sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

RBNZ Deputy Governor Grant Spencer says the impact of LVR 'speed limits' will not be uniform around the country; house prices to stay high

Property
RBNZ Deputy Governor Grant Spencer says the impact of LVR 'speed limits' will not be uniform around the country; house prices to stay high
<a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/">Image sourced from Shutterstock.com</a>

The impact of the new "speed limits" on high loan to value lending will not be felt uniformly around the country, and house prices in NZ will remain relatively high, Reserve Bank Deputy Governor Grant Spencer says.

He also says the RBNZ doesn't believe that three-year targets for new housing developments in Auckland and Canterbury will be met. Also, he brushed off industry suggestions that the LVR limits might dampen residential construction activity.

Spencer told attendees at a Property Council New Zealand "Residential Summit" in Auckland that a more responsive "supply side" of the housing market - more new houses - was needed and this might include needing to import labour.

Not uniform

"The impact of LVR restrictions will not be uniform across the country," Spencer said.

"Market segments with a higher proportion of high-LVR borrowers are likely to see larger effects, as will areas where house prices and borrower incomes exceed the criteria for Welcome Home Loans, which are exempt.

"The LVR restrictions are intended to reduce the build-up of systematic risk in the New Zealand financial system.

"They will also potentially reduce the extent of interest rate increases, and hence exchange rate pressure, that may be needed in the coming cycle. The LVR restrictions are also expected to reduce risk in the banks’ balance sheets."

Record house prices

The deputy governor's speech came a day after latest Real Estate Institute figures showed the national median house price hit an equal-record high of $400,000 last month, while Auckland prices also achieved a new record median of $570,000.

The rate of house price inflation nationally is already very close to the 10% peak the Reserve Bank is forecasting for later in the year. Auckland's house price inflation is 17.5%.

But also out this week was the latest BNZ-REINZ monthly Residential Market Survey. This survey, completed after the October 1 introduction of "speed limits" showed a marked impact on the housing market, particularly among first home buyers.

The heated state of the market has been of concern to the Reserve Bank, which introduced the LVR "speed limits"  in an attempt to protect financial stability and to partially rein in prices - particularly in Auckland. See here for articles on LVRs.

The Government for its part announced new measures aimed at alleviating the politically-loaded situation of first home buyers being potentially locked out of the market by rising prices. In Auckland the Government and the Auckland Council have combined in the Auckland Housing Accord, through which it is aimed to build another 39,000 houses in the Auckland area over the next three years.

Prices to stay high

Spencer said it was important point to note that while house price inflation "should be reduced" by the LVR restrictions, New Zealand house price levels would remain high "on most metrics", for example, relative to incomes and rents.

"In this sense it is hard to see how these restrictions will materially reduce the existing incentives to develop new residential property. Provided the “red tape” costs and delays are reduced, there will remain a strong price incentive to expand the housing stock, particularly in Auckland and Christchurch."

The RBNZ expected that "in due course" housing supply would catch up with demand, and for demand to be further moderated as interest rates returned to "more normal levels" over the next couple of years.

"As the imbalance between demand and supply is reduced, we will look to lift the LVR restrictions," Spencer said.

"The indicators we will assess in this regard include house price inflation, mortgage approvals, credit growth and house sales. We will be looking for clear signs that excess demand pressures have substantially reduced and that a removal of the restrictions will not result in a return of such pressures."

Auckland unresponsive

Spencer said that while "many" dwellings were built in Auckland between 1991 and 2005, research suggested that, relative to population growth, districts in Auckland had the lowest supply responsiveness in the country.

"If we exclude apartments from the picture, the construction of new dwellings has been weak or declining since 2004."

The RBNZ estimated that for new housing targets in Auckland and Canterbury over the next three years, new dwelling construction would need to be 9% higher than at the height of the recent housing boom, "even assuming no growth in home building through the rest of the country".

"At the same time, a significant amount of repair work, infrastructure and commercial construction will be taking place in Canterbury.

