Mortgage

Almost three-quarters of variable borrowers who asked for a rate cut, got one, a new survey has found.&nbsp;

In a RateCity.com.au survey of over 1,000 mortgage holders, of those on a variable rate, 52 per cent haggled with their bank for a lower rate. Over 73 per cent of these people were successful in getting at least one rate cut.

A rate reduction of 0.25 per cent could save the average mortgage holder $1,241 in interest after one year and $3,656 after three years. This is based on a $500,000 loan balance with 25 years remaining.

While the majority of changes to fixed rates in the last two months have been hikes, the opposite is happening in the variable rate market.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=29048 project_image_fid=151675]

RateCity.com.au home loan database analysis:

<ul>
	<li>49 lenders have cut at least one variable rate in the past two months.</li>
	<li>10 lenders have hiked variable rates in that time.</li>
	<li>The vast majority of variable rate cuts are reserved for new customers, not existing ones.</li>
</ul>

RateCity research director, Sally Tindall, said while the RBA is not expected to move the cash rate tomorrow, one phone call could potentially save the average variable rate mortgage holder thousands.

&ldquo;Variable rates are at record lows, however, most of these deals are reserved for new customers, not existing ones, unless you specifically ask,&rdquo; she said.

&ldquo;A lot of people think a handful of basis points won&rsquo;t make much of a difference, but if the discount is permanent, then the savings can potentially run into the thousands in just a few years.&quot;

While the majority of changes to fixed rates in the last two months have been hikes, the opposite is happening in the variable rate market

jordan_55689

Three out of four mortgage holders who asked for a rate cut, got one: RateCity 

EXPERT INSIGHT

So you think it&rsquo;s the right time to dive in and buy a home.

I can&rsquo;t tell you you&rsquo;re wrong. I can tell you it would have been better to do it before prices began soaring, and that if they keep soaring it will get worse still.

When the year began, the typical Sydney price was <a href="https://www.corelogic.com.au/news/corelogic-december-home-value-indices">$872,000</a>. Five months later at the start of June it is <a href="https://www.corelogic.com.au/news/australias-housing-boom-rolls-national-home-values-lifting-another-22-may">$970,000</a>.

That&rsquo;s a jump of almost $100,000 in a matter of months &mdash; an awfully big price for procrastinating.

In Melbourne the typical price has climbed from $682,000 to $740,500. In Perth it has climbed from $471,000 to $521,500, and so on.

And banks are beginning to withdraw the cheapest of their still-very-cheap mortgage rates, at this stage mainly the fixed four-year rates which had been below <a href="https://www.domain.com.au/news/house-hunters-facing-rising-fixed-mortgage-rates-with-further-hikes-expected-1054965/">2%</a>.

So why on earth wouldn&rsquo;t you dive in, cut your living expenses to the bare minimum and try and buy a home while it&rsquo;s the least bit possible?

One (slight) reason to relax is mortgage rates. Despite the increases in fixed four-year rates, three-year rates have barely moved. That&rsquo;s because the Reserve Bank has promised to hold the three-year bond rate <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/media-releases/2021/mr-21-09.html">constant</a> at 0.1%.

Buying has become a bigger commitment

The three-year bond rate determines the cost to banks of their three-year fixed rate mortgages.

The Reserve Bank has said it does not expect to lift its 0.1% cash rate until &ldquo;2024 at the earliest&rdquo;. Movements in the cash rate determine movements in variable mortgage rates.

But there is another reason for proceeding with caution and taking stock.

For our parents, buying a home was an exceptionally good deal, not only because homes were cheaper &mdash; until the end of the 1990s homes typically cost between two and three times household after-tax income, they now cost closer to five &mdash; but also because over time the loan became easier to pay off.

That isn&rsquo;t because mortgage rates were coming down &mdash; at times they were going up &mdash; it&rsquo;s because during our parents&rsquo; times wages (and prices) were climbing.

It meant that even if someone of our parents&rsquo; generation just squeaked through one of the bank&rsquo;s tests about their ability to make payments on a mortgage, a few years and lots of inflation and several big wage rises down the track those mortgage payments shrank compared to everything else.

Once, wage rises took care of repayments

Many of our parents paid off their mortgages early.

One way to look at this is that the bank&rsquo;s ability-to-repay calculators were set too harshly. They failed to account for future hefty wage rises and inflation.

It&rsquo;s probably also true that they were set more generously than they might have been in an implicit acknowledgement of what the assistant governor in charge of the Reserve Bank&rsquo;s economic branch Luci Ellis calls &ldquo;<a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2006/2006-12/global-trends.html">mortgage tilt</a>&rdquo;.

