View more on these topics

Clock is ticking for interest-only loans

Richard Fox

The FSA has identified that interest-only mortgages represent a ticking timebomb and are asking lenders to clarify their liability on these loans.

The theory of interest-only loans was that borrowers would make independent arrangements to enable them to repay the capital at the end of the term. For many years, such loans where linked to endowment insurance policies, with the lender holding a charge over the policy and receiving regular notifications that premiums were being paid. Over time, this connection was broken and borrowers had to maintain proper arrangements themselves. It has been obvious for some time that many have failed to do this and as a result will be unable to repay the capital sum on the due date.

Trying to allocate blame for this situation is pointless. It could be said that lenders should not have stopped tracking repayments but, from their point of view, their lending was supported by the value of the property charged against the loan. Equally, borrowers should have been more prudent but rational behaviour was diminished by the astronomic rise in property values, which resulted in a false sense of wealth, a problem compounded by economic policies encouraging consumer spending.

To put some numbers on the problem, it is estimated that 150,000 interest-only mortgages will reach the end of their term every year for the next 10 years, and that 80 per cent of those borrowers have no repayment strategy for the outstanding loan. The total sum involved is thought to be in the region of £120bn. It is clear there is no ready solution, such sums being way beyond the capacity of equity-release lending. Only a relaxation of lending criteria could enable such a need to be met. But, in turn, any such borrowing would be at much higher rates and would significantly restrict the ability of lenders to make funds available to younger housebuyers.

It is unfortunate that some politicians continue to believe they can micro-manage the mortgage market and control the behaviour of consumers. Obviously, society has an interest in ensuring an adequate supply of housing but manipulating interest rates, encouraging house price inflation, which in turn forced many borrowers to take on ruinous amounts of debt in order to get into the housing market, must be recognised as a seriously flawed policy.

The problems the FSA is now identifying are not new. There are many people entering retirement carrying significant debt with inadequate income to service it.

Is it possible, or right, to devise a management strategy for these individuals? Or should society stand back and leave it for them to sort it out for themselves, perhaps by accepting a move to cheaper housing and significantly reduced standards of living?

The sheer numbers of people who are seeking advice with their financial difficulties sends a clear message that advisers have a role to play, regulators need to fully understand the problem and product providers have a requirement to devise mechanisms which will ease the immediate problems and ensure that future borrowers cannot borrow beyond their means.

Richard Fox is chief executive of the Society of Mortgage Professionals

Recommended

1

Advisers hit out over £60m FSCS levy for the ‘idiocy’ of others

Advisers have branded the Financial Services Compensation Scheme’s funding model “hopeless” and hit out at having to pay for the “supreme idiocy” of others as they get invoices for the £60m interim levy on investment intermediaries. The FSCS announced the £60m interim levy for 2011/12 earlier this month. Claims related to the collapse of MF […]

Royal London pre-tax profits dive as investment returns plummet

Royal London’s pre-tax IFRS operating profit plummeted from £232m in 2010 to £64m in 2011 as total revenues slumped by over £2bn. The mutual insurer’s year end results, published today, show total revenues dropped from £4.39bn in 2010 to £2.34bn last year. This was mainly due to a £2bn fall in investment returns, from £3.32bn […]

3

Treasury report admits it was not ready for financial crisis

The Treasury did not see the financial crisis coming and was unprepared to deal with it as a result, an official report has revealed.  An internal review into the response of the department’s management to the crisis admits that before 2007 financial services and stability were not “high profile” issues for the department. It says […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There is one comment at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Is it just me, or is anyone else thinking about the “real-life” impact on IO maturing mortgages.

    What happens if someone hasn’t the ability to repay the mortgage at term? Will they have to sell up and move? What if they don’t want to / can’t – they have been in their home for 25 years, will have family ties, etc – so may wish to remain in the house.

    Who is going to get them out? Is the lender, after receiving 25 years of on-time interest payments really going to take these people to court and seek possession? Will we (through judges) really evict people from their homes?

    But what are the options? The debt could be rolled over (repaid on death), but how will interest be paid (particulalry if the borrower is now retired)? Are such borrowers/lenders going to be forced into some “sale – rent back” schemes?

    Have many people come to end of IO terms and being unable to repay debt? What happended to those people?

    Seems odd that there isn’t much commentrary about this…………………… or have I just missed it?

Leave a comment