2017-21 help to buy scheme - megathread. All help to buy discussion here please

ThisRegard wrote: »

Nobody is entitled to live anywhere.

And to think social housing couples openly reject houses they are given lol.

Change entitled to want then.

Earleybird

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

A 500k house with the max deposit allowed under the scheme of 30% would still require savings of 130k (+20k top up from government) and combined salary of 100k.

At 600k, it's 160k saved (+20k) and salary of 120k. I wouldn't feel too bad for the people in the 100k-120k bracket who can't get the 20k rebate for their 500k-600k house.

Exactly ðŸ–’

Worst case: someone needs the 20k rebate to make the minimum deposit requirements for a 600k house (the actual point of the scheme). Minimum deposit is 98k, which means they have a deposit of 78k saved and a salary of 143k.

pilly

morrga wrote: »

That's west Dublin, disastrous commute to work and not where we're from. But this is proving my point. You're saying we should leave the area we are settled in. I'm saying this is not fair compared to every other couple who don't have to leave their area.

So in other words it's obviously a very expensive area that you want to live in, that's fine and dandy. You're will entitled to make that choice, no-one is saying you can't. But if it's the choice you make then you shouldn't get assistance from the government to do so because if you can afford to buy over 500k then you don't need it.

pilly wrote: »

So in other words it's obviously a very expensive area that you want to live in, that's fine and dandy. You're will entitled to make that choice, no-one is saying you can't. But if it's the choice you make then you shouldn't get assistance from the government to do so because if you can afford to buy over 500k then you don't need it.

We want to live in South Dublin on the Wicklow border. Carrickmines or Shankill hardly the Dalkey, Killiney profile. My point is the govt deem it ok to support couples in North Dublin who earn the same salaries as ourselves.

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Worst case: someone needs the 20k rebate to make the minimum deposit requirements for a 600k house (the actual point of the scheme). Minimum deposit is 98k, which means they have a deposit of 78k saved and a salary of 143k.

10% deposits are allowed.

morrga wrote: »

We want to live in South Dublin on the Wicklow border. Carrickmines or Shankill hardly the Dalkey, Killiney profile. My point is the govt deem it ok to support couples in North Dublin who earn the same salaries as ourselves.

They deem it OK to support couples all over the country tbh
The support is available to you too just not in you preferred area

Earleybird

morrga wrote: »

We want to live in South Dublin on the Wicklow border. Carrickmines or Shankill hardly the Dalkey, Killiney profile. My point is the govt deem it ok to support couples in North Dublin who earn the same salaries as ourselves.

I think you're missing the point. If you can afford to purchase a house for over 500k why would you deserve a grant? It doesn't matter where you're from. I remember you asking was the grant per house or per couple in a previous thread, at some point you need to realise you just sound plain greedy.

morrga wrote: »

10% deposits are allowed.

Not without an exception over 220k I thought?

Stheno wrote: »

They deem it OK to support couples all over the country tbh
The support is available to you too just not in you preferred area

Thank you. You are getting my point.

morrga wrote: »

Thank you. You are getting my point.

Yes so either save and buy over 500k in your area or buy under it somewhere else and get the rebate.

Stheno wrote: »

Not without an exception over 220k I thought?

And with an exception they would usually need an even higher salary, which means they'd be in the 150-200k salary range. Even less sympathy.

Earleybird wrote: »

I think you're missing the point. If you can afford to purchase a house for over 500k why would you deserve a grant? It doesn't matter where you're from. I remember you asking was the grant per house or per couple in a previous thread, at some point you need to realise you just sound plain greedy.

We can afford the repayments. But due to spiraling rents we have struggled to get the deposit together in recent years. Which was exactly the point of the policy. To give people a push to get on the ladder. And now they are supporting people who have LTV lower than 80%. That defeats the purpose of this incentive.

Christ a colleague in work mentioned it to me. I didn't believe it so I asked on boards which is the purpose of a forum.

We're far from greedy. We had a deposit ready for the house. But the house went up an extra 20k last month, surprise surprise. Now we are left high and dry and we are short 20k of the purchase price.

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

And with an exception they would usually need an even higher salary, which means they'd be in the 150-200k salary range. Even less sympathy.

That is categorically incorrect.

Stheno wrote: »

Yes so either save and buy over 500k in your area or buy under it somewhere else and get the rebate.

The point of the policy was it was taking so long for people to get to their deposit targets that this was a kick start to achieve their target and kick of sales and building m. We can keep saving for another 3 years. But that's another 3 years of renting.

morrga wrote: »

That is categorically incorrect.

Explain how. If you want to buy a 600k home as a first time buyer with a 10% deposit, you'll need to qualify for an exception to the central bank rules. Banks will usually look for spare capacity in salary as the main criteria for allowing an exception but let's ignore that for now.

At 600k with 10% deposit, you'd need a mortgage for 540k, which at an income multiple of 3.5 is €154k.

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

Explain how. If you want to buy a 600k home as a first time buyer with a 10% deposit, you'll need to qualify for an exception to the central bank rules. Banks will usually look for spare capacity in salary as the main criteria for allowing an exception but let's ignore that for now.

At 600k with 10% deposit, you'd need a mortgage for 540k, which at an income multiple of 3.5 is €154k.

I'm not talking about 600k homes.

listermint

morrga wrote: »

We want to live in South Dublin on the Wicklow border. Carrickmines or Shankill hardly the Dalkey, Killiney profile. My point is the govt deem it ok to support couples in North Dublin who earn the same salaries as ourselves.

You are quite hilarious, I cant figure out though if you are being honestly amusing on purpose or not.

Your whole point being you are victimised because you cant afford a house on the Dublin Wicklow border.

Like that is literally what you are saying

morrga wrote: »

I'm not talking about 600k homes.

And I was. I was talking about the lowering of the limit from 600k to 500k.

Earleybird

morrga wrote: »

The point of the policy was it was taking so long for people to get to their deposit targets that this was a kick start to achieve their target and kick of sales and building m. We can keep saving for another 3 years. But that's another 3 years of renting.

If it's going to take you 3 years to save 20k despite being able to get a mortgage for over 400k then I would suggest you find a less luxurious apartment to live or curb your lifestyle. Your figures don't add up!

listermint wrote: »

You are quite hilarious, I cant figure out though if you are being honestly amusing on purpose or not.

Your whole point being you are victimised because you cant afford a house on the Dublin Wicklow border.

Like that is literally what you are saying

Nope. The policy was designed to give people the last push to meet the higher deposit requirements. So instead of another 3 years of saving and renting we could buy now, trigger sales and help free up another apartment for the desperate rental sector.

pilly

morrga wrote: »

The point of the policy was it was taking so long for people to get to their deposit targets that this was a kick start to achieve their target and kick of sales and building m. We can keep saving for another 3 years. But that's another 3 years of renting.

You're so missing the point here OP and that's why you're gaining very little sympathy. There are plenty of choices in life and if you choose to live in a very specific area then that's completely your choice but you can not claim to be discriminated against because property is expensive in that area. Seriously, who's problem is it that houses in a very specific area are very expensive? No-one's except the people who insist they have to live there!

Actually, I've just thought of a comparison, it's like someone living up the North saying they're being discriminated because they can't claim the grant because of where they live. Sorry, doesn't wash.

listermint

morrga wrote: »

Nope. The policy was designed to give people the last push to meet the higher deposit requirements. So instead of another 3 years of saving and renting we could buy now, trigger sales and help free up another apartment for the desperate rental sector.

No the policy was to trigger sales of new houses.

The policy was not to trigger sales for people who cant afford houses outside the limits.

Which is what appears to be the case here.

You are not being victimised. Like everyone else if you want to live somewhere special then work hard and save. Id love to live by the sea in dalkey for example.

Wouldnt we all.

morrga wrote: »

I'm not talking about 600k homes.

What are you talking about then? We're you about to purchase a home under 500k in your chosen area that has gone up 20k and is now over 500k? And was it a new build?

pilly wrote: »

Exactly, it's ludicrous! They can't claim discrimination because it's so ridiculous and neither can you.

They are governed by different parties, different rules different policies. I am talking about discrepancies in one jurisdiction. Don't muddy the waters with irrelevant statements.

morrga wrote: »

But I am talking about Dublin exclusively.

It's the same distinction. Dublin is more expensive than the rest of Ireland, South Dublin is more expensive than the rest of Dublin, Dalkey is more expensive than the rest of South Dublin, Vico Road is more expensive than the rest of Dalkey. There's no discrimination.

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

It's the same distinction. Dublin is more expensive than the rest of Ireland, South Dublin is more expensive than the rest of Dublin, Dalkey is more expensive than the rest of South Dublin, Vico Road is more expensive than the rest of Dalkey. There's no discrimination.

Which is my point. So don't lower the threshold from 600k.

morrga wrote: »

Which is my point. So don't lower the threshold from 600k.

I thought you weren't talking about 60k houses? Do you mind if I ask you again about the house you were going to buy?how much was it, was it in your preferred area and under 500k but is now over that?

morrga wrote: »

Which is my point. So don't lower the threshold from 600k.

But I should be entitled to buy the new build in Rathgar which costs €1.15 million then. We shouldn't have a cap at all. Everyone should get the 20k, even if they have a deposit of 188k and a salary of 270k.

The line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise it will be seen as a tax break for the rich.