Archive for the ‘The Mortgage Market’ Category

High time APR or Annual Percentage Rate interest calculations were removed from mortgage products

Thursday, November 19th, 2009

One of the most bewildering and confusing items on any mortgage illustration from my point of view must be the Annual Percentage Rate or APR listed on a product. APR was developed to give a comparative measure between various loans to show the overall cost of the borrowing on an annual basis taking into account a much broader range of fees and charges than the loan interest on its own.

Now that’s a good thing where the calculation makes sense, but on mortgage products in its current guise it makes no sense at all.

A simple look at the best buy tables on our website will show you that a product far cheaper during its initial interest rate term may have a much higher APR than a product with a considerably higher rate of interest. The issue is that APR is calculated over the lifetime of the loan and so will also consider the reversion rate of the product after its initial term.

There are several reasons why this is misleading;

  1. 1. Reversion rates are generally variable and not linked directly to bank base rate. In two years time a lender with a previously un-competitive reversion rate may well be leading the market and vice versa – hence it is not a factor that should play a major part in the decision making process.
  2. 2. You would generally regularly remortgage during the early years of your mortgage repayment to ensure a competitive rate of interest so including the reversion rate after the initial mortgage term distorts the picture.
  3. 3. Clever design can skew the figure. Lifetime trackers appear very competitive because they have no reversion rate, and refunding upfront fee’s affects the calculation but could cost a pretty penny if the loan never goes ahead.

APR is a system that was never really designed for mortgage contracts but has become a legal obligation when advertising them due to the confused dual regulatory system between the FSA and the Office of Fair Trading, it makes some sense on unsecured loans and very little in the mortgage market.

It is high time this dual regulation was removed and APR calculations either scrapped on mortgage contracts or replaced with something far more specific to the complex nature a mortgage product.

Why the rate loading Mr Lender?

Monday, October 26th, 2009

When a mortgage broker arranges a mortgage for a borrower the commission they receive (if they take the commission as opposed to a fee) is not standardised but there is however only a limited difference from lender to lender. Typically the percentage is about 0.3 to 0.35% for a residential mortgage with good credit, 0.40 to 0.45% for buy to let mortgages, and slightly higher for adverse credit applications.

Why then are several banks, one of which I won’t name but is almost entirely government owned (guess who?) is loading rates available via intermediaries by anything up to 1% against an equivalent product available through them direct? If these lenders are proposing that it costs them more to accept intermediary applications this is farcical.

They may argue that the intermediary market would simply direct too much business to them which they don’t have funds to supply. This is plausible but I think it is actually pricing intermediary products out of the market to attract business from consumers direct who can then be goat herded into higher rate products with down valuations and clandestine credit scoring, or even lower rate products with ridiculous fee’s which are more expensive in reality. Without a broker to argue the case and guide on fee’s most people will simply accept being cascaded to a higher rate without asking difficult questions, or being declined an application having paid for valuations and the like.

I want someone to actually put the question to these banks, how is this rate loading fair practice and why is it in place? Because to the educated it seems to be the intention to get mortgage advisors out of the market so that dodgy products can once again be sold in bulk. Just look at the return of long early repayment charges on market leading rates as a sign that lenders are looking for ways to lock customers into potentially crippling mortgage rates.

House Price rises driven by larger properties

Tuesday, September 29th, 2009

Findaproperty.com’s new house price index suggests that house prices have remained stagnant at the bottom end of the market while strong rises in higher value properties are propping up the major indices.

Their figures collated from average asking prices on the website over the past month show high value properties climbing at 6.6% annually against a monthly rise of o.3% for first time buyer properties leaving them still down -4.6% year on year. This would appear to suggest that the difficult lending conditions for first time buyers are continuing to drag down property prices as second times buyers struggle to find a purchaser who can afford their property in the current market.

However there is good news in the bag too with average first time buyer affordability improving dramatically fuelled by the price reduction. Their figures for affordability gap or the average deposit required show a drop to £55,700 or 1.74 times gross household income against £71,000 or 2.8 times gross household income in January 2008.

Overall the indices showed a 0.2% rise on August figures leaving the average national asking price at £218,134.

You can see their results and the rest of the overview here Find a property.com’s September House Price Indices

More on buying without deposit

Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

I wrote a couple of weeks ago about the amount of enquiries mortgage brokers are facing around buying without deposit and I forgot to mention a couple of other important ways to buy without deposit in my previous post.

Firstly it is possible to arrange a gifted deposit from relatives or even possibly another interested party using a form of contract which entitles them to ownership of the relevant share of the property. This contract would allow you to buy the interested party out at your choice or entitle them to the share on sale.

This device gives the potential giftor a legal right to some of the proceeds of sale even if values continue to fall and much more certainty of receiving their gift back in the future.

Also those who are lucky enough to have the right to buy a council property may be able to buy without deposit as well because many lenders will accept the discounted value of the property as the deposit as long as their valuation reflects the councils figures.

However if you are  eligible for a Right to Buy but live in a council flat don’t get too excited straight away as many lenders are restricting their exposure on flats due to the flood of 1 bed properties during the boom so if your property isn’t a house its a good idea to speak to a mortgage advisor and see whether a deposit will or will not be required.

Who needs Self Certification?

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

There have been muted announcement’s from the FSA recently that indicate they may be moving to stop fast track lending and self certification mortgages for people in full time employment but there still seems to be a lack of understanding in what self cert is for.

