It may go as high as 5.5%.

Powered by

Fixed rate till august 2011 can i find a better deal and change to another bank

of course you can. Though some mortgages have pre-payment penalties, so you must factor that in. Also, check to see what the formula is for changing the rate in August. You may find that the interest rate may go down. bests, -rsr- Exclusive Buyer Broker

Powered by

I currently have an arm with the rate fixed at 3 7/8% until 2010ish. obviously, ditching this mortgage right now would be a moron move - it's saving me a lot of money. any competing fixed rate would be well over 5% and there would be significant refinancing fees. i wanted to know if it was possible to lock a rate for closing in 2010 or 2011. these locks are common in the 30-90 day timeframe, but are they available several years in the future? i realize the fee required to lock the rate may be significant, and that i should probably wait as interest rates are falling right now. as a sidenote, i intend on living here a very long time, my credit is excellent, and i should have >80% ltv ratios. -->adam i meant less than 80% ltv, not greater than 80%. oops. no prepayment penalty. since i'm paying 3 7/8%, i'm sure my current mortgage company would be happy if i refinanced right now, so they could loan the money out at 5-6%. fortunately, i'm not that stupid. i'm also not stupid enough to keep it after the 3 7/8% rate runs out.

No, the max lock time is 90 days. If there were locks over that, your rate would be significantly higher or you'd be paying your broker or bank several percent up from just as origination points to cover the amount they'd have to pay the lender to lock in a loan for an extended period of time.

Powered by

The housing crisis is unprecedented; the same way that the first $700 billion bail-out ratified in about a week time was. i know that the mortgage rates are at record 40- year low, but it is not enough! we should have the interest rates at lowest ever as an emergency, the same way as bail-out for big corporations was. when you bundle 5 million foreclosures, it should become "too big to fail", but it did not because no one as powerful as the treasury secretary (who listens to the wall street) could tell the president to stop the failures (for whatever reasons) now. to stop the foreclosures (over 1 million in 2010), the government must figure out a way to reduce the 30-year fixed long term mortgage rates to about 3%. there should be certain percentage of loans with even lower rates for a 5, 10, and 15 year terms.the percentage should be figured out based on a formula that the economy could absorb when the loans would become due and have to be refinanced. the longer the term of the loan, the less of a future problem since over time the inflation as well as the reduced principal of the mortgage loan would take away the risk. then, the mortgage payments would become affordable and it would become cheaper to own than rent. investors would snap the rest of the properties to rent them. the foreclosures would stop. the banks would be in better shape since the potentially bad loans would become good performing loans. more people would qualify for a new loan or refinancing since the payments are lower with the lower interest rates. now the government is trying to reduce and subsidize the principal amount of a loan to reduce monthly payments. this is not working since the home prices are falling further. if the interest rates go down, the property values will go up and payments become affordable at the same time. the wealth creation due to increased home values would stimulate the economy further. the guidelines for lending should be also modified to be more realistic without increasing risk. banks must participate in loan risks. fannie and freddie should have a very limited role. the banks are now paying record low interest for saving accounts and should use the money with some kind of an insurance added to mortgage fees and then banks could participate in loan risks based on more realistic criteria.for example, if a person has not been late during the past few years, he would not be posing a new risk if his mortgage loan interest rate go down resulting in lower payments. he should be automatically eligible for refinancing with the lower payments since he has been paying the higher payments throughout the most difficult period during the housing crisis. many big financial institutions got the government bailout money and manipulated the stock market to make record profit. other companies on wall street recovered fast due to interest rates being near zero. for example, ibm had record profit because like many other companies they could borrow at 1%. as it was reported. why can't the homeowners on the main street be treated the same way and given cheap money to turn around the housing foreclosures. if it was good for the wall street, it must be good for the main street. the reality is the lobbyist from big companies have more influence over the government decisions than the middle and working classes. there were over 1 million foreclosures last year and the suffering is unimaginable among the children of these group of people. there will be even more foreclosures in 2011, unless the interest rates go down further. if interest rates go down it will stimulate the housing industry. the jobs created by the housing industry with lower mortgage rates would benefit the main street and would bring down the unemployment rates. without housing recovery, the economy will not recover fast and the unemployment would remain high.the obama administration was perceived to be sensitive to the plight of people living on main street, but it made the wall street its first priority for recovery, may be rightfully so. now what? there is no excuse not tobe sensitive to foreclosure rates by letting it go through its normal attrition. the crisis was caused by the greed of wall street and "creative" and fraudulent packaging of the loans into securities. now the common people, with good or bad credit alike, have to pay the price by seeing the equity in their homes vanish. some of the inflated prices were unrealistic. on the other hand when is "enough" is enough. the suffering as a result of foreclosures have reached unacceptable levels in terms of human including innocent children. at least, the government should try as hard as it did to resolve the bankruptcy of aig, goldman sachs, citibank, gm, b of a, and others. in aggregate, the human suffering is the same as if one of the "too big to fail" companies. in other words, when you add a couple of millions of foreclosures together in a bundle, it

prime rate is an extremely short term loan and a completely different kind of loan than a home mortgage that may last 30 years . I have been in real estate since 1978 and have seen prime rate go up and at the same time the mortgage rate go down. They are not closely related at all.

