This crackpot scheme proves that British houses are too expensive

By MoneyWeek Editor John Stepek Sep 24, 2012

John Stepek

Share with
friends:

Comments (85) Print this article

I’ve always felt mildly sorry for the Liberal Democrats.

It must have been awful for them. To be dragged kicking and screaming from the responsibility-free moral high ground of the backbenches and forced to contend with the mucky compromises of being in government.

Imagine – going from being able to carp from the sidelines without a care in the world, to having to defend and sell actual policies to an electorate who by and large, didn’t even vote for you.

No wonder they hate Nick Clegg, the man who did this to them.

But their latest crackpot scheme just highlights why it’s a good thing they very rarely get their hands near the gears of power…

The stupidest idea to come out of the coalition yet

The Liberal Democrats have a cunning plan to solve Britain’s housing problems.

What’s that? No, they’re not going to build more houses. And no, they’re not going to try to improve tenants’ rights. Nor have they suggested that it might be a good idea if house prices were lower.

Instead, the big idea is that parents and grandparents should be able to put their pensions at risk in the name of helping their offspring to buy a house.

We haven’t got the exact details yet. But we’ve heard more than enough to realise that it is possibly the single most stupid idea to have come out of the coalition government so far. Which is quite an achievement, all things considered.

Nick Clegg, talking to the BBC’s Andrew Marr, described it as a “pensions for property scheme”. Here’s what Nick said: “We have thousands of young people who are desperate to get their feet on the first rung of the property ladder, but deposits have doubled and the number of young people asking for help from family members has doubled.”

What seems to be worrying Nick is not that houses are so expensive that young people are asset-stripping their parents in order to buy one. Nor is he questioning exactly why it is that ‘deposits have doubled’.

What he really seems exercised about is that it’s only ‘rich’ people who can help their kids onto the property ladder. He wants to extend this wonderful opportunity to the less well-off as well.

Gamble your pension on the property market, says Nick Clegg

One feature of a pension is that when you cash it in, you can take 25% of your pot as a tax-free lump sum. What the LibDems propose is that parents or grandparents will be able to put this future 25% pay-out up as security for their children’s mortgages.

The idea is that the bank – knowing it can grab a quarter of granny’s pension pot if the grandkids end up stiffing it for the mortgage – will be happy to write home loans at a lower loan-to-value. So the kids will need a less chunky deposit to secure their mortgage. (If you need a refresher on the basics of mortgages, check out my colleague Tim Bennett’s beginner’s guide to mortgages).

Here’s how Nick puts it. “We’re getting people who don’t have a great deal of disposable income, but do have a pension pot, to use that for the good purpose of helping their children and grandchildren buy a home that they can call their own.”

I could fill a week’s worth of Money Mornings telling you all of the reasons why this idea is so wrong. But we’d both get bored. So here’s the short version.

We’re always being told that people in Britain aren’t saving enough for their retirement. We also know that houses in Britain are too expensive.

Getting people who already can’t afford to retire to risk some of their meagre pension pots on a scheme that will help to continue to prop house prices up will make both of those problems worse.

Worse still, too many people in this country already think of ‘bricks and mortar’ as being their ‘pension’. Now the government is trying to drag even those who have had the sense to make some alternative provision for their retirement, back into the housing market as well. 


  Property Report

'Don't be fooled... house prices will fall again'

A MoneyWeek special report opens the lid on the UK and US property market, revealing what's really going on, how it affects house prices, and what you can do to profit from this.

A must read for anyone interested in the property market

 


The truth about UK property

What’s at the heart of this nonsense?

The BBC complains that “the size of deposits has risen in recent years, as banks have become less willing to issue mortgages.” It’s as though the banks – the rotten brutes - are deliberately spoiling everyone’s chances of getting on the great British property ladder.

Yet five years ago, almost to the day, people were queuing up outside Northern Rock, concerned they might never see their savings again. Northern Rock was also the champion of the 125% home loan. Those two facts are not unrelated.

The financial crisis was caused largely by banks in various parts of the world being too lax with lending standards. They have now reined things in for several reasons.

Firstly, regulators are telling them to. Secondly, they still have lots of bad loans and potential bad loans on their balance sheets, so the last thing they want is even more. And thirdly, they recognise that right now, British property is a risky, poor-value investment. So they want the potential homeowner to take on a big chunk of that risk – in the form of a healthy deposit - before they’ll get involved.

Normally this would have already resulted in a correction. And in many areas it has. The main reason that prices remain so expensive in some areas, and haven’t fallen further in others, is that the Bank of England is doing all it can to prop the housing market up. It knows the banks would be insolvent if it crashed.

So now we’re left in the ridiculous situation where the government would rather find some convoluted way to get the older generation to pay for the younger to ‘get on the ladder’, than allow a healthy correction to bring prices back to reasonable levels.

It’s a ponzi scheme on a national scale. Granny takes her pension and uses it to pay her grandkid’s deposit. After all, she’s already ‘made’ money on her house. But what happens when we all run out of liquid assets, and each of us is sitting in an expensive house with no disposable income in our pockets?

This pathetic obsession with property has to end. Until it does, Britain will continue to lag behind in the recovery stakes. Loopy schemes like this are often the sorts of things you see at the top of the market. Let’s hope this is the last we hear of it.

You can find out more about why we’re pessimistic on property prospects in this report. And you can read more about the asset classes we do like (including some countries where property looks more reasonable) in the current issue of MoneyWeek magazine. If you're not already a subscriber, get your first three copies free here.

• This article is taken from the free investment email Money Morning. Sign up to Money Morning here .

Follow John on Twitter || Google+ John Stepek

Our recommended articles for today

How to find great companies

One of the most important steps in investing is to make sure you only buy good or great companies. So what makes a great company? Phil Oakley explains.

A beginner's guide to mortgages

A mortgage is the biggest debt most of us will ever take on. So choosing the right one is vital. In his latest video tutorial, Tim Bennett explains the basics of mortgages and highlights the main pitfalls to avoid.

Comments (85)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Roger

    (24 September 2012, 10:53AM)  Complain about this comment

    I never voted LibDams, I encourage anyone with decent standard voting against them. This is the worst, no-principle, no-standard, no-decency kind of bundle of trash. All they want is a taste of second class power. If they can not stand up to their principles, why they want to mddle in the politics world?

  • 2. Nick

    (24 September 2012, 10:54AM)  Complain about this comment

    Hear, Hear

  • 3. Bob

    (24 September 2012, 10:57AM)  Complain about this comment

    With all respect to Moneyweek, it is a shame that this article is not printed in the Daily Mail, The Sun and The Express - never will be of course, but that is where it needs to be seen and read by millions and not just us devoted MW's readers.

    I agree, it shows the complete desperation to keep the ponzi housing bubble of UK house prices inflated.

  • 4. RedBaron

    (24 September 2012, 11:02AM)  Complain about this comment

    I usually agree with the majority of money week comments - not this time. Calling this a crackpot scheme is wrong - it may not be the best idea but it could help first time buyers and assist in regenerating the property market.

  • 5. Wonderful Tenants

    (24 September 2012, 11:03AM)  Complain about this comment

    "So now we’re left in the ridiculous situation where the government would rather find some convoluted way to get the older generation to pay for the younger to ‘get on the ladder’, than allow a healthy correction to bring prices back to reasonable levels."

    The words healthy correction are seminal. Until the politicians realise that the problem of debt has to be faced with a "cost" (as politically unsavoury as that may be) then our problems will never be resolved. Whilst it may be ok to kick the whipping boy Clegg he is only the cat's paw of political malaise. Whilst his bad leadership has doomed the Lib Dems in the next general election we shouldn't allow the others off the hook too easily.

  • 6. RedBaron

    (24 September 2012, 11:05AM)  Complain about this comment

    I usually agree with the majority of Moneyweek comments - not this time! Calling this a crackpot scheme is unfair- it could help first time buyers onto the property ladder and help to regenerate the housing market.

  • 7. Alan

    (24 September 2012, 11:05AM)  Complain about this comment

    As a previously registered FA for 20 years..out now and thank God for that.....all I can say is that, if I even remotely suggested granny taking her pension pot to help little Johnny out for a deposit on a house, I would be taken to the wood shed and cut up into a million pieces by the regulator. And rightly so.

    And one other thing. People often have more than one child and, even more so, more than one grandchild. Could someone tell me how granny is going to choose which grandchild can financially rape her in retirement??

  • 8. Jake Brumby

    (24 September 2012, 11:07AM)  Complain about this comment

    Absolutely spot on.

    I wish the government would hire you and the Money Week team as advisors!

  • 9. Peter Kellow

    (24 September 2012, 11:12AM)  Complain about this comment

    Nice one

    And remember this is the party that brought you a multi million pound referendum on AV when any poll sampling would have told you AV did not have a hope in hell of being accepted

    It brought you a commitment to take us into the euro that it has not renounced

    It proposes an unworkable property tax

    It advocates a rubbish bill on House of Lords reform

    I could go on

    LibDem policies are designed to appeal to the pixiebrains that comprise its members and supporters

    They will get hammered in 2015. Good

  • 10. Dyadco

    (24 September 2012, 11:17AM)  Complain about this comment

    Great article.......unlike Clegg's idea!

  • 11. Wonderful Tenants

    (24 September 2012, 11:23AM)  Complain about this comment

    Red Baron...." Calling this a crackpot scheme is unfair- it could help first time buyers onto the property ladder and help to regenerate the housing market."

    The point is that the property market has to degenerate first. Additionally, simply in terms of risk management such a scheme is obviously crackpot. As the property market is massively over valued such a scheme suggests placing funds secured for pension provision into asset purchase at the height of a bubble.

    The Economist describes property as an “unfinished bust” 20%-28% too high. Fitch says 25% too high. Deutsche Bank says 34% too high. Morgan Stanley says 15%-25% too high and the IMF says 30% over valued. Who says it is not over valued and just why are they saying that?

  • 12. Luke

    (24 September 2012, 11:23AM)  Complain about this comment

    I cringe every time I hear the phrase "property ladder". It is so naive and I fear for anyone who still considers it so.

    The problem is that for the last 40 years it has been the only way for most people to make any serious money. You can't give up a drug like that so easily, especially when you have someone like Clegg trying to give you another fix.

  • 13. MRS C

    (24 September 2012, 11:34AM)  Complain about this comment

    I think you should all write to Nick Clegg. I will. He may not realise the property market is in a bubble. Money Week should give him (and David Cameron) a free one year subscription, in the national interest.

  • 14. Kojak

    (24 September 2012, 11:35AM)  Complain about this comment

    Good comment but I wish you would mention that high net immigration and an increase in the birth rate over the last 6-10 years are significant factors in pushing up property prices.
    The UK population has increased by 3 million over the last 10 years and is forecast to rise to 70 million in less than 20 years. Everywhere one goes it is easy to see a large number of properties that have been built in the last 20-30 years with very few examples of houses being demolished.
    There are other factors of course affecting the housing market but all the important ones must be recognised and admitted.

  • 15. Stephen Makin

    (24 September 2012, 11:41AM)  Complain about this comment

    Don't these jokers at the helm of LibDem policy making have no sense at all?
    Anyone with a scrap of intelligent thought will see this as a raid on the savings in the 'Last chance Soloon' bank.

    They really are mealy brained losers this lot.

    And yes, I agree with most of the previous comments; and yes, it's a shame you can't get articles like this into the mainstream press where the masses can be touched by intelligent debate.

    A great shame, keep up the good work!

  • 16. alanmrob

    (24 September 2012, 12:06PM)  Complain about this comment

    An utterly crackpot scheme, matched only by their equally wacky idea of a "mansion tax" - so it is OK if you have a £750k house with a £10m art collection or £5m worth of classic cars, but if you break the bank to buy a £1.5m house with little other assets, then boy the Lib Dems think you should pay more. More like the Monster Raving Loony party I'd say!

  • 17. Alec

    (24 September 2012, 12:06PM)  Complain about this comment

    Savers have already been propping up the reckless borrowers for the past 5 years and now the LibDems want to further inflate the bubble.

  • 18. Ellen

    (24 September 2012, 12:10PM)  Complain about this comment

    Absolutely agree. But, alas, both government and central bank know very well that property is in a huge bubble that the banks created through lax credit over several years. Any wealth accumulated by people to pay for their futures, and even people's future earnings, are being eyed up as a possible way to socialise the banks losses. This is just another example.

    Society, across the globe, is paying a very heavy price for a negligent, even criminal, decade of borrowers and bankers. It should be brought to a swift end and the markets, especially for basics such as food and shelter, need to be left alone to find its equilibrium.

  • 19. Novice

    (24 September 2012, 12:19PM)  Complain about this comment

    The politics of despair.

  • 20. crazy tony

    (24 September 2012, 12:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    Headline grabbing half-baked non-sense. It will turn out like most of Gordon Brown's hair-brain housing schemes. And will probably appeal to two dozen pensioners tops.

  • 21. simpleton

    (24 September 2012, 12:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    Yet another attempt to borrow from the future in order to fund present consumption - you'd have thought over the past 5 years some learning might have taken place - obviously not. The best thing politicos could do for FTBs and the housing market is to STOP MEDDLING ! If the market had been allowed to correct, we'd already be back to a growth path, instead by propping up the sick monsetr that is the housing market, politicos and the BoE are condemning Blighty to stagnation for many more years.

  • 22. Andrew

    (24 September 2012, 12:40PM)  Complain about this comment

    John, this is perhaps the first time that I've had to disagree with you. It may not be a perfect scheme or idea but it is a starting point perhaps to look at what has happened over the last 20 years with pensions - especially in this country! They've dissapeared, funds have collapsed, bankers have gotten rich and those who invested for years watching annual returns of 6% compound on their funds have been left to retire in poverty. A pension in bricks and mortar is as safe as you can get. The idea is great, it just needs modification.

  • 23. Chester

    (24 September 2012, 12:44PM)  Complain about this comment

    The housing ponzi scheme ... the Govt debt / pension / entitlement / welfare ponzi scheme ... all are unsustainable

    This is populist claptrap, which gets an airing in mainstream media but resonates with voters believe in the "fairness agenda". Those who "do the right thing" (Cameron's words) and saved to look after themselves are increasingly having wealth confiscated to sustain the unsustainable, bail out debtors, banks and scamsters ... all in the name of "fairness" at the expense of others

    If the 1% already pay 35% in tax, how much do the top 10% pay? This is the same 10% Glegg believes should pay "their fair share". By whose benchmark are they not already doing so? At least Glegg et al are accountable to voters - central bankers, who can do even more damage than idiot politicians, are not

  • 24. Ann

    (24 September 2012, 12:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    I have been trying to sell my house since May 2011 - but no luck. The problem is the stamp duty. If you want to get the housing market going, get rid (or drastically reduce) stamp duty! It is ever since they have increased this duty that everything has come to a standstill.

