Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Thousands In Their 50S Fear Losing Homes, Says Age Uk

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23490621

Nearly a quarter of people in their early 50s polled by Age UK are afraid of falling on hard times and being forced out of their homes.

The charity says 23% of the 971 people they asked aged between 50 and 55 fear that they will not be able to keep up mortgage payments or rent.

Age UK says that people in this age group should be at the peak of their earning power.

But instead, it says, they are beset with financial worries.

"We know that times are tough financially," said Michelle Mitchell of Age UK.

If you have a huge mortgage in your 50's what have you been doing for the past 30 years? Having a good time with mortgage equity release and now suddenly you are concerned?

Although I like the extrapolation after polling under 1000 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The charity says 23% of the 971 people they asked aged between 50 and 55 fear that they will not be able to keep up mortgage payments or rent.

So 23% of people are total idiots.

Seems about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My home is my pension, My home is my pension, My home is my pension...

.......if they have already spent their homes having a good time at the time, that was their choice at that time.....so you now have those in fear of losing something they haven't paid for and those in fear of never owning something they will never pay for.......you couldn't make it up if you tried. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's non-news. They asked a particular age range and find out that only a minority of 50-somethings have money worries and have spun it up into a problem. I think the younger you go the worse the worries will be. The 40+ generation worry about the pension they haven't started yet; the 30+ generation still haven't got the deposit they need to buy their first home and for the women the bio clock is ticking loud; the 20+ worry that they will never get a "career" job so be on part time/min wage/zero-hour contracts forever and hence no deposit even for a rental, let alone a purchase or the impossible dream of starting a pension that would actually keep them in their old age.

When I started my first pension fund in the 1980s they "threw in" a guaranteed annuity rate of 11% and said, "You won't use that because you'll be able to get far better on the open market." They thought it would cost them nothing to throw in an 11% GAR. (Not Equitable Life fortunately!) Imagine, back then, you could invest at 10% and then buy an annuity for 15%. A few quid a week would keep you in your old age - and most people had defined benefit schemes anyway, even in the private sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they're in trouble, even with zero IRs, massive government debt bailouts of banks (to be paid by next generation), and banks not repossessing homes!

Endless subsidy for baby boomers, yet still they're in trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we have priced out youngsters, stressed out middle-agers and destitute pensioners.

Who wins with HPI?

Urgh. The few older owners worrying now have mostly either spent their homes, upsized into the bubble, or were reckless in other ways.

That is what happened to Mr Rudland, of Rustington, West Sussex, who got an interest-only mortgage 10 years ago after his divorce left him having to find the money for a new home.

Our pensioner victim in the sleeping bag. http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/personal-finance/mortgage-benefit-cuts-mean-thousands-262973

They need to bring their homes to the market, to sell.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I started my first pension fund in the 1980s they "threw in" a guaranteed annuity rate of 11% and said, "You won't use that because you'll be able to get far better on the open market." They thought it would cost them nothing to throw in an 11% GAR. (Not Equitable Life fortunately!) Imagine, back then, you could invest at 10% and then buy an annuity for 15%. A few quid a week would keep you in your old age - and most people had defined benefit schemes anyway, even in the private sector.

Providing they don't go bust? When the numbers get bigger these types of guarantees start hitting the exponential problem. It's like lots of people don't grasp simple maths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we have priced out youngsters, stressed out middle-agers and destitute pensioners.

Who wins with HPI?

Well, eventually, a small number of economic entities (probably 'trusts' to avoid IHT) will own pretty much all the housing and have a lock down on new build construction, thus keeping prices extortionately high and making large continuous profits through rent. These entities will employ a stead stream of ex-MPs as 'consultants' on stratospheric salaries to make sure that no inconvenient legislation is passed, and the more right-wing press will have regular stories about how wonderful it is to be free of the burden of owning a house, and how paying half your income in rent is the normal order of things.

Does that answer your question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Providing they don't go bust? When the numbers get bigger these types of guarantees start hitting the exponential problem. It's like lots of people don't grasp simple maths.

And at that point you may as well have had your pension with the Equitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we have priced out youngsters, stressed out middle-agers and destitute pensioners.

Who wins with HPI?

The Banks and HMRC from what I've seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nearly a quarter of people in their early 50s polled by Age UK are afraid of falling on hard times and being forced out of their homes

So they must have been about 30 when the 90s housing crash was in full swing and they didn't "learn lessons" about what was happening to people then in their 50s?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although I like the extrapolation after polling under 1000 people.

