Auctions Continue Their Winning Ways

The latest provisional results from APM PriceFinder shows that clearance rates across the country were strong today.  Nationally, there were 1,858 listed, and 78.6% cleared. The number was down a little from last week, but achieved a higher rate of sale. Further evidence of strong interest in property.

apm-15-oct-2016-1

Sydney cleared 80% of the 673 listed, whilst Melbourne listed 989 and cleared 78%. Canberra cleared 74% of the 48 listed and Adelaide 70% of the 50 listed. Brisbane results are yet to be posted.

Whilst overall volumes are down a little on this time last year, we do not see much sign of people walking away from the property market. This is another reason why we believe home prices will continue to strengthen as we move towards the summer.

apm-15-oct-2016

Housing Affordability Down In Melbourne and Canberra – HIA

The HIA has just released its Affordability Report for the September 2016 quarter which shows a small improvement in housing affordability, in some states, thanks to rate cuts but offset by rising prices. However, affordability fell in Melbourne and Canberra.

half-buit-house-pic-4

During the September 2016 quarter, housing affordability improved by 0.1 per cent compared with the previous quarter and affordability is now 2.5 per cent more favourable than it was a year earlier.

Affordability improved in six of the eight capital cities: Darwin (+7.8 per cent), Hobart (+7.6 per cent), Perth (+7.5 per cent), Brisbane (+2.7 per cent), Sydney (+1.5 per cent) and Adelaide (+1.1 per cent).

Affordability deteriorated in Melbourne (-2.6 per cent) and Canberra (-1.3 per cent) during the September 2016 quarter.

Comparatively, Sydney remains the capital city with the most challenging housing affordability conditions (affordability index score of 59.0), followed by Melbourne (70.9), Canberra (81.6) and Brisbane (87.9). Affordability is most favourable in Hobart (123.6) followed by Perth (98.0), Adelaide (93.7) and Darwin (86.8).

The HIA said “Over the past year, housing affordability has been helped by the two reductions in interest rates from the RBA. Despite not being fully passed on by lenders, these reductions have helped bring the mortgage repayment burden down a little. However, dwelling price growth remains strong in most capital cities and this has prevented affordability from improving more tangibly. Another challenge to housing affordability is presented by the fact that earnings growth in the economy is close to its weakest in two decades, making it more difficult to dilute the burden of mortgage repayments. With direct and indirect taxation accounting for over 40 per cent of the cost of a new house in some markets, the role of progressing tax reform in order to drive better affordability outcomes can no longer be ignored.”

 

‘Rising risks’ for banks in commercial property

Higher vacancy rates for office properties combined with growing settlement risks for newly-built residential apartments add up to a credit negative for Australia’s major banks, says Moody’s Investors Service via InvestorDaily.

Payment-Pic

A new report by Moody’s Investors Service has concluded that the risks from commercial real estate are rising for the big four banks, but they remain “manageable”.

After a hiatus in the years following the global financial crisis, Australia’s major banks have been steadily growing their exposures by 5 per cent or more each year from December 2013 onwards.

There are two major risks in the commercial property sector, according to Moody’s.

First, there are higher vacancy rates in office properties in Brisbane and Perth due to an increase in supply (and weak demand).

Second, there is growing settlement risk from a potential oversupply of newly-built residential apartments in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

The second risk factor could negatively affect property development companies as well as the broader market, said Moody’s – “especially in the context of tighter lending restrictions imposed by the major banks recently”.

However, Australia’s major banks should be able to manage the risk because they have limited their exposure to the high-risk commercial property segments, said Moody’s.

The major banks’ commercial real estate loans as a percentage of total committed exposures is “moderate” at around 6-8 per cent, said Moody’s.

Australia’s big banks also tightened their lending criteria to the commercial real estate sector following material losses in the aftermath of the GFC, said the ratings house.

“As a result, we see foreign bank branches being more at risk of current headwinds in this segment, and expect the major banks’ CRE impairment levels to remain at moderate levels,” said Moody’s.

A stress test of the major banks’ commercial real estate exposures indicates only a “mild deterioration” in Common Equity Tier 1 ratios under a “severe stress” scenario, said Moody’s.

Retirement will be harder for future Australians

New research by the Swinburne Institute for Social Research, shows the wealth effect of holding property, and the risks in retirement of those unable to get on the ladder. In fact, a comfortable retirement is unlikely for those renting, because they are excluded from capital growth, which makes up such a large element of household wealth.

They also show that households who invested in property in 2013 were far more highly leveraged than those from 2003, reflecting changes in tax concessions, and growing household debt.

Essentially, households have little choice but to join the property owning sector, once again highlighting why people are so desperate to join the band wagon; and the risks embedded should home prices revert to more normal level. As we said in a recent blog – all most everyone wins from ever high home prices, until the music stops.

The report examined the wealth of people aged 40 to 64 years and recent retirees.

It evaluated the degree to which households can accumulate wealth for retirement, focusing on housing, and the impact of relationships and divorce or separation.

owners-wealth

Lead researcher Dr Andrea Sharam says lone person and couple-only renters over 45 years of age tend to have little wealth.

“There are currently 425,000 people in lone person or couple households over 50 renting in Australia with this number expected to rise to 600,000 by 2030 and again to 830,000 by 2050.

“This number of impoverished older people equates to a huge increase in demand for housing assistance.”

Men and women are revealed to have different pathways into rental poverty in old age. For women the cost of care and the gender wage gap negatively affects them, while for men low educational achievement, consequential limited employment prospects and disability are factors.

“Relationship breakdown typically adversely impacts wealth with one if not both former partners often falling out of home ownership and not later recovering home ownership.

“Single mothers with young children are particularly vulnerable,” Dr Sharam says.

Policy recommendations

The report recommends a number of policy changes, including substantial community investment in social housing, and new affordable housing tenures aimed at midlife households who may not be eligible for social housing but also cannot afford full market house pricing.

“Social housing eligibility should be widened to order to cater for a broader range of incomes,” Dr Sharam says.

This would help prevent the loss of wealth associated with being a private renter and minimise the danger of retirees exhausting their resources before end of life.

The report also recommends better rights for renters, including:

  • security of tenure in residential tenancies legislation,
  • institutional investment in rental housing,
  • age-specific rental supplements, and
  • a National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) type program targeted to age pensioners.

To read the full report see, Security in Retirement: The impact of housing and key critical life events.

Chinese ‘upgraders’ adding new twist to real estate boom

As Chinese buyers gain residency, they also want to move into existing homes partly so they don’t have to compete with foreign investors buying overpriced apartments. From News.com.au.

wolli-building

Shanghai-born accountant Vincent Liu, 33, moved to Sydney around 10 years ago to complete his Masters degree. After renting in three different suburbs, he finally bought an apartment in Macquarie Park in 2012 for $570,000.

But with a young daughter and family, he’s already to keen to move out.

“A lot of my friends and schoolmates are in a similar situation,” he said. “We bought apartments or units around 2012 or 2013, now most of them have kids or are planning for the next stage of their life.”

Mr Liu said another concern for this group was the potential oversupply in apartments, making houses or townhouses with land attached a more attractive long-term investment.

“[But] I don’t think they’re going to sell just because of price fluctuation in the short term, unless something major happens,” he said. “For Chinese people, growth is not their major concern, it’s about putting money in a safe place.”

And as Chinese buyers gain residency, they also want to move into existing homes partly so they don’t have to compete with foreign investors buying overpriced apartments.

“For new migrants I don’t think apartments are going to be a good option now, especially if they don’t want to compete with foreign investors,” he said. “It’s better to save a little bit more [and wait].”

Mr Liu argues Australians concerned about rising house prices due to foreign investment should blame the government — not the Chinese.

“Australia is gathering investment from all over the world, your economy got a boost based on that,” he said. “Yes, local residents in Sydney or Melbourne might suffer a little bit but in the end it’s the all the government’s call.

“You want the investment, you introduce the money, now your residents are suffering because of your decision. It’s not one single factor that caused the situation.”

According to Mark Lauzon from Sotheby’s International Realty, the Chinese “came for the education and ended up staying for the lifestyle”.

“A lot of these couples arrived as single students, decided to start a career here after graduation and ended up marrying either another student from overseas or a local,” he said.

Mr Lauzon said he was currently selling a penthouse apartment in Waterloo owned by a couple from China. “Their penthouse is big enough for a family, but the vendors would like to move to a house or terrace to raise kids,” he said.

“In part, they are worried about having children on a high-floor apartment with balconies.

“They are hoping to stay in same area. The challenge for young families in Waterloo, Zetland and much of South Sydney is that there is a shortage of stock of single-family homes, and there aren’t many school catchments. They also look at Kensington and Surry Hills because there are not enough primary schools in this part of Sydney.

“People in South Sydney have really embraced apartment living. In terms of family-friendly, they prefer to look at terraces.

“Many of these vendors are very loyal to the area. They like this area because of its good infrastructure, transit, restaurants and shopping.”

James Pratt, director of auctions for Raine & Horne and J Pratt Realty, said a three-bedroom house in Zetland which recently broke the suburb price record went to upgraders.

“The buyers were Chinese, looking for a good place to raise a family,” he said.

“We are seeing Chinese upgraders at auctions in numbers I don’t recall seeing before. More and more, I am auctioning their units for them, and then see them bidding for the house they want to move to.”

Mr Pratt said so far this year he had sold around 26 entry-level apartments in South Sydney for Chinese-origin owners who were moving to a terrace or house. “Most of these buyers by now have Australian permanent residency,” he said.

Jackie Wang from Raine & Horne Ashfield said with the busiest time of the year, the spring selling season now here, she was expecting many more transactions over the next three months.

“Different from overseas Chinese buyers, local Chinese buyers are not bound by law to purchase brand new property, and they are more into existing homes,” she said.

“First home buyers are usually searching for old unit in a good location which can be owner occupied for a few years, then easy to rent out as investment once they are ready to upgrade to a house.

“Upgraders are more attracted to houses with nice features and space for the growing family. They live in a unit or apartment and are planning to upgrade to large semis or houses in the nearby area.

“From the recent sales around Ashfield area, I can see a lot of local Chinese upgrade buyers still have strong interest in Torrens title properties, especially the local upgraders.”

In just the past five years, Chinese investment has grown from 10 per cent to 25 per cent of all foreign real estate investment in Australia.

According to Gavin Norris, Australian head of Chinese real estate portal Juwai.com, there were potentially several thousand Chinese-origin households in this situation, “ready to move up the property ladder in the traditional Australian way”.

“Chinese buying in Sydney only really began in earnest in about 2009,” Mr Norris said.

“A home to live in while studying in Australia is the biggest driver of Chinese property buying in the big capital cities like Sydney. Now that the significant Chinese investment trend has passed the half-decade mark, these buyers are starting to age out of their first purchase. Many of them have married and are starting families.

“One out of every three people living in some Sydney suburbs, such as Haymarket and Ultimo, is a student from overseas. And 39 per cent of Sydney residents overall were actually born in another country — so this is potential a very large group of new buyers looking to purchase.

“The fact that so many of these buyers intend to hold onto their first purchase as an investment, rather than sell it to fund a larger new home, shows their frugality and dedication to real estate as an asset class.”

Auction Momentum Continues

Anyone who wishes to argue the property market is stalling, needs to explain the continued high auction clearance rates from last weekend. The market appears in rude health to us!

According to CoreLogic, last week the capital city auction markets were quiet due to the Labour Day long weekend which coincided with the AFL and NRL grand finals. Given this, it was unsurprising to see volumes increase substantially this week, with 2,246 held across the combined capital cities.  The preliminary clearance rate was 79.2 per cent this week, up from a final clearance rate of 75.8 per cent last week across just 872 auctions.  This week four of the capital cities recorded clearance rates above 80 per cent.  At the same time last year, results were lower, with 69.5 per cent of auctions clearing over a total of 3,016 capital city auctions.

20161009-capital-city

Latest Auction Results

The preliminary results for today are in from APM PriceFinder. After the drop in volume last week, thanks to the long weekend and storms, the national clearance rate was 78.5% from 1,855 listings. Melbourne beat Sydney at 79.8% versus 78.8% and on 966 listed compared with 651. apm-08-oct-2016-1

Volumes are still lower than this time last year, but demand remains strong. Adelaide listed 74 and cleared 75%, Brisbane cleared 57% of the 120 listed whilst Canberra listed 44 and cleared 87%.

apm-08-oct-2016

Negative equity risk for nearly 7% of Australian mortgage holders

From Australian Broker.

Across Australia, 311,000 (or 6.8% of) mortgage holders have been found to have little or no real equity in their home, according to a recent report from Roy Morgan.

The report, State of the Nation: Spotlight on Finance Risk, highlighted that this group of property owners is at particular risk if they have to sell or prices decline.

Broken down by state, mortgage customers in Western Australia were most at risk with 9.2% of homes valued less than or equal to the amount owed. NSW was the safest with only 5.1% of mortgage holders in the same situation.

Overall figures for each state found in the report are listed below:

  • NSW (5.1%)
  • TAS (6.1%)
  • VIC (6.3%)
  • SA (6.7%)
  • QLD (7.5%)
  • WA (9.2%)

One of the key trends revealed by the research was that lower value homes tended to face more equity risk. The value of homes owned by mortgage holders with little or no equity was $487,000 across Australia – compared to a nationwide average of $674,000 for all mortgage holders.

This trend was found across all states with figures found in the following graph:

“It tends to be at the lower end which seems to indicate maybe it’s the newer borrowers,” Norman Morris, industry communications director from Roy Morgan Research, told Australian Broker. “These sorts of numbers indicate there are people borrowing right up to the limit.”

While this could reflect on the duty of care that brokers had to customers, Morris said that these trends would present more of a problem if prices go down.

Compared with 2012 however, the figures have improved in the past four years.

“In 2012, the figure was 7.7%. Now it’s 6.8%. I would say that the main reason for that is housing and dwelling prices that they’ve been borrowing on have been going up fast.”

Eager homebuyers still falling victim to shadowy rent-to-buy deals

From The Conversation.

Those looking to get a piece of the Australian dream of buying a home are still falling victim to the shadow property market of rent-to-buy deals, a new report shows.

In a typical rent-to-buy deal, the buyer agrees to an inflated property price, then pays market rent (or above), an “option fee” to buy the property in several years’ time, and in some cases a deposit and outgoings. The option fees are at least partly credited to the purchase price. The catch is that the buyer has to refinance with a mainstream lender to buy the home by the time the rent-to-buy deal expires.

Payment-Pic

People who have signed up to rent-to-buy deals find it virtually impossible to refinance. The Consumer Action Law Centre has seen no examples of successful rent-to-buy deals. They are extremely risky financially and the legal protections for buyers are grossly inadequate.

In vendor finance schemes, the buyer agrees to an inflated property price, then pays a deposit, instalments, outgoings and, in some cases, their First Home Owner Grant. Vendor finance agreements are typically for between two and 30 years. However, the buyer will often need to refinance within several years and will face the same obstacles as in rent-to-buy deals.

The Consumer Action Law Centre report, Fringe Dwellings: The vendor finance and rent-to-buy housing black market, collected and published 10 case studies from Victoria and beyond. The studies detail the experiences of people across Australia who have bought into these schemes. There are some striking similarities between these cases.

The sales pitch is the same – “Own a home quickly and easily”, “Buy without a bank!”, “Tell the landlord to shove it!” and so on. The dream of home ownership is a very easy sell, especially to someone who thought it was out of their reach.

There are many examples of failed vendor finance deals. Many buyers have paid significant amounts towards what they hope will be their home, only to find they cannot complete the purchase and will lose everything.

The people who fall victim to these schemes don’t have the income, savings or credit history to get a mortgage. Often the banks have said no and people are drawn in by someone who seems to understands their predicament and finally says yes.

In most cases the deals were unaffordable from the beginning. The purchase price is well in excess of market value and the repayments are much higher than you’d see in a mainstream mortgage.

How people fall into the trap

Owning your own home is at the centre of the modern Australian dream. Yet this dream is increasingly out of reach of many as housing affordability worsens with rocketing property prices in our major cities. A report published earlier this year by the Australian Population Research Institute cited international research data ranking Sydney and Melbourne as second and fourth respectively among the most unaffordable locations in the world across the 86 major markets surveyed.

So it’s no wonder that people will go to extreme lengths, and are susceptible to the seductions of smooth-talking property spruikers, as they chase the dream of home ownership.

The legal framework is almost impossible for an individual to navigate without expert advice. In Victoria alone, there are nine pieces of state and federal legislation that can apply to rent-to-buy and/or vendor finance arrangements.

Although the various deals are sold to buyers in much the same way, it’s when they unravel that the complicated nature of the deals comes to light. This is essentially a black market, because it does not sit within established property markets or laws.

How common is this in Australia?

Such schemes have a long history in Australia and elsewhere but have achieved somewhat of a renaissance with the rise of the people who promote these schemes.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to identify how many people have entered into these sorts of schemes due to a lack of available data. Answers to questions in the census also do not provide this information. For the most part, therefore, these transactions are invisible.

As the property has not changed hands, there is no record on the title to the land and consumers rarely register caveats. However, the Consumer Action Law Centre and other legal services around Australia have assisted clients regarding these schemes in recent years.

In addition to this, there is an unhealthy level of interest in getting involved in these schemes. Thousands of potential brokers have attended vendor finance and rent-to-buy promotions in Australia. We Buy Houses Pty Ltd, the biggest of the operators, had a turnover of $20 million between January 2011 and June 2014. The role that some lawyers play in the establishment of the schemes is another concern.

People who use the rent-to-buy schemes may or may not fall under the protection of the law. Dan Peled/AAP

What can be done?

These schemes operate in a legal twilight zone. The patchwork of state and federal laws does not adequately regulate these transactions.

Depending on the structure of the particular transaction and the jurisdiction in which it occurs, some consumers may qualify for some legal protection while others simply fall through the cracks. Given the already onerous financial and emotional burdens incurred, consumers may recoil at the prospect of further expense and stress through engagement with the legal system.

Obviously the best course is to discourage consumers from entering into these transactions in the first place, so more public awareness of the pitfalls is desirable. The reality is, however, that the tantalising prospect of home ownership will mean that many hopeful but vulnerable homebuyers will still enter into these transactions. Proactive legal intervention is necessary and urgent.

As suggested by the Consumer Action Law Centre, the most effective solution would be to prohibit such schemes. Their track record in Australia and elsewhere is poor. The only benefit flows to the broker.

Failing this, property investment advice should be more tightly regulated.

The Corporations Act and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act impose tight regulations upon other forms of financial advice and all of these transactions should be no exception. Also purveyors should be licensed under the national credit laws to ensure compliance with national standards and make sanctions available for non-compliance.

These measures are essential to ensure that advice provided complies with existing regulation, that consumers are aware of the pitfalls of the schemes and that an especially vulnerable cohort of consumers is protected.

Another concern is the coverage of existing national and state laws. It is ironic that, in many cases, these transactions do not fall under the national credit law, the cornerstone of responsible lending and protection from unjust contracts.

State legislatures, which have carriage of real property laws, also have a role to play. Again, depending on the the structure of the transaction, laws could potentially overlap and yet other scenarios are not addressed at all.

Finally, regulators should use consumer protection laws to pursue these schemes. These laws prohibit misleading or deceptive and unconscionable conduct – although proving these legal standards before a court can be onerous.

The Consumer Action Law Centre’s suggestion of an extension of the provisions to include unfair trading – especially within the context of the ongoing review of the Australian Consumer Law – is timely.

These types of shonky schemes are not new and their shortcomings cannot be denied. The desire for a home means that many consumers will be vulnerable, especially in a time of declining home affordability and tighter credit. It seems we have reached a point where a national approach to the regulation of these transactions is not just desirable, but essential.

Authors: Eileen Webb, Associate Professor, Curtin Law School, Curtin University; Allan Fels, Professorial Fellow, University of Melbourne

High Clearance, But Low Auction Volumes Confirmed

CoreLogic confirms what we saw already, that there was a substantial drop in auction numbers this week due to the grand finals and the Labour Day long weekend.

853 properties were taken to auction last week, with a preliminary clearance rate of 77.5 per cent, compared to the same time last year when there were 865 auctions were held, with a clearance rate of 68.2 per cent.  In comparison, over the week before last a total of 2,480 auctions were held with a clearance rate of 75.4 per cent.

20161004-capital-city