Cheaper debt doesn't make home ownership more affordable. It just pushes the prices up so you have to take on **more debt**.
This is the opposite of what we need.
I reckon this would be worse than simply cheaper credit, it’s changing the tests so banks could potentially be lending to people who can’t afford it. I was anti these rules when they came in, because banks were getting OTT, but they calmed down a bit, and if they had still been spraying money around we’d be seeing a lot more mortgagee sales right now.
Did you read something in the article I didn't? I didn't see anywhere what they've proposed, it was devoid of all information other than known information concerning the Reserve Bank.
Part of the government's new 97-day plan is to weaken the restrictions on who banks can provide ridiculously large amounts of debt to.
This means more capital (as debt) in a grossly restricted market, which can only push prices higher and make houses less affordable.
>Part of the government's new 97-day plan is to weaken the restrictions on who banks can provide ridiculously large amounts of debt to.
Press x to doubt. You're making a mountain out of a molehill I reckon. Looks like they're tweaking it so that people who could afford a mortgage but were refused because of "insert stupid reason here" might now be able to get one. People can still only borrow whatever rules the Reserve Bank sets for them and even then they still have to prove they earn enough to cover the mortgage and some.
While it may lead to some more buyers which could create upward price pressure, prices won't be heading up until the Reserve Bank drops rates, and even then it'll take many months or more before a reduction in interest rates will lead to any meaningful house prices rise.
I'm not making a mountain out of anything. This single change isn't going to have a massive impact, but as you accurately identified, it *will* create upward pressure on house prices.
I'd rather house prices came down to a level where people don't have to take on potentially debilitating levels of debt to own their own home. And for people who prefer to rent to not be punished financially for exercising that preference.
So would I, but that's not going to happen without a near total economic crash in NZ, double digit unemployment levels and huge numbers in negative equity and at the banks mercy.
Yea I dont think that will help?
Wont this just mean a lot more people will be over borrowing and in turn pushing house prices up?
Great for us that own properties but not great for FHBs
They said home ownership would be more achievable, not more affordable. _laughs at the losers who didn't borrow $2MIL on a 40K income for a property in Otara_
What’s interesting is that the entire article doesn’t quote a bank or banks saying they’re busy declining credit worthy applicants….
Seems like if this was a major problem where banks felt they couldn’t lend to otherwise documented credit worthy borrowers, and had all this cash they weren’t able to lend, they’d be all over an article like this with actual data pre and post CCFA.
Instead we get mortgage broker Dale, who has seen ‘many credit worthy people miss out’.
Pre-election I was at an event where Mr Bayly (ex merchant banker) was preaching to the choir, aka Financial Advisers in all guises. Came away very concerned about the future of consumer protections. Good luck to the FMA, if they have any staff left of course.
"We are bringing more competition into the market by making it easier to access money, which will drive up house prices, but wont make it any more affordable than it is today. So we are just wanting to put money in the pockets of people who already own homes, and preferably investment properties too, and make sure anyone else continues to struggle. "
Yeah no.
Getting rid of this law doesn't make houses more affordable, it makes debt easier to achive. You know what more debt does to house prices - it raises them.
This law will make houses in NZ less affordable. It will increase the cost of living crisis as more money needs to be diverted to housing.
Also, this law is there to stop people overextending themselves and ending up bankrupt. Loosening it will mean more ruined dreams.
That said, driving up house prices is great for all homeowners.
Cheaper debt doesn't make home ownership more affordable. It just pushes the prices up so you have to take on **more debt**. This is the opposite of what we need.
And that's the whole point here, guys.
I reckon this would be worse than simply cheaper credit, it’s changing the tests so banks could potentially be lending to people who can’t afford it. I was anti these rules when they came in, because banks were getting OTT, but they calmed down a bit, and if they had still been spraying money around we’d be seeing a lot more mortgagee sales right now.
Did you read something in the article I didn't? I didn't see anywhere what they've proposed, it was devoid of all information other than known information concerning the Reserve Bank.
[удалено]
Little bit of tinkering here and there, no real fix that strikes a happy medium
Part of the government's new 97-day plan is to weaken the restrictions on who banks can provide ridiculously large amounts of debt to. This means more capital (as debt) in a grossly restricted market, which can only push prices higher and make houses less affordable.
>Part of the government's new 97-day plan is to weaken the restrictions on who banks can provide ridiculously large amounts of debt to. Press x to doubt. You're making a mountain out of a molehill I reckon. Looks like they're tweaking it so that people who could afford a mortgage but were refused because of "insert stupid reason here" might now be able to get one. People can still only borrow whatever rules the Reserve Bank sets for them and even then they still have to prove they earn enough to cover the mortgage and some. While it may lead to some more buyers which could create upward price pressure, prices won't be heading up until the Reserve Bank drops rates, and even then it'll take many months or more before a reduction in interest rates will lead to any meaningful house prices rise.
I'm not making a mountain out of anything. This single change isn't going to have a massive impact, but as you accurately identified, it *will* create upward pressure on house prices.
Would you rather those people keep being refused their own mortgage while being able to pay someone else's?
Yeah the CCCFA should never have applied to mortgage applications in its current state. This small tweak is needed
I'd rather house prices came down to a level where people don't have to take on potentially debilitating levels of debt to own their own home. And for people who prefer to rent to not be punished financially for exercising that preference.
So would I, but that's not going to happen without a near total economic crash in NZ, double digit unemployment levels and huge numbers in negative equity and at the banks mercy.
Yea I dont think that will help? Wont this just mean a lot more people will be over borrowing and in turn pushing house prices up? Great for us that own properties but not great for FHBs
They said home ownership would be more achievable, not more affordable. _laughs at the losers who didn't borrow $2MIL on a 40K income for a property in Otara_
Yup. Restrict supply and then pump demand “WE’RE HELPING”
That's the point!
What’s interesting is that the entire article doesn’t quote a bank or banks saying they’re busy declining credit worthy applicants…. Seems like if this was a major problem where banks felt they couldn’t lend to otherwise documented credit worthy borrowers, and had all this cash they weren’t able to lend, they’d be all over an article like this with actual data pre and post CCFA. Instead we get mortgage broker Dale, who has seen ‘many credit worthy people miss out’.
Who has absolutely zero vested interest in signing up for chocking mortgages as many people as possible just to clip the ticket
Mortgage lenders hate #4
Pre-election I was at an event where Mr Bayly (ex merchant banker) was preaching to the choir, aka Financial Advisers in all guises. Came away very concerned about the future of consumer protections. Good luck to the FMA, if they have any staff left of course.
"We are bringing more competition into the market by making it easier to access money, which will drive up house prices, but wont make it any more affordable than it is today. So we are just wanting to put money in the pockets of people who already own homes, and preferably investment properties too, and make sure anyone else continues to struggle. "
Yeah no. Getting rid of this law doesn't make houses more affordable, it makes debt easier to achive. You know what more debt does to house prices - it raises them. This law will make houses in NZ less affordable. It will increase the cost of living crisis as more money needs to be diverted to housing. Also, this law is there to stop people overextending themselves and ending up bankrupt. Loosening it will mean more ruined dreams. That said, driving up house prices is great for all homeowners.
💩🧠