"In reality, we expect the targeted house building in Auckland and Christchurch to occur over a longer period than three years. How much longer will depend on the extent of improvements in approval processes and on the ability of the construction industry to expand its current capacity."

Wage and price pressures

Spencer said some wage and price pressures would "inevitably result" from the ramping up of construction activity in Auckland and Canterbury.

"On a moderate scale, this would help to attract resources into the construction industry and hence facilitate the building expansion. On an excessive scale, this would risk spilling over into general inflation and put upward pressure on interest rates and the exchange rate," he said.

Spencer said that to avoid the potential problems associated with excessive house price and construction cost inflation, a more responsive "supply side" was needed that included:

  • A responsive and innovative building sector;
  • An adequate supply of labour, some of which will need to be imported; and
  • A responsive planning and consenting process.

"We will also need the demand side to be kept in check while the supply response takes place," he said.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

16 Comments

The impact of the new "speed limits" on high loan to value lending will not be felt uniformly around the country, and house prices in NZ will remain relatively high, Reserve Bank Deputy Governor Grant Spencer says.

 

Cripes, another bureaucrat picking winners - why can't they leave it to those that purchase properties for a living to make these predictions?

Up
0

The RBNZ has been correct about its house price forecasts exactly 0% of the time so probably not anything to get too concerned about.

Up
0

and anyone has consistantly done better?

I think not...

Up
0

Shanghai-born Jan Kot runs the China arm of Juwai.com, the world's biggest international property website for Chinese buyers, visits Australia for the first time this year

At each city we went to, she kept saying, "Gosh, there are so many Chinese here"

Her observation made perfect sense. China is the second biggest source of migration to Australia, after India. But this story is not about the Chinese who call Australia home. It is about the foreigners who never get to settle here, who live overseas but invest in Australia's residential real estate. The Chinese are a rapidly growing force in that market.

A lot of it is being paid for by cash. They don't come to the banks for this.

SMH - real-estate-in-sydney-the-big-foreign-buyup

Up
0

Hmmm - Britain seeking the same benefits, if one can call them that.

 

George Osborne has heralded the "next big step" in Britain's relationship with Beijing, unveiling a new visa system to make it easier for Chinese business leaders and rich tourists to visit the UK. Read more

Up
0

I believe the article below may explain the increased schmoozing by NZ and GB towards the wealthy Chinese. As per your link above, the western world appear to be falling over themselves to get a slice of the cake.

http://thediplomat.com/pacific-money/2013/05/30/half-a-billion-chinas-m…

 

Up
0

Well here's one price driver:

The cost of house building in Christchurch is currenlty increasing by 1.6% a month.

Now if my house burned down tomorrow it would take at least 4 months to demolish, get geotech, design and consents (excluding any delay for any resource consent) and then it couldn't be built in less than 12 months.

So in the 16 months it would take to execute the build the various costs will increase by 25.6%.

 

On top of that is an insurance question. if I get the house insured for a valuation done on todays price and subsequent to that it burnt down 12 months later (say on the last day of my insurance cover) then my valuation is likely to be 19.2% under replacement cost.

Up
0

Not unless its a mass burn down like several streets. This 1.6% premium being pad for builders is due to the chch EQ I assume? So subbies are getting $40 an hour maybe more, up from $30ish.  So if your home was a one off burn down it shouldnt see that much of a hit unless its in chch right now.

Im doing my house insurance right now and Im allowing 2% on its present estimated rebuild value.....bit of a punt really.  

So really you can just allow a % to cover 12months......of course the premium is then higher.

:/

regards

Up
0

Well yes, but that is the circumstance we are in.  And the 1.6% is likely to continue for at least the next 12 months, which is the insurance period that is up for renewal.

One assumes price pressure in ChCh will stay around for quite some yet, but as you suggest, who can say for how long.

Even we you hope it may halve, at .8% per month, for a year it's still a 9.6% inflation allowance on an insurance calculation for one year.  If the average was $400,000 you are talking about people having to find $40,000 minimum extra if things go wrong.

