[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::dcu

Title:DCU
Notice:1996 BoD Election results in 1004
Moderator:CPEEDY::BRADLEY
Created:Sat Feb 07 1987
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1041
Total number of notes:18759

811.0. "Guess it wasn't such a good year for loans after all" by SMAUG::GARROD (DCU Board of Directors Candidate) Sat Apr 09 1994 01:17

    I thought it would be an interesting exercise to compare the "words" in
    the 1993 annual report to what the numbers REALLY say. As I guessed
    they're not the same.
    
    Lets look at the words in 1993 annual report:
    
    "1993 marked record growth in loans (see chart below)"
    "Overall consumer loans grew by 20.9% with the largest increase in new
    vehicles (40.5%), used vehicles (24.2%) and credit cards (20.1%)"
    
    The chart (bar graph) shows the following:
    
    Total Loans Granted:
    
    1991:	~$100M
    1992:	 $181.7M
    1993:	 $216.5M
    
    This marvellous performance is attributed to:
    
    "Service improvements included a reduction in loan turn around time to
    less than 24 hours, a simplified application, and an approval rate over
    84%."
    
    And many other statements that on the surface indicate that DCU is
    doing a growing stellar business in loans.
    
    Now let's look at the figures and do a proper analysis of them.
    
    In the 1991 and 1992 annual reports the activity in loans was broken
    down in the consolidated statements of cash flows as follows:
    
    
    INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
    ...                             	1991		1992
    
    Originations of Loans Sold          <56,745,587>    <140,988,894>
    Proceeds from sale of loans          51,997,070      128,200,200
    Net decrease in loans to members     13,981,785       17,884,616
    
    The top two lines are purely talking about loans that granted and then
    sold. The first line is the amount of cash given to the members taking
    out the loan, the second line is the amount of cash recovered when the
    loan was sold on the secondary market. These are primarily long term
    mortgages that quite sensibly the DCU doesn't want to hold too many of
    due to interest rate risk.
    
    The third line is the interesting one. It tells you what's happening to
    the loans that the credit union is holding. It says that at the end of
    1991 it was holding $13M+ less in loans than it was at the beginning
    of the year. And in 1992 it was holding $17M+ less again. This line is
    basically:
    
    VALUE OF LOANS GRANTED THAT YEAR - PAID OFF PRINCIPAL OF LOANS
    
    Doesn't look too hot for a credit union. The credit unions main purpose
    for existing is to grant loans.
    
    But wait. What of the 1993 statement. One would have thought that it
    would be presented in the same manner as the 1991 and 1992 statements.
    But NO it isn't. Instead it is presented as follows (1992 is restated
    in the new terms as well)
    
    INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
    ...                             	  1993	          1992
    
    Proceeds from sale of loans           138,301,205      128,200,200
    Net originations of loans to members <120,721,245>    <122,409,278>

    
    In other words the lines "Originations of loans sold" and
    "Net decrease in loans to members" has been combined into the new
    line "Net originations of loans to members". So let's give the benefit
    of the doubt and say this isn't covering up information on a big drop
    in loans that are actually being held (although one wonders why
    three lines were combined into two, that's LESS information).
    Assuming this there is still a drop of about $1.7M in the value of
    the loan portfolio. Which of course means less interest being earned.
    
    So it appears that even though loan originations are up from the last
    year (remember the words) that is a meaningless statistic because
    more principal was paid off than loaned out. One would have hoped
    that a banner year in loan originations should lead to a balance sheet
    showing a larger loan portfolio. I guess not. I wonder how much of
    that was due to people refinancing and taking their business elsewhere?
    
    I think the credit union needs to do a better job. That in my mind
    means that more people do business with the credit union. I say the
    only way to achieve that is to improve services and marketing. I
    believe fees are doing the exact opposite.
    
    Dave
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
811.1QBUS::M_PARISESouthern, but no comfortTue Apr 12 1994 01:4511
    I must be missing something..
      Why would a credit union want to sell loan contracts to a third
      party for 9cents on the dollar?  That sounds more like a mortgage
      broker than a lending institution.
      Also why wouldn't the net decrease for 1993 be in the $13-17M range? 
      What is the actual amount in loan balance?
    
    Mike
    (no monetary wizard)
    
    
811.2AOSG::GILLETTRunning for the DCU BoardTue Apr 12 1994 11:1716
re:  .1

Yes, it does sound a lot like a mortgage broker.  Basically, they
are trying to avoid carrying a lot of low interest loans on the books.
They can sell them now, make a quick buck, and "risk less" when 
interest rates rise.

The argument is typically that if they have a lot of low interest
stuff on the books, when rates go up they'll be less available to
loan out.

I believe they currently carry the fixed rate stuff on the books - I
don't think those are sold.

Chris
811.3It's long term fixed rate that is soldSMAUG::GARRODDCU Board of Directors CandidateTue Apr 12 1994 11:2831
    
    Re .-1
    
>Yes, it does sound a lot like a mortgage broker.  Basically, they
>are trying to avoid carrying a lot of low interest loans on the books.
>They can sell them now, make a quick buck, and "risk less" when 
>interest rates rise.
>
>The argument is typically that if they have a lot of low interest
>stuff on the books, when rates go up they'll be less available to
>loan out.
    
    Actually I think tthere is more to it than that. The problem with having a
    lot of low interest loans on the book is that if prevailing rates go up an
    institution would not be able to raise its deposit rates to prevailing
    market rates due to lack of income. This would cause depositors to
    remove money causing a big cash flow problem for the institution. In
    addition of course it would mean there would be no more money to loan
    out.
    

>I believe they currently carry the fixed rate stuff on the books - I
>don't think those are sold.
    
    Actually it is the other way round. It is long term fixed rate
    mortgages that tend to be sold on the secondary market immediately.
    Institutions will hold on to all variable rate mortgages because they
    know that they can adjust the interest rates on these to prevailing
    rates as time goes by.
    
    Dave
811.4QBUS::M_PARISESouthern, but no comfortTue Apr 12 1994 12:4515
Dave

You claim in the rebuttal of the "Committee for a Qualified DCU Board"
memo that investing in membership loans is a far more lucrative, and by
inference desirable, pursuit rather than short term cash vehicles
employed to develop a better capital position.  How does this statement
of principle coincide with the line from .0 which states:  "These are
primarily long term mortgages that quite sensibly the DCU doesn't want
to hold too many of due to the interest rate risk."
Should the DCU grant and hold loans, or merely broker them?

Mike


811.5STAR::BUDAI am the NRATue Apr 12 1994 13:0915
RE: Note 811.3 by SMAUG::GARROD

>    Actually it is the other way round. It is long term fixed rate
>    mortgages that tend to be sold on the secondary market immediately.
>    Institutions will hold on to all variable rate mortgages because they
>    know that they can adjust the interest rates on these to prevailing
>    rates as time goes by.

You, a mere engineer know of such financial topics???  I thought only,
'Qualified' people would have such knowledge... :-)

Looks like engineers can balance a check book after all! :-) :-)

	- mark

811.6Thats the problem...SSDEVO::RMCLEANTue Apr 12 1994 13:168
>>You, a mere engineer know of such financial topics???  I thought only,
>>'Qualified' people would have such knowledge... :-)


  This is EXACTLY the problem!  Engineers believe in doing the "right" thing
and not keep track of the pennies like the bean counters!!!  They forget that
as the company gets smaller the ratio of Bean counters to Engineers gets 
smaller ;-.] ;-.]
811.7Need to bring members business to DCU not elsewhereSMAUG::GARRODDCU Board of Directors CandidateTue Apr 12 1994 13:3255
    Re:

>You claim in the rebuttal of the "Committee for a Qualified DCU Board"
>memo that investing in membership loans is a far more lucrative, and by
>inference desirable, pursuit rather than short term cash vehicles
>employed to develop a better capital position.  How does this statement
>of principle coincide with the line from .0 which states:  "These are
>primarily long term mortgages that quite sensibly the DCU doesn't want
>to hold too many of due to the interest rate risk."
>Should the DCU grant and hold loans, or merely broker them?
    
