Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Self Employed Youth

Firstbuy Mortgages, Encouraged And Subsidised By The State

Recommended Posts

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/lenders-defend-firstbuy-mortgage-hikes/6516876.article

High street lenders have defended their right to charge higher mortgage rates for people buying homes in the government’s £500 million homeownership scheme.

Losses will naturally be taken by the government before the banks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/tenancies/lenders-defend-firstbuy-mortgage-hikes/6516876.article

High street lenders have defended their right to charge higher mortgage rates for people buying homes in the government’s £500 million homeownership scheme.

Losses will naturally be taken by the government before the banks.

Halifax, which is part of the state-owned Lloyds Banking Group, charges 4.49 per cent for a two-year fixed rate deal rather than 3.59 per cent for people who buy outright. The higher rate means Firstbuy borrowers pay an extra £890 a year.

I thought Camelot had the monopoly on stupid taxes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High street lenders have defended their right to charge higher mortgage rates for people buying homes in the government's £500 million homeownership scheme.

That's what happens when Grant Shapp's calls an Emergency meeting to discuss the plight of First Time Buyers.

But then does not invite any First Time Buyers.

Instead he only invites Mortgage lenders, house builders and industry leaders, some of whom make substantial contributions to Mr Shapps.

What else could we expect?

Except the continued rape of the taxpayer?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How innovative.

New innovative ways of backhanding taxpayer money to the banksters and alnd-banksters.

Barratts have pissed through two years worth on bungs in one year and comlaining the bungs are running out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guys - this scheme is NOT about supporting the property market, it is far too small for that; it is abotu maintaining cash flow in ther building industry and preventing a transient wipe-out of the self-same industry

housing bears should support this move by the govt - in the mdeium to long term it is bearish, because it is ANTI-CYCLICAL

if the builders survive this then the real prospect comes about of them building decent numbers of new homes in the south

if the building industry collapses (as you seem to want it to do) then house prices and rents in the South especially will go up and up again in the long run, we do not want this

bears should support this scheme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed they do!

I find it fascinating that the Tories are so hellbent on perpetuating Labour's high HPI policies.

I find it even more amusing that people are calling for "Plan B", when there isn't one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed they do!

I find it fascinating that the Tories are so hellbent on perpetuating Labour's high HPI policies.

it's of the order of 1000 houses to get subsidised, it is f*ck all in HPI terms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it even more amusing that people are calling for "Plan B", when there isn't one.

That I find depressing. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guys - this scheme is NOT about supporting the property market, it is far too small for that; it is abotu maintaining cash flow in ther building industry and preventing a transient wipe-out of the self-same industry

housing bears should support this move by the govt - in the mdeium to long term it is bearish, because it is ANTI-CYCLICAL

if the builders survive this then the real prospect comes about of them building decent numbers of new homes in the south

if the building industry collapses (as you seem to want it to do) then house prices and rents in the South especially will go up and up again in the long run, we do not want this

bears should support this scheme

http://www.newhomestoday.org.uk/news_features/Barratt-slashes-its-debt-as-it-forecasts-big-rise-in-profits

Funny money.

The staff whom build houses would be better off employed by a new debt free organisation. And that organisation would be more productive to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's of the order of 1000 houses to get subsidised, it is f*ck all in HPI terms

Just one piece of the puzzle. It goes with student loans and other vile shenanigans that aim to push more people into debt. Debt servitude for those that do and poverty for those that don't as increased debt brings inflation with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one piece of the puzzle. It goes with student loans and other vile shenanigans that aim to push more people into debt. Debt servitude for those that do and poverty for those that don't as increased debt brings inflation with it.

perhaps,

but at the same time this is not pro-HPI as it is not lending secured on houses nor is it enabling lending secured on houses and furthermore restrictions on lending secured on houses are getting tighter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perhaps,

but at the same time this is not pro-HPI as it is not lending secured on houses nor is it enabling lending secured on houses and furthermore restrictions on lending secured on houses are getting tighter

Correct me if I am wrong but as I understand it Firstbuy enables people with insufficient saving capacity to put up a standard deposit so they can buy a house with minimal (5%) deposit.

As I see it:

- it helps people get a mortgage they can't afford;

- it increases hpi by recruiting a new cohort of poorer people into a housing market they can't afford;

- it perpetuates the hpi madness by creating new 'evangelists' who will be telling everyone and their dogs that house prices always go up;

- most importantly: it sends a clear message to all the nation's property owners and vendors that the government is pro-home ownership / pro-hpi and therefore they should not fear house price falls. This is a psychological factor of great importance in the market's supply /demand balance. It clearly aims to push the market towards more hpi.

Even if I'm making too much of it is abhorrent in principle.

Edited by _w_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong but as I understand it Firstbuy enables people with insufficient saving capacity to put up a standard deposit so they can buy a house with minimal (5%) deposit.

As I see it:

- it helps people get a mortgage they can't afford;

but very few

- it increases hpi by recruiting a new cohort of poorer people into a housing market they can't afford;

but very few

- it perpetuates the hpi madness by creating new 'evangelists' who will be telling everyone and their dogs that house prices always go up;

perhaps, but I think this will be a small effect with so few people

- most importantly: it sends a clear message to all the nation's property owners and vendors that the government is pro-home ownership

ok agreed

/ pro-hpi and therefore they should not fear house price falls.

yes, so preventing panic; those persuaded will be financially damaged by it, taking on the national debt into their own private hands

I s'ppose this is immoral in some ways, but they have free will...

This is a psychological factor of great importance in the market's supply /demand balance. It clearly aims to push the market towards more hpi.

totally disagree, it does not aim to do this, it is too limited in financial scope to do so, far far far too limited

Even if I'm making too much of it is abhorrent in principle.

you are making too much of it, but then again it IS abhorrent in principle, but not so bad as the prospect of destroying the house building industry speaking for myself, but tho I have ideals I try to be pragmatic and think it is a decent mechanism to prevent a nasty shock to the system making the housing market even less efficient than it needs to be

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

totally disagree, it does not aim to do this, it is too limited in financial scope to do so, far far far too limited

I like the graph below (source here). It tells me that based purely on monetary dynamics the market should be going down by at least 20% per year. One key reason for the break in correlation IMO is 0 IR combined with the sibley attitude. This attitude is fostered by the govt and I think is worth 20% a year .

hpi_scatter_plot.jpg

you are making too much of it,

I probably am.

but then again it IS abhorrent in principle, but not so bad as the prospect of destroying the house building industry speaking for myself, but tho I have ideals I try to be pragmatic and think it is a decent mechanism to prevent a nasty shock to the system making the housing market even less efficient than it needs to be

Personally I wouldn't mind one bit. Our construction industry is bloated and totally unproductive; we already have too many buildings, be they for housing, industry, commercial or offices. We've wasted tons of capital building things we don't need, it's time we stopped. It's had three years to downsize and adjust, and instead I read about big building firms increasing the size of their land banks. This madness has got to stop, sooner rather than later.

If the government is going to follow a socialist policy of selecting those industries that are worthy of help I could think of many that are more likely to bring good returns to the nation than construction. Needless to say I don't work in this industry and so wouldn't be affected, so it's easier for me to say than others I suspect.

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.

  • 276 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.