Mortgage Rate Rises

[bigmike20vt]

That the thing, train drivers, lorry drivers, tradespeople such as plumbers, electricians, brickies etc are all well paid relative and good solid jobs. I would say things such as train and lorry drivers may well phase out over next couple of decades as we go more and more autonomous in those areas. But the others are still very much trades that will continue.

i am not fully clued in, however the rail strikes, are they not more about the lower paid positions anyway? the kiosk workers and the conductors and the cleaners etc?.... actual drivers do get a good chunk of change but like you said, its a risky job to go into now as a younger person.......... also, there is the grim side of it no one wants to think about. i would want some hazzard pay for the mental anguish of living with someone jumping in font of me.
My cousin years ago worked briefly in crewe something to do with the trains (i dont know exact details). one of the jobs just before he left was hosing down parts of a sheep that the train had hit and making sure all was ok.
He was not sure if it was just some form of hazing and they didnt mean it, but his colleagues told him it was prep for the next time it was a person who the train hit. like i said, maybe they were joking but i do know he decided he was not paid enough for that and quit.

 

[glenimp617]

My local plumber has just bought himself a bright orange lambo. It's an older one, but still, it's a bloody lambo.

I can see why, after recently getting some quotes for garden work. You don't get much for 10 grand these days

The moneys in Trades, especially if you are half decent, can tell the time, and can answer a phone.

 

[delta0]

I literally live in my excel spreadsheet. I've mapped out the entire years finances already to plan for a garden renovation, holiday and the dreaded mortgage renewal in July

I’ve got mine mapped out all the way to retirement

I do the same for the annual expenditure and any major expenses like the house renovation I just did.

 

[bigmike20vt]

My local plumber has just bought himself a bright orange lambo. It's an older one, but still, it's a bloody lambo.

I can see why, after recently getting some quotes for garden work. You don't get much for 10 grand these days

things have gone insane in the last 5 years.
i chatted with the builder who did our front 2 story extension in....... 2017 i think it was. i paid him close enough £20,000 for it (I got the plans written up for it myself and planning etc to keep prices down). He said now he would have to charge over double for the same job - but the majority of that was materials increases more than labour.

he doesnt drive a lambo tho (but my double glazer has (or had) a lotus esprit we were chatting about it after he saw my 350z at the time)

 

[Curlyriff]

You could, but its basically irrelevant anyway.

You need to get with it now and not complaining about X in the past etc.

Its just so different now. There are so many factors such as in the 70s and early 80s you would struggle to get a mortgage for many people, capital controls.
It was very much a thing to build a relationship with your local building society as it was often the only access to borrowing people had.
banks mainly didn't offer mortgages. Its just a different world.

I am not suggesting anything beyond that, just that it would be interesting to see how economics and living has changed. Like how much are you worse off now to then, are you even. Like % of your take home I guess would be best way just to see.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

i am not fully clued in, however the rail strikes, are they not more about the lower paid positions anyway? the kiosk workers and the conductors and the cleaners etc?.... actual drivers do get a good chunk of change but like you said, its a risky job to go into now as a younger person.......... also, there is the grim side of it no one wants to think about. i would want some hazzard pay for the mental anguish of living with someone jumping in font of me.
My cousin years ago worked briefly in crewe something to do with the trains (i dont know exact details). one of the jobs just before he left was hosing down parts of a sheep that the train had hit and making sure all was ok.
He was not sure if it was just some form of hazing and they didnt mean it, but his colleagues told him it was prep for the next time it was a person who the train hit. like i said, maybe they were joking but i do know he decided he was not paid enough for that and quit.

I think most unions are across all the roles. The government keep trying a bit of divide and conquer here.

Its not just the rare deliberate people jumping in front, but the far more likely idiots on level crossings.
I mean every single one is a potential for life threatening idiocy to be taking place. Not just for that person, but the driver as well.

 

[Curlyriff]

I literally live in my excel spreadsheet. I've mapped out the entire years finances already to plan for a garden renovation, holiday and the dreaded mortgage renewal in July

Same, I have done a two year map by monthly breakdown. I have then done 5yrs beyond that showing April with assumed increase in costs due to inflation such as council tax, help to buy, wage increases, CSA payments, pension contribution changes and such to get a principle idea of how the future is looking and aims for that period in what want to earn and where likely to be at.

At moment my 2yr plan is clear all and any debts apart from Mortgage/Help to Buy that will be ongoing. Then year 3 will be any redecoration/renovation/holidays etc when I should be financially more secure.

My local plumber has just bought himself a bright orange lambo. It's an older one, but still, it's a bloody lambo.

I can see why, after recently getting some quotes for garden work. You don't get much for 10 grand these days

The moneys in Trades, especially if you are half decent, can tell the time, and can answer a phone.

Yeah landscaping can be good monies but generally the bigger jobs are seasonal and smaller projects over winter but yes can be very lucrative. I have actually taken holiday last couple of years from my day job to do landscape projects for neighbours and such with things like retaining walls, patios, sheds and such forth for some extra income. I don't charge what the full timers do but it some pocket monies for the year and the neighbours get some decent landscaping at a greatly reduced cost (profits only about £300 per weeks work).

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

I am not suggesting anything beyond that, just that it would be interesting to see how economics and living has changed. Like how much are you worse off now to then, are you even. Like % of your take home I guess would be best way just to see.

Its interesting, I had this debate with Dan some time ago.
In the early 90s when i got a house with my first serious girlfriend.
We were both in decentish jobs. I was a trainee accountant, she was a general office level role.
Her wage only just covered the mortgage, not much left over.
This wasnt some lovely house, it was the cheapest we could get pretty much, mid terranced 2 up 2 down, with a 2 story extension with kitchen and bathroom. Probably single skinned from the impossibility to actually heat them.

By the time I covered the insurances, food, utilities etc etc we didn't have that much left over.
There was no minimum wage then ofc so salaries towards the bottom were arguably worse than today since it was literally impossible to underpay.
Lets not forget those times were after a long and nasty period and as such many people were happy to be in any job earning rather than on the dole.

The 80s were very bad for many people. Its far easier to get another job now than then.
I remember people harking back to the good days of being able to walk into a job the next day.
How do you take that sort of thing into account, the chances of being out of work being significantly higher than today?

 

[Curlyriff]

Its interesting, I had this debate with Dan some time ago.
In the early 90s when i got a house with my first serious girlfriend.
We were both in decentish jobs. I was a trainee accountant, she was a general office level role.
Her wage only just covered the mortgage, not much left over.
This wasnt some lovely house, it was the cheapest we could get pretty much, mid terranced 2 up 2 down, with a 2 story extension with kitchen and bathroom. Probably single skinned from the impossibility to actually heat them.

By the time I covered the insurances, food, utilities etc etc we didn't have that much left over.
There was no minimum age then ofc so salaries towards the bottom were arguably worse than today since it was literally impossible to underpay.
Lets not forget those times were after a long and nasty period and as such many people were happy to be in any job earning rather than on the dole.

The 80s were very bad for many people. Its far easier to get another job now than then.
I remember people harking back to the good days of being able to walk into a job the next day.
How do you take that sort of thing into account, the chances of being out of work being significantly higher than today?

Honestly I think those are moot points and aren't though directly to the cost and difference of a house/mortgage. Those are general life elements with regard to having a job or not.

We are more talking about what you get paid as an employee in a role then to now and comparing that to housing/mortgage market. Indeed you could also add into account insurance, food and utilities as a next step as an overall to your general living standards and affordibility but you need to break it down and be compariable to understand the direction living standards at a base level is.

If you want to add house insurance fair enough as that is a must to have a mortgage. Then you can do a compare to gas/electric/water then and now as another element.

Then do a monthly shop by comparing to then and now and see the difference. All of that added to a spreadsheet and comparing salaries and your percentage of net takehome (ignoring pension contribution) would give a base level of where we as a country sit. For instance (I am only 34) but my role I work in if I was a senior technician in 2000 when started was about £25k, now it is about £37k. How does all the above compare in the last 23yrs then to compare if you are better off in % terms for the same standard of living.

If I compare that again to 1980 and my farthers earning in a similar role back then and on about £18k to his costs then it would be interesting to plot to see how the change in cost of standard living has been over the last 43yrs.

 

[413x]

I use a couple of loose excels for managing my CC debt and a personal finance project.

I buy a load of stuff in November until January stick it all on a 0pc CC, bundle the cash into a fixed saver and when fix ends pay off the CCs
This also coincides with my personal project in trying. So go into significant debt this time of year until November. Then cycle repeats

Just helps me keep track of dates and quick way to work when to apply for new ones etc

 

[Terminal_Boy]

My local plumber has just bought himself a bright orange lambo. It's an older one, but still, it's a bloody lambo.

I can see why, after recently getting some quotes for garden work. You don't get much for 10 grand these days

The moneys in Trades, especially if you are half decent, can tell the time, and can answer a phone.

That’s the thing, if you can do a decent job for a decent fee, turn up on schedule AND are available on a phone for new and existing customers; you will be busy until you retire.

 

[200sols]

what was the rate on your first house ? mine 9.8% and atm 1.89%... just glad this house will be paid of in 7 yrs

And in real terms 9.8% back then was more affordable than these 3/4/5/6% rates today.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Those aren't though directly to the cost and difference of a house/mortgage. Those are general life elements with regard to having a job or not. We are more talking about what you get paid as an employee in a role then to now and comparing that to housing/mortgage market.

No, this is the issue I alluded to earlier

You can't pick certain bits of a time and say "see it was cheap then" unless you take all the factors into account.
For example there are far more "large"* houses now. That changed, most would live in a 2 up 2 down or maybe a 3 bed, but the majority (the vast majority) didn't have big houses, thats changed.

* by large I mean in terms of number of rooms, bathrooms etc

The pricing of houses and wages are based on the cost of living.
Insurances for example were more then, as I said there was a premium if you had a LTV of over 75/80% I can't remember what that was called. That made switching a rare thing for most since you would have to pay it every time you moved, so most people didnt. And again as I said there was FAR less competition in the market place, it was more like begging someone to lend you money rather than have them fighting to lend it to you.
You were often forced to take the lenders buildings insurance, at a vastly inflated cost for example. Yet another thing legislation changed.
So you often had a buildings and contents with different lenders, not getting a better deal for both in the same policy.

 

[glenimp617]

i chatted with the builder who did our front 2 story extension in....... 2017 i think it was. i paid him close enough £20,000 for it (I got the plans written up for it myself and planning etc to keep prices down). He said now he would have to charge over double for the same job - but the majority of that was materials increases more than labour

Tell me about it. We were having a garage extension done a few years ago. Didn't, then got a requote last year. Price had doubled

 

[danlightbulb]

Its interesting, I had this debate with Dan some time ago.
In the early 90s when i got a house with my first serious girlfriend.
We were both in decentish jobs. I was a trainee accountant, she was a general office level role.
Her wage only just covered the mortgage, not much left over.
This wasnt some lovely house, it was the cheapest we could get pretty much, mid terranced 2 up 2 down, with a 2 story extension with kitchen and bathroom. Probably single skinned from the impossibility to actually heat them.

By the time I covered the insurances, food, utilities etc etc we didn't have that much left over.
There was no minimum wage then ofc so salaries towards the bottom were arguably worse than today since it was literally impossible to underpay.
Lets not forget those times were after a long and nasty period and as such many people were happy to be in any job earning rather than on the dole.

I bought my first house with my now ex wife in 2004 and basically the same as you there. It was 85k for an ex council box that needed work. Not cheap really, 2004 was still a period in the middle of the huge property inflation bubble that started in the late 90s. I struggled to get a house for that money. If I recall, the interest rate was somewhere in the region of 5%. Our wages were low and it was tough.

Compared to now, I am better off. Decently paid (but less than a train driver, a job I'd quite like to do actually), but still at the age of 42 having needed to take out a £225k 30 year mortgage at 2.84% to get a house.

So yes I'm in a better position today, but that could be so easily wiped out by government policy decisions, interest rate spikes and a recession. My exposure now is far higher than it was in the past, despite being better off.

Back to the school point - it may have been different for others but at my school there was never any careers advice. Good academically, you were sort of left alone really, I guess they thought those people would be ok. But could have been so much more given the right opportunities and exposure I feel.

