Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Thousands of borrowers shocked, SHOCKED to discover that mortgages actually have to be repaid at some point   ( telegraph.co.uk) divider line
    More: Obvious, outstanding balance, waking up early, mortgages, rises, homeowners, saves  
•       •       •

4399 clicks; posted to Business » on 19 Mar 2013 at 9:57 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



127 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-03-19 10:03:00 AM  
Speaking as someone who just bought a house yesterday, I'm outraged that no one told me I'm supposed to pay this mortgage back.
 
2013-03-19 10:09:23 AM  

Avonmore: Speaking as someone who just bought a house yesterday, I'm outraged that no one told me I'm supposed to pay this mortgage back.


I closed on my new place on Friday, so I've been moving all weekend. Hopefully, I'll be done tonight. Unlike the people in the article, though, I put 20% down, and I didn't get an interest only loan.
 
2013-03-19 10:10:49 AM  

dchurch0: I closed on my new place on Friday, so I've been moving all weekend. Hopefully, I'll be done tonight. Unlike the people in the article, though, I put 20% down, and I didn't get an interest only loan.


Hmm... I wanna rag on you, but "20% down" isn't nearly as obnoxious as the "I paid for my house with straight cash and if you didn't, you are financially irresponsible" crowd that will be here shortly.
 
2013-03-19 10:18:06 AM  

The_Gallant_Gallstone: dchurch0: I closed on my new place on Friday, so I've been moving all weekend. Hopefully, I'll be done tonight. Unlike the people in the article, though, I put 20% down, and I didn't get an interest only loan.

Hmm... I wanna rag on you, but "20% down" isn't nearly as obnoxious as the "I paid for my house with straight cash and if you didn't, you are financially irresponsible" crowd that will be here shortly.


I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.
 
2013-03-19 10:19:32 AM  

The_Gallant_Gallstone: dchurch0: I closed on my new place on Friday, so I've been moving all weekend. Hopefully, I'll be done tonight. Unlike the people in the article, though, I put 20% down, and I didn't get an interest only loan.

Hmm... I wanna rag on you, but "20% down" isn't nearly as obnoxious as the "I paid for my house with straight cash and if you didn't, you are financially irresponsible" crowd that will be here shortly.


I didn't mean to sound snobby. The only reason I mentioned it in the thread is because the article is talking about elderly people with interest only loans who don't have 20% or better equity in their homes... I thought it applied.

Plus  I am pretty proud of myself for being able to come up with that down payment. Been saving my butt off for 4 years.
 
2013-03-19 10:26:08 AM  
It can depend on who you know, sometimes a loan isn't a loan. Where some people screw up here is claiming a tax deduction for a mortgage they don't actually pay.
 
2013-03-19 10:29:08 AM  
i47.tinypic.com

"Why don't they just provide consulting services for a company and take the loans out in the company's name?"
 
2013-03-19 10:40:58 AM  
I love how they blame their financial irresponsibility on their children.
 
2013-03-19 10:50:39 AM  

LouDobbsAwaaaay: [i47.tinypic.com image 640x360]

"Why don't they just provide consulting services for a company and take the loans out in the company's name?"


media.washingtonpost.com

"Amateur"
 
2013-03-19 10:52:40 AM  
These people had no way of knowing what they were obligating themselves to.  The predatory loan officers should go to jail.
 
2013-03-19 10:53:18 AM  
<i>Word History: The great jurist Sir Edward Coke, who lived from 1552 to 1634, has explained why the <b>term mortgage comes from the Old French words mort, "dead," and gage, "pledge." <b/>It seemed to him that it had to do with the doubtfulness of whether or not the mortgagor will pay the debt. If the mortgagor does not, then the land pledged to the mortgagee as security for the debt "is taken from him for ever, and so dead to him upon condition, &c. And if he doth pay the money, then the pledge is dead as to the [mortgagee]." This etymology, as understood by 17th-century attorneys, of the Old French term morgage, which we adopted, may well be correct. The term has been in English much longer than the 17th century, being first recorded in Middle English with the form morgage and the figurative sense "pledge" in a work written before 1393. <i/>
 
2013-03-19 11:00:10 AM  
I only put 5% down, but have a decent fixed rate and should be out of pmi land in 4 instead of 10 years. But I wish I stuck with renting, home ownership isn't for some people. Hooray preventative maintenance and lawn work.
 
