By Deborah Sweeney It’s officially that time of the year: Back to school for the kids and back to business for the entrepreneurs! While entrepreneurs are technically in business 365 days a year, the fall months bring along a renewed focus on balancing parenthood and school with work as well as determining what’s next to […]
The post 4 Items to Put on Your “Back to School, Back to Business” Checklist appeared first on The Work at Home Woman.
If you’re like me, you love your carbs. Say it with me… pasta!
For those of you who proudly spin your forks (With a spoon? Without a spoon?) to scoop up that delicious Italian concoction of noodles and sauce, I have great news.
The Olive Garden has brought back the buy one, take one meal deal.
It’s simple. Get one meal to eat at the restaurant, and get a second meal to take home and heat up later for as little as $12.99. That’s two full pasta meals for under $13.
The Olive Garden buy one, take one menu has four dishes at the $12.99 price point:
If you’d like something a little different, there are three upgraded menu options for just a little more dough.
Whether you’re dining solo (It’s OK, really!) or taking the family out for a nice meal, the buy one, take one deal is pretty tasty. Settle in, and enjoy that bottomless salad and those amazing breadsticks. You may even have leftovers to take home along with your second meal!
Don’t have time to sit in the restaurant or simply want to chow down on your pasta while binge-watching “The Godfather” trilogy? You can get the buy one, take one deal for carryout, but you’ll need to pay an extra $4.29 if you want a salad and breadsticks with the second meal. But let’s face it, the one salad Olive Garden gives you is usually plenty for two meals, right?
Penny Hoarder tip: Ask for extra Andes mints! I always ask for this because my wife loves them, and we often end up with a dozen or so instead of the two the server usually hands out. That’s an easy win!
The beauty of this deal is that you’re getting a second meal that will actually reheat well. What’s better as a leftover than pasta?
Get dinner tonight and lunch or dinner for tomorrow without breaking the bank.
Prego! (That means “you’re welcome” in Italian. Who knew?)
Tyler Omoth is a senior writer at The Penny Hoarder who loves soaking up the sun and finding creative ways to help others. Catch him on Twitter at @Tyomoth.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, one of the largest personal finance websites. We help millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. In 2016, Inc. 500 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the No. 1 fastest-growing private media company in the U.S.
Working from home is awesome — but you probably already knew that.
I mean, that’s why you’re here, right?
You’re looking to snag an awesome work-from-home job that will allow you to stay home with your kids, your pets, your fridge — whatever it is you value most in this world. And I don’t blame you, not one bit.
Below, you’ll find a bunch of work-from-home jobs that give you the freedom and flexibility to live your life the way you want (i.e. without the miserable commute and the cruel torture device that is a pair of pants).
Check out these four work-from-home job opportunities that you can apply for today!
VIPdesk is a U.S.-based call center provider.
The company is looking for part-time customer service representatives to assist customers via phone by scheduling appointments or referring them to different contractors in the HomeAdvisor program. You’ll also be tasked with upselling and cross-selling to customers and converting inquiries into referrals.
You must possess a high school diploma or GED equivalent, although some college is preferred, and should have at least one year of prior customer service experience. You’ll also need a quiet home-office environment and a stable internet connection. You can see the rest of the technical requirements here.
You should have excellent communication and computer skills, and an interest in home repair services is a plus.
Applicants should live in one of the following states: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas, Utah and Virginia.
There are a variety of available shifts which you can learn more about here, but you should also be prepared to work at least one weekend shift. Part-time employees can work up to 29 hours each week.
This position pays up to $18 per hour (a combination of an hourly base rate plus incentives).
Go here to apply for this job.
HSN, the Home Shopping Network, is looking for full-time customer service representatives to work from home.
You’ll field inbound support calls, answer customer questions and solve issues that are often complex. You should be able to use active listening to relay customer needs and independently determine the best course of action.
You should also be able to troubleshoot and make decisions that will best serve the customers and the company.
You must have a high school diploma or GED equivalent, and prior customer service experience is a plus. You should also be an excellent communicator and possess exceptional computer skills (including Microsoft and Outlook) and organizational abilities.
You must have a high-speed, wired internet connection, a telephone headset and a standard, wired telephone service with a home number.
Applicants should live in or around the Nashville or central Tennessee area (acceptable area codes include 931 and 615).
