‘Bricks and Mortar’ Security

The Great British love affair with property and the unwavering belief that, whatever else happens in the world, good old ‘bricks and mortar’ will always be there to save the day, evidently remains undiminished. The major banks have based a huge part of their entire existence on using real estate assets as security and judging by the recent crop of pre-Christmas authorisations granted to some P2P platforms– LandBay, Landlord Invest, Folk2Folk to name just three examples – that same underlying faith would seem to extend to the FCA.

As one of the many established platforms still waiting in the queue for the ‘green light’ from the FCA, it is galling to be watching from the sidelines. Sour grapes, possibly. But it does raise the legitimate argument about what should represent acceptable security for P2P loans – something that we know has been taxing the mind of the regulator.

My motive in raising the subject is not to ‘rubbish’ the intrinsic value of UK property as an asset, but rather to question its suitability for the task in every situation. Security is based on two fundamentals: you need an asset against which you can formally register an interest; and you need an asset that can readily be converted into cash at or close to valuation should the need arise.

A property – be it a house, a flat, office building or hotel – undoubtedly retains a value and ownership can indeed be registered. But the accuracy of the valuation is not so certain, especially in a forced sale situation or where development forms a significant part of the proposition. At the end of the day, a property is worth what someone else is prepared to pay for it. In house ownership, for example, I suspect we are all guilty of expecting to sell our own property at the top, but to buy someone else’s place at rock bottom. We are often wrong on both counts. And the longer a property takes to sell, the more detrimental it is likely to be to the valuation.

house-for-sale

Many ordinary people know what it feels like to be trapped in negative equity, especially if they are not party to the lucrative property game that operates in London or one of the other UK ‘sweet spots’. Reality is often far removed from mega deals that make the headlines and which are usually accessible to only a privileged few. Property assets with this potential are most unlikely to form part of the security used to back P2P loans.

It is a fallacy that all property lending is secure and suitable for retail.

On the other hand, assets such as sales invoices are designed to convert readily into cash; it is their sole purpose. You can’t live in them or run your business from them, but they can be registered at Companies House, they do have a face value and that value can be underpinned by credit insurance. Hopefully, one day this will be recognised by the regulator.

Bank stress tests herald an opportunity for P2P sector

The 2016 stress tests conducted by the Bank of England’s Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) revealed that three of our major banks would not to be able to withstand another financial crisis on the scale of 2008. RBS, Barclays and Standard Chartered were all found to be vulnerable while the remaining four – HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, Nationwide and Santander – were judged to be sufficiently robust.

However, the reality is that, although the tests replicate the Armageddon scenario of another synchronised global recession (which includes, for example, the prospect of UK residential property prices falling by 30%), there is no real chance that the Bank of England would ever allow any of them to go bust. In the meantime, the three banks that failed the tests are being granted leave to boost their financial resilience as a precaution.

bank-of-england

 

Some commentators have been quick to suggest that perhaps the P2P lending industry should undergo similar stress testing on the basis that the vast majority of the operators have never experienced an economic recession. While this argument may have some headline appeal, it ignores the fact that banks are balance sheet lenders whereas P2P lenders are not – they simply match borrowers with lenders via internet trading platforms and the terms and interest rates applicable to both parties are fixed throughout the lifetime of the arrangement. Loans can still go bad, of course, but that outcome should not have a direct impact on the solvency of the platform operator. It is a non-argument.

One useful reminder from history is that the last time we had a recession the first instinct of the banks was to draw in their horns and stop lending, especially to the hard-pressed SME sector which, according to the FSB, provides 60% of private sector jobs and accounts for nearly half of private sector turnover. It was against this economic backdrop that the P2P lending industry was born in the first place. Difficult conditions represent opportunity.

Of more concern, perhaps, was the recent announcement by Zopa – the one company that was created pre-recession in 2005 – that it is to stop taking in funds from investors without there being sufficient loans in which to put their money.

Zopa, which had accumulated losses of £20m over 11 years of operations, specialises in consumer loans, but there is evidence to suggest that SMEs, too, are not so eager to borrow money as they once were. Commenting on Q3 this year, Mike Conroy, the British Banking Association’s MD for Business Finance, stated that: “…there is clearly lower demand for finance for businesses overall than in the same quarter a year ago. This subdued demand reflects reduced or postponed investment plans and confirmed deposit holding, particularly by smaller firms, as they operate within an uncertain trading environment.”

In the circumstances, it seems the arrival of the Government’s new Bank Referral Scheme, which officially went live on November 1, could not be more timely. Growth-minded SMEs and interest-starved lenders could both find what they are looking for through a vibrant P2P business lending sector.

Investing in Property, Investing in Family?

[avatar]

As First time buyers continue to struggle to save their deposit to climb onto the property ladder, some of the lucky ones get to call on the “Bank of Mum and Dad”. But other family members are not receiving much interest on their savings so they are also lending to their nieces/nephews or grandchildren.

The more the merrier, Family Crowdfunding, clearly the details need ironing out before you lend to this close network! If the deal isn’t clearly labelled for what it is Christmas and Family parties could get a little awkward.

“The Borrowers/The Kids” sign up for a Two or Three year fixed mortgage with the aim to remortgage once that fixed term is over and from the remortgage they release the deposit raised back to the “Crowd” plus a bit of interest.

Loads to think about before you sign up, especially having various Aunts and Uncles having a percentage in your home, but it’s your family what could possibly go wrong?