2013-03-19 11:00:26 AM  

Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.


I'll bite; I prefer renting. Owned a 20 year-old house a few years back and it was nice...until I started adding up maintenance costs. New roof, new deck, new turkey mound....repair this, repair that. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the benefits, it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property. But I'm not at that point where that's nearly as important as saving cash. My rent is $625 a month and if something breaks, I call a landlord. Might buy again sometime in the next few years, but I'm perfectly content to rent for now.

/I only have 1 Neighbor and my own driveway and garage.
 
2013-03-19 11:21:04 AM  

YodaBlues: Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.

I'll bite; I prefer renting. Owned a 20 year-old house a few years back and it was nice...until I started adding up maintenance costs. New roof, new deck, new turkey mound....repair this, repair that. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the benefits, it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property. But I'm not at that point where that's nearly as important as saving cash. My rent is $625 a month and if something breaks, I call a landlord. Might buy again sometime in the next few years, but I'm perfectly content to rent for now.

/I only have 1 Neighbor and my own driveway and garage.


Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.
 
2013-03-19 11:21:54 AM  
Hey subby, 2008 called and it wants its headline back.
 
2013-03-19 11:26:16 AM  

Elzar: YodaBlues: Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.

I'll bite; I prefer renting. Owned a 20 year-old house a few years back and it was nice...until I started adding up maintenance costs. New roof, new deck, new turkey mound....repair this, repair that. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the benefits, it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property. But I'm not at that point where that's nearly as important as saving cash. My rent is $625 a month and if something breaks, I call a landlord. Might buy again sometime in the next few years, but I'm perfectly content to rent for now.

/I only have 1 Neighbor and my own driveway and garage.

Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.


I've been moved 5 times by work and each time they buy my home and reimburse me for any capital improvements made to the home in the interim between purchase date and move date.

Hasn't affected my mobility at all.
 
2013-03-19 11:29:21 AM  
Smackledorfer:

I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself.


It gets real cute when they start in with the "rent is too damn high!" when their lease comes up. I know what my housing costs will be in eighteen years, and i also know that in nineteen years, it will be zero.  Can a renter say that?
 
2013-03-19 11:32:35 AM  

Dougie AXP: I've been moved 5 times by work and each time they buy my home and reimburse me for any capital improvements made to the home in the interim between purchase date and move date.

Hasn't affected my mobility at all.


Fortunately everyone has that luxury.
 
2013-03-19 11:33:52 AM  

Dougie AXP: I've been moved 5 times by work and each time they buy my home and reimburse me for any capital improvements made to the home in the interim between purchase date and move date.

Hasn't affected my mobility at all.


I've been moved 37 times by work and each time, they buy me 13 houses, a fleet of 89 pecan Jaguar convertibles and reimburse me for the expenses of moving my entourage of sapphic sex slaves, advisory Catholic cardinals and gangster rapper bodyguards.

Doesn't hurt my mobility too much either.
 
2013-03-19 11:34:22 AM  

Elzar: YodaBlues: Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.

I'll bite; I prefer renting. Owned a 20 year-old house a few years back and it was nice...until I started adding up maintenance costs. New roof, new deck, new turkey mound....repair this, repair that. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the benefits, it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property. But I'm not at that point where that's nearly as important as saving cash. My rent is $625 a month and if something breaks, I call a landlord. Might buy again sometime in the next few years, but I'm perfectly content to rent for now.

/I only have 1 Neighbor and my own driveway and garage.

Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.


I haven't needed mobility so far in my 20 some odd years of home ownership.  We paid off our modern 3 bedroom home some years ago and when we decided to buy a larger place on an acreage, we kept the smaller place as a rental.  Now it pays for most of our mortgage.  So far our various tenants have been good to the place and paid their rent on time.  Yes, maintenance on two homes is some times a PITA, but it's manageable.
 
