Author Archive

Mortgage lenders continue to ration the size of their loans to home buyers and people remortgaging.

The number of deals on offer has risen by 66% this year, from 1,414 in January to 2,351 now, says the financial information service Moneyfacts.

But 58% of the deals available still require a downpayment of at least 25% of the value of the home being bought.

And the proportion requiring only a 10% deposit still stands at just 8% of all the mortgages currently on offer.

"There has been no real movement in the overall number of new mortgages available on the market [in the past month], but those that are available continue to be more competitive," explained Michelle Slade of Moneyfacts.

"Many of the best deals are now available for a 25% deposit, having previously only been available for those with a 40% deposit."

Although there has been little change this year in the proportion of mortgage deals requiring smaller deposits, the average interest rate being charged on them has drifted down.

The average two-year fixed rate deal now comes with an interest rate of 4.5% compared to 4.9% in January.

Three-year fixed rates now cost on average 5.2% instead of 5.5% at the start of the year, and five-year deals now cost 5.6% instead of the 6.1% charged in January.

However these figures disguise the very wide difference in the interest being charged according to the size of the deposit being put down.

According to Moneyfacts, a two-year fixed deal with just a 90% deposit comes with an interest charge of 6.2%, but a 25% deposit brings that down to 4.1% while a 40% deposit attracts an interest charge of just 4%.

According to statistics from the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML), the average first-time buyer is now putting down a deposit of £35,000 to buy a home.

Aaron Strutt, of mortgage brokers Trinity Financial, said there were only four deals on general offer with just a 5% deposit.

And deals from the big banks with 10% deposits were often very expensive.

"RBS have one of the worst rates available for first-time buyers with a 10% deposit - 6.89% fixed for five years," he said.

"You would have to be really desperate to take this rate," he added.

The world's largest fertiliser producer, Potash Corporation, has urged its shareholders to reject a hostile takeover bid from BHP Billiton.

Mining giant BHP last week launched a $40bn (£25.8bn) hostile bid for Canada's Potash Corp after having had an initial offer rejected.

Potash reiterated that the bid was "wholly inadequate", as demand for its products is expected to rise.

It said it expected "superior offers" or other alternatives to emerge.

Demand for fertiliser is expected to increase in the next few years because of rising demand for meat in emerging markets, as more crops are needed to feed cattle.

"The Potash Corp board of directors is unanimous in its belief that the BHP Billiton offer substantially undervalues Potash Corp and fails to reflect both the value of our premier position in a strategically vital industry and our unparalleled future growth prospects," said Potash Corp chief executive Bill Doyle.

BHP has offered to buy Potash for $130 per share. Analysts have suggested that BHP, one of the world's biggest mining firms, will need to increase its offer to secure acceptance.

Potash described the offer as "highly opportunistic" and said it was unhappy that the offer was only 16% above its share price the day before BHP's offer was announced.

Since then, its shares have been trading above the offer price. The company takes this as a sign that the offer is for less that it is worth.

As the world population grows, existing arable land will need to become more productive if it is to meet increased demand.

As well as crops needed for food and drink products, more will also be required to feed cattle as demand for meat increases.

The UN's Food and Agriculture Organization says demand for meat products in developing countries is being pushed up by rising incomes, population growth and urbanisation, and has forecast global meat production to double by 2050.

The fertiliser industry is therefore expected to benefit, and BHP is keen to cash in.

The Unite union says it is planning legal action against British Airways over the removal of travel concessions from cabin crew who went on strike.

Unite, which represents 11,000 cabin crew at the airline, said the management's action was a breach of European Human rights legislation.

It also believes the concessions were withdrawn without proper disciplinary procedures being followed.

The move follows the union's rejection last week of BA's "final" offer.

BA said it had acted properly in withdrawing the benefit.

"Staff travel is a non-contractual perk that the company can withdraw at its discretion," the firm said in a statement.

"Our cabin crew knew that if they took part in strike action, they would lose their staff travel perks.

"We totally reject the claim from Unite and will defend our position vigorously."

The dispute began over changes to working practices, but became more entrenched over so-called travel perks.

These entitled staff to a certain amount of discounted travel, which increased with service.

BA withdrew them from staff who went on strike.

It has offered to reinstate the perks of striking staff, but only at the level of new joiners - meaning staff would lose their length of service entitlement which gives them, for example, priority in a standby queue for discounted flights.

In another move, Unite said it would provide additional assistance to support crew who have suffered particular financial hardship.

Unite's joint general secretaries, Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson, said: "Unite remains determined to secure a settlement to this dispute acceptable to cabin crew.

"We will continue to support our members financially and legally to ensure that every avenue is explored to achieve justice for these loyal and professional men and women who have been so badly treated by their employer."

Union leaders are planning to meet BA executives next week at the conciliation service Acas for further talks to resolve the still unsolved dispute, which has cost the airline £150m and disrupted 22 days of service.