  • 25. Andy

    (24 September 2012, 01:01PM)  Complain about this comment

    Should I laugh or should I cry?

  • 26. Robards

    (24 September 2012, 01:04PM)  Complain about this comment

    The UK housing market is like a communist dictator lying on his deathbed. The masses are still deluded by the glorious victories of a bygone decade, whilst the generals shuffle nervously hoping the toil of their children will keep this thing alive. It's insanity.

  • 27. Stephen Griffiths

    (24 September 2012, 01:13PM)  Complain about this comment

    Imagine that Britain became so dependent on farming that the government tried to cancel winter. It would stand to reason that with plants only really growing in summer time the sensible thing to do would be to set up giant networks of floodlights and patio heaters all over the country. It would be disastrous for the whole agricultural industry to allow a long quiet period of inactivity between September and April. No more boom and bust. Abolish winter.

    I agree totally with 'Wonderful tenants'. You can't have regeneration without degeneration. For every person that suffers from falling house prices there are a couple of generations of people who will benefit by being able to afford their own home. If the banks fail then it's because they deserve to.

  • 28. Nick

    (24 September 2012, 01:20PM)  Complain about this comment

    @14. Kojak

    Correlation does not imply causation

  • 29. Ian

    (24 September 2012, 01:26PM)  Complain about this comment

    Your article does not go far enough with truth...

    what happens if house prices continue to fall? The banks call upon the mortgage guarantee and reduce the pensions of the aged....... possibly causing a need to downsize - placing further downward pressure on house prices - but worst of all - the pensioner has less income to live on -

    the pensioner has less income to live on

    so this is fine for overpaid top civil servants, judges, doctors etc..... who can afford the loss

    I actually voted LibDem last time - not now I see the colour of their idiocy

  • 30. NVP

    (24 September 2012, 01:43PM)  Complain about this comment


    But the Goverments pension scheme is already a Ponzi scheme ?

    (old) People at the top of the chain dependent on new people joining and paying contributions to them ....sound familiar ?

    we should scrap all rules re pensions and allow Pensioners to do what they want with the money ...all of it .....that should get the economy going again

    NVP (FXCorrelator.com)

  • 31. Celia

    (24 September 2012, 01:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    This feature would not be out of place in one of the extreme tabloids. You admit you write without knowing the details. You use this is a hook on which to hang unacceptable insults about the LibDems.
    But perhaps you assume all your clients are Tories? That might be why You don't mention that Coalition Government policies are agreed by the Conservatives and the LibDems. Whether or not your predictions turn out to be right, this is not the way to express what should have been a measured argument - not firing from the hip. (You might take a lesson from Vince Cable on how to to this.)

  • 32. NVP

    (24 September 2012, 01:47PM)  Complain about this comment

    re comment 25......

    with respect - Anne the reason you cannot sell your house is not stamp duty

    we took a £70k hit on one property a year ago to move on ....if everyone else in this country was forced to so the same then we would already be starting to get out of the property mess we are in ....

    NVP

  • 33. Grandchild in Yorkshire.

    (24 September 2012, 01:49PM)  Complain about this comment

    I am a grandchild, and also a child. I live in 'social' rented accommodation, and that is more expensive than many of my friends mortgages on larger properties with gardens! I am one of 3 children. My nan on my fathers side has no pension but the state pension, she rents a house too, she has 2 children, 6 grandchildren and 1 great grandchild so far.
    On my mothers side I have two grandparents still alive, both with pensions, they have 5 children, and 10 grandchildren.

    This policy would assume all pensioners have a private pension to be tapped, and that they only have one grandchild each?

    I know birthrates have collapsed, but many people still have more than one child. That said, of my peers, many are too scared to have children because after paying the rent they can barely feed themselves. Many put having children off till later in life, and end up using IVF through the NHS.

  • 34. NVP

    (24 September 2012, 01:55PM)  Complain about this comment

    too scared to have children because you cant afford them ?

    what is the uk coming to ...a disgrace !

  • 35. Celia

    (24 September 2012, 02:07PM)  Complain about this comment

    Yes, Ann (entry 25) makes a crucial point: abolishing stamp duty or at least reducing it very drastically would make a difference.

  • 36. DavePage

    (24 September 2012, 02:39PM)  Complain about this comment

    Nope Celia, Ann (at 25) does not make a good point:

    "...I have been trying to sell my house since May 2011 - but no luck. The problem is the stamp duty". Ann.

    It is NVP (at 32) who does. If you can't sell your house today, it's not the few-£1000 in stamp duty that is responsible -- it's the £100,000-or-so that you want on top of its value 10 years back that is responsible for it not selling, either as a product of your own greed or the foolishness involved in buying it recently from a similarly self-interested party.

  • 37. Chris

    (24 September 2012, 02:43PM)  Complain about this comment

    To Ann and Celia.

    No, stamp duty is not the problem - if house prices reduced to sustainable levels, the duty would not be a major issue. It might make sense to shift the duty onto sellers rather than buyers though – it might focus their minds on what overpricing does to a market.

