Vague_Boy Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 The first family took out a 100% mortgage on a £500,000 house with £2,000 mortgage payments per month, for 10 years the husbands engineering company was doing well, family ski holidays etc, for 10 years, nothing put aside for the bad times, are you kidding me. "We had two cars, we sold one which paid for Christmas." WTF? And that's with interest rates at multi-century lows. Heaven help them if they should ever rise. ---------- Post added 14-12-2012 at 22:44 ---------- Why are we not experiencing things like Greece, because we borrow at 2% and not 6-7%. Plus we have access to a printing press (Quantitative Easing = money created out of thin air) which the Greeks don't. The simple truth is, if interest rates were at their normal rate of 5% - instead of the extremely low 2% they're at right now – there's absolutely no way Britain could ever repay its debts. In fact, at normal rates of interest we're already bust. Not just 'in over our heads' but six feet under. It's simple maths. If interest rates moved back towards the normal 5% level, our cost of borrowing would triple. Just to put that into context, if our current debt repayments tripled, the government would have to take drastic action – like abolishing the state pension. Or privatising the NHS. Or pushing tax rates back up to 90%, as they were in the 1960s. In short, Britain would change radically. And that's just if interest rates move back to "normal" levels. LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Expat owl Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 It's an odd situation. Just watched Panorama £500,000, 100% mortgage and the people saying they worked hard for it. If they'd worked hard for it then they wouldn't have had a 100% mortgage to begin with. Basically what they did was reckless in the extreme and idiocy when they had kids to think about. Don't understand why this family didn't just sell the house and trade down. A house purchased 10 years ago (even with a 100% mortgage) would have increased in value by at least 25%. That would give them circa £250k to buy somewhere else and avoid eviction. Therefore this family are either stupid or we weren't being told the full story and this was just another sensationalist TV programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scentral Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 How do you work that out-the highest rate is 50 % on income and 20% for VAT. And, as others have pointed out, 12% for the 'free at the point of service' NHS. And don't forget, VAT is actually much higher - it's a tax on money that's already been taxed. Throw in fuel duty (highest in Europe) and, if you use them, booze and fags, and it's hardly worth getting out of bed. The old argument about 'taxes are needed for schools, hospitals etc.' is becoming increasingly redundant. Politicians can't be trusted with our money when they are so incompetent (West Coast rail link etc. etc.) or downright corrupt (their own expenses, 'Foreign Aid' etc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 And, as others have pointed out, 12% for the 'free at the point of service' NHS. And don't forget, VAT is actually much higher - it's a tax on money that's already been taxed. Throw in fuel duty (highest in Europe) and, if you use them, booze and fags, and it's hardly worth getting out of bed. The old argument about 'taxes are needed for schools, hospitals etc.' is becoming increasingly redundant. Politicians can't be trusted with our money when they are so incompetent (West Coast rail link etc. etc.) or downright corrupt (their own expenses, 'Foreign Aid' etc.) Thats why I suggested in an earlier post that we pay over 100% of our incomes in taxes-I don't know how man can live like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alternageek Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Don't understand why this family didn't just sell the house and trade down. A house purchased 10 years ago (even with a 100% mortgage) would have increased in value by at least 25%. That would give them circa £250k to buy somewhere else and avoid eviction. Therefore this family are either stupid or we weren't being told the full story and this was just another sensationalist TV programme. This... Also, they must have put their heads in the sand and ignored the situation instead of contacting the bank as soon as things got tough. I have a friend who works in banks and saw someone with over £50,000 in debt on the mortgage and house was no where near to being repossessed. I am also surprised to hear stories about the amount of people who sign up for the biggest debt of their lives and have zero understanding of how the debt works. Some blame needs to fall on to the homeowners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnvqsos Posted December 16, 2012 Share Posted December 16, 2012 This... Also, they must have put their heads in the sand and ignored the situation instead of contacting the bank as soon as things got tough. I have a friend who works in banks and saw someone with over £50,000 in debt on the mortgage and house was no where near to being repossessed. I am also surprised to hear stories about the amount of people who sign up for the biggest