Self-Employed Borrowers: Go Away!

Christina Jordan
by Lovemoney Staff Christina Jordan on 02 February 2009  |  Comments 76 comments

HBOS brands have withdrawn from self-cert and sub-prime mortgage lending and tightened all new build criteria.

HBOS subsidiaries Bank of Scotland (BoS) and BM Solutions (BM) have announced they have pulled their entire range of new business self-certification and sub-prime mortgage products.

The move sees the newly formed giant Lloyds Banking Group (comprising Lloyds TSB and HBOS) reducing its overall lending risk and becoming far more cautious.

The HBOS brands made the announcement late last week and all affected products are now no longer available. This is a blow to the mortgage industry, in particular to brokers who introduced the vast majority of the two lenders' specialist business.

In addition the lender has massively tightened criteria in new build lending, on both mainstream and buy-to-let business.

What has it pulled?

  • BM and BoS have completely withdrawn from the self-cert mortgage market.
  • BM has also stopped its sub-prime operations -- it was still offering near-prime lending to those with extremely minor credit blips. Now this has gone.
  • All HBOS brands have tightened their lending criteria on any mainstream new build properties, reducing the maximum loan-to-value ratio from 90% to 80%. This means anyone buying a new build property needs at least 20% upfront.
  • Plus the four brands (Halifax, BoS, BM, Intelligent Finance) have reduced the maximum loan-to-value on new build buy-to-let properties from 75% to 65%. So anyone buying a new build property to let out needs at least 35% upfront.

Why has it made the move?

The country's largest lending group says it has made the changes on the back of similar moves to tighten criteria by other lenders.

It also pointed to the fact that there has been a huge reduction in the number of active players in the specialist lending sector (which comprises self-cert, sub-prime and buy-to-let lending). A spokesperson for Lloyds Banking Group claimed it had 'no option other than to respond to ensure we continue to lend in a prudent and proportionate manner.'

It's true that the specialist markets have shrunk enormously in the last year alone with around 20 lenders pulling out of the self-cert market and 22 from sub-prime lending. Lloyds TSB does not want to be the lender of last resort for all the borrowers left behind by those lenders that have exited the market. After all, specialist lending is by its very nature higher risk than mainstream lending.

The company also stressed that not only does it still have one of the widest mainstream residential mortgage ranges available, BM Solutions will also continue to be the country's largest buy-to-let lender. But that will be cold comfort to borrowers left with a dwindling number of specialist mortgages to choose from, or brokers with even less options for placing their clients' business.

Going, going ...

The sub-prime market has virtually disappeared in the UK and BM Solutions only lent at the near-prime end of the sector, to borrowers with extremely minor credit problems.

But what is more of a blow is the total withdrawal of self-cert lending -- a controversial area of the market that has raised concerns in the past from both the regulator and the media.

Self-cert lending was designed to help the self-employed get a mortgage without having to prove their income. This is because many self-employed borrowers reduce their income on paper to minimise their tax liabilities. But they can often afford to service a larger mortgage than their accounts testify. Self-cert allows them to certify their own income without the lender checking this.

But it also became widely used by borrowers who were not self-employed and this led to some controversy as some borrowers began lying about their income in order to get larger mortgages than the lender thought they could afford.

Self-cert in the right circumstances though is valuable and valid for those who genuinely need a mortgage and would find it hard to prove their income. As a freelance journalist, I will have to get a self-cert mortgage in order to buy a property.

But where can I go now that two of the biggest players have withdrawn from the market?

Self-cert saviours

Probably the biggest remaining self-cert lender is The Mortgage Works, the specialist lending subsidiary of Nationwide. As of today (2/2/09) it still offers a range of self-cert mortgages -- the lender confirmed all the rates below at noon. They are all fixed rates, only available up to 65% loan-to-value and only available to self-employed borrowers. And the rates are not bad at all, considering.

The Mortgage Works' Self-Cert range

Length of fixRateFee
2 Year Fix5.39%2.50% of loan (min £595)
2 Year Fix remortgage only, online only5.64%2.5% (min £595) £500 cashback
2 year fix remortgage only, online only5.64%2.5% (min £595) Free legals and valuation
2 year fix5.79%1.5% (min £595)
3 year fix5.49%2.5% (min £595)
3 year fix5.78%1.5% (min £595)

Platform Home Loans' Self-Cert Range

Not available to employed borrowers and not available on new build flats. All the rates below were confirmed at noon on 02/02/09:

Type of dealMaximum LTVRateFee
2 year fix60%7.19%£1,995
2 year fix75%7.54%£1,995
3 year fix60%7.19%£1,995
3 year fix75%7.54%£1,995
3 year fix remortgage special60%7.29%£1,995, Free legal and valuation fees
3 year fix remortgage special70%7.64%£1,995, Free legal and valuation fees

In addition to these lenders, a few other specialist lenders, such as Money Partners, are offering self-cert through mortgage brokers only.

Indeed, all the products listed above are only available through brokers and if you cannot prove your income to a lender, you are going to struggle to find a suitable mortgage on the high street.

Even if you do go to a broker be aware that the HBOS withdrawal from self-cert will put enormous pressure on the remaining lenders and mortgages could change rapidly. Do not be at all surprised to see deals quickly repriced, criteria tightened or lenders even withdrawing from the self-cert mortgage market altogether.

Compare mortgages to find the best deal

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (76)

  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    A new bank is born, just as dumb as it's parents. It suffers from their short sightedness as well.

    The govt is encouraging banks to lend, it's better for the banks too. This new big kid has a lot of mortgages on it's books and it can suffer if the property market declines further. This type of behaviour can only add to the markets woes. If the worst happened and the market implodes and it has to reposses properties and can't get it's money back, it will suffer.

    But no it's dumb, it's big and suffers from learning difficulties.

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Malcolm Wheatley
    Love rating 3
    Malcolm Wheatley said

    Christina,

    I'm a self-employed journalist (and Fool writer). Admitedly I have a low LTV, but I've never needed a self-cert yet. Accounts and tax statement have always worked. Freelance journalists don't get paid in cash, which may have something to do with it.

