blonde poker forum

Just wondered if there was anyone who came on blonde that was a mortgage advisor and could give me some unbiased advice

I'm currently in the process of buying my 1st house with my cousin and we had a mortgage promise with halifax and everything seemed to be going along smoothly.We had an interest rate of 5.7% with payments set at £372 and i was well happy with that.However as it then went to the underwriter they realised that my cousin had only being working self employed for 9months so have backed out of the deal cause of this.We have now been giving an agreement with ge money but its at 7.9% and the monthly amount is now risen to £529 mean total repayable for an £80k mortgage is £245k  :'(

So basically was just wondering if anyone who deals in this business would no if it's likely the market will get back to normal within 6months and we would be able to get a much better deal than this or if it's likely that the market is going to be this bad for the next year or more and this is close to best we would get in a years time. Obviously nobody can predict the future but just looking for little bit of advice from someone who knows what they're talking about.

Thanks in advance for anyone's help.

An small increase in the % rate from 5.7% to 7.9% means your monthly payments increase by 42%? How does that work?

Why are you buying a house now, just as the market is peaking?

the market is going to be tough for at least 2 years. I would not buy a house now. Wait it out if you can, prices are headed down as the economy adjusts to the credit crunch at best and goes into recession at worst

tighty, are we being driven into recession by the banks greed?

banks greed?


I am not saying we are headed into recession. I think its certain we are in for a rough year at least though

both individuals and companies are too highly borrowed, asset prices are too high and now the availability of credit is shrinking

add to that high oil prices, high food prices and other inflationary pressures and its pretty clear to me that you want to be careful, be saving and waiting for the cycle to turn

as to the banks, well their strategies were the result of Western government policies of cheap credit. They made hay whilst these conditions reigned. Now things are tougher and it wouldn't surprise me to see more Western Banks get into serious trouble from bad debts, much like the Midland Bank did from the last property bust, when it was bailed out by HSBC buying it

The reason i'm buying it now is because its my dads and uncle's house which was left to them by my grandma.Also my cousin needs a place to live as he's renting off his dad but they've falling out so he needs to get out(all very complex hmm).The house is valued at 100k but they're selling it to us for 80k so it's a good deal but just a shit mortgage deal.Also i live with my mam and shes selling her house to go live with her partner and i don't want to move with her up there so i want to buy somewhere as i feel renting is a total waste of money.

I used to work for Barratt homes, the rate increase sounds normal I'm afraid, if you don't have 12mths worth of books the banks are reluctant to lend to you!

I can put you in touch with a great independent mortgage adviser (he did my mortgage) if you want?

i said "delay if you can"...obviously everyone has their reasons and timings.

Renting in a rising market is not great but in a falling makret it helps protect capital and give you flexibility to buy right at the bottom.

If your situation allows it of course.

If it's valued at 100K but you're getting it for 80k that's a good enough reason to buy now. Seeing as it's a special family deal, that 80K isn't going to become 60K if the value of the house drops to 80K.

Thanks for the replys guys/girls

If it's valued at 100K but you're getting it for 80k that's a good enough reason to buy now. Seeing as it's a special family deal, that 80K isn't going to become 60K if the value of the house drops to 80K.
[/quote]

It's not about the price where paying for the house mate its the bank where getting the mortgage off that is the problem as where getting a poor deal due to all the banks tighting up.

The lenders are getting so strict on there lending criteria that any appliciations deemed to be a greater risk are either being declined or hit by high arrangement fees plus a high interest rates. Sadly any self employed person with less than 12 months accounts is one of the areas they are getting really strict on. A year ago you could comfortable process it under a self cert mortgage but these are nolonger so easy to obtain at present. 7.9% does seem a tad high and I'm sure there are probably better deals out there.

I'm sure tighty's would be horroried but I'm still buying at present as I believe there are bargains out there if you do your research and negiotate hard. Some of the auction deals I'm seeing at the moment are great puchases. The subject of to buy or not to buy at present is a very personal one and specific to an individuals situation. A blanket hold and wait is not always the best advice even though I agree the market is on a downturn which will probably last for the next couple of years. I'm however an investor looking at the long term but I still find projects that can produce a short term profit. Your purchase is a very specific one and if you are really getting it at 20% below market value I can't see why anybody would pass up that opportunity. That is unless they are convinced the market will fall by greater than 20%, standup Mr housepricecrash.co.uk, and even than that's by some margin when you factor in monies lost in rental expenses whilst waiting for the property market to bottom out. 

Mondatoo, I will check out a couple of sites to see what other products are out there. The availabilty of mortgages are reducing on a daily basis so it is getting harder to find a suitable mortgage especially in your situation. Can you not buy with someone else. One option, but worse case scenio is to take that mortgage and plan to move it to a better deal once the market improves. The risk to this is when will that happen and what new products will be available at any given time. The optmistic view is that lenders make their business from lending and won't always be so nervous. Times will change, the question is when, sadly the answer is who knows.

Your cousin would need to have three years certified accounts for his income to count towards the affordability criteria of the mortgage. But with an 8-% LTV (Loan to Valuation) you should have no problem in getting a mortgage from any responsible lender. If you earn over £17000 per year then you could get it just on your income and in any case you would want to set up an agreement with a solicitor regarding how much you and your cousin should contribute to the mortgage payments and the share of the property you will own if one of you moves out.

