Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
juvenal

R4 12 Midday Julian Worricker Today

Recommended Posts

Pretty sure I heard yesterday that Worricker is discussing 95% mortgages coming back on his slot today

While of course you could from a personal perspective decide to call whatever mortgage you liked "sub-prime" , traditionally that description has applied to the credit quality of the person applying rather than the specfic loan to value. In fact even in their pomp real sub-prime lending rarely got over the 85% mark in terms of LTV.

The return of 95% LTV lending ( if it's true) is of course worthy of discussion as would the return of sub-prime lending but the two are not necessarilly related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While of course you could from a personal perspective decide to call whatever mortgage you liked "sub-prime" , traditionally that description has applied to the credit quality of the person applying rather than the specfic loan to value. In fact even in their pomp real sub-prime lending rarely got over the 85% mark in terms of LTV.

The return of 95% LTV lending ( if it's true) is of course worthy of discussion as would the return of sub-prime lending but the two are not necessarilly related.

Anything over 3 x REAL, NON-LIAR, CHECKED & VERIFIED income is a

LIAR LOAN.

95% is a LIAR LOAN too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything over 3 x REAL, NON-LIAR, CHECKED & VERIFIED income is a

LIAR LOAN.

95% is a LIAR LOAN too.

I'm going against the tide on this one. I totally agree that, as above, Anything over 3 x REAL, NON-LIAR, CHECKED & VERIFIED income is a

LIAR LOAN.

however,

if you are on, say, £30,000 per year and ask for a £65,000 mortgage, I would see not such a high danger with 95%.

I don't quite see this pushing prices high again.

But I might miss something important here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going against the tide on this one. I totally agree that, as above, Anything over 3 x REAL, NON-LIAR, CHECKED & VERIFIED income is a

LIAR LOAN.

however,

if you are on, say, £30,000 per year and ask for a £65,000 mortgage, I would see not such a high danger with 95%.

I don't quite see this pushing prices high again.

But I might miss something important here.

A person in this position would not need a 95% mortgage.

95% mortgage imply that the applicant is unwilling or unable to save a proper deposit in which case they are unlikely to be as prudent and much higher risk of default.

Also 95% mortgages never really went. Skipton financial had one until recently. It was a two fix at 7.12% reverting to BR+ 4.99%. Apparently the reason they pulled it was due to lack of applications. Hardly suprising at those rates.

I believe also there is another lender offer 95% but can't remember who it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are on, say, £30,000 per year and ask for a £65,000 mortgage, I would see not such a high danger with 95%.

A buyer's deposit is secure, so lower LTV protects a lender.

Income is insecure, and offers little protection to a lender. Unearned income may be more secure, but still not as good as that deposit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A buyer's deposit is secure, so lower LTV protects a lender.

Income is insecure, and offers little protection to a lender. Unearned income may be more secure, but still not as good as that deposit.

both good points, actually.

Especially the one where someone on 30k wouldn't need a 95% mortgage to finance 65k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

both good points, actually.

Especially the one where someone on 30k wouldn't need a 95% mortgage to finance 65k.

unless they had other debts... wonder how many do now!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mortgage issue is one of four items coming up before 1pm. It's Winifred Robinson presenting today.

ON NOW

Edited by juvenal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While of course you could from a personal perspective decide to call whatever mortgage you liked "sub-prime" , traditionally that description has applied to the credit quality of the person applying rather than the specfic loan to value. In fact even in their pomp real sub-prime lending rarely got over the 85% mark in terms of LTV.

The return of 95% LTV lending ( if it's true) is of course worthy of discussion as would the return of sub-prime lending but the two are not necessarilly related.

traditional?...never was a term we'd heard of in the UK until the credit crunch when we find that our major banks had bought billions of £££££ of interest in these things.

Our banks were thought to be temples of propriety.

today, they are a homage to evil itself...the financed personal dwellingplace.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 246 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.