Powered by

I live in the uk i have a 3year fixed rate mortgage which doesn't end until sept 2011. i will be finishing my current job (i was on a temporary contract) in a few days and realise i am not going to be able to afford my bills and mortgage etc and i have not found another job yet. i would like some advice on what to do, i have no savings, i know my house value has decreased by around 10k so selling it doesn't seem to be an option + all the estate agent fees that i would en cur would make it worse. are there any such thing as being able to give the property back to the lender to sell, i have heard of an agreement of handing the keys back? are there companies that can take over my property? or companies that will rent out my house for me, without me being too or at all involved? what would happen if i was evicted or the house was re possessed or if i went bankrupt? i am only 20yrs old and i no longer wish to own my own home so i am not fighting to keep it, i am happy to not keep the house but do not wish this to have too much debt etc, i do understand that this will not be painless and i am under no illusions i just want to know what my options are? any advice is much appreciated.

Unlike in the USA you cannot just walk away and give your keys back to the lender. There is also a moral issue at play here. You should actively engage with your lender about your situation as they are under a lot of pressure at moment from Government to ‘Treat Customers Fairly’ and you may also be eligible for one of the Government support schemes. You should consult the DWP and Citizens Advice Bureau. The sale and rent back market is being closely scrutinized at the moment and you need specialist advice on that. You would have to be actively involved in that process. Check the FSA’s website here for a step by step guide to prioritizing your issues. I wish you all the best in your new job search. http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/guides/help/dealing_with_debt.html Disclaimer: The answers above are for guidance only and should not be acted upon without you receiving professional mortgage advice relevant to your circumstances . To find an independent mortgage adviser please go to http://www.unbiased.co.uk

Powered by

We purchased the property in march 2009 for £147,000. i put down £75,000 as a deposit. the mortgage was a fixed rate mortgage at 4.8% it is now due for renewal in march 2011 as it was a 2 year fixed term. my question is: what happens to the 75k i put down? if i wanted to change provider to find a better deal then would i see any of that money or has it been eaten up by the provider?? i did not know what i was doing at the time and my parents have desperate financial circumstances as they paid for my sisters wedding. i would like to support them so wondered what i could do. what happens to the deposit i put down? sorry if i am being silly. thanks

That money was applied to the purchase of your property. You do not get it back, you spent it all buying the house.

Powered by

Hi, i currently have a fixed mortgage with nothern rock, which ends on in april 2011 and would normally revert to their standard rate, but giving it's nothern rock, they may not allow this and i may have to go to a new mortgage provider. however, i'm currently looking to buy a new house and rent my current house out. am i best to wait until 2011 when my fixed rate mortgage deal expires and then set up my current house on a buy to let mortgage and then buy a new house on a separate mortgage. slightly concerned about tax implications if i rent my old house out for more than 2 years. it's all getting complicated when all i really want to do is buy a new house and rent out my current property. all help gratefully recieved.

Not directly answering your question but you should note that most mortgage lenders will require you to notify them if you are letting the property - and charge considerably more as you are granting a tenancy to the occupier which will still exist if they have to re-possess. Also, all rental income is subject to tax - although mortgage interest is an allowable expense. Also bear in mind that if you let the house for, say, 12 months you have no guarantee that in 12 months and 1 day the house will be vacant - tenants can legally stay in situ until you get a court possession order.

Powered by

Hello all, just need some advice... have a northern rock 5 year fixed rate mortgage (ends feb 2011) with early redemption charge. what do you folks think about jumping mortgage lenders at this point in time considering the fact that there may not be a buyer, or that jc flowers/cerberus/lloyds tsb buy them out? also if they go into administration - how will this effect mortgagees? thanks in advance, k

Your fixed rate mortgage won't go away. If Northern Rock are bought or go into administration, you may find you owe the money to someone else, but they can't change the terms until Feb 2011. If you were going to switch lenders now, the Northern Rock's problems won't affect your ability to do so. If you like the deal, don't make the Northern Rock's problems make you run away and get stuck with an exit charge. Remember, you owe them money - the worst that can happen is that they want it back.

