100% Mortgages

cool username

Do they still exist???

eth0_

cool username wrote: »

Do they still exist???

No. We're in a recession. No bank will offer a 100% mortgage.

tHE vAGGABOND

if you want one, you cant afford the place - keep saving - indeed start saving

ParkRunner

I got one 2 weeks ago

eth0_

EF wrote: »

I got one 2 weeks ago

I presume you work in a bank.

gdael

We got approved for one.

Probably because, we could pay 25% up front if we wanted. But for now the money earns more invested than paying it off a mortgage. So we'll take the full 100% mortgage and then when the rates make sense, pay it off the mortgage.

Senna

gdael wrote: »

We got approved for one.

Probably because, we could pay 25% up front if we wanted. But for now the money earns more invested than paying it off a mortgage. So we'll take the full 100% mortgage and then when the rates make sense, pay it off the mortgage.

Did the bank make you invest the 25% with themselves to avail of the 100% mortgage?

eth0_

gdael wrote: »

We got approved for one.

Probably because, we could pay 25% up front if we wanted. But for now the money earns more invested than paying it off a mortgage. So we'll take the full 100% mortgage and then when the rates make sense, pay it off the mortgage.

Which bank was that, if you don't mind me asking?

?Cee?view

gdael wrote: »

We got approved for one.

Probably because, we could pay 25% up front if we wanted. But for now the money earns more invested than paying it off a mortgage. So we'll take the full 100% mortgage and then when the rates make sense, pay it off the mortgage.

Sorry, and no insult intended, but I just don't believe this.

Have the bank taken a lien over the 25%?

kravmaga

EF wrote: »

I got one 2 weeks ago

Wow I am impressed, what bank was this is your dont mind me asking?

stepbar

For certain professions they still exist. However in saying that, it depends on the strength of the case put in front of the mortgage advisor.

?Cee?view

Which professions?

JupiterKid

Which professions? The ones that guarantee a stable job/cash flow...

Civil servant
Teacher
Doctor and;

Prostitute/rent boy...:D

I think 100% mortgages are as rare as hen's teeth these days. And rightly so. People need to be protected from themselves.

gdael

Senna wrote: »

Did the bank make you invest the 25% with themselves to avail of the 100% mortgage?

No. It stays where it is. Best rates and we're not moving it.

I work in the IT Sector - Software house. Partner works in the Food business.
We dont actually need a 100% mortgage. We can well afford the payments even if one of us is unemployed. Intend to pay what we save from the rent into savings too and then pay it all off the mortgage when interest rates change enough to make it more economical to do that than save it.

We might as well take the 100% and earn more than mortgage interest costs us - along with the mortgage interest relief. The interest rates are like that now, so its good to do. When they switch around so it makes more sense to pay off the mortgage with our savings, we'll pay it all off it.

Its much, much cheaper than what we are renting just down the road at the moment for essentially the same house and to tell the truth we would rather own a house now because babies are in mind.

We just visited all the banks and talked to their lenders. 2 Offered us the 100%. Several offered 95%. Several 90%, Some wouldnt give us anything - well i mean they wanted 30%+ deposit, which is as good as offering you nothing.
Mind you we havent drawn down yet. Until we do nothing is certain.

gurramok

There are 16 banks lending??

If you want to overpay for an asset with immediate negative equity, go ahead. Just make sure you are going to live there to suit your needs for many years to come.

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

There are 16 banks lending??

If you want to overpay for an asset with immediate negative equity, go ahead. Just make sure you are going to live there to suit your needs for many years to come.

Well done gurramok. You don't know what property they are talking about, you don't know what price they are paying and yet you do know they are paying too much!

gurramok

ZYX wrote: »

Well done gurramok. You don't know what property they are talking about, you don't know what price they are paying and yet you do know they are paying too much!

Thanks ZYX.

I have not seen a price rise yet nor one pencilled into the future, have you?

gdael

ZYX wrote: »

Well done gurramok. You don't know what property they are talking about, you don't know what price they are paying and yet you do know they are paying too much!