If you went for a tracker mortgage, then they are available for around 1% above base rate which would be around 6.2% APR and with the Bank of England Rate set to fall over the rest of this year this could look like a great deal. There should be no fees to get this apart from a valuation fee of about £120 and possibly chaps fees of around £17.50. Also look for a deal with no tie in or early repayment fees.

Don't go through a broker unless you don't like your money, in which case come play me at poker.

The amount you quoted for the Halifax is far too low for that interest rate and must have been some kind of initial discount rate. You will be looking at payments around the £500 mark for that size loan anything lower is just clever marketing with the expected strings attached.

If you get a mortgage over 25 years, and make overpayments when you can, then you will pay a lot less than £245k in total, but do be aware that in any mortgage for the first 10 years or so you are mostly just paying the interest and making very little capital reduction.

I am not going to recommend an individual lender, but if I did it would have four letters beginning with an H.

Thanks for your input thediceman and grier much appreciated(as is everyoneelses).The tracker mortgage idea sounds like this could be a good idea for us with our situation does this work like a fixed rate mortgage where you can try to change to a better deal in 2/3 years time or do u have to stay to a tracker mortgage for the full length of the deal.( i imagine you can but just checking i don't really no much about it tbh).

I was also suprised at how good the halifax offer was it was a fixed rate %  for 1st 2 years am not really expecting to get as good a deal as that but somewhere in between.

Also thanks for the non-recommendation. :)up

Normally once its a tracker its always a tracker so its gauranteed to be with in x% of the base rate for the life of the loan, this means that although you wont always have the cheapest possible mortgage it also will never be anywhere near the most expensive. Fixed rate deals can be full of hidden catches like being stuck on the very high variable rate for a number of years following the end of the fixed rate and you have to pay a fee to redeem it and prob can't make any over payments (although this depends on the lender).

The lender I didn't recommend also allows unlimited overpayments and early redemption with no fees whatsoever, unlike some more "hidden in the small print" lenders like the one which is named after a town called Halifax.

Will have a look in both m8 cheers.I was hoping this would be done quite quickly but now am expecting quite a long process by the looks of it oh well see how it goes will let uz no thanks again for e1s help much appreciated.

cheers tighty.

I meant 'banks greed' in terms of them absolutely raking it in for years but as soon as it gets a bit choppy they protect themselves by punishing their customers with high interest rates and low tolerence for credit.

In terms of how mush they have had to write down etc how does that compare to the huge fortunes they have made in the last 15 years?

ok well it doesn't quite work like that

the public perception may be that they are now punishing customers by reducing the avaialbility of credit but the fact is that these banks fund themselves via the inter-bank market

lets say they borrow at x (LIBOR in the uk) and lend at y, their profit being y-x less costs

if the the amount that is available for them to fund their lending reduces then they can't look to grow their business.

Yes a number have clearly lent aggressively in the past (look at some mortgage lending in the UK) and are now seeing bad debts rise but its all a natural economci cycle.....

and whilst the banks have lent the consumers have binged too...so with wages stagnant, living costs rising and credit terms tightening the consumer has a pinch coming

and thats before unemployment starts to rise

I gather from someone high up within a UK major bank that a few British banks have serious captial adeqauacy problems, as we are only just starting the downturn I would say the profits earned over the past 15 years aren't much of a protection when the multiplier effect of the downturn kicks in

why? well most of the accumulated profit has been paid out in dividends, to buy other banks etc etc

I do think its funny that banks are labled as greedy, its not as if they are a business and need to make a profit.

In actual fact for the last decade or so the British market has been very competitive and the vast majority of the banks profits have been comming from developing markets in Asia and Latin America.

If you love the house bite the bullet and pay the price.

Today it may be hard. Don't waste money gambling. Get a bit of equity in a few years you'll get a better deal.

P.S I'd buy alone and rent to your cousin. Have him as a lodger.

Regards

M


  

Tightend has just proved why the public need the FSA

Regards

M

lol fair enough

of course my views are only opinions and not the professional advice of one subject to the FSA's rules!

At the end of the day free advice is worth every penny you spend on it. Where as paid advice normally isn't.

I actually believe that house prices will drop, lending will become tougher as a direct result of media hysteria.
Labour of course have screwed us badly taxwise obviously (cuz it's historically correct), tories will come in and help a bit but they cannot reverse the trend.
I say cut all overseas aid, immigrant benefit and pump the cash back in via tax breaks subsidies before we are all screwed.

Vote IFM at the next elections..

Sorry if this is toungue in cheek and I've just been wooshed but are you seriously advocating reallocating resources away from those with a degree of need (LDCs, benefit recipients) to homeowners simply because  equity gains over the past decade may end up being 150% instead of 200%?

House prices will drop, in part because lending is tougher, yes. However lending criteria are entirely unaffected by "media hysteria". The criteria have been too loose because loan originators (Mortgage providers) have had their incentive to check the credit worthiness of loan recipients eroded away by well developed secondary markets for loans-loans could be sold on. However, as loan performances have dropped below historical averages, the demand for repackaged loans has evaporated, financial instiutions are stuck with the loans they've made and are belatedly realising a default by the debtor once again directly hits them in the pocket.

