After the CBN in
July 2019, directed Deposit Money Banks (DMBs) have a Loan to deposit ratio
(LDR) of 60% or risk the CBN retaining an amount equivalent to 50% of the shortfall
in the LDR, and even going a step further to, in the last quarter of 2019,
raise the LDR to 65%, I got worried about the safety of depositors’ funds given
the high rate of non-performing loans (NPLs) in the banking sector.
The CBN had over
time, tried to put in place some safety measures against ballooning NPLs like
the establishment of the Credit Risk Management System (CRMS) or Credit Bureau,
given legal backing by Sections 28 &
52 of the CBN Act (as amended). The CRMS, now web-enabled, allow banks and
other stakeholders to dial directly into the CRMS database for the purpose of
rendering statutory returns or conducting status enquiries on borrowers. The
CBN had also always consistently stressed to banks the importance of
strengthening their risk management practices.
It can be argued
that banks’ obligation under the CBN Act to update their credits on a monthly
basis and to make status enquiry on any intending borrower to determine their
eligibility or otherwise has made some difference to the quantum of NPLs in the
industry. The CBN’s Financial Stability Report of 2018
reported an improvement in NPLs of Domestic Systematically Important Banks
(D-SIBs), from 11.31% at end of June 2018 to 9.82% at end of December 2018. The
D-SIBs, which were 7 in number in 2018 accounted for 63.80% of the industry
total assets of N35.10Tn, 65.23% of the
industry total deposit of N21.75Tn and
66% of the industry total loans of N15.34Tn.
While NPLs as at Q4
of 2018 stood at N1.792Tn equal to
11.67% of gross loans (N15,353,758,941,686.20),
at end of December 2019, the percentage of NPLs had reduced to 6.03% of gross
loans of N17.563Tn according to the Selected
Banking Sector data released by the National Bureau of Statistics
(NBS) in March 2020.
Still in a bid to
ensure borrowers pay what they owe financial institutions in the country and
reduce NPLs, as recently as the 16th of June 2020, the CRC Credit
Bureau, one of the 3 licensed credit Bureaus in Nigeria, reportedly launched
its data submission platform to allow lenders to provide real time credit
information about borrowers.
The Asset
Management Company of Nigeria (AMCON) had initially been created in 2010 by the
AMCON Act of 2010 which was amended
twice; in 2015 and 2019 in order to resolve the issue of NPLs in eligible
financial institutions. How successful AMCON has been over the years is a
subject of debate. According to the 2018 Financial Stability Report earlier
mentioned, the carrying value of AMCON’s liabilities increased from N4.53Tn at end of June 2018 to N5.43Tn at
end of December 2018 due to its investment of N895.45Bn
in Polaris Bank. AMCON’s total recoveries from asset sales and credit
repayments at end of December came to N759.058Bn.
The 2019 amendments to the AMCON Act in fact contained several sections which
allows AMCON to obtain ex-parte Orders of Court to put debtors’ accounts under
surveillance, or to get access to devices which will reveal where a debtor
keeps his/her funds: Section 6(1)(ua).
A newly inserted Section 6(6)
mandates AMCON to furnish governments Ministries, Agencies and departments
(MDAs) with the name of recalcitrant debtors so as either to stop them from
being given government contracts or to stop them from being paid if they had
already been awarded contracts.
On Tuesday the 14th
of July 2020, the CBN released Guidelines
on Global Standing Instructions (GSI) (Individuals) targeted at enhancing
loan recovery in the banking sector. GSI will allow banks to debit debtors’
eligible accounts across different banks
A debtor who has an overdue loan with Bank A can thus with the aid of GSI, have his/her funded accounts in
Banks B, C & D debited with amount equivalent to
his/her indebtedness (principal sum and interest thereon) to Bank A.
Article 2.0. of the GSI Guidelines lists accounts which
qualify for GSI to include domiciliary accounts, investment/deposit accounts
and electronic wallets and joint accounts, apart from the traditional savings
and current accounts that most people have. By Article 3.2.1., borrowers are to execute GSI mandates (for their
banks or lenders) either in hard copy or digital form. All the borrowers’ accounts
are also expected to be linked to his/her Bank Verification Number (BVN) and
any of his/her account which qualifies for GSI found not to be so linked shall
be watch-listed.
The mandate which
would have been signed by a borrower before being given loan by a Participating
Financial Institution (PFI) will enable a PFI to issue a GSI trigger which will
in turn allow the borrower’s eligible accounts across PFIs to debit the
borrower’s account(s) without recourse to the borrower.
While it was stated
that the GSI is supposed to be used as a last resort to recover past due debts
inclusive of the principal sum and interest but excluding any penal charge
imposed by the PFI, it is my opinion that PFIs should still have been mandated
to apply ex-parte to the Courts
before the accounts are debited with the amounts owed by borrowers in order to
avoid situations where the process is abused by PFIs.
The fact that joint
accounts are also included in the list of GSI eligible accounts may also pose
some problems and is likely to be challenged by persons (spouses, partners,
siblings etc) who may, for one reason or another, be operating joint accounts
with borrowers.
Having been a bit
worried by the CBN’s 65% LDR policy as it concerns the safety of depositors’
funds, it is unlikely one will not support any policy that will improve loan
recovery and protect depositors’ funds from high toxic or non-performing loans.
My support for the GSI process in principle notwithstanding, I do not believe
anything could be lost if a borrower’s account is frozen and then debited upon
application and grant thereof by a court of Law. Much the same way the Courts
have held that anti-corruption agencies like the EFCC and ICPC have no right to
request banks to freeze a customer’s account without first obtaining a court
order, so should the case be with the GSI process. The shift in a democratic
dispensation towards making Laws and Regulations that give too much power to
individuals or entities without first getting a go-ahead from the Court is a
bit uncomfortable.