Minor content rant...

NewFrockTuesday

Ive noticed a vibe in here that is manifesting itself more and more frequently - "anyone who wants to buy a house/flat is an idiot and dont buy and here are a hundred reasons why". Im getting tired of every question ending with the same statements. No matter what question is posed the "dont buy you fool" brigade come out in force. I understand that 99% of the time it is intended to be helpful, but lately its really all I see when anyone mentions that they want to buy. They have made the decision, need some advice and that advice is dispensed with a swift backhander of “Youre an eejit” comments.

Anyone daring to suggest that the market is not as black as night gets bashed - Sweet Sue in another thread is an expmple of this. We get it - youre not a fan of EAs. But is there any need to abuse the ones who do come on and declare themselves? It was very poor form tbh.




There are a few people who do actually want to buy, so why not help them with advice like usual instead of I told you so ramrodding all the time? Its wearing and its boring and it makes in here less fun to wander about in when you know how every thread is going to end.

Sorry. Rant over. Blame the sugar levels.

ntlbell

i think advising people not to throw away a few thousand euro is pretty sound.

NewFrockTuesday

Agreed...but not every time. We are all pretty aware that it will fall further but some people have made up their mind to buy now so why the need to say it?

Just reread...worst phrased post ever. Sorry folks, Ill dolly it up a bit later. Its just making a point really. Dont really expect any responses to it.

ntlbell

Deepsense wrote: »

Agreed...but not every time. We are all pretty aware that it will fall further but some people have made up their mind to buy now so why the need to say it?

Just reread...worst phrased post ever. Sorry folks, Ill dolly it up a bit later. Its just making a point really. Dont really expect any responses to it.

A lot of people are not aware and hear nonsense in papers and various media outlets that we're at the bottom etc and all want to jump.

if the poster explained there situation in their original post so we knew where they were at we could avoid giving them advice they may not want to hear.

EKRIUQ

The theme of this forum generally is,

Everybody if a fool who wants to buy.
No matter what the price is you should offer a maximum if 40%-55% of that price.
All and I mean All estate agents want to rob you.
Landlords are money grabbing bastids.
Everybodys opinion is right providing it agrees to the above if not your a fool and shouldn't be posting here.

Small Change

Q. Just went sale agreed on an apartment, can anyone suggest a good moving company?

A1. Don't do it!
A2. Have you been living in a cave, houses are way overpriced these days
A.3 EA imo
A4. More and more of these EA trolls about these days, take your schilling somewhere else

ionapaul

Small Change wrote: »

Q. Just went sale agreed on an apartment, can anyone suggest a good moving company?

A1. Don't do it!
A2. Have you been living in a cave, houses are way overpriced these days
A.3 EA imo
A4. More and more of these EA trolls about these days, take your schilling somewhere else

You are right, if someone has actually signed the contract and can't / doesn't want to back out, going on about the poor timing of their investment is unhelpful and unneccessary. A lot of people do not particularly care if they are seen as 'throwing away money', they are looking for a home and may want it as soon as possible.

I look on people buying new cars or paying extra for a brand as 'throwing away money' - but it is THEIR money and they can do with it as like want!

I do feel most of the posters here who warn about buying property now are not doing it to be unhelpful or to berate someone, most are genuinely trying to help - there are a lot of clueless people out there who might appreciate getting a slant different to the 'always a great time to buy', 'property has bottomed out', etc spin that the media carries!

ntlbell

I think there was a similar rant when the posts went a long the line's of

I'm buying a home

"buy two or three, get a portfolio together make a fortune! interest only and rent them out!! I'm pouring another glass of champagne posting from a deck chair in fiji!! waaaaaaay da lads"

swings and round abouts.

cyrusdvirus

There is also another thing to take into consideration, and this particular point applies to me anyway... I'm an FTB, have 2 houses to pick from in a suburb of Dublin, both within my price range. My complication (if you can call it that) is my age. I'm 33 now and approaching (what i percieve to be) the upper age limit for being granted a 35 year mortgage. So the nay-sayers and doom-peddlars don't fully understand my situation. I'm happy with the 2 houses that i need to pick one from. They are reasonably priced in my opinion, and will not be getting sold for a number of years, if ever. so even if the market continues to fall for another while, i'm content.

ntlbell

the doom sayers would probably say wtf are you doing getting a 35 year mortgage for anyway?

cyrusdvirus

ntlbell wrote: »

the doom sayers would probably say wtf are you doing getting a 35 year mortgage for anyway?

That'd be cos Ms. Crash isn't Mrs Crash yet, and her name is going nowhere near the deeds or anything like until such time as we meet at the top of a church type building!!

ionapaul

gatecrash wrote: »

That'd be cos Ms. Crash isn't Mrs Crash yet, and her name is going nowhere near the deeds or anything like until such time as we meet at the top of a church type building!!

Good luck with the purchase! I am of a similar age to you and will not seek a mortage term of longer than 30 years, preferably 25 years of course. I'd also plan on putting down at least 25% of the total in deposit - risk adverse, thy name is ionapaul!

ZYX

ntlbell wrote: »

the doom sayers would probably say wtf are you doing getting a 35 year mortgage for anyway?

Which proves how little they know. With interest rates so low the sensible thing to do is to get as long a term as you can (interest only if you could). Sensibly then put the amount you save over a 20year mortgage into a high earning account. Then you can always pay mortgage off early if you want to.

ntlbell

ZYX wrote: »

Which proves how little they know. With interest rates so low the sensible thing to do is to get as long a term as you can (interest only if you could). Sensibly then put the amount you save over a 20year mortgage into a high earning account. Then you can always pay mortgage off early if you want to.

will the interest you gain in a high interest account offset the thousands they'd lose by not waiting for prices to drop further?

the length of the mortgage has no relevance to current interest rates

what difference will a 35 year over a 20yr if your paying interest only and rates go back up in the next 6 months and the price of the house drops 30-50k?

paying low interest back on a 350k asset and gaining interest on a few quid you can manage to save...

right.

do you offer personal finance advice?

where do i sign up

Blackjack

ZYX wrote: »

Which proves how little they know. With interest rates so low the sensible thing to do is to get as long a term as you can (interest only if you could). Sensibly then put the amount you save over a 20year mortgage into a high earning account. Then you can always pay mortgage off early if you want to.

:eek::eek::eek:

ZYX

ntlbell wrote: »

will the interest you gain in a high interest account offset the thousands they'd lose by not waiting for prices to drop further?

the length of the mortgage has no relevance to current interest rates

what difference will a 35 year over a 20yr if your paying interest only and rates go back up in the next 6 months and the price of the house drops 30-50k?

Who said anything about now being a good time to buy. This thread is about people like you ntlbell.
I am simply saying 35 year mortgages can be a good idea. I do not have one. If I could change my current mortgage to a 35 year mortgage and keep my tracker rate I would certainly do so. In my situation it makes huge financial sense. That is what this thread is all about. People criticising others choices without knowing their situation

ntlbell wrote: »

paying low interest back on a 350k asset and gaining interest on a few quid you can manage to save...

right.

do you offer personal finance advice?

where do i sign up

If you don't understand how borrowing money at a low rate of interest and then saving it at a higher rate makes sense then you seriously need someone to give you financial advice.

ntlbell

ZYX wrote: »

Who said anything about now being a good time to buy. This thread is about people like you ntlbell.
I am simply saying 35 year mortgages can be a good idea. I do not have one. If I could change my current mortgage to a 35 year mortgage and keep my tracker rate I would certainly do so. In my situation it makes huge financial sense. That is what this thread is all about. People criticising others choices without knowing their situation



If you don't understand how borrowing money at a low rate of interest and then saving it at a higher rate makes sense then you seriously need someone to give you financial advice.

but your not just "borrowing" money and making money on it.

right _now_ taken the averge house price and the avg drops you're going to be loosing 20k+ a year on the asset.

your saving a much smaller amount of money?

e.g. your paying back 900e a month on the house paying interest on a 300k loan

your saving? the few quid you have left over at a higher rate? rate of interest on a much smaller sum?

so your paying back on a huge amount gaining on a smaller amount and are losing about 20k+ a year on the asset

again.

where do i sign up..

NewFrockTuesday

Jesus ntbell. Give it a rest. Ramrodding or trolling - I cant decide which.

stereo_steve

Ntlbell is not trolling. He backs up the points he makes.

Why do people post messages up here and then get annoyed when people offer their opinion?

ntlbell

Deepsense wrote: »

Jesus ntbell. Give it a rest. Ramrodding or trolling - I cant decide which.

If you have a problem with my posts, report them.

D3PO

ntlbell wrote: »

right _now_ taken the averge house price and the avg drops you're going to be loosing 20k+ a year on the asset.

.

not too dissimilar to when you buy a new car. Gosh why do people do it such a bad decision I mean its like throwing money away in depreciation.

Fact is people make decisions based on their personal and financial circumstances, when they ask for advise on buying coming out with dont buy is just a blind blanket statement. Try being helpful by giving the advise asked and not your opinion of things.

D3PO

stereo_steve wrote: »

Ntlbell is not trolling. He backs up the points he makes.

Why do people post messages up here and then get annoyed when people offer their opinion?

I dont think people are getting annoyed because of anybodys option. If somebody askes for particular information about buying a property they should be entitled to get answers relating to that rather than a barrage of dont buy or your an idiot type sentiment.

its not helpful and not what the person posting the thread wants. Now on the otherhand if somebody askes if now a good time to buy then fill your boots.

gurramok

D3PO wrote: »

not too dissimilar to when you buy a new car. Gosh why do people do it such a bad decision I mean its like throwing money away in depreciation.

Fact is people make decisions based on their personal and financial circumstances, when they ask for advise on buying coming out with dont buy is just a blind blanket statement. Try being helpful by giving the advise asked and not your opinion of things.

Car loans are usually 3-5yrs long.

House loans(mortgages) are 35yrs long as in Gatecrash's example. Bog difference between 20k loan and a 300k loan over a lifetime.

My complication (if you can call it that) is my age. I'm 33 now and approaching (what i percieve to be) the upper age limit for being granted a 35 year mortgage. So the nay-sayers and doom-peddlars don't fully understand my situation.

Yes we do, i'm in the same boat as you and around same age(34).

Gatecrash knows that the target houses are not getting sold in the short to medium term so gatecrash can wait for the prices to fall further and hence get a shorter mortgage term and a lower mortgage amount while saving at the same time.

You can save 10years by waiting maybe a year or two to buy, that simple.

That my friend is sound common sense.

NewFrockTuesday

ntlbell wrote: »

If you have a problem with my posts, report them.

Actually, my bad. I read the posts too fast and tought it was going down the previously mentioned alleyway again. Peace.

ntlbell

D3PO wrote: »

not too dissimilar to when you buy a new car. Gosh why do people do it such a bad decision I mean its like throwing money away in depreciation.

Fact is people make decisions based on their personal and financial circumstances, when they ask for advise on buying coming out with dont buy is just a blind blanket statement. Try being helpful by giving the advise asked and not your opinion of things.

I was using the example to show where depreciation would out weigh the gain on the interest on the small sum.

and I think anyone who buys a new car is an idiot anyway.

I don't say don't buy now my general advise is this.

If you can comfortably afford the house.

Have 20-25% deposit.

have stress tested against numerous interest rate increases

accounted for possibly loosing one income/starting a family etc

Can still lead the lifestyle you wish

have found an area your very happy with and would be willing to live there for 10+ years.

then it doesn't really matter when you buy.

your making it out like i'm some nazi, I'm a home owner I have no issues with people buying home's I just try an offer some advise so people don't land themselves up to their eyes in debt living somewhere they don't like

as i said all ready if people give more information in their posts we can give more advice.

D3PO

ntlbell wrote: »

I was using the example to show where depreciation would out weigh the gain on the interest on the small sum.

and I think anyone who buys a new car is an idiot anyway.

I don't say don't buy now my general advise is this.

If you can comfortably afford the house.

Have 20-25% deposit.

have stress tested against numerous interest rate increases

accounted for possibly loosing one income/starting a family etc

Can still lead the lifestyle you wish

have found an area your very happy with and would be willing to live there for 10+ years.

then it doesn't really matter when you buy.

your making it out like i'm some nazi, I'm a home owner I have no issues with people buying home's I just try an offer some advise so people don't land themselves up to their eyes in debt living somewhere they don't like

as i said all ready if people give more information in their posts we can give more advice.

if only the banks and people followed this advise over the last 8 years or so we wouldnt be in the mess we are in now !!

D3PO

ntlbell wrote: »

your making it out like i'm some nazi, I'm a home owner I have no issues with people buying home's I just try an offer some advise so people don't land themselves up to their eyes in debt living somewhere they don't like

.

Just to clarify I wasnt directing any of my posts at you despite quoting you. It was more a general comment against the dont buy now you idiot brigade.

ZYX

ntlbell wrote: »

but your not just "borrowing" money and making money on it.

right _now_ taken the averge house price and the avg drops you're going to be loosing 20k+ a year on the asset.

your saving a much smaller amount of money?

e.g. your paying back 900e a month on the house paying interest on a 300k loan

your saving? the few quid you have left over at a higher rate? rate of interest on a much smaller sum?

so your paying back on a huge amount gaining on a smaller amount and are losing about 20k+ a year on the asset

again.

where do i sign up..

Oh for Christ sake ntlbell. Read the posts first. We are not talking about whether to buy or not. The question is if you have decided to buy whether you get a 20 year mortgage or a 35 year mortgage or if you already have a mortgage whether it makes sense to change to a 35 year mortgage or not. The change in value of the property value makes no difference to this decision.

ZYX

D3PO wrote: »

not too dissimilar to when you buy a new car. Gosh why do people do it such a bad decision I mean its like throwing money away in depreciation.

Fact is people make decisions based on their personal and financial circumstances, when they ask for advise on buying coming out with dont buy is just a blind blanket statement. Try being helpful by giving the advise asked and not your opinion of things.

No it is not. It is like after you decide to buy a car how do you decide who to borrow the money from, over what period and at what rate.

ntlbell

ZYX wrote: »

Oh for Christ sake ntlbell. Read the posts first. We are not talking about whether to buy or not. The question is if you have decided to buy whether you get a 20 year mortgage or a 35 year mortgage or if you already have a mortgage whether it makes sense to change to a 35 year mortgage or not. The change in value of the property value makes no difference to this decision.

look you made statements that made no sense at all.

now you want to accuse me of changing the subject address my points please and educate us on this borrowing at one rate putting it into a depreciating asset and saving the rest to make money.

I'm all ears.

ZYX

ntlbell wrote: »

look you made statements that made no sense at all.

now you want to accuse me of changing the subject address my points please and educate us on this borrowing at one rate putting it into a depreciating asset and saving the rest to make money.

I'm all ears.

OK to use the example I gave already; I own a house. I have a tracker mortgage rate of 1.9%. My mortgage has about 15 years to go. If I could now remortgage at 1.9% tracker over 35 years I would certainly do this. If I put this on deposit at 4% (after dirt) that means I earn 2.1% more on my savings. As long as the interest on my savings is higher than my mortgage rate then it makes sense. Once mortgage rates go higher I then I take out my savings use it to pay off some of mortgage and increase my monthly mortgage payments. Whether my house goes up or down in value makes no difference as I own the property whether I have a 20 year mortgage or a 35 year mortgage. (Obviously the savings could be much higher if you use the money to reduce other loans)

That is the whole point of this thread. People make decisions that suit them. Others then dive in without knowing the persons circumstances and basically tell them they are stupid.

ntlbell

ZYX wrote: »

OK to use the example I gave already; I own a house. I have a tracker mortgage rate of 1.9%. My mortgage has about 15 years to go. If I could now remortgage at 1.9% tracker over 35 years I would certainly do this. If I put this on deposit at 4% (after dirt) that means I earn 2.1% more on my savings. As long as the interest on my savings is higher than my mortgage rate then it makes sense. Once mortgage rates go higher I then I take out my savings use it to pay off some of mortgage and increase my monthly mortgage payments. Whether my house goes up or down in value makes no difference as I own the property whether I have a 20 year mortgage or a 35 year mortgage. (Obviously the savings could be much higher if you use the money to reduce other loans)

That is the whole point of this thread. People make decisions that suit them. Others then dive in without knowing the persons circumstances and basically tell them they are stupid.

but the poster wasn't re-mortgaging he was going to buy a home with a 35yr mortgage?

you do understand how a tracker works right? if you could FIX at 1.9 you might be on to something.

so he's using the money to buy the property not savings!

ZYX

ntlbell wrote: »

but the poster wasn't re-mortgaging he was going to buy a home with a 35yr mortgage?



so he's using the money to buy the property not savings!