BP says it has set aside $32.2bn (£20.8bn) to cover the costs linked to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

The company said the charge gave it a loss of $17bn for the three months between April and June - a UK record.

BP's chairman said the costs estimate was based on the company's belief that it was not grossly negligent, and added the bill could be higher.

BP also said Bob Dudley, head of the Gulf clean-up operation, will replace Tony Hayward as chief executive.

Mr Hayward will leave his post by mutual agreement in October.

He is likely to retain a role within the company. BP plans to nominate him as a non-executive director of its Russian joint venture, TNK-BP.

BP also announced it would increase its asset sales over the next 18 months to $30bn, a total that includes the $7bn-worth earmarked for sale last week.

The $32.2bn cost of the clean-up includes the $20bn already set aside in an escrow account for compensation claims.

"That estimate is also based on our belief that we are not grossly negligent," BP chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg told the BBC's business editor Robert Peston.

"Of course we will not know precisely because it depends on how many claims are coming in and [other] things that could happen."

But he insisted that the company was in good financial shape, with strong cashflow.

"It's of course a huge loss that overshadows everything else, but the underlying performance of the company is actually strong," he told the BBC.

"There is no worry about our financial position and our ability to get through this. It's of course a tragedy and it has large consequences, but we have no doubt that we will be able to rebuild the company," he said.

Stripping out the oil spill costs, BP made a second quarter profit, on a replacement cost basis, of $5bn, compared with $2.9bn for the second quarter of 2009.

Bob Dudley, currently managing director and a US citizen, told ABC's Good Morning America programme, that BP would become a leaner organisation.

"It will be smaller and financially, it will grow. We're going to learn a lot from this incident and this accident... There's no question that we will change as a company."

The announcements were welcomed by most investors for their clear-cut approach.

Peter Hitchens, of Panmure Gordon stockbrokers, said: "It's basically a kitchen sink job...

"I think it's the board trying to wipe the slate clean."

Tony Hayward said that, now oil had stopped spilling from the Macondo well, it was a good time to leave his post.

"With the leak now capped, we have reached a significant milestone. This provides a firm basis to reshape the company," he said.

On Monday, the BBC revealed that 53-year old Mr Hayward will receive a year's salary plus benefits, together worth more than £1m.

He will also be entitled to draw an annual pension of £600,000 once he reaches the age of 55.

Mr Hayward's pension pot is valued at about £11m and he will keep his rights to shares under a long-term performance scheme which could - depending on BP's stock market recovery - eventually be worth several million pounds.

Carl-Henric Svanberg said Mr Hayward would be missed.

"The BP board is deeply saddened to lose a CEO whose success over some three years in driving the performance of the company was so widely and deservedly admired," he said.

The handling of the explosion on the drilling rig off Louisiana on 20 April, which killed 11 workers and triggered the worst oil spill in the US, raised questions about Mr Hayward's leadership.

BP: Capping the crisis. Jon Sopel will have the latest political and market reaction in a special live programme on the BBC World Service and BBC World News from 1830 GMT.

Second-quarter profits at oil giant Royal Dutch Shell have almost doubled after the firm completed a year-long corporate restructuring programme.

The firm reported profits of $4.5bn (£2.9bn) on a current cost of supplies basis, up from $2.3bn a year ago.

Chief executive Peter Voser also defended deep sea oil drilling in the wake of rival BP's massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Meanwhile, US oil giant Exxon Mobil reported quarterly profits of $7.6bn.

This was a rise of 85% on the $4.1bn it posted a year earlier. Revenue rose to $92.5bn, 23% higher than the $72.5bn it made a year ago.

The profits are in sharp contrast to crisis hit rival BP who earlier this week reported a record $17bn second-quarter loss. This included a provision of $32bn to cover the costs of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Shell's chief executive said the explosion on BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April and the subsequent oil spill had been a tragedy.

However, he added: "Worldwide deep water production has an important role to play in the global energy supply equation, with potential for production growth with supply diversity and sustained investment in technology, jobs and services."

In contrast to BP, who suspended dividends for the rest of the year, Shell said it would pay a second quarter dividend of $0.42 per share.

Excluding one-off items, Shell's profit was $4.2bn, compared with $3.1bn last year.

Shell said that its restructuring programme had achieved cost savings of $3.5bn, beating its target by about 15% and some six months ahead of schedule.

It added that as a result of the changes, 7,000 employees would leave the company 18 months earlier than planned.

Shell also said it expected to sell $7bn-$8bn of assets in 2010-11 as it refocuses its portfolio on projects with higher growth potential.

"We continue to see mixed signals in the global economy," Mr Voser said.

"Oil prices have remained firm so far this year, but refining margins, oil products demand and natural gas spot prices all remain under pressure.

"Our earnings and cashflow have rallied from 2009's lows, but the outlook remains uncertain."

The price Shell received for its oil was 41% higher than the same period a year ago, while gas prices were 15% higher.

Richard Hunter, head of UK equities at stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said Shell's update underlined the "stark difference in fortunes of the UK's two oil majors".