  • 38. Anthony

    (24 September 2012, 02:43PM)  Complain about this comment

    Why don't the BBC, and many others come to that, look at mortgages from an historical standpoint? Before we lost our heads, a mortgage would cost you 6 or 7% and you had to put down a deposit of 10 or 20%. You were limited to loans of 3 times one person's income. A bit extra could be had where there was a second income, if you had a secure and respected job such as teaching, and so forth. We live in times where governments borrow and print then spend too much. Then we copy their bad example. Things are out of balance. Things will change.

    This time it's different....Don't make me laugh.

  • 39. Alberto

    (24 September 2012, 02:45PM)  Complain about this comment

    I agree.

    Houses are too expensive and that's a problem.
    Pensions are too low and that's a problem.

    Lowering pensions to make houses dearer is exactly the opposite of what should be done.

  • 40. martin

    (24 September 2012, 03:29PM)  Complain about this comment

    Agreed, no way on this plante would i use my pension like this. correct housing market well over valued. ho can a 2 bed home in my home town in wales be £100k, when ave salary = 20k?

  • 41. max

    (24 September 2012, 03:29PM)  Complain about this comment

    Whilst I agree with you John about almost everything you say in this article, your magazine is also obsessed with other ridiculous asset classes. Some people like property because it hedges against inflation (a house selling for 100k in 1979 in London now sells for about 3million ) . You like Gold for the same reason, $35 oz in 1970 is now $2000.

    Houses are at least something useful to live in. Gold bars are not.

  • 42. Colin

    (24 September 2012, 03:30PM)  Complain about this comment

    (1) you risk offending clients, this one included, by making crass, ignorant political comments - they have no place in business.

    (2) parents and grandparents have been involved in children's mortgages for years I was on my son's mortgage 9 years ago. After an education, the ability to buy a house is the next best gift if you can afford it.

    (3) I find it hard to undertsand criticism of the 'suggestion' unless the motives are politically driven or hacks struggling for a story

    (4) Anthony is absolutely right. France still has these requirements by law. It is only in the "spiv" societies where everything is driven by commision that you get mortgages of up to 125% And the commission is paid for by ever increasing and unrealistic house prices.

  • 43. Ellen

    (24 September 2012, 04:31PM)  Complain about this comment

    @ 41. Max. Investors are avoiding currency based assets because of the worldwide loose monetary policies in the form of low interest rates and QE. ZIRP is the primary driver to why new pensioners are doing so badly on their annuities.

    Gold is one a the main assets that is replacing currency and the rise in the value of gold against all currencies is more a reflection of a loss of confidence in unbacked fiat currencies (and loose monetary policy) than a love of the yellow metal. It demonstrates a suspicion among gold bugs that they believe some sort of return to the gold standard is not only possible, but necessary. In so many ways its the perfect investment during times where there are so many in governments and central bank across the world trying to socialise bank debts onto its citizens.



  • 44. Manny

    (24 September 2012, 04:40PM)  Complain about this comment

    I have an even better idea...
    IF you have a pension, cash it in and use it a as basis for deposits with 70% leverage to build a "PROPERTY PORTFOLIO"

    Dont bother wasting this money on your children, get rich instead.

    Come on all you property bulls and homes under hammer people you know it makes sense!!!

  • 45. chris

    (24 September 2012, 04:42PM)  Complain about this comment

    Great article John I was similarly disgusted when I heard the proposal. Nick clegg doesn't give a damn about the younger generation getting property he is merely trying to maintain a housing bubble of unaffordable houses by attempting to persuade the older generation to prop it up. The UK cannot continue to run an economy based on inflated housing and financial services. It is clearly a disaster already. The high cost of living in the UK caused mainly by the high price of housing makes the UK uncompetitive on the world stage.
    If Clegg really wanted to help the younger generation letting housing correct would be the best thing for them and the country. But of course we know they don't want that.

  • 46. financialfundi

    (24 September 2012, 04:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    If property were such a good investment then surely estate agents would be falling over themselves in the rush to provide collateralised loans to help FTBuyers?

  • 47. Andy

    (24 September 2012, 04:49PM)  Complain about this comment

    #41 Max
    At least there is nothing immoral speculating on gold. It is only you that stand winning or loosing, no homelessness involved.

    #24 Ann
    Have you tried lowering your price?

  • 48. Chris

    (24 September 2012, 05:20PM)  Complain about this comment

    In many ways this is Thatchers legacy. By destroying UK manufacturing (and under blair also) the UK has become some sort of ponzi scheme based on house price speculation and massive debt based consumerism of shoddy goods. By attempting to prop up the bubble the corrupt BoE and political parties are condemning the UK to decades of decline and inflation and shafting the people who had no part in it and who were not even born. What a disaster.