While the position is full-time, there is no information on specific schedule requirements, pay or benefits included in the job listing. We’ve reached out to the company to find out more information, and we’ll update this post when we find out.
Go here to apply for this job.
LearnDash is a WordPress plugin that that helps people create, manage and sell online courses.
The company is currently looking for a part-time customer service specialist to provide technical support to users.
You’ll field questions, troubleshoot and research and guide customers to a solution. You’ll also be in charge of maintaining and updating documentation and addressing pre-sales inquiries.
A good fit for this role will be competent with WordPress, have a proven track record in customer service and will have a basic proficiency in CSS and HTML. A bachelor’s degree is preferred but not required.
You must be located in North America.
There is no pay included in the job listing, but we’ve contacted the company and will update this post when we find out more information.
Go here to apply for this job.
Toptal is a network of the top freelance designers, developers and finance experts that helps businesses hire “top talent.”
The company is looking for a full-time client experience specialist to work directly with clients to identify, address and resolve issues and drive client processes and initiatives to better the client experience.
You should have exceptional communication skills, the ability to build strong professional relationships and a history of successful client interactions. You should be independent, proactive and persistent. Knowledge of the software development field is a plus.
Applicants can be located anywhere.
There is no information about pay or benefits included in the job listing, but we’ve reached out to the company and will update this post when we hear back.
Go here to apply for this job.
And if you’re looking for even more awesome work-from-home jobs, be sure to like our Jobs page on Facebook! We post new opportunities there all the time.
Grace Schweizer is a junior writer at The Penny Hoarder.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, one of the largest personal finance websites. We help millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. In 2016, Inc. 500 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the No. 1 fastest-growing private media company in the U.S.
Is it one of those nights when you just can’t bother cooking, but you don’t want to break your budget? We’ve got a dinner deal for you.
Through the end of August, you can use this printable coupon to get a free entree at Smashburger when you buy one.
To claim your free sandwich, just find your local Smashburger restaurant and present the coupon. The cheaper of the two sandwiches you order will be free.
You can order nearly any sandwich from the menu and get this deal, but it’s not valid on the $4 promotional Triple Double.
You also want to remember that you can only use one coupon per person per visit. That means you might have to split your orders up if you want to treat the whole family to this BOGO deal.
Desiree Stennett is a staff writer at The Penny Hoarder.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, one of the largest personal finance websites. We help millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. In 2016, Inc. 500 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the No. 1 fastest-growing private media company in the U.S.
Hertz is hiring full-time home-based Express Rents Sales Specialists to help customers rent cars through its live-video service kiosks.
(I think there’s something deliciously ironic about not needing a car to get to your job with a car rental company.)
As if working from home wasn’t benefit enough, these bonuses could add up to as much as $1,750 during your first year on the job!
The pay is a base hourly pay with “unlimited bonus potential.” We’ve reached out to Hertz for more details and will update when we hear back from them.
Your responsibilities will include:
You must be available for five weeks of virtual training, Monday through Friday from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
After you complete training, you’ll be expected to be available to work 40 hours, any shift, any day, including nights, weekends and holidays between 11 a.m. and 9:30 p.m.
To be eligible for this job, you must meet the following requirements:
You may be eligible for the following benefits:
Apply here for a Express Rents Sales Specialist Job at Hertz.
Don’t forget to check out our Jobs page on Facebook. We post new jobs there all the time.
Lisa McGreevy is a staff writer at The Penny Hoarder. She loves telling readers about new job opportunities so look her up on Twitter @lisah if you’ve got a tip to share.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, one of the largest personal finance websites. We help millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. In 2016, Inc. 500 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the No. 1 fastest-growing private media company in the U.S.
One of the core ideas that I like to share regarding personal finance success revolves around the idea that it’s better to spend your money on “experiences” rather than “stuff.” For example, I’d rather spend $100 going to a convention for a particular hobby than spend $100 on items for that hobby.
An astute reader, Lisa, called that into question with a very nice mailbag submission:
How do you draw the line between “stuff” and “experience”? Is it just whether or not you wind up with a physical item at the end?
If I buy a book for example, I buy it to go on some intellectual experience. Take me away with a good story or some new ideas! That’s an experience, right? Or is it stuff, because you wind up with that physical book at the end? Does the distinction really matter?
That’s a really good question, and it’s one that’s right in line with several other things I’ve read recently and some of the directions of my own life as of late.
What really led me down this path was this interesting short article from The Guardian, which describes a recent research study from by two researchers from the Hungarian Academy of Science, Tamás Hajdu of the Institute of Economics and Gabor Hajdu of the Institute of Sociology. Their paper suggests that there really isn’t that much of a difference between the total amount of happiness that people extract from “material” purchases versus “experience” purchases. Here’s the abstract of that paper:
In the last decade, a number of experiments have stated that spending money on experiences rather than on material goods tends to make people happier. However, the experimental designs used to analyze the relationship between consumption and subjective well-being had several limitations: small and homogeneous samples, a direct question assessing the effect of consumption, and a potential social desirability bias due to the stigmatization of materialism. To reduce these limitations, we used a survey method. In two studies based on survey data from nationally representative samples in Hungary, we estimated linear and non-linear associations of experiential and material expenditures with life satisfaction. Although both experiential and material expenditures were positively associated with life satisfaction, evidence supporting the greater return received when buying experiences was limited. The main difference between experiential purchases and material purchases was that the marginal utility of expeiential purchases appeared to be linear, whereas the marginal utility of material purchases was decreasing. Despite the limited differences between the effects of experiential and material purchases, the results of the non-linear estimates indicate that to maximize life satisfaction, an average person should allocate more money to buying experiences rather than material goods.
In other words, the overall joy one receives from material purchases versus experiences was actually pretty similar. The biggest difference between the two was that the joy received from experience purchases was linear while the material purchases decreased over time.
To be more specific, people tended to be very consistent when reporting their joy about a past experience, regardless of how long it was in the past. If they liked it a certain amount a month after the fact, their feeling was pretty similar a year after the fact.
On the other hand, if they were considering a material item, their pleasure with that item was much higher if it was a recent purchase, and it declined over time. Overall, the total happiness was about the same in the survey data, but the brunt of the happiness from a material purchase occurred shortly after the purchase, while the happiness from an experience tended to spread out more.
Let’s put that into a real world example. Let’s say, for example, that I had $100 to spend. I might use that $100 to buy a new ten gallon mash tun for my home brewing setup, as it’s something I’ve been itching to have for a long time (don’t worry about what a mash tun is – let’s just say it’s a useful thing for home brewing). On the other hand, I might spend that $100 going out with my wife and a couple of friends for a great meal and something fun afterwards.
If you ask me a week or two afterwards, I’d probably give higher marks to the mash tun. I would have probably used it for two different home brew batches by then and would be really high on that purchase. I’d give high marks to the dinner, but I’d really be happy with that mash tun. I would mark the mash tun as providing more happiness than the dinner at the two week mark.
On the other hand, if we wait a year, I’d probably have that mash tun on a shelf somewhere without having touched it for a couple of months. I’d think about how I probably should use it and feel guilty that I hadn’t used it, and then also think about how much space it was taking up. My marks might still be positive, but they wouldn’t be strongly so.
At that same point, I’d still look back at that night out on the town with my wife and our friends with fondness. I’d probably remember a few of the highlights and get a big smile on my face, and I’d mark it as being a very positive memory that still brings me happiness and helped to reinforce some of my best relationships. I’d probably rank the dinner experience as being better than the mash tun one year out.
Overall, the total amount of joy is about the same. Neither one can be rated as spectacularly higher than the other one.
However, there are a few big key advantages that point toward the value of experience rather than the value of a material item.
First, the material item requires upkeep. If you have an experience, then it’s done. It’s over with. You don’t retain any sort of physical item. What remains of that experience is in your head. Perhaps it changed you in some way, like a great book or an amazing piece of music or a wonderful experience with a friend. No matter what, though, the experience doesn’t leave you with a physical item.
Buying a material item does leave you with a physical item, for better or worse. Often, as Lisa pointed out in her question, that physical item is connected to an experience of some kind. That book you bought will take you on an intellectual journey, for instance. That mash tun will enable me to make an amazing IPA.
The problem comes when you’re not actually having that experience. At that point, the book just becomes another thing clogging up your shelf. The mash tun becomes a large object in your garage.
