Debt Consolidation Credit Counseling In Phoenix

Over the last four weeks you may be aware that many governments have been pumping money into their failing banking systems in an attempt to salvage the mortgage markets. The reason for this is that all the bad debt, known as toxic debt, is having a detrimental effect on the financial institutions and is making us all worse off.

The burning question now is whether or not this cash injection will have the desired effect so that we are able to borrow money confidently again. At present I am only able to comment on the effect these changes will have on the general public in the United Kingdom, as I am unaware of how other global markets work within their countries, and therefore am unqualified to comment. There may be similarities in how the markets work, but it is best to take my comments here as a rough guide only if outside the UK.

Now the general consensus would be that due to the credit crunch the various financial institutions involved in the lending of money are not at liberty to do so, through a lack of it. So it would then follow on that the way to solve the problem is to supply them with the necessary means, i.e. more money. But this approach does not begin to scratch the surface with regards to the underlying problem. The reality is that the banks have been badly hit by the credit crunch and so are quite unwilling to continue on with lending as if nothing had happened.

The main result and contributory factor to the current financial predicament is that of house prices, and house prices are not only falling but are set to continue to fall for the foreseeable future. Consequently lenders are finding that they have to tighten all their criteria not least in the area of loan to value LTV, that is the amount of money that is lent based on the value of the property. Most lenders during 2007 lent up to 95% LTV some lent 100% LTV and in some cases they went as high as 125%LTV.

Now in a healthy market there is nothing wrong with this type of lending. For example, if you give a 125% loan on a house valued at 100,000 then the resulting loan would work out at 125,000. With a buoyant market the house prices may increase at an average of 10% per annum over the next three years. The resulting LTV would equate to 93%. So mathematically we can see that there would be nothing wrong with the initial 125% loan in that there would be negligible risk involved.

The problem now is that rather than rising by 10% per annum the housing prices are in fact dropping by that much, and they are set to drop even more. If you consider that drop, if a lender was to give 85,000 on a 100,000 property which continued to drop in value, in 3 years the LTV could rise to 118%, which in these turbulent times is simply not acceptable. This is why lenders are now slow to lend out quantities much over 85%.

So with regards to the money bailouts, what does this mean for our financial future? In my professional opinion I believe that there will be little overall effect, although with any luck time will prove me wrong. Although lenders are now obliged to lend in 2009 at the rates of 2007, as you will see from the first part of this article they won't be able to lend at the high LTV rates of 2007. The people who are now desperate to borrow are those coming out of rates already arranged in the past 5 years, and these borrowers are going to push the LTV to its limit because of the drop in house prices.

Another thing to consider is the high amount of self certification mortgages that have been arranged over the last 5 years. These types of mortgages will definitely be a rarity because they are seen as to high a risk and the institutions don?t want to know. And even if they are available the LTV will be far lower so what are the consequences in that scenario?

In conclusion, although the cash injections can only be welcomed as a step in the right direction, I fear that there will be little knock on effect whilst housing prices continue to plummet and lenders fail to meet the level of lending that was rife before 2008. It seems more likely that the money will be stored up for the future. This will unfortunately create a catch-22 situation where the prices continue to fall because of the low LTVs and the tight lending criteria, in turn making the lenders more nervous about lending. It seems to me that the only way out will be for someone to bite the bullet and take the risks again at lending, even taking into account the possible risks involved.