I do agree that taxation, borrowing and above all spending by the government are too high but I think there are better targets than the ones you've suggested.

I don't think unemployment will actually rise all that much. Many of the new jobs that have been created over the past few years have been going to immigrants from other EU countries (mostly the Eastern Europeans). If our economy contracts, and jobs are lost, it will be these jobs which go, and the E Europeans will just go back home, particularly as the economies of their home countries grow (the zloty has surged against the pound recently).

One good thing to come out of the housing slide will be a series of Property Ladder where the idiot developers lose a packet on their mangled projects, instead of being saved by a general rise in house prices.

All power to the Beeny.

If you can get a  house now worth 100k for 80k you are obviously getting a good deal. But paying 245k for an 80k house obviously isn't...if you can get a better deal I'd go hae a look somewhere else.

The housing market will be tough for the next few years as the influence of what is going on in the States wil no doubt have a major impact on the UK economy and the banks are iffy enough already.

I agree with the "4 letter starting with an H" recommendation..they are the only bank that will still be able to give decent deals to people as they are the only ones that will not be hit by the sub-prime market directly. (They are clever boys there at the H in the way their bank is set-up..very very clever actually and will become a dominant force in the mortgage market within the next 10 years or so, whereas right now they are not....Really...very clever boys..it's been a long time since I have been this impressed with the way a company will try to kill off the competition and expand into a market.)

Make no mistake..the economy is in for a proper rough ride and this means that the housing market will have it tough...there are opportunities there but now is not the time to mortgage yourself upto the hilt..make sure you can easily afford the payments.

I bet a growing number of estate agents will be seeking new employment opportunities.

They will need to be very aggressive to make an impact on the morgtate market, I believe they currently have a 3% market share so have some way to go.

Interestingly H*** are the company I've just contacted re: my next couple of mortgage.

H*** will be very agressive..they are also the only bank with money still to lend out. They are very serious about this and are the only bank with plenty/endless monies..the other banks all have to tighten the belt and H*** will kill every single one of them off.

Well if we mirror whats happened in the states its only going to get worse. Sold house in CA last year and the property developer that bought it cant sell it now for 30% less then what he bought it for and its still going down.

Now if we could only get the $ to  increase in value a bit I can payoff my mortgage :)

Why is HSBC a swearword on this thread?

the $ won't increase in value for a long time, I think.

its HBOS isn't it?

(http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc43/kinboshi/ban.gif)

Because Kev's with the Royal Bank of Scotland.

rotflmfao.


no.

I beleive it should be.

For personal accounts they're fine, but for business, they are so expensive for everything and generally, you have no option to use a bank.      They charge to put money in, they charge to take money out, they charge annually to set up overdrafts, they obviously charge for using the overdraft.  They also charge annual fees for having credit and debit cards.  Then there's the charges for being able to take credit cards - charges for the rental of the machine, charges for each transaction, plus of course the cost when the money goes to pay into your account.  If the bank is involved, there's a charge for it and all the time, we're lending money to the bank to make investments.

You've got me started now, where's that other thread!

and they hardly offer value for money..and that's where the problem is.

There certainly not taking any risks at the moment charging a 1.5%, and sometimes even 2.5%, arrangement fees and thats on LTV's below 85%.

Re: he H*** tip I thought this was code for the Northern Rock. I was somewhat surprised last week when I was offered a mortgage with NR.

This nationalisation was only because Gordon Brown thought it was taking too long to get hold of all your stuff..so now everyone will have to get a mortgage through NR and pay everything straight to the govt.

Now i know what that H bank is ...  rotflmfao Grier78 innitially mentioned the H word but hadn't wanted to recommend me personally to them.

mondatoo - i've sent you a PM

Very serious, why should our hard earned money be sent overseas as aid?

this made me lol....

The first part or the second?

The first is pretty accurate I think:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/03/19/utax.xml

Why not?

The fact that people believe Labour are a party of high taxes and the Conservatives are not.

Look at their respective records in power they all virtually the same now. The only difference is how its portrayed to the public.

July 1997
01 • Mortgage Interest Tax Relief At Source (MIRAS) reduced from 15% to 10%
02 • Dividend Tax Credits for pension schemes abolished
03 • Income tax relief on health insurance abolished
04 • Insurance Premium Tax extended to some health insurance
05 • Road Fuel Tax escalator increased to 6%
06 • Vehicle Excise Duty increased
07 • Tobacco duty escalator increased to 5%
08 • Stamp Duty raised to 2%
09 • Carry back of Corporation Tax losses limited to 1 year
10 • Windfall tax on utilities

March 1998
11 • Tax relief for the married couple's allowance (MCA) cut to 10%
12 • Top rate of Insurance Premium Tax extended to travel insurance
13 • Exceptional increase in tobacco and alcohol duties
14 • Duties on casinos and gaming machines raised
15 • Road Fuel Tax escalator increase brought forward
16 • Tax on company cars increased
17 • Tax relief on foreign earnings abolished
18 • Tax concessions for certain professions abolished
19 • Capital gains tax imposed on certain non-residents
20 • Restriction of Capital Gains Tax relief on reinvestment
21 • Corporation tax payments on account brought forward
22 • Stamp duty increased again
23 • Certain hydrocarbon duties increased
24 • Additional diesel duties introduced
25 • Landfill Tax increased
26 • Double tax credits on certain dividends restricted