The former governor, Glenn Stevens, used another term, &ldquo;<a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/1997/sp-ag-081097.html">front-end loading</a>&rdquo;.

Mortgages were &lsquo;front-end loaded&rsquo;

When inflation was high, and as a consequence interest rates were high, wages that climbed rapidly with high inflation made the servicing burden &ldquo;most acute in the very early phase of a loan, falling over time&rdquo;.

On a graph (and the former governor presented a graph) the line showing payments as a portion of income tilts down over time.

In a world of lower inflation and interest rates, the tilt becomes flatter.

By now (Stevens published the graph in 1997) the line must be near horizontal.

If wage growth remains near the <a href="https://twitter.com/1petermartin/status/1399520798734389250/photo/1">record lows</a> the treasury is forecasting it will become scarcely any easier to make payments on a home loan over time.

Yet the banks are still handing out loans using the sort of formulas they used to.

If you get a loan you&rsquo;ll be assessed as being able to (just) make the payments as always, but you&rsquo;ll be denied the near certainty of being able to more easily meet the payments as time goes on.

Now, we retire mortgaged

This is a different from the risk you&rsquo;ll also run of today&rsquo;s ultra-low mortgage rates climbing (which banks do take into account in deciding whether to give you a loan).

The proportion of homeowners reaching retirement age while still paying off their mortgage has doubled in 20 years. Which might be why some banks ask for details of your super before granting you a loan. It isn&rsquo;t an idle inquiry.

Might things get better? Maybe, if we can get wages moving again.

Evidence given to Tuesday&rsquo;s post-budget Senate estimate hearing provides cause for hope, and despair.

Super hikes will make things worse

The budget forecasts for wage growth over the next four financial years are incredibly low &mdash; 1.5%, 2.25%, 2.5% and 2.75%

On Tuesday Treasury Secretary Steven Kennedy revealed that each would have been higher &mdash; 0.4 points higher &mdash; had the government not persisted with the five scheduled annual increases in compulsory superannuation contributions of 0.5% of salary starting in July.

The treasury believes each increase will slice 0.4 percentage points from wage growth, on the basis that employers, who are legally required to pay the contributions, will have to find the money somewhere.

It&rsquo;s the same conclusion reached by the government&rsquo;s <a href="https://theconversation.com/that-extra-youre-about-to-get-in-super-most-of-it-will-come-from-you-but-dont-expect-the-ads-to-tell-you-that-154723">retirement incomes review</a>.

It&rsquo;s cause for hope because it means that when those five increases stop (in mid-2026, or sooner if the government stops them mid-track) wages might be able to grow more strongly.

It&rsquo;s cause for despair because if the treasury is right, we are denying ourselves wage rises we could use in return for super we will increasingly use to pay down our mortgages.<img alt="The Conversation" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161873/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important" width="1" z5zyoz6tp="" />

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a>

This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/paying-off-a-home-loan-used-to-be-easier-than-it-looked-its-now-harder-heres-why-161873">original article</a>.

Paying off a home loan used to be easier than it looked - it's now harder - here's why

<html><body>
Australian homeowners are skeptical about receiving unbiased advice from a bank when it comes to refinancing a home loan, according to research commissioned Mortgage Choice.

The research reveals two out of five (38%) homeowners are either in the process of refinancing or are considering making the move to a new loan.

However, 53% of homeowners are wary that if they speak to a bank they won’t be advised if they could get a similar or better home loan deal elsewhere. One in two (49%) homeowners feel that banks don’t always have their best interests at heart.

High levels of trust for mortgage brokers 

The survey results confirmed that a significant majority (94%) of Australian homeowners say they trust the loan recommendations made by a mortgage broker.

For half (55%) of the respondents surveyed, the number one benefit of partnering with a mortgage broker during the refinancing process is professional support comparing loan options, rates and features. For 45% of refinancers, a mortgage broker streamlines the process, “saving time and hassle”.

“Faced with what can be an overwhelming choice of home loans, homeowners want to be confident they are making the move to a loan that will improve their financial wellbeing through a lower rate, improved loan features, or both," Susan Mitchell, CEO of Mortgage Choice said.

“While banks can provide information on their own product suite, they do not have an in-depth understanding of competitors’ products. That is why I urge borrowers in the market for a better deal to engage the help of an experienced mortgage broker to learn what other options they have,” she added.
</body></html>

Mortgage Choice found 53% of homeowners are wary that if they speak to a bank they won’t be advised if they could get a similar or better home loan deal elsewhere

urban.com.au

Australians are skeptical about receiving unbiased refinancing advice from banks

<html><body>
Is it a case of banks don’t know what’s going on, or is it more a statement they don’t want to know? Pour yourself a fresh cup of coffee and read on. Don’t forget, your comments are welcomed and be sure to share them.
There are three main issues that banks appear to be very silent on and the question that is fitting in this property-climate is simply: “why are they so quiet?” A question which begs a straight answer; especially with the concerns surrounding foreign and local property investors buying newly built property and pricing local first-time-home-buyers out.
The three concerns and issues I refer to are:
·     Rental guarantees
·     Overly inflated commissions and
·     The scourge of the financial industry sector, selling property without a real estate industry license.
My immediate guess is, if you are riding the “Gravy Train” of “Overseas &amp; Local Investors” why should these seemingly illegal practices be of concern to banks? Again and for now, I’m just speculating that; it’s best to turn a blind eye than it is to confront what may well be considered unfair and unjust to local home buyers. After all, first-time-home-buyers aren’t the flavor of the month to all concerned, now are they?
It is my strong belief that the three topics noted, create an unfair advantage that has driven property values sky-high as developers reach for the skies.
Why is this unfair? I have previously discussed in other articles, “Rental-Guarantees” and “Overly-Inflated Commissions” are ultimately paid by the investor.
<a href="https://mail.privatemedia.com.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=buh8exBazU3bNSloPOr0rrJNNQesJNSotxGFO7YMkRixynWPdWzSCGgAdAB0AHAAOgAvAC8AdwB3AHcALgBsAGkAbgBrAGUAZABpAG4ALgBjAG8AbQAvAHAAdQBsAHMAZQAvAGkAbgB0AGUAcgBuAGEAdABpAG8AbgBhAGwALQBpAG4AdgBlAHMAdABvAHIAcwAtAGIAZQBpAG4AZwAtAGQAdQBwAGUAZAAtAHMAeQBkAG4AZQB5AC0AYQB1AHMAdAByAGEAbABpAGEALQBlAGQAdwBpAG4ALQBhAGwAbQBlAGkAZABhAA..&amp;URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.linkedin.com%2fpulse%2finternational-investors-being-duped-sydney-australia-edwin-almeida"> </a>Ha! And you thought the developers were generous and paid for these right? Therefore, driving the values of the newly built properties upward.
Now allow me to break it down for you.
Rental guarantees:
What is common amidst most of the activity surrounding the sales of newly built property is the rental guarantees. Some rental guarantees are lasting for as long as 3 years.
It is my belief that any incentive made by the vendor or the agent to enhance the sale, the incentive has to be disclosed and must also form part of the contract of sale. The inducement being the rental guarantee but this is not limited to a rental guarantee.
In my time I have also seen cars and furniture packages form part of sales incentives, all in the aim to entice the investor to buy.
Inflated Commissions:
Yes, I know I speak out a lot about this very subject but when spruikers earn 5 times what the local agent earns in one sale, there has to be something wrong. If I don’t speak out, will the REI NSW step in or any of the REI’s for that matter?
I stopped holding that breath 4 years ago.
Nevertheless, the banking bodies should take note as their clients (the investors) are ultimately paying for this.
I also note that most of my endeared friends that have created this negative impact on the local home front, all sell newly built property. An arena where highly inflated commissions can and are paid out.
Selling without an industry license:
The temptation is just too great and the grass is greener on the other side. When so much money is at stake we have seen; brokers, accountants, financial planners and advisers jump the fence to moonlight as real estate agents as they lead their clients astray.
Again, this is an area where the banks should focus on, as local investors fall prey to the rogues within the financial sector.
A closer eye and perhaps a magnifying glass should be used to review contracts especially when the buyers are: Trustee Companies for Self-Managed-Super-Fund (SMSF) Trusts. More to the point when the property is new as this is the territory where these rogues, feast and boast about the high commissions earned.
Rental guarantees, overly inflated commissions and spruikers selling real estate without a license under the guise of calling themselves property-marketers: should send alarm bells ringing through the banking sector. But once more, why is there so much silence surrounding the very issues that have overly inflated the value of a new property in Sydney?
Getting to the nuts and bolts
Unethical real estate agents, spruikers, property marketing companies and the scourge of the financial sector; all have been ensnared by the prize of the high commissions and in turn lure investors by creating false perceptions of property: growth, demand, under-supply and high return on investment. How? By the simple use of instruments (such as rental guarantees) outside of the contract of sale and therefore, making the transaction questionable and unconscionable.
The falsely represented, high priced, new property sales ultimately filters down to established homes and we have what I refer to as “property-osmosis”. Property osmosis is an upward pull of established property's prices, caused by the exaggerated values of the surrounding new developments.
Most people are also under the impression that Overseas-Investors are paying for their properties with 100% cash. However, that it is not the case. Most investors buy property with a high deposit and borrow 50-60% through a loan vehicle.
In actual fact, Chinese citizens can only take up to $50,000 out of China through legal channels. However, there are means and ways to take $200K-$400K without much fuss.
Therefore, banks are more than happy to lend at 60% Loan to Value Ratios, as they are well secured even if the market dips by 20-30%. As you can see, there is very little risk for the banks.
Then there are our home grown Local-Investors that have been enticed to buy. Their property investment guides as previously mentioned are mainly, property spruikers and financial experts that assist in creating (SMSF) schemes to buy property. These vehicles also requiring low LVRs to purchase.
Typically, the SMSF schemes may borrow 70-80% to buy the investment property. Again the banking sector feeling secure on all counts.
What banks and Industry bodies need to do
The first and foremost prudent demand banks should place on the real estate industry is, for the “Sales Inspection Report and Agency Agreement” to be disclosed. Disclosure of what the “AGENCY” is being rewarded for the sale, will provide a twofold and strong indication to the valuer if there are any hidden agreements not being revealed.
·     Overinflated commissions
·     Payments made to agent/agency to cover rental guarantees and other incentives not disclosed in the Contract of Sale, which are passed on to the investor.
A copy of the agency/corporation license, should also accompany the contract of sale when providing the relevant documentation to the valuers. For the bank valuers to properly asses the true value of the property.
·     An agency or business name on the front page of the contract inserted after "Vendor's Agent" does not represent that the agent holds an industry license.
Perhaps at this very moment there is simply too much at stake to curve these questionable practices. The banks, financial institutions, real estate agents and we may also include the government, are all making too much money on this gravy train, to really care about our local first home buyers.
I am troubled nonetheless to think that all these practices that may be considered highly questionable if not illegal, have and continue to go on and right under the very noses of the banking institutions.
EDWIN ALMEIDA is licensee in charge of <a href="https://www.just-think.com.au/" target="_blank">Just Think Real Estate</a>.<a href="https://www.just-thin.com.au/"> </a>
He is also the creator of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/user/JustThinkProperty" target="_blank">Oz Real Estate.TV</a> and a presenter for <a href="https://propertyinvestingvault.com/" target="_blank">propertyinvestingvault.com</a>.
 
</body></html>

ealmedia-arK4DBYLjS

Banks turning a blind eye: Edwin Almeida

<html><body>
<div>
Australia's largest and most recently listed mortgage aggregator Australian Finance Group (AFG) released its December 2015 quarter Mortgage Index, which now again includes figures at the state level.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The index, which is not seasonally adjusted, showed a solid 7 per cent increase in the volume of mortgages sold from the prior corresponding period, up from $12.9 billion in December 2014 to $13.8 billion last quarter.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="/images/2016/01/14/AFG1.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div><img src="/images/2016/01/14/AFG1.jpg" alt=""></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>This was in spite of the investor share of the market continuing to decline, with this sector slinking back down to a 6 year low.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Investor loan volumes are expected to stabilise from here, with the impact of tighter lending rates for investors and tougher lending criteria now largely baked in. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Click to enlarge</div>
<div><img src="/images/2016/01/14/AFG2.jpg" alt=""></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>The investor segment of the market had clearly become overheated in 2013, contributing to slowing rental growth.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>State versus state</div>
<div> </div>
<div>At the state level, AFG recorded more than $5 billion of mortgages written in New South Wales for the third time, as the state saw mortgage volumes up by 12 per cent from one year ago.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The data series adds further weight to the suggestion that the Melbourne market may be set for a bright 2016, with mortgage volumes in Victoria up by nearly 18 per cent over the year in rising to a new high, despite the final quarter of the year being a short one due to the Christmas break.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Mortgage volumes written also increased by 13 per cent over the year in South Australia, but have declined in Western Australia (-10 per cent) and the Northern Territory (-21 per cent respectively).</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="/images/2016/01/14/AFG3.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div><img src="/images/2016/01/14/AFG3.jpg" alt=""></div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>Mortgage sizes have soared</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The average size of mortgage written continues to rise, up by 20 per cent over the past three years to a fresh all-time high of $476,479.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="/images/2016/01/14/AFG4.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div><img src="/images/2016/01/14/AFG4.jpg" alt=""></div>
<div> </div>
<div>The average size of mortgage written in NSW increased to a new high of $583,708, with mortgage sizes also rising by around 7 per cent over the past year in Victoria, Queensland, and South Australia. </div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="/images/2016/01/14/AFG6.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a></div>
<div><img src="/images/2016/01/14/AFG6.jpg" alt=""></div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>The wrap</div>
<div> </div>
<div>While AFG's index may be distorted by changes in market share, meaning that users should be wary of premature extrapolation, the figures do provide further hints as to what to expect in the year ahead.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It is evident that markets will increasingly be driven forward by owner-occupiers rather than investors, while the market in Melbourne continues to defy...well, people like me, I suppose, who felt that the market have may peaked some years ago.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Overall, APRA's cooling measures appear to have worked and the property market seems to have calmed after the frenzy we saw around April and May last year, particularly in Sydney. That said, mortgage volumes - and particularly mortgage sizes - have to date remained very high, with owner-occupiers plugging most of the gap being left by investors. Accordingly, we might expect to see a more sustainable and balanced market going forward in 2016. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
PETE WARGENT is the co-founder of <a href="https://allenwargent.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">AllenWargent</a> property buyers (London, Sydney) and a best-selling author and <a href="https://petewargent.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">blogger</a>. 
His latest book is <a href="https://www.bigskypublishing.com.au/Books/General-Interest/Four-Green-Houses--and-a-Red-Hotel/1015/productview.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Four Green Houses and a Red Hotel</a>.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body></html>

pwargent-M4siyDbqQY

Our mortgages are getting bigger: Pete Wargent

<html><body>
Someone with lots of time on their hands and not much to do has decided I’m a stressed person.
I should probably seek professional help because not only am I stressed but, alarmingly, I don’t know it. I’m never felt more relaxed in my life, but the aficionados has declared me stressed and these people are experts. Clearly I have a serious disorder.
But it gets worse. Apparently Australia is chock full of people just like me - stressed to the max, but don’t know it. We’re delusional apparently.
We’re all suffering from a new 21st Century disorder known as mortgage stress. The symptoms are a high standard of living, a quality home, an ability to pay all your bills, holidays overseas, happy kids and 30% of your income spent on your mortgage.
It’s a national issue because we don’t know it’s serious. We should all be in therapy but most of us aren’t. Someone should bring on a parliamentary inquiry. 
Sorry, I forgot, they already have. We already have an politicians inquiry into affordability, following close on the heels of the previous 18-month investigation that found nothing of value.
Here’s how it works. One of those pointless businesses that compare home loans and interest rate deals has decided to drum up a bit of publicity in a competitive industry.
They know the key to success is to publish something sensationally negative and they know media is obsessive-compulsive over the whole issue of house prices and affordability.
So they’ve invented something called mortgage stress. They’ve arrogantly decided on a benchmark based on nothing other their desire for media profile. 
So they’ve come up with garbage like this: “On average many owners in capital cities are on the tipping point of mortgage stress, committing 29% of their income to cover repayments. When owners use 30% of their income to repay their loans they are considered to be in mortgage stress.”
Really? According to which experts? Who has pronounced 30% to be the point at which we all fall into stress?
The answer is someone who writes press releases for a loan comparison outfit. It’s the quintessential case of lies, damned lies and statistics.
With the latest findings of this pointless exercise, you could actually come up with something spectacularly positive. Because the latest “research” indicates that Sydney residents with mortgages are NOT mortgage stressed. On average, Sydneysiders with mortgages spend only 26% of income on their mortgages payments. 
After all the hysteria about Sydney prices and the so-called affordability crisis, Sydney households are actually very comfortable with their home loans. Isn’t that extraordinary?
Melbourne also is a city bereft of mortgage stress, with the typical household paying only 28% of income on the mortgage. Perth is very comfortable also. And across Australia, the average household is below the arbitrary red line of 30%.
That’s worth a headline, I would have thought, assuming you believe these figures have any relevance at all.
But the press release writer has buried this deep down the bottom of the media statement, because it’s a rather inconvenient fact. It doesn’t fit the objective of a sensationally negative finding.
The spokesperson for the pointless organisation (which will remain nameless because they don’t deserve the publicity) has declared the results “a bit worrying”.
“It’s alarming that so many Australians are over-stretching themselves and first home buyers and those buying with others are the worst off,’’ she said.
Actually, it’s not alarming at all. It’s quite the opposite. According to their figures, the residents of our largest and most expensive cities are not mortgage-stressed at all. And the average Australian is below the manufactured stress level.
So what did media do? Naturally they published the “findings” pretty much verbatim from the press release, breathlessly declaring a crisis.
Another addition to the great seething mass of misinformation about Australia real estate.
In my perfect world, publishing this kind of dishonest, fabricated-crisis nonsense would be a criminal offence. I see it as a form of fraud.
 
TERRY RYDER is the founder of <a href="https://www.hotspotting.com.au/" target="_blank">hotspotting.com.au</a>. You can <a href="https://mailto:ryder@hotspotting.com.au" target="_blank">email him</a> or follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/hotspotting" target="_blank">Twitter.</a> 
Terry was recently joined by Property Observer editor at large Jonathan Chancellor for a webinar on why research is the key to successful property investing in 2015. You can download slides and audio from the webinar <a href="component/content/article?id=42796" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

terryryder-YECXbqmri2

Are you suffering from mortgage stress? Terry Ryder

<html><body>
Housing finance data for January 2016 shows that the value of housing finance commitments was recorded at $31.9 billion over the month. 
Based on this figure, mortgage lending fell by -3.4 percent over the month.  Even though the data is seasonally adjusted, we often see falls in mortgage lending over January so perhaps we need not read too much into the fall, however, this is the largest January fall in lending since 2011.
<a href="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-1-1-580x213.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-1-1-580x213.jpg" alt="">
Looking at the two major components of mortgage lending: owner occupier and investors both have recorded a fall over the month. In January there was $20.5 billion worth of finance commitments to owner occupiers and $11.4 billion in commitments to investors. The value of owner occupier commitments fell by -4.3 percent over the month but was 15.9 percent higher year-on-year.
Investor commitments fell by -1.6 percent in January and were -14.8 percent lower year-on-year. With investor demand having slowed over recent months, they now account for 35.6 percent of all mortgage commitments which is virtually right on its decade average after peaking at 43.3 percent of all housing finance commitments in May of last year.
<a href="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-21-580x210.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-21-580x210.jpg" alt="">
Of the $20.5 billion in commitments to owner occupiers in January, $1.9 billion was for construction of dwellings, $1.2 billion was for purchase of new dwellings, $7.2 billion was for refinancing of established dwellings and $10.2 billion was for the purchase of other established dwellings.  Construction of dwellings was the only segment of lending to rise over the month (+0.7 percent) with falls in value of lending for purchase of new dwellings (-5.2 percent), refinancing established dwellings (-2.3 percent) and purchase of other established dwellings (-6.4 percent). 
Despite monthly falls, year-on-year all segments have seen an increase in lending with construction of new dwellings rising 6.1 percent, purchase of new dwellings up 35.6 percent, refinances up 36.0 percent and purchase of other established dwellings having increased by 4.8 percent.  Although lending is up over the past year, there is a clear downwards trend in owner occupier lending, particularly for established dwellings, over recent months.  It will important to monitor whether this trend persists in coming months as it could point to slowing value growth.
<a href="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-3-1-580x213.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-3-1-580x213.jpg" alt="">
Following intervention in the market by the regulator, we have seen a sharp slowdown in lending to the investment segment over the past 8 months.  As earlier mentioned, investors accounted for 43.3% of all housing finance commitments in May of last year with their proportion falling to 35.6% in January 2016.  Looking at the two components, in January 2016 there were $899 million worth of commitments for new construction and $10.5 billion worth of commitments for established housing stock. 
Over the month, the value of commitments fell by -4.2% for new construction and by -1.4% for established housing stock.  Year-on-year the value of lending is 3.2% higher for new construction but -16.0% lower for established stock.  Much like the owner occupier chart, it shows that demand for established stock has eased and is trending lower, albeit at a slower pace.  In fact, the value of commitments for established investment stock is at its lowest level since April 2014.
<a href="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-4-1-580x215.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/04/15/Chart-4-1-580x215.jpg" alt="">
The CoreLogic Mortgage Index which is published weekly and tracks mortgage activity across our proprietary platforms indicates that January was a weak month for housing finance commitments.  We would expect that housing finance commitments will rise in February and so far March also points to increasing demand.  However, mortgage demand remains lower than it was at the end of last year and lower than it was a year ago.  While housing finance commitments should increase from their January levels it is unlikely that demand will start to grow as strongly as it was in the early part of last year or late in 2015.
The constraints on investment lending have been extremely effective and have resulted in a swift and significant pull-back in demand, in fact the value of investment housing finance commitments in January was -20.0% lower than its April 2015 peak.  Although the CoreLogic Mortgage Index points to a rebound in demand over the coming months, we expect that growth in housing finance commitments will remain more subdued than what we saw over recent years. 
Of course, the direction of housing finance will ultimately be determined by housing demand.  After demand weakened over the second half of 2015 we have seen stronger demand early in 2016 with much stronger auction clearance rates falling property listings in a number of cities and a rise in property transactions.
Cameron Kusher is research analyst for CoreLogic RP Data. You can contact him <a href="https://blog.corelogic.com.au/about/">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