  • 49. Evita

    (24 September 2012, 05:29PM)  Complain about this comment

    Surely all the moral and ethical problems associated with legalising euthanasia also relate to this scheme.
    Parents and grandparents may feel obliged to put their hard-earned pension on the line simply because this scheme exists and their children/grandchildren's friends are being helped by relatives in this way.
    Maybe it would help if euthanasia were legally allowed to those who lose their pensions in this, as a consolation!

  • 50. Midge

    (24 September 2012, 05:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    The acronym KIPPERS comes to mind-kids in parents pockets eroding retirement savings.

  • 51. Luke

    (24 September 2012, 06:18PM)  Complain about this comment

    @38 Anthony. I cant help but think that people were happier back then. They might have been paying 6-7% on their mortgage but they could afford it on one salary.

  • 52. jack

    (24 September 2012, 07:11PM)  Complain about this comment

    I'm sorry to say it but everyone with a second property or more has to pay for this mess! TAX them to the hilt and the housing shortage will be no more and every empty house around the uk would become a home and the working man would have faith in the goverment again!

    Nick, I hope your reading this

  • 53. NeutronWarp9

    (24 September 2012, 07:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    Most sensible people realise the UK housing market is a bubble ready to burst and all it needs is one little pr.....Ah, step forward Nick Clegg.

  • 54. Hector McTumshie

    (24 September 2012, 08:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    John ,
    This article seems just a bit of a rant - do you actually own any ("heritable"- to we Scots: to the English) real property ?
    PS. I have tried to get you to conect a couple of times with your office in the excellent Money Week re the importance of stating in each article the actual yield of each fund - unfortunately you have not done replied - please do.

  • 55. Hector McTumshie

    (24 September 2012, 08:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    John ,
    This article seems just a bit of a rant - do you actually own any ("heritable"- to we Scots: to the English) real property ?
    PS. I have tried to get you to conect a couple of times with your office in the excellent Money Week re the importance of stating in each article the actual yield of each fund - unfortunately you have not done replied - please do.

  • 56. carol42

    (24 September 2012, 08:57PM)  Complain about this comment

    I agree with comment 32, I dropped my price by 20%, £45,000, to sell a house early this year, which is, after all, only worth what someone will or can pay to buy it. People just have to be realistic if they want to sell. I also bought my present and last house at the top of the market but not complaining you win some, lose some in the housing market. I have lived through enough recessions to know that but it seems a new generation will have to learn. I have however never seen anything like the price rises between 1997 - 2007 it was ridiculous.

  • 57. Boris MacDonut

    (24 September 2012, 08:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    With the exception of Red Baron&Kojak blinking flip. John seems to have woken up the anti LibDem rent a mob who wish they'd never had to cosy up to Clegg to get a sniff of power. Peter Kellow is particularly obnoxious.
    John has just found another way to say House price crash,buy gold.Lazy journalism John.

  • 58. steve wells

    (24 September 2012, 08:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    David Penhaligon (A true Liberal at heart ) used to stamp my first day covers at a local post ofice as he and his wife Anne were the local post masters. He had a trmendous amount of respect and appeal in the West -Country ,he sadly died in a car crash and would now be turning in his grave at the present situation with regard to the LD short sited ,attention seeking coalition scenario.I have looked into my crystal ball and it shows me that the LD party will vanish and UKIP will quickly become the third party !

  • 59. Boris MacDonut

    (24 September 2012, 09:03PM)  Complain about this comment

    I thought the Thatcherite Tories approved of folk getting more choice. This is liberating tied assets and offering relatively poor people more choices.What a shame the toffs scorn it. So Cleggy hasn't thought it thorough properly,but where would we start with the Eton toffs as regards absence of forethought?

  • 60. Nacho

    (24 September 2012, 09:10PM)  Complain about this comment

    I absolutely agree with your sentiments on this one John. Using pension pots as collateral to prop up house prices is simply ridiculous. If so many are being forced to borrow from parents and grandparents to get on the housing ladder it must be clear that house prices are simply too high. If the government should be concentrating on anything it should surely be to ensure enough homes are being built to meet demand, which is not currently the case. Supply and demand should then allow a natural correction, all be it delayed by record low interest rates. Perhaps increasing taxes in some way on buy to let landlords (say ones with more than one buy to let property) would be a good way of bringing more houses onto the market in the short term?

  • 61. Boris MacDonut

    (24 September 2012, 09:32PM)  Complain about this comment

    #60 .Pensions are already used to support HP's. 2 million pensioners still have mortgages. 65% of FTB's are given up to £20,000 by family as deposits and half do not repay it. Pension lump sums are used to pay of interest only deals. Clegg is offering a bit of freedom to use hard earned collateral as a gaurantee. Oh, and Gold is overpriced.

  • 62. spesbona

    (25 September 2012, 12:08AM)  Complain about this comment

    The idea of a "housing ladder" is the root of the problem . Why this national obsession with owner-occupancy? Another obsession that needs to be binned is that of single houses. IMO the problem with Britain is that there are cheap flats and expensive apartments and not much in-between. And those that do exist are owned by individuals who only offer short leases rather than companies which could offer long leases. Housing associations sound like a good idea until you read that many of their tenants rents are “paid directly by the government”. I think I know what that means. To fill an apartment complex with good quality tenants there needs to be a vetting system of potential tenants – not by some faceless bureaucrats sitting in an office, but the tenants themselves should have some say in who their "new neighbours" will be. I know this idea will "offend" the usual leftist whiners but what good idea would not?

  • 63. Roberto Birquet

    (25 September 2012, 03:13AM)  Complain about this comment

    Here here, or is as nick 2 says, hear, near?

    Complains that Labour seeks more debt in this crisis, and then tries to push more debbt on people while cutting back their pension. Pensions crisis, anyone?

    Crackpot, stupid nonsense from an out of his depth politician.

  • 64. Jimmy

    (25 September 2012, 09:51AM)  Complain about this comment

    Point of order on the "by and large, didn't even vote for [the Lib Dems]" comment:

    The Lib Dems took 23% of the vote last time, with Labour on 29% and the Tories on 36%, yet they took only a fifth of the seats compared to Labour, which was the single reason I voted for AV.

    Now, will anyone vote for the LD next time? That's a different question.

  • 65. Andy

    (25 September 2012, 10:54AM)  Complain about this comment

    #61. Boris MacDonut

    Boris, if you think gold is overpriced then wait for the next QE and the next one, and the next one...
    The clever plan here is to inflate away the debt without hurting the top 0.1% of the population. Nothing to hide, no conspiracies, it's all out there for everyone to see. It will work until the mother of all financial catostrophes will hit: hyperinflation. It will, brace yourself for a nasty ride!

  • 66. Sam Cow

    (25 September 2012, 12:50PM)  Complain about this comment

    Couldn't have put it better myself. As someone else writes, this needs really wide circulation, as did Merryn's piece about McKinsey's study into 31 recessions and how they ended.

  • 67. jbird125

    (25 September 2012, 01:03PM)  Complain about this comment

    @7, Alan maybe they are hoping that those who may look to take up this scheme will not be those who have IFA's who would advise them against it anyway.

    And besides government should stop trying to get the housing market to go up, or down, maybe just aim to keep everything at its current prices and let everything else catch up. If they truly wanted to help they could legislate a maximum LTV, or a maximum multiple of income that could be used... it might start putting it back on a sensible footing, but would also cause significant pain in the middle, and that is want they are keen to avoid.

  • 68. lokojones

    (25 September 2012, 04:08PM)  Complain about this comment

    Of course that is another way to keep property overpriced. One of the last attempt I believe before correction, is much more difficult to find a fool with money this day.

  • 69. jack

    (25 September 2012, 08:58PM)  Complain about this comment

    The fact is the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer!

    What are all you talkers going to do? Bring on a revolution, riot or maybe borrow the French gillotene? NO your going to vote Nick Clegg out.
    They are all as bad as eachother, face it!
    Mr Clegg this is your only chance to prove me wrong and go down in history as a great leader and not just another a spineless rich boy!!

  • 70. whitehart

    (25 September 2012, 09:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    Couldn't agree more, a totally crazy idea to encourage debt and keep house prices out of the reach of many. The main problem is that MPs are meant to be representative of the people but how many of them, I wonder, do not own a house themselves?

  • 71. Roberto Birquet

    (25 September 2012, 11:25PM)  Complain about this comment

    Ann24
    The way to sell your house is to accept the highest offer. economics 101.
    Unfortunately Ann and millions like her are proof that Adam Smith was arrogant in his claims, and the economics profession has to start again. There few rational human actions, just guesses, and emotions: typically greed or fear.
    I have a bias towards Keynes, but still believe a couple of years of Hayek are required before government puts a bottom on the market.

    Let prices fall and if banks collapse, nationalise them for free. Millions are going without homes, and a chance to rear families because of this madness.

    this govt like the last: pitiful.

  • 72. Roberto Birquet

    (25 September 2012, 11:32PM)  Complain about this comment

    Celia 31
    This feature would not be out of place in one of the extreme tabloids. You admit you write without knowing the details. You use this is a hook on which to hang unacceptable insults about the LibDems.
    But perhaps you assume all your clients are Tories?
    ---------------
    I willingly call myself a socialist. In fact, I am a curious mix finding truth and nonsense in many philosophies. I embrace some but shudder at other thoughts of Hayek, but also of Keynes and Marx. I mulled becoming a LibDem 5 years ago. And yet I find Clegg a fool each time I hear him. And when I heard this oafish policy, it was the deepest groan; almost an inward roar. Utterly stupid!

  • 73. Dunflogging

    (26 September 2012, 09:51AM)  Complain about this comment

    IMHO this is simply unworkable. Remember that this is specifically aimed at the Non-Rich, who could be expected to have modest pensions probably insufficient for a secure retirement.

    1) Mortgages generally have to be ADVISED, and anyone flogging such a scheme would have to take financial responsibility for it, No Advisor in their right mind would take responsibility for Granny being deprived of a quater of her pension.

    2) Banks want security they can get at when the fertiliser hits, and they have to foreclose. A promise that they can have a quarter of a 50 year old Dad's pension when he retires @ 68 is no good to the banks.

