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

Credit Crunch: Hardworking Family Forced To Live In Car

Recommended Posts

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/CREDIT-CRUNC...rced.4348773.jp

A DESPERATE Sheffield family are being forced to live in their car after their home was repossessed because they could no longer afford rocketing mortgage repayments.

Four-month pregnant Laura Whitney, aged 28, her partner Richard Webster, 32, and children Jessica, seven, and Jack, two, have spent the last fortnight crammed into a Vauxhall Vectra after being forced from their Batemoor maisonette.

The couple could no longer pay their £62,500 mortgage, which has an interest rate of 10.9 per cent, because their sub-prime lender increased payments from £373 a month to £553.

Laura said her young family had not been given priority for rehousing by Sheffield Council because they were deemed "intentionally homeless".

And they were turned down for private-rented housing because the repossession gave them a bad credit rating.

Does the BoE seriously think people can afford nearly £200 adding to their mortgage!!!! Low income families haven't got that cash.

The anchors for inflation. A price worth paying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is tragic. This is what Nu-Labour have created. Brown and Blair and all Nu-Labour MPs jumping into bed with unbridled Capitalists... in fact, even so far as removing the bridles...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/CREDIT-CRUNC...rced.4348773.jp

Does the BoE seriously think people can afford nearly £200 adding to their mortgage!!!! Low income families haven't got that cash.

The anchors for inflation. A price worth paying.

And they still owe the bank a load of money too, no doubt.

Maybe they should talk foreign and paint their faces less white.

A new council property would be ready before they can say 'asylum seekers have 'reserved' accommodation in councils up and down the UK'.

Great, the UK citizens and their kids.

No doubt some scummy private landlord' will come out of their litle slimy shell and say 'I'll save ya'.

Maybe not :lol:

Edited by renterbob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awful news.

£553 per month on a £62,500 mortgage (presumably 25yr capital & interest) is outrageous.

It's because they are robbing bar stewards.

I wonder if we will see a explosion of these stories?

It's a good job we have good social housing in this country and no one sold all the stock off for a quick profit, god just think of the mess we'd be in then....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£553 a month doesn't seem like much to me, but then I guess it could be compared to local wages. What's the average rent up there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's because they are robbing bar stewards.

I wonder if we will see a explosion of these stories?

It's a good job we have good social housing in this country and no one sold all the stock off for a quick profit, god just think of the mess we'd be in then....

:lol::lol:

the former council 'housing directors' of almost al councils are presently 'on the run' with wads of money shoved down their pants.

who said 'corruption'?

It impresses the ladies, apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
£553 a month doesn't seem like much to me, but then I guess it could be compared to local wages. What's the average rent up there?

Private, I'd say between £400-£550 for a flat ("luxury of course!) and say £450-£600 for a house. This is general (not too posh) Sheffield I'm on about.

Batemoor sample rentals:

2 bed apartment £525 per month

3 bed terrace £460 per month

Or this 2 bed "house" at £375 per month

Here's something from the higher end of the Sheffield market as a comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that's the cost of renting, the question arises of how they would afford to rent if they couldn't pay a mortgage at a similar level. Should've send the wife out to work in a restaurant in the evenings or something to make up the extra cash on the house.

Edited by JohnnyB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps they should park in front of the council housing offices. May get more attention. No mention of whether either of them works. Would this make a difference in attitudes. :ph34r:

Edited: I read the article, should have done that first I know, he works for Royal Mail.

Edited by Stourbridge Baggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Family who could never really afford their mortgage get evicted"

Oh, the shock!

Why does this always have to be the banks fault? I could quite easily have decided to go for it leaving similar margins for error in my finances, but I didn't. Personal responsibility is dying on it's ****, I swear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also interesting is that the couple are deemed to be intentionally homeless due to a change in circumstances. However, when a council c0cks up, even when children die, after tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds have been spent investigating, the outcome always seems to be that "no individual was responsible"!

p-o-p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article has been carefully spun and I strongly suspect there's more to it than meets the eye.

they were turned down for private-rented housing because the repossession gave them a bad credit rating.

...

The couple had to take a sub-prime mortgage because Laura was on her previous husband's mortgage and would have been forced to pay a fee to have her name removed. Richard had a previous credit problem.

So it wasn't just the mortgage that gave them a bad credit rating, then. And this thing about the mortgage being arranged as it was in order to avoid a fee sounds like there's a can of worms to be examined.

"We've been living in the car for two weeks because relatives can't accommodate us all and we don't want to be split up."

This implies that accommodation would be available if they were prepared to live separately while they sorted themselves out.

In the meantime, their furniture is in storage, costing £120 a month. Laura said Sheffield Council has offered temporary accommodation - but because Richard is working, they must pay £130 a week, which they say they cannot afford.

