Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Mortgages still four times rate set by Bank

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 06 December 2008
HOMEOWNERS are still paying mortgage interest at rates up to four times as high as the official Bank of England rate, despite Gordon Brown's warning that lenders must pass on rate cuts.



The Prime Minister pressed high street banks to pass on the one percentage point cut to struggling borrowers yesterday.

Although taxpayers are now majority shareholders of many of Britain's leading banks thanks to the bailout package, the government has stopped short of forcing lenders to cut rates.

Among those holding out on customers yesterday was GE Money, which charges 8.44 per cent for its variable rate – more than four times as much as the base rate of 2 per cent.

But there was good news for 750,000 homeowners with tracker mortgages yesterday when Halifax and Nationwide said they would pass on the rate cut in full to these borrowers, despite clauses in agreements stating they did not have to.

The move by Halifax followed speculation that City watchdog the Financial Services Authority could force it to reduce its rates as borrowers had not been made aware of the clause when they took out their mortgage.

But the government-owned Northern Rock had still not said what it would do, with its rate staying firm at 5.84 per cent.

Mr Brown said: "I think banks should really pass on the interest rate cut. We are talking to the banks. Last time there was a cut we had to speak to them before it was passed on and we will be speaking to them again."

And Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, said: "It really is important that we see these reductions passed on because that is the best way of helping the economy get through this difficult time. A number of the banks have said they are going to pass on the reductions to businesses and homeowners. I want to see them do more."

So far, seven out of ten leading lenders have agreed to pass on savings but their standard variable rates are still well above the Bank of England's base rate.

Just hours after the Prime Minister's remarks, RBS said it would pass on some of the cut to customers, dropping its standard variable rate by 0.75 per cent to 4.44 per cent.

But research from MoneyFacts, the financial publisher, showed banks making much bigger margins on fixed-rate mortgages than a month ago.

Even before Thursday's rate cut, the average margin was 2.86 per cent, whereas at the start of last month it was 2 per cent.

Borrowers who have less than 25 per cent equity are offered deals at 6 per cent or higher. This will deter first-time buyers – who are crucial for kick-starting the beleaguered property market. And the cut in the base rate will make it even harder for them to save towards a deposit.

Ray Boulger, of broker John Charcol, said: "If anything, the rate cut could make the situation worse. The amount of money being deposited with banks has been falling as the interest rates come down. That reduces the amount of money available to offer as mortgages."

The rate cut has led to warnings that pensioners and savers would be punished.

Ros Altman, a former adviser to Tony Blair, said: "Policymakers are ignoring millions of responsible citizens who saved for their future, in the hope that rate cuts might free up credit markets and banks might lend more.

"This is a dangerously unbalanced policy mix."

Fresh protest over HBOS deal by Which?

EUROPE'S biggest consumer watchdog has thrown its weight behind a last-ditch attempt to stop Lloyds TSB taking over HBOS.

The support from Which? – which has a 700,000-strong membership – came as Lloyds TSB confirmed it would keep the Bank of Scotland brand but eventually review the branch network north of the Border.

In a letter to the Competition Appeals Tribunal, Peter Vicary-Smith, the chief executive of Which?, said he feared the merger could set a precedent and have serious consequences for fair competition.

"We consider that the concerns this raises affect consumers across the UK, not just those in Scotland," he said.

He added that while Which? understood that financial stability was the top objective of the government, "we have some concerns about the way in which the Secretary of State (Lord Mandelson] made his decision in this case and the potential ramifications this may have for the future use of the legislation".

Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, defended the government's stance on the merger yesterday.

"I have always made it clear that if another offer were to come along, provided it had a credible plan and the funding to go with it, we would look at it," he said. "No other proposal has been made, so the decision lies very much in the hands of the (HBOS] shareholders next week."

Archie Kane, Lloyds TSB's executive director of insurance and investments, yesterday tried to placate the fears of Scottish shareholders, saying that the Bank of Scotland would keep its identity in Scotland under the proposed deal.

As The Scotsman reported previously, the bank will keep its headquarters on the Mound, but there are doubts the Bank of Scotland's identity will exist beyond Scotland.

Mr Kane insisted the group would have a "very strong presence" in Scotland, adding: "Bank of Scotland is an iconic brand which we look forward to developing even more in the years to come. We are also very focused on integrating Bank of Scotland and Lloyds TSB Scotland businesses.

"Lloyds Banking Group will have the largest branch network in Scotland."




The full article contains 941 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 05 December 2008 11:33 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Interest rates
 
1

subrosa,

06/12/2008 01:22:27
Brown & Co can threaten the banks all they like but banks will do their own thing.

Stupid giving billions to banks without ring-fencing any of it.
2

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

06/12/2008 01:48:51
The banks aren't inherently wicked that they want to somehow harm their customers. They are simply trying to do what banks do-and that's make money. Surely they rather than the government know what their interest rates should be. I worry that this constant meddling in the market by this government is going to end in tears. Perhaps they should remember Maggie Thatcher's maxim: 'you can't buck the markets'.
3

Dark Lochnagar,

Symington 06/12/2008 02:10:57
understand the deal that the banks have is that they have to pay 12% on any money borrowed from the Government. How then can they offer 4% mortgages or 10 % overdrafts to small business. MugaBroon didn't tell us this when he was saving the world as we know it.
4

A True Scot.,

06/12/2008 06:37:21
Mortgages still four times rate set by Bank

Of course they are house prices are still 4 times higher than the average salary.
5

A True Scot.,

06/12/2008 06:39:17
1

True enough to have a base rate of 2% which is likely to drop to fractions in the near future makes it futile for savers to keep their money in a bank at all.
6

yockel,

06/12/2008 07:55:36
4# DL This explains the con trick pretty well.
www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/3067846/brown-is-trying-to-deflect-blame-onto-the-bankers.thtml
7

Mercutio,

FALKIRK 06/12/2008 08:47:31
I presume the banks still have to attract savers (remember them )as well as pay off the government.
8

subrosa,

06/12/2008 08:47:50
# 7

Very interesting link. Thanks.
9

ddmc,

06/12/2008 08:52:42
withhold executive bonuses , you'll see the rate set by banks come down quicker than WTC7
10

Anne,

Eaglesham 06/12/2008 08:54:23
The mortgage rate is only one side of the banks' business.

How are they going to raise the money to support those mortgages if they cannot attract savers to deposit money with them?

Interest rates for savers have to be maintained at a level that will encourage them tokeep their money in the institutions.
11

Guga II,

Rockall 06/12/2008 09:52:06
As regards savers, they would be just as well, and probably safer, keeping their money in a sock under the bed.
12

Jimmy Le Pie,

06/12/2008 11:24:04
What surprises me is that anyone is surprised by this headline!!
13

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 06/12/2008 12:00:51
Today's banks are the modern-day equivalent of the money lenders that Jesus Christ threw out of the temple at Jerusalem.

Did ANYONE ever expect them to act honourably and with the interests of their customers predominating their filthy greed?

Banks, money lenders, etc. have not changed in thousands of years. Has been, always will be.
14

Lurking from home,

06/12/2008 13:41:36
test
15

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 06/12/2008 15:31:42
We should have nationalised them.
16

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 06/12/2008 16:10:29
18 - we should have nationalised them for the very basic reason that nationalisation was invented. To make them work. I am not proposing that as a long term political measure, but as a short term pragmatic one.
17

Scunnert,

06/12/2008 17:07:51
I well remember the inefficiency of nationalized industries. Personally I fault the managerial classes for that. No vision - too preoccupied with preserving their status and privileges. Something like labour MWP's.

Aye - nationalize the banks - not as a short term remedy, but as a absolute imperative for a fairer more prosperous future.
18

Tim C,

Southern England 06/12/2008 21:08:53
Sterling touched a record low against the euro a couple of days ago, but it didn't make the news. Macavity's predecessor is rumoured to have been paid about 12 million pounds for speeches this year; I wonder where he banks his loot? A nationalised bank? And does he keep it foreign currency or GB pounds?
I hope that when historians excavate these comments and bloggery and subject them to analysis hundreds of years hence, that they will appreciate that we can not say what we feel, for fear of censorship or worse. Yockel, 7, thanks for the link.
Stock up on long-life food, because poverty will bring hunger. Let's pray that people vote wisely at the next general election and re-house Zanulabour on a dung heap.


19

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 07/12/2008 12:03:37
There comes a point when the Bank of England base rate becomes meaningless and we are almost certainly there now. Banks cannot provide loans and mortgages unless they receive savings deposits and, obviously, the interest rate for borrowers must be higher than that for savers - and the savings rate must be high enough to attract funds.

Much of the problem with many UK banks is down to them borrowing in Euros and then lending the funds in sterling when sterling was high. Now the banks themselves are repaying far more in Euros in interest and principal than they are reeiving in pounds.
20

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 08/12/2008 17:37:29
How many times has he said this.. ?

The Power -

http://www.augustreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7&Itemid=4

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.