Up
0

Well what Im doing is taking the price I have today and adding +2%...today.....so the way around finding the $40k is to pay a % more.

regards

Up
0

A self admitted fail by the outfit that introduced the new rules?

Up
0

A self admitted fail by the outfit that introduced the new rules?

Up
0

 

Ralf, your referring to Demand Surge which is post event inflation, the dirty little secret your insurer doesn't want to talk about esp. when offering settlements that do not take it into account. Changes to NZ insurance policies now see this risk passed from the insurer to you and you get to pay for this honour in the form of much higher premiums. Demand surge refers to price inflation for scarce construction materials, labor and services following a significant disaster. The more widespread the damage, the greater the price for the rebuilding resources.

For example, After Cyclone Tracey in Darwin, building costs increased by 75 per cent; after the Newcastle earthquake, building coats increased by 35 per cent; and after the ACT bush fires in 2003, building costs increased by fifty per cent between November 2002 and January 2003. 

The figures for American cyclones make really scary reading. Mind you, the industry still recorded record profits in those years. Policyholders took the loss and many are still unable to rebuild because demand surge has continued to drive up the cost and other factors such as new construction requirements increasing the distance between the amount of a settlement and the cost of rebuilding.

Few New Zealanders will factor demand surge in and will be seriously under insurned as a consequence should there be a large scale disaster. The only way to make good out of this fiasco is to divest your interest in property and purchase shares in insurance companies, but you'd have to ask yourself if you could sleep at night knowing what business you are in.

Up
0

Cunning isnt it

Insurers are no longer offering "full replacement" which loads any "demand surge" in costs onto the insurer, but now offering "sum insured"

 

You have a building which was "valued" last year by a valuer at $200,000 and this year at $220,000. You cant add in an additional amount to cover any "surge cost" as that would be classed as over insurance and disallowed. Because, at the time of the event, costs hadn't surged. They surged afterwards, after the insurable event.

 

Insurers have thus shifted the cost of any surge in costs off their books onto the insured

So, how do you protect yourself?

Up
0

Im not so sure you are correct. Im just doing my policy right now (and its quite a jump).  However what they say is the re-build cost not cost of the house just before the major incident.

Such a thing as you contend would I assume leave them open to legal action....dunno, guess we need a lawyer.

I'll agree they have certianly shifted risk to us...the least qualified to deal with it.

regards

 

 

Up
0

 

 

Two otherguys, Yes very  cunning. How do you protect yourself? You can't. It is the governments role to regulate the industry so we are protected, but this government has shown where it stands there with the fiasco that is CHCH. 

There are so many other things wrong with these new insurance policies that leave us all totally at their mercy. It is really very scary.

We wound up getting a quantity surveyor in (another cost) to accurately estimate our reinstatement amont, so we have some documentation to fall back on should they try and screw us in the event of a total loss. QS estimate was exactly double the estimate provided by the online insurance calculators I accurately filled out. The QS added a building inflation figure of a little under 5% which insurers then immediately added to the sum insured (which in turn increases your sum insured up front as opposed to gradually). Some insurers wanted to charge us a 500% increase in premiums from last year. There was a difference in the premiums of the insurance companies we got quotes from of over 150% - We ended up paying well over double the premiums we did last year.

Interestingly when I changed my sum insured from the calculator total to the new QS total and got new quotes I noticed with one insurer I could insure 2 homes at a combined value of $600k more than my single home for 30% less in annual premiums! It turns out their new formulas are a work in progress for the first guinea pigs through the doors, this particular insurance company admitting they would have to adjust their formulas when I pointed out the anomalies. 

All this for less cover, new policy wording that is even more bias towards the insurer with terms like the insurer "deems" the value which basically means it doesn't matter what you value the home at (and pay premiums based on) they will ultimately decide what it is worth should they ever have to pay out or repair.

Should Auckland eventually get a direct hit from a cyclone with these new polices it will be even more of a nightmare for her residents that it is proving to be for those poor souls in CHCH so many of whom have been shafted. 
Up
0