 

[413x]

No, this is the issue I alluded to earlier

You can't pick certain bits of a time and say "see it was cheap then" unless you take all the factors into account.
For example there are far more "large"* houses now. That changed, most would live in a 2 up 2 down or maybe a 3 bed, but the majority (the vast majority) didn't have big houses, thats changed.

* by large I mean in terms of number of rooms, bathrooms etc

The pricing of houses and wages are based on the cost of living.
Insurances for example were more then, as I said there was a premium if you had a LTV of over 75/80% I can't remember what that was called. That made switching a rare thing for most since you would have to pay it every time you moved, so most people didnt. And again as I said there was FAR less competition in the market place, it was more like begging someone to lend you money rather than have them fighting to lend it to you.
You were often forced to take the lenders buildings insurance, at a vastly inflated cost for example. Yet another thing legislation changed.
So you often had a buildings and contents with different lenders, not getting a better deal for both in the same policy.

Interesting. Its easy to forget all the associated costs rather than the headline ones.

 

[Curlyriff]

No, this is the issue I alluded to earlier

You can't pick certain bits of a time and say "see it was cheap then" unless you take all the factors into account.
For example there are far more "large"* houses now. That changed, most would live in a 2 up 2 down or maybe a 3 bed, but the majority (the vast majority) didn't have big houses, thats changed.

* by large I mean in terms of number of rooms, bathrooms etc

The pricing of houses and wages are based on the cost of living.
Insurances for example were more then, as I said there was a premium if you had a LTV of over 75/80% I can't remember what that was called. That made switching a rare thing for most since you would have to pay it every time you moved, so most people didnt. And again as I said there was FAR less competition in the market place, it was more like begging someone to lend you money rather than have them fighting to lend it to you.
You were often forced to take the lenders buildings insurance, at a vastly inflated cost for example. Yet another thing legislation changed.
So you often had a buildings and contents with different lenders, not getting a better deal for both in the same policy.

No you are talking about working or in work compared to out of work. That is an irrelevant data point to compare cost of living. I have already said that that you need to consider the same property type to compare it. I also don't agree the vast majority have larger houses now in term of room count. The majority new builds are still 2up/2down though. New housing estates average about 60% stock as that, another 20% as 3 bed. Then social housing on top of that doesn't leave much for "larger" houses.

None of what you have stated though means you cannot compare elements and add them up to give a rough picture and be reasonably accurate.

 

[Mysterae_]

I literally live in my excel spreadsheet. I've mapped out the entire years finances already to plan for a garden renovation, holiday and the dreaded mortgage renewal in July

I'm another avid financial spreadsheet user and it's evolved over time to help me make the most of money. At the end of each year I do a "year in review" to see how much we've spent over the course of a year and it is quite surprising what comes out of it. It can help you change behaviours with little to no impact to your way of life that you don't want.

Taking control of your finances is a good thing whichever method you use to manage it. I've tried to show the benefits of it to a young lad at work who has a family but for some reason he'd rather struggle in to the unknown, ignorance is bliss.

 

[doodah]

Any juicy templates you lot want to share ?

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Interesting. Its easy to forget all the associated costs rather than the headline ones.

In general I would say there were far more extras you were paying than compared to current times.
Mortgages were far less flexible as well. It took until the mid/late 90s before they operated on the sorts of practice we see now. Interest was annual, or at best monthly.
Many wouldn't take any overpayment into account until the 1st of the next year, so saving up and paying it off in Dec was a thing.
Some would allow you to not hold your buildings insurance with them, provided you paid a fee and provided proof of the insurance being also in their name.

No you are talking about working or in work compared to out of work. That is an irrelevant data point to compare cost of living. I have already said that that you need to consider the same property type to compare it. I also don't agree the vast majority have larger houses now in term of room count. The majority new builds are still 2up/2down though. New housing estates average about 60% stock as that, another 20% as 3 bed. Then social housing on top of that doesn't leave much for "larger" houses.

None of what you have stated though means you cannot compare elements and add them up to give a rough picture and be reasonably accurate.

The point about in work vs out is that there was massive house price suppression due to many being out of work. When people are losing jobs and struggling they often end up selling at a desperate price

Sorry was going to comment oh house mix as well. Maybe its because Oxford is more expensive, but generally even in the most expensive areas of Suffolk the estates are more larger houses than smaller ones.
They just get them in a bit tighter.