Bank repossessed houses - Our new Social Housing stock

[Cyclone]

Doesn’t a scheme a long these lines already exist, someone I know is about to have his house reposed and he says its being bought off the bank and then rented back to him, I don’t know if it’s the council that buys it or an housing association that does this.

 

 

 

If there is any equity.... in most cases I would have thought the only equity would be a negative one or the owner would have gone down the sale / down size route.

 

Negative equity for the home owner might mean just a small loss for the lender. It's certainly better than the house being taken from them and the entire loan being written off.

 

Of course if the bank is paid for the house and it becomes social housing then they've got (and wouldn't have) any complaints as they've got their money back.

[sierraman]

When interest rates rise, along with the job cuts, we will see an increase in repossessions and property prices will fall. People are being repossessed currently, and some by, the banks we bailed out, RBS for example.

 

With such a lack of social housing across the country. I think its high time we increased the stock.

 

I want to see massive building programs to address the need and improve the future prosperity of our country, but these don't seem to be in the pipeline, yet.

 

Seeing as we bailed out the banks, we should repossess from them, the houses they repossess from the citizens of the state, the state that bailed them out.

 

What do you think?

 

Are you off your rocker? The banks repossess properties to claw back the capital they lent to the person buying the house. If they gave the property to ,the government they would be down say £120,000. If they carried on like that they would be going bust again quite quickly, thus requiring the government to pump further money into bailing them out.

[chem1st]

Are you off your rocker? The banks repossess properties to claw back the capital they lent to the person buying the house. If they gave the property to ,the government they would be down say £120,000. If they carried on like that they would be going bust again quite quickly, thus requiring the government to pump further money into bailing them out.

 

They were lending money they didn't have. The government needs to get our money back from the banks. We should take the houses from the banks.

[sierraman]

They were lending money they didn't have. The government needs to get our money back from the banks. We should take the houses from the banks.

 

So what do you suggest we do with these houses? Sell them or move some scroungers into them to live there for free?

[liza D]

When interest rates rise, along with the job cuts, we will see an increase in repossessions and property prices will fall. People are being repossessed currently, and some by, the banks we bailed out, RBS for example.

 

With such a lack of social housing across the country. I think its high time we increased the stock.

 

I want to see massive building programs to address the need and improve the future prosperity of our country, but these don't seem to be in the pipeline, yet.

 

Seeing as we bailed out the banks, we should repossess from them, the houses they repossess from the citizens of the state, the state that bailed them out.

 

What do you think?

 

 

So people who have been made redundant because of the recession, then lose their homes to the people who caused recession in the first place, have to then go on the waiting list for social housing whilst their home is taken over by the government who allowed the banks to cause recession and then made into social housing, Which will no doubt end up being tenanted by someone "seeking asylum".

 

It would be better if they took over all those building that belong to the big firms, left empty for years on end until the prices pick up.

 

Or instead of throwing people out of their homes why not step in and offer to buy them and let the people stay in it, just paying rent.

[Cyclone]

They were lending money they didn't have. The government needs to get our money back from the banks. We should take the houses from the banks.

 

That's the entire basis of the banking system, the law determines what level of capital to loans made the banks have to maintain.

 

And even given your ridiculous objection, how does destroying the banks by stealing their assets help the situation?