RBI move for construction progress based loans | Mainstream media hoping for correction?

Reserve Bank of India Letter 

http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/BS_CircularIndexDisplay.aspx?Id=8366

RBI/2013-14/217
DBOD.BP.BC.No. 51/08.12.015/2013-14

September 3, 2013

All Scheduled Commercial Banks
(excluding RRBs)
Dear Sir,

Housing Sector: Innovative Housing Loan Products – Upfront disbursal of housing loans

It has been observed that some banks have introduced certain innovative Housing Loan Schemes in association with developers/builders, e.g. upfront disbursal of sanctioned individual housing loans to the builders without linking the disbursals to various stages of construction of housing project, interest/EMI on the housing loan availed of by the individual borrower being serviced by the builders during the construction period/specified period, etc. This might include signing of tripartite agreements between the bank, the builder and the buyer of the housing unit. These loan products are popularly known by various names like 80:20, 75:25 Schemes.
2. Such housing loan products are likely to expose the banks as well as their home loan borrowers to additional risks e.g. in case of disputes between individual borrowers and developers/builders, default/delayed payment of interest/EMI by the developer/builder during the agreed period on behalf of the borrower, non-completion of the project on time, etc. Further, any delayed payments by developers/builders on behalf of individual borrowers to banks may lead to lower credit rating/scoring of such borrowers by credit information companies (CICs) as information about servicing of loans gets passed on to the CICs on a regular basis. In cases where bank loans are also disbursed upfront on behalf of their individual borrowers in a lump-sum to builders/developers without any linkage to stages of construction, banks run disproportionately higher exposures with concomitant risks of diversion of funds.
3. In view of the higher risks associated with such lump-sum disbursal of sanctioned housing loans and customer suitability issues, banks are advised that disbursal of housing loans sanctioned to individuals should be closely linked to the stages of construction of the housing project/houses and upfront disbursal should not be made in cases of incomplete/under-construction/green field housing projects.
4. It is emphasized that banks while introducing any kind of product should take into account the customer suitability and appropriateness issues and also ensure that the borrowers/customers are made fully aware of the risks and liabilities under such products.


Yours faithfully
(Rajesh Verma)
Chief General Manager

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/banking/stakeholders-divided-over-rbi-curbs-on-innovative-home-loan-schemes/article5097436.ece

Banks have been advised not to give loans upfront for financing under-construction projects


Copyright @ The Hindu (business line)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/Realty-feels-slowdown-pinch/articleshow/22500365.cms

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/real-estate/realty-trends/economic-slowdown-inflation-and-steep-interest-rates-pinches-realty/articleshow/22508453.cms

 

 

image copyrights with Bennett & Coleman + times of india group internet limited + economic times etc

Real Estate Regulator - Friend or Enemy

Sugata Ghosh  from Economic Times Writes -

 Verbatim copy from ET
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/comments-analysis/real-estate-regulator-harsh-rules-soft-banks-will-keep-realty-unclean/articleshow/20468159.cms

Real estate regulator: Harsh rules & soft banks will keep realty unclean

After politicians, builders are the most despised lot. Everyone has a story of someone who got a raw deal. The keys were handed over three years after the promised date; buyers had to cough up more midway, thanks to a clause that initially appeared insignificant; the redeveloped apartment had two-and-a-half bedrooms instead of three; and a year later, another 20-storied tower sprung up on the "open space", blocking the view of the racecourse or the sea — for which the owner, taken in by pictures on glossy brochures, had paid a premium. The list is endless.

Some angry buyers move the consumer court while others grudgingly accept what they get. A few years down the line, they stop cribbing as properties in the neighbourhood change hands for double the price they had paid. By then, they could be browsing another brochure that has found its way into the inbox, planning a second home that comes across as the only sensible, even if a little sticky, investment.

The housing market is about spiralling rates that have priced out most buyers, ambitious developers who are answerable to no one, emergence of property as an asset class and mortgage instalments becoming the dominant outgo in household budgets.

Like politicians, developers require no qualification: anyone with a claim on a slice of land can put out an advertisement to attract buyers. It's a business that employs millions and flourishes without a watchdog. Thus, any hint of a new law that assures fair deals and exemplary punishments that would be handed out by a new regulator is irresistible.

But it won't be a cakewalk. Advocates of such legislation should be prepared for the tortuous road towards a well-regulated and cleaner property market.

First, home prices could go up in the medium term. Once the new Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Bill, 2013, becomes law, builders would be barred from selling a project till all approvals — as many as 70 of them — are in place. This would delay launch of new projects and push up prices of those that are cleared.

Second, corruption may rise as multiple agencies drag their feet on clearances. Developers may strike convoluted deals giving buyers the option to purchase later. Third, disqualifying a shoddy builder could stall construction in all half-done projects and hurt genuine buyers. And, lastly, the validity of many regulatory actions could be challenged in higher courts.

There would be hurdles on the way and unless there is a quick and effective mechanism to throw out unscrupulous developers and hand over unfinished projects to others for completion, harsh measures would backfire on home buyers. This could defeat the purpose behind an otherwise strong law.

The proposed regulator must play a meaningful role so that approvals are not held back without a valid reason. Besides listing out approved projects, its website should also spell out reasons why clearances are yet to come for pre-launch projects. This would make agencies responsible for vetting projects little more accountable.

It will be a tedious job but a real estate regulator, unlike most regulators, will have to play a far more proactive role that goes beyond giving the final green signal to a project when all approvals have been obtained by a builder. This will ensure that supply doesn't dry up in the short run.

But throwing the rule book would be ahalfway measure if men who bankroll developers are unwilling to pull the plug. More than any rule, this alone can make the biggest difference to the Indian property mart. So far, it hasn't happened. Banks could have brought about the change in 2008-09 when one of India's largest builders was on the brink of collapse.

Instead, lenders threw a lifeline to keep it afloat. While realty stocks plunged 90%, generous bankers thwarted a natural correction in property prices. India was among the few countries where real estate prices did not fall — in fact, even rose in cities like Mumbai — post Lehman. It was a reminder of the clout the trade wields. Having survived the worst crunch, its influence could have only grown since then. Pushing a righteous Bill a year before the polls may be a brilliant idea by the government. But make no mistake. It's aimed to restrain a formidable lobby.  


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The question now becomes - will this regulator be actually beneficial to end users  - Will India make a law like China - where they are discouraging or banning buying properties for investment -
Will our builders which are in full nexus with the politicos comply ? Will the corrupt bureaucracy of India actually change and not let this regulator be yet another bribe to pay to get a home?

New real estate bill worries builders

NDTV.com reports. Will this regulator be as toothless as SEBI.  One more department for the builders to grease. All the regulator needs to do is crack down on the black money component. Everything else will fall into place. Who will bell the cat ? Not anytime soon is my guess

The government is all set to tighten the noose around the realty industry. Under the provisions of the new real estate bill, developers may have to face stringent reporting norms.

Besides recommending a regulator for the real estate sector, the new bill also mandates the auditing of account books every quarter. NDTV has learnt that the audit of real estate companies will be conducted by auditors approved by the regulator.

As a result, the realty sector is clearly worried saying that quarterly audit amounts to overregulation.

But what does the government hope to achieve through a real estate regulator and quarterly audits. It is believed that by doing this the government is looking to keep a track on sale of properties besides having clarity on developer’s land bank. The government is also looking to overvaluation of land in accounts.

For the realty sector which is used to work in an unorganised fashion, the real estate regulator is expected to bring in proper regulation.

The bill soon coming up for clearance at the Cabinet also gives the regulator power to cancel the license of a property developer on violation of their guidelines – a step welcomed by many experts who feel that it is high time the government steps in.

It remains to be seen how far the law could be implemented, if at all it gets Cabinet approval as land is a state subject and would need active participation from the states.