March 1999
27 • National Insurance Contributions earning limit raised
28 • NI Contributions for self-employed increased
29 • Tax relief of Married Couple's Allowance abolished
30 • MIRAS abolished
31 • Self-employed contractors to pay NI and income tax as if employees
32 • Company car business mileage discount limited
33 • Double escalator on tobacco duties
34 • Insurance Premium Tax increased to 5%
35 • Vocational training relief abolished
36 • Employer NI Contribution base broadened to include all benefits in kind
37 • VAT on some banking services increased
38 • Tax on reverse premiums paid to tenants by landlords introduced
39 • Duty on domestic fuel oils up
40 • Vehicle Excise Duty for lorries increased
41 • Landfill tax escalator introduced
42 • Stamp Duty rates raised again to 2.5/3.5%

March 2000
43 • Tobacco duties increased above inflation
44 • Stamp duty raised for 4th time, scope of duty extended
45 • Extra taxation of life assurance companies
46 • Rules on tax havens tightened up
47 • Company car taxes raised

2001
The Chancellor gives the exhausted nation a year off – no new stealth taxes!

April 2002
48 • Personal tax allowances frozen
49 • National Insurance threshold frozen
50 • NI Contributions for employers raised
51 • NI Contributions for employees raised [Class 1 up 1%]
52 • NI Contributions for self-employed raised
53 • North Sea taxation increased
54 • Duty on some alcoholic drinks raised
55 • Stamp duty thresholds frozen
56 • Tax relief on investment in film industy restricted
57 • Rules on corporate debt tightened
58 • Nil-rate threshold for inheritance tax raised by less than the rate of inflation

April 2003
59 • VAT imposed on electronically supplied services
60 • Domestic staff on £89/week to pay NI & income tax, employers to pay NI
61 • Betting duty increases
62 • Tax on red diesel and fuel oil increased
63 • Anti-tax haven rules tightened to cover more UK firms with Irish subsidiaries
64 • Vehicle excise duty raised
65 • Personal tax allowances frozen again

July, 2003
66 • £35 added to all fines and £3 added to the cost of a home insurance policy

September, 2003
67 • Price of petrol raised 7p per gallon (with the VAT)

October, 2003
68 • Up to 8 times increase in the stamp duty on leases for retail premises
69 • Airport Tax doubled

December, 2003
70 • 40% extra Council Tax on second homes was sneaked in while the Westminster Wonders were breaking up for their hols a whole week before Xmas.
Additional info : It has been pointed out that a number of councils gave an even bigger discount for second homes and the increase for some people can be 80%. Plus the usual 6-18% annual rise, depending on how bloated the council's operations have become.
   Exemptions may be granted if the second home owner (1) has to live somewhere because of his/her employment, (2) the dwelling comes with the job, or (3) there are special threat/security reasons involved. All of which excuses apply to 10, Downing Street, the home of a certain Mr. Anthony B. Liar. (Thanks to M.K.)

January, 2004
71 • £60 per day fine for late submission of self-assessment income tax forms
72 • Traffic wardens to receive powers to impose fines for a whole bunch of offences to keep poor people off the roads. The offences will include parking more than 19 inches from the kerb (£100) and dithering by people who are lost over, and who don't know whether to make a turn or keep straight on
73 • A 'Victims Fund' surcharge fine on everyone who passes through the courts. £5 for speeding up to £30 for murder.
74 • Legal Aid for the middle classes abolished

February, 2004
75 • £40 per week charge to middle-class parents for formerly free nursery places
76 • £200 per year charge to middle-class parents for places on formerly free school buses
77 • £250 per hour charge from the fire brigade for non-fire-related call-outs, e.g. clearing up after road accidents and rescuing pussy cats from trees

March, 2004
78 • £550 tax rise (at standard rate) for people using a company van or people-carrier out of work time
79 • Council Tax will rise at least 7.4% next year (according to the Budget)
80 • The tax incentive for owner-operator small businesses to become companies abolished
81 • Tax on cross-border payments for goods and services between multi-divisional companies extended to transactions within the UK
82 • Tax on trusts up from 34% to 40%
83 • Duty on red diesel up 1p/litre above inflation (57% rise)
84 • Duty on liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) used as fuel up 1p/litre above inflation (45% rise)
85 • Personal allowances for taxpayers under 65 frozen

April 2004
86 • PEPs and ISAs containing shares lose their tax break on dividends and the annual ISA allowance cut by £2,000 to £5,000
87 • The 100% tax allowance for small businesses & self-employed on new computer/advanced telephone equipment cut to 50% for 2004/5 tax year
88 • Passports – in addition to costing twice as much as the present price of £42, the new 'biometric data' passports will be valid for half as long. They will have to be renewed every 5 years instead of every 10 years, which doubles the cost yet again.
89 • £100 per year 'lighthouse tax' on small boats over 8 metres long. Commerial shipping lines think they should pay £2.6 million per year towards the annual £73 million cost of maintaining lighthouses and navigational equipment.

May 2004
90 • Council Tax bills to rise a further £110 in the affected areas to pay for 'Two Jags' Prescott's regional assemblies

Gordon Brown has imposed 157 'stealth tax' rises since 1997, according to an authoritative study.