Self Certification is designed for those who cannot prove their income and for whom normal lending practice of considering income that is not guaranteed at a rate of 50% would cause unfair difficulty in borrowing.
There are many types of employment that are paid largely in commission income ranging from recruitment consultants, estate agents, business development managers to stock brokers, (even mortgage advisors my friend!). These are all forms of employment that may produce a need for self certification.

Other people that are owners of a business that may produce very irregular income streams such as businesses in tourism sectors or a firm that was paid on completion of large irregular contracts may also have a need to self certify particularly when self employed.

What it is not is a means to inflate income. Lenders will withhold the right to contact employers, ask for bank statements and other supporting information so if the figures are out of the ordinary they should be asking questions and hopefully if the FSA keep this mind it won’t be banned. There is a home for Self Certification that shouldn’t be ignored.

Can I Buy without a deposit?

Monday, June 29th, 2009

A big question for many first time buyers at the moment is how can I purchase a house without a deposit in the absence of 100% mortgage products.

One way that is possible is the governments Home Buy Direct shared equity scheme which allows customers to buy a house for 70% or more of its value, the developer or makes a loan for the remainder on an interest free basis which later reverts to a very low rate such as 1.75% after several years. Some of the property developers involved in the scheme are offering purchase without deposit.

The scheme operator is repaid either by staircasing (buying a larger stake in the property towards 100% ownership) or on sale of the property in which case they will take their percentage of the sale value.

Housing associations may also run similar schemes known as shared ownership where you purchase between 25-75% of a property typically and pay a nominal rent on the remainder however these may require a deposit. Broadly both schemes are quite similar.

To find out more search for Home buy Direct on Google etc or for housing associations in your area.

However one way that usually wouldn’t work is if the vendor simply strikes the deposit value off the sale price. Known as a vendors deposit this is now very unlikely to be accepted and pretty much all lenders will take the lesser figure for the valuation leaving you back at square one.

Time to fix your mortgage?

Thursday, June 18th, 2009

A lot of people have been asking me recently whether it’s the right time to fix their mortgage payment in light of the fact that rates have started to go up.

And it’s a very interesting question without a very straightforward answer, but here’s the main considerations to think about.

Firstly if you are on or about to go onto your banks standard variable rate, is it below the current fixed rates? Many banks haven’t passed on the full rate cut and there are SVR’s out there far higher than current fixes if you have a decent amount of equity in your property. There are fixed rates available around the 3% mark if you have 25-30% equity.

So if your current rate is above 3% then it’s well worth considering if you have the equity there however if you don’t have a lot of equity or if you have any significant adverse credit the picture changes considerably and it may be better waiting till rates are about to jump significantly, it largely depends on how much more a month you will have to pay in order to fix now.

If you have a very low standard variable rate then the really big question is when will bank base rate go up and by how much? And while Mervin King announced that it definitely wouldn’t go up this year, it’s well worth looking at inflation. You may have noticed petrol starting to go up again and crude oil prices have bounced back to $70 a barrel. This could have a big effect on the Retail Prices Index & Consumer Prices Index and very importantly swap rates, and if you look at prices of other commodities which eventually filter down to consumer prices such as prices for metals like steel and aluminium many are enjoying a boost at the moment as well.

Many lenders have just increased their fixed rates due to increases in swap rates. Unfortunately without a crystal ball it’s hard to know whether swap rates will continue to rise or if they may even fall again before the bank base rate changes. It is likely though that the swap rate increases are due to inflation concern and the anticipated rise in base rate so may continue to rise moving forward. Historically speaking a 3-4% interest rate on a mortgage is still low so this all points to now being a good time to fix for 2-3 years as long as your circumstances suit.

Should Affordability be regulated?

Wednesday, March 11th, 2009

Hi and welcome to this the first post of the brokers blog.

As my first topic I thought I would comment on Gordon Browns recent suggestion that there may be a move to regulate the affordability models used by banks and building societies when determining how much to lend to a borrower.

I am probably one of few people in an industry based around percentage commission to think that this is a good idea in essence, but I am all too aware of the dangers of getting it wrong.

The point being the dual regulation system we have currently with Mortgages being FSA Regulated and non residential and second charge lending being essentially unregulated outside of the limited involvement of the OFT (Office of fair trading).

There’s no point regulating affordability on first charge residential loans without bringing second charge loans and Buy to Let into the same body of regulation, or the effect will be to encourage further the misuse of Buy to Let mortgages for the purposes of getting a larger loan leaving the market still open to abuse and also encouraging people to take more expensive second charge lending for debt consolidation.

Its important not to get carried away with the sentiment of the moment and bodge regulation just because it seems like a good idea to bring the banks into line with each other. Perhaps the question should be is it time to regulate all non-commercial lending under the same body (and I include Buy to Let in non-commercial) as well as limit the affordability calculation used?

The answer is probably yes. However even then there is a very important thing to consider, how do you regulate that without leaving a significant number of people locked out of a re-mortgage? Because whilst it is favourable to have a control on the fire of house price inflation it definitely isn’t a good idea to lock people on existing 4 to 5+ times income Mortgages out of competitive new rates, at the same time as leaving them exposed on their variable rate to every change of bank base rate.

Whatever the government does decide to do on this they need to think carefully about how it can be done without leaving thousands of people in even more danger of mortgage default.

Another important aspect to it is that it will be likely to further the reduction in house prices, which would currently leave people deeper in negative equity. There are still many areas where the average first time buyer simply can’t afford to buy at 4 times main income, so the market is still generally overpriced in many areas, and bringing in this type of regulation could worsen the pain of the credit crunch for many particularly those who have pushed their income that bit further and are already treading water.

So in my opinion whilst it’s definitely needed, a bull in a china shop approach could be nothing short of disastrous.