Tuesday, July 2, 2013
Builder says thank you to taxpayers
Help to Buy boosts housebuilder Persimmon
Help to Buy, which helps buyers with small deposits to get a mortgage, had generated a "positive response" from prospective buyers since its launch in April, Persimmon said on Tuesday. Reservation rates on private homes had jumped 30pc since Chancellor George Osborne announced the scheme, with 1,124 homes secured so far. This compares with an annual rise of 12pc in the six months to June 30. Persimmon said improved availability of mortgage credit helped revenues rise 12pc in the first half of the year to £900m from the same period last year. The company completed 5,022 new homes, representing a rise of 7pc, while margins rose by almost three percentage points, to 15pc.
Posted by quiet guy @ 01:49 PM (1917 views)
One thought on “Builder says thank you to taxpayers”
Add a comment
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user´s views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
Dangerous Dan says:
I sent the following letter to a few councils when Help to buy was announced, and they collectively fobbed me off.
In fact, some of the councillors became quite threatening, as they were part owners in property development companies.
………..
To Whom it May concern,
With Regards to your plans to launch a Local Authority Mortgage Scheme in order to help first-time buyers get on the housing ladder.
By acting as a guarantor for First Time Buyers, the Council is actually encouraging young people to take on increasing amounts of debt, as a pose to allowing the preferable, and equitable solution, of the average house price to return to its long term measure of affordability against income.
Your scheme is not designed to help First time buyers.
Did the council take into consideration the recent comments made by the president of the Law Society and the IPPR?
The president of the Law Society John Wotton sent out a strong warning to first-time buyers to be wary about affordable housing schemes such as Peterborough councils:
September 2011
“A significant number of repossessions take place against first-time buyers who often do not fully anticipate the nature and significance of the responsibilities they are taking on. As a group they are at the greatest risk of negative equity.”
The Insititute for Public Policy Research also stated just this month [December 2011] that the biggest beneficiaries of the governments, Homebuyers Direct Scheme, are not First Time buyers, but are in fact, large housebuilders, and that the main effect of the government scheme is to ‘prop up’ weaker housebuilders.
[Under the scheme, the government and a housing developer jointly fund a loan of 30% of the cost of a property.]
Please can you inform me:
How many of the councillors who voted to approve this scheme, actually own property?
And do any of those councillors who voted in favour of the scheme own Buy To Let property, or hold other investments in property?
Surely It’s highly immoral for councillors to vote in favour of a scheme, where they stand to benefit personally? And whom therefore have a strong ‘vested interest’
Rather than allow the cost of an average house to return to its long term affordability as a proportion of income, this scheme, if rolled out across the country, is an blatant attempt to keep the ‘housing bubble’ inflated.
In other words Rather than let your own house prices drop, this is a convenient way in which to ‘transfer that debt’ onto a younger generation.
Disgusting behaviour and highly immoral.
What business does the local council have meddling in markets and acting as a lender? Which will clearly have massive benefit for one section of the community over another?
Were there any councillors who voted, on the board who do not stand to benefit personally? [I.E. Those Who do not own property?]
Are you also able to guarantee that Interest Rates will not rise again, over the next 29 years, and that the beneficiaries of your scheme will not be left facing negative equity and repossession?
You are underwriting slavery, and spinning it, in a cynical attempt, to suggest that you are ‘helping’ First Time Buyers.
I look forward to your response. And answers to my questions.
Sincerely.
P.S.
If this is such a good idea why arent Lloyds taking the risk themselves, instead of pushing it onto councils?
Because if [or when] the first time buyer defaults – the local authority will lose their money – Lloyds of course, will win whatever happens.
Did it not appear strange to the council board, that a government majority-owned bank is negotiating with councils to guarantee their lending?
The losers are people who pay council tax and who are guaranteeing these high risk mortgages. [On top of the hundreds of billions of their money, pledged without anyone’s consent, for debt which is not theirs, which was used to prop up the banks in 2008.]
The Council has agreed that people not yet on the housing ladder, should continue to pay to keep the banks assets, [other peoples houses] at their massively overinflated levels!
So Banks do not have to write down losses, and can continue to pay themselves vast bonuses based upon fake mark to market valuations.
Im sure the class action legal firms will be having a field day suing councils, for mis-selling a product like this in 3-4 years time when they are all facing negative equity………