Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
geezer466

No Mortage Holidays For Those Burnt Out

Recommended Posts

Britain's banking giants were slammed yesterday for refusing to help the innocent victims of the riots. For many, the iconic image of the violence was the burning Carpetright building in Tottenham, North London, and the flats above the shop. But it emerged yesterday that residents whose homes were gutted in the blaze are still being forced to pay their mortgage.

These are the snippets that gripped mine!!

Mr Payne runs Metropolitan Housing Partnership, which operates the 26 shared ownership flats in the block.

Under this scheme, the homeowner has a mortgage for a percentage of the property, and pays rent to the housing association for the rest of it.

One female resident left homeless by the fire has spoken of her outrage at her mortgage lender, Woolwich, part of Barclays.

Despite losing her home and all her belongings in the arson attack, she is being forced to keep up with her £661 monthly payments for her flat.

All that dosh and they only get to own a part of it!! :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they bleat how they need to buy something and how buying half of something is better than renting...

*rolls eyes*

They were always going to get burnt. Just didn't think it'd be this literally.

I'm surprised no enterprising supermarket hasn't realised this yet.

People need to eat so why not charge double the price, but turn half of it into rent ... So you buy some spuds and special brew and pay about what you're paying now but then pay at least the same again into the "shared food scheme" over the next six month.

People could get more into debt than ever before and didn't Gordon tell us that meant they were rich?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...you can bet your bottom Euro, that the Insurance Companies won't pay out on this.

Those burnt out owners are ******ed.

Depends - did they even have insurance??

If I were living in London I'd make pretty sure that my insurance policy covered things such as rioting, although I can see that it could be something that isn't normally included as covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems guaranteed to push people into declaring in bankruptcy - at his point, what more have they got to lose, if the insurance won't pay out? Don't pay the mortgage ( come on, try and repossess!!) run up credit card bills on the justifiable need for new clothes etc, then off to the courts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The police will pay for it, surely?

Riot (Damages) Act 1886, Section 2.

Compensation to persons for damage by riot.

(1) Where a house, shop, or building in a police area has been injured or destroyed, or the property therein has been injured, stolen, or destroyed, by any persons riotously and tumultuously assembled together, such compensation as hereinafter mentioned shall be paid out of the police fund of the area to any person who has sustained loss by such injury, stealing, or destruction; but in fixing the amount of such compensation regard shall be had to the conduct of the said person, whether as respects the precautions taken by him or as respects his being a party or accessory to such riotous or tumultuous assembly, or as regards any provocation offered to the persons assembled or otherwise.

(2)Where any person having sustained such loss as aforesaid has received, by way of insurance or otherwise, any sum to recoup him, in whole or in part, for such loss, the compensation otherwise payable to him under this Act shall, if exceeding such sum, be reduced by the amount thereof, and in any other case shall not be paid to him, and the payer of such sum shall be entitled to compensation under this Act in respect of the sum so paid in like manner as if he had sustained the said loss, and any policy of insurance given by such payer shall continue in force as if he had made no such payment, and where such person was recouped as aforesaid otherwise than by payment of a sum, this enactment shall apply as if the value of such recoupment were a sum paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a very convenient way out of an unaffordable mortgage for some of those residents. One possible catch is whether the insurance company or the police pay out the amount the property was bought for or what they judge its current market price to have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is not paying the bank for the use of the flat, she is paying the bank for the use of the money she borrowed. As the principal has not been paid off, she owes the interest. Next she will be asking to stop paying finance on her car if she crashes it. Lenders could show some forebearance but she is not entitled to forbearance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. If my house burns down then it's not the bank's fault. I would have to claim on my insurance to have the house rebuilt. Otherwise anyone in mortgage difficulties may as well burn their houses down to clear their debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a very convenient way out of an unaffordable mortgage for some of those residents. One possible catch is whether the insurance company or the police pay out the amount the property was bought for or what they judge its current market price to have been.

It will be it's current value which of course will have suffered greatly given the location it is in!! You can bet your last £1 the Government will not be compensating above the absolute minimums.

Yes if it was me I probably would bail out. I wouldn't be paying the mortgage firstly trousering that money to sort out an AST rental asap and has been pointed out replacing what I have lost with credit.

