Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am unconvinced rates will go up dramatically for a long time - we live in change times macroeconomically/politically


Significant interest rates rises will also potentially


a) lead to serious social/political 'problems', the banks may have got away with 'it' in 2008 but the mass repossessions associated with big hikes (or proably just a couple of percentage points) would have some serious, serious issues politically...... and potentially for capitalism.


b)ultimately it will bust many banks again if a housing bust resulted from the above


Inflation will be allowed to get higher rtaher than any significant hike in interest rates IMO


Western Economies are still in intensive care.......(and worryingly there's some suggestions that the BRIC/MINTS are going that way too)

the banks will still be there still making their money, there's been no real incentive for them to change their approach. the banks got away with it and will do so again. and why, given they don't actually suffer, wouldn't they.

even RBS, owned by the government, is taking the piss, as ever. 2 years ago they were ordered to offload a huge proportion of their retail / Corporate customer base - but it never happened (and there was a determination within RBS that it would NOT happen). banks rule OK, regardless of the 'politics' - until a Govt grows a spine why should this not continue ? the banks have nothing to be scared of !

We have free banking, no-one switches and the internet is the way forward. Many of them would be delighted to offload a bunch of retail as it's expensive to run and outdated.


Metro - they've done well

Tesco bank forging ahead

Vigin - in the top 5 in a matter of time


NOT


We get exactly what we deserve......

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We have free banking, no-one switches and the

> internet is the way forward. Many of them would be

> delighted to offload a bunch of retail as it's

> expensive to run and outdated.

>

> Metro - they've done well

> Tesco bank forging ahead

> Vigin - in the top 5 in a matter of time

>

> NOT

>

> We get exactly what we deserve......



I agree to an extent, but every bank takes the piss, just to a different extent.


Can someone (Quids) explain to me (because I genuinely don't know) how the banks justify charging 4 - 5% on mortgages when the interest rate has been rock bottom for years? I get that they need to turn a profit, but I just don't know how they justify these figures. surely 2 - 2.5% would make them a profit without blatantly robbing everyone just because they can.

That's what we'll be paying. For two years...


Funny how the people that are "high risk" are the ones they make life most difficult for. And surely the whole point of the government guaranteeing 15% is we default is to take the risk away from the banks, so we should be treated like everyone else, but instead we just have to bend over and let them roger us, because they can, and we don't have any other option other than to keep paying low rent for a dump or stupid rent for somewhere half decent.




I know it's cheap and simplistic and left wing to have a go at the banks, but they are a bunch of theiving cunts!

Yeh if you are being quoted much more than 2 - 4% at the moment then you must be viewed as a risk or have a very low deposit. What are the typical rates being offered to Help to Buy customers at the moment?


We don't talk about it much here but there are sub prime lenders in the UK too, many of whom deal with people with bad credit or on low incomes - in my line of work we see a lot of people who brought under Right to Buy with those types of lenders and they really struggle if rates go up as they are already paying fairly high rates.

The banks are perfectly happy to lend to individuals that can't afford it, because should they default the banks still get their money back, with interest. With a deposit put down, prices rising and a taxpayer guarantee to boot, they can't lose. If they can squeeze a good rate of interest up to the point that the inevitable does happen then all the better (from their point of view). The banks and the government are complicit in this crazy 'help to buy' scheme because it's a vote winner with those already on the ladder (who tend to be the demographic most likely to go to vote), who like seeing the price of their house going up on paper. It's completely cynical IMO.


Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That's what we'll be paying. For two years...

>

> Funny how the people that are "high risk" are the

> ones they make life most difficult for. And surely

> the whole point of the government guaranteeing 15%

> is we default is to take the risk away from the

> banks, so we should be treated like everyone else,

> but instead we just have to bend over and let them

> roger us, because they can, and we don't have any

> other option other than to keep paying low rent

> for a dump or stupid rent for somewhere half

> decent.

>

>

>

> I know it's cheap and simplistic and left wing to

> have a go at the banks, but they are a bunch of

> theiving @#$%&!

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's completely cynical IMO.




Tend to agree. I certainly am under no illusion that the gov are doing this to help the likes of me. But it's the only option open to us so we just have to go for it and hope that we get a better deal (or at least not a worse deal) next time.

I actually don't think you can blame the banks really. I mean, lending to people who you know are likely to default is not the most ethical thing and is (as I said) pretty cynical, but them their duty is primarily to their shareholders. It's not *entirely* the fault of government either, as they know that even if it would be in the general long term good to put measures in place to bring house prices down, it would be political suicide. Fundamentally, it's the fault of the many home owners who get excited about the ever increasing list value of their home, base their feelings of security and well being on it and use it to judge the success of government.

I didn't mean to criticise anyone taking up these schemes - it makes sense from an individual's point of view to do what they can to get on the ladder.

I just despair at the whole narrative around house prices. The fact that papers report increasing prices as 'good news'.


Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's completely cynical IMO.

>

>

>

> Tend to agree. I certainly am under no illusion

> that the gov are doing this to help the likes of

> me. But it's the only option open to us so we just

> have to go for it and hope that we get a better

> deal (or at least not a worse deal) next time.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The banks are perfectly happy to lend to

> individuals that can't afford it, because should

> they default the banks still get their money back,

> with interest. With a deposit put down, prices

> rising and a taxpayer guarantee to boot, they

> can't lose. If they can squeeze a good rate of

> interest up to the point that the inevitable does

> happen then all the better (from their point of

> view). The banks and the government are complicit

> in this crazy 'help to buy' scheme because it's a

> vote winner with those already on the ladder (who

> tend to be the demographic most likely to go to

> vote), who like seeing the price of their house

> going up on paper. It's completely cynical IMO.


Yes "help to buy" is really about recapitalising the banks that have dodgy balance sheets rather than helping first-time buyers get "on the ladder". If it happens to bolster the apparent recovery and win votes, so much the better. The one thing it isn't doing is helping people who aren't already on the property ladder.

Prices are crazy at the moment. A house we tried to buy in the summer and eventually gave up hope of the sale going through in October has just come back on the market this week a full ?150k more than it was on for in the summer! That's crazy. We've shipped out to nunhead in the end which seems much more affordable and still a lovely feel, lovely shops and only mile or so from east dulwich. Surely this kind of crazy growth isn't sustainable?!

If buying a house in this area was near impossible then they wouldn't be selling. But they are.


What you mean is it's near impossible for you. And as it happens, for me.


It's sh*t isn't it but then no-one *has* to live in ED after all.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...