ckusher-ujnxiKuFQs

Mortgage demand shrinks in January, will it continue throughout 2016? Cameron Kusher

<html><body>
When it comes to the question of who pays the mortgage interest, the answer is that New South Wales and Victoria do: well over half of the national interest payable in fact.
<a href="/images/2015/11/25/Interest%20Payable.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
 <img src="/images/2015/11/25/Interest%20Payable.jpg" alt="">
<div>While this might seem surprising, in fact the share of interest paid by the largest two states has declined over the past two decades.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The reason for this has been the expansion of both the population and mortgage sizes in Queensland (its share of the mortgage interest pie increasing from 15%to 19%) and Western Australia (its share increasing from 9 to 13%).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The changes elsewhere have been negligible when viewed from the national level.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Despite the Australian population having increased by well over 1 million persons (or about 4.7%) over the past three years, total interest payable has declined by nearly 22% thanks to the slashing of interest rates.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
PETE WARGENT is the co-founder of <a href="https://allenwargent.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">AllenWargent</a> property buyers (London, Sydney) and a best-selling author and <a href="https://petewargent.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">blogger</a>. 
His latest book is <a href="https://www.bigskypublishing.com.au/Books/General-Interest/Four-Green-Houses--and-a-Red-Hotel/1015/productview.aspx" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Four Green Houses and a Red Hotel</a>.
</div>
</body></html>

Who pays the interest? Pete Wargent

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVER
As a nation, Australians are fascinated with residential real estate.
Today, you cannot open a newspaper, turn on the radio, watch television, or even have a chat with a friend without the subject of residential real estate coming up. 
Of course, when you consider that real estate is the nation’s number one asset class, this is hardly surprising. 
Everyone has an opinion when it comes to real estate. Most recently, we have heard a number of people argue that lenders and mortgage brokers are encouraging borrowers to take out loans they cannot afford, putting them in housing stress. 
I don’t want to contribute further opinion to this topic. Instead, I want to lay down some facts and figures that will hopefully go a long way to painting the true story. 
Residential real estate, like any commodity, is driven by a few key fundamentals, including supply and demand, the cost of credit, employment and access to credit. 
Access to credit, or the amount of money an individual can borrow, will determine what they can and will pay for a property. In recent times, there has been a lot of discussion about the high debt levels in Australia and the purported inappropriate lending practices undertaken by Australia’s lenders and mortgage brokers. 
While we do have high levels of debt in Australia, data from CoreLogic shows the proportion of income needed to service current household debt is actually lower now than it was in 2011. 
In 2011, the proportion of household income required to service an 80% LVR mortgage across the combined capital cities was 43.92%. By 2016, that percentage had dropped to 35.02% thanks, in part, to historically low interest rates.  
So while property is certainly expensive and the level of household debt is high, it would seem many Australians are actually in a better position now than they were five years ago.  
Moreover, lending practices are constantly improving. Borrowers aren’t being forced into higher loans, they are simply choosing to borrow more in order to purchase their desired asset. 
The banking industry is highly regulated and both brokers and lenders are more scrupulous than ever.
20 years ago, a home loan application was a single sheet of paper and the level of data that was collected by a lender was scant. 
Only 10 years ago, approximately 50% of all home loan applications in Australia required borrowers to certify their income and their asset position. These loans, commonly referred to as low-doc or no-doc loans, were very popular within Australia. 
When you contrast these lending practices with what we have today, it is fair to say things have come a long way. 
Today, new legislation requires brokers and lenders to forensically examine a borrower’s assets and liability situation. They are also required to verify a borrower’s employment through documentation as well as telephone checks and discussions with employers. At the end of the day, nobody - lender or mortgage broker - wants a consumer to be in a situation where they access credit they can't afford. 
At Mortgage Choice, the vast majority of our customers are more than nine months in front of their mortgage repayments. They are overpaying their mortgage in a bid to quickly and efficiently reduce their level of debt. 
 Looking ahead, brokers and lenders will continue to do the right thing by their customers, helping them into loans they can afford and helping them to get their foot onto the property ladder.   
I believe property prices will continue to rise across most markets. However, the rate of growth may be more moderate than what we have seen in the past. I do not think mortgage holders are at risk of losing their property. I believe Australia’s lenders and mortgage brokers do all they can to ensure borrowers are in the right product for their needs and long will this tradition continue.
John Flavell is chief executive officer <a href="https://www.mortgagechoice.com.au/" target="_blank">Mortgage Choice</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

