wild card

Normaly by this time I am watching the news reveiw on Sky Active but tonight its not on.

I will let you know what I find. They also did 100% mortgages.

Up to 2003 when Accord opened its doors to the intermediary market YBS did not take revolving credit commitments into account for affordability. There is every likelyhood that if a broker was involved these commitments would have been used to work out affordability as that would have been the norm. However YBS did not count them. After Accord was started YBS did tighten up on things. It is doubtful that I could find criteria from so long ago but I will have a wee look for you next week. I have no numbers for the amount of RTB that YBS did. All I can tell you is that before 2003 over 50% of RTB business in my office would have gone to YBS. Soon after Accord opened YBS stopped paying proc fees to brokers as all business went through Accord. Accord did not do RTB purchases but they were happy to remortgage RTB. From 2003 until 2006 Accord mortgages were trying to gain market share and the rates offered to self cert and adverse customers were very competitive. During these times there would have been very little difference in the rates and fees offered by some of the adverse lenders as there was from the high street lenders. I will google about for figures concerning how much business Accord did - all I can say is that for a few years they would have been one of the most used from my office where people didn’t fit into the high street lenders criteria. I would think that most brokers would have used them as they did regular mortgages too, so were not recognised as an adverse only lender.

We are therefore very surprised by Moody's action to YBS. We have one of the strongest capital positions in the industry, we have no exposure to some of the riskier areas of the mortgage market, such as commercial, buy-to-let and unsecured lending and we have never purchased mortgage books from third party lenders. In addition the average loan to value of the Society's mortgage book is just 50% and our mortgage arrears levels are below the industry average. This doesn't sound right to me as YBS own Accord Mortgages who concentrated on self cert and adverse mortgages. YBS were also one of the main Right to Buy lenders. YBS did not take credit card balances into account when working out affordability for mortgages. http://www.ybs.co.uk/your_society/about_yb...bsidiaries.html

My sister in law has lived and worked in Spain for just over 12 years now. She was the manager of one of the largest estate agents untill 2007 when the company closed. She now deals with private clients looking for bargains. The bargains consist of the repo lists given to her by the banks she had previously delt with. Tha banks are not keeping repossessed properties as assets, they want rid of them. They just dont want the selling prices to become public knowledge. Last month I considered buying one of the apartments on the list as it was 25000 euros. Previously it had been sold at over 120000 euros. Even tho the purchase would have been strictly for personal use I have decided to wait just a wee bit longer. If the £ was stronger I might be more tempted to jump in.

GE Money under their First National mortgage lender name have to take some of the responsibility for this. They lent 10 times income for adverse customers and would lend more if you were paying interest only.

Bombardier 1000 from Belfast FG Wilson 97

Maybe we should all squat in these empty properties while waiting to buy?

I think it would probably be wise to stay away from the main forum on NI subjects - I really do try but they make me mad. :angry:

Where are all the tenants going to come from for these new BTL's ? Sincerely interested.

Obviously first thoughts go to the families of the dead and wounded. Thought I would post as I have noticed that the comments on the main board are somewhat less measured than the comments on the NI board. Last night I considered posting on the main board but as my thoughts are more about the families grieving and the hope that we all had for our wee country slowly weakening than the politics involved, thought my post would be considered irrelevant. I am hopeful that this difference in attitude is a good sign for this country. The NI board is about sympathy and disgust for lives taken and not the politics of it all. I think for today that is enough.

Brown will get so angry with the banks that he'll give them billions of pounds as a strict punishment.

Bankrupt people use this card a lot. http://www.mycashplus.co.uk/landing/...FQ6vQwodGw-FcA You can get wages & benifits paid onto it. Cash can be taken put and put in at any post office. Accepted at all Mastercard points. State benefits can be paid by cheque cashable with proof of ID in a post office. They may want a reason to pay by cheque but not trusting the banks is seen as a good enough reason. ( mainly to do with charges taken from benefits) Open a credit union account. May cost more to operate in this way but would really piss the banks off if a decent number of people did it.

Lovely veiw, Cumbria is beautiful. You would have to try very hard to have a bad day after waking up to that veiw. Any salmon fishing in your stretch of the river? Health to enjoy.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1998/ukpga_19980029_en_3 Section 12 If the decision has already been made section 12 2b I have used this more times than I can remember to get applications reveiwed. Not once has any lender refused to reconsider the case. Sometimes a decline is still the result but at least the applicant is given some reason why.

The credit reference agencies scores give an indication of what a lender will score you as but they are not 100% reliable. Each agency will score you differently as will each lender. Silly as it sounds no longer being a homeowner reduces your score (with any lender) Length of time at your current address is short - reduces score also. ER may not be updated yet. C + G are declining a lot at the minute. All talk and no action sums it up. They have also stated that they will not reconsider any applications. All very well for them to state that, but there is a provision in the DPA which states that you can not be declined credit purely based on an automated credit score. Needs to be done in a letter stating that you wish your application to reconsidered under The Data Protection Act 1998. Non Automated Decision-Making section 7.7 They will need an original signature on it so it needs to be delivered (get a receipt) or posted recorded delivery. http://www.bba.org.uk/content/1/c4/66/11/G...coring_2000.pdf section 7.7 As the lenders do not appreciate having to do extra work, I would suggest that you enclose copy pay slips, 3 months of bank account statements, proof of address for each of the last 3 years, proof of deposit and an explanation of circumstances. They may still ask for more info, tho they are not allowed to go overboard with their requests. This right under the DPA allows your application to be reviewed manually and creates extra work for the underwriting department. Its worth a try, but they may still say no, expect this time if they say no, they have to write to you explaining why. And they can not just state "score too low" The explanation should indicate over indebted, address history etc. Good luck.

I was wondering when this was ? And how I have missed those years? March 2008 to October 2008 Co Ownership ran out of funding and had to source private funding. Months not years. Not that anything I submit ever gets online anyway. I am always polite and truthful. Ahh thats the problem then - truth is not welcome.

Thank you Lagansider I am trying to find contact details for him now. :angry: I feel a rather abrupt letter coming on.

This has really annoyed me. I feel enormous sympathy for the family who have done nothing wrong. Why has the BT not named & shamed the developer? Am going to have a look at LR and see if I can find out who owns this pile of bricks. Any body in the area know the answer? (would be quicker) Public humiliation for the developer may be the only way to get the rebuild started. Unless of course they have already gone under.

There are several things that may have triggered an internal investigation. Another one of that particular brokers mortgages had gone into arrears and on investigation of that (usually an income & expenditure form) irregularities with the income have been uncovered. This could set off an investigation of all cases submitted by that broker. If it was this tho, surely it would have been mentioned? The girl herself could have given Abbey different figures when applying for a further product with Abbey. It could just be random internal check. Abbey have a fast track system where depending on LTV, credit score, behavioral history and circumstances they will on occasion not ask for any documents from the broker. Not even proof of ID. The broker is still supposed to collect and keep all the docs on file and can be asked to produce them to Abbey at any time. The underwriter concerned could of been under investigation and all his/her cases were being checked. I also would like to know how this case ended up in court. I know of other cases where the circumstances of the alleged fraud would have indicated a lengthy sentence but the cases never even got near a court room.

Most of these loans will be LIBOR linked + 4-10% Silybear2 is right. The capital repayment is a problem.

Subprime definitions are a funny thing. On HPC subprime seems to mean any LTV over 80% with any lender. BTL, LTB or self cert mortgages. Within the mortgage industry none of these would be classed as subprime. Subprime would usually mean the lender takes on people with poor credit, missed payments on unsecured credit, CCJ;s, mortgage arrears and previous bankruptcy's. My feeling would be that the definition used in this article refers to subprime acknowledged by the CML and the mortgage industry. If all the self cert, BTL etc were included it could be as high as 30% of mortgages were "unusual" (subprime) in my opinion.

I am not implying anything of the sort. If the help is there to be used, then it should be used. This is what I do, help people understand exactly what they are entitled to. They would be living of £179.00 or there abouts after the child is born, but yes you are right, people have other bills too and even £179 is not a huge amount to live on. It is a safety net and this particular couple called it their plan. It is not a plan I would have. I am not expecting huge numbers of repossessions, huge numbers of people in arrears yes, most definitely, but not repossessions. As I stated, nominal monthly payments are requested and the majority of the high street lenders are not taking legal action. They are waiting to be paid by MPPI. (If the criteria fits) We agree.

My assessment of their particular situation was that their plan will work, which is very depressing for all prudent people. I dont think their case is the norm tho as the deposit was given to them. My point is that not only are the public relying on the gov to pay the mortgages so are the lenders! I actually think that this reliance on gov mortgage money was written into the agreements when bailouts were done. With an arrears case I speak to the lenders and most ask for confirmation that the mortgage holders will be able to receive MPPI. If they are, that is enough for the lenders to put a hold on any legal proceedings and wait for the gov money to start coming in. This is still either 26 weeks or 39 weeks at the moment but waiting is still seen as preferable to repossessing. They would ask for a something to be paid, even if only nominal. This is not the reaction of all lenders, exceptions include most of the "adverse" lenders, especially the ones who no longer lend. These still seem to go into the courts quickly but are then conveniently held up, sometimes for months in back logs. Their are a lot of factors to be taken into account. The loan needs to currently be within the size allowed, no second charge lending is currently paid for unless it can be proven that it was taken for necessary home improvements and unemployment has to be genuine so it is not an option open to all, but that may only be a matter of time.