2013-03-19 11:42:02 AM  

Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.


I enjoy the other side of the argument too -- the "Buying is always the better option than renting" crowd
 
2013-03-19 11:42:49 AM  
As someone who has a refinance closing scheduled for Thursday that will cut how much we are paying in interest in half, I am getting a kick.  As someone who is going to be laid off shortly and has not found another job, FML.

//Hung on long enough to get my bonus, tax refund, and accrue a week of PTO that will be paid out, so hopefully that will see us through until I can find another job.  2 interviews this week, fingers crossed.
 
2013-03-19 11:42:52 AM  

Elzar: Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.


If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago.
 
2013-03-19 11:45:46 AM  

FormlessOne: Elzar: Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.

If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago.


There's also been a shift in attitude from considering a single family house as a "home" into making it a "real estate investment".

Do you think people in the 40's and 50's had "resale value" on the top of their minds when buying places in the suburbs, or just "is this a good place to raise a family"?
 
2013-03-19 11:46:07 AM  

squegeebooo: I only put 5% down, but have a decent fixed rate and should be out of pmi land in 4 instead of 10 years. But I wish I stuck with renting, home ownership isn't for some people. Hooray preventative maintenance and lawn work.


Pay off the mortgage, then put part of that payment aside on a regular basis to have that work done for you. In about two and a half years, my mortgage is paid off. In three years, I'm looking quite forward to paying folks to help me with that work. The money I used to give to the bank will instead go to my retirement fund, and to various remodeling projects to update the kitchen, dining room, and living room. If you didn't buy more than you could afford, home ownership is a lovely thing.
 
2013-03-19 11:48:32 AM  

Donnchadha: FormlessOne: Elzar: Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.

If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago.

There's also been a shift in attitude from considering a single family house as a "home" into making it a "real estate investment".

Do you think people in the 40's and 50's had "resale value" on the top of their minds when buying places in the suburbs, or just "is this a good place to raise a family"?


Actually, yes - and not just "resale value." They also had "will this be worth passing on to my kids?" on their minds, too. Owning a home was seen, even then, as a way of establishing community and wealth. I do agree with you, though, that once we hit the 80's, the idea of exploitative investment started to trickle down to folks that had too little to risk, with the promises of easy wealth dangled in front of them.
 
2013-03-19 11:51:46 AM  
Finally managed to refinance from an interest-only variable to a 30-year fixed. Took a little extra out, but still have 35% equity. Putting it all back into the house anyway.
 
2013-03-19 11:51:47 AM  
From the article it sounds like in the last 8 years a ton of elderly people over 65 years old have taken out new interest only mortgages on their homes and that a lot of those people have refinanced to help their kids.

Would I be too cynical if I suspected some of them have tapped as much equity in their houses as possible, gifted it to their kids and are now waiting out the 7-years required to avoid inheritance tax.
 
2013-03-19 11:53:01 AM  

FormlessOne: Donnchadha: FormlessOne: Elzar: Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.

If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago.

There's also been a shift in attitude from considering a single family house as a "home" into making it a "real estate investment".

Do you think people in the 40's and 50's had "resale value" on the top of their minds when buying places in the suburbs, or just "is this a good place to raise a family"?

Actually, yes - and not just "resale value." They also had "will this be worth passing on to my kids?" on their minds, too. Owning a home was seen, even then, as a way of establishing community and wealth. I do agree with you, though, that once we hit the 80's, the idea of exploitative investment started to trickle down to folks that had too little to risk, with the promises of easy wealth dangled in front of them.


I guess I agree with that.... it's more of a "long term" vs. "short term" investment argument.
 
2013-03-19 11:57:13 AM  
Aren't interest only mortgages for people who are not planning on living there for long anyway?
 
2013-03-19 12:00:34 PM  

FormlessOne: Donnchadha: FormlessOne: Elzar: Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.

