vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"Note - this is a complicated topic. I've read the rules multiple times and I'm still not sure I understand them perfectly. So please take this with a pinch of salt and read the rules for yourself. The time(s) at which a test is done against the LTA are known as a ""Benefit Crystallization Event"" (BCE). There are 13 of these (!) - they're numbered 1-9 with the addition of some extras numbered 5A-D. However, the most important ones for those with defined contribution pensions are: Broadly, the idea is that a BCE occurs when you start taking money out of your pension, and when you reach age 75. Each time one happens, the amount you are taking out (""crystallizing"") gets compared against the LTA and a certain percentage of your LTA gets designated as being used. Crystallising doesn't necessarily mean you actually receive the money immediately, just that some of your money is switched into a mode where you can start receiving it in different ways. The rules are designed to avoid double counting, so broadly anything that was taken off your LTA won't be taken off a second time. The cumulative use of your LTA is tracked as a percentage rather than an absolute amount, to take account of any changes in the LTA between the different times you crystallise money. For example if you crystallise £100K when the LTA is £1mn, that's 10% of your LTA gone. If later on the LTA has risen to £1.1mn and you take out £110K, that's another 10%. Once you hit 100%, you start paying a LTA charge on any excess. The really simple path here is if you just get an annuity with your entire pot, before hitting age 75 (and you don't make any further pension contributions after). Then only BCE 4 applies: your pension pot, all of which is being used to buy the annuity, is compared with the LTA. After this point your entire pension pot is considered to be crystallized, so no more BCEs will apply - the tests at age 75 only apply if you still have money that you haven't taken out or used to buy an annuity.
Are you interested in refurbishing your rented home here in Singapore? If you are struggling with financial difficulties, you can apply for a renovation loan offered by banks. Most banks in Singapore offer renovation loans and home loans only to those who own a property. It is very hard to find a renovation loan for a rented home. **Home loans for renovation** You can take a home loan for your rented property and top up your home loan to finance your renovation project. If you already have a home loan, all you need to do is ask your bank representative to add extra financing to your [home loan](https://www.bankbazaar.sg/home-loan.html) for renovation purpose. Applying for a home loan for a rented property is simple. You can use an online loan calculator and compare home loans provided for a rented property. According to your repayment capacity and financial requirements, you can choose a home loan and use it for renovation. Make sure you have a good credit score while applying so that your home loan gets approved easily. **Personal loans for renovation** If you are not able to find too many home loans or renovation loans for rented property, you need not worry. Have you considered taking a personal loan to make awesome home improvement measures? That’s right; you can apply for a personal loan and use the funds to renovate your abode. The best thing about a personal loan is that a lender does not enquire about the purpose for your loan application. So, you can use your personal loan for any of your needs. *Eligibility criteria for personal loans* The general criteria to be qualified for a personal loan in Singapore are: The applicant should be 21 to 65 years old. The applicant should be a Singaporean or a permanent resident or a foreigner. The minimum income requirement for a Singaporean or PR is generally S$20,000 p.a. and S$40,000 p.a. for a foreigner. **When are personal loans ideal for renovation?** There are a few situations when a personal loan is the best option for renovating your rented property: Many banks give personal loans with attractive promotions such as interest-free loan for a certain period.
The boomers weren't buying many houses in the 70s, because they weren't old enough.  I'm a boomer,  I know.  When 1970 rolled in, I was still in 8th grade.  There are varying definitions but I think those born 1946 thru 1964 are generally considered boomers.  Use 1955 as the mid-point.    That big housing peak in the early 70s is the Greatest Generation moving out to the suburbs.  They are maybe 50 years old, got lots of equity in their house in the city, they are near their peak in earning power.    A major factor in the 70s was the inflation rate.  With inflation running 9%, it made sense to get a big mortgage.  Inflation would eat away almost 10% of the loan (adjusted to constant dollars) every year and a mortgage payment that was barely affordable would be a breeze in just a few years when you were getting paid 10% more (nonadjusted dollars) every year.
I know a few people who got &gt;100% mortgages at that time. A friend of my dad's got a 120% mortgage, i.e. the full price of the house plus extra for moving and furniture etc. And then the banks were surprised that people like that couldn't make the repayments.
I will be very interested in this subject as well in a few years. So far what I found is from an excellent article at the Motley Fool. Basically if you have between $200,000.00 and $1,500,000.00 in assets you should consider long term care insurance around age 55. Less than $200,000.00 and you will most likely qualify for some government hand out.  More than 1,500,000.00 and you can self insure.  Here is the article I found.  Fool article
This guy is a painter riding aroud on a hipster bike (nothing wrong with hipster bikes) and he qualifies to buy a house.  How can a 23 year old even have enough credit history to buy a house?  This story doesn't add up.
