To think no one has a right to make money off their house

[Laughingstock1991]

The general consensus among financial commentators this week has been that the housing market has turned. Interest rates are still going up and are unlikely to come down for a few years. The low interest rate financial experiment that has been in place since 2008 has ended and it’s unwinding is going to be painful. The housing boom was based on cheap credit.

My mortgage is likely to go up about 400 a month. Lots of commentators reckon we are in for a big fall in house prices. Good thread here:
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1668987423643119623

What pisses me off is the absolute assumption made by some people (like my friend today) that the government should use public money to bail out mortgage holders. Most people were stress tested on their mortgage- I was- and yes it’s going to be tough but do I think public Money (renters money) should be used to bail out mortgage holders- fuck no! The Lib Dems have raised this also today.

House equity is unearned wealth. There are no guarantees. We have been through a boom and now it’s going bust. Hopefully sanity will return & housing will be seen as a home again- not an investment. Its not a ‘market’.

And I say all of this as a homeowner who is going to have to pay a lot more. I want everyone to be able to afford a decent home- not just those with money.

I don’t think that’s unreasonable!

If mortgage payers are pushed out of their homes, won't that just push rent prices up higher and benefit nobody but landlords? It's a situation with no good way forward and we're basically up the creek, as it were. Personally I'm a renter, and I've had a look at rent prices in my area sometimes out of curiosity, and they've gone up by 1-200 in mere months. House prices won't 'drop' either - it's essentially impossible.

@nosyupnorth can you not speak about me in such an utterly patronising manner?

This.

What would you advise first time buyers to do who have secure & cheap rental? Sorry I’ve NCd from another thread since, we would love to buy but not at the expense of being house poor and trapped in negative equity which is likely with our low deposit. We live in a nice safe area and think we might just plan to stay for a bit here.

I do think though that people hope to make money off their house overall and that’s not a bad aspiration to have

However

Agree with a PP. who cares about owning, renting, honestly whatever… everyone should have a safe space to live and everyone who works and contributes to society should be allowed to pay for a flat or house that can forever be theirs, if they want

Ah so you've definitely seen the very simple questions, but have no answer. I think that says everything I need to know about this thread.

Yes, more houses would have helped, particularly council houses. As you say, there have been huge restrictions on planning.
However, the lack of homes is not the chief factor that causes house prices to rise and fall. That is affordability. Did half the population leave the country in 1990 and 2008? Obviously not. The falls were directly related to affordability.

There was a really good piece in radio 4 today challenging Ed Davey on bailing out mortgage holders https://twitter.com/JibbaJabb/status/1669749187691393048

I think OP is either a troll or just wants to have a go. They must have a very unpleasant life to seek entertainment like this.

OP also doesn't seem to understand that keeping people in their homes doesn't equal equity. While there IS a mortgage the house is owned by the bank. So essentially, instead of paying landlords, government is paying bank to keep people in their homes.

@carly2803 Specifically what annoys you about that? Would you prefer them to be beholden to a landlord for life? Why begrudge renters and/or people in low paying jobs from having security for their families through the opportunity to buy their [council] home? Many of whom will have worked as hard as you claim to have yourself.

I like Jeremy Hunt, he is ruling out the possibility of helping mortgage borrowers in a very clear way. However the cynic in me thinks this might just simply be because he recognises the government just can't borrow any more money for bailouts ? I think some kind of forbearance such as allowing intrest only - or charges on houses for missed payments at the time of sale - is going to be as much help as can be given. That's absolutely the right thing to do.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-hunt-rules-out-help-mortgage-borrowers-backs-hike-interest-rates-2412428

Im so frustrated for people like you, you deserve to be enjoying your first home not worried about rates

So (entirely made up numbers) if I buy my house for say £250k, mortgage for £200k, house prices go up after 15 years and I can sell for £350k, pay off my mortgage.

To be fair a 75% increase over 15 years is peanuts compared to some of the rises in the fairly recent past in my area, so the house my parents used to live in has increased by 340% over 20 years.

See. Naive again.

The government don't care about anybody. Otherwise they wouldn't put fuel on the housing market to keep it propped up and increasing. Do you think homeowners want to pay over the odds to buy a house and the pain that comes from saving for a deposit!

The only thing government thinks about is helping banks and HMRC to claw in as much as possible.

Helping renters? The irony of your comment is that many more would be homeless if the market crashed like you're wanting it to.

But who would that truly benefit? Most people who will be fine through it all are the people you are talking about in your OP. Those who have benefited greatly from equity over the years and/or are mortgage-free & likely own several properties. Those most affected and most likely to struggle are those who just recently bought and likely have zero equity in their home. If many people default on their mortgage and their houses get repossessed/ those people enter debt to try and payback what they owe? Won’t they eventually go from Tax payers who are partaking into the system to people who are likely to end up needing help from the system and receiving it once they do lose their home and are greatly struggling, be it via rent subsidies (considering they will be back to renting) or other ways ? Like how is it beneficial and not further putting the system on its knees long-term?

If anything all those repossessed properties are most likely to be bought by people who are financially comfortable and have already benefited greatly from the housing market or foreign investors unaffected by interest rates. They are very unlikely to lead to struggling renters having more accessible housing.

Also considering a lot of tax money go to benefit people who do not necessarily partake in the system, I am not sure it’s necessarily wrong to help homeowners who too pay taxes.

I am mortgage-free and a high earner. I happily pay my taxes (as I believe in doing my part) and like you think everyone should have access to accessible (and decent!) affordable housing options. But personally I also think that home owners should be entitled to some discretionary help just as is the rest of society. Most of the help people get via benefits or else “isn’t earned”. It doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be something that’s given out or received though. I don’t think throwing the middle men (recent buyers with no or little equity) under the bus, is going to help. If anything it will free the market so people who have the means can buy more and will lead to people who weren’t struggling (but weren’t extremely comfortable) to now struggle and struggling people to keep struggling (because landlords who will buy those properties will be able to afford to not rent out the property if it’s not beneficial for them to do so and there will be more renters on the market due to all those evictions.)

Equity only matter for people who care to sell, most people have invested into a home and it’s only casually that their home has gained value (something that realistically doesn’t matter as they live there and aren’t selling). They aren’t responsible of the fluctuation in value of their home and their home being worth more doesn’t mean they can now afford double the repayments? So why should they be punished or treated as purposefully trying to make a buck when likely they just wanted what you state in your OP, aka a home rather than an investment.

Because it comes at the expense of future generations in low paying jobs? Is that not obvious?

The appreciation in value is unearned.

No if it was down to me wealthy parents shouldn’t claim child benefit -as you pointed out. Also I don’t think wealthy pensioners should get receive handouts either.

But that’s another argument and my opinion only! I’m sure no one cares for my opinion anyway.

The irony of your comment is that many more would be homeless if the market crashed like you're wanting it to

Its not that I am wanting it to @SamanthaCaine - it’s that it actually already is.

It's not the fault of the people buying the property though!! Jesus wept.

I'm new to the thread - how is that a pile-on?
Also in classic MN fashion many people have voted without reading your post, which doesn't make sense.
You still haven't answered why you think the government 'bailing our mortgage payers' is more expensive than paying housing benefit for life, to the people that lost their homes.

Don't really know how to answer you OP. But I don't want to lose my home, the home my children feel safe and secure in, the home that's near their school, the home my DH and I worked bloody hard to afford and finally purchased in lockdown. Seems you'd be happy to see us out and renting miles away though! I bet your alright in your house.

'im ok Jack ...stuff everyone else..."

As I've said before, not everywhere and not in my area.

@AscensionToCheese how do you know people haven’t RTFT?

And actually, most renters don’t claim housing benefit. Most renters work so not sure what your point is either?