Pitfalls in financing a house
20/02/2003
theedgedaily.com By Shaik Osman Majid
Advertisements are enticements, especially those by financial institutions
offering housing loans that are short on details but loud on benefits.
High on the enticement list is the declaration that
processing fees would be waived. The waiver is purveyed to constitute
savings. But if paperwork is an intrinsic part of the loan, how tangible
is this benefit?
Competitiveness among lenders is evident in their other
offerings. Time was when financing was capped at 70 or 80 per cent of the
purchase price. Today, almost all financiers are willing to lend up to 95
per cent. When then is the attraction in this claim?
Most, if not all, throw in personal accident insurance
policies, a few as high as RM200,000 depending on the loan amount. The
insured sum or portions can only be claimed when life or limb is lost. As
for hospitalisation, only the small print reveals the extent of the cover,
if at all.
True, house buyers these days are better informed. They
can see through the spurious claims.
They would like to know the total costs that their loans
would entail. This is what the financiers do not tell all, at least
upfront. They only give a ballpark figure. Herein lies the source of
pitfalls the borrower would encounter after he has signed up to finance
his house.
The problem starts with the marketers of loans in booths
set up by developers at their launches or with customer relations
personnel manning the telephones in the back offices of banks. Many, and
the number is increasing, are mere agents, not employees of the lenders.
True, armed with statistical tables, they would be able
to brief potential clients on loan eligibility, that the first year is
free of interest or that a rate of 3.25 per cent is imposed for the first
two or even three years, the attractiveness of one loan package as opposed
to another, et cetera.
Not many of these agents explain the hidden costs. For
one, the loan agreement, even though it is a standard format, is prepared
by a legal firm which means the fees have to be incurred by the borrower.
Another thing is the stamp duty levied on the loan document to
authenticate its legality which must also be paid by the borrower.
The agents, because their remuneration is based on
commissions, are often little inclined or ill-prepared to explain crucial
details that add to the costs of a loan. Few of them know what constitutes
the base lending rate (BLR), the reasons why the borrower must obtain a
mortgage reducing term assurance (MRTA) policy as well as a fire insurance
cover for the house used as collateral to obtain the loan.
This is further illustrated by the ignorance I
encountered among the staff who responded to my calls to three different
banks enquiring about their loan plans. All three patiently clarified what
the abbreviation BLR stood for. But they could not answer the question why
it was not a fixed rate. Neither could they explain the imposition of the
additional half per cent to the base rate. One ended our discussion with a
pledge to return my call. The other two referred me to superiors whose
lines were either perpetually engaged or continuously unattended.
If loan marketers employed by bankers cannot explain how
the BLR is arrived at, why it is not a constant figure, or the reason for
the imposition of the extra half per cent, what information do borrowers
have to understand the real costs of a housing loan?
But understand they must for they will ultimately have
to pay between 150 to 250 per cent of the loan in interest alone,
depending on the prevailing BLR and the tenure of the loan. They should
also be aware of the costs of buying the MRTA policy which requires only a
single premium and the fire insurance cover that has to be renewed
annually throughout the loan repayment period.
First, let us look at the BLR. It is not computed by any
esoteric formula. It is simply the costs of funds to the bank plus
operational overheads, provisions for bad debts and profit margin.
The costs of funds to the bank cannot be arrived at by
estimating the interest it credits on deposits as money is placed in
different types of accounts that yield varying rates. But one benchmark is
available in the form of the three-month Kuala Lumpur Inter Bank Offered
Rates (Klibor).
The Klibor is the interest banks pay when they borrow
from one another, rendering it a reliable measure of the cost of funds.
And the three-month Klibor has averaged 3.0 per cent over the past several
months. That is what they pay when they borrow. What do they charge when
they lend?
The average current BLR is 6.45 per cent. What is more,
they add half a percentage or more after the enticement of an
interest-free year or a package of 2.8 per cent for year one, BLR for year
two and three. Then the BLR plus becomes the operative interest rate.
This is not the only detail borrowers must realise. If
they presume that the BLR would go down, they must also concede that it
could conversely edge upwards. The ultimate factor is the margin lenders
want to maintain.
The MRTA is the other cost that conditions of a housing
loan will impose. This policy is a protective cover that assures the loan
would be fully settled if the borrower dies. The premium, however, is a
variable factor.
If the medical examiner gives a clean bill of health,
the premium would be around a few thousand ringgit, depending on the loan
sought. But if you are a diabetic or have high blood pressure or worse, a
combination of both, the cover will cost as much as RM20,000.
Finally loan seekers should learn of the implications of
the fire policy. One, the beneficiary is the loan provider. Two, the
insurance would provide a cover equivalent to the sum taken out in loan
which is invariably greater than what a house should normally be insured
for.
Borrowers must remember that the value of the land is
worth between a third and a half of the total price of the house. So the
premium would be higher than that of a normal fire cover that carries an
insurance value of about half the price of the property. Three, the
borrower is not protected in the event of a fire razing down his house.
This also should wise him up to buy his own insurance policy, preferably a
householder's cover.
That is another detail that exemplifies the need to have
a clear idea of the pitfalls in financing a house.
Shaik Osman Majid is a former teacher and journalist. |