The industry has never been healthier: John Flavell

<html><body>
Housing affordability, rather the lack of it, doesn’t seem to be going away anytime soon, and Treasurer Scott Morrison’s recent speech at an Urban Development Institute of Australia event just reinforced the view.  
In such a scenario, the ‘bank of mum and dad’ for first-home buyers might be the way to realise the ‘great Australian dream’.
With the apartment median price in Sydney around $850,000, and Melbourne not too far behind, saving for even that 10 percent or higher deposit is a tough task for the new kids on the property block.
Normally, when a borrower can’t meet a 20 percent deposit and stamp duty, the bank will impose a Lenders Mortgage Insurance, which adds up to a few thousands of dollars. 
The ‘bank of mum and dad’ can seem to be a good option in such circumstances.
Ask a parent how far they would go to support the financial aspirations of their children, and chances are they will say: “Yes, if I had the money I would be happy to act as <a href="/expert-insights/buying/41726-the-problems-of-relying-on-the-bank-of-mum-and-dad" target="_blank">a guarantor for my children</a> to purchase a property.” 
According to Todd Hunter, founder and director wHeregroup, mum and dad can help their children — even when they are teenagers — get a head start into the property market by buying a cheap property in the right location and let it sit there for 10 or 20 years and grow in value. Once the property is sold, the children will have a ready-made deposit without asking parents for help.  
Cheap properties below $250,000, and they don’t have to be in the city. And cheap properties because they “tend to pay for themselves, meaning the rent pays the interest on the loan, so any extra payments they make go directly off the principal of the loan”.
While this may be a great way to get the next generation started in property, there’s also a rising trend for adult children who are already property owners to dip into the bank of mum and dad besides the first-home buyers, according to Mortgage and Finance Association of Australia (MFAA) director and managing director of smart lending Melissa Gielnik in an article in www.domain.com.au earlier this year.
“In the past three years brokers across the MFAA network have witnessed a spike in requests for these types of loans and expect this trend to continue. Parental guarantee loans represent over 15 per cent of loans written for some brokers,” Gielnik said.
“As the housing market continues to grow parental guarantees are becoming more popular with upgraders allowing them to avoid mortgage insurance and therefore borrow a larger amount,” she said.
Housing is the single biggest asset class in Australia, worth an estimated $6.5 trillion across 9.6 million dwellings, according to CoreLogic. To put it in perspective, this is worth more than three times the value of Australian superannuation funds ($2 trillion) and more than four times the value of Australian listed stocks ($1.5 trillion).
But roping in parents to guarantee loan doesn’t come without risks, as Mamiza Haq, a lecturer in finance at The University of Queensland, points out in an article in <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-problems-with-relying-on-the-bank-of-mum-and-dad-33826" target="_blank">The Conversation</a>. 
The risk to lenders
Family-pledged loans can be categorised as non-conforming loans, an area where lenders seek to minimise the level of risk as much as possible. The Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority has outlined some guidelines for Authorised Deposit-Taking Institutions (ADIs) with regard to loans including a guarantor relationship (e.g. from a parent of the borrower) as these loans carry a greater risk. 
Inadequate bank supervision and poorly underwritten home mortgages led to the financial crisis, adds Haq. 
Sydney mortgage broker Elaine Lam explains in an article in The Australian that while “a family guarantee can be a useful tool that allows borrowers to finance property with little or no deposit, the procedure can be a risky strategy as it allows borrowers to buy property with no cash and no evidence of genuine savings, as long as the bank is satisfied the borrower can meet the ongoing loan repayments, says Lam. In the event the borrower defaults on the loan, the bank will come after the parents for any losses and costs that the bank incurs.
Consumer advocates also cite “lots of cases" where guarantors have been faced with the prospect of losing their home, adds Haq.
In the current uncertain economic climate with low wage growth and rising costs of living, parents must consider the risks of acting as guarantor, and all the legal responsibilities that come with it, before pitching in to help your children realise the ‘Australian dream’.
</body></html>

Mortgage

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Mortgage

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News