You mentioned 15-20 years in your comment on mhoran_psprep's response. This is the most important factor to consider in the points vs. rate question. With a horizon that long it sounds like the points are probably a better option for you. There is a neat comparison tool at The Mortgage Professor's website that may help you build your spreadsheet or simply check the numbers you are getting.
It's just money in an account somewhere with no tax shelter or string attached, to help maturing children (18-22ish) get a kick start in life whether they go to college or not.  Basically, the money can be used for anything (for you or them).  Or you can put it in a UGMA-type account where it's technically the child's funds and not yours (but check how college loans are calculated before dumping a bunch of money in those, I believe they are looked at differently, maybe as the first source of funds that gets tapped and could impact loan qualification).
Make sure you can really do what you plan on doing: Look at the maximum loan length and the maximum loan amount.   From the IRS- retirement plans faqs regarding loans A qualified plan may, but is not required to provide for loans. If a   plan provides for loans, the plan may limit the amount that can be   taken as a loan. The maximum amount that the plan can permit as a loan   is (1) the greater of $10,000 or 50% of your vested account balance,   or (2) $50,000, whichever is less ... A plan that provides for loans must specify the procedures for   applying for a loan and the repayment terms for the loan. Repayment of   the loan must occur within 5 years, and payments must be made in   substantially equal payments that include principal and interest and   that are paid at least quarterly.  Loan repayments are not plan   contributions. The referenced documents also discuss the option regarding multiple loans, and the maximum amount of all active and recent loans  Having a 401K loan will still count against the maximum amount of monthly payments you can afford. Also check the interest rate, and yes they required to charge interest.  Some companies will not allow you to make contributions to a 401K while you have an outstanding loan. If that is true with your company then you will miss out on the matching funds.
I'd suggest you put only 20% down if you qualify for the 80% amount of the mortgage. Live in the house a year and see what expenses really are. Then if your non-Ret accounts are still being funded to your liking, start prepaying the mortgage if you wish.  It's great to start with a house that's only 50% mortgaged, but if any life change happens to you, it may be tough to borrow it back. Far easier to just take your time and not make a decision you may regret. You don't give much detail about your retirement savings, but I'd suggest that I'd rather have a large mortgage and fund my retirement accounts to the maximum than to have a paid house and start the retirement account at age 35. Some choose that option.
There is no perfect age. Factors that I consider important are, Perfect age for the long term care insurance is after you retire. When you are working, you do have insurance provided by your employer.  It also depends on your assets. If you have assets in excess of $250,000 then you will less likely get any government assistance.  In general, age between 60 and 65 would be perfect for the long term care insurance.
Would you like to make an impact on others in the community and get paid for doing it? Well, one of the best ways of doing so is by starting a group home for foster children. Maybe you want to target foster children that have been removed from their homes and are between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. You may think that this is a target age range that will allow you to really positively impact their lives. Once you have done this, you are halfway there. So move ahead and join your hand for the noble cause.
Sheegan has a great explanation of how the TBA market contributes to  mortgage rates. The 30 Year Mortgage rates are closely tied to the 10-Year Treasury.  One can track this rate at many stock quoting sites using symbol TNX.
Within some limitations, the dealer is allowed to approve or deny lending to anyone that it chooses.  Those constraints are the basics that you'd expect for any regulation in the US:  Race Religion Nationality Sex Marital Status Age  Source of income You can read more about them in this leaflet from the FDIC's Fair Lending Laws office. (Link is a pdf download.) As far as what to do in your mother's case, it sounds like it may be some slightly shady sales tactics, but it isn't entirely illegal... It's just annoying.  One thing you could do to try to head off some of the crazy bait-and-switch sales tactics is to communicate with a handful of dealerships in your area about the specifics of your mother's profile as a purchaser. It's much harder to give someone the run-around if you have already agreed to something in principle by email.
The bank will consider total of both parties income for the loan qualification. Provided both parties will be listed on the mortgage.
At your age, the only place you are going to get a loan is from relatives. If you can't... Go to next year's conference. Missing it this year might feel like a disaster, but it really, really isn't.
