Phil

You've not defended the weak as piss link you posted, and now you're claiming the rates released three months before the scheme comes online - are the scheme. This is too stupid for words! The initail rates will not be a true reflection of the rate in March - April. It's a stimulation scheme, which means it'll take time for the bank to naturally compete over the next few months in the lead up to the spring (when most people start looking to move). Oh, and Halfix offer 3.44% on a 15% deposit. But you didn't link - again! http://www.halifax.co.uk/mortgages/first-time-buyers/fixed/ You're either a WUM or stupid. I suspect both. Either way not I'm wasting any more of my time on a troll. You've shown no interest in discussing the topic - just nit picking to give your sad troll life a purpose.

95% mortgages have been out for a while http://www.knowyourmoney.co.uk/95-percent-mortgages/?gclid=CLGu04ach7oCFW3KtAodRGsAYg

I look forward to that reply, dont forget my favourite bit where he says you cant get a mortgage without a 25-30% deposit The plan is very clever and is unlikely to cost the government anything. So I dont see many losers. The main benefactor will obviously be people with 5% deposit will be able to access 20% rates. However, I think its actually a business policy aimed at making the banks to be more competitive on their rates. The base rate is 0.5% and look set to stay there for another year or so. I think this will give all the banks a bit of a kick to go out and win new business. It's certainly provided enough marketing material for them to start competing! fwiw, I think 0.9% will be about right. As £900 for a 15k a insurance policy seems sensible, if tad high. But high is a good place to start, they can always review the fees and lower them.

I've read it twice now and cant stop laughing! see this is the issue with forums, you get into debates with people thinking it's peer-topeer. When the reality is, they are proper thick and just google stuff to act intelligent! So he thinks you can get one for 4.4%... ...no wait 4.75% C'mon Ewerk nail you're flag to this mast! :lol:

Finally the Troll has posted a link! I'm very disappointed that's what you're basing your insults on!? You really are a mong! It starts with a line the daily mail would be proud of... It goes on to say... ..which they arent! Lots of people pull him up on it this inaccurate statement... ...even if they were charging 3.5, the 4.4% is only for the first year! It's help to buy, not freemoney.com. drum roll for the best part... ...he retracts everything but the 0.9% arrangement fee and he admits he fucked up his sums! He's clearly trying to lead the reader by; a) bumping up the current rate banks offer glossing over the fact the 0.9% is an arrangement fee (loads of banks load these in already) c) randomly using 75% LTV, when the government are offering 80% and most bank use 90%, 80%, 60% as the bench marks Only a mong would take that artcle as fact... oh, wait, you are a mong!

point proven! Lots of hot air and insults, but nothing to back any of it up.

Without a link, they are hearsay

Actually dont bother. You're clearly a fucking mong that doesnt know his arse from his elbow trying to be a smart arse. I might not agree with Renton, Padlock and Sweetleftpeg, but at least I respect them.

Post links to back up your wild claims you fucking mong!

Making more claims withput proving any evidence Mr Troll. You need to let Ant know your browser doesn't let you post links. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/help-to-buy-mortgage-guarantee-available-3-months-early

The government have been pretty clear they'll pull the scheme if prices rise. I think that's why its been given a winter date (and randomly brought forward to catch people off guard and stagger take up). Agree with the house price rise thingy. A stable predicable market is best for everyone. You have to give credit to the government for some of their non-front page policies. Like increasing council tax to 150% on empty properties and small business rate relief (100% free).

While we're on radical theories, I liked the one about bringing the retirement age forward to 55 to free up jobs for the next generation.

From what I understand they are just setting up a 12 billion pound insurance policy to cover the risk of loaning people with 95% LTV the rates of 80% LTV. So in real terms over the next few months we'll see 2.99% rates on 95% LTV, instead of the current 4.99%. This isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things, as anyone with a 5% deposit can already get a mortgage at 4.99% There is no money being loaned from the government to the banks or the buyer/seller. The buyer will also have to pay an arrangement fee. It's a really well thought out idea, which wont be nearly as generous as the new build equity loans. A stimulation scheme, which will probably take more money in additional tax than lose in mortgage defaults.

no link to the VAT rise nerd love in?

Is it open to buy to let? I dont think it is. Try not to think of the scheme as anything more than helping 95% LTV people get 80% LTV rates for a fee. i.e. 2.9% instead of 4.99%

It does seem you agree with the point I was making, so not sure why you started with the inaccurate economics lesson. It's a law of economics, universally accepted outside of toontastic I totally agree the government scheme is to convert the potential demand into actual demand, which is why I support the scheme and pulled Renton, Padlock and Sweetleftpeg up for slagging it off without a proper reason. These two posts cover most of it; Renton saying we need more houses instead of help-to-buy; and padlock thinking help-to-buy is the same as banks selling mortgages risk free http://www.toontastic.net/board/topic/27471-politics/?p=1231805 Sweetleft peg saying help to buy is bad http://www.toontastic.net/board/topic/27471-politics/?p=1231995 It's clear as day banks arent lending at sensible rates to people with 5% as the risk is too high! This scheme just gives people access to the low base rate - for a fee. Anyone who thinks that's a bad idea doesnt understand it. Rentons comment about new houses is actually irrelevant as this is a 12 billion pound national insurance policy. 200k in house will have very little affect on anything but the neighbours.

You are clearly an idiot. Back it up with a link or stay a mug. You're a grown man making troll snipes on a forum. how fucking sad are you! what a loser...

Scroll back and read my posts mate. You'll find we agree on this. No mortgage = no buyer = no demand There is very little demand because banks aren't lending. As you've highlighted there's plenty of people wanting to buy they just need help accessing the competitive rates. Hence the help to buy scheme. Renton thinks to kick start the housing market the government need to build more homes (i.e. create more supply). While Padlock thinks the government scheme to fix this issue is a bad thing!

Quoted this seperatly as fundamentally this is where you are incorrect. There is currently very little demand everywhere - hence the help to buy schemes. So adding supply will have a massive affect on current sellers in that area.

You're in the politics thread mate. All that would be relevant if we were in the public sector thread. There is not a cat in hells chance the government (labour or Tory) would research and impliment a housing scheme that would improve the area. They'd contract it out to the cheapest company that could deliver the numbers. Only kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Also, very few new build improve the area. Most are cheap and boxy looking.

Link or shut the f**k up

All very true. However building a shed load of new houses won't result in a temporary dip for the neighbours. Especially if they are "affordable"

Which part is ill informed? House prices trippled in 10 year, so the government have taken a massive amount of extra revenue. ...and still managed to run at a deficit. Fwiw, the current UK house prices are still massively over value, so that has had a bigger impact on the market not picking up, as everyone now has to over stretch. Pretty sound logic.

No need for hindsight to know labour were spending like a mad man to cling onto power. The reference to the g7 countries running at a deficit only highlights how shallow politic has become. Clearly if you know g7 your smart enough to know two wrongs don't make a right. Which bit of supply and demand dont you understand? Its really simple, so pay attention, if you build 100 house at the end of my street, my house price will fall. Rule 101 of economics.

When you say accessible credit, do you mean by setting up a liability scheme in conjunction with the banks to kick start the stagnant housing market; allowing people with a 5% deposit that meet a strict lending code to access the same excellent rates as people on 20%? Is that what you meant? As I dont remember labour doing that?? They just incompetently sat back and watched an internet and housing bubble explode! Vote labour! They can run the country at a deficit during a boom!