    MDW1954

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • avfc2002
    Love rating 0
    avfc2002 said

    Banks will lend but I understand many propositions being hawked around do not stand up to normal bank ending criteria. With the country running into recession many firms are losing custom and therefore sales and it hardly makes lending sense for the banks to bale out companies who really have no apparent chance to pay back such lending. The normal security for loans has deteriorated so much that in many cases it does not cover existing debt levels.

    It was not that long ago that larger firms were gearing up their balance sheets enabling them to pay special dividends to shareholders, perhaps now is the time for the reverse to happen

    From talking to bankers down at my local it is not that the banks wont or cant lend money it is that the requests are basically not bank lending propositions they are cries for help that only an infussion of equity capital will solve - this is not a bank's duty to supply.

    I am amazed at how many people deride the banks for not lending but if they cared to look at the figures they would not put their monies at risk.

    Finally self cert mortgages were shown to have been terribly abused and basically why should banks take the unquantifiable risk, lend to audited figures fine.

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rober09
    Love rating 0
    rober09 said

    I agree with the comment above Christina, unless you are a self employed journalist working in the "black economy" I cannot see why you cannot produce evidence of your income.

    I remortgaged in retirement above my pension income, using evidence of my investment income. It was a "pain" to get the two years of evidence required by a very conservative Building Society together, but I did it.

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • supasap
    Love rating 19
    supasap said

    yes I am not sure why the self employed are treated any differently, after all they are obliged to do a tax return so are we saying these exzggerate their earnings? Probably not. Also in terms of job security aren't the self employed more in control of their future ie work longer hours, naturally incentivised to look after customers and so on.

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bimber
    Love rating 44
    bimber said

    "A new bank is born, just as dumb as it's parents."

    It's quite ironic you should make a dumb mistake in that sentence ;-) Since you made the same mistake 3 times you probably need a quick refresher on ITS and IT'S...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITS

    It's not dumb for a bank to reduce its risk profile at the moment - they are short on capital so there's no point in wasting it. Increasing lending to reinflate the property bubble is not a long term solution. We have to take the pain of a recession at some point - the central banks inflated out of recession in 2001 but because the problem which led to the recession was not fixed, we've got an even nastier downturn this time. Until the misallocated capital is reallocated to productive activities we cannot get back on track. Allocating capital to housing will not fix the problem.

    Report on 02 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    So what,s new these lending conditions were so 30 years ago with little problems, then we/they got lax!!!and fell into the mire, it,s back to sensible lending/borrowing again

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Ciscosurplus
    Love rating 0
    Ciscosurplus said

    This has affected me. I currently run my own limited company (which I have been doing for 18 months). I provide services in IT and have a contract to provide consultancy for the next 8 months. The value of this is far more than I could get in one year in a permanent position. We were in the process of buying a new build property at £230,000, the property was offered on a 75/25 equity share (the housing developer has a 25% equity stake at 0% interest repayable on moving again in the future). This leaves a sum of £172,000, of which we had a further £35,000 to put down and another £12K to cover legal costs. My wife is also a primary teacher on a reasonable salary. Anyway last week the halifax said this was all ok, as my earnings were more than x4s hers. This week the offer has been withdrawn due to the risk associated with my circumstances! Don't the realise it's just as likely that a permanent employee could be made redundant tomorrow too? Anyway so now, instead of the £830 mortgage payments that I cant afford Ill continue paying my £950 in rent!!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • prodigy9
    Love rating 0
    prodigy9 said

    I also agree that self-cert applicants should be able/have to prove their income. If they don't have 2+ years accounts they should save and wait which is what used to happen before we all got greedy and scared that we'd miss our chance to get on the property ladder.

    The issue is why have these "liar loans" become so prevalent? In my view it is because house prices ran away from reality (well real salaries at any rate). And instead of banks being prudent and maintaining their lending criteria of 2.5-3x income, they saw a chance to get money for nothing, devised complex instruments so they could lend to any joker with a pulse, and so of course every joker with a pulse took the opportunity.

    I really feel that if we were not able to borrow to meet those inflated house prices, the prices woyld have had to come down to affordable levels. Banks could have acted as a brake but instead they were an accelerator.

    So now they are withdrawing from they market they created leaving some people high and dry.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Grobbendonk
    Love rating 26
    Grobbendonk said

    Lack of regulation of self-certification lending was part of the problem.

    I am self employed and had no issues getting a mortgage based on a few shreds of paperwork that I could have knocked off in a word processor in 5 minutes. The bank never even bothered to check it.

    I can't blame them for pulling this option, they need to reduce risk. In the long run, this is a good move, as it should help reduce the chances of another bubble forming based on bad debts.

    But for those that it was originally designed for, the banks need to come up with some other way of doing it. My first thought would be to look at the tax return...

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • richkw
    Love rating 0
    richkw said

    38 years ago, when I applied for my first mortgage, it was 3 times your own salary, plus 1 times your wifes and a 20% deposit. There were virtually no exceptions except for a few very high interest, fly by night lenders. The system worked well for both lenders and borrowers who were prepared to save for their deposit. To do so, you went without. No take-aways, no pub, no trips out at the weekend, no treats. In the long run, everyone was a winner.

    A return to a similar policy today, might well shorten this recession. Inevitably we will see short term pain for long term gain, but will emerge a fitter and leaner country.

    It's all about greed - on both sides.