But ntlbell you do not know the circumstances. He could have the deal of the century. Maybe he has managed to get 99% off the asking price, you don't know. Maybe in his situation a 35 year mortgage makes perfect sense (as it would for me), you don't know. maybe this is the greatest house in the entire world and will never be on sale again, you don't know. That is what this thread is about people like you barge in with advice without knowing the persons circumstances.

ntlbell wrote: »

you do understand how a tracker works right? if you could FIX at 1.9 you might be on to something.

Well clearly you don't. If I fixed I couldn't pay off the mortgage any earlier if I wanted to,if savings rates dropped - without paying penalties.

bangersandmash

ZYX wrote: »

OK to use the example I gave already; I own a house. I have a tracker mortgage rate of 1.9%. My mortgage has about 15 years to go. If I could now remortgage at 1.9% tracker over 35 years I would certainly do this. If I put this on deposit at 4% (after dirt) that means I earn 2.1% more on my savings. As long as the interest on my savings is higher than my mortgage rate then it makes sense. Once mortgage rates go higher I then I take out my savings use it to pay off some of mortgage and increase my monthly mortgage payments. Whether my house goes up or down in value makes no difference as I own the property whether I have a 20 year mortgage or a 35 year mortgage. (Obviously the savings could be much higher if you use the money to reduce other loans)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your example seems to rely on a combination of:

• The availability of a competitive tracker mortgage now - no sign of them coming back, realistically these were an artefact of the boom.
• ECB rates remaining at an all-time low - many would say that rates will rise in the short-medium term as the rest of the Eurozone recovers ahead of Ireland.
• The availability of a good fixed lump sum deposit rate now, giving 4% after DIRT - there's not too many of those about and you'll need to lock-in for a fairly long term. There's no guarantee of what deposit rates will be available or what the DIRT rate will be after that term expires.
• The assumption that nothing unexpected or exceptional will happen in the Irish banking sector during the foreseeable future.

In essence you seem to be proposing a bet that lump sum deposit rates will beat mortgage interest rates over the medium term, based on unavailable rates for both.

ntlbell

ZYX wrote: »

But ntlbell you do not know the circumstances. He could have the deal of the century. Maybe he has managed to get 99% off the asking price, you don't know. Maybe in his situation a 35 year mortgage makes perfect sense (as it would for me), you don't know. maybe this is the greatest house in the entire world and will never be on sale again, you don't know. That is what this thread is about people like you barge in with advice without knowing the persons circumstances.



Well clearly you don't. If I fixed I couldn't pay off the mortgage any earlier if I wanted to,if savings rates dropped - without paying penalties.

your talking to me like i told him not to buy, i didn't tell him to do anything so i don't know what your rabbiting on about.

and if you don't fix it won't do you any good as interest rates have nowhere to go but up so you wouldn't get your 1.x over 35 years?

christ.

gurramok

New trackers are dead.

I'm sure ZYX would give plenty of advice to the Var/Fixed mortgage holders here on where to obtain them?

20goto10

ntlbell wrote: »

and if you don't fix it won't do you any good as interest rates have nowhere to go but up so you wouldn't get your 1.x over 35 years?

Not great advice either. People who are on tracker mortgages should think long and had about going fixed. For example lets say interest rates go nowhere for a year and then only start to increase in small increments over a long period. Then at the end of it all you'll be pushed into a higher standard variable or in some cases you won't even be able to get that and you'll be pushed into an LTV rate (you will be offered whichever is the highest). Ask yourself what is the gain at the end of the mortgage term. Tracker is the way to go imo. After all, the banks have stopped offering them for a reason. Whats bad for the banks is good for the consumer. And what the banks want is for everyone to go fixed as soon as possible to clear all their tracker mortgages off the books.

ntlbell

20goto10 wrote: »

Not great advice either. People who are on tracker mortgages should think long and had about going fixed. For example lets say interest rates go nowhere for a year and then only start to increase in small increments over a long period. Then at the end of it all you'll be pushed into a higher standard variable or in some cases you won't even be able to get that and you'll be pushed into an LTV rate (you will be offered whichever is the highest). Ask yourself what is the gain at the end of the mortgage term. Tracker is the way to go imo. After all, the banks have stopped offering them for a reason. Whats bad for the banks is good for the consumer. And what the banks want is for everyone to go fixed as soon as possible to clear all their tracker mortgages off the books.

I wasn't given anyone advice.

I'm pointing out how this raping banks by getting loans off them to put it into houses and make a killing on magic non exisiting rates is a false economy.

so unless you want to discuss what i was discussing don't quote me.