Those objects that aren’t a part of an active experience take up space, and that’s space you have to pay for in some way. It has a real cost. You have to pay for the square footage to store it; if you have too much stuff, that means a larger home or a storage locker of some kind, which has a direct financial cost. You have to maintain it – dusting it, keeping it clean, and so on. You have to deal with it when you move. It’s another item that’s in the way when you’re trying to find something else. You may have to deal with the guilt when you see it because of the unfulfilled experience it represents (“Man, I have that mash tun… why am I not making a batch of beer with it? I’m so lazy!”).
On the flip side of that, a fresh purchase brings along with it some additional happiness due to that positive feeling of acquisition. We feel good when we buy something that we’re excited about. We get that short term burst of pleasure of having this new item, of opening it up and using it for a time or two. That’s a heightened experience, one that is often even better than a paid experience at the same cost that’s often over very quickly.
The problem, of course, is that the newness fades. The honeymoon ends. At that point, you’re left with that physical object, one you may not be as excited to use. It ends up on the shelf, unused, and then it becomes much less of a positive and perhaps even a negative.
Let’s compare these two situations using something very similar.
Let’s imagine, hypothetically, that a new book is coming out and you’re really excited to read it. You have two potential options regarding this book: you could reserve it at the library and read it within a few weeks of getting it from the library and then return it, or you could buy it and read it at your convenience and keep the book.
The library option gives you the experience of reading the book. You get that full intellectual journey. You also don’t have to pay for it. However, after going on that intellectual ride, you have to return the book to the library. You paid nothing, but at the end, all you have are the memories and thoughts.
On the other hand, the bookstore option gives you that physical book. You get the burst of pleasure of buying it, and then you can read it at your convenience. You still get that same intellectual journey, but afterwards you still have the physical book, although it’s used now. On the downside, you do have to pay for the book in this situation. You get the memories and thoughts and you still retain the physical book.
Is it better to pay $0 for the experience alone, or $10 for the experience and the physical book (which you could probably sell for a dollar or two later on)?
It’s probably not easy to answer that question, just as it’s not easy to answer the overall question of experience versus physical purchase. That’s because you’re choosing between two completely different curves. They’re both fun immediately, one rises to a peak shortly after the initial expense (the purchase) and then falls below the other over the long tail (dealing with the less-wanted physical object).
Even given that, there are four reasons why I prefer an experience purchase over a physical one most of the time.
First, the chaining together of that peak pleasure from buying physical objects becomes addictive. Let me offer up a theory here, one of my own devising based on the research study quoted at the start, many other readings, and my own experiences.
You buy an item. It’s pretty enjoyable – you get that rush of excitement from the purchase and the new experience of enjoying that object. It’s yours – you can use it at your convenience and enjoy it as you please! It’s fresh and new!
But, eventually, that starts to fade. It’s not providing pleasure like it once was. How can you fix that? Buy another new thing!
By consistently buying new things, you manage to keep that level of pleasure artificially high. (Of course, after a while, even that high consistent level of pleasure begins to dull, but that’s another subject.)
You buy something. The pleasure bursts, then fades. You miss that pleasure, so you buy something else. The pleasure bursts, then fades.
In other words, to consistently keep the level of pleasure from buying physical objects higher than that of experiences, you have to keep buying physical objects. This explains a great deal about how people fall into credit card debt. They become accustomed to that high level of consumer pleasure. They feel empty when it fades and buy things to bring it back.
To put it bluntly, I don’t want to fall into that addiction.
Second, I want to find joy and contentment in what I already have. It is my goal to be content with what I have, to explore my inner self, and to find joy in the simpler things in life.
The reasons for this are plenty, but almost every one of them points toward valuing experiences over things. Many experiences are free, while not many things are free. Delving into one’s own thoughts is an experience, and a free one. Most simple pleasures – things like walking barefoot in the grass or getting lost in a great book or walking on a trail or enjoying the company of a good friend – are free experiences, and many other simple pleasures – the flavor of homemade potato salad, the chill of a cold glass on a hot summer day – are nearly free experiences.
Best of all, those types of experiences can always be found, no matter what hand life deals you. There are very few outcomes in my life that would cause me to lose the pleasure of a good book or a cool glass of lemonade or the feeling of warm sun on my skin. I want my life to be full of those things, rather than physical objects. I yearn for every day to be an appreciation of the bounty I already have, rather than a yearning for endless new things.