The analysis, by some of Britain's most respected economic forecasters, reveals that the number of Labour tax hikes is more than double previously thought.

The Tories had identified only 66 tax rises and called Mr Brown the 'clickety click' Chancellor.

Last night they said the latest study, by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, exposed Labour promises not to raise tax as a 'sham'.

Labour went into the 1997 and 2001 general elections pledging not to increase the standard or top rates of income tax. Tony Blair went even further in 1995 saying: "We have no plans to increase taxes at all."

But while Labour has kept its pledge not to raise the rate of income tax, Chancellor Gordon Brown has devised dozens of alternative revenue-raising schemes.

The most notable include an increase of 10 per cent in National Insurance contributions to raise money for spending on the NHS.

Duty on a bottle of spirits has gone up by 19p since 1997, by 16p on a bottle of wine and £1.03 on 20 cigarettes.

Council tax, meanwhile, has gone up by 70 per cent since Labour came to power.

Mr Brown has also refused to raise income tax thresholds in line with increasing earnings.

This has dragged 1.5million more people into the higher tax rate since 1997, meaning that 2.8million people pay 40 per cent tax.

But the IFS study, part of its annual 'Green Budget', highlights dozens of other tax-raising measures, including action on offshore trusts, climate change levies on business and moves to stop avoidance of stamp duty.

Shadow Chancellor Oliver Letwin said: "This shows the true extent of Mr Blair's smash-and-grab raid on our pockets.

"People are having to work ever harder simply to stand still. It is a phenomenal number of increases.

"The result is that taxes have risen by £5,000 a year per family since 1997."

The Tories warn of more tax rises if Labour wins a third term.

Mr Letwin said: "There is more to come. A couple on average earnings will pay an extra £1,000 a year immediately if Labour are re-elected."

The IFS predicts the Chancellor will have to raise taxes by at least £11billion a year to pay for his future spending plans and says the tax burden is set to reach a 25-year high by 2010.

The analysis also shows Mr Brown has made 215 tax-cutting measures since 1997, as well as the 157 hikes.

It concludes that the Chancellor will take £17.9billion more in tax this year than he would if he had made no changes to the tax regime.

"We estimate that in real terms, the tax take for 2005/6 will be £17.9billion higher as a result of the specific changes to the tax system that have been implemented by Labour," said an IFS spokesman.

Last night Treasury sources said more than £9billion of the increase in the annual tax take was a result of changes made by the last Tory government and implemented by Labour.

Chief Secretary to the Treasury Paul Boateng said: "The UK continues to be one of the lowest taxed economies in the EU.

"The average family is facing a lower direct tax burden than in 1997."

He added: "As a result of all the changes we've made to the tax and benefit system since 1997, families with children will be on average £1,300 a year better off this April.

"Families in the poorest fifth of the population will be £3,000 a year better off."

I can copy and paste loads of articles too with Conservative tax increases.

Means fukall, bottom line is they all very similar now and alot of the increases are dependent on our economic situation.

What a ridiculous statement.   The Labour Party have done this country in, open borders with no controls, bottomless pit welfare state, bloated civil service non jobs - massive pensions, PFI,  god, I could go on all night.

please don't.

Funny that...you and I are from the opposite ends of the political spectrum (IOW..I am always right and you are always wrong ;) ) and on this even we agree.

Of course its labour that have done all the rubbish stuff over the last 11 years cos they are in power and the tories are not. If they were then they would have also done a load of stupid stuff like they did for the two decades years before 1997.

IMHO we should give the Lib Dems a try, but they are two busy sitting in a corner playing conkers for anyone to notice that they have any policies.

Lib Dems don't have policies..it's one of the problems with the Lib Dems..they have ideals but no policies..the other one being that they don't have anyone decent who can lead the party, they have a 14 YO spoker person on education and the rest of them don't mind paying to suck some c*ck or leave their wife for one of the Cheeky slappers and then try to get them an immigration visa...hardly people I would trust running a country.

So your saying the parties are wide apart in how they would run the country and tax people? they are virtually identical once the rhetoric is taken away. The only party with slightly different policies are the Lib Dem's who can say whatever they want as they will not get in.

I agree with you this country is done in, its in such a state.  I mean all those people feeling the pinch will have to cut back on their sky TV subscription, not continually overspend on huge mortgages, or stop getting take aways every night, or getting pissed up and wasting their money. Fuck me how will we cope?

I also agree with you, now the boarders are open all those minimun wage jobs are being taken up by well manered hard working people who pay taxes! It's now so hard to get a job, you have my sympathy's.

You forget Ecosse is a racist bigot so don't  read too much into his posts.

One of the best things that has happened under the Labour government is the tide of foreign hard working minimum wage workers that now live and work in the uk.

how 'hard earned' is it though?  I'd wager that it's a damn site harder surviving in a third world country and grafting hard for peanuts.  Why should we not share a small percentage of our wealth with those who were not fortunate enough to be born into the same level of luxury as us?

I, like many others in this country, have always worked hard for my money.

I have no problem assisting others with aid, my problem is that too often the aid does not get down to the levels where it is intended.

A lot of those you mention are forced to work hard for peanuts by there own greedy governments actions.

