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.
To most people the credit crunch is all about banks not having the money to lend. So it is fair to assume that if you give the banks the money that will solve the problem. Sorry this is not the case in fact this is actually far from the case. Banks not having the money to lend is only one aspect of the problem. Most banks are “once bitten twice shy” to coin a phrase. They have lent badly and are now paying the price, it is this issue that will be with us way beyond any bailout plan has been agreed and distributed.
One of the principal areas to focus on when assessing the reasons for our present financial crisis is the area of house prices. As everyone knows they have taken a big tumble and there would seem to be no respite in the immediate future. Lenders are now facing a situation in which they have to implement more rigorous procedures and one of the targets is that of loan to value, or LTV, which is the amount that they are willing to loan dependent on the value of the property. They were lending from 95%LTV up to a staggering 125%LTV.
While the market is buoyant most annalists will agree this type of lending is OK. Think about it if you lend on a 100,000 house 125% which results in a loan of 125,000 and the house price rises over the next three years at a rate of 10% per annum, which was not unheard of. Then your LTV in three years time would only be 93% this is alright from a lending point of view and what would be considered an acceptable risk.
The problem now is that rather than rising by 10% per annum the housing prices are in fact dropping by that much, and they are set to drop even more. If you consider that drop, if a lender was to give 85,000 on a 100,000 property which continued to drop in value, in 3 years the LTV could rise to 118%, which in these turbulent times is simply not acceptable. This is why lenders are now slow to lend out quantities much over 85%.
So what does this mean to the bailout and the future of the market? Well in my opinion, and I may be right or wrong only time will tell, I think that the bailout will have little effect. Yes the lenders are under a commitment to lend at the levels of 2007 during 2009, but if you understand what has been said in my previous paragraphs they cant lend at the high loan to values. Most of the urgent cases for lending are the people coming out of rates that have been arrange in the last five years, these people are going to be pushing the LTVs due to the current house price falls.
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?
Don?t get me wrong, I am all for the government trying to give the economy a much needed boost, but I just think that the institutions will be unwilling to take the risk on loans at the 2007 and before levels. They will most probably stockpile for the future. This will mean that house prices will continue to spiral downwards due to the LTV not being at a suitable level and the banks will be even more cautious about the type of loans on offer and also the vetting process. It really is a difficult situation and I think that the only way around it if for one of the institutions to bite the bullet and take a calculated risk with regards to their lending.