Representatives of the real estate business offered the government and the Bank of Russia to allow the sale of secondary housing while maintaining the terms of the mortgage from previous buyers. The corresponding appeal was sent to the departments by the federal company “Etazhi”. Izvestia writes about it. According to the authors of the initiative, it will ensure the availability of secondary housing and support demand without additional subsidies from the state. As for banks, nothing will change for them, as there will only be a change in the owner of the existing collateral.
Now the average rates on a loan for secondary housing are about 18-24%. But even last year, when the key rate reached its lowest value in history of 4.25%, mortgages for “secondary” could be taken at 7.5-8%, even without taking into account the state program of preferential housing lending.
According to representatives of the industry, today preferential mortgages at 12% (it was also increased from 6.5%) stimulate the interest of buyers in new buildings. But the secondary market begins to lose both in terms of the quality of the offer and the terms of the purchase. According to the CEO of “Etazhy” Ildar Khusainov, in April, the demand for mortgages on secondary housing decreased by more than 70% compared to February values.
“This figure is critical for the market. Owners who are interested in the urgent sale of their properties, including due to the need to pay off debts, will not be able to quickly sell them or will be forced to make a big discount,” he said.
The government reported that the letter was received by the apparatus. The Bank of Russia also noted that they would consider the initiative. However, the experts interviewed by “SP” were skeptical about it. According to General Director of Relight-Nedvizhimost Konstantin Barsukoveven if this measure is adopted, it will be relevant for a very small circle of citizens. To support the secondary market, it would be more logical to launch a preferential mortgage program, as for new buildings.
There are several problems with this initiative. First, the buyer will have to apply for a mortgage in the same bank as the previous owner. It’s still okay, if the rate is good, the person will go for this one. But to implement the idea, the government will have to oblige banks to conduct this kind of post-mortgage transactions. By itself, this scheme is quite familiar – a person buys not only an apartment, but also a mortgage loan, which is transferred to him. It’s just that he draws it up on new terms.
It would seem that for the bank there is no difference whether the old or the new owner pays him at the rate that was. But this is a superficial approach. Under current legislation, banks do not have the right to change the terms of the loan agreement, no matter what shocks occur in the market, these are their commercial risks. The change of ownership at least allows you to reissue the loan at the new rates. This gives the bank a profit. Servicing a mortgage at 8%, when money costs almost 20%, is a loss for them, and from a new client.
In my opinion, this approach may lead to the fact that in the future, when the situation calms down, and it calms down, banks will start to look at the issuance of loans in a completely different way, embedding, among other things, such risks in mortgages. Because crises will happen in the future, and if the state took such a step once, it will do it again.
“SP”: – But is it so problematic for banks to reissue a mortgage at the old rate, how many people will take advantage of such an offer?
– If the loan remains at least with the same amount, it is not so critical. For example, a person took out a mortgage for eight million, paid off seven of them, which means that a new buyer at the same rate can take only this remaining million. This is at least somewhat fair. But if you oblige the bank to issue a mortgage at the old rate for the entire amount, this will not suit many people.
Therefore, in my opinion, even if this measure were taken, it would not be very effective. For those who have taken loans relatively recently, this will be a good innovation, because it will help them sell their property. Buyers will look at these apartments in the first place – the amount is large, and the rate is low.
But for those people who bought an apartment a long time ago and they have a small amount of debt left, this will not affect anything. Just because the buyer will be able to take out a mortgage at the old interest only for a small amount, he will have to pay the rest to the seller, and even taking into account rising housing prices. Instead of such half-measures, the state should think about fully subsidizing mortgages in the secondary market.
SP: How exactly?
– It seems to me that it would be more correct to launch the same state mortgage support program for the secondary housing market as for new buildings. The state should help banks issue loans at low mortgage rates that do not depend on the size of the key rate. This initiative would be useful, because the demand in the secondary market really fell a lot.
It’s not just about revitalizing the market, but also about the fact that many people cannot solve their housing problems because of high rates. Suppose another child appears in the family, and people need to expand their living space right now, they do not have time to wait until the construction is completed, make repairs, and so on. In this case, secondary housing is a way out of the situation, so family mortgages and other preferential programs can also be extended to it.
Such a measure would also support business. Now the state supports the construction industry with preferential mortgages, but the secondary market also provides a large number of employment among realtors, appraisers, banking, insurance companies, and so on.
Vice President of the International Academy of Mortgage and Real Estate Irina Radchenko I am convinced that the banking system will not take such a step.
– Realtors want to push through such an initiative to increase demand. But legally, in the case of the sale of a mortgage apartment, the loan is always fully repaid first and the mortgage agreement is terminated. After that, the new owner draws up a mortgage on himself already on the conditions that are in force now.
Why on earth should someone live in pre-op times? Banks are now taking loans from the Central Bank at 17%. Why should they give a new client a loan at 8%? From a legal point of view, such a “trade-in” is meaningless.
“SP”: – But the authors of the initiative point out that the bank will not have to bear additional losses, after all, it already received payments at the previously approved rate, isn’t there any logic in this?
– This is the opinion of the author of the idea that nothing will change for banks. But banks are not a realtor’s “sharash-montazh”, which may not take into account some formalities. They must close one mortgage and report to their shareholders and the Central Bank why they suddenly issue a new loan at 8%. These are the arguments of an amateur who does not understand how the banking system works and how complex it is.
If we follow this path, why shouldn’t the bank tell the client that he will now open a deposit not at 20%, but at 3.5%, as it was a year ago? Such initiatives seem amateurish to me. They are purely technically and legally impossible to implement, except in the dreams of realtors.