Geo

Geo makes a good point about good governance...definitely there is a massive case for aid being targeted rather than being purely cash

My 'alleged' bigotry seems to stem from the fact that, like the left wing BBC,  mr flush thinks anyone who voices their disquiet against the levels of (illegal) immigration into this country is 'a racist bigot'. 


Decorum prevents me from airing on a public forum my thoughts on Mr flush.

I suspect Flushy's views are based more on the colourful language you chose to use when voicing your disquiet.  I would link to the relevant posts but they've been deleted from public view, presumably because of their racist content.

FYP

Making sweeping statements about immigration that are untrue gives the impression your a racist. Nothing to do with left wing, flushy, or the mods.

well that didn't take long

from a blog this moring after the £5bn RBOS captial raising


"And so Royal Bank of Scotland (owner of NatWest) is going to be forced to break ranks and admit that it needs to shore up its capital base. A £5bn rights issue is just part of the fun. Expect at least as much again in some for of hybrid securitization and more senior debt. Not for nothing were its shares yielding 9% yesterday. They ain’t gonna be yielding that no more.

Personally, if RBS were a customer seeking a mortgage and I were a bank, the conversation between me and Sir Fred Goodwin, RBS chairman, would go something along the lines of ...

“So, Sir Fred, you want to raise £5bn from us, without very much as collateral, because you went out and splurged money on ABN Amro and you lent money to a mate of yours in the pub who was always a bit dodgy, but he promised that he would pay you back and offered you a caravan as security?”

“Yes, that’s right.”

“Thank you, Sir Fred, but I think I’ll pass on this one. Don’t you know that there’s a credit crisis? We are only dealing with reliable borrowers with a good track record. In other words, like banks, we are only willing to lend to institutions who don’t need it. Close the door on the way out, won’t you?”


Halifax Bank of Scotland will likely be next in line, I guess, perhaps followed by Lloyds TSB and Barclays. HSBC is beginning to look an oasis in a desert of crap financial institutions.

The Bank of England, ever keen to bail out these incompetent basket cases, is apparently willing to accept as much as £30bn in collateral in the form of mortgages. However, if RBS needs to raise £12bn, the question must be, is even that much enough? And that, you should note, already constitutes nearly a thousand quid for every adult in the country. I wouldn’t mind so much if the banks had stepped up to the plate to help Citizen UK in the tough times of the early 1990s, but, as far as I recall, they were too busy wallowing in their bonuses.

The banks, I would think, will try to put a positive spin on this, along the lines of “before today we just didn’t know what the impact was going to be, but now things are becoming clearer and it’s possible to draw a line under the whole affair”. All of this sidesteps the fact that the UK banks have steadfastly insisted in past months that they do not need to raise fresh capital. That line has been exposed as, quite simply, a lie. And it isn’t really ameliorated by the fact that anyone who could see what was happening in the US knew that it was a lie. Sir Fred Goodwin was also the guy who said at last year that the takeover of ABN Amro was a good idea. I think I wrote at the time that this was probably one battle that Fortis would eventually be happy to have lost. That's been proved true even sooner than I anticipated.

If Goodwin doesn’t fall on his sword soon, he will do so in the medium term after some of the fuss has died down, but Goodwin isn’t solely at fault here – it’s corporate complacency at RBS, Lloyds TSB and Barclays that will have caused the problems. They have people who are just money brokers who thought that they understood risk. Brokers don’t understand risk – it’s traders and underwriters who understand risk. The bankers, in other words, thought that they were better at their job than they really were, and they didn’t really understand what their job was anyway."

 :goodpost:

Also just wanted to say thanks 4 all the post they've mostly been very helpful,i won't get involved in the racial debate except to say i think a big problem with many people issues with foreigners coming over here is there own ignorance(guess i am now hmm!).Also many thanks for all the pms recieved all your help is very much appreciated.

excellent post. (always nice to see someone agreeing with me about HSBC as well  :) )

[/quote]
One of the best things that has happened under the Labour government is the tide of foreign hard working minimum wage workers that now live and work in the uk.
[/quote]

at least they can now pay tax @ 20%  :)up

This is the problem, it has nothing to do with race or immigrant workers for that matter it is to do with immigrants coming here purely for handouts be it via benefits or the nhs, it's wrong.

 
But most immigrants come here for economic reasons- not to scrounge or sponge, but to work. A great deal of anecdotal evidence suggests that many of those who do rely on the state for their income (i.e. asylum seekers/ refugees still awaiting confirmation of their right to remain) would prefer to earn their own living but are prevented from doing so by their legal limbo.

As for people coming to the UK for the NHS, I would have thought the bigger problem would be Brits going to poorer countries for cheaper healthcare thereby pushing up the cost for locals?

Thank you.

Again you sidestep the group i am talking about but while you do mention asylum seekers/ refugees why do you think they all want to come here?

Article 1A(2) of the Convention defines a refugee as:

'A person who has a well-founded fear of persecution for reason of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion and who is outside the country of his nationality or former habitual residence and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country or to return to it.'

That's why they want to come here.

I think you may have misunderstood my post m8 i ment english peoples ignorance. For instance most of the political correctness bs doesn't come from the people its about but from idiotic ministers and the such who are so frightened of offending anyone in a minority.This therefore annoys the majority i.e english people and leads to them blaming the minority for this stupidity even though it's not there doing.

