Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Realistbear

Repossession Threat As Government Reduces Home Owner Support

Recommended Posts

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/repossession-threat-as-government-reduces-home-owner-support-tele-63755951fb93.html?x=0

Repossession threat as Government reduces home owner support
Myra Butterworth, 16:11, Thursday 12 August 2010
More families will lose their homes, charities warn, as the Government prepares to reduce the amount of financial support it provides to borrowers by as much as £200 a month.
The latest repossession statistics showed numbers dropping after the Government introduced several measures for home owners who lost their jobs amid the economic downturn.
But some of this support is now being reduced. It includes Support for Mortgage Interest, which is paid to those on income-related benefits such as Job Seekers Allowance at a rate of 6.08 per cent.

The end of government attempts to keep HPI going. Things should pick up to the downside nicely from here on in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Home repossession orders down 29 percent year-on-year

(Reuters) - Courts in England and Wales made 29 percent fewer mortgage repossession orders between April and June this year than a year ago, the Ministry of Justice said on Thursday.

There were 13,389 orders for home repossession according to seasonally-adjusted second-quarter data, down from 18,813 a year ago and 7 percent fewer than the 14,385 orders made between January and March.

However, 46 percent of the orders were suspended, the same proportion as in the previous quarter, meaning the total number of actual home repossessions is likely to be lower.

Only 9,800 properties were actually repossessed in the first quarter of 2010, the last period for which data is available.

Low interest rates for existing home owners and the absence of a big surge in unemployment to date have meant there has been far less of a surge in repossessions to date than in the aftermath of Britain's previous recession in the early 1990s.

(Reporting by David Milliken)

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67B1AD20100812

And what has been suspended will be the water first through the cracked dam...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Martin Lewis has a piece on his site about it - which means the hoards are being exposed to this repo news.

"Home repossessions down but we're 'not out of the woods'"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me, why I pay tax which is used to support people, to keep them in over-priced houses they cant afford, artificially keeping prices high...meanwhile I am being held back from buying a decent house....please someone explain it to me.....it doesnt seem rigth somehow.

It doesn't seem sustainable or sensible.

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me, why I pay tax which is used to support people, to keep them in over-priced houses they cant afford, artificially keeping prices high...meanwhile I am being held back from buying a decent house....please someone explain it to me.....it doesnt seem rigth somehow.

It doesn't seem sustainable or sensible.

Simple - its a ponzi scheme and you're last in :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/us-banks-seizing-homes-at-record-levels-tele-2b5a52a55015.html?x=0

US banks seizing homes at record levels

James Quinn, 18:45, Thursday 12 August 2010
Repossessions of houses and flats by major US banks is at close to an all-time high as the American housing market continues to struggle.
Major US banks wrote off approximately $8bn (£5.1bn) on mortgages in the first three months of this year, on track to repeat or even surpass - last year's full-year total of $31bn.
The news could have severe implications for the wider financial market, given it was problems in the US housing market which triggered the credit crisis back in 2007.
Fresh data shows that the number of US homes being repossessed due to mortgage arrears rose to 92,858 last month, up 9pc on June and up 6pc from the same month last year.

What happens when the government no longer props up non-pays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me, why I pay tax which is used to support people, to keep them in over-priced houses they cant afford, artificially keeping prices high...meanwhile I am being held back from buying a decent house....please someone explain it to me.....it doesnt seem rigth somehow.

It doesn't seem sustainable or sensible.

You used to own a house though didn't you, but chose to sell it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You used to own a house though didn't you, but chose to sell it?

...would imagine he is trying to buy back in to market at realistic price but is prevented by these subsidies.... :rolleyes:

Edited by South Lorne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me, why I pay tax which is used to support people, to keep them in over-priced houses they cant afford, artificially keeping prices high...meanwhile I am being held back from buying a decent house....please someone explain it to me.....it doesnt seem rigth somehow.

It doesn't seem sustainable or sensible.

You and I are paying three times over:

  1. Tax, as you said.

  2. An inflated price if and when you buy.

  3. Rent, in a market inflated by both the above.

But I hope things are about to improve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The really significant figure is percentage of mortgages in arrears. The change in the figure for possession orders is a function of government interference.

Lenders have been whipped into shape since 2008, with an increasing tolerance for chronic default. MCOB guideline is that no legal proceedings may be brought before 2 months of arrears have accrued. These days it is common to see that period extended to 8-12 months.

NRK seem to be the worst on this. Also their general mandate at the moment is to agree suspended orders on payment of the monthly instalments with nothing paid toward the arrears - strictly speaking that is unlawful, but nobody wants to be the bad guy, so it has become accepted practice.

The low end of the mortgage market is a joke, with the courts allowing lenders to erect a Potemkin village at every bend of the river.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone tell me, why I pay tax which is used to support people, to keep them in over-priced houses they cant afford, artificially keeping prices high...meanwhile I am being held back from buying a decent house....please someone explain it to me.....it doesnt seem rigth somehow.

It doesn't seem sustainable or sensible.

because socialism is about doing the right thing with someone[ mugs] else's money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People will still be getting their mortgages repaid at 3.5% interest rate, they're just not getting their capital repaid too.

It's still a prop, one that should be kicked away, or at least the repayments should be a loan recouped when the house is repossessed/sold

Edited by exiges

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The really significant figure is percentage of mortgages in arrears. The change in the figure for possession orders is a function of government interference.

Lenders have been whipped into shape since 2008, with an increasing tolerance for chronic default. MCOB guideline is that no legal proceedings may be brought before 2 months of arrears have accrued. These days it is common to see that period extended to 8-12 months.

NRK seem to be the worst on this. Also their general mandate at the moment is to agree suspended orders on payment of the monthly instalments with nothing paid toward the arrears - strictly speaking that is unlawful, but nobody wants to be the bad guy, so it has become accepted practice.

The low end of the mortgage market is a joke, with the courts allowing lenders to erect a Potemkin village at every bend of the river.

...invisible bad debts....for now...... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Guardian .... The coalition intends to almost halve the benefit that helps redundant homeowners maintain mortgage interest payments at a time of mounting job fears

They are not homeowners they are people who borrowed lots of money and did not take steps to be able to pay it back. If they have been made redundant surely their insurance policy will pay ... oh didn't have one .... then why should I bail them out.

Because you would expect a bail out and your rent paid, and I bet you've got no insurance.

BTW. They are homeowners, the bank has an financial interest in the house that's all. The house isn't on HP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you would expect a bail out and your rent paid, and I bet you've got no insurance.

Yes, but not at the more than 6% rate that everyone gets regardless of the rate they actualily pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but not at the more than 6% rate that everyone gets regardless of the rate they actualily pay.

Sure, but the question was 'why should I bail them out'.

The answer is: Because renters expect to get bailed out too. It shouldn't make a difference. People shouldn't automatically be made homeless because they've lost their job.

Should you help out people who become ill? What about the fatties and the smokers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the free insurance from the government that pay a flat 6.08% irrespective of the actual mortgage rate is a very good deal for those that receive it. Can't find anything else to match it in the real world.

Assuming your SVR is 2.5%, the goverment paying 6.08% on a £200k mortgage would give you a capital repayment of £8160 over 2yrs, or £680 a month for free !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no issue helping people who lose their job for a period, say 6 months, but 200k at 6.08% is over the top.

Do you have an issue with the fact that at present, the taxpayer helps homeowners who lose their job for a period (regardless of their level of savings) but not private tenants?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have an issue with the fact that at present, the taxpayer helps homeowners mortgage holders who lose their job for a period (regardless of their level of savings) but not private tenants?

EFA - big difference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 150 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.