jam_mac_jam wrote: » I completely agree with you on the second hand home of 20% is way too high. 10% for everyone would be more logical. It makes it much harder for the second house.
mcbert wrote: » Day after no deal kicks in, papers full of doom and gloom, what are the chances the more expensive many-months-for-sale houses will accept a very low-ball offer? Worth a try I'm thinking...
fago wrote: » - places in good locations, well priced will sell and have multiple bidders willing to bid well beyond a fair market value.
BrownFinger wrote: » It means you cant buy now. we needed 30k deposit (10%) but couldn't borrow 270K . So we saved 60K for a deposit + a wedge for fees and taxes.
Cyrus wrote: » what are the chances the sellers of those houses are so personally impacted by brexit that they would knee jerk react in that way
mcbert wrote: » Unlikely, but no harm trying. I see places for sale since january or last year, maybe they've been holding out for Brexit to be solved with some deal, but then they are faced with talk of recession, food shortages and job losses. I'm no disaster capitalism, and think Brexit is madness but if it lets me afford something, its worth a try I think.
JDD wrote: » I was in the midst of it. Bought a house with family in the boom, plunged into negative equity for a long time. While waiting for the first property to emerge from negative equity I rented with my husband and children and as time went on, and childcare and rent payments went up, it became virtually impossible to save for a deposit to buy a house of our own. Luckily, we secured a deposit exemption and even still we needed a hefty contribution from our parents in order to buy. If we did not get the exemption or the gift from our parents we'd still be renting, paying €500 more than our mortgage payment. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a deposit ratio. I'm saying that I absolutely do not see the point of a higher one for second time buyers in circumstances where they do not still own their first home. 10% is a sensible cushion for everyone. Holding people in a never ending state of renting does not stabilize property prices either. It just keeps the rental market artificially inflated and more attractive as an investment for institutional landlords. In addition, you have to look at the bigger picture here. The longer we keep this situation going, the older the long-term renters get, and the less and less likely they will ever be able to get mortgage approval. Fast forward 20/30 years when these people retire, we're going to have an almighty problem on our hands when their pension payments (if they have one) won't cover market rent. House owners will not have the same exposure. I'm very much in favour of the Central Bank rules. We'd be in an awful state right now without them. But I think it's a sensible plan to make an exemption for second time buyers who are long term renters. That's all.
terrydel wrote: » In a society where many people are struggling to get a home of any description, why should any consideration at all be given to helping people get their second home?
LiamoSail wrote: » Agree entirely. I saw a Dublin City Council worker earlier emptying a bin, and Firefighters rushing to an emergency. Why weren’t they out focusing their efforts on sorting the housing crisis?? Don’t these people realize that it’s apparently impossible to deal with two separate issues simultaneously?? The cheek of people to question the large deposits requirements for moving home. They should realize just how lucky they are as a family of four in cosy 1 bed apartment.
terrydel wrote: » Why would this be the case, you owned a home you could always have moved into at some stage? Renting by choice.
In a society where many people are struggling to get a home of any description, why should any consideration at all be given to helping people get their second home?
terrydel wrote: » I was referring to people wanting to own a second home smartarse.
JJJackal wrote: » 10% deposit makes sense if you only own one home at a time I agree with 20% deposit if your buying a second home (and will have 2 mortgage) and the first one is for renting (and still has a mortgage). The risk is far greater
lleti wrote: » "we" = a couple? What about single people?
The discussion, and the point being made, was about movers, people intending on trading up. Non-first time buyers. People in these situations are having real difficulty, and are often left as accidental landlords with no way out
JDD wrote: » Hard to fit a husband and three children into a two bed house that my two brothers were already living in. I'm not looking to buy a second house to supplement my primary residence. This isn't a little investment property or a holiday home in Marbella. This was a mortgage for the house I intend to live in for the rest of my life and raise my family in. The fact that I happened to have bought a property in my twenties that I only owned a portion of, lost any of the money I put into it, and no longer own, shouldn't mean that I get treated any differently to a first time buyer.
terrydel wrote: » Fair enough, that wasnt clear from your initial post. My issue is with people wanting to buy a second property to become multiple property owners, they should be at the bottom of the list of people getting assistance.
Padre_Pio wrote: » What about single people? The rules don't differenciate between single and couple? Surely if you are selling a house, a 20% deposit rule doesn't bother you, unless your current house is worth less than 20% of the new house?
duffman13 wrote: » You need more than a 20% deposit to get an investment property. Investments don't get or warrant any assistance as is
terrydel wrote: » How much exactly?
jay0109 wrote: » Soc Dems want the Mortgage rules relaxedhttps://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/mortgage-rules-time-for-common-sense-1.4037927 Luckily they are a small fringe party and nonsense like this will be ignored
JDD wrote: » In fairness to them, they're only asking for an exemption to the rules (and there are already exemptions) for long term renters who can prove that they can pay a stress tested mortgage payment. While the multiple on salary is eminently sensible, I've never understood the 20% rule for all second time buyers. I think it is to prevent second time buyers from using equity in their first home to put a deposit down on an investment property. Renters fall completely out of this category. It's not the worst suggestion in the world.
