Towards the extension of the first home fund for the under 36s
The 80% first home guarantee fund for under 36s, expiring in end of Junewill soon be extended to September 2023. According to the online comparison site Facile.it as part of the process currently being converted into law of the so-called DL Enti an amendment presented by several parliamentary groups was approved. Whose goal would be to slip from 30 June to 30 September the deadline for submitting an application for access to the First home guarantee fund to obtain the 80% guarantee. Essential element to obtain a 100% mortgage under 36.
Converted into law by 9 July
This is excellent news given that before the extension of the guarantee offered by the Fund the under 36s accounted for 43% of the total demand of first home loans. Value which, following the strengthening of the Fund, exceeded 51% in the January-May 2023 period. The provision in question, after the examination of the constitutional affairs and budget commissions of the Chamber and the approval of the Chamber of Deputies, will be forwarded to the Senate and then be converted into law by 9 July.
The Fair Compensation Act
But there is also bad news. In fact who tries to substitute that already obtained in the past has to deal with the Fair Compensation Act which came into effect on 20 maggio. This could have a negative impact on the substitutes that today they represent, according to data from Facile.it, more than 20% of mortgage applications. The subrogation allows borrowers to transfer their remaining loan free of charge from the original bank to another one offering more advantageous conditions. An opportunity to great value which in recent years has contributed to keeping competition between credit institutions alive, to the benefit of final consumers.
Cost increase
The costs associated with the subrogation operation therefore, in particular those relating to the notarial deed, fall on the bank itself. And this is where it comes in fair compensation law. The law establishes the values that the credit institution must pay to the notary, thus eliminating the possibility of benefiting from discounted prices. And therefore this story could translate into an increase in notary costs borne by the banks. Especially for those that in the past could enjoy discounted prices under the large number of substitutes which they normally manage every year. The credit institutions they could, therefore, choose to tighten the criteria with which to grant subrogations. To the detriment of the possibility for consumers to change banks and find more favorable loan conditions. Or, at worst, they could raise subrogation rates offered to customers, making the transaction less profitable.