debt of their lives and have zero understanding of how the debt works. Some blame needs to fall on to the homeowners Equally banks can make an effort to help,by arranging a personal visit to help counsel those with arrears.In some cases they make quite a lot of profit on selling repossessed homes,where the sums owed total £40k yet the house is valued at £180k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erebus Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I like the attitudes expressed in this post, where the victim being conned is responsible and well deserves all the blame. One can sell anything to suckers, and make them think they are better off, as for the con artist, ignorance is always bliss. Who wants well informed, intelligent suckers? That is not the road to riches is it? I agree that it’s time the victim took complete responsibility for being stupid, and when sold financial products, deserves not to be compensated at all. Why reward stupidity? If one sells people debts through mortgages, one is attempting to make such idiots run to stand still, thus making the financial industry profitable, and an industry worth investing in, one hopes by the more educated classes. Pensions, investing in the future, 25 or so years ahead, has always been a great scam, and as they say the only person who makes a profit from betting, is the bookmaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted December 18, 2012 Author Share Posted December 18, 2012 .In some cases they make quite a lot of profit on selling repossessed homes,where the sums owed total £40k yet the house is valued at £180k. But the bank only keeps what it is owned, including legal fees, any profit left over is returned to the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 I like the attitudes expressed in this post, where the victim being conned is responsible and well deserves all the blame. One can sell anything to suckers, and make them think they are better off, as for the con artist, ignorance is always bliss. Who wants well informed, intelligent suckers? That is not the road to riches is it? I agree that it’s time the victim took complete responsibility for being stupid, and when sold financial products, deserves not to be compensated at all. Why reward stupidity? If one sells people debts through mortgages, one is attempting to make such idiots run to stand still, thus making the financial industry profitable, and an industry worth investing in, one hopes by the more educated classes. Pensions, investing in the future, 25 or so years ahead, has always been a great scam, and as they say the only person who makes a profit from betting, is the bookmaker. I agree entirely. If people who had lied and cheated, or chose very stupidly to take out a mortgage they couldn't afford it would be very wrong if they benefitted from that through ongoing forebarance, debt write-down etc... Especially so if people who had acted prudently with their finances were excluded from those rewards and the people paying the utlimate price were the prudent. There is the issue of wealth transfer from the prudent to the financially feckless. That said the banks know that whatever credit lines you give to the feckless they will use them to the max to splurge cash on rubbish. And there we have it really - in the new world of banking the best customers for banks are not the savers and the prudent but rather anybody who has an unquenchable desire for credit. Banks want people by the balls, in heaps of debt. The savers aren't really needed any more to provide the capital for lending - the capital for lending is magically generated by exotic financial products. The role of the savers is to be a backstop for when it all goes wrong, there to have their savings taken away to cover for the mistakes of others. I know that while they are in the public eye banks are taking a little break from all this but beleive me they can't wait to get started again. The whole cycle will start again soon enough once they work out how to do it and get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francypants Posted December 18, 2012 Share Posted December 18, 2012 Odd reporting in this programme, I'm sure we weren't told the whole truth regarding the people shown. The family in the £500k house who took out 100% mortgage ! Don't they ever learn, and surely they could see what was coming but it seems they buried their heads in the sand !!! They had plenty of time to sell up and buy a cheaper house. Stupid people. The woman with cancer who bought her council house for £54k ( now worth £180k ) should have done the same. There would have been plenty of collateral in the house to enable her to do this. Things don't happen overnight, it takes quite a while to get to the bailiff stage, plenty of time to sell. The family who had been placed in private rented accommodation had been given plenty of assistance but didn't help themselves by not filling in the forms sent to them. You could tell they were a 'problem' family by their attitude. They even caused their own eviction from the first private rented accommodation, no hopers. I don't have much sympathy with people who won't help themselves. It was an odd programme though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.