Technically, it shouldn't be extrapolation. The 1,000 people should be a representative sample, and if they are representative, then the conclusions should hold across the whole population subject to normal statistical caveats. It would be extrapolation if you used this result on another population (which you would presumably consider to be similar in some way),

Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's non-news. They asked a particular age range and find out that only a minority of 50-somethings have money worries and have spun it up into a problem. I think the younger you go the worse the worries will be. The 40+ generation worry about the pension they haven't started yet; the 30+ generation still haven't got the deposit they need to buy their first home and for the women the bio clock is ticking loud; the 20+ worry that they will never get a "career" job so be on part time/min wage/zero-hour contracts forever and hence no deposit even for a rental, let alone a purchase or the impossible dream of starting a pension that would actually keep them in their old age.

When I started my first pension fund in the 1980s they "threw in" a guaranteed annuity rate of 11% and said, "You won't use that because you'll be able to get far better on the open market." They thought it would cost them nothing to throw in an 11% GAR. (Not Equitable Life fortunately!) Imagine, back then, you could invest at 10% and then buy an annuity for 15%. A few quid a week would keep you in your old age - and most people had defined benefit schemes anyway, even in the private sector.

Won't that be only 'single life' though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't that be only 'single life' though?

Correct, and male single life at that, and not index-linked. But still worth having. ;)

Sadly the fund is paid up and cannot have new contributions added to it. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct, and male single life at that, and not index-linked. But still worth having. ;)

Sadly the fund is paid up and cannot have new contributions added to it. :(

So you are saying property will not be increasing 10% + every year like before, not even index-linked to inflation.......not the good pension provision they sold it to me as being......never trust a financial salesman nor the man down the pub. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23490621

If you have a huge mortgage in your 50's what have you been doing for the past 30 years? Having a good time with mortgage equity release and now suddenly you are concerned?

Although I like the extrapolation after polling under 1000 people.

Yeh but my house will keep going up and i will be able to sell the house and pay off the small inflation reduced mortgage and by a smaller house, OH No you wont.

How the dream has gone sour.

Problems are building up for years to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a good recent good thread on mumsnet:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/property/1809646-Could-anyone-give-their-honest-opinions-on-why-this-house-isnt-selling

Starts off 'Whys it not selling'

Reply: Price.

Then it gets interesting. House is the PILs. DH grew up there.

So a good guess is the poster is 30s-40s. PIls must be 60s-70s.

PILs must have had the house 30-40 years.

Apparently they've been MEWing - holiday home and probably a lot more.

Can't drop the price cos of mortgage on it FFS!

The price is not cheap.

The Age Concern report is wrong about peak earnings.

Joe UK peak earning is in their early 30s. The kids get in the way and earnings fall.

Remember Average Joe UK is pretty unskilled and will only earn more if they work OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's all coming to a head now because PILs have an interest-only mortgage, didn't make any arrangements for repaying the capital at the end of the term, and have now retired, making the ongoing interest payments unaffordable."

I'm not quite sure why these boomer morons think that the young should bail them out and pay for all the new cars and holidays that they have been enjoying against the imaginary value of their home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a good recent good thread on mumsnet:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/property/1809646-Could-anyone-give-their-honest-opinions-on-why-this-house-isnt-selling

Starts off 'Whys it not selling'

Reply: Price.

Then it gets interesting. House is the PILs. DH grew up there.

So a good guess is the poster is 30s-40s. PIls must be 60s-70s.

PILs must have had the house 30-40 years.

Apparently they've been MEWing - holiday home and probably a lot more.

Can't drop the price cos of mortgage on it FFS!

The price is not cheap.

The Age Concern report is wrong about peak earnings.

Joe UK peak earning is in their early 30s. The kids get in the way and earnings fall.

Remember Average Joe UK is pretty unskilled and will only earn more if they work OT.

ComtesseDeSpair Tue 23-Jul-13 15:20:19

The house was originally marketed at offers over £400,000 in 2008. There was an offer of £385,000 just after going on the market, but PILs turned it down as they were so confident of getting the 'offers over' at that stage.

All offers since then have been around the £250,000 mark, the last being £255,000 in late 2011. No offers since, but none of the few viewers since then have been in a position to make one as they needed to sell their own properties first. There's not a chance PILs will ever accept £250,000, no way and no how.

I do like the 'doctoring' idea whilst PIL's rent. I'll discuss it with DP I think, although how we'd ever convince MIL that her beloved dining room curtains needed to go into storage for a bit, I have no idea!

The MN poster seems to get it alright, but her PsIL must be nutters. Attempting to leech off the kid in order to keep their (envisaged) bubble equity intact.

Edited by cheeznbreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   215 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.