Investment
Court rulings in Spain create more uncertainty over illegal homes
Three rulings by Spain's Supreme Court have left the owners of more than 16,500 homes built in Marbella since 1986 in legal limbo by declaring planning regulations void. In a series of decisions, the country's highest court has declared null and void Marbella's urban planning regulations that were passed in 2010 and which legalised thousands of homes constructed since the previous town plans, dating back to 1986, were approved. In response to appeals against previous Supreme Court of Andalusia rulings, the rulings all arrived at the same conclusions, namely that the Town Council does not have power to retroactively declare legal properties that have been built illegally as that rests with the courts, nor to alter land classifications, nor legal liabilities. According to Adam Neal of real estate firm Terra Meridiana it means that individual property owners, even those who bought in good faith, will be held liable for illegal constructions, rather than passing the responsibility on to developers, as the 2010 plan sought to do. He explained that much of the problem arose during the three terms of the GIL (Grupo Independiente Liberal) government, from 1991 to 2003. The then mayor Jesús Gil is regarded as having run the council like a fiefdom, with claims of cash being funnelling under the table in exchange for carte blanche building licenses. ‘Subsequent administrations, under mayors Julián Muñoz, Marisol Yagüe, and Tomás Reñones, all sentenced to jail time for offences following the Caso Malaya scandal, were little better, leading to the suspension of the entire Town Council in 2006 by the central government, to make way for a team of auditors who tried to unravel Marbella's finances,’ he said. Neal believes that now all the paperwork for every property built within Marbella's municipal area since 1986 will need to be looked at very carefully indeed. ‘There are two possible outcomes: either a property is legal, because it was built on urban land as per the 1986 town plan, or it isn't, because it wasn't,’ he pointed out. According to Mark Stucklin of Spanish Property Insight it is bad news for the local property market, which was one of the few real estate bright spots in Spain until now. ‘It drags Marbella’s reputation back into the dirt by reminding people of its corrupt past, whilst the uncertainty will put off buyers and investors,’ he said. He pointed out that the decision could mean no more new building licences for the foreseeable future, plunging the residential construction business back into crisis just when it looked like recovering after more than a decade of downturn. Ricardo Arranz, president of the National Association of Urbanisation Developers, said the decision was right and expected. He explained that the industry welcomes the demise of the 2010 revised plan. ‘It was an unmanageable plan, absurd in every way and had started to scare off investors. It was done in a hurry by architects who knew absolutely nothing about the needs… Continue reading
UK buyers have saved almost £2 billion since stamp duty change a year ago
Buyers in the UK have collectively saved £1.9 billion since stamp duty was reformed in December last year, according to new research. An analysis of the figures by conveyancing services firm My Home Move says that buyers saving an average of £1,500 each since the reforms. Stamp duty reforms which were announced on 04 December 2014 abolished the old slab system of stamp duty and benefited anyone purchasing a home priced under £937,500. The firm also said that a recent poll of estate agents showed that 87% said that last year’s stamp duty changes have had a positive impact on the market. According to Doug Crawford, chief executive officer, the big winners from the changes have been the first time buyers and second steppers who have really struggled from price hikes due to a lack of housing stock. ‘Cheaper stamp duty bills don’t fix all the problems facing these buyers, but they do help by making it easier to save for a deposit,’ he said. He pointed out that the old slab system was ripe for reform as it was creating a stranglehold over the market, especially where property prices neared the stamp duty thresholds, and in particular around the £250,000 mark. ‘Home buyers have benefited from the significant stamp duty overhaul during the last 12 months with each buyer saving an average of £1,500, a much needed boost for those struggling to get on the housing ladder as prices have risen by 6% during the last year. Thanks to the reforms, people are now able to sell their homes for a truer value,’ Crawford explained. ‘However, as with all reforms there are those who have lost out from the changes. There are a small minority of buyers who are looking for luxury homes or expensive London properties which now command up to 12% in stamp duty,’ he said. ‘With a slowdown now being felt towards the top end of the market, it could cause a worry for the Government as receipts from stamp duty start to fall. However, following last week’s announcement of a 3% stamp duty surcharge for buy to let investors, any deficit could be offset from April,’ he added. Continue reading
Bank of England closely monitoring UK buy to let lending
The Bank of England has confirmed that it is closely monitoring the buy to let sector in the UK following changes announced in the sector in the autumn statement. Its latest Financial Stability Report says that the buy to let sector continues to drive growth in the UK mortgage market and the Bank of England believes it is more interest rate sensitive than the owner occupied sector and warns that strong growth may have implications for financial stability. It means that more buy to let lending controls may therefore be on the cards. That would be another blow to the sector. Landlord wishing to enter the sector and those looking to expand their portfolios already face paying an extra 3% in stamp duty from next April and there have also been changes to tax on earnings. The Financial Stability Report says that since 2010, credit loss rates incurred on buy to let loans in the UK have been around twice those incurred on lending to owner occupiers. It points out that the buy to let sector continues to drive growth in the mortgage market and while greater competition in this sector has not to date led to a widespread deterioration in underwriting standards of UK banks, strong growth in buy to let lending may have implications for financial stability. ‘The FPC remains alert to financial stability risks arising from rapid growth in buy to let mortgage lending and notes the difference in underwriting standards in the owner occupier and buy to let mortgage markets, in particular in the typical interest rates used in affordability stress tests,’ it says. ‘New loans to buy to let investors are often subject to less stringent affordability tests than loans to owner occupiers. According to industry standards, the affordability of a buy to let loan is typically tested by ensuring that the rental income exceeds 125% of loan interest payments at a mortgage interest rate of 5% to 6%. In contrast, and in accordance with the FPC’s June 2014 Recommendation, the affordability of loans to owner occupiers is tested by ensuring that the borrower has sufficient income to cover their mortgage payments at a more stringent mortgage interest rate of around 7%, despite owner occupier mortgage rates tending to be around 0.7% lower,’ the report continues. ‘Assessed against these affordability metrics, buy to let borrowers may be more vulnerable than owner occupiers to an unexpected rise in interest rates or a fall in income. For example, if mortgage rates rose by 300 basis points, the increment by which the FPC recommended the affordability of mortgages to owner occupiers is tested, nearly 60% of buy to let borrowers who took out loans recently would see their rental income no longer covering 125% of their interest payments. By comparison, only 4% of recent owner occupier borrowers would see their mortgage debt costs rise to above 40% of income, a level above which households… Continue reading
