Think I've upset the bank manager LOL
Discussion
You are right, it's not funny, it's disgraceful! Charges of fraud should be brought to bare upon those crooks that were involved.
Not got a very good record the finance industry has it?
Rate fixing
PPI missold
Endowment Mortgages missold
SERPS missold
Funny thing is, in 28 years of business, it always seem to be those operating in the sector that like to have a list of initials on their business cards....
Mmmm
Not got a very good record the finance industry has it?
Rate fixing
PPI missold
Endowment Mortgages missold
SERPS missold
Funny thing is, in 28 years of business, it always seem to be those operating in the sector that like to have a list of initials on their business cards....
Mmmm
Mr Loudly you forgot about misselling of hedging products to small businesses.
I agree fraud it is and I am expecting criminal charges to ensure those involved are brought to task.
The banks have a lot to answer for with the recession society is suffering at the moment. It would appear they are still arrogant enough to believe they can conduct business with little or no regard to morality.
I agree fraud it is and I am expecting criminal charges to ensure those involved are brought to task.
The banks have a lot to answer for with the recession society is suffering at the moment. It would appear they are still arrogant enough to believe they can conduct business with little or no regard to morality.
The BoE has just printed a shedload of more magic money.
Will the banks (a) lend it, or (b) keep it?
And every time they print money your pensions get even more worthless.
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend, or let the BoE lend directly? Seems to me the banks just sit in the middle getting fat and screwing the economy for everybody else.
Will the banks (a) lend it, or (b) keep it?
And every time they print money your pensions get even more worthless.
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend, or let the BoE lend directly? Seems to me the banks just sit in the middle getting fat and screwing the economy for everybody else.
What people don't realise is that whilst banks do receive funds in (through savings, repayments as well as other means) they are currently being forced under incoming regulation (Basel 3) to hold a far higher proportion of capital reserves, thus new funds can't be lent until the capital reserve provision for the bank has been met, if they could lend they would.
However banks have learned from previous events, they won't lend without adequate security or to the wrong people, every loan is stress tested and analysed in far more detail in comparison to before the crash. In addition the skills and track record of the borrowers are judged more stringently, if they fail they won't lend or of they do it will be at a far higher cost, again due to the new regulations the costs associated with lending are far higher now than they used to be, in my field (comm property) where margins were c. 3% they are now c.5%+ LIBOR
Hedging (SWAPS) was often a condition of any loan to minimise risk on the bank's part...rates can go down as well as up, everybody complains when it's not in the customers favor though...bet there wouldn't be an issue of it was the other way around. If people didn't want to take these SWAPS with the loan they could have sought finance elsewhere although this would have been at increased costs due to the higher risks associated with an un-hedged loan...
However banks have learned from previous events, they won't lend without adequate security or to the wrong people, every loan is stress tested and analysed in far more detail in comparison to before the crash. In addition the skills and track record of the borrowers are judged more stringently, if they fail they won't lend or of they do it will be at a far higher cost, again due to the new regulations the costs associated with lending are far higher now than they used to be, in my field (comm property) where margins were c. 3% they are now c.5%+ LIBOR
Hedging (SWAPS) was often a condition of any loan to minimise risk on the bank's part...rates can go down as well as up, everybody complains when it's not in the customers favor though...bet there wouldn't be an issue of it was the other way around. If people didn't want to take these SWAPS with the loan they could have sought finance elsewhere although this would have been at increased costs due to the higher risks associated with an un-hedged loan...
Edited by kiethton on Saturday 14th July 14:13
kiethton said:
they are currently being forced under incoming regulation (Basel 3) to hold a far higher proportion of capital reserves, thus new funds can't be lent until the capital reserve provision for the bank has been met
So the Govt is not actually giving them money to lend, but giving them money to top up their capital reserves... One has to ask - what did the banks do with the last lot? And their bail-out money of 2008? Ah yes.It is really no better than my ex-tenant who thought buying herself a shiny new oven was more exciting than paying the rent.
kiethton said:
What people don't realise is that whilst banks do receive funds in (through savings, repayments as well as other means) they are currently being forced under incoming regulation (Basel 3) to hold a far higher proportion of capital reserves, thus new funds can't be lent until the capital reserve provision for the bank has been met, if they could lend they would.
