A new report from TD Canada Trust shows that many first time home buyers wish they had done things differently.
Despite being the single largest purchase of most peoples lives, research doesn’t seem to play a big role for most first time buyers.
More than half of those surveyed said they would have preferred to have a bigger down payment and bought sooner.
Many first-time homebuyers said they could have been better prepared and more thorough when budgeting, the poll found. Thirty-seven per cent of those surveyed did not budget for ongoing costs such as maintenance and utilities, while 17 per cent overlooked some of the one-time charges like inspection fees and five per cent didn’t budget for anything beyond the down payment and mortgage payment.
That article quotes a mortgage broker who advises that you make sure you’re able to make the monthly payment, don’t worry so much about the down payment or the timing of your purchase.
Some of the extra costs that some first time home buyers don’t seem to be budgeting for are inspection, appraisal, property transfer tax, legal fees, CMHC fees, Strata fees or mortgage rate increases. Then of course there’s ongoing maintenance and insurance.
I suspect a ‘bigger down payment’ will always be on the wish list, but if the Vancouver market does the bubble pop dive you may see the ‘bought sooner’ wish drop right off there.
How’s this for an opener:
While the country’s new mortgage rules are meant to cool the market, eventually making housing more affordable, they’ve put home ownership out of reach for many prospective buyers.
Uh-huh. And what if the problem was that we put home ownership in reach of too many prospective buyers?
Those who don’t have a down payment of 20 per cent or more will be limited to a maximum amortization period of 25 years. Since 40 per cent of new mortgages last year were for 26 to 30 years, according to a survey from the Canadian Association of Accredited Mortgage Professionals, real-estate neophytes might feel the change most dramatically.
WHoa! Did they just say 40 percent of new mortgages were over 25 year amorts?
Another new rule announced by Mr. Flaherty sets the maximum gross debt-service ratio – the percentage of household income being used to pay for housing – at 39 per cent so buyers will be less likely to take on mortgages that are too big and could leave them floundering if rates increase.
That’s the one that Andrea Benton, a 37-year-old entrepreneur in North Vancouver, B.C., said hits her family of four hardest.
“It means my total family income would have to be an exorbitant amount to afford an $800,000 house,” she said.
You mean you’re expected to have a high income to afford an $800,000 house?!?
Read all the comedy in the full article here.
..well that headline is a little misleading, you’ll still be able to get a 30 year mortgage but you better have a big down payment. No more 30 year mortgages for CMHC insured mortgages.
The country’s biggest banks were caught off guard on Wednesday night as the Department of Finance prepared to clamp down on mortgages by reducing the maximum amortization for a government-insured mortgage to 25 years from 30.
Ottawa will also limit the amount of equity that can be borrowed against a home to 80 per cent of the property’s value, down from 85 per cent.
The moves are designed to cool the housing market and limit the record levels of personal debt Canadians have amassed in recent years. Figures from Statistics Canada show the average ratio of debt-to-disposable income climbed to 152 per cent, up from 150.6 per cent at the end of 2011. A rise in interest rates or further job losses could put some households at financial risk, endangering any economic recovery.
So we’ve come circle with mortgages going from 25 year, cranked all the way up to US bubble style zero-down 40 year mortgages and then ramped back down over the last few years to a maximum 25 year amort. It will be very interesting to see what this does to some of Canadas overpriced markets.
Canadian Mortgage Trends is saying that changes to HELOC loan to value (LTV) limits are a done deal.
If so this means the maximum HELOC you’ll be able will move from 80% to 65% of the total value of the property.
Read the original link for full details. Many commenters there seem to think this is too big a move.
65% is too much of a leap all at once.
I can’t understand why OSFI doesn’t ratchet the LTV ratio down a little more slowly (i.e., 5% at at a time and sit back to observe the consequences).
As has been noted lately, the previous three sets of mortgage tightening guidelines have been gradually working their way through the credit markets effectively.
You can kill an ant with a hand grenade, but it usually makes a hell of a mess.
Canadian mortgage brokers are freaking out about new refinancing rules proposed by the OSFI which has taken over responsibility for the CMHC. Reasonably enough, they’re asking for clarification about proposals to require banks to check income and current house value before refinancing.
Currently, when mortgages come up for renewal, banks tend to focus on the borrower’s payment history. They rarely appraise the property again and not all banks will check the borrower’s updated income level, Mr. Murphy said.
“CAAMP strongly recommends that this concept be clarified so that mortgages continue to be renewed at maturity without requalification,” the industry association said in a submission to the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI).
“If not, homeowners who have been in compliance may no longer qualify. This would result in a number of properties hitting the market at the same time and thereby driving down prices.”
Such a phenomenon could add further fuel to a real estate downturn if lower house prices and higher unemployment caused more people to lose their homes upon renewal, Mr. Murphy suggested.
Read the full article in the Globe and Mail.