Mortgage Rate Rises

Why not go the full hog and whack rates up 5%, what we really need is for all those pesky mortgage holders to default so all the property can be hoovered up by cash buyers then slapped onto the rental market.

That being said I’m surprised rates need to be adjusted at all, what with the clear impact the last 20 rises have had on inflation. It’s plummeting at a rate of knots.
 
Last edited:
That being said I’m surprised rates need to be adjusted at all, what with the clear impact the last 20 rises have had on inflation. It’s plummeting at a rate of knots.

That's a slightly flawed conclusion as we don't know what inflation would have been if we hadn't increased the rate.

We could assume it would be higher if we hadn't raised the rates, since we're a net importer and everyone else has, our currency would have probably weakened making imported goods dearer.
 
That's a slightly flawed conclusion as we don't know what inflation would have been if we hadn't increased the rate.

We could assume it would be higher if we hadn't raised the rates, since we're a net importer and everyone else has, our currency would have probably weakened making imported goods dearer.

It's all guess work. They were literally blaming zelda for inflation earlier on
 
I think IHT is fair. I don't think it should be adjusted to benefit the rich more.

Inheritance is a massive factor in long term wealth inequality
I wouldn’t really call having an illiquid asset rich. It’s an unfortunate necessity and pain that we have to go through living in the south and London. You get pinched at both ends. Ridiculous taxes, loss of benefits and then high cost of living.
 
That's a slightly flawed conclusion as we don't know what inflation would have been if we hadn't increased the rate.

We could assume it would be higher if we hadn't raised the rates, since we're a net importer and everyone else has, our currency would have probably weakened making imported goods dearer.

Spot on.

Not only that but the full impacts of the rate rises that occurred around the time of the diabolical Truss budget will only just be properly filtering into the data this summer/autumn in reality.

I feel like a broken record, but it can take a huge amount of time for the impacts of rate rises to be fully felt, let alone manifest themselves in the form of changed spending habits; and even then they still have to be recorded and published.

This lag will be even more pronounced given the high prevalence of short term fixed rate mortgages in the UK today.

We can argue all day long about how fast or slow we think they should have been raised in order to most effectively combat inflation, but the idea that they haven’t had any effect at all is based on a few misunderstandings.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn’t really call having an illiquid asset rich. It’s an unfortunate necessity and pain that we have to go through living in the south and London. You get pinched at both ends. Ridiculous taxes, loss of benefits and then high cost of living.

But you can retire in a life of luxury. And as this was IHT based question it will become liquid at that point.
Also you could use equity release later in life to avoid some IHT.
 
But you can retire in a life of luxury. And as this was IHT based question it will become liquid at that point.
Also you could use equity release later in life to avoid some IHT.
I wasn’t agreeing on the IHT changes just to be mindful calling someone rich just because they have an expensive house. It’s an illiquid asset that absorbs cash and arguably makes you poorer.
 
el-arien reputed economist on C4 news on mortgage rates / brexit role 3:30


the initial section on people out spending seems unfortunately reminiscemt of the band on the titanic
 
the initial section on people out spending seems unfortunately reminiscemt of the band on the titanic
I've not read the article but this is certainly my behaviour at the moment. I'm spending every penny/saving nothing to get the house sorted, as I will be sat in it doing not a lot quite cold for the foreseeable :cry:
 
Im guessing a short term lease of 6 months.

It will be an excluded occupier agreement or should be. Not a lease or tenancy agreement. The rights each grant differ significantly.

I rent out rooms, as everyone is saying people now have to do to survive the mortgage crisis. I already have been doing that for 5 years. I welcome people into my house, and charge them less than market value. You're getting confused with renting a whole house, comparing to renting a room in a house with a landlord. People don't expect to be in that room for years, let alone 12 months. They know what to expect, they don't want a lease for a year but a monthly thing so that when they find their long term place they can freely move to it, without having to give 3 months notice etc.

I had an aussie guy stay, was with us 5 months. Worked for him, worked for us. Plenty examples like that over the years. Some French girl, December to April. Lost her job, moved back home 2 weeks later. Imagine her paying twice the amount per month to rent with an agency, be stuck in a 12 month contract etc.

But yeah I'm glad I don't know you either.

I have to have their mess in my kitchen, their stuff in the dishwasher for days, their clothes drying in my lounge, their stinky fridge, their mess in the bathrooms. Living with others isn't easy, living with 2 others is harder.

All I'm saying is that 7.5k relief should be increasing, as its not done for a long time now. We can agree that the relief is worth less now than it used to be.

On top, at a time when rent is flying up, there just isn't enough competition, especially low cost but still decent completion, increasing the benefit for landlords to rent rooms in their house makes sense to me. At some point, whenever the 7.5k relief was set (does anyone know when this was set?) the powers that be decided 7.5k was correct at the current market rate. Why is it not going up?

I rent out rooms too, I agree with you that the allowance hasn't moved but really should. I've not read that far back so I don't know where about you are based or how large a supply of potential lodgers you have.

However I have always vetted mine well and not just accepted the first person to express interest. If I have felt living with them, their lifestyle or their first impression hasn't sat well with me I have waited for someone better suited. Though I appreciate you might not have the luxury of time or robust cashflow.

Monday-Friday agreements have worked well and suit most professionals who work that little bit too far from home. And since Covid with more flexible working arrangements I have recently had one lodger paying for 5 nights and only staying for 2 per week. Most have left Thursday morning to work locally that day and from home on Friday. You will need to charge and clear less per month but equally be inconvenienced less as they have usually not done washing and little in the way of cooking too. My preference has always been men to because their utility usage is lower no hairdryers, straighteners, showers instead of baths etc and they don't mind the house being colder.

I'm not effected by this but its relevant or at least similar. The Private Mileage rates of 45/25p per mile haven't moved either, not even temporarily when fuel was at £2+/litre. So anyone claiming mileage is slowly getting screwed on running costs and depreciation (vehicle price bubble aside).

The rent a room relief used to be £4,250 per year and changed around 2016.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom