# CBA hikes 0.30%



## BradK (6 February 2008)

Bastards


----------



## numbercruncher (6 February 2008)

*Re: CBA Hikes 0.30*

Got to love the 20pc profit ontop of the RBA hike 

Seems we are stuck in the Inflation cycle !


----------



## Uncle Festivus (6 February 2008)

What's that? They have raised their deposit rates by .3%?? ha ha ha
Actually, when did this happen??


----------



## ithatheekret (6 February 2008)

8.79% , may as well call it 9 , the $%#^&$$ @rzoles.

Pirates they're all pirates !


----------



## Judd (6 February 2008)

BradK - and others

I am surprised that you and others appear surprised/angered/mortified/pissed off.  The convention of 10 or more years of jawboning by previous Government to keep mortgage rates unofficially tied to movements in the RBA cash rate was broken in January, it is now gloves off.  It was a convention: never a requirement.

I noticed Swannie gave a serve to one bank which raised rates by 0.2% as excessive but then was totally silent when Members Equity did exactly the same.  Oh yes, I forgot.  ME has a union association.  Odd about that.


----------



## Buddy (6 February 2008)

I am one of those people who actually have more cash than debt. Sorry folks. Baby Boomer.  Anyway, have you noticed how the bastard banks always jack up the borrowing rates immediately, and then some (as with the CBA) but they never are that quick to increase the deposit rate, and then without some. Yes, I agree, bastards all. I put most cash in places like credit unions and ING, rather than conventional banks.  I just hope these people are not playing around with derivatives.  Anyone know.......?


----------



## Judd (6 February 2008)

Buddy said:


> I am one of those people who actually have more cash than debt. Sorry folks. Baby Boomer.  Anyway, have you noticed how the bastard banks always jack up the borrowing rates immediately, and then some (as with the CBA) but they never are that quick to increase the deposit rate, and then without some. Yes, I agree, bastards all. I put most cash in places like credit unions and ING, rather than conventional banks.  I just hope these people are not playing around with derivatives.  Anyone know.......?




Um, the credit unions are not exactly saints you know.  Same dishonour fees as banks.  Charge for direct debits, levy excess ATM fees, have increased mortgages rates by the same or more than the banks.  Really no different from any other financial institution except that the banks, if you buy their shares, pay dividends which can offset such costs.  With CU's and such you get none of those.  CUs have merged creating institutions as just as faceless as banks.

Such is life.


----------



## ROE (6 February 2008)

Time to go back to basic and only borrow sensibly ...

remember in the old day? bank take your applications
and apply a extra 2%-3% on top of the current rate to see if 
you can still afford to replay if rate do rise by that much?

they then approve your loan.. Gone are those days with these non-bank lenders flooding the market. 

so borrow sensibly and apply the rules yourself.

people got to remember banks are commercial institution and they will make as much money as they can out of you.

Same way as you run a take away or a business, if you can charge your customer more for a burger you would do it.

I dont owns bank shares but that is the way the capitalist model works so I guess you have to put up or do something about it like share their profits and buy their stocks


----------



## numbercruncher (6 February 2008)

ithatheekret said:


> 8.79% , may as well call it 9 , the $%#^&$$ @rzoles.
> 
> Pirates they're all pirates !







> CommBank said today that it was raising rates by 0.30% on its home and business accounts, meaning the new rate stands at 8.97%.




http://www.scopical.com.au/articles/BusinessandFinance/2503/Commonwealth_first_to_hike_loan_rates

Im guessing was just a typo, but thought I better clear that up for folks, probably another rise next month ? to make it 9.27


----------



## Judd (6 February 2008)

ROE said:


> Time to go back to basic and only borrow sensibly ...




Not having a shot at you, Bro, but when wasn't the time to borrow sensibly?  I blew up an account early last year and that, in hindsight, was a grand time to do it.

If you are just a mug punter like most of us, ie, we hold down a job to earn a wage, and decide to go a'gearing, then 20% max give a goodnight's sleep.  With an LVR at 70% and at that gearing, prices have to drop by over 65% before you get into margin call.

That is tuck up in bed and have good dreams territory as opposed to waking up in a cold sweat.  Yep, been there.


----------



## BradK (6 February 2008)

Anyone seeing David Wenham in 'The Bank'? 

Im going to the video store to get it for another viewing.... 

Boo hoo for the banks if borrowing costs are high for them. They got us into this mess, and I guess they will want US to get them out. 

F*#$&*$ing Bastards! 

Brad

PS. I have OODLES of equity and a comparitavely small mortgage. So, I can talk!


----------



## numbercruncher (6 February 2008)

Just Had a thought !


Maybe the CBA is expecting a Realestate crash, or atleast big financial stress amoungst the most stretched mortgage holders.

Therefore they raise rates over and above the RBAs effectively encouraging, especially those most financially stressed, to shop around and take their business elsewhere ?

A conspiracy to help get them off the hook for the more dubious mortgages


----------



## Bill M (6 February 2008)

I think you will find that in January when the banks bumped up their margins on mortgage rates that the CBA went up the least. All they are doing now is "catch up" to the others.

Standard variable rate rises:
ANZ: 0.20% to 8.77%
St George: 0.20% to 8.77%
Westpac: 0.15% to 8.72%
NAB: 0.12% to 8.69%
CBA: 0.10% to 8.67%

Source here.


----------



## Smurf1976 (6 February 2008)

ROE said:


> Time to go back to basic and only borrow sensibly ...
> 
> remember in the old day? bank take your applications
> and apply a extra 2%-3% on top of the current rate to see if
> you can still afford to replay if rate do rise by that much?



CBA thought I was pretty weird using interest rates in double figures for my own calculations. They only applied 1.5% above the current rate when approving the loan.


----------



## Buster (6 February 2008)

Hey Juddy,



Judd said:


> I noticed Swannie gave a serve to one bank which raised rates by 0.2% as excessive but then was totally silent when Members Equity did exactly the same.  Oh yes, I forgot.  ME has a union association.  Odd about that.




You omit that ME has absorbed a number of the previous rate rises.. unlike any of the 'other' lenders.. this is thier first hike in some time..

Don't work for them or have any dealings with them, did some time ago and found them excellent.. If I were ever to require another loan, it would be with them

Regards,

Buster.


----------



## MS+Tradesim (7 February 2008)

I have 90% of my banking with Heritage Building Society. They are excellent. They even held off on some rises as long as possible. And we knew our manager by name and he always had time for us whenever we needed anything - moved now and haven't needed to meet local manager yet. Personal service, can't beat it.


----------



## ROE (7 February 2008)

Smurf1976 said:


> CBA thought I was pretty weird using interest rates in double figures for my own calculations. They only applied 1.5% above the current rate when approving the loan.




Banks lower their standard ever since non-bank lender enter the market because non-bank lenders dont play by the same rules


----------



## ROE (7 February 2008)

Buster said:


> Hey Juddy,
> 
> 
> 
> ...




My letter to ME and they haven't reply yet.. Everyone should do the same and ask their banks 

To who it may concerns
I just receive a letter from ME advising me of increase home loan regardless of RBA interest rate movement due to the cost of funding resulting from US sub-prime credit crunch.

My question to ME is and if you can address these concern I'm all open ears.

1. You called yourself a superfund bank, dont you source most of your fund from superannuation? so what is sub-prime fallout funding cost got anything to do with ME accessing its money?

2. According to the RBA statement on monetary policy  (Nov 2007)
http://www.rba.gov.au/PublicationsAndResearch/StatementsOnMonetaryPolicy/Nov2007/banks_funding.html
banks source 25% of their funding from oversea
how much of this is ME real oversea source of funding? and is it really effecting your borrowing your cost or we just rise rate people everyone else does it to better ME bottom line?

Thankyou


----------



## Judd (7 February 2008)

ROE said:


> 1. You called yourself a superfund bank, dont you source most of your fund from superannuation? so what is sub-prime fallout funding cost got anything to do with ME accessing its money?
> 
> 2. According to the RBA statement on monetary policy  (Nov 2007)
> http://www.rba.gov.au/PublicationsAndResearch/StatementsOnMonetaryPolicy/Nov2007/banks_funding.html
> ...




Not quite ROE.  Here is a bit from ME web-site on where they source the funds.



> Our SMHL program raises funding by issuing bonds and mortgage backed securities that are rated AAA or equivalent by Standard and Poor's and Moody's Investors Service.




and, again



> So you can be rest assured, your superannuation fund or union and Members Equity are looking after your very best interests.




Seems they are in the same life (sinking) boat as any other financial institution.  I seem to recall that they recently pulled a $500M bond issue because they couldn't find buyers are the right price.  Things may have moved on since then of course.

I'm not knocking ME, banks, CU's or building societies.  They are just facing up to the financial facts which are being dealt to them and they are a business.  It is painful for those at the pointy end and if, apart from a mortgage, punters have maxed out credit cards (multiple), personal loans and car loans.  Phew! Not pretty in any way shape or form.


----------



## Mofra (7 February 2008)

Stupid form by the CBA. Overall, they've increased their rate 0.15% above the RBA movements (0.10% previously & 0.05% now), which is less than most of the other major banks (ave 0.18%-0.20%). By getting the timing wrong, every ACA-loving bogan in the land now believes them to be evil, despite the fact they've moved their rates less than their competitors. Given the average CBA loan is a lower balance than their competitors, they've p!ssed off their target market.

They now have both a PR nightmare & less profit from their book compared to their rivals.


----------



## ROE (7 February 2008)

Everyone should write to the bank and said take one rate hike for the team
(your customers)  go on do it , go on do it for the team. 

or better yet go to the branch and do it


----------



## Bill M (8 February 2008)

As I said before the CBA is no worse than the others and as a shareholder I think they are doing as required. Nothing is for free, if you borrow you must pay. If you over commit yourself then you must sell or cut down on your not important spending, it isn't rocket science. If you can not afford to borrow then don't do it.


----------



## MS+Tradesim (8 February 2008)

Bill M said:


> As I said before the CBA is no worse than the others and as a shareholder I think they are doing as required. Nothing is for free, if you borrow you must pay. If you over commit yourself then you must sell or cut down on your not important spending, it isn't rocket science. If you can not afford to borrow then don't do it.




So the customers have to pay to help the banks dig themselves out of the hole they jumped into in the first place by lowering lending standards and investing greedily into ridiculous debt-backed derivatives? Yep, let's just go ahead and socialise every moral hazard as long as management still get their large payrises and bonuses.


----------



## numbercruncher (8 February 2008)

Someone should start " The Bank Run Club "

Get a million members and start dictating the terms.


----------



## ithatheekret (8 February 2008)

numbercruncher said:


> http://www.scopical.com.au/articles/BusinessandFinance/2503/Commonwealth_first_to_hike_loan_rates
> 
> Im guessing was just a typo, but thought I better clear that up for folks, probably another rise next month ? to make it 9.27




Yep t'was , taa much for that .

I'm (excuse the pun ) safe as houses , don't have a mortgage , thought about it , but we bought outright , thinking I was smart now .

I was contemplating using the cash to bolster investment portfolio , but just the thought of owing money gave me the jitters . Problem I have , if I owe money I tend to struggle sleeping till the debt is cleared .In fact I go all out to get rid of it . Had to borrow for eldest daughters Uni fees etc. got that thorn out of my side last year ( the loan that is ) .


----------



## Bill M (8 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> So the customers have to pay to help the banks dig themselves out of the hole they jumped into in the first place by lowering lending standards and investing greedily into ridiculous debt-backed derivatives? Yep, let's just go ahead and socialise every moral hazard as long as management still get their large payrises and bonuses.



The customers took a variable home loan on the risk that they were going to pay less in the near term and weren't worried about the long term. If they had took a fixed term for 5 years at 6% in the beginning then they would be better off now.

If anyone in this world doesn't calculate interest rate increases into their mortgage repayments then I have no sympathy for them, it was always going to happen. The excuses for rates going up is not important, it is the planing you do before hand that is important.


----------



## BradK (8 February 2008)

I only have around $215,000 home loan - so, that is not much. Most of my friends have around the $350,000 mark. 

I would be able uncomfortable at interest rates past 10 per cent - but, I have no credit card, personal loan, or consumer debt. 

Its not the mortage that tips you over. Its the extras - the GE card, the Visa, the car loan... and suddenly. Whamo. 

Still gotta feel it for the battlers. 

Cheers
Brad


----------



## MS+Tradesim (8 February 2008)

Bill M said:


> The customers took a variable home loan on the risk that they were going to pay less in the near term and weren't worried about the long term. If they had took a fixed term for 5 years at 6% in the beginning then they would be better off now.
> 
> If anyone in this world doesn't calculate interest rate increases into their mortgage repayments then I have no sympathy for them, it was always going to happen. The excuses for rates going up is not important, it is the planing you do before hand that is important.




I only agree to a certain extent. Yes, people should be responsible for making sound financial decisions about their own affairs. But banks should be more responsible to their shareholders by doing better due diligence on loan applicants. Also, they should not have been gambling in junk derivatives. The customers should *not* be forced to pay for the bank's greed, incompetence and/or duplicity.


----------



## Judd (9 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> I only agree to a certain extent. Yes, people should be responsible for making sound financial decisions about their own affairs. But banks should be more responsible to their shareholders by doing better due diligence on loan applicants. Also, they should not have been gambling in junk derivatives. The customers should *not* be forced to pay for the bank's greed, incompetence and/or duplicity.




Please prove that the major banks in Australia have been gambling in junk derivatives and that they are guilty of greed, incompetence and/or duplicity.  I don't hold any bank shares by the way. Just would like to see your evidence.

And just to make everybody very happy, here is a graph of home loan interest rates over the years since 1959.

Seems pretty much tied to economic conditions.

And just to make us all very thankful that we are not dealing in grain in around 700BC there is a tablet at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York recording an eight month grain loan at 50% - and annualised rate of 75%.


----------



## Mofra (9 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> So the customers have to pay to help the banks dig themselves out of the hole they jumped into in the first place by lowering lending standards and investing greedily into ridiculous debt-backed derivatives? Yep, let's just go ahead and socialise every moral hazard as long as management still get their large payrises and bonuses.



Please explain how the *CBA* has been complicit in the *US* lowering of credit standards which is the major cause of the credit squeeze?

If the US had the same standards as Australian lenders I doubt we'd be in this situation.


----------



## Smurf1976 (9 February 2008)

ROE said:


> 1. You called yourself a superfund bank, dont you source most of your fund from superannuation? so what is sub-prime fallout funding cost got anything to do with ME accessing its money?



Markets are made at the margin. If some of the money needed to finance loans has to be accessed from overseas markets etc then that increases the value of ALL money being used for that purpose regardless of its source.

If it was your super being used to fund the loans then you'd expect to be gaining the benefit of rising rates.


----------



## MS+Tradesim (9 February 2008)

Mofra and Judd - think as you wish. I know some interesting info and you can disregard whatever you like if it makes you feel better about the banks.


----------



## Judd (9 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> EDIT: Nor do I feel any need to provide evidence. My source works in a major and knows some inner problems. I am not prepared to divulge any such information in this forum. You (Mofra and Judd) can disregard that in any way you see fit that makes you feel better about their activities.




No probs, bro.  My old man knew a bloke, who knew a bloke who worked for the CIA and that man knows the true story behind the Grassy Knoll.

PS: I beat your edit LOL


----------



## MS+Tradesim (9 February 2008)

Judd said:


> No probs, bro.  My old man knew a bloke, who knew a bloke who worked for the CIA and that man knows the true story behind the Grassy Knoll.




Exactly why I changed my response. I am not prepared to go into any detail and you can discount that however you like. You reaction, however, has no relevance whatsoever to what I know. I expected such childish responses.


----------



## Smurf1976 (9 February 2008)

Bill M said:


> The customers took a variable home loan on the risk that they were going to pay less in the near term and weren't worried about the long term. If they had took a fixed term for 5 years at 6% in the beginning then they would be better off now.
> 
> If anyone in this world doesn't calculate interest rate increases into their mortgage repayments then I have no sympathy for them, it was always going to happen. The excuses for rates going up is not important, it is the planing you do before hand that is important.



Hit the nail on the head there. A variable rate mortgage is speculating on future interest rates whether borrowers acknowledge it or not. Don't speculate if you aren't prepared for rates to move in BOTH directions - down AND UP.

Some may point to certain politicians harping on about low rates over the past few years. Anyone who puts their faith in politicians to tell the truth is either incredibly naive or stupid. 

It's like looking at the weather or anything else that is variable and able to be predicted only over the very short term. If the temperature in, say, Adelaide is anywhere between 0 and 48 then that's within the normally expected range. If you're too hot or cold then you should have bought warmer clothes, an air-conditioner, heater or whatever but you can't say it's unexpected whilst it's within the historic range of recorded temperatures. Only if it goes _significantly_ outside the historic range, either above 50 or well below zero in this example, do you have ANY excuse for not being prepared. 

Likewise you know that cars can break down, flights can be cancelled, the power supply can be disrupted, your hot water tank could blow up, mobile phones aren't certain to always work, nightclubs refuse entry for no obvious reason, milk goes off before the use by date, rats find their way into the bed, concert tickets sell out in minutes and so on. All little challenges in life but NONE of these are unexpected as we all know they happen from time to time and that situation isn't likely to change.

Interest rates at the moment are well within historic norms and are nowhere near the upper limits of what can, judging by history, be expected. Actual rates aren't high and the rate of change hasn't been overly fast. Thus there's no excuse to not be prepared.


----------



## Mofra (9 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> Mofra and Judd - think as you wish. I know some interesting info and you can disregard whatever you like if it makes you feel better about the banks.



You haven't actually provided any info.
Are you honestly going to argue that Australian & US lending standards are the same? They are barely even similar!

Eg. Australian Low Docs are almost always limited to 80% & Metro postcodes only (without limit restruictions), no NINJA loans, Low Start loans are virtually non-existant and non-genuine savings loans must be CRAA clear.

Credit quality in Australia is miles ahead of the US market.


----------



## Judd (9 February 2008)

Bill M said:


> The customers took a variable home loan on the risk that they were going to pay less in the near term and weren't worried about the long term. *If they had took a fixed term for 5 years at 6% in the beginning then they would be better off now*.
> 
> If anyone in this world doesn't calculate interest rate increases into their mortgage repayments then I have no sympathy for them, it was always going to happen. The excuses for rates going up is not important, it is the planing you do before hand that is important.




A bit of thread drift here.

Have the fixed rate borrowers who may now be coming out of the 5 year fixed mentally prepared, or capable, of accommodating the higher repayments?  They have been used to repayments based on 6% and now they are facing repayments based on around 8.5% to 9%.  Should be interesting.  Suppose it depends on how they originally structured their repayments.


----------



## numbercruncher (9 February 2008)

Judd said:


> A bit of thread drift here.
> 
> Have the fixed rate borrowers who may now be coming out of the 5 year fixed mentally prepared, or capable, of accommodating the higher repayments?  They have been used to repayments based on 6% and now they are facing repayments based on around 8.5% to 9%.  Should be interesting.  Suppose it depends on how they originally structured their repayments.





Very good point, I wonder how many mortgages are facing this ?

The US ARM resets that ended in carnage reset by an average of 2.5pc higher 

But on the flip side with house prices seemingly still holding here, people with Homes/Mortgages originating 5 years ago should see significant equity in there properties.


----------



## MS+Tradesim (10 February 2008)

Mofra said:


> You haven't actually provided any info.




Yes, because I know some interesting internal stuff and I'm not about to spread it over this forum. Believe as you will. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. Just don't be so naive as to think the banks have it together.


----------



## Mofra (10 February 2008)

MS+Tradesim said:


> Yes, because I know some interesting internal stuff and I'm not about to spread it over this forum. Believe as you will. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. Just don't be so naive as to think the banks have it together.



Given I have worked in the banking & finance industry for the majority of my adult life, I am fully aware of the errors some banks & lenders make in their margin calculations & market reactions. The margins *all* lenders are adding now are due to treasury costs of sourcing funds - to assume that one lender has made a mistake when every lender on the planet is having problems scraping together their MBS/CDO offerings at a decent funding rate is ridiculous.

I doubt you actually know any "interesting info" as you have not posted as scerrick of this info (nobody is interested in a source of non-existant info so I don;' think you have anyhting to be worried about)


----------



## $20shoes (10 April 2008)

It looks like the mongrels snuck in another interest rate rise while the media  were too busy listening to Mr Rudd speak Mandarin. 
My Viridian Line of Credit increased from 9.37% to 9.49% yesterday.

That's an interest rate hike every month since December.


----------



## greggles (19 March 2020)

BradK said:


> Bastards




Still bastards 12 years later. CBA not passing on any of the 0.25% interest rate cut announced today.

Close your CBA accounts people. What a dog act in a time of crisis.


----------



## Country Lad (19 March 2020)

"_Minutes after the Reserve Bank cut the cash rate to an all-time low of 0.25 per cent, CBA said via Twitter it would not cut standard variable rates on mortgages, but it would slash rates on small business loans by 1 percentage point.

The bank also said it would cut various fixed-rate loans by as much as 0.7 percentage points, and increase one of its term deposit rates._"


----------



## satanoperca (19 March 2020)

Greggles, the banks are f--kd. Under captilised, over leverage into the mortgage sector, full of fat ugly men who think they are worth 100 of thousands a year.

Why would they, they never cared about you, they care only about the $$$$.

Hang the bankers, parasites on society


----------



## againsthegrain (19 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Greggles, the banks are f--kd. Under captilised, over leverage into the mortgage sector, full of fat ugly men who think they are worth 100 of thousands a year.
> 
> Why would they, they never cared about you, they care only about the $$$$.
> 
> Hang the bankers, parasites on society




They are all going to hell but taking your IP


satanoperca said:


> Greggles, the banks are f--kd. Under captilised, over leverage into the mortgage sector, full of fat ugly men who think they are worth 100 of thousands a year.
> 
> Why would they, they never cared about you, they care only about the $$$$.
> 
> Hang the bankers, parasites on society




thats why doing deals with the devil he always wins, I mean banks


----------



## greggles (19 March 2020)

satanoperca said:


> Greggles, the banks are f--kd. Under captilised, over leverage into the mortgage sector, full of fat ugly men who think they are worth 100 of thousands a year.
> 
> Why would they, they never cared about you, they care only about the $$$$.
> 
> Hang the bankers, parasites on society




Agree.

I'm watching very carefully at the moment and will continue to watch in the months to come to see which companies actually try and do something to assist ordinary people and which ones try and take advantage of and exploit us.

There will be real lessons to be learned as this crisis plays out during 2020. True colours will be shown.


----------



## satanoperca (19 March 2020)

greggles said:


> There will be real lessons to be learned as this crisis plays out during 2020. True colours will be shown.



Agreed, but f---k the bankers, they have had plenty of experiences to learn from.

Hang the bankers from the talliest trees


----------

