The FSA should limit risky mortgages before a new housing bubble forms

The Financial Services Authority wants to limit risky mortgages by imposing regulations on lenders. But the banks are kicking up a stink.

I am bemused by this story in the FT. The FSA has been running a review of the mortgage market (the MMR) for sometime now. The idea is to try and prevent boom and bust being quite as painful as it has been this time around by limiting risky lending.

Advertisement - Article continues below

So far, all ideas of putting in place caps on loan to value ratios, banning interest-only mortgages, enforcing a maximum multiple of salary on loans and so on appear to have been rejected in favour of having the banks make proper checks on borrowers' incomes and on their spending patterns these being the things that should show just what their ability to repay a loan is like.

It is all basic and reasonably sensible stuff stuff you'd have thought a bank would be on top of anyway.

But, like all sensible stuff, it is also turning out to be controversial. This week the Financial Services Consumer Panel said that any changes should be delayed. Why? Because "there is a danger that lenders will reject mortgages that they view as not complying with the MMR and so further restrict consumers' options during a period of general lending restraint To avert this danger, implementation of new affordability rules should be delayed until the housing market had demonstrably recovered.'"

Hmmmm. So the rules should be delayed so that banks aren't discouraged from lending money to people who they think might not be able to afford to repay their loans at a time when it is increasingly clear that house prices are about to take another nasty tumble?That doesn't seem quite right.

Surely, if everyone agrees that change is necessary, the consumer panel would be doing consumers more of a favour if they were urging the MMR to be brought forward? That way, its members would know that, even if the credit environment were to suddenly ease, no consumers were being allowed to take on more debt than they can cope with at a time when they are likely to make capital losses.

They'd also know that they had acted before a new bubble had been built rather than afterwards. Which would make a pleasant change.




Beyond the Brexit talk, the British economy isn’t doing too badly

The political Brexit pantomime aside, Britain is in pretty good shape. With near-record employment, strong wage growth and modest inflation, there is …
17 Oct 2019
Small business

State support for small businesses on the slide

Government aid for small firms is winding down. Make plans now.
6 Jun 2020
UK Economy

UK set to see more extreme monetary policy

The Bank of England looks likely to cut interest rates below zero at the end of this year.
4 Jun 2020
UK Economy

Good news at last – household debt is falling fast

Thre's not much good news around at the moment., But the fact that UK households are paying off debt at a record rate must surely count, says Merryn S…
4 Jun 2020

Most Popular


These seven charts show exactly why you must own gold today

Covid-19 is accelerating many trends that were already in existence. The rising gold price is one such trend. These seven charts, says Dominic Frisby,…
3 Jun 2020

Disease, rioting and mass unemployment – so why are markets soaring?

Despite some pretty strong headwinds in the last year, America’s S&P 500 stock index is close to all-time highs. John Stepek explains why markets seem…
4 Jun 2020
EU Economy

Why a stronger euro is good news for investors

The fragile state of the eurozone has for a long time brought the threat of deflation. But the ECB’s latest moves have dampened those fears. John Step…
5 Jun 2020