    P.S. Before I'm accused of ignoring the issue of house prices rising far more than salaries, in 1971 I was earning a very average £1400 a year, and my wife £900. Our mortgage was thus £5100. It took 2 years to save the deposit required for a very basic house costing just over £6000. Work it out. We were no better off than the young of today. The system worked.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • fairmaid
    Love rating 4
    fairmaid said

    My husband has been self employed for almost thirteen years. We have remortgaged a couple of times but have never used a self cert mortgage. We have alsways proved his income using an average of his previous three years accounts. Celf cert mortgages allow people to vastly inflate their earnings to get a mortgage they can't actually afford. Who then pays the price?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • durhamlassagain
    Love rating 0
    durhamlassagain said

    I knew someone who was so behind with paying their taxes that they were suggesting that the baliffs would call while at the same time they were trying to arrange a self cert mortgage. The mortgage was based on the income supposedly from 3 sources. One was a start up company that hit the buffers very quickly when one of the directors left after developing health problems. The other did not have the range of skills and experience required to continue the business. One was an organisation that relied on funding to survive but the funding dried up as the person responsible for claiming it (same as the one trying to get the mortgage) also developed health problems as their world collapsed around them. The third source came from working 1 or 2 days a month so did not amount to much. Somehow despite all of this they managed to get a mortgage. No one who knew their financial situation could understand how they had managed to do this. If the bank had known the whole truth they never would have lent them any money but with self cert they could hide the truth.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    Hi richkw we seem to agree!! I had the same conditions 35 years ago

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • zugental
    Love rating 0
    zugental said

    I keep hearing people talk about sensible lending 10, 20, 30 years ago. But, pray tell me, werent there repossessions then?

    We may moan about the buy-to-lets who used self cert to buy up several properties. Maybe they are now dumping those houses.

    However, some of us who used 125% mortgages were not crazy. We were straight out of school, so we bought the house. Since then, my income has almost doubled. My wife's finished school and is now earning significantly. Our mortgage has gone from 50% of household income in 2006 to 16% today.

    So knock us all you like (like my solicitor then), some of us on 125% mortages are far more sensible than you think.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Icelolly
    Love rating 0
    Icelolly said

    What's going to happen to the thousands of people who they lent to on the same terms that that they have just taken off the market? They will have nowhere to turn to when it comes to remortgaging and will be at the mercy of their original lender. The people that run these banks are all leeches and crooks and I hope they suffer.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    ZUGENTAL you are lucky/wise etc and one of the few exceptions, yes there were re-possesions 30 years ago but nothing like todays!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    Banks are soley responsible for this recession and they will be equally responsible for the time it takes to recover from it. A property now is worth (according to RICS) 17% less than it was in October 2007. Bearing in mind LTV's on buy to lets (BTL's) back then were around 80% on average, in theory, there should still be positive equity in a BTL property purchased at the peak of the boom. So why be so prudent to lend 65% max LTV on BTL's now when property is already down 17%? Property value to income has already reduced to around 4 times the average annual income. Making affordable sensible products available for first time buyers will see the property market stabilize and resume growth in accordance with inflation making property the safe saving option it has always been. Property values and the direction they're heading are always an indication of the bouyancy of UK economy; as is construction. In a recession they are first to be affected and are the first to lead the country from a recession. Banks should penalise people for buying a new-build or the people that want to build them. Also, people will always want to rent. Don't strangle the self cert market completely since new build and BTL's do offer a service and new build is the way out.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    I meant shouldn't penalise people..sorry :)

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Iniq
    Love rating 27
    Iniq said

    Quote:

    "BM and BoS have completely withdrawn from the self-cert mortgage market ... stopped its sub-prime operations ... tightened their lending criteria ... maximum loan-to-value ratio from 90% to 80% ..."

    So - sanity at last! Pity they and the other lenders didn't do that 10 years ago.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • prodigy9
    Love rating 0
    prodigy9 said

    zugental. Well done you! (Hope I've managed to get enough of a patronising tone into that.) What you are saying is that because you were and your wife were not made redundant you were able to pay your mortgage. Fact is you took a punt and it paid off. Some people win the lottery, but not everyone.

    Knowing what you know now (house prices can go down as well as up) would you take out a 125% mortgage if they were available today? I'd take a punt and say no.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • colin106
    Love rating 0
    colin106 said

    supasap - it is strange to me how few contributors to these forums complain about the amount of tax we pay, and about the enormous waste by government of that tax. Just look at it; tax on income, 15% VAT on virtually everything we buy, tax on insurance policies, tax on savings, "road fund" licence tax, alcohol and fuel duties and I bet there are more I can't think of. Then the last great take - 40% inheritance tax. Why do we tolerate this wasteful and corrupt system which is designed partly to buy votes from a large section of the people? Seeing this - if you were self employed - would you not whenever possible take cash from customers, perhaps in return for not charging them VAT on a job? If you did this on a large scale - and many do - then the remaining "legitimate" income might not be sufficient for a mortgage - hence the popularity of self cert mortgages.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • zugental
    Love rating 0
    zugental said

    Prodigy9: You ve made two points. The first about taking a punt. Aren't all mortages 'taking a punt'? I mean, even if you had 50 LTV and still made redundant, you cant still pay your mortgage so your point on that one is mute.

    Your second point was on today's prices. I live in a house were I dont pay rent and am steadily eating away at the mortgage. So does it even make any difference to me that prices have gone down?

    Our strategy for trading up is a different matter altogether and when that time comes, we will cross the bridge.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • supasap
    Love rating 19
    supasap said

    what has happened to ciscosurplus endorses my point / question above........ why can't the self employed use tax returns in same way as employed use pay slips? Can someone from financial sector explain why you are discriminating against someone who is as likely to maintain his income as his employed counterpart? what his so difficult about validating tax returns ....... and if you mention forged documents then are they more difficult to forge than payslips?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    Can someone give Bimber a bowl of Optimistic flakes, I see he's brought he's doom into this debate now. I don;:::t have the time to be to careful with my spelling and punctuation on here as I didn't believe I had a proof reader as a shadow. I wasn't planning to publish my thought's in the daily paper's.

    Anyway back to the debate, many who are self employed can prove their earnings, however it may be that they will get knocked back simply because this is an area that a particular bank/banks do not wish to go. They then get tarred with the same brush as the worst possible scenario, piegon holed in fact.

    When are these banks going to realise they have to do everything to get the housing market up and thriving again. They are so short termist they could bring about their own nightmare if it totally imploded and people walked away from their debt.

    Bimber doesn't believe allocating more capital to the housing market is appropriate how very wrong he is !

    I am not saying we want to overheat it again, that's certainly not the case but the UK is a little unique in it's housing market being of paramount importance to our financial well being. There are a host of differentiators that are behind this that make us different from say Germany. However even this useless Labour Government have realised this simple fact that Bimber with all his intricate economic school typre arguments for doom cannot seem to fathom.

    But of course in his own mind he is right, whilst the rest of us are trying to navigate our way through all this crisis with danger at every turn don't have a clue and are learning nothing in the process. I am beginning to hope maybe it's not such a good thing to have paid the mortgage off, be comfortable and safe and create the illusion that I alone know what's what. There is that old cliche, "The mother of invention is necessity", that tend to come from people who are up against it and not those who have plateaued or stopped !

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • wellington101
    Love rating 0
    wellington101 said

    Self employed are scapegoats for badly managed and greedy banks. If you are successful you are excluded on the grounds you are a greater risk.

    While golden parachutes for losing money is common place in the banking industory. Let alone the fact that the tax payer is bailing out reckless banking. Fat greedy cats are still payed a bonus. Nice work if you can get it?

    Sorry your just not good enough if you work hard?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    How is the new-build housing market meant to recover when banks adopt this attitude? The result will be that self-builders, small builders and developers cannot get loans to build houses, especially with the current low prices, and housebuilding will be completely dominated by the big players with their landbanks and cosy relationships with councils that guarantees them planning permission and hefty "affordable homes" contributions to the government. Did you know one-third of all housing developments have to be given away now to the government as affordable homes? The builder only gets the construction cost back, which means all the land and development costs have to be borne by the remaining two-thirds of houses for private sale.

    To me, as a businessman involved in the building trade, it makes no sense to be cutting back on lending and tightening lending criteria in a downturn: now is the time to be supporting business people with good, profitable ideas, as they prepare for the upturn. As usual people bleat on about "mortgage lending should only be three times income + 20% deposit". If interest rates are low, what is the point of artificially restricting the income multiple? The 3x figure just became established at a certain point in history, when it matched what people had left over from their incomes once they'd paid for food and other essentials. But now salaries are vastly higher in real terms, and food prices and many other costs are much lower as a proportion of income, so people have more disposable money. It makes far more sense to say that people should not spend more than 20-25% of their income on covering their mortgage interest, which is precisely why 125% mortgages were available: the calculation was done on *affordability*, not some random multiple. Very few 125% mortgages were issued, and then only to people who had serious incomes and low outgoings.

    As regards self-cert mortgages, they were a great idea for self-employed people, who generally get shafted by the financial services industry and by the social security system all round. Perhaps self-cert was abused - well, that serves the banks right for doing inadequate checks, and hopefully the people who wrongly applied have been financially ruined - serves them right. But for people like me, whose income varies wildly from year to year (between £12K one year and £250K the next, for example), because it depends on very large occasional sales, self-cert mortgages were a god-send.

    More and more people in business, who are entrepreneurial and want to build something that makes money, employs people, and is a success, are just going to have to give up on banks, who are risk-averse, want safe bets and therefore just look after the big boys. The answer is to avoid banks entirely, use your own capital, and grow more slowly, which across the whole country means slower growth and a hobbled economy.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • ChristinaJordan
    Love rating 0
    ChristinaJordan said

    thanks for your comments

    MDW1954 and avfc2002 . yes you are quite right that you do not need to get a self-cert mortgage just because you are self-employed. indeed many self-employeed borrowers from any field of work get full status (mainstream) mortgages based on three years of accounts.

    As mentioned in the piece I am a fledgling freelancer and i do not have three years of accounts. I have only just done my first tax return. I do not know of any lender that would offer me a status mortgage based on one year's accounts. If you do please let me know - it would save me a lot of money. The shortest period I have heard of is at least 18 months of accounts for being accepted onto mainstream.

    prodigy9 reckons that if self-employed borrowers don't have 2 years of accounts they should stop being greedy and wait. But what if,like me,they have a signifcant FTB deposit, and would be joint buying with an employed borrower (civil servant) at less than 2 x times joint income. Is it being greedy to assume we can afford a property? Short of about three grand it would stack up on my partners' salary alone. But we will be forced to get an expensive self-cert deal.

    Out of interest have either MDW1954 and avfc2002 remortgaged in the last year? Things have tightened up considerably for self-employed borrowers - even those with accounts can't get one from some lenders I contacted. let me know if you have and who with.

    cheers for your feedback

    cj

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • WrenChasen
    Love rating 0
    WrenChasen said

    I don't see the problem; the restriction affects people who seek to lie about their income and those operating 'under the radar'. It should have been brought in years ago on both sides of the Atlantic.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    Supasap

    As a property developer and investor I'll tell you exactly why it's difficult for some people, certainly in my proffession, to validate income on a tax return. Decalarable income shown on a tax return is PAYE, dividends, rentals or other earinings etc. If I build a property and cannot sell it, but re-mortgage it to redeem development funding I do not have to declare any re-finance income reaped from the re-mortgage. I can only declare this income, and any other profit made on a tax return as a capital gain when the property is sold. So if there is no self cert it's impossible to justify real income if I haven't sold anything; as is the case last year. Self cert products could base their affordability on bank statements. This would provide greater insight into an individual's position to afford the mortgage.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Strebor19
    Love rating 0
    Strebor19 said

    Well To all those who are knocking Self cert mortgages, all I can say is everyones situation is different. When I got Divorced 10 years ago my Ex Wife at the time got everything so she could buy a Mortgage free house for herself and our two Children. I had to start again with nothing whilst paying 30% of my Salary in CSA payments. What I did to get back on the Housing ladder was to arrange a self Cert Mortgage interest only, and at the last moment just before completion on the property I also arranged a personal loan from my Bank for the Deposit of 5%. Once I moved in and so that I could afford to pay the Mortgage I rented out 2 of the 3 Bedrooms to lodgers, whose rent more than covered the Mortgage. within 3 years I paid back the Personal loan for the Deposit, and also in that time luckily for me the House value went up 30%. Also in that 3 years being single again I studied and with the increased qualification managed to get a better paying job, and no longer needed the Lodgers. I have since remortgaged several times to a better deal, and well on the way to paying back the Mortgage and currently have a 60% stake in my property even with the reduced value in the last year. In todays market place I would have been doomed to rent forever as what I did would not be possible! My point is everyones situation is different and people get income from lots of different sources which traditional lenders do not recognise like lodgers, Allowances from parents, Part time jobs or business, Keep money from grown up children or other family members, etc etc.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    richkw - as I've just said, 3 x salary is a completely arbitrary figure. It worked for you 38 years ago, but why is it appropriate now as a measure of what a house is worth? House new-build quality and people's expectations of what's included (insulation, central heating, fitted kitchens etc) are vastly higher, there is insufficient supply of housing as people expect more space now and live alone much more, plus there isn't enough development land so it costs a fortune to buy land and get planning permission, and so on. The world is completely different from 1970.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    100% with you matchmade

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • DarkestGrey
    Love rating 0
    DarkestGrey said

    I tried to get a mortgage on three years of accounts when building up my business. People forget that you can make a loss, so after three years in business the maximum mortgage I could get was £60000 (based on the average of 3 years income tax returns). Not enough to even buy a house. Plus I was told I would have to pay an accountant to verify the accounts. Eventually, I went self-cert where I could get up to £200,000 (based on my savings). A vast difference in amount. I was sensible an borrowed £120,000. Self-cert isn't always abused.

    It is unfair that after three years being self-employed, I could not get a normal mortgage because I was "unstable". My employee on the other hand, could get a mortgage based on three months payslips for me, Mr "Unstable".

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MikeGG1
    Love rating 879
    MikeGG1 said

    Quite frankly, anyone who relies on income that they haven't declared to HMRC doesn't deserve to get a mortgage based on it. Those of us on PAYE can't get away with anything. So why should they?

    As for dropping the LTV for New Builds, that is simply to ignore the new build premium which is lost as soon as you move in. So why should the banks lend on something that is about to evaporate?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Coypu
    Love rating 0
    Coypu said

    Supasap makes good points. The 'received wisdom' that self-employed people are inherently riskier bets than those employed by someone else is hard to justify at any time and particularly so in a recession.

    If you are self employed, your income is very likely to fluctuate from year to year, you get used to it and plan accordingly. Big institutions don't like that, they equate change with with problems, because in the world of banking that tends to be true, as we see.

    A few months ago a long term employee of Woolworths would have seemed to them a much better bet than a self-employed electrician. I doesn't now though does it.

    The crux of the matter is that "Past performance is no guarentee of future performance" and that is almost as true if you check pay slips, 3 years accounts or go on self certification.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • etphonehome247
    Love rating 0
    etphonehome247 said

    Strebor19 - I do have to agree with you about everyones situation being different. I too have taken some risks with regard to 'house buying' and thankfully they have always so far, paid off. In an ideal world everyone would have a well paid job, an impeccable credit rating and 100% job security. Unfortunately, very few have all those luxuries, so compromises have to be made and risks taken.

    At the end of the day, is anything certain now-a-days? I think recent global changes show us that nothing in the Financial Market is.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • prodigy9
    Love rating 0
    prodigy9 said

    zugental. No. All mortgages are not punts. A punt is a gamble. If you buy a home with a 125% mortgage you are more likely to be at a significant disadvantage from the start unless your home was undervalued which would be fantastic. Mortgages are or should be loans for homes in which you live. To me BTLs are business propositions and so should be treated like a business loan for which you need to provide adequate collateral.

    If you had a 50% LTV with a mortgage of substantially less than 125% and were made redundant I would suggest you are more likely to find a job that will allow you to service your debt, so I disagree that the point is "moot".

    Not sure I get your 2nd paragraph (probably just me) but I think you are saying that your mortgage now is less than when you bought. That's as it should be, but surely you must admit that you had the advantage of timing.

    I bought a place in the late 80s and was hit by the 90s recession with crippling negative equity. When we sold 13 years later we still lost 3-4k.

    My point is that lenders lent too too readily and whilst I don't blame people for taking advantage of lax lending criteria, I do get annoyed that we appear to be here again, and lenders are scratching their heads wondering why.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    It is unfair that after three years being self-employed, I could not get a normal mortgage because I was "unstable". My employee on the other hand, could get a mortgage based on three months payslips for me, Mr "Unstable".

    DarkestGrey, yes a friend of mine who was in the same situation about a decade back had the same problem. This goes to show how stupid banks really are when this type of contradiction can occur !

    And while I am knocking them , how about a bankers draft that you pay extra for ? Somene tried to give me one to buy a car for 7k, I tried to check it's validity with the issuing bank in case it was a stolen one(there are a lot of them out there). No we can't do that... was the reply... well i won;t accept it then...it was only after a complaint from the purchaser that they grudgingly took steps to prove it's validity ! The guy paid 35 pounds extra for the draft and what kind of service do they provide...eh none....you can't make this stuff up !

    The trouble is the heads of the banks are so detached from reality it's no wonder they rode into this perfect storm !

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    And here's an idea !

    Instead of using income multiples etc etc....why not over a lifetime allow people to borrow what they want providing they have a history of making their own choices of what they can afford and always pay back what they borrow.

    Most people self regulate what they do and in many of the above posts people have tweaked or ducked under the system. But they took responsibility for what they were doing and the banks were oblivious.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • glynh100
    Love rating 0
    glynh100 said

    I took out a self-certification mortgage in 2003 and can remember being surprised at just how straightforward the entire process was, with the broker falling over himself to get the deal done. Having had a standard employed person's mortgage since the late 1980s, it all seemed a little too easy.

    The only caveat I would enter for self-employed people is that you should have an accountant; because I had done my own accounts (self-assessment, i.e. not verified by an accountant),the Citizens Advice Bureau were reluctant to help me when I had a period of ill health a few years ago, for fear that they might be implicated if my accounts were not accurate.

    What bothers me now is that we are apparently entering into one of the worst recessions in living memory, whereupon a number of those who lose their jobs are likely, either through choice or the lack of it, to take the freelance route rather than trying for a permanent job which might not be any more secure. If those people cannot get a mortgage or any other form of lending, how will the housing market and the economy at large fare?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • prodigy9
    Love rating 0
    prodigy9 said

    ChristinaJordan, I didn't say "they should stop being greedy and wait." I said "they should save and wait which is what used to happen before we all got greedy and scared that we'd miss our chance to get on the property ladder."