Let the banks pursue me if they wish, hopefully any compo due will settle all the secured loans on the property, if they don't then I fell sure bankruptcy in these circumstances would not carry a stigma!!

After all the Banks are partly to blame for the reasons behind the rioting in the first place. Let them take a haircut on those properties destroyed!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the bank who loaned the money for the mortgage didnt insist on buildings insurance, then tough on the banks. If they did, then what's the ******ing problem?? That's what insurance is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The police will pay for it, surely?

Riot (Damages) Act 1886, Section 2.

Compensation to persons for damage by riot.

(1) Where a house, shop, or building in a police area has been injured or destroyed, or the property therein has been injured, stolen, or destroyed, by any persons riotously and tumultuously assembled together, such compensation as hereinafter mentioned shall be paid out of the police fund of the area to any person who has sustained loss by such injury, stealing, or destruction; but in fixing the amount of such compensation regard shall be had to the conduct of the said person, whether as respects the precautions taken by him or as respects his being a party or accessory to such riotous or tumultuous assembly, or as regards any provocation offered to the persons assembled or otherwise.

(2)Where any person having sustained such loss as aforesaid has received, by way of insurance or otherwise, any sum to recoup him, in whole or in part, for such loss, the compensation otherwise payable to him under this Act shall, if exceeding such sum, be reduced by the amount thereof, and in any other case shall not be paid to him, and the payer of such sum shall be entitled to compensation under this Act in respect of the sum so paid in like manner as if he had sustained the said loss, and any policy of insurance given by such payer shall continue in force as if he had made no such payment, and where such person was recouped as aforesaid otherwise than by payment of a sum, this enactment shall apply as if the value of such recoupment were a sum paid.

That's correct. The only problem I can see is that, since some of the people affected didn't seem to have insurance, it's not clear whether the costs of alternative accommodation whilst waiting for repairs or a final settlement may not be covered. I can easily see someone having to pay their mortgage for a year whilst they wait for a lump of cash of the police to pay it off but, also, having to pay rent for somewhere else. I can't image that settlement will be anything other than painfully slow and bureaucratic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the bank who loaned the money for the mortgage didnt insist on buildings insurance, then tough on the banks. If they did, then what's the ******ing problem?? That's what insurance is for.

There's 3 cases I can see:

- someone has insurance which doesn't exclude damage by acts of civil disorder. In this case the insurance company pays out and reclaims from the government.

- someone has insurance which excludes damage by acts of civil disorder. In this case they claim directly from the government.

- someone has no insurance. In this case they claim directly from the government.

I would imagine an insurance company would pay out a lot quicker than the government will though, so some people will no doubt end up going bust whilst waiting for a payout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How common is buildings insurance that excludes riot damage? My quick unscientific google research suggests not very.

I'm not being unsympathetic to people that have lost their homes because I would hate it if it happened to me, but insurance and in particular buildings insurance exists for these very reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How common is buildings insurance that excludes riot damage? My quick unscientific google research suggests not very.

Honestly no idea, although I suspect there will be plenty of wriggle-room (e.g. extending the meaning of terrorism to include simple criminal acts, that sort of thing). I doubt any of the people we're talking about in shared ownership flats would lack building insurance though as that would be arranged by the property management company (which may be a housing association in this case) and not optional. It'll be contents insurance they're missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is not paying the bank for the use of the flat, she is paying the bank for the use of the money she borrowed. As the principal has not been paid off, she owes the interest.

The bank magicked this money out of thin air .- it can replace it with similar ease. under the circumstances, I'd stop paying the mortgage on a flat that no longer exists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bank magicked this money out of thin air .- it can replace it with similar ease. under the circumstances

No it didn't and no it can't. It took a deposit from someone else and is paying interest on that deposit and/or providing banking services in return. Its profit is the difference between what it pays out in interest to its depositors and what it receives from the people it lends to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a very convenient way out of an unaffordable mortgage for some of those residents. One possible catch is whether the insurance company or the police pay out the amount the property was bought for or what they judge its current market price to have been.

It is nothing to do with the flats value when bought or its current market value , its insured value will be its current rebuild cost. The whole block will be insured as one unit flats always are .

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.

  • 338 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.