october '07 and they are now offering to waive the £5.5k + legal fees fee and give him £10,300 as long as he takes his business elsewhere (bit tricky as Edeus had loose lending criteria compared to anyone else and the loan is probably in neg equity) A slight whiff of desperation from the mortgage creators I think, I'm pretty sure this is unprecedented.
  25. I'm afraid mi'lady is mistaken, I am not stalking you at all. I propose nothing less than honourable marriage and a future which involves me moving to the west indies. If that doesn't appeal I would consider a position as gardener/pool side orniment.
  • 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.