House prices to crash

[WATFORD zero]

Please READ what I have stated for the 3rd time. You COULD NOT self cert at 100% and above as you have highlighted.

So if you lie about your income on a 90% mortgage it's not a lie

This isn't a pop at you US because i know that you take a great pride in what you do and how you do it, but when the market was buoyant, there were brokers and lenders who were at best negligent and at worst, accessories to fraud.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

I am sorry but are you a mortgage advisor ?. You are peddling a lot of mistruths. You COULD NOT ever get a 100-125% mortgage on self cert, income had to be proved and verified. Self certs were limited to 90% at the highest. Also do you know how many repossessions have occured for the people who took out the 100% plus mortgages ?. Not very many at all.

The credit crunch and recession was not and never has been down to mortgage lending in the UK.

Just for the record, in my post referring to sub-prime 120% mortgages and repossessions, I was citing the US market, which was mainly responsible for lighting the blue touch paper of the "crunch", not the UK.

 

[Mr Burns]

I am sorry but are you a mortgage advisor ?

No. If I was I would have never gone into an industry that was always only going to service a small amount of people, and as soon as the internet and those "money" sites came along I would have loked for a new career.

When I started talking about looking for a mortgage, nearly everyone I spoke to told me not to bother with brookers. A waste of time was the popular quote. Not saying they don't have there usess to certain people, but I would think at least 95% of people can do without them. As I have proved.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

So if you lie about your income on a 90% mortgage it's not a lie

We are talking at crossed purposes here. Yes it is but I am correcting the fact you could never do it at 100% or over. Surely its not that complicated to understand.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Ah well. I will still feircely believe in my value and what I do but I guess you have made your mind up.

 

[Mr Burns]

Please READ what I have stated for the 3rd time. You COULD NOT self cert at 100% and above as you have highlighted.

You're just being picky now. Okay you could not get a 100% self cert. You could get a 90% self cert, so if you write down you earn 100k a year when you only earn 30k, is that fraud? As you well know, the point I am making is about the fraud, NOT whether or not you could only get 90 or 100% self certs! But I'm sure you knew that!

 

[Mr Burns]

I am sorry but are you a mortgage advisor ?. You are peddling a lot of mistruths. You COULD NOT ever get a 100-125% mortgage on self cert, income had to be proved and verified. Self certs were limited to 90% at the highest. Also do you know how many repossessions have occured for the people who took out the 100% plus mortgages ?. Not very many at all.

The credit crunch and recession was not and never has been down to mortgage lending in the UK.

You'd make a very good MP. You're very good at picking on general comments that may not be 100% accurate, and then twisting it to fit your own argument, whilst ignoring the wider point.

As you have told us, you ouldn't get self certs 100% mortgages, so I would imagine on that basis very little repossenssions would happen on 100% mortgages

But how many repossessions have happened, or are likely to happen on the 90% LTV self cert mortgages?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

You're just being picky now. Okay you could not get a 100% self cert. You could get a 90% self cert, so if you write down you earn 100k a year when you only earn 30k, is that fraud? As you well know, the point I am making is about the fraud, NOT whether or not you could only get 90 or 100% self certs! But I'm sure you knew that!

I was correcting you on your statement people lied on 100-120% mortgages to get a higher mortgage. If we are going to have a reasoned debate lets at least get the facts right and yes it is mortgage fraud.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

You'd make a very good MP. You're very good at picking on general comments that may not be 100% accurate, and then twisting it to fit your own argument, whilst ignoring the wider point.

As you have told us, you ouldn't get self certs 100% mortgages, so I would imagine on that basis very little repossenssions would happen on 100% mortgages

But how many repossessions have happened, or are likely to happen on the 90% LTV self cert mortgages?

Hardly any at the moment.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

You'd make a very good MP. You're very good at picking on general comments that may not be 100% accurate, and then twisting it to fit your own argument, whilst ignoring the wider point.

As you have told us, you ouldn't get self certs 100% mortgages, so I would imagine on that basis very little repossenssions would happen on 100% mortgages

But how many repossessions have happened, or are likely to happen on the 90% LTV self cert mortgages?

I don't get your reasoning. Your statement people lied on their income to get 100% plus mortgages and because of this they are in the shit and will be repossed is a lie. It is an important thing to put correct.

 

[Mr Burns]

I was correcting you on your statement people lied on 100-120% mortgages to get a higher mortgage. If we are going to have a reasoned debate lets at least get the facts right and yes it is mortgage fraud.

Thank you for putting me right on that point, but if you are going to have a reasoned argument, its probably best not to answer someone with "not true" when they say that its fraud, just because they got the % of what people can borrow wrong. At the end of the day, if you couldn't borrow 100%, your answer should have been "not relavant" and not "not true", and that would have made it clearer.

But then I suppose if the mortgage market was clearer and easier to understand, they'd be even less need for advisors/brookers, so I can see where you're coming from

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Thanks for the debate Mr Burns. All the best.

Uncle Spielberg
Mortgage Brooker

 

[Chicken Runner61]

I never said it was the brokers fault, and there is a bit more to my story that I won't put on here. I wasn't borrowing the money to use it - I wanted it for now not then!

But you would have to be an extremely naive broker not to realise that most if not all of your clients were not borrowing more than they possibly should.

After all if you could prove your income why would you need to self cert? You could have gone to a high street society if you had the documentation and not paid a fee.

Lets face it US the rise of the mortgage broker only came about because lending regs were relaxed and the financiers wanted to place lots of confusing deals on offer and needed people like you to work day and night without directly employing them and on a commision basis.

When the system abused itself and came crashing down the financiers simply ditched you lot and moved back to the old system and now charge a whacking arrangement fee to make the money they used to make from the dumb taxpayers that give them the money to loan back to them!

 

[Chicken Runner61]

But then I suppose if the mortgage market was clearer and easier to understand, they'd be even less need for advisors/brookers, so I can see where you're coming from

OHHHH Mr Burns

Nail & head mate, Nail & head!

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I never said it was the brokers fault, and there is a bit more to my story that I won't put on here. I wasn't borrowing the money to use it - I wanted it for now not then!

But you would have to be an extremely naive broker not to realise that most if not all of your clients were not borrowing more than they possibly should.

After all if you could prove your income why would you need to self cert? You could have gone to a high street society if you had the documentation and not paid a fee.

Lets face it US the rise of the mortgage broker only came about because lending regs were relaxed and the financiers wanted to place lots of confusing deals on offer and needed people like you to work day and night without directly employing them and on a commision basis.

When the system abused itself and came crashing down the financiers simply ditched you lot and moved back to the old system and now charge a whacking arrangement fee to make the money they used to make from the dumb taxpayers that give them the money to loan back to them!

Fair enough mate. I am retraining as a Solar Panel salesman now anyway.

 

[Mr Burns]

OHHHH Mr Burns

Nail & head mate, Nail & head!

Yer didn't like that did he.

I love it when you get into a debate, and the other side plays high and mighty, when you make a point they don't like they finish the debate.

Classic!

No relation to London Irish are you Uncle S?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

I've had a couple of PM from this thread from people that value my advice so its not been a total loss.

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Yer didn't like that did he.

I love it when you get into a debate, and the other side plays high and mighty, when you make a point they don't like they finish the debate.

Classic!

No relation to London Irish are you Uncle S?

FOR FUCKS SAKE. You are the one who clouded the debate by saying people lied at 100% plus to get a mortgage was listen up WAS NOT TRUE. Are you thick or something ?.

 

[Mr Burns]

Fair enough mate. I am retraining as a Solar Panel salesman now anyway.

Now that is A game to get into. Abeit it one that will probably get harder and harder to earn from as the years go by, but certainly a bit of a cash cow in the early years, before people catch on to the fact they can make more money if they go DIY!!

Sounds familiar?!?!

 

[Mr Burns]

FOR FUCKS SAKE. You are the one who clouded the debate by saying people lied at 100% plus to get a mortgage was listen up WAS NOT TRUE. Are you thick or something ?.

No just got the percentage wrong. LISTN UP FOR THE SECOND OR THIRD TIME I accpeted this that was not true.

You ARE the one that clouded the debate, by answering a question, without pointing that fact out? So by saying it was not true that fraud had been committed was clouding the debate when it had been (had it been 90%) was not clouding the debate then?

Are you DISHONEST or something?

Or do you just like misleading people?