Is £130 a week really that outrageous? I don't know, but given our wonderful welfare state I'm surprised they couldn't find some way to afford it.

Sheffield Council leader Coun Paul Scriven said housing officials told him the family was not given priority because staff were not aware they were living in a car.

He added: "Clearly, this is very serious and I have instructed the case to be reviewed. If the family's situation is confirmed, they will automatically be suitable for temporary accommodation."

What more needs to be said?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of those stories where the facts don't match up. I've worked in the housing departments of local authorities and it doesn't ring true.

No council would refuse to provide a place to stay for a family with children and force them to live in a car. The only reason to do this would be because the family had a suitable place to stay but were choosing not to use this.

I am still sympathetic to them as that repayment is £150 a month less than what I pay for a £120k mortgage

Edit - Huw answered this far more thoroughly above!

Edited by Timak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Family who could never really afford their mortgage get evicted"

Oh, the shock!

Why does this always have to be the banks fault? I could quite easily have decided to go for it leaving similar margins for error in my finances, but I didn't. Personal responsibility is dying on it's ****, I swear!

couldn't agree more. If they HAD got council housing easily, then people would complain that they got council housing simply because they have kids.

I feel sorry for the kids, and feel that consideration should be given to the parents having tacitly abused the children by way of financial irresponsibility. In other words, shouldn't the kids enter the foster system if the parents are sh*t, or would that be even worse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
couldn't agree more. If they HAD got council housing easily, then people would complain that they got council housing simply because they have kids.

I feel sorry for the kids, and feel that consideration should be given to the parents having tacitly abused the children by way of financial irresponsibility. In other words, shouldn't the kids enter the foster system if the parents are sh*t, or would that be even worse?

Are there enough foster homes to cope with the number of kids your going to take of parents?

However you could have found the new economic boom to solve the current crisis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are there enough foster homes to cope with the number of kids your going to take of parents?

agree, may be impractical.

interesting that even right wing commentators agree that market regulation is necessary in future to rpevent these destructive bubbles occuring again.

NuLab DID try to introduce it with the FSA to achieve 'no more boom and bust', but it transparently failed. It will be the job of future govts to try and do this better. Even clear tory advisers like Roger Bootle acknowledge this and say that the next step is to improve market regulation.

Additionally, I think all would agree that it is disgraceful that Adam Applegarth has got away with all this - and is now apparently looking for work again - http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and...p;in_page_id=23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agree, may be impractical.

interesting that even right wing commentators agree that market regulation is necessary in future to rpevent these destructive bubbles occuring again.

NuLab DID try to introduce it with the FSA to achieve 'no more boom and bust', but it transparently failed. It will be the job of future govts to try and do this better. Even clear tory advisers like Roger Bootle acknowledge this and say that the next step is to improve market regulation.

Additionally, I think all would agree that it is disgraceful that Adam Applegarth has got away with all this - and is now apparently looking for work again - http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/investing-and...p;in_page_id=23

Maybe impractical??? :P

Where would you stop taking fat kids off parents, kids who didn't get treats as they would likely to turn into axe murders because they didn't feel loved, kids whose parents post on HPC as they might produce non-conformist off-spring?

Applegarth should be given the same treatment as David Kelly.

Edited by interestrateripoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
couldn't agree more. If they HAD got council housing easily, then people would complain that they got council housing simply because they have kids.

I feel sorry for the kids, and feel that consideration should be given to the parents having tacitly abused the children by way of financial irresponsibility. In other words, shouldn't the kids enter the foster system if the parents are sh*t, or would that be even worse?

It would be a lot more expensive . Would it not be better not to take so much tax from the low paid so they can stand on their own feet. And yes it would be even worse for the kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They've been found intentionally homeless - almost certainly means the council have looked at their incomes and outgoings and decided they could afford the mortgage but have spent it on other things (e.g. foreign holidays) instead

They're both working f-t - £533 per month isn't really that much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't be bothered to RTFA, but the phrase "credit crunch" really irritates me now. What's wrong with the good honest "recession" or "bust", who is kidding who? What will the new media-safe phrase be in 18 years' time? Anyone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't be bothered to RTFA, but the phrase "credit crunch" really irritates me now. What's wrong with the good honest "recession" or "bust", who is kidding who? What will the new media-safe phrase be in 18 years' time? Anyone?

Economic anomaly? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economic anomaly? :blink:

Financial changes.

Economic wowee.

Credit restructuring.

Monetory re-evaluation.

or as the BBC say 'increased rents coming our way'.

BBC = imbalanced fkcwits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't be bothered to RTFA, but the phrase "credit crunch" really irritates me now. What's wrong with the good honest "recession" or "bust", who is kidding who? What will the new media-safe phrase be in 18 years' time? Anyone?

Pecuniary Contraction (PC)

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.

  • 401 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.