However banks have learned from previous events, they won't lend without adequate security or to the wrong people, every loan is stress tested and analysed in far more detail in comparison to before the crash. In addition the skills and track record of the borrowers are judged more stringently, if they fail they won't lend or of they do it will be at a far higher cost, again due to the new regulations the costs associated with lending are far higher now than they used to be, in my field (comm property) where margins were c. 3% they are now c.5%+ LIBOR
Hedging (SWAPS) was often a condition of any loan to minimise risk on the bank's part...rates can go down as well as up, everybody complains when it's not in the customers favor though...bet there wouldn't be an issue of it was the other way around. If people didn't want to take these SWAPS with the loan they could have sought finance elsewhere although this would have been at increased costs due to the higher risks associated with an un-hedged loan...
They're a bunch of buffoons that wouldn't last ten minutes in the real world of business! Oohh sorry, they couldn't even survive in the protected world of banking...However banks have learned from previous events, they won't lend without adequate security or to the wrong people, every loan is stress tested and analysed in far more detail in comparison to before the crash. In addition the skills and track record of the borrowers are judged more stringently, if they fail they won't lend or of they do it will be at a far higher cost, again due to the new regulations the costs associated with lending are far higher now than they used to be, in my field (comm property) where margins were c. 3% they are now c.5%+ LIBOR
Hedging (SWAPS) was often a condition of any loan to minimise risk on the bank's part...rates can go down as well as up, everybody complains when it's not in the customers favor though...bet there wouldn't be an issue of it was the other way around. If people didn't want to take these SWAPS with the loan they could have sought finance elsewhere although this would have been at increased costs due to the higher risks associated with an un-hedged loan...
Edited by kiethton on Saturday 14th July 14:13
More fraud.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18839293
Edited by mrloudly on Saturday 14th July 17:33
It would appear they can't even count... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18829551
grumbledoak said:
Simpo Two said:
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend
Er, because the US doing that was what caused the banking crisis in the first place?Simpo Two said:
grumbledoak said:
Simpo Two said:
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend
Er, because the US doing that was what caused the banking crisis in the first place?They stitched each other up, and in the end nobody knew what was good and what was bad debt...
ETA The Ratings agencies in the "pay" of the banks didn't help either... Crap debt rated "AAA" by somebody you're paying to rate it errr....
Edited by mrloudly on Saturday 14th July 17:51
mrloudly said:
Simpo Two said:
grumbledoak said:
Simpo Two said:
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend
Er, because the US doing that was what caused the banking crisis in the first place?They stitched each other up, and in the end nobody knew what was good and what was bad debt...
Surely banks should lend responsibly to avoid another crisis?
Simpo Two said:
grumbledoak said:
Simpo Two said:
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend
Er, because the US doing that was what caused the banking crisis in the first place?AM04ARO said:
mrloudly said:
Simpo Two said:
grumbledoak said:
Simpo Two said:
Why do HM Govt simply not pass a law forcing banks to lend
Er, because the US doing that was what caused the banking crisis in the first place?They stitched each other up, and in the end nobody knew what was good and what was bad debt...
Surely banks should lend responsibly to avoid another crisis?
I just had a percent knocked off my mortgage. From 3.94 to 3%. All done on line - no valuation, no call, no we'll get back to you - job done.
Now, whilst nice, I suspect this is now classed as "new lending" and I have become a helpful stat. I am not a squeezed business, I am not even the squeezed middle - I am just a target helper.
Now, whilst nice, I suspect this is now classed as "new lending" and I have become a helpful stat. I am not a squeezed business, I am not even the squeezed middle - I am just a target helper.
Stevie Mojo said:
mrloudly said:
"So is the NatWest loan rate fixed or will you be discussing it with Barclays later?" I love seeing the b.stards sweat 
Yeah, cos it's the fault of your local branch's manager innit!kiethton said:
However banks have learned from previous events, they won't lend without adequate security or to the wrong people, every loan is stress tested and analysed in far more detail in comparison to before the crash. In addition the skills and track record of the borrowers are judged more stringently,
Is that the same lesson that they learnt so well from in the late 80s crash?Gassing Station | Business | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff