Housebuyers or homeowners?

Presumably because the title to mortgaged property rests with the buyer. The buyer therefore owns the property, although the property is held in security for a mortgage loan.

You need to stop watching the stuff they pretend is news. Gordon is going to solve the subprime debt crisis by making us spend some more.

I guess the reason it drives me batty is because people who do actually own their homes, ie have not loan against it, do not benefit from any cut in mortgage rates and indeed, probably have savings so will actually lose out, yet the media keep stating it is "homeowners" who will benefit the most from such a move. This gives a totally misleading impression of who the winners and losers actually are.

As I said, drives me mad, but I do at least understand this is my problem. :-)

Perhaps they could come up with a third description:

Homebuyers = looking to buy, homeowners = people without an outstanding load, homeloaners = those with a mortgage?

Of course. But we live in an age of political spin, when losing politicians try to portray themselves as winners when they (and unfortunately the rest of us) are the losers.

Our best course, given the chance, is to fire them out of office at the next opportunity.

No, it's *our* problem.

Forget that. Let's instead call a spade a spade, and not believe their spin, or be afraid of their lies.

Fair enough!

So less telly and wait for the good times to roll!

:-)

Well ... technically the home is security for a secured loan. A mortgage is a loan secured by the security alone, and if on repo/sale the lender is left short then that's tough. So yonks ago they changed to a secured loan where if the security proves insufficient, then they get to go after the [former] borrower for the balance -- even IF the lender has an indemnity insurance policy!

But, apparently (see another posting "Missed 2 payments? We'll take your equity thanks.") if you miss two payments, the lender can actually take possession without even having to go to court.

I've come across that for commercial lending, where for example a landlord can enter and repo leased premises from the commercial tenant.

I wasn't aware that this was possible for residential dwellings.

Well less telly and find nice things to do with your time instead. Make use of the libraries and sports centres before they shut them all down.

Privatise them surely? We should certainly keep them going. They'll be handy when we get to rounding up all the bankers, estate agents, and politicians who voted for the Bailout.

FoFP

"Richard" wrote

Surely a gallows would be more use then? :)

Probably for the same reason the developing depression is being referred to as a downturn.