Yes, in the 1970s and 1980s the formula which anyone could follow was to take a mortgage on a single family house; just about any house in any community; and ten years later double your money, while (during those ten years) paying about the same (and in a few years, actually less) amount of money as you would for an apartment with about half the space. Those days were then, not now, and I seriously doubt that I will ever see them again in my lifetime. You might, at your age, one day. In the mean time, I would like to suggest that you think about that word options again; something that you have that I don't. If your mind is made up for certain that a house is the one and only thing you want, okay; this does not apply. During this time of building your credit (we're talking more than a year) I would like to encourage you to look at some of the other options that are out there waiting for you; such as... I also encourage you to take a calculator and a spreadsheet (I would be surprised if there is no freeware out there to do this with a few clicks) and compare the past 30 years of various investments. For example... It is especially educational if you can see line charts, with the ups and downs along the way. One last thing; about the stock market, you have an option (I love that word when people your age are actually thinking) called ""dollar cost averaging"". If you are not aware of this concept, just ask and I will edit this post (although I'm confident it has been explained by others far better than myself on this very site). Hit just about any solid stock market investment (plain old mutual fund, even with a load, and it will still work) and I believe you'll see what I'm trying to get across. Still, yes, you need a roof, and a young person should clearly plan on leaving parents in a healthy and happy way; so again, if the house is the one and only goal, then go for it kid (uhm, ""kid"", if you're still under 18). All the best. Do remember that you will be fixing the pipes, not the maintenance guy."
All the guidelines in the world won't help after the fact. We've just fielded a similar question, How big of a mortgage can I realistically afford? The reality is this - the numbers are all based on averages, and on what banks have determined safe ratios to be. Those ratios don't know if you are single or a couple with no children, or have 4 kids. They don't know if you like to take 2 exotic vacations a year, or stay home and build furniture for the grandkids.  To get to the point - Once you're in the house and are paying the mortgage, only you know how your budget is doing. If you love the house and don't mind paying XX% of income to live in that house/location, then it can be right for you.
Timo's concern may be accurate, but talking to the bank is the next step.  If I am the banker, I'm happier that (a) there's 25% down, and (b) it's not an additional loan as some might get from a parent.  It's not that your parents have a lien for the 25% as a lender would, the structure is ownership, they own 25%. An important, if not obvious, distinction.  Timo is right that as an asset of the parents, the ownership stake is at risk if their finances run into issues. Other than that, so long as all is done above board, your proposal can work. The bank will want your parents to sign the note of course, you can't mortgage property you don't fully own.
If you're very near the retirement age (I'm not), this advice may not be applicable to you. Edit: and oh, if your mortgage is fixed rate, and interest rates have come down, the bank will require you to pay the opportunity cost of the unpaid interests. So, you may need to pay more than you owe the bank. Edit2: let's assume the bank offered you a 4% fixed rate for a 10-year loan, which you agreed to. Now let's also assume interest rates of new agreements have come down to 2%. It would be a loss to the bank to pay back the amount of the loan (because the bank cannot get 4% by offering somebody else a new loan, only 2%), unless you paid also 10 years * (4% - 2%) * amount = 20% * amount of lost interest income. At least where I live, in fixed rate loans, one needs to pay back the bank this opportunity cost of unpaid interests.
Whether or not you'll be allowed to enter the UK is a topic for a different forum (and really more a topic for a lawyer rather than strangers on the internet). That being said, as a non-lawyer giving my opinion of the situation, you should be granted access to the UK as the banks/money lenders/phone companies don't have a relationship with Border Entry. With regards to debts in the UK, there is some precedent to debts being waived after a certain period of time, but the minimum is 6 years for unsecured debt, and the companies you owe money to can still chase you for payment, but can't use legal proceedings to force you to pay. However, the big caveat to this is that this only applies to residents of England and Wales.  From the cleardebt.co.uk site: What is out of date debt? Debts like these are covered by the Limitation Act 1980, which is a   statute of limitations that provides time scales as to how long a   creditor can chase you (the debtor) for an unpaid debt. The Limitation   Act 1980 only applies when no acknowledgement of a debt has been made   between you and the creditor for six years for unsecured debts or 12   years for mortgage shortfalls and secured loans. This law only applies   to residents of England and Wales. When does debt go out of date? If the creditor fails to maintain contact with you for six years or   more, you may be able to claim that the outstanding debt is statute   barred under the Limitation Act 1980. This means the creditor cannot   use the legal system to enforce payment of the outstanding debt. The   time limit starts from when you last acknowledged owing the debt or   made a payment to the account. When can a creditor pursue an unsecured debt?  You may think a creditor has written off your debt if you haven’t heard from them for   a long time. The reality is that the debt still exists. The creditor   can still contact you and they are entitled to chase the outstanding   debt, even if the debt has been statute barred, but they are unable to   use legal proceedings to force you to pay. Creditors can pursue an   unsecured debt if:
Construction loans have an entirely set of rules and factors than mortgages and that's hard to reconcile into one instrument.  Also, I'm guessing the bank would be a bit shy about giving a commitment to a home loan before they have any information about how the construction process is going.  There would have to be a ton of contingencies put into mortgage and they probably can't account for everything.
