to be irritated that people on here assume mortgage means security

[Purplepoodle]

Several times on aibu people have gotten very uppty with people who have mortgages. They seems to assume it means instant security, an asset ect. Its bugs me as I have been called out myself in threads for commenting and having a mortgage BUT I'm in huge negative equity, I can only afford to pay the interest which is likely to be the situation for a good few years. So no I dont feel privileged that I have a mortgage, it feels like a chain around me kneck.

At least with a mortgage you pay = you get somewhere permanent to live.

that's because of insane laws here that don't give tenants security.

@OP yup. I have said before. mortgages are risky. people forget that.

I personally feel much more secure with a mortgage than renting. There are pros and cons to each, but on a purely financial level, our mortgage (on a 3 bed house) is much cheaper than our previous rent on a 1 bed flat! This is because we were lucky enough to buy during the recession, so our house value has subsequently increased so much that our loan to value ratio ensures us an excellent interest rate. We have friends paying almost 3x what we pay monthly in rent for much smaller properties.
Also I feel happier knowing our mortgage will be paid off before we're 60, so we'll have a roof over our heads into old age, enabling us to go part time or retire earlier if we want.
To those who point out that mortgages are also insecure if you become ill or made redundant , this us true, but we have a 'holiday' clause in our contract which means we can take a 6 month break from our mortgage in these circumstances and then as others have said, our bank would be more amenable to helping us keep our house than a landlord.
To the pp who mentioned care fees and old people having to sell their homes anyway, I don't know many who will suffer this. I'm not saying it's right or ethical, but many of my friends parents have already 'signed over' their houses to their kids to avoid both inheritance tax and to avoid the council using their assets. I thought this was quite common, and know my parents will be considering it over the next few years.
Anyway, I think renting is great for those who prefer it to owning, but I do feel very sad for those trapped in renting who would rather buy.

What rallytog said. Some people can have up to a years worth of arrears and still not get repossessed.

Even once a mortgage company has a repossession order, they don't have to enforce it and many don't - opting instead to work out a repayment plan for arrears or even extend the term and consolidate the arrears back into the mortgage.

As I earned more than my other half after the divorce i ended up with a mortgage of over £1.3m, (interest only, £90k a year) no savings at all and over drawn for a few years. That did not feel that secure.
We also had a time of negative equity too and I remember the day interest rates went up to 12% (Black Monday).
We also sold two flats for 50% less than we paid for them.

Renters thinking homeowners have a good time are not always correct.

I would certainly encourage people to buy however and to have repayment mortgages not interest only (and marry someone who earns more which most mumsnetters manage and I didn't - hence my problems).

Can you not see the huge amount of options you must have had Greengrow, as opposed to someone stuck in private renting?

As someone who rents I think that attitude comes from people who have mortgages. Using having a mortgage as short hand for being grown up/ secure etc. You were only ever renting it off the bank as part of a financial arrangement that you should be able to lose in in a capitalist democracy IMO

Depends, doesn't it? If you took us in our 20s spending more on childcare than one of us earned, virtually no equity in the house - not sure there were lots of options then. on the divorce I could have moved us into a small flat. I agree that was an option but I am not typical of home owners.

The other problem for home owners now is that many cannot now get a mortgage on the house they have here even if the mortgage was supposedly taken out as "portable" as the new lending criteria from earlier in 2014 mean they cnanot get loans anymore so they get stuck in their current house.

I do recommend people buy as soon as they can. Do what many of us who own did - try to pick higher paid work as teenagers, not low paid, work hard at school to get the right exams, put off children until you can afford it, buy as soon as you can even if it is a wreck in an awful area. Only have second hand or junk furniture in your house as we had. Don't go on holidays or eat out. Do whatever it takes to buy that first tiny starter place as soon as you can even if it risks losing value.

Yes it usually does take a year for repossession to happen. Sometimes longer. But in that time the arrears that you are building up are adding to your mortgage balance which at some point has to be paid. Once you've been repossessed the mortgage company will keep on chasing you for the money that owe.

Personally I don't think renting or a mortgage is secure. Life isn't secure. It's unpredictable and unless your a combination of very sensible, very careful and very lucky you can never be completely sure that everything is going to be ok.

If private renting was more secure than there would be less mortgage envy. However it's simply a fact that having a mortgage is more secure than renting.
If you over stretch yourself or you find your circumstances change then you have options to pay the rent. You can share rooms and rent out and spare rooms to lodgers tax free (and still be in better accommodation than many families in temporary housing, with the knowledge that you can kick the lodgers out when you get back on your feet) or you can take in seasonal tenants like foreign students. You can start a home business! All of those options are prohibited by almost all tenancy agreements. You could rent the house out and move to a cheaper area and rent a smaller house for a period of 1-2 years until you can get back int your own house.

Security.

I was very sensible, very careful and very lucky - and bought the old fashioned way, shared apartment with a friend/bedsit/flat/2 bed/3 bed and have finally got to the best part EVER of having a mortgage - it is paid off.

I now have £650 of "spare money" every month because I owe nothing to anyone and have no rent to pay.

For me not having a mortgage was an extremely positive thing after my marriage breakdown. I have two children with autism and cannot work, my ex is a nightmare and would never have left a home he was paying a mortgage on, I would not have been able to claim housing benefit etc. I would love to own a house but do think that financially they can be a real trap if things go wrong. I am also extremely fortunate to be in a HA property with assured secure tenancy so don't have the headache of private rental.