The man is psychic.
He knows everything about us. Like where we live, how much money we have, what house we are renting and buying. He knows our rent. He knows the cost of the house we are looking at.
He's good. He probably asks people for all sorts of links for proof when they make statements elsewhere too, but makes wild assumptions himself as he does here, but i couldnt bother looking.

We're currently still trying to negotiate the price down, havent bought it yet.

As long as the mortgage payments are significantly cheaper than renting and we get the bonus of mortgage interest relief, it makes sense for us to buy it than rent our current house. We worked out we'll be about €4000 a year better off, but that depends what rate we take and what % loan and how long before we have to switch our savings to pay off the 25% - probably more actually.

Sorry, im going off topic now.
Mr, Gurramok can answer any other questions anyone has about me, since hes psychic and all. ta ta

gurramok

gdael wrote: »

The man is psychic.
He knows everything about us. Like where we live, how much money we have, what house we are renting and buying. He knows our rent. He knows the cost of the house we are looking at.
He's good. He probably asks people for all sorts of links for proof when they make statements elsewhere too, but makes wild assumptions himself as he does here, but i couldnt bother looking.

We're currently still trying to negotiate the price down, havent bought it yet.

As long as the mortgage payments are significantly cheaper than renting and we get the bonus of mortgage interest relief, it makes sense for us to buy it than rent our current house. We worked out we'll be about €4000 a year better off, but that depends what rate we take and what % loan and how long before we have to switch our savings to pay off the 25% - probably more actually.

Sorry, im going off topic now.
Mr, Gurramok can answer any other questions anyone has about me, since hes psychic and all. ta ta

I simply said "If you want to overpay for an asset with immediate negative equity, go ahead.". Go ahead then.

It aint psychic stuff, you already said you are negotiating a reduction in the price you will pay. There is nothing stopping a near future valuation being less. What's wrong with that?

Watch out for teaser interest rates, they will go up.

"bonus of mortgage interest relief"...watch out for this being reduced in future budgets.

You have still not answered the other question, who are these 16 banks offering 90%+ mortgages nevermind the 9 banks offering 95%+ mortgages?

eth0_

gurramok wrote: »

You have still not answered the other question, who are these 16 banks offering 90%+ mortgages nevermind the 9 banks offering 95%+ mortgages?

I honestly don't believe his claim he has been offered a 100% mortgage. Not with his and his partners profession, and as for the bank telling him to keep his 25% where it is - UNLIKELY. Banks right now are encouraging people to overpay their mortgages, because of negative equity.

accensi0n

gurramok wrote: »

You have still not answered the other question, who are these 16 banks offering 90%+ mortgages nevermind the 9 banks offering 95%+ mortgages?

Where are you getting 16 from?

He mentioned '2', 'several', 'several' and 'some'.

That could be 9 in total...

T-Square

JupiterKid wrote: »

Which professions? The ones that guarantee a stable job/cash flow...

Civil servant
Teacher
Doctor and;

Prostitute/rent boy...:D

I think 100% mortgages are as rare as hen's teeth these days. And rightly so. People need to be protected from themselves.

Don't forget to include engineers and surgeons, etc.

gurramok

accensi0n wrote: »

Where are you getting 16 from?

He mentioned '2', 'several', 'several' and 'some'.

That could be 9 in total...

quite simple.

gdael wrote:

2 Offered us the 100%. Several offered 95%. Several 90%

Several means seven in my book. Add 7 to 2 and you get 9 for 95%->100% offers.

Add another 7 for 90% offerings and we get 16 banks. Where are these 16 banks?

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

Thanks ZYX.

I have not seen a price rise yet nor one pencilled into the future, have you?

But you don't know the house they are talking about or the price they are getting it for. You are talking about the housing market not their house.

By the way several means more than 2 (not seven)

F-Stop

Several means seven in my book.

So, you just make stuff up then to suit your ends? Several means more than two but not many.

TaxiManMartin

gurramok wrote: »

quite simple.



Several means seven in my book. Add 7 to 2 and you get 9 for 95%->100% offers.