    The reason I said this is because I was in this position. I have a self cert mortgage but I recognise I was v.v. lucky with my timing. I wanted a house and I wanted it now. My point is that we need to return to saving and waiting until we can afford a house. But we were scared by the prospect of the property ladder become impossible to step onto. I know I was. But my main point is that I blame banks for creating a market, stoking demand then withdrawing from it leaving a vacuum.

    I would suggest your case is different to others and the problem here is not your self cert status, but that banks act like pack animals with no discretion and a fear of doing something different. They don't have the sense to look at cases as individuals. Maybe this is what they need to return to.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • richkw
    Love rating 0
    richkw said

    Matchmade

    Perhaps the financial troubles we face to day are in part due to a blurring of the meanings of the words 'expectation' and 'greed'.

    If society in general subscribed to the age old ethos that if you can't afford it, don't buy it, then we might just get out of this recession just a little quicker, and possibly wouldn't have got into it in the first place.

    The banks spotted our weaknesses, especially materialism, and exploited them. Now, with a plunging property market and rising unemployment, they are being forced, through their own mistakes, to cherry pick their customers.

    Most didn't complain when money was easy to get, but equally most didn't forecast a recession of such severity. Now, the price has to be paid for our expectations/greed and the banks exploitation of those traits. A return to former values might just be the 'new beginning' that the banks and other lenders need to find.

    Tough for the self-employed, of which I'm one, and also for first time buyers, but a way forward, perhaps.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bimber
    Love rating 44
    bimber said

    "Bimber doesn't believe allocating more capital to the housing market is appropriate how very wrong he is !"

    So the solution is not to allocate capital to productive activites? If we allocate it away from productive activities and into asset price inflation, where would that get us? We know the answer - it gets us to where we are now. Unfortunately there are no grounds for optimism and the idea that you need to create value for value to be increased is not just economic mumbo-jumbo but cold hard reality. Banks need to allocate capital to activities which create value. A country cannot get rich by rotating its housing stock, and it can't get rich by extracting the value of those homes to buy imported goods. There comes a time when you have to cut your spending and start to pay back the debt. That time has come.

    It was pointed out to me recently that I was confusing the words "effect" and "affect". I took it on board and was grateful (that's another word I used to get wrong).

    Christina, I appreciate your frustration at not being able to get a mortgage but in the current climate do you not think you are better off waiting another year until prices have fallen and you've got more evidence of income? It needn't be that long - you can file your tax return before the deadline if you want.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Finnoula
    Love rating 0
    Finnoula said

    Ahh Yes great another reason for me to lay off my 20 staff and get a job what a great idea more on the dole.

    I have a mortgage with Birmingham Midshires it is a self cert mortgage I am already penealised for keeping others in employment by higher tax and national insurance contributions it also keeps me out of normal high street lending regardless of your 2 years accounts as you are classed as a high risk and increases interested on any of my loans, I have never complained before but the facts are it is employed people pretending to be self-employed as they did not earn enough that has caused this in the 5 years I have had my mortgage with BM I have over payed £150,000 leaving me with just £90,000 left which if interest rates stay low will be gone in the next three years how am I a bad risk? a £260,000 25 year mortgage paid off in 8 years its a shame some on here tar us all with the same brush as currently I have a base rate+1.75% tracker with BM in the future my interest cost will at least double so I am effectively being punished for employing others.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kybosh909
    Love rating 6
    kybosh909 said

    If Mr Brown didnt hammer the contracting/self cert market with rediculous taxes and even lower expense claim thresholds maybe the self cert workers wouldnt have to fiddle the tax.

    i am a contractor and self employed, as we all know our jobs have very low security, we usually have to bear high travel costs (some get through a car every two years!!!), pay for 2 or 3 types of insurance, accountants fees, no holiday pay and no sick pay and no company benefits such as pensions. so the higher pay is an incentive to cover this and help us build a slush fund to cover us when times are bad and build some sort of pension. its no wonder folk are having to be "articulate" with their earnings when you see 1/2 of it wiped away and given to the government to spend on banks, who wont lend it back.

    lets not forget a fair percentage of the workforce that built most of our houses are self cert. On one side our country needs more manual skill sets (plumbers, builders etc...)to get our country away from service based businesses and back to something of real value but on the other hand if you go self cert now you cant even get a mortgage.

    I know the risk is greater and poeple have abused the system. Its a shame its been abused by the few who spoil it for the many.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kempstonflyer
    Love rating 0
    kempstonflyer said

    I have no credible alternative other than to self-certify, being a self-employed accountant running his own smallish/medium sized practice for 20 years or so - the only other option would be if I were to let one of my competitors audit my books, finding out my client base, my charges etc in the process - who else would let their competitors have such access? There is a place for self-cert mortgages, but they are open to abuse - "sensible lending" (after whatever checks and balances have been made) should be the only criteria

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • kybosh909
    Love rating 6
    kybosh909 said

    oh yeah, almost forgot double NI - employers and employees!!!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • jadle
    Love rating 0
    jadle said

    Another great slamming of stable doors accompanies the thunder of hooves receding into the distance.

    If the banks/building societies had been enforcing these rules before, we would not be in the mess we are in now.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LateDeveloper
    Love rating 22
    LateDeveloper said

    Amazing, some of the biggest earners are self employed, so the banks rule these out as far as loans are concerned, these bankers are just thick headed.

    I tend to think it is about time the government puts checks in place on all lenders by capping interest rates to a sensible amount over base rate.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • vurrister
    Love rating 0
    vurrister said

    With so many jobs under threat probably self employed overal are better risk?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    Ah so the government????? was not aware that that is what was happening, methinks skullduggery

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • LovelyLeeloo
    Love rating 10
    LovelyLeeloo said

    It's interesting to read these varying opinions about self-cert mortgages, but nobody's mentioned my own particular bugbear in all this mess - mortgages with no repayment vehicle. A big self-cert mortgage may be a punt, but they have obviously worked for some in the right market conditions. But when I first read that interest-only mortgages were being granted to people with no strategy for repayment other than a lottery win, a legacy or - failing everything else - the sale of the property, then I had to check to make sure it wasn't April 1st! Giving a self-cert repayment mortgage to someone who can start working hard immediately to reduce the balance may be a risk, but giving one to someone who will still owe you the same amount 20 years down the line, without any agreement as to how they will pay you back, still strikes me as a recipe for toxic debt. Time taught us a hard lesson about endowments, but at least when we were sold our interest-only mortgage in the 1980s they not only checked properly to see if we could afford the interest payments, but made it a condition of the loan that we saved towards repaying the principal sum too. Yes, some borrowers have been rash, duplicitous and irresponsible - but the banks have encouraged them to be.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • starseed777
    Love rating 0
    starseed777 said

    So why not became a Limited Comp, and be employed??