Third, I already have plenty of clutter, and adding another object that I’m not certain to be using frequently is not a good choice. I’m far more interested in downsizing the number of possessions I have rather than increasing them. I want to spend less of my time (and, to an extent, my money) taking care of the possessions I have. Instead, I’d rather spend time enjoying them and having experiences.
This simply boils down to a time and energy management issue. The more possessions I have, the more time and energy I have to spend in my life dealing with them – cleaning them, maintaining them, finding places to store them, digging through them when I’m looking for something, and so on. When I add a possession to my life, I want to be sure that it’s actually adding enough value to overcome that, which means I tend to default to “experience” over “stuff” unless a clear case is made otherwise.
Finally, a focus on collecting great experiences – and things that provide the foundation for more, such as good friendships – raises the baseline joy of life. If my life is loaded with a long history of great experiences, my life becomes more joyful. Every one adds a small note of joy to my overall life – every book read, every conversation, every hike in the woods, everything. Investing my time and energy into experiences – and into things that build more and better experiences, such as building good friendships – equals a higher baseline quality of life, one that doesn’t constantly have to be refreshed with the latest purchase. This is actually one of the most active areas of my life right now, as I’m spending a lot of time evaluating how I use my time and energy to make my life consistently better, and I’m finding that experiences and building up to great future experiences adds a ton of value to my life, a value that sticks around and doesn’t really fade over time.
There’s the obvious additional factor that most of the time, experiences are simply less expensive than things. Undoubtedly, there are expensive experiences and free things, but in general, there is such a wide variety of free and low cost experiences in life as compared to the variety of free and low cost physical items that, by defaulting to spending your time and energy focused on experiences, you’re likely to spend less money. It costs far less to check a book out from the library than to buy one from the bookstore, after all.
So, here’s my answer to the battle between things and experiences. I default to experiences, and avoid buying things unless there’s a clear reason to do so. I want to spend as little of my time as possible managing and caring for and storing objects, and as much of my time as possible actually having experiences or preparing for greater experiences by building skills and relationships. That choice also happens to be the more financially astute choice most of the time, which is another large benefit.
This leaves me with one final question: when is it the right choice to buy a thing rather than buying an experience? When is it okay to have an object rather than just paying for an experience? For me, it comes down to consistent use. Am I going to use this item consistently in my day to day life? For example, with a book, have I checked it out from the library multiple times? That’s why I own a copy of The History of Western Philosophy. With a tool, have I borrowed it from a friend multiple times? That’s led me to buy a corded drill, for example. I return to those things consistently.
Things that I’m going to use once and then simply store it, likely never to be used again, are things I want to avoid buying going forward. I don’t mind owning a few reference books or books I intend to reread, but books that I’ve never read before? I’m going to borrow them. I’m in the process of rapidly paring down my board game collection to ones that I want to play again and again, and I’m becoming much more picky on new ones that I acquire (and that’s one of my biggest hobbies). I haven’t bought any new home brewing gear in a long while.
Am I spending more money on experiences than before? I don’t know, perhaps a little, but I do know I’m consciously investing more of my time into trying to genuinely experience things and stay in the moment and build the foundation for more experiences. The number of people I count as “friends” has gone up drastically in recent years. The percentage of the books I’ve read that have come from the library or from book swapping at little free libraries has gone way up. I’m “collecting” things like trails walked at local parks or days with more than 10,000 steps taken, rather than collecting DVDs.
I generally come down on the side of “experiences” for all of these reasons. I don’t believe it’s always the right answer, and I don’t think there’s a perfect right answer for everyone, but it’s something that I think is worth exploring for everyone.
Do you need all of the physical objects that you own? How many of them just sit there gathering dust until you have to dig through them to find something or to rearrange a room or to simply get cleaned up? Is there any reason to add more, when you already have all of this stuff? Perhaps most important: can you find joy without buying something?
Good luck in figuring out the answers to those questions for yourself!
The post Buying Things Versus Buying Experiences: A Deeper Look appeared first on The Simple Dollar.
Buy to let landlords with four or more properties have been warned to prepare now for new rules, which will result in stricter lending criteria – and higher mortgage rates.
From 30 September, borrowers with four or more mortgaged properties – dubbed ‘portfolio landlords’ – will have their entire portfolio of properties assessed when remortgaging a buy to let or taking out a new buy to let mortgage.
This differs from the present rules, where portfolio landlords are usually only assessed on the property they’re adding to their portfolio or remortgaging.
Borrowers’ experience in the buy to let market, as well as any alternative sources of income will also be considered as part of the new lending requirements.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), which announced these new rules in September 2016, stated at the time that this change in approach is needed as lending to portfolio landlords is “inherently more complex given the quantum of debt in aggregate, the cash flows and costs arising from multiple tenancies and potential risks of property and/or geographical concentrations”.
To summarise, mortgage experts believe the rule change will likely result in the following – although of course no-one has a crystal ball:
Mortgage expert, Ray Boulger, who works for broker John Charcol, explains. “Some lenders will take the view that it’s not viable to do the extra work, or they might want to do the work but they will not be ready when the rules come in.
“And if there’s less choice, that would suggest there’s more pressure on those lenders that can provide mortgages, and those lenders will have to spend more time on each case and admin delays will build-up, which means people may have to wait longer for a mortgage approval.”
The change will also push up prices, according to Mr Boulger. “Absolutely prices will go up. The laws of competition are clearly going to apply – one way lenders can limit the volume of business is by upping the price. We’ve seen this happen in the past where application levels have needed to be slowed. That’s easier than changing application criteria and it’s a short-term solution.”
Lenders have yet to start pulling deals though. Data from comparison service, Moneyfacts, reveals that there were more buy to let lenders offering both fixed and variable products to landlords with four or more properties in July 2017 than there were in July 2016.
And competition in the market is still strong. Andrew Montlake, an expert at mortgage broker Coreco, says: “The low rate environment, coupled with lenders’ desire to still lend in a smaller buy to let market has meant that competitive pressures have driven mortgage rates down to levels never seen in the buy to let market. Hence the buy to let remortgage market is currently booming.
“However, once these changes come in to play, the additional cost in terms of time and training for lenders may see these rates rise a touch, although competition in this market should stay strong.”
An additional layer of complexity is that the rules themselves are also something of a grey area, as Mr Boulger explains: “Say, you’re a landlord with 20 properties – 18 of which have adequate rental income, but two of which don’t. Despite your other 18 properties making surplus rents to cover the two mortgages that aren’t, does the lender look at the total picture? Or does the lender look at the properties on an individual basis? The rules are open to interpretation.”
Mr Montlake adds: “The issue here is that this becomes a very grey area that will differ substantially from lender to lender, meaning a quick ‘agreement in principle’ from a lender will be a thing of the past.
“Some lenders, for example, may decline anyone who has a house in multiple occupation (HMO) or a student let in their portfolio as it is not something they feel comfortable with, while others will be much more relaxed.”
When Moneywise asked some of the major buy to let lenders if they’ll continue to lend to landlords with four or more properties, they told us:
However, act now and you can beat the tighter lending criteria; three mortgage experts share their top tips with Moneywise:
Mr Montlake says: “Those applying for a mortgage after September are going to be in for a shock in terms of the amount of paperwork that lenders are going to require in order to assess their application, as it is no longer going to be a case of just assessing the security property itself.
“It is therefore imperative that landlords get their tax affairs in order quickly and utilise advice from a properly qualified accountant and not just a part-time book keeper.”
David Hollingworth, associate director of communications at mortgage broker London and Country, says: “Those who want to continue with their portfolio or grow it in future may want to take advantage of low rates now in a market they already know and understand what the options are.”
Mr Montlake adds: “For those with equity in their portfolio it makes a lot of sense to look at remortgaging while rates are low and pulling out equity to help speed up any future purchases.”
Mr Boulger echoes these sentiments: “ My advice to landlords is if you know you need to re-mortgage by the end of the year or early next year, get in sooner rather than later and you avoid both those risks [higher prices and slow lender responses]. Remember, mortgage offers last three months.”
He adds that landlords may also want to consider a product transfer instead of remortgaging. Mr Boulger explains that this is where you get a different product with the same lender, but the terms stay the same and you’re not borrowing any more money. A remortgage on the other hand is where you’re getting a loan on the same property with a different lender.
The PRA’s rules are the latest in a string of changes to hit buy to let landlords over the last few years, and they may be the final straw for some landlords. Mr Hollingworth says: “Changes to tax relief in conjunction with this new lending criteria should prompt landlords to consider whether they’ve got the right level of property risk or whether they should offload their properties.”
My wife and I just sold the SUV we owned for 15 years, a White Gold Crystal-colored Lexus RX 300, wrapping up a very hard financial lesson.
We purchased the car in July 2002 for our fourth wedding anniversary. We went all-in on a spanking-new vehicle whose namesake evoked luxury, performance and, yes, a smidgen of status.
Our son, Kevin, was a little over a year old at the time, so part of the justification for the car was to get the latest safety equipment. That was a rationalization — what I really wanted was to keep up with the Joneses, the Smiths and anyone else who drove a lavish car around our neighborhood.
Our RX 300 had all the bells and whistles, like leather seats, automatic climate control, walnut wood trim, an electrochromatic rearview mirror with compass and even a seven-speaker 240-watt premium-sound audio system.
The price for this bit of image enhancement?
After adding some accessories and various dealer fees, and receiving a special package discount, the initial price rang in at $37,180. I was able to negotiate another 10% off, bringing our price to $33,500.
Of course there were other fees, including a $45 document prep fee, $2,599.74 in sales tax, $260 in license fees and a $5 California tire fee. After it was all said and done, we got an out-the-door price of $36,409.74
Suppose we had opted for something a little less extravagant, say a Toyota Corolla CE. How much money could we have saved?
According to MSN Autos, the 2002 Corolla with an automatic transmission had a $12,983 MSRP.
If we stuck with the Corolla’s standard features, we would have ended up with a $13,558 final sticker price after the $575 in dealer fees. Because there would have likely been less profit in the Corolla, my negotiating skills may have only gotten me an additional 5% off, putting our total price at $12,880.
Like the Lexus, there would have been fees involved in buying the Corolla. After calculating in a $45 document prep fee, $1,004.64 in sales tax, $260 in license fees and $5 in California tire fees, we have an out-the-door total of $14,194.64
Buying the Corolla would have saved us $22,215.10. We could have purchased two Corollas for the price of one RX 300 and still saved $8020.46.
Quyen and I have two teenage children: 16-year-old Kevin and 13-year-old Kristie. Think that $22,215.10 savings would’ve helped with their future college expenses? If only…
Let’s go a little further with this “what if” scenario. My wife and I obtained an equity line on our home to pay for the Lexus, but the actual loan numbers are murky because we’ve since refinanced a few times. Because our loan numbers aren’t available, we’ll compare the cost of financing assuming we took out a 60-month car loan at the 2002 commercial bank rate of 7.58%.
We put down a $500 deposit on the Lexus and financed the remaining $35,909.74 through the dealership before we secured the equity line. We’ll use that number for comparing the cost of financing both cars.
According to Nerd Wallet’s calculator, we would have paid $7345.46 in interest with a five-year loan for the RX 300. The interest for the Corolla would have been just $2801.16, saving us $4,544.30 in interest alone.
But there’s more. Driving the RX 300 was considerably more expensive than our hypothetical Corolla.
The Environmental Protection Agency rates the 2002 Lexus RX 300 at 18 miles per gallon combined. At the time of this writing, fueling the Lexus would cost the average driver $1,900 a year. The Corolla, on the other hand, has an EPA rating of 27 mpg combined and costs the average driver just $1,300 a year for fuel. The Corolla would have saved $600 annually in gas and $9,000 over 15 years.
I called my insurance company, but it couldn’t give me a quote for insuring a new vehicle in 2002. So I used NerdWallet to compare insurance costs to cover a 2002 Toyota Corolla and a 2002 Lexus RX 300.
Surprisingly, the RX 300 would be less expensive to insure. I used myself as the driver, with an average of 10,000 to 15,000 miles a year. The rate to insure the Lexus was $61 a month, which was $2 per month cheaper than the Corolla. Over the 15 years we owned the Lexus, we would have saved $360.
We sold the RX 300 to Carmax this year for $3,000. Kelley Blue Book says the trade-in value for a 2002 Corolla is $522. The Lexus would have put $2,478 more back into our pockets than the Corolla.
Considering the price difference between the two vehicles, the financing costs, fuel savings, the cost of auto insurance and resale value, buying the Corolla would have saved us $32,921.40 over 15 years.