Add another 7 for 90% offerings and we get 16 banks. Where are these 16 banks?

I came in here to tell you about someone I know who got 95% but I found this post hilarious.

Agh the old foot in mouth disease. You could have saved yourself the humiliation there by looking up what several means.

You always seem to chime in on any post where someone wants to buy a house , with awful ****e. Always adding one and one and getting four. Or a whe lot more in this case.

Posters, don't even waste your time replying to him. He'll just lie his little heart out and make up stuff all night. And he'll keep going and going.

gurramok

F-Stop wrote: »

So, you just make stuff up then to suit your ends? Several means more than two but not many.

So its a figure of speech. Lets say 3 of each then, so that makes 5+ offered 95%+ mortgages, who are they?

ZYX wrote:

But you don't know the house they are talking about or the price they are getting it for. You are talking about the housing market not their house

It just seems very very strange that the poster had a problem with me being psychic aka the following post which he had a problem with. That to me is that the poster thinks the below will not happen.

me wrote:

If you want to overpay for an asset with immediate negative equity, go ahead.

TaxiManMartin wrote: »

Posters, don't even waste your time replying to him. He'll just lie his little heart out and make up stuff all night. And he'll keep going and going.

What lies?

I asked a question and still not have had an answer yet.

Senna

Did you get a 100% mortgage because the house you bought is on the books of the bank. Thats the only way i can see a person getting a 100% mortgage with professions like yours.
What bank is it from, i think you failed to mentsion.
On the point of NE, yes you are walking right into NE, you cant argue with that regarless of your plans or whatever you bought the house for.

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

It just seems very very strange that the poster had a problem with me being psychic aka the following post which he had a problem with. That to me is that the poster thinks the below will not happen.


.

You don't get the point. You do not know the value of the house yet can say they will be in negative equity, based only on what you feel will happen to the market in general. You do not know if they got a really good price or not. Yet you jump in basically telling them they got a really bad deal. Based on the fact that the bank are willing to lend 100% that implies to me that they must have valued it at a lot more than the purchase price or at the very least have valued it at the purchase price.

gurramok

ZYX wrote: »

You don't get the point. You do not know the value of the house yet can say they will be in negative equity, based only on what you feel will happen to the market in general. You do not know if they got a really good price or not. Yet you jump in basically telling them they got a really bad deal. Based on the fact that the bank are willing to lend 100% that implies to me that they must have valued it at a lot more than the purchase price or at the very least have valued it at the purchase price.

You are assuming that the haircut of the original price to reach that purchase is huge to prevent future negative equity?

Thats very rare. If the banks valuation is as you say, its immediate negative equity.

dearg lady

I know I'll get slated on here for saying this but there are other factors besides the financials to look at when buying a house.
gdael, sounds like it's a good decison for you, you'll be paying less than you were in rent to live in similiar house, and when interest rates go up you'll clear what around 25-30% of your mortgage in one go. Sounds pretty good.

not everyone goes in with their eyes closed and even in a lousy market there's individual cases where it makes sense to buy. Sweeping generalisations will only apply to some people.

Gurramok, I'd say the reason the question hasn't been answered is cos you're looking for 16 banks and there aint 16!

gurramok

dearg lady wrote: »

Gurramok, I'd say the reason the question hasn't been answered is cos you're looking for 16 banks and there aint 16!

Of course there are people who buy in a crappy market, there is never a zero amount of buyers.

That 16 has been wiltered down to at least 5 offering 95% mortgages, no-one has answered who these mysterious banks are.

?Cee?view

gurramok wrote: »

Of course there are people who buy in a crappy market, there is never a zero amount of buyers.

That 16 has been wiltered down to at least 5 offering 95% mortgages, no-one has answered who these mysterious banks are.

There certainly ain't five either!

?Cee?view

gdael wrote: »

No. It stays where it is. Best rates and we're not moving it.

I work in the IT Sector - Software house. Partner works in the Food business.
We dont actually need a 100% mortgage. We can well afford the payments even if one of us is unemployed. Intend to pay what we save from the rent into savings too and then pay it all off the mortgage when interest rates change enough to make it more economical to do that than save it.