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    Lovelyleeloo

    Time will show that even in light of a well publicised 17% downturn in property values in the short term, long-term investors in property will always show a considerable profit in property over the general 25 year term. The price you pay for a property today will be worth many-many times more than your property in 25 years and if you are looking to downsize and retire at this stage the equity in your property should be more than capable of re-housing yourself and paying off the mortgage.

    starseed777

    Forming a ltd company and being 'employed' you are in fact a director which according to lenders generally carries the same burdens as being self employed. It also means you pay an employers NI stamp too and preparation of certified company accounts are notoriously more expensive.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Delta112
    Love rating 0
    Delta112 said

    I haven't really had a chance to read previous comments on this article yet. This blanket withdrawal from the self-employed (and sub-prime) market on the part of HBOS will be yet another setback for mortgage borrowers wishing to get back on their feet (and in some cases buying a property for the rist time).

    On a personal note, I am not self-employed (but employed), but am mortgaged to a very high loan-to-value (LTV). Including my secured loan too, it was about 88% last year but is likely to be at least 98% now with present house prices! I'm not seeking to raise any further finance but my mortgage company, part of the Bradford & Bingley group, is offering a window of 5 months from 1st February to waive its present Early Repayment Charge in order for their customers to re-mortgage to a more competitive deal. However, I have no chance of doing so with my existing high LTV especially as my credit report is not squeaky clean!!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Delta112
    Love rating 0
    Delta112 said

    I should have proof-read this more!

    In my first para, instead of "rist time" please read "first time"!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • alibali102
    Love rating 0
    alibali102 said

    strange articile this only on friday i managed to get £60000 of them im self employed didnt even ask for proof of income just the value of the property ??

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • van12345
    Love rating 0
    van12345 said

    I think most people on here are missing the point.

    Being in the industry and seeing first hand what was happening i have a better view of this situation.

    The main culprits are the IFAs with a littlehelp from the banks.

    I have always used non status and yes information provided is limited but they do credit check as well. This is where the problems come in.

    For example GMAC did offer very good rates i am 100% clean so went on a 5 year fixed for two years.

    I have since left them. However they used to work on a sliding scale and even if you had bad credit they would lend. Now this is irresponsible. One CCJ maybe but if you had a valid excuse why these came about they would lend. If they and others had kept their criteria down to a minimum of 1 ccj or none and Kensington/ohthers who i would class as super prime were nor in the market this may have been different. This is the banks fault, greed being the only answer. Which leads me on to IFAs.

    Did you know you used to have some using other IFAs registration numbers to place work this was rife and illegal. I had some people see me who had mortgages arranged, not AIPs, ARRANGED who didnt work and couldnt speak english. I had one who was 68. This was happening all the time and was wide spread. One even got a mortgae through on a provisional and was an illegal. Now these cases go through packages and then through to banks. But then bank staff are paid to pass them, if you understand where i am coming from. There is also mortgae fraud at an alarming rate but surveyors that have been paid off. One person defaulted on 6 mortgages (fraud) and then got another 6.

    Trust me people you dont know half of what goes on. Even some of these IFAs dont speak English and use forged passports and utilites.

    Dont get me wrong there are very good IFAs out there the one I use is fantastic and i have used them for 8 years.

    Dont get me wrong this has been going on for years, I go back 20 years and it was going on then.

    But with immigration going through the roof these

    people should have been looked into further by the banks. Its not thet hard trust me.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    van12345

    We generally understand why we ended up where we are, and I think the 'people missing the point' you refer to are HBOS. What's done is done and let's hope banks ans IFA's are regularised more to prevent anything like this happening again. But surely HBOS's plan forward it short sighted to say the least, indicating the way forward is to stop lending on self cert self employed. I hope all lenders don't follow suit as it would mean the vast majority of jobbing builders, tradesmen and property developers in the UK couldn't get a mortgage for love nor money. Banks need to understand that they, and only they, can lead us from this position and it starts with lending again with sensible LTV's for already down valued and subsidised property. The value and equity we have in our homes how ever large or small nationally unites us and it is within all our interests that banks now act sensibly.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    Removing self certs for the self employed is not, I beleive, sensible

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • van12345
    Love rating 0
    van12345 said

    The banks should have been fully nationalised

    Self Cert is used by mainly the self employed. We are the ones who employ the majority of workers,we are the back bone of this country they say., but we are the ones being continually hit. Its hard enough for us to get credit off of banks at present but unless we can remortgage through our present lendor we have now had every avenue cut off.

    I am throughly disgusted by this and to top it all British gas gave me 10% off this year when energy has reduced by 50%. Didnt help me my gas and electric for the last quarter was £920.00. You know when youre being ripped off.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • elainesteed
    Love rating 0
    elainesteed said

    There is anther point as a director of a small company one pays PAYE on income and National Insurace during the year

    IF you are lucky enough (under this government)to make a profit you take a share of the profits (if any) at the end of the financial year as dividends

    Banks do not see divedends as income when working out affordability for a mortgage therfore a self cert mortgage is legal and necessary to include all income

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Fazzersix
    Love rating 0
    Fazzersix said

    Mmmmm ive been self employed for 40 years and it dont seem a day too long.

    You go and see your helpfull mortgage broker he or she does the searches and gets you the best deal, never had a problem with accounts or self cert !

    Find the right long standing broker with high street office let him sort it for you.

    Works everytime for me somethings havn't changed.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Staintunerider
    Love rating 0
    Staintunerider said

    Just a point regarding lovelyleelo re interest only mortgages. I think it's a case of personal choice, foolhardy for some, strategic for others. In any case interest only could be cheaper than renting and if you rented for 25 years you's not own the house.

