At the end of last week EBS announced that it would no longer provide a mortgage for the purchase of an apartment outside of the four major cities of Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway, or the large commuter towns (such as Navan and Newbridge) (see here and here for story). It’s not fully clear whether the move also excludes large regional towns such as Waterford, Athlone and Sligo, but it appears that way from the media coverage. In the case of the cities it will only lend 85% of the value of the property, in commuter towns 80%. It is also changing its rules with respect to second incomes, reducing the amount it will take into account, and only allowing borrowers to lend 30% of disposable income. This change in policy concerning the purchasing of apartments is worrying for a number of reasons as it appears to execute a form of redlining.
First, it suggests that apartments are a particularly risky part of the housing the market, especially outside of the major cities. I can find no data to suggest this is the case and, in the absence of a detailed explanation from EBS, my guess is that they feel that there is a serious oversupply of apartments in many areas, which they anticipate will lead to large price falls from present levels. That said, there is a demand for apartment living in any town of any reasonable size, in terms of lifestyle choice and cost, and all local markets need a diverse stock to cater for different consumer groups. Moreover, it seems unlikely to me that someone who can afford to front up 20% of the cost of an apartment represents a serious financial risk for EBS going forward and over the long term the value of the asset will increase (and EBS are protected from a future fall of 20% if the borrowers did get into trouble).
Second, excluding buyers from buying apartments across large swathes of the country potentially creates serious problems for both existing owners and EBS itself (who presumably have lent mortgages during the boom years to the purchasers of such properties) as it will undermine the value of the assets by making them much more difficult to sell. This will potentially lock a number of apartment owners onto the first rung of the property ladder, unable to sell and move on, and also place them in (further) negative equity.
Third, EBS is a nationalized institution, which one would have hoped means that it would serve the interests of all citizens regardless of where they want to live (assuming they meet financial as opposed to geographic criteria) and also the taxpayer (one assumes that many new apartments are heading into NAMA and if no-one can access a mortgage to be able to purchase them they effectively become worthless).
EBS, Bank of Ireland and AIB, are the only lenders in the market at the minute, and if BoI and AIB follow EBS’s lead, then a significant part of the housing market in many areas of the country will become excluded from buyers and lock-in existing apartment owners for the foreseeable future. It’s hard to see the justification for such redlining.
Rob Kitchin
June 8, 2010 at 9:10 am
A sound move by the EBS. In fact, I am amazed that it has taken them so long to implement this. Given the low interest rates current and the propensity for them to revert to a higher mean, the 30% limit seems risky, but as this and other factors conspire to lower price levels, it will become less of a risk factor.
Apartments are not an area where Irish buiders have a long proven track record. Quality varies widely. But I would be amazed to see easier terms for houses as is implied by your post? How easy is it to borrow 95% now? Lenders must recognize that the markets are changing and that bad debts are far more likely. More conservative terms are a requirement. Why has the regulator not made this clear?
June 8, 2010 at 10:56 am
I have no problem with the 85% or 30% disposable income clauses, it stops people overlending and is less risky for them. Where I am querying the policy is with respect to redlining – ruling out the purchase of apartments everywhere in the country except for the cities and Dublin commuter belt. If they want to block individual blocks on the basis build quality, etc, that is fine, but a blanket ban on what people can buy based on geographic location makes little sense to me and they’ve provided no justification for it as far I can see.
June 8, 2010 at 11:24 am
Yes.
Those apartments affected would also be less costly. This provision will reduce their price again!
So, back to the old divide of beyond the Pale? Good to see banking is being done with care for the entire community …….
June 8, 2010 at 9:21 am
This could indeed be worrying for those who bought apartments in the last number of years.
A massive amount have been developed in the last 5-6 years. According to the 2006 Census the total housing stock contained 139,872 apartments/flats. Almost 58% of these were within Dublin.
From 2006 to April 2010 a further 57,221 apartments were completed according to DEHLG/ESB(some of the 2006 completions would have been included in the Census figures). Big years were 2006 (19,946), 2007 (18,691) but this has slowed down to a total of 625 for the first 4 month in 2010.
June 8, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Do you think it’s possible that they want to leave open the option of demolishing whole apartment complexes, by ensuring they don’t have part-occupied developments?
June 8, 2010 at 1:02 pm
I think that will only apply to abandoned unfinished developments.
Different agency involved.
June 8, 2010 at 2:41 pm
“EBS, Bank of Ireland and AIB, are the only lenders in the market at the minute”
The last breakdown I saw for mortgage market share put IL&P (Permanent TSB’s parent) at 20% of the mortgage market. Hopefully they’re still doing some business – otherwise that ESRI/Permanent TSB index is going to be very shakey!
The question posed by this article – why exclude apartments in certain rural areas? – is important enough to put to EBS and perhaps one of the academics on irelandafternama might do that. On the face of it, it seems a strange decision and given EBS is effectively part of the State, as is NAMA who are increasingly dependant on a recovery in prices, it’s hard not to conclude there’s an absence of joint-up thinking.
As regards the 30% of salary restriction and the 75% of second salary, this would restrict someone on an average wage (€36,000) to buying a €171,000 property (25 year mortgage, 92% LTV, 3% interest rate, 25% mortgage interest relief,repayment mortgage) and a couple both on the €36,000 average to a €300,000 property. With an average property costing €205k at the end of March 2010, this “restriction” is not likely to greatly restrict buyers or significantly drag down prices.
June 8, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Sorry, yes PTSB in market, but not sure how much FTB business they’re doing. If RTE can’t get a straight answer to the reasoning behind this, I doubt we will, but we can try.
June 10, 2010 at 7:49 am
I don’t have a big problem with this save to say that there should be some class of value on apartments in non commutable areas, even if that was 30% rather than 0% as EBS imply.
June 10, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Does this story by Charlie Weston in the Independent cast any more light on the subject.
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/charlie-weston/charlie-weston-ebs-move-casts-a-dark-shadow-over-apartments-2214696.html
He says “A major oversupply of apartments, some located in smaller towns, has prompted the building society to decide that apartments have no resale value.”
NO RESALE VALUE
June 11, 2010 at 1:56 am
Yeah …. guarantees a headline, huh?! Misleading for those who refuse to think for themselves. Maybe an opportunity? Remember DAD properties?
As they are fit for habitation, often anyway, they do have a market value, but if restricted to one lender or cash buyers, they will surely decline, based on market factors, to a much more marked degree than slightly better placed apartments.
Maybe these can be called “flats”? In Australia they are more often termed units.
Some property will end up suffering more than others, so yes, some selection and advice is not inappropriate. Perhaps as repossessions bite, these flats cab be bought up by local authorities as housing? They should certainly not waste public money on apartments that can be financed privately?
June 16, 2010 at 5:32 pm
[…] been a couple of follow-on stories in the Independent by Charlie Weston about the EBS decision to redline apartments outside of the cities (here and here). Weston suggests that the decision to redline apartments […]