If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago.

There's also been a shift in attitude from considering a single family house as a "home" into making it a "real estate investment".

Do you think people in the 40's and 50's had "resale value" on the top of their minds when buying places in the suburbs, or just "is this a good place to raise a family"?

Actually, yes - and not just "resale value." They also had "will this be worth passing on to my kids?" on their minds, too. Owning a home was seen, even then, as a way of establishing community and wealth. I do agree with you, though, that once we hit the 80's, the idea of exploitative investment started to trickle down to folks that had too little to risk, with the promises of easy wealth dangled in front of them.


Should probably add some context to my post - in the early 1950's, we had a suburban housing boom precisely because of cheap, government-secured loans made possible by the G.I. Bill. A rush of folks who previously couldn't own homes were now able to do so - and in doing so, changed our economy in a number of ways. The suburbs used to be where wealth resided - if you were poor, you lived on farms or in the city. Thanks to the G.I. Bill's low-interest, zero-down loans to veterans (and there were a lot of them), millions of people moved away from the city and into the suburbs, where they could own property that would appreciate in value, in places where they could raise families. It's an interesting time, actually, in terms of property ownership in America - a huge reward for service in WWII.
 
2013-03-19 12:01:58 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: Aren't interest only mortgages for people who are not planning on living there for long anyway?


I often thought that was the push - friend of mine called them "refi or die" mortgages, because you wanted to do one or the other before the balloon payment came due.
 
2013-03-19 12:02:27 PM  
FormlessOne

Quoting yourself... is... so.... obnoxious.

/ like talking to yourself on Facebook
// only slightly less pathetic.
 
2013-03-19 12:09:04 PM  
I'm 50, have 10 years or so on my mortgage, not upside down or anything, financially comfortable and like my house and my situation.

But in ten years or so, I'll sell this house, stuff the 250K in savings and investments, and NEVER buy another house again.  I can't imagine taking a loan out.  We'll rent a house or a condo, and never cut grass again, never fix roofs and plumbing, never shovel snow again.  Fark That.  I'll sit on the deck with a beer and maybe a cigar and watch everyone else do my work.

//and I don't even smoke cigars but it sounded about right
 
2013-03-19 12:10:16 PM  

DrewCurtisJr: Aren't interest only mortgages for people who are not planning on living there for long anyway?


Interest only loans are popular with people who flip. Keeps their out of pocket expenses low while they fix up the place, then they sell it.
 
2013-03-19 12:32:03 PM  

The_Gallant_Gallstone: FormlessOne

Quoting yourself... is... so.... obnoxious.

/ like talking to yourself on Facebook
// only slightly less pathetic.


Yeah, but I wanted to get that bit in the thread - I do agree, though, it's typically obnoxious.
 
2013-03-19 12:32:06 PM  
Unless you're really unstable in your job and/or jobs are hard to find in your region, renting is dumb when there are 15-year 3% mortgages, and the housing market has reached bottom and is now slowing climbing back up.
 
2013-03-19 12:32:16 PM  

Elzar: YodaBlues: Smackledorfer: I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself. Especially the ones who think there are enough houses for everyone to rent after they admit apartment life has serious downsides.

I love having two neighbors and my own driveway and garage.

I'll bite; I prefer renting. Owned a 20 year-old house a few years back and it was nice...until I started adding up maintenance costs. New roof, new deck, new turkey mound....repair this, repair that. Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the benefits, it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property. But I'm not at that point where that's nearly as important as saving cash. My rent is $625 a month and if something breaks, I call a landlord. Might buy again sometime in the next few years, but I'm perfectly content to rent for now.

/I only have 1 Neighbor and my own driveway and garage.

Pretty much this - home ownership is for suckers. Good luck with mobility when you are stuck in a underwater overpriced fixer.


Who cares about mobility if you love your house?
 
2013-03-19 12:35:26 PM  

FormlessOne: squegeebooo: I only put 5% down, but have a decent fixed rate and should be out of pmi land in 4 instead of 10 years. But I wish I stuck with renting, home ownership isn't for some people. Hooray preventative maintenance and lawn work.

Pay off the mortgage, then put part of that payment aside on a regular basis to have that work done for you. In about two and a half years, my mortgage is paid off. In three years, I'm looking quite forward to paying folks to help me with that work. The money I used to give to the bank will instead go to my retirement fund, and to various remodeling projects to update the kitchen, dining room, and living room. If you didn't buy more than you could afford, home ownership is a lovely thing.


Do you live in a semi-detached cardboard box?
 
2013-03-19 12:36:35 PM  

LemSkroob: Smackledorfer:

I like the 'renting is always better' crowd myself.

It gets real cute when they start in with the "rent is too damn high!" when their lease comes up. I know what my housing costs will be in eighteen years, and i also know that in nineteen years, it will be zero.  Can a renter say that?


No.  And they also won't have anything to show for all the money they pissed away over the years, whereas you will have real property to with as you wish.

We just paid our mortgage off in December.  Took 26 years and a lot of hard work, but it's nice being in our mid-50's and having an extra $900/month in our pockets for the rest of our lives while living in a home that's currently worth almost $100K more now than what we paid for it.  Not only that?  If the wife and both croak tomorrow our daughter will get to say, "Hey look!  Free house!"
 
2013-03-19 12:42:41 PM  
Why does Fark steal words?  It was fine when I previewed it.  Somebody owes me a 'do' and an "I"

/to *do* with as you wish
//the wife and *I*
///obligatory 3rd slashie
 
2013-03-19 12:42:48 PM  
Considering these interest only loans have been around 1.5% and the market has been returned 90% in the last 4 years, some of these "idiots" will make out like bandits if they've done it right.

Many of these were likely speculative properties with the goal of an eventual flip before the end of the mortgage anyway.  With housing rising back to 2003ish levels by 2015, those investors will probably do fine.
 
2013-03-19 12:44:16 PM  

LemSkroob: It gets real cute when they start in with the "rent is too damn high!" when their lease comes up. I know what my housing costs will be in eighteen years, and i also know that in nineteen years, it will be zero.  Can a renter say that?


Does that include upkeep, maintenance, school/local/property taxes? Cause those have a tendency to rise over time. Not being antagonistic  just genuinely curious. I tend to include everything into housing costs. I pay rent @ $625 and that's it. And it ain't going up anytime soon, so I'm happy with it. If I bought a house, now I'd have mortgage + insurance + local taxes (school, property, misc) + yearly maintenance. I could certainly afford it, but it's not worth it to me. I'd prefer to put my cash into other things is all.

FormlessOne: If you're dumb enough to buy during a housing bubble, I'd agree. Thankfully, I wasn't. That's part of the real problem - the "suckers" in question thought they needed McMansions, bought larger than they could afford, egged on by predatory lenders pushing a mindset that had died a decade ago


Agreed. A house is something to live-in, people need to stop thinking of them as investments. Buy what you can afford realistically.
 
jgi
2013-03-19 12:54:46 PM  

YodaBlues: Does that include upkeep, maintenance, school/local/property taxes? Cause those have a tendency to rise over time. Not being antagonistic  just genuinely curious. I tend to include everything into housing costs. I pay rent @ $625 and that's it. And it ain't going up anytime soon, so I'm happy with it. If I bought a house, now I'd have mortgage + insurance + local taxes (school, property, misc) + yearly maintenance. I could certainly afford it, but it's not worth it to me. I'd prefer to put my cash into other things is all.


I keep doing this same calculation, and renting turns out to be a better deal. Sure, I'm "throwing money away" or "paying somebody else's mortgage" but my monthly costs would almost double if I were to buy something comparable to what I currently rent. I live in a place where decent condos cost at least $350K. If I were to buy one of these, not only am I spending a lot of money to continue to share space with other people but I also have monthly association fees which are $100 on the low end, $300 on the higher end. Property taxes on these types of condos are at least $5K per year. If I wanted to buy my own house, I'm looking at spending $600K-$1M+ just to have my own space that I don't share.

