If a black man (or woman) takes a R100 note out of his or her pocket, is it a different colour?
Or is it blue? I bet it’s blue.
So I was astonished to read a report this week that Bond Choice’s chief executive, Richard Gray, says that the 50% of applications for home loans from first-time home buyers were from black people.
Moreover, the proportion of successful black mortgage applicants increased.
And, to complicate matters, his figures say that in January 40% of applications came from white people and the balance came from coloured and Indian people. And the successful rate of black mortgage applications increased by 15%.
For some reason I cannot see where the race factor becomes a criterion for anything – be it statistically or on the basis of bond approval. The story goes on to say that the proportion of successful black mortgage applicants increased although it was “nowhere near the level of successful white applicants”.
What on earth is going on?
Then I read that only between 3% and 5% of bond applications (for a 1000% bond) are approved. This figure comes from Rob Lawrence, national manager of Rawson Finance, who says that over 40% of the applications for a 100% bond from his company are successful.
By now, I am getting monumentally confused:
- Only 5% of people applying for bonds get approval - At least 50% of bond applications are from blacks - But 40% of applications are from white people and the balance are from coloureds and Indians
I don’t care what colour, race, religion or creed belongs to a bond applicant. The only thing that matters is: can the person repay the loan? Our money doesn’t have a different colour so how can our loan process (using the same colour of money) have some kind of relevance?
Maybe I’m missing the point.
Maybe what the different spokesmen are trying to indicate is that more and more blacks really do want a stake in our country. At least I hope that’s what they are saying because if not then the entire foundation for their statistics is flawed.
If more black people want to buy homes that’s wonderful news because as soon as you value something, (like your own home) then, and only then, does it have a value to you. The money is incidental.
Simple analogy: Picasso painted one particular picture. It is the only one of its kind. The person who owns it owns what Picasso painted. Any copies are just that: copies.
In exactly the same way, the R100 note that I take from my pocket is exactly the same as Kim’s, Sipho’s, Nosiviwe’s, Lindwe’s or anyone else’s. And, if the banks (who I think are the most legalised thieves in South Africa) are using race as some kind of criterion to lend those blue notes then I’m finished.
And so are we all.
If, on the other hand, the reports are there to indicate that more and more black, middle-class people are buying property then I’m delighted. The fact of the matter is that property is the very first step on the wealth creation ladder. Once you own property you have a stake in this continent of ours. You have a stake in Africa.
As Deon du Plessis, an old buddy of mine, once said when he bought his house: “There’s nothing like peeing on your own piece of Africa.”
And he’s dead right.
However, I get deeply concerned when I hear reports that banks are still being so stingy about lending money and, worse than that, that they are keeping records of the colour of the person that they are lending money to. Because that has absolutely no relevance in our community.
The National Credit Act (NCA) makes the lending criteria exceptionally clear and it’s an Act – not a whim or a choice.
And, I personally hope that every single black, white, coloured and Indian person in this country takes that vital step of buying their very own little piece of Africa. I don’t care if they are spending R450k on the “affordable” home or if they are spending R4,5m on a Cape Town apartment.
Every time they buy something that is euphemistically called “immovable assets” they are making a commitment to this land of ours. And because that piece of Africa belongs to them (albeit through bond finance), it means that they have something to protect.
When Sharpeville happened and a massacre left so many South African’s so horrified, the world (and most reasonable people) reacted with horror. Now Sharpeville had nothing to do with property. But it had a lot to do with the fact that the Sharpeville people had nothing.
They had nothing to protect and nothing to lose (except their lives and that’s what they lost).
They had no stake in this country and they were not allowed to have that stake either.
The Apartheid laws prohibited them from that.
So how can we be sitting here, in 2010, saying that black bond applications have increased or that white approvals are at 40% or any other such nonsense?
We want everyone to have a stake in our country because that way everyone has something to protect. Something that has value to them. Something that they have worked for, earned and now deserve.
And remember that, in time, that wealth devolves to the next generation and the next and the one after that.
So if we need anything at all right now, it’s for the banks to start realising that the more they help people gain a stake in our country the more they protect their own long-term profits and their own sustainability.
And I don’t care what colour the bond applicant is – the banks just have to follow the NCA and make sure that the loan they provide can be paid back.
That’s it.
If they start lending blue R100 notes to black people, yellow ones to white people, green ones to Indian people and red ones to coloured people then we are in real trouble.
So banks, you listen to your Uncle Paddy.
Start lending money to anyone who can afford it and forget about what colour the money is or what colour the person borrowing it is too. Because colour doesn’t come into the borrowing equation.
And I don’t care what your statistics might say.
*Hartdegen writes a regular column for Property24.com. The content of his columns constitutes his personal opinion and doesn’t pretend to be facts or advice. Contact him at paddy@neomail.co.za.
Readers' Comments Have a comment about this article? Email us now.
its sad that it is still going on, considering that even with Vehicle financing, colour is taken into effect. I would also like to buy a house one day but chances are because i am black i will either not be approved or be approved for a ridiculously low amount of money. Just because i am black. Everything needs to change in this country, including the banking system... – AnonymousExcellent article! – Cape Li’In
If you want to publish articles like this you will lose the little credibility you have left.
Race / Sex / Age / Income Group / City etc all make up analysis to get a complete picture of your customer. Police use race to profile, anti terrorist governmental orginisation use race and ethnicity and religion to profile. The benefit is to work out high risk groups and non high risk groups in detail from the neighborhood they live to the fact they are married or not.
Example:
Since race does not matter, please ask the author if he would rather sleep with a random black women in Southern Africa or a random white woman. Should not matter, because according to him race will have no impact on his probability of getting HIV?
Since race does not matter, please ask the author to select a distance running team for the Olympics Im sure hes going start in Kenya?
By profiling and categorizing customers business become more effective by targeting your perfect customer and advertising to your most profitable target group.
Profiling is a science, and numbers dont lie. Money = Color, Job, Sex, Address, Race, Salary Bracket, years in Job, Gov or non Gov etc... Money has much more than color. - Yzelle De Wet
For Heaven's sake Paddy, don't be so naive. – Anonymous
Print