    As the man said it's likely in 25 years the house will be worth multiples of what you paid for it and the pound will prob be a distant memory as well. Hence it seems on the face of it better than long term renting. I agree repayment may be better but it is a choice that some are prepared to take and I believ they should be able to. No worse than those city boys going short or long on investments in fact a lot less. Why should financial chicanery be only for the city types ?

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • van12345
    Love rating 0
    van12345 said

    take into account that if memory serves me right a repayment mortgage is fine if you are looking to stay in your present property for over 10 years as the first 10years is interest.If you move youll have the same amount of principle left. Considering the average person may move every 7 years, until you settle in your final house you are basically relying on an upturn in the market to basically be mortgage free when you down grade.

    I do interest only, yes for affordability but also because i am at the age where i will move within 10 years. on record prices increase.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • matchmade
    Love rating 38
    matchmade said

    Staintunerider - I agree that it shouldn't always be necessary to have a repayment vhicle: I've alsways gone interest-only and assumed in the medium term I would always be able to sell the house to pay off the mortgage. That doesn't mean I don't also save by putting money into ISAs and pensions when I can afford it - I just don't see the point of tying those investments to a particular mortgage.

    I also remember being heavily stung by endowment mortgages, where supposedly you were paying extra in return for an investment that would eventually pay off the mortgage. Loads of people used to take out endowments, and lots of us lost out. The insurance companies are a racket in the way they take more money off people than is actually needed for strict insurance - they should never have been involved in the savings business in the first place.

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rovibaby
    Love rating 0
    rovibaby said

    It's been a good discussion today. I think supporters of self cert nicked it. Let's hope someone influential from HBOS was reading!

    Report on 03 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • willywonka59
    Love rating 0
    willywonka59 said

    I also agree with 'richkw'. The problem for a long time is that people want it now rather than later just like kids who have seen a toy or gadget who force their parents into buying it regardless of affordability or whether it is necessary. With the financial mess that has been created, not just in this country, greed appears to be the common denominator.

    Report on 04 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MinniesMum
    Love rating 0
    MinniesMum said

    I remortgaged over Christmas despite being self-employed with no real problems and without producing my accounts or tax computations. My bank relied on the sales going through my business account.

    Report on 04 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • jackhosana
    Love rating 0
    jackhosana said

    Hi. It s good to whack the banks ain't it, the over charge for services, give their bosses big bonuses and don,t listen to the needs of their customers. why should anything change when all the lending is done through computer, these have no heart, no knowledge or understanding of needs. For example I have 5 children, self employed and making a small profit, I pay tax, NI, council tax, water rates and £800 rent per week. I sold my house 7 years ago for £30,000 to return to college and do a BA. The bank didn't support me through college and neither did the state.

    However I started working self employed and attempted to buy a house and was told I needed two years books so I waited two years. I supplied the paperwork and was told I could get a loan of £125,00o based on my audited and declared and taxed income. However in that intervening two years house prices rose, because of an influx of people buying second homes. a house now cost £260,000. I relish the thought of a property slump so that I can buy a house at a more reasonable price. However I set my business up with no finance or loans or support from banks, They simply refused me credit as I had been a student, I was also part time employed through out my college time. So I really resent the government giving financial support to banks who willing and I know it to be willingly over extended and encourage their clients to do so. I have been looking to see where I should put my money, and I was thinking of premium bonds but I don,t agree with how our government has spent our money so I shall have to look over seas.

    Banks must lend but to do this they must know their customers. A friend of mine managed to get a £260,000 mortgage by self cert with the halifax, he was encouraged to use self cert to boost how much he could borrow, he is not self employed but works in the offshore industry... Blame the banks, I blame a culture that has bred GREED into our everyday standards..

    Report on 04 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • elainesteed
    Love rating 0
    elainesteed said

    Why is it that anyone who has nothing thinks everybody else ids greedy they dont see us as hard working saving not running up credit If we have a nice house or nice car.

    This is envy by lazy people not always greed

    Fazzersix

    Thinss are changing daily, your frindly broker or any other mortgage broker for that matter ( to give you a proper choice od mortgage )will all be out of business by the end of the year due to this governments red tape and incompetance

    Report on 04 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • elainesteed
    Love rating 0
    elainesteed said

    Minnies Mum

    Much has changed just since Chritmas the mortgage you have would not be available now

    Report on 04 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rammy121
    Love rating 0
    rammy121 said

    zugental...you were the lucky one, probably had a good job etc. i'm not knocking you for it, good on you. however, in my experience, richkw is absolutely right. i had the same scenario twenty years ago. at the age of twenty two, put down my 20% deposit and probably got a much better roi than you. so imagine if had put down the 20% deposit, i suspect you'd have been even better off. just f.y.i. my first property cost 64k i think but now i sit on 500k of property. oh also, i never ever bought any property as an investment, it was always seen as my home, first and foremost. never gamble with it. that was my dad's advice and to pay off the mortgage as quick as you can.

    rammy

    Report on 05 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • rammy121
    Love rating 0
    rammy121 said

    kybosh909....agreed totally, tony and gordy killed their nice little cash cow...fools!!!

    Report on 05 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • XENIA1
    Love rating 0
    XENIA1 said

    The point made in this article is entirely valid. As a (self-employed) barrister, I am entitled to pay tax on my earnings received in a business year, of which I can choose to set the beginning and end so that it lags behind the tax year by -almost- a year. Therefore, each year I am effectively paying tax on income earned 2 years before. As I earn a little bit more every year compared to the year before, this leaves me with more money to spend on a mortgage. Also, I have expenses that employed people also have, however I am entitled to take them out of my taxable income. The problem is that all this is very tricky for mainstream mortgage providers to process and therefore I get penalised on the breadth of products that are available to me.

    Report on 07 February 2009  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 26Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 26 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable)

Barclaycard 25Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 25 months (2.4% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.5% to 2.4% (T&Cs apply)

Halifax BT 25 Month MasterCard

0% for 25 months (2.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 19.0% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV1