Boulger slams lenders' 'computer says no' attitude

13 August 2010 | By Samuel Dale

There is a ‘computer says no’ attitude among lenders with one admitting to refusing nine out of 10 borrowers on 90% LTV mortgages, says John Charcol.

Ray Boulger, senior technical director at John Charcol, says minor errors on consumers’ credit scores are stopping borrowers from getting mortgages.

He says: “Before the credit crunch, getting money from some mortgage lenders was nearly as easy as asking a resident of the North Pole to lend you some ice.”

Boulger says certain lenders fell over themselves to meet lending targets by offering loss leading rates, but we now find ourselves in completely the opposite place.

Boulger says: “Borrowers are being rejected at record rates, often for very minor indiscretions like being late with a credit card payment, and one major lender admits privately to rejecting 90% of the applications it receives for 90% LTV mortgages.

“The computer says no has become the most common utterance from some lenders. For borrowers it is difficult to know where to turn.”

He says those who rely on best buy tables frequently find that they don’t qualify and most high street lenders (Halifax is an exception) try to inhibit shopping around by leaving a hard footprint even when a customer just asks for a Decision in Principle rather than making a full mortgage application.

He says: “This blatantly contravenes FSA rules, with only a few footprints needed to crucify a credit score.”

But he does say that knowledge of the entire mortgage market is not only an enviable weapon, but absolutely critical to secure a competitive mortgage, and sometimes to secure any mortgage at all.

He says: “In this environment a good, independent mortgage broker is worth their weight in gold.

“The mortgage market has changed radically and is unlikely to ever return to what we knew before the summer of 2007, but it is not as dire as some think. Borrowers just need to know who to talk to for the right advice.”

Readers' comments (13)

Grey Haired Underwriter | 13 Aug 2010 12:30 pm
Not just a good independent broker but a lender who has decision makers that are not just plugged in. And this market isn't new but a return to the '70s - perhaps not quite as radical as is thought and I would have expected Ray to remember that far back.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
unemployed underwriter | 13 Aug 2010 12:45 pm
This has always been the case with large lenders and we need more of the small & specialised lenders in the market place who use real people with experience of underwriting who look at the whole case and get a feel for the lending and the security and use the computer as an aid to making a decission
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Aug 2010 12:58 pm
Before the credit crunch, getting money from some mortgage lenders was nearly as easy as asking a resident of the North Pole to lend you some ice."

Isn't that precisely why we are in the mess we are???
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Colin Chapman | 13 Aug 2010 1:35 pm
the 9/10 decline rate doesn t come as any surprise to be honest...lenders don t want that type of business and are only paying lip service to it by hiking the rates.......although I imagine its very profitable right now!!!!!!!!!!.........lenders direct operations are pretty poor......its a non advised service, constrained by the 9-5 opening times or spending an hour + on the phone.........a broker is easy, convenient and in our case without charge. The market will return and at £200bn annual lending and some 66% down turn in broker numbers since the heights and goo living can once again be made
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
old timer underwriter | 13 Aug 2010 1:36 pm
where has RB been for the last 2 years years!? whilst he appears to feel the 'computer says no' all too often, it was previously the (human) underwriter, with targets to hit, and BDM's, with bonuses to earn, that would ignore missed payments etc in the rush to hit that months target....

and look where that got us.

Very easy for Mr Boulger to lend other peoples money, take the proc fee (although not that much in his firms case we have recently learned)and move on....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Aug 2010 1:40 pm
Its obvious that previous lending was cavalier' - however the latest reactions to the FSA etc will leave good self employed, and so many more at the mercy of rising rates with no hope of further finance. This will surely increase defaults and damage property values & recovery - someone has to take risk!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Denis Gilgallon | 13 Aug 2010 1:45 pm
The point is quite a number of 90% 1st time buyers are absolutely creditworthy, low risk, and are the future customers for any Bank, just trying to get a foothold on property ladder. They are being treated shamefully simply because the Lenders no longer show any discretion or common sense.They should wake up to a missed market opportunity!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 13 Aug 2010 1:47 pm
I urge you mortgage strategy to take a long hard look at where you go for comment in future. this industry has changed beyond all recognition in the last 2 years, there are new faces and new opinions out there that more accuratley reflect the state of play in a reset mortgage industry.

a return to the 'good old days'???!!! give it a rest.

what next free school milk, jumpers for goalposts, outside toilets!?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
AP | 13 Aug 2010 2:12 pm
America had a problem with Ninja loans, we didn't. There were 46,000 homes repossessed in 2009, still lower than the 1995 figure which was right at the tail end of the 1989/92 downturn. We need to get a sense of perspective here wich is completely lacking. We have just endured the worst recession in 60 years and the moma of all credit crunches.

There were some obvious areas to avoid a) self cert severe impaired 90% ltv remortgages b) Self cert 85%+ mortgages on BTLs on new build apartments with deposit gifts but for vast majority of people the market worked very well and the banks made money out of it. The losses our banks have made have been largely caused by dubious bond trading in CDOs and speculative developers and comercial property borrowers.

Now the self employed are pretty much excluded from the market, and will be until they have three years excellent trading accounts (we have just had a recession remember) Those with lower deposits, a single missed credit card payment etc etc are all excluded. Meanwhile lenders have jacked up their margins on their captive clients.

No sign of the FSA asking the lenders to treat customers fairly on that is there? The only good thing the FSA are doing is requiring individual registration of brokers, something they should have done at the outset.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
mic2002 | 13 Aug 2010 2:15 pm
In reply to 'old time underwriter' above,I wold like to know where exactly did that get us? Ah yes..the FSA view that there is a dotted line from UK mortgage lending that caused the economic crisis? What nonsense.The millions of unaffordable mortgages maybe? Yeah right.Primary school economics rules again.Oh dear.For gods sake the recession was not linked in any way to UK mortgage lending - full stop.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment