You may have noticed over the last month many countries have past bills in their governments to inject substantial amounts of cash into their banking system. They have done this on the understanding that all the bad loans also known as toxic debt is weakening the institutions and rendering us unable to borrow money so leaving us all worse off as a result.
The burning question now is whether or not this cash injection will have the desired effect so that we are able to borrow money confidently again. At present I am only able to comment on the effect these changes will have on the general public in the United Kingdom, as I am unaware of how other global markets work within their countries, and therefore am unqualified to comment. There may be similarities in how the markets work, but it is best to take my comments here as a rough guide only if outside the UK.
The general public is under the impression that the credit crunch is due to the banks not having enough money to lend. Logic would then dictate that by giving the banks more money the problem is resolved. Unfortunately this is rather far from the truth. The lack of money to lend is only the tip of the iceberg. Banks have been burned by the bad debt accrued over the last few years and are therefore now much more cautious about lending again. Their careless actions in the past will prove much more difficult to rectify in times to come.
The main result and contributory factor to the current financial predicament is that of house prices, and house prices are not only falling but are set to continue to fall for the foreseeable future. Consequently lenders are finding that they have to tighten all their criteria not least in the area of loan to value LTV, that is the amount of money that is lent based on the value of the property. Most lenders during 2007 lent up to 95% LTV some lent 100% LTV and in some cases they went as high as 125%LTV.
Most experts will agree that as long as the market is buoyant, this lending is alright. If you take into account that the market was rising at a rate of 10%, lending 125% on a property of 100,000 means you are lending 125,000, but with that 10% rate of increase in value over just 3 years your LTV has already dropped to around 93%. In a buoyant market, this sort of lending would be considered a calculated profitable risk and was therefore given the o.k..
But the problem that we face is that house prices are going in the opposite direction. The decline is at least 10% and analysts figure that it could get worse. So, if 100,000 was lent on an 85,000 property then in the same three year time span the loan could have actually increased to 118% LTV. Now I am sure you would agree that in this present climate that this sort of loaning is both irresponsible and detrimental to all involved.
So with regards to the money bailouts, what does this mean for our financial future? In my professional opinion I believe that there will be little overall effect, although with any luck time will prove me wrong. Although lenders are now obliged to lend in 2009 at the rates of 2007, as you will see from the first part of this article they won't be able to lend at the high LTV rates of 2007. The people who are now desperate to borrow are those coming out of rates already arranged in the past 5 years, and these borrowers are going to push the LTV to its limit because of the drop in house prices.
You also need to take into account that a lot of people in the last few years have acquired mortgages on a self certification basis. These sort of mortgages are now considered high risk for lenders and so are mostly unavailable, and even if they are available they will be at greatly reduced LTVs, so what options do these people have to chose from?
So whilst I do welcome the money that is being injected into the finance market I sadly think that whilst property continues to fall and lenders fail to have the pre 2008 appetite for lending it is more than likely just going to be stockpiled. This will have a domino effect as house prices will continue to fall because of the lack of lending at the right LTV with the right lending criteria which again will make lenders even less willing to lend. I have to say this is quite a quandary and I honestly don't see how it can be stopped until someone has the bravery to just lend knowing the calculated risk it represents I think it is fondly known as taking a punt!. - 16928
The burning question now is whether or not this cash injection will have the desired effect so that we are able to borrow money confidently again. At present I am only able to comment on the effect these changes will have on the general public in the United Kingdom, as I am unaware of how other global markets work within their countries, and therefore am unqualified to comment. There may be similarities in how the markets work, but it is best to take my comments here as a rough guide only if outside the UK.
The general public is under the impression that the credit crunch is due to the banks not having enough money to lend. Logic would then dictate that by giving the banks more money the problem is resolved. Unfortunately this is rather far from the truth. The lack of money to lend is only the tip of the iceberg. Banks have been burned by the bad debt accrued over the last few years and are therefore now much more cautious about lending again. Their careless actions in the past will prove much more difficult to rectify in times to come.
The main result and contributory factor to the current financial predicament is that of house prices, and house prices are not only falling but are set to continue to fall for the foreseeable future. Consequently lenders are finding that they have to tighten all their criteria not least in the area of loan to value LTV, that is the amount of money that is lent based on the value of the property. Most lenders during 2007 lent up to 95% LTV some lent 100% LTV and in some cases they went as high as 125%LTV.
Most experts will agree that as long as the market is buoyant, this lending is alright. If you take into account that the market was rising at a rate of 10%, lending 125% on a property of 100,000 means you are lending 125,000, but with that 10% rate of increase in value over just 3 years your LTV has already dropped to around 93%. In a buoyant market, this sort of lending would be considered a calculated profitable risk and was therefore given the o.k..
But the problem that we face is that house prices are going in the opposite direction. The decline is at least 10% and analysts figure that it could get worse. So, if 100,000 was lent on an 85,000 property then in the same three year time span the loan could have actually increased to 118% LTV. Now I am sure you would agree that in this present climate that this sort of loaning is both irresponsible and detrimental to all involved.
So with regards to the money bailouts, what does this mean for our financial future? In my professional opinion I believe that there will be little overall effect, although with any luck time will prove me wrong. Although lenders are now obliged to lend in 2009 at the rates of 2007, as you will see from the first part of this article they won't be able to lend at the high LTV rates of 2007. The people who are now desperate to borrow are those coming out of rates already arranged in the past 5 years, and these borrowers are going to push the LTV to its limit because of the drop in house prices.
You also need to take into account that a lot of people in the last few years have acquired mortgages on a self certification basis. These sort of mortgages are now considered high risk for lenders and so are mostly unavailable, and even if they are available they will be at greatly reduced LTVs, so what options do these people have to chose from?
So whilst I do welcome the money that is being injected into the finance market I sadly think that whilst property continues to fall and lenders fail to have the pre 2008 appetite for lending it is more than likely just going to be stockpiled. This will have a domino effect as house prices will continue to fall because of the lack of lending at the right LTV with the right lending criteria which again will make lenders even less willing to lend. I have to say this is quite a quandary and I honestly don't see how it can be stopped until someone has the bravery to just lend knowing the calculated risk it represents I think it is fondly known as taking a punt!. - 16928
About the Author:
Advice on mortgages from specialist Independent Mortgage Advisers help information and free to use mortgage calculators come to Mortgage Route Grab a totally unique version of this article from the Uber Article Directory
No comments:
Post a Comment