"Concise answers to your questions: Depends on the loan and the bank; when you ""accelerate"" repayment of a loan by applying a pre-payment balance to the principal, your monthly payment may be reduced. However, standard practice for most loan types is that the repayment schedule will be accelerated; you'll pay no less each month, but you'll pay it off sooner. I can neither confirm nor deny that an internship counts as job experience in the field for the purpose of mortgage lending. It sounds logical, especially if it were a paid internship (in which case you'd just call it a ""job""), but I can't be sure as I don't know of anyone who got a mortgage without accruing the necessary job experience post-graduation. A loan officer will be happy to talk to you and answer specific questions, but if you go in today, with no credit history (the student loan probably hasn't even entered repayment) and a lot of unknowns (an offer can be rescinded, for instance), you are virtually certain to be denied a mortgage. The bank is going to want evidence that you will make good on the debt you have over time. One $10,000 payment on the loan, though significant, is just one payment as far as your credit history (and credit score) is concerned. Now, a few more reality checks: $70k/yr is not what you'll be bringing home. As a single person without dependents, you'll be taxed at the highest possible withholdings rate. Your effective tax rate on $70k, depending on the state in which you live, can be as high as 30% (including all payroll/SS taxes, for a 1099 earner and/or an employee in a state with an income tax), so you're actually only bringing home 42k/yr, or about $1,600/paycheck if you're paid biweekly. To that, add a decent chunk for your group healthcare plan (which, as of 2014, you will be required to buy, or else pay another $2500 - effectively another 3% of gross earnings - in taxes).
Are you trolling right now? If you knew what you were doing when you made that bet, you might consider reinvesting that money.   24yr olds don't buy first-time houses anymore. Houses today are meant for existing landowners and wealthy foreign investors willing to pay cash.
If you want to retire in 7 years at age 35 and only currently have 150k, and you need to ask this question of how to invest your money (risk free), then you will not be retiring at age 35 nor buying your house.  It is possible to do (but not risk free - in fact you will need to take quite a bit of risk) but you would need to have a detailed plan about how you would go about to achieve this goal, what assets you would be investing in, and what risk management you would have in place. If you have to ask this question all you have is a goal but no plan. You probably will need to do plenty of research in the types of investment you prefer and develop a plan to take you to your destination. This could take you a year or 10 years, depending on how motivated you are in acheiving your goals.
Furthermore, you can't count your chickens before they hatch, and neither will the banks. A big part of qualifying for a loan is your proof of income. If you haven't had that steady job for 6 months to a year or more, you're going to have a tough time getting a loan. Suppose your wife-to-be DOES start making that income...it's still not going to make a difference to the banks until they can say that it's not just a month long fling. Last, after reading all this I want to tell you that I am BIAS. I happened to miss the opportunity I'm explaining to you now, and that affects what I think you should do in this situation. Weigh the options carefully and objectively. Talk to your fiance. Talk to your friends, parents, anyone who is close with you. Come to an educated decision, rather than the decision that might be more exciting, or the one you WISH you could take. Good luck."
I think you're eligible for the tuition fee loan but not the maintenance loan. I think that SFE were suggesting that you'd be eligible under point 4 here 4: People with the right of permanent residence in the UK If you satisfy all the conditions under this category, you will be   eligible for full Student Support. To be eligible: (a) you have the right of permanent residence in the UK; and (b) you are ordinarily resident in England on the first day of the   first academic year of your course; and (c) you were ordinarily resident in the UK and Islands for three years   before the first day of the first academic year of the course; and (d) if your three-year residence in the UK and Islands was at any time   mainly for the purpose of receiving full-time education, you must have   been ordinarily resident in the UK or elsewhere in the EEA and/or   Switzerland immediately prior to the three-year period of ordinary   residence in the UK and Islands. It does not matter if you were in the   EEA and/or Switzerland mainly in order to receive full-time education   during this earlier period. Point (b) would be the reason for asking you to prove you were in England on 1 September, but since you were under three years old when you left the UK, you wouldn't satisfy point (c). You should be eligible for the tuition fee loan under point 2 2: EU nationals, and family If you satisfy all the conditions under this category only, you are   eligible only for a loan to pay your tuition fees. To be eligible: (a) on the first day of the first academic year of the course, you   must be:     a UK national; or a non-UK EU national who is in the UK as a   self-sufficient person or as a student; the relevant family member of   such a person above; and (b) you must have been ordinarily resident in the EEA and/or   Switzerland for three years before the first day of the first academic   year of the course; and (c) the main purpose for your residence in the EEA and/or Switzerland   must not have been to receive full-time education during any part of   the three year period.