The saga of mortgage prisoners has been rumbling along since 2014 (when the recommendations of the Mortgage Market Review were implemented). Understandably, it has rather taken a backseat to both COVID19 and Brexit. It now appears to be back on the agenda with the industry, the FCA and the houses of parliament.
News from the mortgage front
Back in April, the plight of mortgage prisoners was highlighted, again, due to a brief skirmish between the government and the house of Lords. When the Financial Services Bill was presented to the Lords, they backed an amendment calling on the government to cap the Standard Variable Rate (SVR) lenders could charge mortgage prisoners.
This amendment was, however, rejected by parliament, leaving mortgage prisoners stuck with the status quo. In July, however, both the Treasury and the FCA made public statements indicating that the matter was still very much in their sights. In fact, the FCA is due to submit a review to parliament in November.
What will the review contain?
Obviously, the exact contents of the review will only become public when it is complete. It is, however, safe to assume that it will include an estimate of the size of the problem. The FCA previously estimated that there were around a quarter of a million mortgage prisoners (in July 2020). It now acknowledges that the number may be greater.
The FCA has also indicated that it will look at the effectiveness of the steps already taken to release mortgage prisoners. Presumably, this will provide some level of insight as to what is and is not working at the moment. It may therefore inform any changes the government may choose to make.
What changes could the government make?
Realistically, the government only has two options. The first is to change the affordability criteria, at least for mortgage prisoners. The other is to take steps to make it easier for mortgage prisoners to satisfy standard affordability criteria. Both options raise clear questions and potential issues.
The first option raises the question of who will be responsible if a former mortgage prisoner defaults on a mortgage they would never have given under current rules. If this risk is placed on the lender, then lenders might choose to play it safe and decline the application. This would therefore effectively send mortgage prisoners right back to square one.
The government could get around this by offering some kind of guarantee to lenders. There is certainly precedent for them doing so. The government already offers support to first-time buyers and certain other buyer groups. They could extend this to mortgage prisoners.
The issue here is that subsidising one group of buyers effectively gives them an advantage over other groups of buyers. This does not necessarily go down well with those other buyers, especially not if they are paying for the subsidy through their taxes.
What options are likely?
The government has to deal with the financial consequences of COVID19 and Brexit along with wider issues such as social care and major projects such as HS2. It, therefore, seems safe to assume that it will wish to avoid taking on any more financial commitments than it can help.
This would suggest that the path forward may be to restructure affordability rules albeit with heavy caveats. For example, the government may allow lenders to relax affordability rules if a borrower is already making repayments of the same amount or more. Obviously, the borrower would need to demonstrate a consistent track record of making those repayments.
Another option might be to insist that borrowers have some form of insurance to cover their repayments at least for a certain period. This requirement could potentially be waived for borrowers who have a minimum level of equity in their homes.
Think carefully before securing other debts against your home. Your home may be repossessed if you do not keep up repayments on your mortgage