With interest rates expected to go down to 1% tomorrow - the lowest ever (lowest previously has been 2% in a few years up to 1892 and then for a month in 1932 and again in 1939) theres speculation what will happen with people on below base rate trackers.
Cheltenham and Gloucester offered a 1.01% below base rate tracker mortgage previously, and people on interest only deals will therefore theoretically be owed the .01%.
Should banks pay mortgagees to have a mortgage ?
Are there any tracker mortgages offered in the past at more than 1.5% below base rate ? Most seem to be 0.25% below base.
Our mortgage is half interest only and half repayment...monthly payments have almost halved as the interest portion has vitually been wiped out (we're on a 0.95 above base rate tracker) Should people on fixed rates look at moving their mortgage paying the ERCs - would this make a better deal in the long run ?
How much would you save moving from a 7.1% fixed rate with an ERC to an SVR ? Have you considered it or are you doing it ?
Is the low rate encouraging people to borrow on their equity whilst the rates are low ?
just some thoughts anyway.
Cheltenham and Gloucester offered a 1.01% below base rate tracker mortgage previously, and people on interest only deals will therefore theoretically be owed the .01%.
Should banks pay mortgagees to have a mortgage ?
Are there any tracker mortgages offered in the past at more than 1.5% below base rate ? Most seem to be 0.25% below base.
Our mortgage is half interest only and half repayment...monthly payments have almost halved as the interest portion has vitually been wiped out (we're on a 0.95 above base rate tracker) Should people on fixed rates look at moving their mortgage paying the ERCs - would this make a better deal in the long run ?
How much would you save moving from a 7.1% fixed rate with an ERC to an SVR ? Have you considered it or are you doing it ?
Is the low rate encouraging people to borrow on their equity whilst the rates are low ?
just some thoughts anyway.
Comment