20goto10

ntlbell wrote: »

I wasn't given anyone advice.

It's there in print for everyone to read :rolleyes: I didn't say you were directing it at anyone in particular.

ntlbell

20goto10 wrote: »

It's there in print for everyone to read :rolleyes: I didn't say you were directing it at anyone in particular.

I'm pointing out how this raping banks by getting loans off them to put it into houses and make a killing on magic non exisiting rates is a false economy.

so unless you want to discuss what i was discussing don't quote me.

20goto10

ntlbell wrote: »

so unless you want to discuss what i was discussing don't quote me.

There we go again with the bad advice :rolleyes:

ntlbell

20goto10 wrote: »

There we go again with the bad advice :rolleyes:

i can do it too look :rolleyes:

El Stuntman

ah leave ntl alone lads, he's a busy man what with single-handedly 'talking down the market', 'eroding confidence' and 'spreading negativity'

the poor fella is wrecked so he is

20goto10

El Stuntman wrote: »

ah leave ntl alone lads, he's a busy man what with single-handedly 'talking down the market', 'eroding confidence' and 'spreading negativity'

the poor fella is wrecked so he is

I'm purely refuting the posts...nothing more.

I don't think anyone is under any illusion that the bad advice given on here has any direct impact on the market. But as the OP suggests, its just a god awful forum to come to if you're looking for an opinion other than you're a gob****e for even consdering to buy.

El Stuntman

20goto10 wrote: »

I'm purely refuting the posts...nothing more.

I don't think anyone is under any illusion that the bad advice given on here has any direct impact on the market. But as the OP suggests, its just a god awful forum to come to if you're looking for an opinion other than you're a gob****e for even consdering to buy.

I think you are twisting the facts to suit your own opinions

I'm a property owner and so is ntlbell. I've seen him post dozens of times that if you meet the following conditions, then buying now is the right option and you should go for it:

- you intend to live in your chosen gaff for the next 10 years or more

- you have stress-tested your mortgage repayments against multiple rate rise scenarios

- you are paying out no more than 30% of disposable income in mortgage repayments

- you can comfortably survive a change in personal circumstances (unemployment, staying at home to have kids etc)

- your mortgage term is 25 years or less

the problem is that most people who post in here don't meet these eminently sensible criteria

NewFrockTuesday

El Stuntman wrote: »

I think you are twisting the facts to suit your own opinions

I'm a property owner and so is ntlbell. I've seen him post dozens of times that if you meet the following conditions, then buying now is the right option and you should go for it:

- you intend to live in your chosen gaff for the next 10 years or more

- you have stress-tested your mortgage repayments against multiple rate rise scenarios

- you are paying out no more than 30% of disposable income in mortgage repayments

- you can comfortably survive a change in personal circumstances (unemployment, staying at home to have kids etc)

- your mortgage term is 25 years or less

the problem is that most people who post in here don't meet these eminently sensible criteria

I dont think there are many people who earn enough to have just 30% of dis income going on their mortgage. Those conditions are very very cushty and I dont know many people now who would be able to buy like that. Most buyers from the mid noughties on

More realistic is I think nearer 50% of net income out on mortgage

30 year term on loan

Savings scrapped through stamp duty and diposit and furnishings

I agree re the ten years and stress testing though. I was so naieve when I bought my first house that it didnt nter my head! I was younger and aloooot more foolish...and more brave. Now you'll take money from my tihtly clenched fist with a very good reason



I think the heat is making folk grouchier than normal!

ntlbell

Deepsense wrote: »

I dont think there are many people who earn enough to have just 30% of dis income going on their mortgage. Those conditions are very very cushty and I dont know many people now who would be able to buy like that. Most buyers from the mid noughties on

this would suggest that housing is over priced?

Deepsense wrote: »

More realistic is I think nearer 50% of net income out on mortgage

It might be realistic based on peak prices but I wouldn't work the hours I work to spend half my hard earned wages on a roof I want to lead a comfortable life also, if someone is happy to spend 50% of their wages then fair play to them.

ntlbell

20goto10 wrote: »

I'm purely refuting the posts...nothing more.

I don't think anyone is under any illusion that the bad advice given on here has any direct impact on the market. But as the OP suggests, its just a god awful forum to come to if you're looking for an opinion other than you're a gob****e for even consdering to buy.

