Fudge Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Rock to take on £14bn mortgages Northern Rock collapsed after a run on the lender Northern Rock is set to revive its mortgage lending business with up to £14bn in new loans by 2011, plans to be released on Monday are due to show. It is expected that Northern Rock will take on about £5bn in new mortgages this year and up to £9bn from 2010. They will be financed with money from new deposits, repayments on existing loans and more government money. The move is part of wider government plans regarding the nationalised lender to be revealed this week. The bank collapsed in 2007 after a run on savers' deposits when it emerged it had sought government help. Restructuring When the Rock was nationalised it pledged to reduce the amount of state aid it would borrow. In January Northern Rock was given more time to pay back its £26bn government loan as part of broader government efforts to boost lending, which it is hoped will boost economic recovery. Previously the bank had been encouraging customers to re-mortgage with other lenders so it could pay off the loan quickly, but this policy will now be relaxed. To help the bank lend, the firm is to be restructured with new mortgages and existing mortgages will be managed separately. In the wake of the credit crisis, it has become increasingly hard and expensive for both individuals and businesses to borrow money. Many analysts argue that improving access to capital is crucial to get the economy working again. Rock to take on £14bn in new mortgages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0q0 Posted December 30, 2009 Author Share Posted December 30, 2009 Did the Brownsta honour it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 (edited) Did the Brownsta honour it? Richard Nixon would be proud of his later day prodigé. Edited December 30, 2009 by tinker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackalope Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 I posted a lengthy blog that night pointing out that if Labour had any sense they would realise that the only way to stay in power now was to sacrifice the greedy property owners. Bottom line being that there were more votes in workers, would-be house owners, the retired, etc, than in the property rampers. This is shit politics as most of that type of loser will vote Labour anyway. There's no point pandering to the core vote or piling up more useless votes in safe seats. The GE will be won and lost in aspirational, middle class middle England. Blair understood this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve99 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 (edited) Because we all know damn well that the number of true 6-1 income multiple loans were miniscule. Most even approaching 5-1 were to DINK couples. This is a way to get lending moving whilst couching it in terms that the doomers can't argue with. £5 says we will see 90% + LTV loans at less than 3% above BOEBR with multiples of 4.5 single or 3.5 joint by the end of this year. You mean back to pre 2007 lending? and off to the races with HPI again? Im not a doomer, I just optimistically expect the bubble to finally pop in the minds of the majority one day, soon hopefully. I read an interesting article recently re if you bought your house in Australia in the 1890's, it would have taken you till 1955 to get your money back, around 60 years. Currently japan is coming up for 20 years and there are few 'Cargo cult' aficionados still sitting on the beach waiting for property prices to turn up again. lets hope this is our lucky fate in the future, we can all hope so for all our benefit (even yours old bean) graph is here: http://www.whocrashedtheeconomy.com/?page_id=5 Edited December 31, 2009 by steve99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y-QUERK Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Did the Brownsta honour it? Heh. Politician lies.....again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve99 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 This is shit politics as most of that type of loser will vote Labour anyway. There's no point pandering to the core vote or piling up more useless votes in safe seats. The GE will be won and lost in aspirational, middle class middle England. Blair understood this. Yes, the votes will be attached to whoever is offering the most house price inflation. That is where the mindset is still firmly anchored, above all else including war, unemployment, value of the currency, clean water etc etc etc. Not until the whole house price thing has been well and truly broken will that list see a change in priorities, which is why in fact Labour have worked hard over the last 18 months to keep prices up at any price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichB Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 bugger... just spent 10 minutes reading the first 6 pages of this before I realised we had a necromancer active on the forums. ****** you very much, and I guess that must mean its time for sleep... :@ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turnbull2000 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 (edited) I case anyone missed it... The FSA said no return to multiples, as this would be detrimental to first-time buyer purchasing power. Edited December 31, 2009 by Turnbull2000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliegog Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 return to affordable multiples and FTB's purchasing power would be just fine when the d$$$m price of the house was made affordable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 3.5 x 25k ( average income) = 87k + lets say another 10 for a 10 procent deposit .... buys you absolutely zilch where i live You could find yourself a couple of wives send them out to work, then get a lodger...hey presto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgia O'Keeffe Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 (edited) I case anyone missed it... The FSA said no return to multiples, as this would be detrimental to first-time buyer purchasing power. there is no need to introduce multiples yet, it would be viewed as crashing the market, it makes more sense to let the market crash and then reintroduce maximum multiples afterwards, just as Glass Steagal wasnt introduced until after the market had crashed Edited December 31, 2009 by Tamara De Lempicka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the end is a bit nigher Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Mortgage broker on Radio 5 this morning said that while it isn't official policy with lenders, it is almost impossible to secure greater than a 4 times income mortgage. From my current experience I would agree with this (not that I wanted anywhere near that). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloo Loo Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 Mortgage broker on Radio 5 this morning said that while it isn't official policy with lenders, it is almost impossible to secure greater than a 4 times income mortgage. From my current experience I would agree with this (not that I wanted anywhere near that). what do they mean by income? joint? the CML certainly does. 4 times joint is 8 times single when the sprogs arrive. hence 2 on 25K ( very good wages for both) gives 200K mortgage...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgia O'Keeffe Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 what do they mean by income? joint? the CML certainly does. 4 times joint is 8 times single when the sprogs arrive. hence 2 on 25K ( very good wages for both) gives 200K mortgage...... yes but by that time you will be able to release equity to pay off the portion lost by the wifes income Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the end is a bit nigher Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 what do they mean by income? joint? the CML certainly does. 4 times joint is 8 times single when the sprogs arrive. hence 2 on 25K ( very good wages for both) gives 200K mortgage...... Joint, maybe, I don't know. No more than 4 times single. It just isn't happening when it comes to the real application. From my own current experience, they are checking everything. They even wanted a copy of my CV to prove I had been in the same line of business for over 3 years and a couple or references to confirm that my CV was indeed true. The application process has been a real eye-opener to what is actually happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0q0 Posted December 31, 2009 Author Share Posted December 31, 2009 Joint, maybe, I don't know. No more than 4 times single. It just isn't happening when it comes to the real application. From my own current experience, they are checking everything. They even wanted a copy of my CV to prove I had been in the same line of business for over 3 years and a couple or references to confirm that my CV was indeed true. The application process has been a real eye-opener to what is actually happening. In which case are many of these sold or sale agreed house deals set to fall through when Johnny Applicant discovers he can't aspirationally embellish the form? TLB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the end is a bit nigher Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 In which case are many of these sold or sale agreed house deals set to fall through when Johnny Applicant discovers he can't aspirationally embellish the form? TLB Quite possibly. As has been the case for the last year, I don't think there is a problem getting a loan, just not enough to support current asking prices. The place I am buying is a repo and hence the asking price and accepted offer are far more reasonable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0q0 Posted December 31, 2009 Author Share Posted December 31, 2009 Quite possibly. As has been the case for the last year, I don't think there is a problem getting a loan, just not enough to support current asking prices. The place I am buying is a repo and hence the asking price and accepted offer are far more reasonable. According to BBC R4's programme just on, everything's wonderful for buyers and property is jumping off the shelf at least in Chorley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the end is a bit nigher Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 According to BBC R4's programme just on, everything's wonderful for buyers and property is jumping off the shelf at least in Chorley. But I don't want to live in Chorley..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peppermint Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 According to BBC R4's programme just on, everything's wonderful for buyers and property is jumping off the shelf at least in Chorley. Do EAs ever say anything else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 (edited) Because we all know damn well that the number of true 6-1 income multiple loans were miniscule. Most even approaching 5-1 were to DINK couples. This is a way to get lending moving whilst couching it in terms that the doomers can't argue with. £5 says we will see 90% + LTV loans at less than 3% above BOEBR with multiples of 4.5 single or 3.5 joint by the end of this year. I've noticed this desperate rationalisation from the bulls lately - true house priuces have bounced, that's about the only argument you've got this really is sheer desperation now - GB says mortgage multiples to come down and most people think banks cannot return to loose lending, but this is somehow twisted to suggest lending will return to bubble levels. in your dreams. Edited December 31, 2009 by Si1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0q0 Posted December 31, 2009 Author Share Posted December 31, 2009 But I don't want to live in Chorley..... You'll get used to it, no one ever likes the idea of it initially but in the end it's for the best, so stiff upper lip and see you by the one way system in 20 minutes. PS It's got a new covered market, you know, complete with "characters"! Do EAs ever say anything else? R4 said to him "Is it a blip?" He replied "I hope not!" He remarked that FTBs were back along with BTL and people tired of low interest on their money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 You'll get used to it, no one ever likes the idea of it initially but in the end it's for the best, so stiff upper lip and see you by the one way system in 20 minutes. PS It's got a new covered market, you know, complete with "characters"! R4 said to him "Is it a blip?" He replied "I hope not!" He remarked that FTBs were back along with BTL and people tired of low interest on their money. there have been legion investment opportunities over last 12 months, so that's a none argument really that property is the only alternative - low debt Asian stockmarkets still look a very good long term bet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.