    I believe my statements are consistent. The DCU has done and should
    continue to sell long term fixed rate loan obligations to avoid the
    interest rate risk (for an example of an institution that thought it
    could predict which way interest rates would go take a look at Abbey
    Financial, they just went bankrupt because they were speculating
    on interest rates continue to fall).
    
    My concern stated in the joint statement is that in my view a too high
    percenentage of DCUs assets are in investments rather than in member
    loans. I believe the reason for this is because members are taking
    their variable rate loan business elsewhere. DCU SHOULD be able to
    offer a credit card that soaks up as much of the free cash as possible.
    But NO it ties the credit card fee to being a "Relationship Member".
    Maybe those who want a credit card don't:
    
    	a) Want to keep over $3,500 on deposit
    	or
    	b) Don't ALWAYS want to have more than $3,500 outstanding in loans
    
    With numbers much less than this DCU could generate significant income
    from credit cards. Just the interchange income alone is astronomical.
    
    But unfortunately the current policy is a complex set of fees and
    relationships that are causing people to just take their business
    elsewhere leaving DCU with about $100M+ (I think that is the figure,
    I don't have the annual report with me at present) sitting in low
    interest rate investments. DCU's goal seems to be to reduce that $100M
    not by loaning it out but by chasing away the depositors through the
    relationship banking scheme. Shouldn't be too difficult since 2/3
    of DCU's members are not "relationship members". Only a 1/3 are not
    "abusers".
    
    What DCU needs to do is make it even easier foer members to do business
    with them. Members need to know that if DCU sets rates too
    conservatively that no problem some of the excess profits will be
    redistributed back to the members at the end of the year. But NO the
    current policy is to retain ALL of that excess profit (except for the
    piece earmarked for the employees of course -gainsharing-) just to
    build up the almighty capital ratio. Nowhere have I ever seen either
    DCU management or the pro fee candidates explain why we need a capital
    ratio that grows at such a high rate. The only half explanation I've
    seen is something around matching industry peers.
    
    Dave
811.8QBUS::M_PARISESouthern, but no comfortTue Apr 12 1994 15:3815
    Dave, don't confuse me with the facts! ;-)
    
    I guess I misunderstood your intentions in posting the basenote.
    I thought you were trying to say that the reason loans were being
    sold was due to the exodus of monies on deposit and the high loan
    imbalance that created.
    Now it appears the loans are sold because it is considered sound
    financial management.
    Maybe I wouldn't want a mortgage with a credit union who is only
    going to sell our contract to a mortgage company I don't know.
    Also isn't it a bit disingenuous to extol loan services which one
    is only acting as a middle-man, and fully intends to outsource?
    
    Mike
    
811.9ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Tue Apr 12 1994 16:2510
re: .8

I think DCU is required to tell you when you apply for a mortgage (along with
all the other mortgage providers) the percentage of loans they have sold in
the past along with an indication of whether they intend to sell yours.

I agree it is a bit hypocritical to sell service to a potential customer when
you have no intention of providing any.

Bob
811.10servicing what you sell?CVG::THOMPSONAn AlphaGeneration NoterTue Apr 12 1994 16:348
    My understanding is that DCU is trying to increase the number of
    loans that it services. There is money to be made in servicing the
    loans that DCU sells. Servicing in this case means collecting the 
    money and passing it on to who ever the loan has been sold to. This
    allows DCU to make additional money on the loan while controlling
    the quality of service to its members.

    			Alfred
811.11Keep the servicing, sell the loans where it makes senseSMAUG::GARRODDCU Board of Directors CandidateTue Apr 12 1994 16:4017
    As Alfred said DCU is moving towards only selling the loan but keeping
    the servicing. I too would think it pretty shoddy if an institution
    hooks you and then immediately sells the servicing to another
    institution.
    
    To be honest I don't think the customer should really care whether or
    not the loan itself is sold on the secondary market. It is the
    servicing that should STAY with the institution that issued the
    mortgage. I'm glad to say this is what DCU is now doing. Whether a
    loan/mortgage is sold or not should be something that is determined
    on sound financial management principles. Whether to continue to
    service loans you issue is more a customer relations issue. It is
    customer relations where DCU needs to take bigger steps in the
    direction it has moved forward on some fronts but unfortunately large
    steps backwards on the front of "fees" and "Relationship Banking".
    
    Dave
811.12PATE::MACNEALruck `n&#039; rollTue Apr 12 1994 16:593
    Personally I never understood the issues some people had with having
    their mortgages serviced by someone other than the company the loan
    originated with.
811.13CSC32::S_BROOKThere and back to see how far it isTue Apr 12 1994 17:1016
    There are a number of problems related to changing the servicing of
    a mortgage ...
    
    a) you're never quite sure where to send your mortgage cheques ... some
       mortgages change hands a couple times a year.
    
    b) the service provided can vary ... lots ... in case of servicing
       questions
    
    c) escrow calculations and policies may be different amongst the 
       different companies
    
    d) every transfer runs a risk of messing up the numbers of the amount
       owning, the amount in escrow etc.
    
    
811.14servicing issuesPACKED::COLLIS::JACKSONLive freed or live a slave to sinTue Apr 12 1994 18:0223
We just completed our second refinancing in a year.

The company that our loan was sold to last summer was

 - unresponsive (10+ minutes to speak to a human voice
   when calling every time I called)
 - slow to post money received
 - quick to slap on fees
 - charge outrageous (IMO) fees for faxing
 - broke promises of providing service promptly
 - gave incorrect information to the Title company
   causing lots of headaches

The new company our loan was sold to is:

 - quick to answer the phone
 - knowledgable
 - pleasant to deal with

IMO, who services the loan is VERY important.  But then
again, I've seen both sides.

Collis
811.15QBUS::M_PARISESouthern, but no comfortTue Apr 12 1994 19:039
I heard of a homeowner who had a mortgage with a company that failed.
Not all mortgages held by this company were picked up and his was
called in (demand payment).  Re-financing was a real hassle and the
interest rate was much higher.  Would this happen with a DCU mortgage
that was sold.  What "service" would one expect in this case?

Mike

811.16STRATA::JOERILEYLegalize FreedomWed Apr 13 1994 03:2120
        RE:.12

    >Personally I never understood the issues some people had with having
    >their mortgages serviced by someone other than the company the loan
    >originated with.

    	When I re-mortgaged the first time I paid a $250 application fee
    plus points (I don't remember how many now) just  because I wanted 
    to be with a local bank.  That way when any problems arise yours or 
    theirs it's a simple hop in your car and drive down the street.  Within
    one year it was sold to a firm in Portland Oregon.  I was never
    advised of this until the deal was done.  It has sense been sold to a
    firm in Texas.  Both Oregon and Texas are a bit to far to drive to on a
    regular basis and any kind of communication with either was almost non
    existent.  So when I just re-mortgaged with a local credit union (not
    DCU) the first question I asked was did they plan on selling the
    mortgage, when they answered no I went ahead with the deal I close
    this Thursday.

    Joe  
811.18DCU should service all its loansCADSYS::RITCHIEGotta love log homesWed Apr 13 1994 09:5512
The savings bank we have our mortgage with told us as soon as we converted our
variable rate construction loan to a fixed rate mortgage, they would sell the
mortgage.  They do service all the loans locally, though.  For us, it's no
difference in service, loan number, billing procedure.  In fact, the escrow
people are a little flaky, but we had to figure out how to deal with them while
we had the construction loan.  When the servicing changes, one has to break in
new people. Also, it's a local number to straighten things out.  They also pay
real estate taxes in person, so there's never any problem with that.  The bank
wins, because they get the servicing income, and they get the proceeds of the
sale of the loan to cover interest rate fluctuations.

Elaine