"Whereas its fierce rival BP has been the subject of forced introspection, Shell has continued to drive its own prospects forward," he commented.

"Refining margins are improving, the restructuring programme continues apace and the proposed sale of assets will enable a more focused strategy in the future."

BP's chief executive Tony Hayward is expected to stand down following widespread criticism of his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Mr Hayward's performance in the crisis has been widely criticised.

A statement issued by BP said a board meeting was being held on Monday and "no final decision has been made".

But BBC business editor Robert Peston says the board has in effect made up its mind that Mr Hayward is going, even if the decision is not yet ratified.

The firm, which said over the weekend that Mr Hayward had the board's full support, added that "any decisions will be announced as appropriate".

Mr Hayward is likely to be replaced by his American colleague, Bob Dudley, who has taken charge of the clean-up operation.

BP's board are to sign off accounts, and these will also be discussed on Monday evening.

The accounts will cover spill compensation and costs of up to £19bn, and may result in the worst quarterly loss for a UK firm.

They are also likely to discuss terms of Mr Hayward's severance package.

Over the weekend, a BP spokesman maintained Mr Hayward continued to have the "full support of the board and senior management".

But a US government official, quoted by the Associated Pressnews agency, said senior figures in the company had already briefed them about a change of leadership at the oil multinational.

It is understood the terms of Mr Hayward's employment entitle him to a payout of at least £1m, equivalent to a year's salary.

At the same time, his pension pot is worth £10.8m, resulting in an annual payment of about £584,000.

Mr Hayward began his career with BP 28 years ago as a rig geologist in the North Sea before working his way up to board level. He was a popular choice for the top job when Lord Browne stepped aside in 2007.

But he will be seen to carry the can for the being at the helm for the worst year in the company's history.

Questions raised

When he became chief executive in 2007, the 53 year-old told journalists his number-one task was to focus "laser-like" on safety and reliability.

The explosion on the drilling rig off Louisiana on 20 April, which killed 11 workers and triggered the worst oil spill in the US, raised questions about his leadership.

Mr Hayward has been heavily criticised by residents of the Gulf coast and US politicians for his handling of the clean-up and for a series of gaffes, including saying that he "just wanted his life back" and that the Gulf of Mexico was a "big ocean" following the leak.

He was also taken to task for attending a sailing event off the Isle of Wight in June.

Mr Hayward was publicly rebuked by members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee last month for "stonewalling" questions at a congressional hearing.

Journalist Tom Bower, who wrote a book called The Squeeze: Oil, Money and Greed in the 21st Century, said Mr Hayward's departure was inevitable because he "hadn't changed the culture" at BP following previous accidents in the US.

"He knew what had to be done, but he didn't do it properly. He was too slow; he wasn't inspired; he wasn't focused enough," said Mr Bower.

The man expected to replace Mr Hayward, BP managing director Mr Dudley, took over the day-to-day operations in the Gulf last month.

Many say that, from a public relations point of view, Mr Dudley has the advantage of being American.

He grew up in Mississippi and, according to BP, has a "deep appreciation and affinity for the Gulf Coast".

BP has lost 40% of its market capitalisation since the May spill.

The company's second quarter results due on Tuesday are expected to reveal a provision for the costs of the clean-up, compensation claims and fines to be paid.

Meanwhile, the official overseeing the US government response to the oil spill has meanwhile said the operation to plug the ruptured Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico permanently has been put back to allow more time for preparatory work.

Retired Coast Guard admiral Thad Allen said the last bit of pipe needed for the process would be put in place in the coming this week, with the actual plugging operation starting in the first week of August. A temporary cap has stopped oil from gushing for more than a week.

A $20bn (£12.9bn) fund to compensate victims of the BP oil spill is set to begin accepting claims applications.

Independent administrator Kenneth Feinberg pledged swift action and said payments would be more generous than those that would be awarded by a court.

But he said those seeking compensation must give up their right to sue BP.

The fund is to reimburse Gulf of Mexico residents and businesses for lost wages and profits and for personal injuries and clean-up, among other claims.

BP has already paid $368m in claims since the April spill.

The oil spill, which began 20 April with the explosion of the BP-leased Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, caused widespread disruption along the US Gulf Coast. An estimated 206 million gallons of oil flowed into the Gulf before BP capped the well last month.

The spill affected fishing and tourism and fouled some beaches and marshes in several US states.BP claims fund 'to begin payouts'

The Gulf Coast Claims Facility, as the claims programme is known, was set up in June amid fears BP would fail to heed President Barack Obama's demand that it reimburse Gulf Coast residents for their losses.

"I want to make sure the people in the Gulf understand we will not let you go out of business or lose your home," Mr Feinberg said in a statement on Monday.

He has pledged to issue emergency six-month payment cheques within 48 hours of receiving claims from individuals and with seven days from businesses.

Mr Feinberg, who was appointed by Mr Obama, has vowed to fight fraudulent claims. The fund requires claimants to document their losses in their applications for compensation.