I can understand that some people think I'm crazy for living in the city, but I think people are crazy for living in the suburbs. Different strokes, you know. I pay $1350 per month to live in my place. I estimate that it would cost me $2000 per month were I to buy something similar. This does not include the variable maintenance costs were something to break.

I still haven't figured out a solution or had any one give me any real, actionable advice that wouldn't cost me a ton of money. Right now, I'm able to save $1000+ per month. If I bought, that would go away. I like having money. I don't think I'd like being house poor.
 
2013-03-19 12:58:21 PM  
Meanwhile, in Vancouver, you can purchase this fifty year-old, 2000 square foot home (on an extremely busy street, no less) for the low low price of $1.18 million.
images.realtor.ca
Now, you don't buy this home to raise a family. You buy this home to rent out while waiting for a developer to buy it from you to build yet another high-rise.
 
2013-03-19 01:01:17 PM  

jgi: YodaBlues: Does that include upkeep, maintenance, school/local/property taxes? Cause those have a tendency to rise over time. Not being antagonistic  just genuinely curious. I tend to include everything into housing costs. I pay rent @ $625 and that's it. And it ain't going up anytime soon, so I'm happy with it. If I bought a house, now I'd have mortgage + insurance + local taxes (school, property, misc) + yearly maintenance. I could certainly afford it, but it's not worth it to me. I'd prefer to put my cash into other things is all.

I keep doing this same calculation, and renting turns out to be a better deal. Sure, I'm "throwing money away" or "paying somebody else's mortgage" but my monthly costs would almost double if I were to buy something comparable to what I currently rent. I live in a place where decent condos cost at least $350K. If I were to buy one of these, not only am I spending a lot of money to continue to share space with other people but I also have monthly association fees which are $100 on the low end, $300 on the higher end. Property taxes on these types of condos are at least $5K per year. If I wanted to buy my own house, I'm looking at spending $600K-$1M+ just to have my own space that I don't share.

I can understand that some people think I'm crazy for living in the city, but I think people are crazy for living in the suburbs. Different strokes, you know. I pay $1350 per month to live in my place. I estimate that it would cost me $2000 per month were I to buy something similar. This does not include the variable maintenance costs were something to break.

I still haven't figured out a solution or had any one give me any real, actionable advice that wouldn't cost me a ton of money. Right now, I'm able to save $1000+ per month. If I bought, that would go away. I like having money. I don't think I'd like being house poor.


Concur. I've done my fair share of city living and I rent half a house in the suburbs of Buffalo right now. It's perfect for my situation. If I were to buy a house though, I'd wait until I could afford something a little further outside the city. Not quite the sticks, but a little more private than what I have now. Unfortunately  those properties tend to be relatively more expensive up here, so I'll rent until I can afford what I want or other circumstances take me somewhere else. My point is that if you wanted to own a something downtown, it's priced out of your range, so renting fulfills the need for you. Same here, I don't necessarily want to live in-town anymore, but can't afford to buy the type of house I'd like right now. I'll rent until circumstances change and I don't regret the decision as much as I would if I just bought a house so I can say I own a house.
 
2013-03-19 01:01:42 PM  
Wait... Raid their savings to pay their mortgages? What the hell is wrong with people? There is almost no circumstance where you should simultaneously have savings and a mortgage. Unless by "savings" they mean investments in a market account that returns a yield higher than the interest rate of the mortgage.

My checking account pays no interest. Every time the balance gets above $2000 I make a double payment.
 
2013-03-19 01:04:38 PM  

jgi: YodaBlues: Does that include upkeep, maintenance, school/local/property taxes? Cause those have a tendency to rise over time. Not being antagonistic  just genuinely curious. I tend to include everything into housing costs. I pay rent @ $625 and that's it. And it ain't going up anytime soon, so I'm happy with it. If I bought a house, now I'd have mortgage + insurance + local taxes (school, property, misc) + yearly maintenance. I could certainly afford it, but it's not worth it to me. I'd prefer to put my cash into other things is all.

I keep doing this same calculation, and renting turns out to be a better deal. Sure, I'm "throwing money away" or "paying somebody else's mortgage" but my monthly costs would almost double if I were to buy something comparable to what I currently rent. I live in a place where decent condos cost at least $350K. If I were to buy one of these, not only am I spending a lot of money to continue to share space with other people but I also have monthly association fees which are $100 on the low end, $300 on the higher end. Property taxes on these types of condos are at least $5K per year. If I wanted to buy my own house, I'm looking at spending $600K-$1M+ just to have my own space that I don't share.

I can understand that some people think I'm crazy for living in the city, but I think people are crazy for living in the suburbs. Different strokes, you know. I pay $1350 per month to live in my place. I estimate that it would cost me $2000 per month were I to buy something similar. This does not include the variable maintenance costs were something to break.

I still haven't figured out a solution or had any one give me any real, actionable advice that wouldn't cost me a ton of money. Right now, I'm able to save $1000+ per month. If I bought, that would go away. I like having money. I don't think I'd like being house poor.


Real estate, marriage, and children are three decisions that involve a good amount of trepidation and emotion.  People who just bought a house, just got married, or just had a baby are the most insistent that their friends do the same.  They're looking for validation of their life choices.

I've had a house way too long to pretend that it's a one-size-fits-all solution.  These are lifestyle decisions at their core, and you should first consider what fits your lifestyle.  I'm not owning a single-family house when I'm old.  My retirement lifestyle plan doesn't include physical labor or dealing with repairs.
 
kab
2013-03-19 01:10:47 PM  

YodaBlues: it's awesome to be able to do whatever I want to my property


It'd be even more awesome if this was actually true.
 
2013-03-19 01:13:09 PM  

jgi: YodaBlues: Does that include upkeep, maintenance, school/local/property taxes? Cause those have a tendency to rise over time. Not being antagonistic  just genuinely curious. I tend to include everything into housing costs. I pay rent @ $625 and that's it. And it ain't going up anytime soon, so I'm happy with it. If I bought a house, now I'd have mortgage + insurance + local taxes (school, property, misc) + yearly maintenance. I could certainly afford it, but it's not worth it to me. I'd prefer to put my cash into other things is all.

I keep doing this same calculation, and renting turns out to be a better deal. Sure, I'm "throwing money away" or "paying somebody else's mortgage" but my monthly costs would almost double if I were to buy something comparable to what I currently rent. I live in a place where decent condos cost at least $350K. If I were to buy one of these, not only am I spending a lot of money to continue to share space with other people but I also have monthly association fees which are $100 on the low end, $300 on the higher end. Property taxes on these types of condos are at least $5K per year. If I wanted to buy my own house, I'm looking at spending $600K-$1M+ just to have my own space that I don't share.

I can understand that some people think I'm crazy for living in the city, but I think people are crazy for living in the suburbs. Different strokes, you know. I pay $1350 per month to live in my place. I estimate that it would cost me $2000 per month were I to buy something similar. This does not include the variable maintenance costs were something to break.

I still haven't figured out a solution or had any one give me any real, actionable advice that wouldn't cost me a ton of money. Right now, I'm able to save $1000+ per month. If I bought, that would go away. I like having money. I don't think I'd like being house poor.


You're making it too difficult.  Renting is NEVER a better deal if you can afford a home.  Look at it like this;  For every dime you spend on rent, you get 0 return.  For every dime you spend on a mortgage you get equity in your house.  Forget all the BS about replacing roofs and crap.  Roofs last about 30 years and should your landlord need to replace the roof, guess who's rent's gonna get raised to pay for it.  Do property taxes go up?  Sure.  But that happens everywhere, and the landlord will reflect it onto you with another rent increase.  (Ever hear of someone saying their rent went DOWN?  I didn't think so.)  You will NEVER go wrong buying within your means as opposed to renting as long as you remember the old adage that real estate is all about location, because it really is.
 
Displayed 50 of 127 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report