Powered by

I'm weary about waiting until 2011 and having to go with what the rates are then, any idea what kind of rate i could currently get if i switch to a fixed rate now? my credit rating was 720 back in 2004 and i have received no other loans since then. i owe about 63,000 still on my mortgage and have to pay about 433.00 a month. any helpful ideas are appreciated, thank you.

Get rid of the arm, before it costs you an arm and a leg. Seriously, when you get an ARM, you have absorbed the risk that interest rates will go up. The bank thanks you for that.

Powered by

Interest rates have nowhere to go but up buzz up! 191 print on sunday april 11, 2010, 1:00 pm edt even as prospects for the american economy brighten, consumers are about to face a new financial burden: a sustained period of rising interest rates. that, economists say, is the inevitable outcome of the nation’s ballooning debt and the renewed prospect of inflation as the economy recovers from the depths of the recent recession. the shift is sure to come as a shock to consumers whose spending habits were shaped by a historic 30-year decline in the cost of borrowing. “americans have assumed the roller coaster goes one way,” said bill gross, whose investment firm, pimco, has taken part in a broad sell-off of government debt, which has pushed up interest rates. “it’s been a great thrill as rates descended, but now we face an extended climb.” the impact of higher rates is likely to be felt first in the housing market, which has only recently begun to rebound from a deep slump. the rate for a 30-year fixed rate mortgage has risen half a point since december, hitting 5.31 last week, the highest level since last summer. along with the sell-off in bonds, the federal reserve has halted its emergency $1.25 trillion program to buy mortgage debt, placing even more upward pressure on rates. “mortgage rates are unlikely to go lower than they are now, and if they go higher, we’re likely to see a reversal of the gains in the housing market,” said christopher j. mayer, a professor of finance and economics at columbia business school. “it’s a really big risk.” each increase of 1 percentage point in rates adds as much as 19 percent to the total cost of a home, according to mr. mayer. the mortgage bankers association expects the rise to continue, with the 30-year mortgage rate going to 5.5 percent by late summer and as high as 6 percent by the end of the year. another area in which higher rates are likely to affect consumers is credit card use. and last week, the federal reserve reported that the average interest rate on credit cards reached 14.26 percent in february, the highest since 2001. that is up from 12.03 percent when rates bottomed in the fourth quarter of 2008 — a jump that amounts to about $200 a year in additional interest payments for the typical american household. with losses from credit card defaults rising and with capital to back credit cards harder to come by, issuers are likely to increase rates to 16 or 17 percent by the fall, according to dennis moroney, a research director at the towergroup, a financial research company. “the banks don’t have a lot of pricing options,” mr. moroney said. “they’re targeting people who carry a balance from month to month.” similarly, many car loans have already become significantly more expensive, with rates at auto finance companies rising to 4.72 percent in february from 3.26 percent in december, according to the federal reserve. washington, too, is expecting to have to pay more to borrow the money it needs for programs. the office of management and budget expects the rate on the benchmark 10-year united states treasury note to remain close to 3.9 percent for the rest of the year, but then rise to 4.5 percent in 2011 and 5 percent in 2012. the run-up in rates is quickening as investors steer more of their money away from bonds and as washington unplugs the economic life support programs that kept rates low through the financial crisis. mortgage rates and car loans are linked to the yield on long-term bonds. besides the inflation fears set off by the strengthening economy, mr. gross said he was also wary of treasury bonds because he feared the burgeoning supply of new debt issued to finance the government’s huge budget deficits would overwhelm demand, driving interest rates higher. nine months ago, united states government debt accounted for half of the assets in mr. gross’s flagship fund, pimco total return. that has shrunk to 30 percent now — the lowest ever in the fund’s 23-year history — as mr. gross has sold american bonds in favor of debt from europe, particularly germany, as well as from developing countries like brazil. last week, the yield on the benchmark 10-year treasury note briefly crossed the psychologically important threshold of 4 percent, as the treasury auctioned off $82 billion in new debt. that is nearly twice as much as the government paid in the fall of 2008, when investors sought out ultrasafe assets like treasury securities after the collapse of lehman brothers and the beginning of the credit crisis. though still very low by historical standards, the rise of bond yields since then is reversing a decline that began in 1981, when 10-year note yields reached nearly 16 percent. from that peak, steadily dropping interest rates have fed a three-decade lending boom, during which american consumers borrowed more and more but managed to hold down the portion of their income devoted to payin

We're seeing an exact carbon-copy repeat of the Carter years thanks to people who were either not alive yet then or are denying that it ever happened so that they can feel GOOD about electing Obama.