That would have made a dent in the cost of our children’s college educations, my retirement or even paid for a vacation to Paris. Our family has learned a financial lesson the hard way. After we sold the Lexus, we bought a four-year-old Toyota Prius.
Raymond M. Wong is a grateful husband and father in San Diego. He works as a counselor at San Diego City College and he writes because it’s his purpose. He hopes this article will help others avoid a costly financial mistake.
This was originally published on The Penny Hoarder, one of the largest personal finance websites. We help millions of readers worldwide earn and save money by sharing unique job opportunities, personal stories, freebies and more. In 2016, Inc. 500 ranked The Penny Hoarder as the No. 1 fastest-growing private media company in the U.S.
Have you developed the habit of regularly checking your credit reports and scores? If so, kudos to you. You’re already doing a better job monitoring your credit than most Americans. However, if your focus remains fixed solely on those three-digit scores, you could be missing some valuable and helpful information — your “score factors.”
What if I told you that I could give you advice and guarantee it will improve your scores? And not just obvious, high-level stuff like “pay your bills on time” or “get that judgment deleted.” I’m talking about customized advice, specific for you and only you.
Whenever you access a copy of your credit reports with your FICO or VantageScore credit scores, you may notice that that there are generally four (or more) statements included alongside your scores. These statements, also called score factors codes, explain why your credit score isn’t higher.
Score factors are generally expressed in two digits. Each code represents a specific reason where you sacrificed credit score points in that scoring model. For example, if you were to look at an actual credit report received by a lender or credit card issuer, underneath your credit scores you’d find something that looks like this:
| Your Credit Score: 560 |
|---|
| (40) Derogatory Public Record or Collection |
| (85) You Have Too Many Inquiries |
| (11) Amount Owed on Revolving Accounts Is Too High |
| (13) Your Most Recently Opened Account is Too New |
The above score factors are actually a hybrid of the FICO and VantageScore score factors. You can see a full list of VantageScore’s score factors here. These factors are specific to your actual score, so paying attention to areas identified as obstacles and working to resolve them can be a great place to start if you’re looking for a roadmap to a better credit score.
It would be impossible to cover all of the reason codes in depth in one, short article, as there are hundreds of them. Fortunately, you don’t have to be knowledgeable about all of the score factors, because only four of them matter to your scores at any given point in time.
There are, however, score factors that seem to come up again and again – certainly some of the more common reasons people don’t have higher scores. These factors tend to be specific to the presence of derogatory information, excessive credit card debt relative to your credit limits, too many accounts with a balance, too many inquiries in the previous 12 months, and a credit file that is too young.
Whenever you’re wondering why your credit scores aren’t higher, it’s not uncommon to hit the web looking for information about credit scores, what makes them tick, and how to increase your credit score. That’s an entire waste of your time. The answer – customized to your situation and credit profile – has already been made completely evident by either FICO or VantageScore in the form of these factors.
For example, say you have a VantageScore of 750, and the number one factor explaining why your score isn’t higher is that the balances on your credit cards is too high.
Would you try to pay down your car loan faster? Would you pay off one of your smaller dollar student loans? Would you go so far as to tap your nest egg to pay off a mortgage or home equity loan? Some of those actions could improve a person’s credit score. But if you did any one of them, you’d be completely ignoring the very specific advice that the scoring system was trying to give you, personally. Auto loans, mortgages, and student loans are not credit cards.
Now, if you’d have listened to what your VantageScore factors were telling you, then maybe you would have used the same funds and paid down a credit card or paid it off entirely. Maybe you’d have paid off a retail store card, or a few of them. And not only would your score have improved, it may have improved considerably.
Just follow the roadmap put forth by your score factors, and your credit scores will have no choice but to improve.
Related Articles:
John Ulzheimer is an expert on credit reporting, credit scoring, and identity theft. He has written four books on the topic and has been interviewed and quoted thousands of times over the past 10 years. With time spent at Equifax and FICO, Ulzheimer is the only credit expert who actually comes from the credit industry. He has been an expert witness in over 230 credit related lawsuits and has been qualified to testify in both federal and state courts on the topic of consumer credit.
The post What Your Credit Score Is Trying to Tell You appeared first on The Simple Dollar.
