Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Council estate capitalist

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Council estate capitalist

  1. This is probably a stupid question but do PCP/PCH contracts allow the leasee/borrower to just hand the car back to the finance co at any time? I know it's different but hire purchase companies like Brighthouse (R.I.H) you can just hand the goods back, sure you've lost whatever you've paid so far but with depreciation it probably isn't that much.
  2. Just did some calculation on how exactly the phasing out of the furlough scheme will affect employers costs to retain workers. For many it will be cheaper to make redundancies and re-hire down the line if needed.
  3. I've never heard of it on normal vanilla owner occupier mortgages but on BTL/Commercial loans this clause is common, I have heard of a portfolio landlord who got wiped out in 08, he made every payment but the bank needed cash so called it in. The Lloyds GRG scandal partially involved engineering a default by revaluing properties down in order to demand repayment (then hitting the borrower with fees when they couldn't )
  4. I had a spreadsheet with the interest costs on a while ago. The interest in the 5th year on the HTB loan is negligible at 1.75% and the increase is only 1% + RPI so the 6th years interest would still be only 1.82%. (assuming RPI = 3%) The real killer is for those who have spent it on £400 car leases, take-out, holidays etc. One loses their job & the fixed-rate on their mortgage ends and they are screwed. < I think this describes a lot of people who have bought a newbuild in the last 5 years.
  5. Universal credit provides a nice smoke screen to hide the true unemployment figures. Instead of "x million on Job seekers" it will be x million on universal credit receiving "a wage topup" even if their wages are actually £0. I suspect they might even get rid of the "minimum income floor" for the self-employed and not ask for much proof. It's the conservative dream, Turning unemployed into "empowered business owners" Labor force survey is also dodgy as it only measures those actually looking for a job excluding anyone who can't be arsed or prefers benefits over some of the absolute rubbish jobs being advertised.
  6. I think anything less than 60% and *some* employees would have just plain refused to accept the new terms taking their chances that they won't be made redundant. Or preferring the "money for nothing" of their stat redundancy payout. Lowering the payment would have also increased the number of UC claims being made for those already on a low wage. So what they don't pay in the furlough scheme they end up paying in UC. No doubt the treasury will have modeled this scenario.
  7. Increasing stress and acting like they will seize property that isn't the debtors is part of the M/O. Some cases they will seize, other cases they won't but will act like it, and other cases they plainly can't (Threatening to seize washing machines, fridges etc). In my mind it's a necessary evil in 80% of cases. Winding up orders are the only real alternative and there's usually nothing left after the liquidator's fees or it's pence in the pound.
  8. The fees some of them bailiffs charge & some of the sketchy characters involved (previous criminal convictions, crossing the line) makes it seem like easy money with low barriers to entry. But will anything be worth seizing? Or will "Extend and pretend" be flavor of the decade. In a low/no interest rate environment I think it will be until prices are reinflated. I've you've got the ability (and don't want to do the repo face-to-face) become a fixed-charge receiver. Oh boy do they charge excessive fees.
  9. I'd do the same if I was an employer. & thinking about it from a selfish perspective keeping on employees you *think* you won't need provided the tax-payer pays is a very cheap option on retaining them if things do miraculously pick up. 1 Aug less 30-45 day consultation less avg notice period (My understanding is that redundancy notice pay can be covered by furlough, but not the stat redundancy payment). It'll be in the next 3 weeks. Some crafty employers will get employees to take holiday first then make them redundant. However... Many of these will be the same zombie companies that have been making losses year after year. Sacking workers, Closing shops, closing offices etc crystallizes an instant accounting if not economic loss (Write-offs, onerous lease provision, dilapidation, stat redundancy payouts)that may be just as bad as retaining the employees and going bust in style 6 months later (After management have creamed off more salary on the hopes of some far-fetched turnaround).
  10. It'll be interesting to see Rishi's announcement next week on the furlough scheme. If the tax-payer will cough up 60% and the employer HAS to come up with the other 20% then I can see massive waves of redundancies at the low-skill end just on that 20% cost. Or if employees are on 0 hours contracts they'll be "taken off furlough" and just told there's just no work. I also think if we see a rise in people complaining (Mumsnet, Dailymail, FB etc) about being made to take holiday then that is a good indicator that the redundancy is just around the corner.
  11. I suspect many employers will just make the employees take the holiday entitlement during their notice period. But it's still a big issue. For those remaining employed they'll still be taking that leave they have accrued during Furlough. I also suspect (in larger organisations) that they'll be a skew towards taking all/most of the holiday towards the end of the holiday year. My employer is making people take leave that they had already booked off "pre-lockdown" which I think will lead to people trying to book holiday at the the last minute (to avoid "losing") it.
  12. Some of those are hilarious, They are a fascinating window in to the excesses of the early 2000s. The pwoperty developer "anyone can make money" culture. Someone has uploaded many full episodes to Youtube if anyone's in need of a laugh.
  13. My thoughts are that for many if they paid below 80% they'd see a huge increase in Universal Credit claims as more people become eligible for it or looked into the possibility of claiming. Single >25 on 80% of 16hr's at NMW can get about £100 UC a month (without rent). For each pound net pay went down the amount of UC would go up by 63p.
  14. Fraud in this scheme was always going to be a big issue. especially in the scrappier businesses out there (If they even bothered with PAYE in the first place). In some cases I can understand bending the rules a bit because of the inflexible nature of the scheme. (store managers checking a shop is secure once a week for example). I'm surprised HMRC don't have the ability to route the calls properly, technologically It isn't that hard but I'm skeptical about this "snitch hotlines". There is one for benefit fraud where about 80%~ of the complaints are false and usually malicious calls made by ex's/warring neighbors.
  15. Honestly you can't teach it and you can see that from how business owners have reacted to the pandemic. The ones that have setup collection/delivery or completely switched product lines rather than just close. I've also taken the loan to use in expanding. at 0% interest for a year & 2.5% beyond that it's a no-brainer to take it.
  16. Take it out into the Ltd, No personal guarantee. Run the business long enough to safely pay out preferred suppliers/salaries to owners, + clear any personally guaranteed overdraft/debt. Then with £5k left call in the insolvency practitioners to make the problem disappear.
  17. I can see the logic in that 60/20/20 loss split. For some employers it still represents a fantastic deal compared to the stat redundancy payments they'd be on the hook for if they made redundancies/loss of skilled staff, However some types of business with young/short service/non-specialised staff (retail, pubs,warehouse etc) will be financially better off by making redundancies & re-hiring if needed (It's not like there would be a shortage of unemployed when they come to rehire!)
  18. I'm shocked by how many don't have £100, I almost don't believe it. I tried to find the methodology behind the study but couldn't find it. Could it be that <£100 is what the 16 million adults have segregated as "savings" either in a dedicated savings account?, or in a "mental piggybank" that excludes whatever is in the current account/wallet "because that money is for bills, not savings". I can certainly believe that 10 million~ are unable to actually count how much savings/debt they have. They just think month to month.
  19. She's just been laid off and it looks like she received her final wage which has (rightly) reduced the amount of UC she'll receive, If she had waited to claim the day after her wages came through she might have received the full amount of UC. She will have entitled to £317.82 + £251.63 in rent for the month (I'm using the pre-April rates). UC reduces by 63p for each £1 of take home pay so if you add £317.82+£251.63 take away £141 (amount she received). Then divide the result by 0.63 you get approx £680 in wages. There are other explanations, most articles on UC conveniently focus on the net figure the claimant receives in cash whilst ignoring any wages, ignoring repayments of the "advance loan" most claimants take, ignoring payments towards previous benefit over-payments, utility arrears, rent arrears etc. I think UC is a badly run system filled with IT problems however I have yet to see an article that has a complete and proper accounting.
  20. Debenhams unable to reach agreement with landlord Hammerson in relation to 5 of their stores - 1000 more jobs gone Uber has announced plans to cut 3700 full-time staff
  21. I saw in the Daily Mail that over 50% were on state support. Reading through I could see they'd double counted so wanted to run the numbers myself and see how many in this country were effectively on the governments books/not paying income tax, I also wanted to include the sizable number of public sector workers who's employment relies ultimately on the tax revenue collected from the rest of the population. Furloughed 6,300,000 - Government data. 0-19 15,098,000 - 2011 census data - Yes you can get a job at 16 but how realistically how many will (and how many will be paying tax in) 65+ 10,376,000 - 2011 census data - I acknowledge that some will be working/paying tax however most won't pay in more than their state pension (They've paid in, In the same way Mr Madoffs' investors paid in.) Economically inactive 8,370,000 - ONS data - Carers, housewives, disabled, too lazy to pretend to look for work etc, BTL landlords. Certainly won't be paying tax. Public sector workers 5,390,000 - ONS Data - Admittedly there might be some crossover with furloughed workers but likely minimal. Unemployed 1,364,000 ONS Data - Most will be signing on or at least not paying tax (I ignored counting UC claims as it would crossover other categories too much). So that's 46,898,000 out of 66,650,000 (total population) essentially being propped up by the government.
  22. I wonder how many of them are posting gross earnings rather than net or excluding child-care costs which are directly related to work. Many will be legit, but their are a lot of non-jobs out there. Layers of middle management and hangers on especially in public sector/charities. Tax credits baby! Not quite but a couple with 4 kids (born before 2017) would get £1785.18 plus rent in benefits.
  23. I was thinking it might be because the employee has to agree to being furloughed as it's a change of contract. 20% loss people will accept, 40% loss I think many would refuse & take their chances on not being made redundant. A friend of mine is pissed off that it might be dropping to 60%. Oh the unfairness of it. In many cases the lower paid furloughed/people with kids especially are able to claim (newly increased) Universal Credits to "top up" their wages. Perhaps not wanting to have the negative press of millions of new UC claims is a reason not to lower the percentage.
  24. I thought that when I saw it on the news earlier. It's £3k a year cheaper, The quality is probably going to be much better than whatever rushed attempt the University puts on + Student doesn't run the risk of disruptions/cost if the uni decides to suddenly return to classroom based learning (To fill their debt funded accommodation blocks).
  25. I think we'll see much worse redundancy figures when the end of the furlough payments scheme is known. Mass redundancy consultation periods are 30 days (20+ workers) or 45 days (100+ workers) + the notice period added on top. For employers who have long serving staff they need to make the redundancies now if they want some/all of it to be covered by the tax payer. From what I can see the government grants can be used to pay notice pay, but not redundancy payments. I Imagine the average BA employee has longer service than say the average retail employee so we'll see redundancies from that type of business first.
  • 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.