We might as well take the 100% and earn more than mortgage interest costs us - along with the mortgage interest relief. The interest rates are like that now, so its good to do. When they switch around so it makes more sense to pay off the mortgage with our savings, we'll pay it all off it.

Its much, much cheaper than what we are renting just down the road at the moment for essentially the same house and to tell the truth we would rather own a house now because babies are in mind.

We just visited all the banks and talked to their lenders. 2 Offered us the 100%. Several offered 95%. Several 90%, Some wouldnt give us anything - well i mean they wanted 30%+ deposit, which is as good as offering you nothing.
Mind you we havent drawn down yet. Until we do nothing is certain.

Genuinely interested, so a few questions to get a bit of clarity.

1. Has the bank given you an Approval in Principle, or do you have an actual formal letter of offer, stating that the security being offered is the particular house you're looking at?

2. Has the Bank's nominated valuer carried out a valuation of the house?

3. Very surprised that you've got a positive response being in the IT industry. Is yours the smaller of the two salaries? Is your partner's salary (in the food business) the primary salary? I presume your partner is not in the restaurant business.

4. Were you asked to offer any security other than the house?

My concern for you here would be that the lender might now be promising you the sun, moon and stars, but when/if you come to draw down you may find that due to "unforeseen" complications, you'll have to ear into your cash straight away.

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

You are assuming that the haircut of the original price to reach that purchase is huge to prevent future negative equity?

.

No I am not. You were saying they will be in immediate negative equity. Now you have changed it to "future negative equity". If they got it for 20% below current value they may never be in negative equity. (Even if you don't take into account the extra money they save by not renting)

gurramok

ZYX wrote: »

No I am not. You were saying they will be in immediate negative equity. Now you have changed it to "future negative equity". If they got it for 20% below current value they may never be in negative equity. (Even if you don't take into account the extra money they save by not renting)

You're being pedantic now. In 1 second after purchase, there will be negative equity, happy now? :P

'20% below current value'. The purchaser does not know what the current value is. They are buying on what's it worth to them. Values are going down day by day hence the term immediate/future(for you:P) negative equity.

Pedalling maybe 1 year of 'its cheaper to buy than rent hence saving' does not hold up for the duration of the mortgage, you know it.

Amhran Nua

ZYX wrote: »

If they got it for 20% below current value they may never be in negative equity.

Current value is the price they bought it for.

?Cee?view

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Current value is the price they bought it for.

Their problem is that that statement is these days often not true in the context of a mortgage. For example, they may pay 200k, but when the bank sends a valuer, he may say it's only worth 150k. They will then only be given 90% of 150k, not 200k.

This is happening frequently these days.

ZYX

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Current value is the price they bought it for.

Then they will not be in negative equity as they are not selling it. :rolleyes::rolleyes:
I think you know what I meant.

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

You're being pedantic now. In 1 second after purchase, there will be negative equity, happy now? :P

'20% below current value'. The purchaser does not know what the current value is. They are buying on what's it worth to them. Values are going down day by day hence the term immediate/future(for you:P) negative equity.

Pedalling maybe 1 year of 'its cheaper to buy than rent hence saving' does not hold up for the duration of the mortgage, you know it.

I cannot believe you don't understand this. Actually I can.

eth0_

Well, Gdael still hasn't replied to our requests to tell us which banks offered 95 and 100% mortgages.

So I can only assume he's a troll.

gurramok

ZYX wrote: »

I cannot believe you don't understand this. Actually I can.

Understand what?

Still waiting on who these 5 banks are.

gdael

eth0_ wrote: »

Well, Gdael still hasn't replied to our requests to tell us which banks offered 95 and 100% mortgages.

So I can only assume he's a troll.

Just following Taximans advice. Ive read some posts by yourselves elsewhere and and hes dead right about yourself and guramok.
i dont appreciate being called a liar, so im out of this discussion.

Find out your own answers. I dont really care what you believe at this stage.

Why not walk into the banks and find out what you want to know for yourselves, instead of calling people liars?

?Cee?view

I'm not calling you a liar.

I do suggest that you address the questions that I've asked, either here, or with a financial advisor.

Also, be aware that bank branches have little or no decision making power in relation to mortgages. You may find yourself promised something by a branch which is denied by "head office". All too common an occurence.

gdael

churchview wrote: »

I'm not calling you a liar.

I do suggest that you address the questions that I've asked, either here, or with a financial advisor.

Also, be aware that bank branches have little or no decision making power in relation to mortgages. You may find yourself promised something by a branch which is denied by "head office". All too common an occurence.

Im more financially literate than most on here. I know how to organize my finances. Im just not happy with the way this thread is going, so im out.

average_runner

Who ever made the comment about the way the IT industry is at the moment.

Well jsut in case you havent done your research, it has pick up alot over last two monthss.

All the people i knew that were unemployed all pick up a job in last two months, thats about 10 people i knew!

Our place recruited alot also.

ZYX

gurramok wrote: »

Understand what?

.

Understand that you are saying, that no matter how much someone pays for a property, they are paying too much. No matter what kind of deal they got, it is too much. If they paid €1 then it is still too much.

?Cee?view

average_runner wrote: »

Who ever made the comment about the way the IT industry is at the moment.

Well jsut in case you havent done your research, it has pick up alot over last two monthss.

All the people i knew that were unemployed all pick up a job in last two months, thats about 10 people i knew!

Our place recruited alot also.

I think that it's me you're misquoting :rolleyes:

I met with a senior lender in one of the lenders the day before yesterday. He told me that they would put IT in the same category as Construction Related. Banks tend to take a bit longer to change their views of these things!

Personally, I have no idea about the state of the IT industry.

?Cee?view

gdael wrote: »

Im more financially literate than most on here. I know how to organize my finances. Im just not happy with the way this thread is going, so im out.

To be quite frank, everyone can continue to learn, regardless of their level of literacy (in any subject), and letting a few eegits here with agendas (who obviously have some sorts of axes to grind) put you off learning more is tantamount to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

My last words to you, unless you want to engage further.

Unless you have a formal letter of offer, with a valuation carried out by the bank's nominated valuer (and that valuation having been accepted by the bank), which states the house being offered as security, then effectively you have nothing. At best, you have a Bank's promise to lend, which is unenforceable and not worth the paper it's written on.

Don't mind all the negative equity BS being spouted here. If you want a particular house as a home, go for it, but be mindful that the process of going from a Bank telling you they will give you money, to them actually giving you the money, can be tortuous, regardless of how accomodating they seem at an early stage.

gurramok

ZYX wrote: »

Understand that you are saying, that no matter how much someone pays for a property, they are paying too much. No matter what kind of deal they got, it is too much. If they paid €1 then it is still too much.

Nope, note i said 'haircut'. If the haircut went from 1 million quid to 1 euro, then yes its a good buy.

gdael wrote: »

Im more financially literate than most on here. I know how to organize my finances. Im just not happy with the way this thread is going, so im out.

gdael wrote: »

Just following Taximans advice. Ive read some posts by yourselves elsewhere and and hes dead right about yourself and guramok.
i dont appreciate being called a liar, so im out of this discussion.

Find out your own answers. I dont really care what you believe at this stage.

Why not walk into the banks and find out what you want to know for yourselves, instead of calling people liars?

What you on about?! Why not answer the questions asked of you?

At least don't insult us by saying we are inferior to you financially.

Correct me if i'm wrong, Taximan has a bee in his bonnet as he was tackled before on the so called benefits of 35yr mortgages he loved and didn't like been pulled up on it and hence attacks any post of mine and others that was involved in that debate.

Now, you come along and say that at least 5 banks were offering 95%-100% mortgages and refuses to name them. Back up your post or what you are saying is just unfounded conjecture.

TwoShedsJackson

So what is the difference between someone who insisted prices are only going to go up back in the day, and someone who now insists prices are only going down? They have to stop going down at some point don't they?