    3) The law could be changed so those few Non Rich people with Money Purchase "Pots" large enough could invest up to 25% of that fund in an interest gaining 2nd Mortgage standing behind the main lender in Security. This would be no good for those in DB schemes where the individual Member has no personal Pot.



  • 74. Alec

    (26 September 2012, 11:43AM)  Complain about this comment

    Ann 24 If you really want to sell your house, take it to the auction house. They will tell you exactly what it's worth.

  • 75. Poortoyboy

    (26 September 2012, 12:26PM)  Complain about this comment

    There is 8ollox

    There is Politicians 8ollox

    There is Libdem Politician's 8ollox

    And then there is LibDem Conference time Politicians 8ollox

    Which IMHO is more 8ollox than most !, This bird has neither wings nor legs and could not fly, but I suspect it was intended to grab soundbites for the Conference faithfull rather than to any sane person

  • 76. don the dodger

    (26 September 2012, 06:11PM)  Complain about this comment

    Hi,a lot of politicians own or rent out houses so self interest abounds
    their policies support this system so its works out well for them its keeps house prices up so people cannot afford them and then have to pay high rents.

  • 77. Robbo

    (28 September 2012, 03:26PM)  Complain about this comment

    Mr Clegg's nobrainer. Take 25% of your pension pot for kids mortgage, tax free. Because you've done that, and you then die, the balance or your pot is taxed by Mr.Osborne at 55%. Do any of these policticians have maths GCSE, sorry Mr Gove, O level.

  • 78. Roger

    (29 September 2012, 10:19AM)  Complain about this comment

    Looks like no one "agrees with Nick".

  • 79. Gary

    (29 September 2012, 03:08PM)  Complain about this comment

    LIbs, behind the times-its possible that 'pensioners' who have been able to take their tax free lump sum, may well be funding support or earmaked, for offspring ALREADY either by choice or necessity and now these typical polititians what to make a 'scheme' of it. How out of touch is that?

  • 80. Geo S

    (29 September 2012, 04:59PM)  Complain about this comment

    One should look to the US to see how property prices might go here. In Arizona, a $1 million property has just sold for $190.000, a decrease of 81 per cent.
    Perhaps we might actually be better off if property prices fell here as they have in the US, because everything else would follow suit and mortgages would once again become affordable.
    Surely there must be other ways to create wealth, rather than relying on property as a means to an end?

  • 81. Boris MacDonut

    (29 September 2012, 09:03PM)  Complain about this comment

    #80 No. A $1million property should sell for $1 million. You describe a house that once upon a time may have commanded a ridiculously inflated valuation. In reality you describe a $190k house.The market has seen to that.

  • 82. Fufflevalve

    (30 September 2012, 12:52AM)  Complain about this comment

    I applaud Nick Clegg. This is a brilliant idea, but it does need some serious tweeks before being implemented:-

    Make this proposition ring fenced ( a wonderful term usually used to make sure that those in authority do not come to any harm).
    Make it mandatory, without exception and no opting out, that all MP's Ministers and Aides, Bankers (boardroom and one division below), All those in receipt of/ holding deferred pension (politicians and bankers) and those in the House of Lords to be included.
    Income to include salary, bonuses and perks ( for instance around £400 per month MP's monthly meal allowance). Twenty five percent of that to be used as mortgage guarantees.
    The best part about this scheme is that cash is available NOW month on month AND the MP's and Bankers cannot complain because they still receive their appropriate income as they are only using it as a guarantee and do not have to pay unless someone defaults.

  • 83. Bill the Badger

    (30 September 2012, 04:23PM)  Complain about this comment

    Yes, great read, all you lot out there.
    A point you've all missed though, will all the grannie paid deposits paid back into banks eventually end up in the banks when their squidgy grandkids fail to keep up on their mortgage payments?
    Maybe Glegg is getting commission?

  • 84. Sydiminky

    (01 October 2012, 11:36AM)  Complain about this comment

    The vast majority (97%) of our money is created by commercial banks and because of the relative risk in lending, 70% of that created money is put into circulation through mortgage debt. Now the banks are crippled by the bad loans made during the past frenzy and can not lend, so our supply of money has been largely restricted.....now this perverse scheme has been dreamt up to get parents to risk a lifetimes saving to keep alive an inflated asset class as well as inject money into the economy. The basic fear is if we don't and property prices fall dramatically (as they should) then we'll no doubt have a banking crisis like we've not seen before as the chain reaction of insolvency gets back underway. These people are barbaric in the extreme. They should be calling for a reform of the way money our money is created in the economy, but that would require real democratic political leadership...so the myth of the "property ladder" as the road to riches will persist...saddly.

  • 85. Beta adjusted

    (04 October 2012, 05:28PM)  Complain about this comment

    Here here! pension = ponzi scheme. So just use a ponzi-scheme that has not yet blown up (but will soon ...) to prop one up that is about to most spectacularly. But at least we get re-elected next time. Maybe. Marvelous!

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


>