Britons Pay Off Mortgage Debts

[Venger]

Good job the fickle risk takers are winning though otherwise unemployment woukd be a lot worse wouldn't it ?

Feel battered on the way up during the HPI, and battered again to prevent VIs lose value of their homes, with the authority's massive reinflation.

Still, some of this is good news, in a way.

1) The banks' balance sheets must also improve as people pay down mortgage debt, allowing them to cope better with a crash, when it comes.

2) Even if a high percentage of owners were to own outright, with no mortgage debt, the price they can sell for depends on what others (including FTBs and those looking to trade up) are able and willing to pay. Prices paid set market values, for individual sellers, and for all other home-owners.

There's ever more sellers on the market around my way looking to downsize, and too few in secure employment with any prospects for significant payrises during the next few years to meet anywhere near their asking prices.

Despite FFL and now Help-To-Buy trying to encourage people to borrow more than independent lending participants believe houses are worth on their deposit requirements ; you can't force people to borrow the money to upsize to £300K/£500K/£700K homes. So home-owners and evermore sellers coming to market are still under siege to the corrective forces of HPC.

[goldbug9999]

Not sure your last sentence adds up though.

I think the point is that those of us with something to lose are constantly being out bid by those with nothing to lose - if youve got zero net assets other than your 5% deposit then you've nothing to lose by taking on crushing debt and rolling the dice. Even if you lose your job the day after moving in the gov will pay for you to live in the house for 2 years.

[cybernoid]

Good job the fickle risk takers are winning though otherwise unemployment woukd be a lot worse wouldn't it ?

If by risk takers you mean those that borrowed more than others were prepared to in order to just buy a house, I don't agree at all.

The irresponsible lending and borrowing leading up to 2008 caused the crisis, those that took on these enormous debts are the cause of the problem, we would all be better off had that borrowing not happened and the housing bubble not happened.

If to 'win' they had to push everyone else down I don't see that as a net gain, they after all have to live in the same world as the rest of us and their incomes are also stagnant and their costs are also rising.

This isn't risk taking that can be beneficial, like the risk you take in starting a business, this is borrowing enormous sums in the hope of finding a greater fool. Unsustainable and damaging to everyone, them included.

You are not to be congratulated for agreeing to pay the enormous asking price for a property and lucking out in being able to pay down the debt before it bankrupted you, you are to be vilified for pricing out others and making the problem worse for everyone else and in the medium and longer term worse for yourself as well.

It is still getting worse out there. It is not over. You made it worse.

[sleepwello'nights]

If by risk takers you mean those that borrowed more than others were prepared to in order to just buy a house, I don't agree at all.

The irresponsible lending and borrowing leading up to 2008 caused the crisis, those that took on these enormous debts are the cause of the problem, we would all be better off had that borrowing not happened and the housing bubble not happened.

Oh, I thought the cause of the crisis was that the lenders mismatched long term loans through short term funding. How is that the borrowers fault?

[cybernoid]

Oh, I thought the cause of the crisis was that the lenders mismatched long term loans through short term funding. How is that the borrowers fault?

Without irresponsible borrowing there would be less lending. Idiots agreeing to pay enormous sums for houses because they believed they'd sell eventually for more to a 'greater fool' and borrowing corresponding enormous amounts were the cause of the bubble and the crisis.

Hello? Did I stumble into mumsnet?

[sleepwello'nights]

Without irresponsible borrowing there would be less lending. Idiots agreeing to pay enormous sums for houses because they believed they'd sell eventually for more to a 'greater fool' and borrowing corresponding enormous amounts were the cause of the bubble and the crisis.

Hello? Did I stumble into mumsnet?

cart before the horse springs to mind for some reason. Why could that be I wonder?

Of course some do confuse cause and effect.

[cybernoid]

cart before the horse springs to mind for some reason. Why could that be I wonder?

Of course some do confuse cause and effect.

If you borrow too much money its your fault.

"Help help im a victim". Pathetic.

[Stonehenge )z]

If you borrow too much money its your fault.

"Help help im a victim". Pathetic.

'Poor me' is actually a career option in 2013 and the University of East Anglia is offering degree courses in 'financial optimization of victim hood' from next September .

[sleepwello'nights]

If you borrow too much money its your fault.

"Help help im a victim". Pathetic.

The pathetic person here is the one who cannot stick to the point that was raised and is trying to bring his bias into the discussion while completely missing the point.

The problem that led to the banking crisis is they didn't match their short term funding to the long term loans. End of.

[okaycuckoo]

If by risk takers you mean those that borrowed more than others were prepared to in order to just buy a house, I don't agree at all.

The irresponsible lending and borrowing leading up to 2008 caused the crisis, those that took on these enormous debts are the cause of the problem, we would all be better off had that borrowing not happened and the housing bubble not happened.

If to 'win' they had to push everyone else down I don't see that as a net gain, they after all have to live in the same world as the rest of us and their incomes are also stagnant and their costs are also rising.

This isn't risk taking that can be beneficial, like the risk you take in starting a business, this is borrowing enormous sums in the hope of finding a greater fool. Unsustainable and damaging to everyone, them included.

You are not to be congratulated for agreeing to pay the enormous asking price for a property and lucking out in being able to pay down the debt before it bankrupted you, you are to be vilified for pricing out others and making the problem worse for everyone else and in the medium and longer term worse for yourself as well.

It is still getting worse out there. It is not over. You made it worse.

There's nothing there I disagree with, but I think the approach is futile.

The central planners recognise all this, but they're ploughing on with their theories. Nothing useful for you in worrying over the past. Not to say you should join them when you can't beat them - just stay alert. That may be the main use of HPC - we post a lot of nonsense, but there's also some insight.

[cybernoid]

There's nothing there I disagree with, but I think the approach is futile.

The central planners recognise all this, but they're ploughing on with their theories. Nothing useful for you in worrying over the past. Not to say you should join them when you can't beat them - just stay alert. That may be the main use of HPC - we post a lot of nonsense, but there's also some insight.

Well there's only so much that I as an individual can do. My choice is to buy or not. Which means jump in with the rest of them and borrow an uncomfortable amount bearing in mind my income and how that could change at any point due to circumstances beyond my control, and just hope rate rises don't put me in a worse position than renting over the same time period.

With the recent events in Cyprus who can say where the cost of borrowing will be in as soon as a year or two, never mind the duration of a mortgage.

And with the job market the way it is, the future not looking at all rosy, the time it would take to sell a property should I buy one and need to move for work, etc etc it is better to stay flexible on location, you would think. Maybe I could buy a place and move to a rental whilst renting out my own if I want to move? I've rented long enough and seen the mortgage statements of enough landlords to know that is a losing proposition.

So the choice becomes, buy when you don't want to for an amount you are uncomfortable with and in the process sacrifice your mobility in a time of enormous uncertainty around my work location and near future borrowing costs, or pay too much for rent with all the nonsense from landlords and lettings agents etc that comes with that.

It's bloody awful, and every numpty who takes the buying choice prolongs the correction by paying an absurd price. To hear them on here tell everyone how clever that was is unhelpful, shall I say. Until the mortgage is gone who knows how good a decision it was...

[South Lorne]

'Poor me' is actually a career option in 2013 and the University of East Anglia is offering degree courses in 'financial optimization of victim hood' from next September .

...do you have a link ...this is beyond the beyond....?...