I know what a refugee is you pillock but why HERE?

Because it's better than where they are coming from, pillock.

They don't just come here, in fact we take less than a lot of other countries do.

LoL. obviously its better, jeez.
Stop stating the obvious, if you really want to argue at least try!

most refugees head for a place they have some knowledge or releationship with


as the british empire spanned the globe many of the refugees have an attachment

also english is a global language and most people on the planet have a splattering  of english (apart from me of course)

that makes english speaking nations targets for refugeess (like austrailia UK and USA) from former french and spanish colonies the

french and spanish have the same problem we have (larger countries with more room and smaller colonies) if the UK wasnt such

a former powerhouse and we had a little more spaces we wouldnt have any problem

Indeed. In Holland it's mainly people from Suriname that came over with Turkish and Marrocans. (because we had a massive employment need in the '50's we asked a lot of Turkish people to come over to Holland to work, this built up a fairly large Turkish community in Holland that integrated very well into Dutch society and therefore a fair few Turkish people now come to Holland if they want to leave Turkey (Turkish Kurds still have a pretty shitty life there).

The immigrants and refugees that come to the UK come here because they think they can integrate better into British society, they already know part of it's culture and often the language..they sure as hell don't come here because your benefit system is soo fantastic or becauuse the NHS is better than any other healthcare system in Europe..anyone who claims that is severely delusional..or just ignorant about the state of the British welfare system compared to the rest of Europe.

LLevan must be your man for this. Ooops sorry i thought it said norkage advice....

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080420/tpl-uk-britain-crunch-20b2d2f.html

must be nice to be a banker.to have made a mess of your business and now find the govt is willing to take over your bad debts.

Also nice..the Bank of England has cut interest rates a few times..so Gordon Brown and Darling have asked the banks to pass this on to their clients (you and me) unfortunatelky the banks have said "no".

Why should the BoE even bail these tossers out now?...only because Brown has finally been completely found out...you can be pretty damn sure it won't do us any good...but it's nice if you're the CEO of a bank (or even a share holder)..it's a 50 billion £ gift from the government to you.

So, Abbey National stops lending to anyone without a 25% deposit. Since a 300k flat (quite standard for two bedrooms in a half-decent area in London) would require you to stump up 75k, plus another 15k or so for expenses, I think that we can safely say that the current market is shot to shit. How steep and horrible the fall will be is anyone's guess, and a lot depends on rollover effects with, for example, remortgagers, and with the knock-on to the whole economy.

In effect, the UK needs to produce itself out of trouble, so, if full employment is maintained, you don't get recession-linked defaults, and the housing market stabilises at a new "more sensible" level, with inflation working to bring house prices back to a p/e ratio of 4 to 4.5 times average annual earnings.

But if we get a dose of unemployment, then you get defaults. People can't remortgage. They get foreclosed. The whole market seizes up. The crash in house prices in areas where most of the purchases were credit-funded could be in the region of 50% (and even I hadn't imagined that in my earlier doom-laden scenarios). London, where more purchases are cash-based and there are fewer first-time buyers, will fare better unless the recession is global. But I can still see a 30% drop in house prices.

One saviour (for London) could be the strong euro. For reasons that escape me, the place is still chic.

But in parts of Bolsover and Newport, where most of the mortgages are 100% and there are no new buyers on the horizon, it makes pretty grim viewing for a number of homeowners, and not that much better for non homeonwers, unless they are sitting on wodges of cash.

One conversation I used to have with people who worried about falling house prices was to ask them "could you afford to buy the place that you are living in today?", to which the answer was invariably "no". "So", I then asked, "who do you expect to buy it, if not another version of you?"

In this sense, the whole housing market was a bit of a Ponzi scheme, with the increased prices hidden by the word "affordability", as if that was all that mattered, the amount of your monthly payment. Hidden away in this emperor's new clothes land was that the debt was real money. a grand a month for 40 years is not cheaper than fifteen hundred a month for 10 years.

The Bank of England wittering about the bailout is clearly trying to hide the fact that it's a bailout. George Osborne follows the nut-line, talking about "unblocking the financial system", while Mervyn King glossed over the cracks by saying that the Banks would be required to pay a fee for the swap facility and they will have to provide the Bank of England with assets "of greater value than the government bonds they will receive".

The key phrase here of course is "of greater value than". What does that mean (apart, of course, from implicitly assuming that the whole thing is a liquidity crisis and nothing else)?

I think the best way to explain this is to remember Schindler's List, when Schindler asks Goeth how much the workers were worth to him. Goeth, clearly an investment banker in a previous life, said that that was not the point. The point was, how much were the workers worth to Schindler.

As Goeth spotted, "value" is a relativistic concept.

Another example might be if I really want a painting that someone else owns. He desperately wants to sell, I (an art expert, for the purpose of this thought experiment) desperately want to buy, and we both agree that the painting is "worth" ten million quid.

Unfortunately, neither I nor anyone else who thinks that the painting is worth ten million quid (all the art experts in the world), have that kind of money. And the people who do have the money (second-hand car dealers in Walthamstow) are only offering a million quid.

We, the art experts, mock this valuation as "way wrong". But, in what sense is it wrong? It's the same with the CDOs. It doesn't matter how many experts say that they are "worth" x-million quid. All that matters is how much a second-hand car dealer in Walthamstow is willing to pay for them.

So, Mervyn King might be talking about value, but it's a nebulous concept and I suspect that King is praying that his assertion is not put to any kind of test in the short term.

 :goodpost: I didn't understand half of it but it was still damned impressive.

so is there a chance i might actually be able to get on the property ladder one day?

sure, some time after you have retired. Or sooner, but only if the world goes to hell in a handbasket first.

good good

I'd like to know how the government has £50 bill to lend, if they've been saving my taxes instead of spending them on what i'm paying for then i will be pissed..

I obviously read the same blogs as tighty ;)

I did credit didn't I?

Oops, Peter Birks...excellent stuff

he is very good...and soo true. it's bye bye to the housing market.

The govt will "ask the banks to be nice to those that can't pay their debts and not to reposses" or something similar was in the news today.

i don't even know where to start there. Banks being nice? It's now OK to not pay your bills because the govt says so?

Population forecasts all suggest a considerable growth, some even stating that by 2020 we will have a population in excess of 70 million.

So with more people & not enough housing does that really = a housing crash ???

Short term factors are indeed having a negative effect on the housing market but bye, bye housing market, IMO it's more a case of see you later.

I did suspect it wasn't an original piece of Prew prose when I got to the phrase 'shot to shit'. :)

This is another reason why the government is keen on immigration - the extra demand for houses props up the housing market and stops muppets who paid well over the odds for their homes from getting their pain medicine.

I suspect the immigration policy has little to do propping up the housing market and more to do with certain industries struggling to find enough, if any, Britsh workers interested in doing a hard days work.

even when it's bye bye it 's a case of see you later....

So when will it crash so I can move from my 3-bed semi to a nice 4-bed detached for not much more?
 

yep :) ..assuming you can sell your three bed semi for enough monies.

I'll sell it for a fiver, and buy the bigger one for a tenner.  Sorted.

Good man :)

Is it not a case of auf wiedersehen ???

Kin, I'll give you a fiver at BB6, please bring the deeds.

Only as a part-ex.  You need to bring the deeds for a 4-bed detached (with garage) and a decent-sized garden.

:)up

Sounds like your changing the terms and conditions. No mention of it being a part-exchange deal in your first post.  ;joestrummer;

It's the current climate.  Everything is in constant flux. 

Sounds like the electrics need redoing as well - that's a big job.

rotflmfao

HSBC FTW!!!  ;applause;

Looks like these guys have decided not to air on the side of caution like everybody else having just spoken to they lending department. They have just increased their rates and changed there policy. H*** advisor actually stated that they are nolonger looking to increase their existing 2% maket share.

I was looking to buy a HMO property at this weeks auction which returns a yield over 18% and has a full occupency agreement for the next 6 months from all existing tenents yet noone is willing to loan on a b-t-l basis unless there is a sole person on the agreement not 9 individuals. Looks like they have really streamlined the mortgage products available.

HSBC have never really been interested in the Buy to let market, not sure why. I think Bradford and Bingley are best for BTL off the top of my head.

Bistol and West apparently at mo

Bradford & Bingley have been the main lender I have used in the past but they have just increased there rates. Whilst speaking th the HSBC adviser he was basically just repeating the same products that the B&B are currently offering both stating a product rate of 2.5% above base rate. The only difference is that B&B charge a 1.5% arrangement fee whereas HSBC's was £500ish. Word is B&B are in a bit of trouble and seriously having to amended it's portfolio.

Bristol & West the lender that came out top with my recent chat with an independent financial adviser them and surprisingly .................................................... Northern Rock.

We have made mortgage application with hsbc was expecting underwriters response today (its been 5days since app. today) should know tmoro whats happening, fingers crossed.

Firstly just wanted to again thank every1 for there input(especially those that pmd was much appreciated) it was a great help finally got news yesterday and we were approved by underwriters so hopefully baring anymore problems should be homeowner within a few weeks. HSBC FOR THE WIN.Cheers all.

HSBC for the win indeed! :)

Good news. 

FINALLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Signed the contracts today and completion date is friday so all should be finished by the end of the week.Again thanks for everyones help, much appreciated

[X] Taking a half day on friday, signing it off and getting mortal with me dad

[  ] My posts will make sense on friday night

N1  wd  :)up :cheers:

Regardng buy to let mortgages, i will be wanting to let my house out at the end of the year but is it ok to do that with my mortgage im paying now?
I thought i would just keep paying the mortgage as normal and let the house out to someone or is it more complicated than that?
Anyone any advice would be handy.


Cheers

By rights you should transfer to a buy to let mortgage.

but you should be able to get away with it until yr current deal expires.

And re direct yr post :)up

depending on the lender they will give permission to let it anyway

or you could just do what most people do and dont tell them they will never find out also gives you the option to swap rates with them and not have to worry about Buyto let rates which are high at the moment.

and if they do find out you just ask their permission anyway

Cheers, that was the plan anyway, but defo good idea to redirect the post :)

Wow-hindsight, Mr. Tightend take a bow, some very prescient chat on this thread regarding the current financial situation...ok crisis... I think my first post (of several) points out mortgage lending as a problem but your insight is far more...well...insightful....