Monday, 19 October 2009

Need A Mortgage? OK, How Much Do You Drink And Smoke?


Do you see a pattern emerging here?

Homebuyers could be forced to provide detailed information about the amount of money they spend on alcohol each month to qualify for a new mortgage under a new clampdown on reckless lending.

In a sweeping review of the mortgage market published today, the Financial Services Authority (FSA) said lenders needed to be far more rigorous about their financial checks of potential borrowers.

It said lenders should delve deeper into homebuyers' personal spending including the amount they spend on alcohol and tobacco.

Sorry, FSA, none of your fucking business.

Nor do you need a breakdown of spending on shoes and childcare, or how much we pay per month on frozen ready meals, or alloy wheels, or that subscription to Jugs Monthly, come to that. Don't you get it? Keep your conks out, these details are no concern of yours. Nor are the ins and outs of a duck's arse and our inside leg measurements.

Overall income and expenditure is all the knowledge you require, OK?

Of course, if these questions really are suggestions for the new bells'n'whistles 'approved' FSA affordability test, I imagine fake charities and the Department of Health will be clamouring to get their gnarled bony hands on the responses, judging by their zeal to push for heavy restrictions lately. Figures can only be twisted when there is plenty of data to pummel into a shape which best serves healthist scaremongery - a whole slew of new figures on alcohol and tobacco use will have them whooping into their pine nut bruschetta and camomile tea.

Harvesting the private consumption levels of those who bother no-one and pay their own way would dovetail nicely with the results of legislation currently passing through parliament enabling benefit claimants to be hectored for much the same thing.

But as the bill draws nearer to becoming law, there are growing concerns about the new powers it will devolve to Jobcentre staff. The legislation would allow them to ask benefit claimants searching questions about their drug or alcohol use. Those suspected of having a dependency or of misusing drugs will then be asked to undergo an assessment and, if they refuse, face having their benefits withdrawn for a maximum of 26 weeks.

Do you know, I think that, secretly, they would really like to just send rummage squads to rifle through our bins, searching for signs of good living, but are afraid of the backlash.

It would be more honest though and, let's face it, it's not like they don't already dream of the day when they can have a good old nose around in our waste, is it? Otherwise, ads like this would have lacked that little spark of original inspiration.


Curtain-twitching is the new black, doncha know.




12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dick, I haven't checked out college courses recently, there must be one to train up the nosey, prying, nannying, gobbledegook inventing, questionnaire rigging bastards that seem to have infested our once free and enjoyable land.

Level 1 invent some new rules to replace existing adequate measures seems about right.

B7

Quiet_Man said...

You're right, it's none of their business, but they're slowly conditioning people into not asking why it's their business.

IanPJ said...

This past year has seen a concerted effort moving to the next stage, the Nanny State was just the mechanism to get majority dependency.

Now the Nanny State is dead, now we are into the Bully State.

You will comply, or else.

Dick Puddlecote said...

Very good point, Quiet Man. Funny enough, I have something along the same lines I was thinking of posting tomorrow involving Jan Moir's article and the US Amazon site. You surely must have seen the link? ;-)

IanPJ: Right enough. I can recommend a good book along those lines.

Anonymous said...

As a poor white, christian,hetrosexual, meat-eating,
beer drinking ,smoking,married
Briton, I've no chance of a mortgage so hopefully they'lle
dish out the goodies to the average DIV and his PARTNER
40 YEARS +plus in hock and retirement at 70+
Cant fault it,just what the schmucks deserve not to mention
the odd flood, drought and heatwave

Regards Old Costa Comber

Sam Duncan said...

When I first heard of this, my initial reaction was that we're back to price controls. They've flooded the market with money, and now they're trying to tell people not to sell it cheaply.

But you make a good point, as does Quiet_Man. There's more to it. This is about increasing control, full stop.

Bearwitch said...

On the point about overfilled recycling. I was clearing out my kitchen the other week and found I had a load of ciders and real ales which were left from lots of parties and unbelievably over a year out of date. Not sure of the effects of this but as I would not have drunk them (am a wine girl) I wasn't over keen on the possibility of what it would do to my poor guests. I also found some almost empty bottles where the contents were a dubious colour - one of them being some dodgy vodka (sorry about the next bit, bts).

I decided just to get rid of it, poured it out and put the bottles and cans in the recycling (2 overfilled boxes worth)

When should I expect the invite to an AA meeting?


For BTS - the black label smirnoff is safe!

Simon Cooke said...

Thanks for this - saved me the trouble of ranting on about the new FSA rules. They certainly wouldn't have given me a mortgage - and I've never missed a payment!

banned said...

Pay for everything in cash, shred your store cards and then mis-remember.

Won't work when they eventually cancel cash in favour of cyber-money though.

Von Spreuth. said...

Don't know if they still do it, but up until a couple of years ago in Sweden, you could only buy "strong alcohol, ie over 3% If I recall (!!!)) from Systembolag. A Soviet style "shop" where the drinks were handed out under a cage barrier, like in post offices or banks, and ONLY on production of an I.D card (ANOTHER interesting "link" with todays Britain).

IF your consumption went over a certain amount per month, and we are talking a couple of bottles of wine, half a dozen beers, and a half bottle of (30%) spirit, then you WOULD get a knock on the door from social services offering "alcoholism councilling".

This IS the way Britain are going, and do NOT thionk looney Cameroon will help you. All he is going to do IF he wins is carry on EXACTLY as it is now.

Pogo said...

Von S...

Which is why, when you meet Swedes outside Sweden, they're almost always pissed out of their brains. :-)

cornyborny said...

Ah, the best-laid plans of mice and Righteous. The thing the fascist fucks never grasp, of course, is that people are smart and resourceful and downright contrary (to the Righteous mind) and so always find ways to circumvent the latest insane, oppressive scheme. The more proscriptive the system, the more people simply lie and cheat to compensate. Simple human nature.

They also never seem to realise that their efforts are ultimately pointless, destined only for an opprobrious footnote in history when their whole rotten system inevitably collapses. Righteous just don't seem to 'do' history.