Showing posts with label SARFAESI Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SARFAESI Act. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

Banks initiate crackdown on wilful defaultersTo recover dues from 50 top defaulters; finance ministry wants proceedings fast-tracked

Manojit Saha  |  Mumbai  March 26, 2013 Last Updated at 00:54 IST



Government-owned banks have started cracking the whip on wilful defaulters, with the finance ministry asking them to recover dues from the top 50 defaulters as the first step. Banks have been asked to furnish the information of the top-50 immediately.

Wilful defaulters are those borrowers who have defaulted on loan repayment to banks despite having adequate cash flows and a healthy net worth. The ones who have not utilised the funds borrowed for specific purposes and diverted those for other purposes have also been categorised as wilful defaulters by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).

The finance ministry has asked chief executives of public-sector banks to take approval of their boards and begin proceedings for penal measures. The ministry has also asked banks to lodge formal complaints against the auditors of the borrowers with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, if they find the auditors were negligent or deficient in conducting the duty. (UNDER STRESS)



The ministry’s directions have come against the backdrop of a rise in “compromises” made by banks in writing off loans. According to data compiled by the ministry, the reduction in banks’ non-performing assets (NPA) due to compromises made during write-offs was 33 per cent of the total reduction as of December-end, compared with 31 per cent as of March-end. The total NPA reduction by public-sector banks as of December-end was Rs 41,672 crore.

The ministry has also mandated banks not to provide any additional facility to these companies and to bar their promoters for five years from availing of institutional financing for floating new ventures.

Following the ministry’s directive, banks have formed committees — comprising chairmen, executive directors and government nominees — to update their respective boards on the matter.

“The finance ministry has also directed us to obtain all necessary powers to recover dues from such defaulters,” said a senior executive of a public-sector bank.

The move has come within days of Finance Minister P Chidambaram’s comments on the corporate sector’s wilful defaulters. He had said after a meeting with chiefs of public-sector banks last week: “We cannot have an affluent promoter and a sick company.”

The government – the owner of public-sector banks – has been pushing for recovery of non-performing loans. Banks have also been asked to have a board-approved policy on loan recovery and to conduct a review of NPA accounts — of Rs 1 crore and more by the board of directors, and top-300 by the board’s management committee.

* Wilful defaulters are those borrowers whoh defaulted on loan payment to banks despite having adequate cash flows and healthy networth
* No additional loans facilities to defaulters
* Banks to bar promoters of defaulting companies from institutional finance for floating new ventures for a period of 5 years
* About a third of NPA reduction is due to comprise while writing off a loan
* Banks to form board level committee to monitor recovery process of willful defaulter



http://www.business-standard.com/article/finance/banks-start-crackdown-on-wilful-defaulters-113032500424_1.html

Monday, December 24, 2012

Asset reconstruction firms expect boost in business

According to a Bill passed on Monday, these firms can convert part of their debt into shares of defaulting companies.
Dinesh Unnikrishnan 
Updated: Wed, Dec 12 2012. 12 42 AM IST
Mumbai: Asset reconstruction companies (ARCs) that purchase bad loans given to sick units from commercial banks are likely to see a revival in their business, once the Enforcement of Security Interest and Recovery of Debts Laws (Amendment) Bill 2011 comes into effect.
The Bill, passed by the Lok Sabha on Monday, allows ARCs to convert part of the debt into the shares of the defaulting companies and purchase the sticky assets of multi-state cooperative banks, among other things.
The actual implementation of the new rules may not take place immediately as the Bill is yet to be cleared by the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of Parliament, following which the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) will announce detailed guidelines.
Chiefs of leading asset reconstruction companies are optimistic that the provision to convert debt in distressed companies to equity will make such purchases more attractive as equity ownership will give more control to them in the operations of companies besides yielding higher returns once the companies turn profitable.
For companies too, conversion of debt into equity will be beneficial as their interest payment burden will come down.
“It’s indeed a big positive for ARCs,” said P. Rudran, managing director and chief executive officer of Arcil, India’s largest ARC. “This will enable us to do actual reconstruction of businesses for the eligible firms. ARCs will be able to take equity ownership in such companies and exit at a later stage by earning an upside on the equity, when the unit turns profitable.”
Another key provision of the debt recovery Bill allows banks to accept immovable property of defaulting companies to realize claims.
ARCs are currently not allowed to directly pick up stakes in stressed units whose loans they buy from commercial banks or other financial institutions. Instead, they typically facilitate the bringing in of long-term capital to these firms.
According to Rudran of Arcil, the provision to allow banks and financial institutions to file caveats and to be heard in debt recovery tribunals before any stay is granted will ensure that the process of law is not misused by unscrupulous borrowers to delay settlements and payment of dues.
“When you are reviving a running company, you are investing in a sick unit. ARCs always wanted to have equity relationships in companies which have a potential to revive but it was not allowed,” said P.H. Ravikumar, managing director and chief executive officer of Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. “The new provisions will help ARCs to focus more on reviving the units rather than just buying out the bad assets.”
Ravikumar is optimistic that the provisions in the new law will help Indian ARCs buy more assets and enhance their ability to revive sick units in a slowing economy. Birendra Kumar, chief executive officer of International Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd, said more clarity will come only after the Reserve Bank announces the norms.
Slowing global exports, high inflation and high interest rates have hit the earnings of most industrial units, especially small and medium enterprises, in Asia’s third largest economy. This has impacted the ability of many companies to repay loans to commercial banks.
However, despite the rise in non-performing assets (NPAs), the business of ARCs is not swelling. Even Arcil, the largest among the ARCs, added just Rs.200 crore to its books this fiscal. For the other two ARCs, there have been hardly any deals in the current fiscal. Arcil has assets under management worth Rs.6,200 crore, Invent has bought assets worth Rs.2,500 crore, while International has principal outstanding assets of Rs.4,000-Rs.4,500 crore. Analysts said the business prospects of ARCs look bright in India, given the stress in the economy and the rise of bad loans and restructured assets. Gross NPAs of 40 listed banks rose by 47% to Rs.1.6 trillion in September from Rs.1.1 trillion in the year-ago period, with state-run banks leading the pack.
Analysts expect at least 25-30% of the restructured assets to turn bad in the absence of a major pick up in the economy, which grew at 5.3% in September quarter. Total restructured assets under the so-called corporate debt restructuring mechanism touched Rs.1.9 trillion on a cumulative basis till September. “It is boom time for ARCs, given the rise in bad loans in the banking system,” said Abhishek Kothari, research analyst at Violet Arch Securities Ltd.
“Post the new regulations, there is a likelihood of more bad loans being sold to ARCs as they will be keen to take equity relationships, which will reward them at a later stage, when valuations go up.”

Saturday, December 15, 2012

New Sarfaesi to break loan pricing deadlock

Published: Friday, Dec 14, 2012, 1:58 IST 
By Megha Mandavia & Aswathy Varughese | Place: Mumbai | Agency: DNA


Revival of financially sick businesses has just become easier. For, the long-standing deadlock between banks with bad loans to sell and asset reconstruction companies (ARCs) over pricing issues may end finally.
This week’s amendments to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (Sarfaesi) now allow ARCs to convert defaulting company’s debt into equity.
Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd or Arcil, India’s biggest ARC, said it may now be able to offer better deals to banks for bad loans. 
R K Bansal (pictured), executive director of IDBI Bank, said other ARCs may follow suit. “They can now pay a better price to banks to buy ailing assets as they will now have more wherewithal to recover their dues.”
The ARC sector has been asset-starved for the past two years. Banks had been expecting higher prices for their bad loans than what ARCs were ready to offer. 
Arcil’s MD and CEO P Rudran said, “At the due diligence stage, we won’t decide on pricing. But, if we are able to assess the value (of the non-performing asset or bad loan concerned), then, perhaps, we would be able to pay a little more. We may reduce the discount. Revivals will focus onbusiness viability. We will help as per the requirements of the ailing company concerned. We will resell the stake the moment such a company recovers.”
But some doubt if everything would be hunky dory for ARCs now. P H Ravikumar, MD and CEO of Invent Assets Securitisation and Reconstruction, for one, said acquisition of bad loans from banks still remains a challenge. 
“More than the pricing issue, the deadlock lies in banks’ under-provisioning for bad loans. If a non-performing asset is under-provided, it will reflect in the price at which banks are willing to give ARCs the bad loans,” said Ravikumar. 
megha.mandavia@dnaindia.net , aswathy.rachel@dnaindia.net

NPA recovery Bill won’t shake things up

Published: Friday, Dec 14, 2012, 2:08 IST 
By Megha Mandavia | Place: Mumbai | Agency: DNA


The pain of bad loans does not seem to be going away anytime soon. A new amendment passed by the Lok Sabha on Monday making auctioning of borrower security easier may not actually translate into any substantial or even immediate reduction in these loans for public sector banks.
The key provision in the new Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (Sarfaesi) now allows banks to bid for the unrealised security against the value of non-performing assets (NPA) if it is unable to secure a decent value of the assets at the auction. This will help banks offset outstanding NPAs against the ‘realisation’ and sell them later at a better price.
“It certainly helps because many auctions don’t go through due to cartelisation by bidders and legal issues. But the impact will not be substantial on non-performing assets because every time we don’t have that much collateral to sell,” pointed out BA Prabhakar, chairman and managing director at Andhra Bank.
PSU banks are plagued by rising levels of non-performing assets with a slowing economy and loose lending norms. Gross NPA levels at all listed banks in the quarter ended September on an average stood close to 3%, which are expected to go up to as much as 4.5% in the next one year.
The recent changes will no doubt hasten the recovery process, but a substantial impact on bad loans will not be visible, bankers and analysts said. “We don’t see this as a material change – the difference is largely optical and it is likely that the market will see through these cosmetic accounting changes,” said Seshadri Sen, an analyst with JP Morgan. “Our negative view on PSU banks is underpinned by expectations of continued momentum in incremental delinquency, a view that remains unchanged.”
Large public sector banks are continuing to lend aggressively to stressed sectors such as real estate, iron and steel, textiles, infra and agriculture, thus increasing the risk factor in the banking system, even though bankers are tracking recoveries on a daily basis now.
“The amendment will definitely help increase recoveries, but won’t reduce the NPAs immediately. The change will happen only over a period of time. All these changes are just enablers which help us put more pressure on willful defaulters,” said RK Bansal, executive director with IDBI Bank.

Friday, April 6, 2012

Save the rod ... and create a Frankenstein

Like all morals and most hazards, moral hazard is man-made. Only man can reduce it.
Dipankar Choudhury - LiveMint

A close friend, who works for an asset reconstruction company, recently told me after a few drinks: “I suggest that you do a project report and take a Rs.100-200 crore loan. The bank, RBI, government –will all treat you like a king if you default. Don’t borrow just 5 or 10 crore, then you will be in trouble.”
He went on: “If my son wants me to find a match for him, I will look for the daughter of a defaulter. Then his life will be made”. Yes, some entrepreneurs regularly dream of graduating from facing a problem to becoming a problem for the system.

Nearly 20 years ago, Michael Fay, an American student in Singapore, was sentenced to six cane lashes for vandalism, which due to hectic American lobbying was reduced to four and he was let off with that. His partners in crime got more severe punishment. Four years later, Fay was held in the US for possessing drugs.

Wikipedia defines moral hazard as a tendency to take undue risks because the costs are not borne by the party taking the risk. The bothersome part is that it is rife even in developed and developing countries which hold the rule of law in high esteem. Just the perspective differs: in the West, public discourse sees moral hazard largely as excessive risk-taking by overpaid bankers, in India it is repeated defaults encouraged by mollycoddling lenders.

Where genuine accommodation ends and mollycoddling begins is extremely tough to ascertain ex-ante. There have been cases of remarkable borrower resuscitation after one lifeline, and even two. And then there are the perpetual delusions. Most banks do not have this data, or choose not to compile it.

But one thumb rule will always work. Indulgence by a lender makes sense only if the underlying fundamentals of the borrower’s business are sound and he happens to be facing a cyclical problem (this of course is a judgment call but not too difficult to make, e.g. it takes some imagination to contend that airlines are facing a temporary problem and their fundamentals are sound). Else it is mala fide and a potential source of moral hazard.

It is a difficult and unpleasant subject as a result of which not much literature is available. However, in a noteworthy paper titled “Financial Intermediation in India: A Case of Aggravated Moral Hazard?” dated July 2002, Saugata Bhattacharya and Urjit Patel made an attempt to look at this issue very early in the lending growth cycle in India. Many points presented there are still relevant.
The authors identify three reasons for the malaise: large and increasing government role in the financial sector, high regulatory forbearance and absence of efficient bankruptcy procedures. They premise that the resultant moral hazard inhibits effective co-financing and capital formation in the economy.

On the first point, it is important to note that the authors identify government participation in the financial sector and not just government ownership that leads to increasing moral hazard. It includes provision of government guarantees to projects, priority sector lending, mandating write-offs of loans, and so on. In good times, there is little incentive for the government to change the status quo, and in bad times, it feels the need to increase its involvement, at which point prudence takes a back seat.
Regulatory forbearance ensures lenders, especially banks, do not close down. At least for banks there is this argument, though shallow, that faith in them should not erode. Why wholesale lenders like IFCI have to remain in perpetual life support is less understandable. If a lender will most likely never be allowed to fail, depositors will not care to monitor lender performance, managers will be less vigilant and the borrower incentivized to take advantage of the system.

Developments on the bankruptcy procedures front have however been encouraging. The SARFAESI Act (which is India’s foreclosure law) has been quite effective but there is still a long way to go.
Ironically, bankers suggest that it has been used largely as a stick to beat the borrowers with and bring them to the negotiating table, and not for seizing and selling off security, the ostensible purpose for which the law was enacted. Thus the effectiveness is at best sub-optimal. Judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings for debt recovery are still tortuous.

To conclude, I particularly like one sentence which the authors use: “This process of increasingly aggravated moral hazard driving…riskiness of the asset portfolios…is analogous to riding a bicycle without brakes – once on it, if you stop pedaling, you will fall off.” Very similar to what Ramalinga Raju remarked along with his confession of having cooked the books of Satyam for years. Let’s not carry on the comparison further; it looks scary.