Does this NE trade up sound feasible?

W

Working mam

Registered User
Messages
40
Ive been having a good think about options that could possibly be open to us, and I wonder could anyone advise on this before I speak to the bank.
We currently have approx €180k NE, mtg with ptsb. We originally borrowed €381k in 2006. We've just spotted a house for €200k in the area we want to move to, and I'm wondering if the bank might consider this NE mortgage as the new loan amount would not be more than we previously borrowed when you add the NE to the price of the new house. We also have savings to cover the stamp duty and other costs. We qualify for the amount based on income and repayment capacity etc. The bank would also get our coveted tracker rate back! Does this sound like a reasonable proposal?
 
Last edited:
permanent tsb should jump at it. I don't know if they are doing negative equity mortgages yet.

But, I think you should wait. If permanent tsb sell off their trackers to some other state entity, the new owners might be more practical about doing a deal. You could sell your home and have the mortgage written down by 10% to 20%.

In fact, you should be proposing this to them now. They will refuse, but you lose nothing by trying.
 
Hi Brendan, thanks for the reply. I know that ptsb are approved by the regulator to do NE mortgages, however they haven't announced an actual product yet.
How realistic do you think it will be about a write down of the mortgage if ownership of the tracker book changes hands? I'm not sure if waiting for that to happen will benefit me as this house is a fantastic price for the area (ex-rental and needs a lot of work.) if we wait for a potential write down we could slip further into NE and we may not get as good a deal on a house.
I think I will just approach the bank and see what they say and I will report back so other people wondering about NE mortgages will also have some info.
 
this house is a fantastic price for the area (ex-rental and needs a lot of work.) if we wait for a potential write down we could slip further into NE and we may not get as good a deal on a house.
Click to expand...

While this may appear to be a great bargain, there will be further great bargains to come, so don't worry if this doesn't work out for you.

But, in any event, I think you will have to sell your house first. If you buy the new house and are unable to sell the old house, you would be in serious trouble.

Brendan
 
Absolutely, we would be counting on a lot of things like selling our own etc. we spoke to an estate agent who has sold 4 houses here in the last couple of months and he gave us best and worst case scenario for price, but he said he could have it sold within 6 weeks as there is good demand for houses here. I suppose I'll wait and see what the bank say and take it from there. As regards the new house, I'm a firm believer in the saying "what's for you won't pass you!"
Thanks again for the advice
 
Oh ,Brendan - "there'll be further great bargains to come ". Bit of property-price speculating there......
Am I allowed to say that I doubt whether Dublin surburbia will produce quite as many bargains in the near future? Outside Dublin,maybe.
 
Working mam, please do post back here on the response you get from PTSB. This is exactly the scenario we put to them last year and they turned us down and even refused us permission to sell our house with such deep NE saying they would not release the title deeds!

Now, we are on the SVR not the tracker so this could be the difference but I will be extremely interested to see what they say either way.
 
swauna78 said:
Working mam, please do post back here on the response you get from PTSB. This is exactly the scenario we put to them last year and they turned us down and even refused us permission to sell our house with such deep NE saying they would not release the title deeds!

Now, we are on the SVR not the tracker so this could be the difference but I will be extremely interested to see what they say either way.
Click to expand...

I will of course, hoping to speak to them tomor or tues do will post back then
 
oldnick said:
Oh ,Brendan - "there'll be further great bargains to come ". Bit of property-price speculating there......
Click to expand...

Hi Nick

It certainly was not intended as price speculation.

I know countless people, at all stages of the property cycle, who felt that they had to buy a particular house because "houses like this come up very rarely". Where they failed to get the house, they nearly always got an even better house.

But perhaps I should have prefixed my suggestion with "Assuming that there is not a sudden upsurge in prices ..."

Am I allowed to say that I doubt whether Dublin surburbia will produce quite as many bargains in the near future? Outside Dublin,maybe.
Click to expand...
No, but the invitation to write a balanced summary of where house prices are is still open.

Brendan
 
Just wanted to update, we have no definite decision yet from the bank but what they are initially looking for is that we do not increase our existing mortgage exposure and have the deposit ourselves which we do.
Not increasing our mortgage exposure is fine in the case of the house we saw but seems unfair when we qualify to borrow a lot more on our salaries. If we weren't looking to move the negative equity we would be allowed borrow more.
I think from the criteria they really do not want to do NE mtgs. Afterall, how many people would have both the deposit saved plus find a house that means they are not increasing their mortgage exposure.
 
Not increasing our mortgage exposure i... seems unfair when we qualify to borrow a lot more on our salaries.
Click to expand...

You have a house worth €200k and a mortgage of €380k. PTSB will have had to make a provision in their accounts for this as if you lose your job or just throw back the keys they face a loss of €180k. Why on earth would they increase that risk.

And you should not be looking to increase that risk either.

You are dramatically increasing the risk by this move - you will incur extra costs; you will spend your savings and you will lose your tracker.

It would be in your own interest if ptsb refused you.

Brendan
 
Brendan I respect your opinion however, if everyone was refused mortgages for those reasons we would all be living in rented accommodation. If I was a ftb or a trader upper with no NE I would get a higher amount so job risk would not come into it, unless either of us worked in a high risk sector.
Unless the govt and banks start assisting people with NE to move in a sensible way there is going to be a huge number of people left stuck in starter houses unsuitable for raising families.

ETA: After looking at my figures again Brendan, where is the increased risk to the bank? Worst case scenario the bank have to repossess then the NE on existing house is 180k so that is the loss to the bank. If bank allowed us increased mortgage for example of 300k and we carry the NE of 180k, bank repossess and the loss is the same. Am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
permanent tsb should jump at it. I don't know if they are doing negative equity mortgages yet.

But, I think you should wait. If permanent tsb sell off their trackers to some other state entity, the new owners might be more practical about doing a deal. You could sell your home and have the mortgage written down by 10% to 20%.

In fact, you should be proposing this to them now. They will refuse, but you lose nothing by trying.
Click to expand...

You have changed your tune from your initial response!
 
Hi mam

Your figures are confusing...

Not increasing our mortgage exposure ... seems unfair when we qualify to borrow a lot more on our salaries.
Click to expand...

You want to increase your mortgage exposure. So presumably you are increasing your mortgage?

In the first post, I answered the question you asked. I think it was this focus on increasing exposure i.e.risk which triggered a more thoughtful response from me.
 
The house we were looking at which as I mentioned was a bargain for the area would have meant we would not be increasing our existing exposure however I found out yesterday the house is sale agreed. Any other house in that area would mean an increase to our mortgage but as I pointed out, of our salaries match up there is no added risk to the bank so it's frustrating they won't allow it.
 
There is a risk to the bank unless you are trading down.

You will be borrowing more.
You will be using up your saving

Brendan
 
Brendan I could go out tomorrow and blow my savings on a round the world trip, so I have to disagree.
Also, the NE remains the same regardless if it is on this address or another and that NE is the bottom line risk for the bank. Our ltv would be reduced by moving and also there is (in time) more chance of the NE lowering quicker on a house in the other area as historically it is a much higher value area.
I think we will have to agree to disagree but l am basing my opinions on fact.
 
Working mam said:
... and that NE is the bottom line risk for the bank.
Click to expand...
What exactly does this mean? There are several risks for the bank.

Working mam said:
Our ltv would be reduced by moving and also there is (in time) more chance of the NE lowering quicker on a house in the other area as historically it is a much higher value area.
I think we will have to agree to disagree but l am basing my opinions on fact.
Click to expand...

That is an assumption based on a very short-term view rather than a fact. You have at best a biased observation (biased because a desire to invest hinders objectivity) based on x number of years which you are extrapolating into the future. Taking a longer term view, areas cycle between desirable and undesirable surprisingly frequently, there are no safe bets.
 
so-crates said:
What exactly does this mean? There are several risks for the bank.



That is an assumption based on a very short-term view rather than a fact. You have at best a biased observation (biased because a desire to invest hinders objectivity) based on x number of years which you are extrapolating into the future. Taking a longer term view, areas cycle between desirable and undesirable surprisingly frequently, there are no safe bets.
Click to expand...

Hi so-crates, when applying for a mortgage the bank will assess risk such as repayment capacity (we have double the proposed mortgage amount in repayment capacity), they will do a nets calculator (we meet that very comfortably). They are a couple of the main risk assessments but the bottom line is, can the applicants pay back this mortgage and if not what is the loss to the lender? As the negative equity amount would not be increased by moving and the ltv would be reduced the NE is what the bank stand to lose in the event of default and repossession. Therefore, my whole argument is what difference does it make to the bank whether I am carrying the same amount of NE on house x or house y?
Yes I can see your point I perhaps have a biased view but are you saying that a house in say dublin 24 could ever be worth more than a house in Dublin 4? I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone by saying that, I am just using an example relevant to my proposal that certain areas will always hold a higher value than others.
 
Mam

Would you do a table or listing of the actual figures involved. You seem to have a house worth €200k in Dublin 24 but you are going to buy a house for €200k in Dublin 4 instead.

How much cash have you to pay the costs of moving?

What are your salaries? How secure are your jobs?

As I said in my first post, if I was ptsb I would facilitate this as switching a loan from a cheap tracker to an expensive SVR would outweigh the risks.

However, if I was you, I would not do this. You should stay put and use your savings, your high salary and your very low tracker rate to eliminate as much as possible of the negative equity.

It might be a bit academic anyway. You will have to sell your own house first before you can buy another house.

Brendan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top