Search results

  1. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    Well lucky for you there is no law of insider trading or market manipulation for residential properties!
  2. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    Yes but the lower equity is insured by the LMI...which is paid for by the borrower. So the bank is covered regardless of the LVR being 80% or 90%.
  3. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    That's not true. If someone purchased a property for $500,000, an 80% lend is a $400,000 loan. If the bank's valuer values it at $450,000, that means that for the $400,000 to come through, mortgage insurance would need to be paid. Otherwise, an 80% lend would now only be a loan of $360,000...
  4. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    I wonder if LMI rates will go up if this continues...
  5. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    Well Fifth that's probably true if you are talking about bank valuations.
  6. A

    Negative equity on the rise

    The people in negative equity are likely to be those who have paid for LMI. If you think that this is happening, why not short QBE or Genworth? You would've made heaps.
Back
Top