Jump to content

Did you borrow money when you knew you couldn't afford it?


Recommended Posts

And if so, do you feel guilty now?


Everyone is blaming the bankers for the credit crunch and fair enough, they should take some of the blame for lending to people who were not intelligent enough to understand their ability to repay their debts, and taking advantage of them, but surely some of the blame must be taken by people who were just greedy and borrowed more than they could afford?

I'm not sure you understand the situation, as your question misses the point.


People borrowed money in what had been a sustained period of high economic growth and low credit costs. When people borrowed money at these rates they could afford it, and expected (and were supported by financial companies in collusion with this belief) that the positive financial outlook would continue.


The damage is being done to borrowers returning to the market as their deals conclude, and finding that new deals are much more expensive and for an expected 1% of individuals may be beyond their means.


This is nothing to feel 'guilty' about, no act of criminal intent had been committed. In fact it's very sad for those affected. There's a suspisciously crowing tone about your post which seems deeply unpleasant.


There may have been the odd spiv who attempted to deliberately defraud the market, but you won't find them by tossing sweeping accusations out in public forums, and they won't feel guilty (trust me).

Bankers (Northern reck) were buying short and selling long.............. a very basic banker's rule was broken there.


After a while, doing this has long term repercussions, it cannot be sustained.


Perhaps in the future rates might be fixed for the first half of the mortgage period.


When embarking on a loan as important as your mortgage it should be much better protected for the individual, to avoid an excessive amount of fore closures.

I am personally shiteing it because my deal is up in March and because of the fact that we now have a child, my missus will not be going back to work full time. We would have no problems if we were both f/t and not shelling out for nursery but we might very well be in trouble come March! There is about ?80 slack in the family budget each month with my mortgage (not on a deal) due to go up by about ?400) Oh Dear!

I'm not accusing anyone of defrauding the market ... just wondering if some blame shouldn't be attributed to those who borrowed beyond their means. I mean everyone knows that interest rates can go up as well as down, don't they? Shouldn't we expect people to be intelligent enough to realise this?


You could argue that ultimately, what will happen to someone who has taken on too large a mortgage, will have to sell back their house and go and live somewhere smaller/not as nice. Which is where they would have been living anyway if everyone had been a bit more realistic about things over the past few years.


"When people borrowed money at these rates they could afford it, and expected (and were supported by financial companies in collusion with this belief) that the positive financial outlook would continue."


Of course, they were in collusion with the financial companies in these beliefs. What I am really saying, is that if we are going to blame the bankers for being deluded, then why should different rules apply to the borrowers? The only defence is that bankers "ought to know better". But at the same time, we currently have lots of people saying it was obvious that it couldn't last and taking a "told-you-so" attitude. Well, if it was so obvious, why did so many people take out big ,mortgages?

How do you judge "beyond their means"? Interest rates can go up and down but how much fluctuation skyward is reasonable to expect and ensure you can afford?


I would agree that interest rates rising 1 or maybe 2% should be anticipated, however, if they were to increase to the rates seen in the 80's I suspect a large percentage would struggle, including those with relatively small mortgages.

so essentially this thread could be titled - "is your house being repossessed?"


"and if so, do you feel guilty now"


i guess that anyone who's house is being repossessed has more pressing problems then feeling guilty about the plight of their lender

ratty Wrote:

There is about ?80 slack in the family budget each month with my mortgage (not on a deal) due to go up by about ?400)

Oh Dear!


Sorry to hear that M8...look I'm also in need of "readies" now.

Can you drive fast?

Just that I'm getting a "Team" together at the moment for a little Business proposition.

Interested?

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...