No, you're not I never _ever_ said people should go for a fixed mortgage.

I was pointing out if you could borrow 300k at fixed 1.5 for 30 years and put it into a high interest account and make money and pay back the 300k when ever you feel like we would be all at it!

my point was you can't borrow the 300k and put it into the bank if your borrowing the money to buy the home you have to buy the home.

if that's now your asset is decreasing at roughly 30k a year, your paying a low rate of interest on a huge figure 300k

if you go interest only and put the "capital" payments into a high interest account your paid interest on a much smaller sum, if it's a tracker that rate can increase anytime

if you can tell us how to do the same in the current climate

for the 3rd time

where do i sign up.

if you're not talking about the above STFU?

ZYX

bangersandmash wrote: »

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your example seems to rely on a combination of:

• The availability of a competitive tracker mortgage now - no sign of them coming back, realistically these were an artefact of the boom.
• ECB rates remaining at an all-time low - many would say that rates will rise in the short-medium term as the rest of the Eurozone recovers ahead of Ireland.
• The availability of a good fixed lump sum deposit rate now, giving 4% after DIRT - there's not too many of those about and you'll need to lock-in for a fairly long term. There's no guarantee of what deposit rates will be available or what the DIRT rate will be after that term expires.
• The assumption that nothing unexpected or exceptional will happen in the Irish banking sector during the foreseeable future.

In essence you seem to be proposing a bet that lump sum deposit rates will beat mortgage interest rates over the medium term, based on unavailable rates for both.

Well I will correct you, you are wrong. If the interest rate on the mortgage you are paying is less than the interest you can earn in a savings account, then it makes sense to pay extra money into the savings account rather than paying it into your mortgage. It does not matter how long this situation lasts for. It doesn't matter if it is a tracker rate or variable rate (obviously it is more difficult if you are on a fixed rate) It could be for 1 day or it could be 35 years but, as long as it lasts you are saving money. Obviously the longer it lasts the more you save. You only do this as long as it makes sense. If interest rates on your savings are less than the mortgage then pay off the mortgage.

Perhaps I should start by explaining what a 35 year mortgage is. It is a mortgage on which you agree to make regular payments to pay it off over a maximum period of 35 years. You can pay it off over 20 years if you want to, unlike a 20 year mortgage which you cannot pay off over 35 years. It means you are more in control of your repayments. For many people it makes a lot of sense. I am not saying it is for everyone but many people who go for longer term mortgages are making decisions based on their own circumstances.

ZYX

El Stuntman wrote: »

- you intend to live in your chosen gaff for the next 10 years or more


- you are paying out no more than 30% of disposable income in mortgage repayments

All depends on situation. Someone earning 1 million a year may well be able to spend 90% of their disposable income on their prooperty and still live comfortably, conversly someone on 10,000 would struggle to spend 15% on their home.

El Stuntman wrote: »

- your mortgage term is 25 years or less

the problem is that most people who post in here don't meet these eminently sensible criteria

Longer terms suit some people. The problem is many on this site have learned your "rules" and think they apply to everyone. They don't. Get to know a persons circumstances first and then offer advice.

johnnyskeleton

Deepsense wrote: »

Ive noticed a vibe in here that is manifesting itself more and more frequently - "anyone who wants to buy a house/flat is an idiot and dont buy and here are a hundred reasons why". Im getting tired of every question ending with the same statements. No matter what question is posed the "dont buy you fool" brigade come out in force. I understand that 99% of the time it is intended to be helpful, but lately its really all I see when anyone mentions that they want to buy. They have made the decision, need some advice and that advice is dispensed with a swift backhander of “Youre an eejit” comments.

While I can't speak for other posters, my advice and the advice of most others tends to be:

1) look at all the factors involved, from the cost of finance to the likely movement in the market and all the hidden costs of buying.

2) work out for yourself what the actual costs of buying v. renting are

3) decide on a personal level whether buying or not buying is worth the potential loss or gain from buying.

If people heed my suggestions and still decide to buy, at least they have looked at all the relevant factors. As it happens in most situations, if they do work out the above, it tends to indicate that they shouldn't buy.

I don't like being branded as being in the "dont buy you fool" brigade as that implies some ideological view on my part. However, if you interpret my advice as being a simple "don't buy" mantra, then it's a convenient way for you to ignore what I say, and I think that's unfortunate.