I spent many years in Germany and everyone rents there for years and years at a time. They're well protected. This country's laws and policies with regards to private rental are not fit for purpose imo.

The security for me in having a mortgage is that we will have a fully paid for house by the time we are 60.

No pressure of having a mortgage to pay or rent to find in retirement and older age. That is security.

For us mortgage is a security. We are not particularly bothered if we pay the mortgage off or not and were lucky enough that we bought at the right time and were able to put down a big deposit on this house and it has significantly increased in value to the point that if we sell we could buy somewhere perfectly nice outright. Having a mortgage which is less than twice our annual salaries also means that if we need to increase it we can and it would still be affordable. Even if there is a price crash it's almost impossible that we will be in negative equity so it's a nice feeling to have.

Can you not see the huge amount of options you must have had Greengrow, as opposed to someone stuck in private renting?

I would much rather rent than go through what she went through.

I am an owner now and doing well. However, I was renting outside of London in 2008/9 watching my friends trying to sell their houses after another price drop. I certainly was glad not to be owning.

Me and DH rent because we need to be flexible with work, so it works in our favour to be able to leave quickly. But we are still going to invest in property, buy to let so that we have some assets in that market.

I don't know if I would feel more secure renting or owning the house I live in. It doesn't worry us if we have to move, although I do dislike the discussion of rental increase each contract renewal. But you can combat that with longer term rents. I can see why both would feel just the same really.

We have pets which were agreed in our terms, other than not being able to decorate (although I know of plenty who hsve agreed this as well) it doesn't bother me. We rent places which have neutral decor already.

You don't have security if you can't afford the mortgage and if they can't sell it on auction for what you owe plus charges then you could still be left owing tens of thousands and potentially bankrupt - if you are in negative equity then you can't afford to sell and rent somewhere - if you need to move due to more children or for work again you can't afford to sell, owe thousands in the short fall and get a deposit to rent - whilst the potential for being given notice is not pleasant you have the freedom and ease of moving, you give notice and find a new rental - as long as you maintain the condition of the house your deposit is secure in the deposit scheme.

Isn't part of the bad feeling/jealousy due to the fact that if you have a mortgage, you could probably choose to rent (with exception of unfit property & no cash to fix it, negative equity, crap area etc), but if you are a lifelong renter then getting a mortgage in the first place seems like an impossible dream?

Was talking to a couple of colleagues the other day at work, one was talking about the DIY he was planning for this weekend and problems with the house. The other was obviously a bit envious & thinking "yeah mate, love to have your problems!" Even if he does end up buying in a few years, I can see where he's coming from. Your choices can be pretty shitty as a home owner, but you generally have more options. Not always, but it's not an unreasonable assumption.

Written - while trying to move in 2008/9 was tough, most people had the good sense to not bother for another year, those who didn't move in that 18 month period, found it much easier and got a lot more money. if you really didn't have to move, then it was insanity to try to sell just as the market crashed. Some people paniced, but there wasn't much need to.

Rather like negative equity, it only matters if you intend to move.

Owning your home doesn't provide secuity against any financial troubles, it just is more secure than renting.

I suspect for many women security comes from picking a well paid career and getting good exam results at school rather than whether they happen to rent or not. It can also flow from not giving up work.

Ok so council might be a bit safer (only if you can pay rent though) but it has massive draw backs too.

Owned house, yours to what you want with (if you can afford to do the work)

Council, deal with what they give you even if the state of it it is very bad

Ie kitchen falling to bits walls/floor needing work and doors needing replaced and you as a tenant are not allowed to do any work yourself so you just have to live with it.

Both are as safe as each other really though because they are only yours until you can't pay but they both safer than private as you can get turfed out with little notice.

The biggest drawback on owning though is if everything hits the fan you lose money and a house, council you just normally lose the house.

I am sorry your under so much pressure though.

The other draw back of council/ha is getting a move is almost impossible (as your seen a safely housed) so if you start a family you could end up with a massive overcrowding problem.

I had to wait 4 1/2 years to get a move and that was related to needing a move for a disability so I can imagine for what seems like lesser reason it would be even tougher.

Just to note I didn't say lesser reason I'm just thinking what the council/ha may think.

My mortgage is paid off next March - but it's been a bumpy ride, with unemployment, not being able to claim housing benefit (we live in Ireland), at one point we were 10 months in arrears and in fear of repossession - but it's all been worth it, because, come April, we own our house (a very modest one, but perfect for us, with a bit of land around it too!) outright - and THAT is security. We're (just) in our 50s, so - with luck - have many more years to enjoy our rent and mortgage free life!

Had we been renting all this time, even with being able to claim housing benefit, we would be in a far worse position, so I do think that a mortgage offers more security, in the long run, than renting.

sorry ive no idea what the implications of negative equity and only being able to pay the interest on a mortgage i just assumed it was like rent you pay one price and eventually get the house no?

negitive equity is a big bad thundercloud for some - if you buy a house with a huge mortgage percentage and it goes DOWN in value - and then your circumstances change - a divorce, a job move, a redundancy etc you you can find yourself in deep doo-doo - you owe more than your mortgage and can often be in a position where you HAVE to sell (or have it reposessed) even though you don't want to. You can then owe that money for YEARS - even though the house has been sold.

Being in negative equity is not a problem if you are bumbling along all tickety boo and nothing changes - you stay put and wait for the value to increase or for the difference be made insignificant by inflation