Lloyds TSB To Gobble Up HBOS

Published in Company Comment on 17 September 2008

The incredible news just keeps on coming. After a slump in the price of its shares, HBOS is being taken over by LLoyds TSB.

Since this article was published, the terms of the Lloyds/HBOS deal have been announced. Read this article for more information.

I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to pick my jaw off the floor this week. After the news of the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the takeover of Merrill Lynch and the bail out of AIG, attention today shifted to banks here in the UK, and in particular HBOS (LSE: HBOS).

Of the big five UK banks, HBOS was the one investors were most concerned about. That’s because it gets the greatest share of its funding from the money markets rather than the more traditional method of customer savings.

At the start of the week HBOS shares were around 280p. On both Monday and Tuesday its share price slumped some 40% during the day only to claw back much of its losses by the close of trading.

Wobbly Wednesday

Wednesday morning’s events were unbelievable. Shortly after the markets opened at 8am HBOS shares were around 200p. By 9am they had sunk to 88p as rumours circulated that it may have difficulty renewing some of its funding.

Then an item appeared on Robert Peston’s blog (he’s the business editor of the BBC who also broke the Northern Rock story) saying that Lloyds TSB (LSE: LLOY) and HBOS were in advanced merger talks which would lead to a takeover of HBOS at close to 300p per share.

HBOS shares rallied back to around 200p within half an hour or so. Finally, at 1:25pm HBOS confirmed that was in talks with Lloyds TSB but gave no details of what form the deal might take. A further announcement with full details could come either later today or first thing tomorrow.

Your money’s safe

The first thing to stress is that if you’ve got money with HBOS then it should be safe. Not only if the combination of Lloyds TSB and HBOS much better equipped to withstand the current financial turmoil, there is a compensation scheme in place that guarantees the first £35,000 of your savings (more details in this article).

That said, it’s highly unlikely that the compensation scheme would ever be required for a bank the size of HBOS as, quite simply, the government cannot afford for it to fail due to the impact that it would have on the economy. For example, HBOS holds around £150bn in savers’ money at the moment, which is around 15% of the all the money held in UK savings accounts.

So a preferable course of action is for HBOS to be ushered into a safe harbour of another bank as a precautionary measure. Indeed, we are being told that Gordon Brown himself has encouraged this merger.

A dominant UK bank

In terms of assets, the combination of Lloyds TSB and HBOS will only be the fourth largest UK bank. It will have around £1 trillion in assets whereas Barclays (£1.3 trillion), HSBC (£1.4 trillion) and Royal Bank of Scotland (£1.8 trillion) are all quite a big larger.

However, the operations of Lloyds TSB and HBOS are predominantly in the UK while the other three are far more international in nature. Lloyds TSB has £65bn in customer savings, so the combination of the two firms will be the market leader in the UK by a considerable distance in the savings market. Indeed, HBOS on its own is already the largest player.

In terms of mortgages, HBOS has 20% of the mortgage and Lloyds TSB has around 10%. The combination of the two, with mortgages totalling some £350 billion, will be three times larger than their nearest competitors Abbey and Nationwide, each of which have around 10% of the market.

The combined firm will also dominate personal current accounts with a 33% market share, twice the size of the next largest player.

Normally such large market shares would attract the wrath of the competition authorities but the government is apparently going to waive any deal through on the grounds that financial stability is more important. Whether disposals will have to be made at a later date, once the economic waters are calmer, remains to be seen.

Of the two, from a customer point of view, HBOS is considerably more competitive and has been collecting lots of new business in recent years with attractive rates on current accounts, savings and credit cards. It would be a shame if this was a casualty of any deal. The rates paid on Lloyds TSB savings accounts are pretty dreadful and it seems obsessed with short-term bonuses.

On the jobs front, both companies employ around 70,000 people and, sadly, there could be a considerable number of redundancies. Lloyds TSB has around 2,000 branches while HBOS has about 1,300 and there is bound to be a significant overlap in many areas. Indeed there have already been estimates as high as 40,000 job losses and 1,000 branch closures, should the deal go ahead.

In closing...

There is a nasty old stench around many aspects of this merger.

The way HBOS shares declined first thing this morning has once again raised the question as to how much involvement hedge funds had in this process and whether malicious rumours were spread enabling some people to illegally profit from the decline. We could see more regulation of these activities in the near future although it will be very difficult to strike a correct balance.

The fact that news of the takeover came via a blog, rather than through proper channels, raises serious questions about the way the UK stock market conducts itself. Robert Peston obviously has excellent connections but it was several hours before any official announcement was made, during which time investors were in limbo. The fact that many online share dealing sites were seemingly out of action today compounded the problem.

The disregard of competition rules, if this rumour turns out to be true, is also a big concern not least for the large number of job cuts that could that result.

The only real positive is that this merger is arguably the least worst option for the economy at this time. A wounded HBOS is something the financial system can ill afford.

More: AIG Saved, Stocks Set To Soar...Maybe

> Compare credit cards and mortgages via Fool.co.uk

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

loughquay 17 Sep 2008 , 4:53pm

You point about HBOS being subject to price fraying gossip is a good case in point to highlight even a professional investors inability to act without emotion. Someone making a loud (personal) financial comment over his breakfast plate is not illegal, and yet, due to herd psychology and emotional reaction, a clever man(team?) can influence a market for a large profit with no more than a lungful of hot air.
Some types of insider trading are incredibly hard to prove.
On a brighter note; I've banked with lloyds for over 25 happy(me)/helpful(them) years. It could be argued they are too 'traditional' a bank, but, if all banks had followed their lending (and service) criteria, I doubt we'd be in the mess we're in today. Integrity counts for a lot, so good luck to the new bank LloydsTSBHBOS!

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 5:29pm

Wave after wave of malicious rumours have rocked HBOS. I am very suspicious that the rumours were deliberate and intended to achieve the purpose above along with hedge betting profits. 'Cui bono?'I hope that an appropriately powerful honourable legal force is brought to bear to identify and expose the perpetrators and extract from them their ill gotten gains and exact due punishment and compensate HBOS. The former will I believe will happen in due course.
The Bank of Scotland is a very old and respected bank, to have allowed this to happen means our stock market is managed disgracefully.
The question is are any shares safe? should we re-establish mutual societies to protect ourselves against such evil activity.

annadams 17 Sep 2008 , 6:19pm

Why does'nt this governament stop this stupid gambling of the finance secter which allows speculators to sell shares which they don't own and buy share without paying up front for them? I have become a grumpy old woman because of this government and our so call financial sector.

tightjock 17 Sep 2008 , 6:20pm

i posted this on the other story, i got a grand in my piggybank is it worth putting this on HBOS or one of the banks right now, surely there is a longer term opp here for an investment right now

MDW1954 17 Sep 2008 , 7:01pm

It should be "wave", not "waive" in the context used. But a nice piece of fast, tight reporting.

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 8:23pm

I am sorry, but in answer to lowkey48 check out the customer performance and interest rates for Lloyds TSB. No, this bank is not a friend to any customer [check the internet] if it breaks the back of HBOS it will have done a great disservice to its shareholders and may have very few clients left in what was The Bank of Scotland. A new shift of funds...already in progress

TMFGoogly 17 Sep 2008 , 8:33pm

Excellent article. Well done Stuart. Extraordinary times.

scotto64 17 Sep 2008 , 8:49pm

Wil it become the Amalgamated Scottish Banking Organisation, or ASBO?

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 9:06pm

Hi scotto64
are you a leader or just a glib follower of events, do you care?

citizenhoyle 18 Sep 2008 , 7:25am

Stuart Watson gets the balance of comment right. We really should stress the "The fact that many online share dealing sites were seemingly out of action today compounded the problem." All fools need to be alarmed at the unexplained way they were locked out of their dealing pages of their on-line accounts. It was as if the banks had locked their doors, When we most need brokerage access we are met with this account closure.Will it be repeated today? who knows! It's no way for the financial capital to treat investors.

pauline75 18 Sep 2008 , 8:10am

To change the subject slightly, the uncertainty in the stock market must have a knock on effect on savings based on shares, such as ISAs. Should we be concerned about the performance of these savings? How about an article on this.

goldenegg47 18 Sep 2008 , 8:17am

It is all the fault of the chairman to merge with Bank of Scotland getting BOS 's debt
I think the layoff should be the bank of scotland's employee not the halifax.

xxzarr 18 Sep 2008 , 8:42am

We are all worried about terrorists and Al Qaeda, the American bankers must be in collusion because it's them that is bringing the world to it's knees. Someone said earlier that they are offering 4 to 1 that Goldman goes to the wall today......

j1rharmer 18 Sep 2008 , 8:43am

It looks like news of the merger talks beteeen HBOS and Lloyds was deliberately leaked to the BBC so that a panic of depositors in HBOS was avoided.
Who did this? Suspects, in order:
1 The Governemnt or one of its agencies (eg the Bank of England)

Triassic 18 Sep 2008 , 8:43am

From the figures presented in the article, meek dour David (Lloyds) takes over Goliath (HBOS). Strange times!! No doubt the financial manipulators have made a killing!

Maybe next week we’ll see a supermarket taking over a bank?

nihon2 18 Sep 2008 , 8:55am

There seems to be a lot of confusion about 'short-selling', which has nothing to do with the problems experienced by HBOS and (to quote Stuart Watson) HBOS getting "the greatest share of its funding from the money markets rather than the more traditional method of customer savings".

Short-selling and possible insider-trading are problems which would only have affected HBOS if it was planning to take over other institutions and needed to use its sgares for this prupose. But even in these cases, the run on the shares was a relection of HBOS' problems, not the cause. Its problems stemmed from the fact that it was perceived as being more exposed to the the UK housing market, coupled with its need for money from the money markets. If you were another bank, would you have chosen HBOS to lend your money to on - say - a one year horizon? Share traders were as capable as anyone else doing the analysis and betting that HBOS looked vulnerable.

According to Darling, the HBOS problem has been under discussion / review for weeks; it's hardly surprising that some of this uncertainty leaked out to the market!

markbsac 18 Sep 2008 , 9:00am

hi what will happen to halifax shares if they merge or get taken over by lloydstsb ?

syco291 18 Sep 2008 , 9:10am

Does this mean that we wont have to put up with those dreadful Halifax adverts anymore?

T1mP 18 Sep 2008 , 9:36am

While I'm not particularly concerned about my current and savings accounts with Halifax, I have absolutely no intention of staying with them. Lloyds used to be a decent bank, once, with a particular emphasis on good customer service. Then there was the merger with TSB, and all that changed. Halifax have been really good, but I don't expect that to survive the takeover.

I'm one of the lucky ones with a moneyback current account, so I'll lose the £60-ish a year they give me, I'm quite sure, and I don't suppose there's anything similar left out there with a half-decent provider. Given recent Foolish comments on the subject of good current accounts, my first inclination is First Direct. Anyone have any comments or Awful Warnings before I jump ship?

MalcolmXtra 18 Sep 2008 , 9:52am

Let's put this into a little perspective.

For years HBOS and other major institutions partook in massively irresponsible borrowing and lending policies which resulted in the housing bubble and credit crunch. Meanwhile 'backwardly traditional' LloydsTSB looked staid by plodding along in their wake with more responsible borrowing and lending policies.

Now all the irresponsibility has come home to roost, and who benefits... LloydsTSB. They get HBOS at a knockdown price, become the countries biggest bank without a whimper from the monopolies commission and with the backing of the Government and sanity is restored.

This entire mess was created by irresponsible banks like HBOS. Their shareholders benefited for years from their irresponsibility. There are no tears shed here. The parallels with Lloyds names of just a few years ago is uncanny. It is called payback. What goes around comes around.

Well done LloydsTSB. They were positioned to take over Northern Rock, the government blocked it and now the taxpayer is paying the price. They again positioned themselves to take over HBOS and this time the gov't caved in and backed them as the least worst case scenario. It took many years of responsibility to get to that position. Well done LloydsTSB.

bungalowgill 18 Sep 2008 , 10:00am

As a mortgage broker I can confirm HBOS were a good lender to deal with and Lloyds TSB/C&G are not so efficient to put it mildly. Ultimately the consumer will have less choice and pay higher rates because they have too large a market share and the other lenders tend to copy each other. Why lend with a small margin, when they can all lend with a larger margin, not quite a cartel, but watch this space..

pjpunter7 18 Sep 2008 , 10:11am

" quite simply, the government cannot afford for it to fail due to the impact that it would have on the economy. "

Fair enough, you believe the Government would be prepared to bail this bank out with taxpayers' money, because of the natioinal interest, if it came to the crunch.

Isn't it a pity that people didn't think about the " national interest" when Thatcher and others were selling off so many of the nation's vital assets ( energy, water, railways, airports, docks)?

Customers of all these organisations have never been so badly treated, in my experience.
I get the impression sometimes that Fool panders to the shareholding mentality with some quite amateurish advice, and then leaves it up to the poor old customer ( that's all of us) to pick up the pieces.
Isn't it time to ditch the self-serving, inexperienced whipper-snappers who have all gone through the same business school of "gimmee, gimmee, gimmee, and blow the rest of ye"?
They've had their chance, made their buck, and left a terrible mess, imo. Time for a huge reality check, I say.

T1mP 18 Sep 2008 , 10:13am

MalcolmXtra: you wouldn't be a Lloyds employee, by any chance?

Financial responsibility in a financial institution is a reasonable thing to expect, I agree, but I wouldn't have said that HBOS was the opposite side of that coin.

From the point of view -- subjective, I admit -- of a normal punter looking for decent service (I run my current account in credit -- if only just -- and am primarily interested in a service that at least feels like it wants to provide me with a service that I find acceptable and I don't feel minimised, let down or disregarded by, I find HBOS excellent in this respect. By contrast, LloydsTSB's customer service is considered to be, by pretty much everyone I know, to be very poor indeed. If your argument is that LloydsTSB are in the solid financial position they're in because they have saved billions by not "wasting" money on good customer service, then I shall applaud their financial management from a distance but will not be inclined to get up close and personal with them.

I never did work out what went wrong with them: Lloyds and TSB separately were both decent companies. Somehow, the whole was /less/ than the sum of its parts...

deeplyblue 18 Sep 2008 , 10:15am

I'm predicting that with the demise of the Halifax will come the demise of the interest-bearing current account. It was the ex-building societies which brought that in, and with the Halifax, the Abbey and Alliance & Leicester all gone under the control of traditional banks, I'll bet that we will be paying for our current accounts inside 18 months.

The Halifax's web access system allows for transfers between current accounts and savings accounts (when both are within the Halifax) in a matter of seconds). Let's hope that survives - we'll be needing it.

Pedros143 18 Sep 2008 , 10:15am

HBOS contained the old North West Securities people who were simply renamed and are well known in the industry for sailing close to the wind in both lending and underwriting. The arrogance shown by HBOS in the retail finance market in the last few years has finally come home to roost. I am sure Black Horse will be well pleased to be rid of this reckless lending competitor. The excellent IF.com sits like a pearl, in amongst the rest of the group. I hope Lloyds TSB recognise that it is everything they are not in online banking and keep and grow it.

Holman22 18 Sep 2008 , 10:17am

If someone were lucky enough to have £35k in a savings account at HBOS and £35k in a savings account with Llloyds, the government scheme would guarantee 100% of both.
What will be the guarantee position once they are all merged under Lloyds?

iwmorris 18 Sep 2008 , 10:35am

Well said Holman22

And even worse if a further £35 was lodged with Sainsburys Bank - which is administered by HBOS as far as I know.

iwmorris 18 Sep 2008 , 10:37am

Oops!!! 35K I meant to say.

Sorry!

gartons 18 Sep 2008 , 10:37am

Before anyone asks or comments, I don't work in the financial sector and I'm not a foaming at the mouth anti capitalist lefty.

Nothing has been said in this article or comments about the people who will lose their jobs as a result of the actions of the spivs and charlatans in the City.

In most towns there is a branch of Lloyds and HBOS, in fact in Halifax itself there are 2 branches of each bank. I doubt if this duplication will last long and therefore expect massive job cuts whilst some sleazy city boys enjoy the rewards of their actions. The whole thing stinks!

It’s time for more regulation in this gambling saloon, oops, I meant the city.

Dick160 18 Sep 2008 , 10:56am

Holman22 & iwmorris - from the BBC website

Under the terms of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), the compensation for savers in bust banks goes up to £35,000 per "authorised institution", not per account.

If a newly merged bank became just one authorised institution with the Financial Services Authority (FSA) then you would have cover for only the first £35,000 of your money, not more.

But banks sometimes retain their separate authorisations with the FSA after a merger, as in the case of the RBS and the NatWest.

HBOSCustomer1 18 Sep 2008 , 10:56am

For over a year now HBOS have been having problems,they have been giving their own customers a raw deal. Their financial problems have landed on their customers door steps, they squeezed the small business end of the market. In some cases companies have gone out of business as a result of their overdraft being recalled. They do not have anyone in place to be answerable to your contact, it is a credit team that decides your fate, this credit team get bonuses for drawing the banking facilities already agreed. At present they hide behind 0800 numbers and you cannot speak to anyone in authority, if you do get a corporate director he advises that he has no power to answer. It has to go to a faceless team. No wonder they are in this mess, I hope the government take measures to ensure that HBOS customers get a fair deal now.

TonyBritten 18 Sep 2008 , 11:05am

HBOS WERE CONTINUALLY SAYING THEY HAD NO PROBLEMS AND WERE FINANCIALLY STRONG AND ACCUSATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OF SPECULATORS DRIVING DOWN THE PRICE. HOWEVER ALISTAIR DARLING SAID ON BBC NEWS 24 THIS MORNING THAT HBOS WERE IN TROUBLE AND WE HEAR FURTHER THAT TALKS HAD BEEN GOING ON TWIXT LLOYDS/HBOS FOR SOME TIME 'SO' SOME PEOPLE WERE FEEDING INFO TO THE CITY ABOUT THIS AND THAT IS WHY THE'SPECULATORS' WERE TAKING SHORT POSITIONS.
THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS THAT HBOS WERE TELLING LIES AND WERE IN TROUBLE AND GROUPS IN THE CITY MADE MONEY OUT OF IT.

Hillocks 18 Sep 2008 , 11:11am

I am not sure what sleazy city practices iwmorris is blaming for the demise of HBOS. Short selling is no worse than long selling: if you believe a share is going up you buy it and if you are right you can sell it at a profit. Even though the price may have gone up as a result of your purchase if it is big enough (or even as a result of false rumours you may have spread) nobody tends to call that sleazy. If you think a business is going down the pan as a result of bad management you can short it and if you get it right you make some money. If you get it wrong there is no limit to your potential losses. This is how the market works and going long or short are both equally acceptable ways of participating in it.

martastik 18 Sep 2008 , 11:26am

According to Interactive Investor, it was the LSE that was not accepting electronic trades in HBOS yesterday, as their systems could not handle the volumes!

Hillocks 18 Sep 2008 , 11:40am

Sorry, it was gartons' comments I was referring to.

complyman 18 Sep 2008 , 11:41am

This whole fiasco is as a result of greedy banks with unscrupulous practices ignoring the consequences of their actions. They encouraged debt and stupid increases in house prices that cannot be maintained. HBOS was exposed to the housing market as the biggest mortgage lender in the UK. Now house prices must drop dramatically like the US where in Florida they are selling buy one get one free. As for what happens to their former supermarket boss I hope he doesn't get a massive pay off.

MalcolmXtra 18 Sep 2008 , 12:02pm

"At 10:13 on September 18 2008, T1mP said:

MalcolmXtra: you wouldn't be a Lloyds employee, by any chance?"

T1mP, no I am not associated with LloydsTSB in any way other than being a satisfied customer. Rare as I appear to be on here I have had personal and business accounts with them for over 20 years and have always found them really good. I never understood why the 'customer service league tables' scored them badly as it was never my experience. Maybe I have been lucky??

No, my comments referred to responsible banking behind the scenes not customer service to the public. LloydsTSB simply didn't take the irresponsible, short-termist approach that so many like HBOS did. Whilst some banks went for growth and market share at all costs, LloydsTSB stayed clear of the bulk of the 'AAA' repackaged loans, didn't tend to mortgage lend at 6+ times earnings with no collateral and didn't massively leverage against their assets like HBOS, Northern Rock et al.

The Vatican Bank is so powerful because it thinks 'in centuries' rather than years or lifetimes. Swiss Banks do the same. The Rothchilds and Monarchy were not built in a few years. I am not putting LloydsTSB in the same bracket but what it shows is that a realistic long term business model will always win out over short term thinking. Bubbles are caused by irresponsible short term thinking.

What is happening now is right and just. Lehmans should be broke, HBOS should be taken over. Northern Rock should have been allowed to be taken over too. Unfettered and self-regulated (read unregulated) capitalism will always become corrupt and fail. The banking system needs this clearout then new regulations put in place and an FSA with powers (not run by the same bankers) to ensure they cannot let it happen again.

In the end, the taxpayer will foot the bill. Yet the taxpayer did not benefit from the irresponsibility of the heads of the banks who allowed all this to happen or the employees whose bonuses outshone their real worth... and don't get me started on the CEO's bonuses for failing to perform....

Rant, rave...

xxzarr 18 Sep 2008 , 12:05pm

If the Government or our dearest leader Gordon really wanted to prove how smart they are, they should get hold of Applegarth, ex boss of Northern Rock and drive him into penuary. Remove his wife and kids and put him in prison for a very long time. Same for the boss of HBOS and you know what, overnight in the banking world reality would set in. Theses reckless morons have caused some serious problems in the UK and I hope Dubya does the same over there. Because the hard pressed consumer will ultimately pay...I'm going to the pub

McLeodC 18 Sep 2008 , 12:51pm

The takeover means that HBOS shareholders won't have the opportunity of another AGM to tell the board what they think of them for leading the company into this situation. No doubt they'll all retire with huge payoffs.

jerardchilton 18 Sep 2008 , 6:39pm

is it time to invest in Lloyds TSB? I'm fed up of losing money over bio companies and bored with the ftse 100 club but this seems a real opportunity.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

keith1942 18 Sep 2008 , 7:19pm

I feel Hillocks is missing the point on selling short. people are selling shares they havn't got then buy when the price as fallen thus at the end of trading cycle when accounts come to be settled they hand over shares they bought for peanuts and getting a much higher price from the original buyer.If the city regulator had some system were share certificates had to be produce before a sale could be made this would stabalize the finacial markets,this and bankers acting responsibly would probably save jobs and possibly reduce the risk of ressesion.

ribena67 18 Sep 2008 , 8:36pm

Don't you just love reading the details about HBOS with an advert for Birmingham Midshires running on the same page. How many know this is the same company?

spud77 19 Sep 2008 , 1:00pm

Q: syco291 "Does this mean that we wont have to put up with those dreadful Halifax adverts anymore?"

A: I'd rather see the end of those dreadful LTSB adverts; the most annoying theme tune possible IMHO!

deeplyblue
"I'm predicting that with the demise of the Halifax will come the demise of the interest-bearing current account. It was the ex-building societies which brought that in...."

Actually it was a bank that introduced interest bearing current accounts. The Co-operative Bank.

Interestingly the Co-op Bank is part of the Co-operative Group, run with an ethical, sustainable philosophy and recently posted a growth in profits. Perhaps other banks could learn a thing or two from being co-operative.

gillianswain 20 Sep 2008 , 3:55am

The merger between Lloyds and HBOS must have been in the offing for some while as it wouldn't have been possible to have got it through so quickly. Old style banking (Lloyds) has won over from indiscriminate lending (HBOS). Years ago when borrowing to buy a property you were allowed up to 3 times one persons salary and half of the second persons salary (or two and a half times both salaries)if memory serves me correctly. Then we hit the period where many banks offered to loan you anything, whether you had any assetts or not. After my late husband was made redundant the banks still sent him letters offering him "gold card memberships" and loans of £30,000 etc. We have now re-discovered what our parents taught us (1) don't buy what you can't afford and (2) avoid going into debt wherever possible. The shame of it is that so many people are going to lose their jobs, homes etc just because of a "live now pay later" and "keeping above the Jones's" lifestyle. Not buying your child the latest computer, trendy trainers etc doesn't mean that you don't love them and the fact that you can't afford to buy them everything they might want teaches them the realities of life (which sadly many adults will now be facing). Obviously, if you are lucky enough or have worked hard enough and been prudent enough to have more than £35,000 in your bank account then you will have to check which banks are merged so that you don't have more than £35,000 in the one combined institution. Obviously, if we are going to have bigger combined banks then the government will need to increase this figure if it is to keep the confidence of those customers. It is going to take some time for all of us to feel quite as confident in banks again and perhaps teaches us not to "keep all our eggs in one basket" (sorry to keep quoting but they are very apt). I also think the banks would do better to go back to old style banking where you can actually speak to human beings and be made to feel valued as a customer rather than the attitude of many banks which appears to be "we have your money and now you don't matter" and "we are too big and imposrtant to care about you". A run on the banks last Wednesday could have left many of them in a terrible state. If a bank as big as HBOS could be brought down whether by rumours, speculators, imprudent lending or just customers withdrawing their cash then it can happen to any bank, so if you work for a bank it's good to remember that your customers are your livelihood (and yes, I once worked for a Building Society and did practice what I preach). We have become a rather greedy, impolite and suspitious society it seems to me. I think a return to some of the old polite, caring ways might do us all some good (myself included).....but I think I am probably being too idealistic to hope it might happen.

Hillocks 22 Sep 2008 , 10:25am

Sorry, Keith1942, but I have not missed the point. I know how shorting works and it is a way of saying that you believe a share is overpriced. It is not responsible for a recession - if the underlying value is there the shorters will get their fingers burnt. You can manipulate the market either way in the short term - neither way is wose than the other.

loughquay 17 Sep 2008 , 4:53pm

You point about HBOS being subject to price fraying gossip is a good case in point to highlight even a professional investors inability to act without emotion. Someone making a loud (personal) financial comment over his breakfast plate is not illegal, and yet, due to herd psychology and emotional reaction, a clever man(team?) can influence a market for a large profit with no more than a lungful of hot air.
Some types of insider trading are incredibly hard to prove.
On a brighter note; I've banked with lloyds for over 25 happy(me)/helpful(them) years. It could be argued they are too 'traditional' a bank, but, if all banks had followed their lending (and service) criteria, I doubt we'd be in the mess we're in today. Integrity counts for a lot, so good luck to the new bank LloydsTSBHBOS!

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 5:29pm

Wave after wave of malicious rumours have rocked HBOS. I am very suspicious that the rumours were deliberate and intended to achieve the purpose above along with hedge betting profits. 'Cui bono?'I hope that an appropriately powerful honourable legal force is brought to bear to identify and expose the perpetrators and extract from them their ill gotten gains and exact due punishment and compensate HBOS. The former will I believe will happen in due course.
The Bank of Scotland is a very old and respected bank, to have allowed this to happen means our stock market is managed disgracefully.
The question is are any shares safe? should we re-establish mutual societies to protect ourselves against such evil activity.

annadams 17 Sep 2008 , 6:19pm

Why does'nt this governament stop this stupid gambling of the finance secter which allows speculators to sell shares which they don't own and buy share without paying up front for them? I have become a grumpy old woman because of this government and our so call financial sector.

tightjock 17 Sep 2008 , 6:20pm

i posted this on the other story, i got a grand in my piggybank is it worth putting this on HBOS or one of the banks right now, surely there is a longer term opp here for an investment right now

MDW1954 17 Sep 2008 , 7:01pm

It should be "wave", not "waive" in the context used. But a nice piece of fast, tight reporting.

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 8:23pm

I am sorry, but in answer to lowkey48 check out the customer performance and interest rates for Lloyds TSB. No, this bank is not a friend to any customer [check the internet] if it breaks the back of HBOS it will have done a great disservice to its shareholders and may have very few clients left in what was The Bank of Scotland. A new shift of funds...already in progress

TMFGoogly 17 Sep 2008 , 8:33pm

Excellent article. Well done Stuart. Extraordinary times.

scotto64 17 Sep 2008 , 8:49pm

Wil it become the Amalgamated Scottish Banking Organisation, or ASBO?

GordonMcGinn 17 Sep 2008 , 9:06pm

Hi scotto64
are you a leader or just a glib follower of events, do you care?

citizenhoyle 18 Sep 2008 , 7:25am

Stuart Watson gets the balance of comment right. We really should stress the "The fact that many online share dealing sites were seemingly out of action today compounded the problem." All fools need to be alarmed at the unexplained way they were locked out of their dealing pages of their on-line accounts. It was as if the banks had locked their doors, When we most need brokerage access we are met with this account closure.Will it be repeated today? who knows! It's no way for the financial capital to treat investors.

pauline75 18 Sep 2008 , 8:10am

To change the subject slightly, the uncertainty in the stock market must have a knock on effect on savings based on shares, such as ISAs. Should we be concerned about the performance of these savings? How about an article on this.

goldenegg47 18 Sep 2008 , 8:17am

It is all the fault of the chairman to merge with Bank of Scotland getting BOS 's debt
I think the layoff should be the bank of scotland's employee not the halifax.

xxzarr 18 Sep 2008 , 8:42am

We are all worried about terrorists and Al Qaeda, the American bankers must be in collusion because it's them that is bringing the world to it's knees. Someone said earlier that they are offering 4 to 1 that Goldman goes to the wall today......

j1rharmer 18 Sep 2008 , 8:43am

It looks like news of the merger talks beteeen HBOS and Lloyds was deliberately leaked to the BBC so that a panic of depositors in HBOS was avoided.
Who did this? Suspects, in order:
1 The Governemnt or one of its agencies (eg the Bank of England)

Triassic 18 Sep 2008 , 8:43am

From the figures presented in the article, meek dour David (Lloyds) takes over Goliath (HBOS). Strange times!! No doubt the financial manipulators have made a killing!

Maybe next week we’ll see a supermarket taking over a bank?

nihon2 18 Sep 2008 , 8:55am

There seems to be a lot of confusion about 'short-selling', which has nothing to do with the problems experienced by HBOS and (to quote Stuart Watson) HBOS getting "the greatest share of its funding from the money markets rather than the more traditional method of customer savings".

Short-selling and possible insider-trading are problems which would only have affected HBOS if it was planning to take over other institutions and needed to use its sgares for this prupose. But even in these cases, the run on the shares was a relection of HBOS' problems, not the cause. Its problems stemmed from the fact that it was perceived as being more exposed to the the UK housing market, coupled with its need for money from the money markets. If you were another bank, would you have chosen HBOS to lend your money to on - say - a one year horizon? Share traders were as capable as anyone else doing the analysis and betting that HBOS looked vulnerable.

According to Darling, the HBOS problem has been under discussion / review for weeks; it's hardly surprising that some of this uncertainty leaked out to the market!

markbsac 18 Sep 2008 , 9:00am

hi what will happen to halifax shares if they merge or get taken over by lloydstsb ?

syco291 18 Sep 2008 , 9:10am

Does this mean that we wont have to put up with those dreadful Halifax adverts anymore?

T1mP 18 Sep 2008 , 9:36am

While I'm not particularly concerned about my current and savings accounts with Halifax, I have absolutely no intention of staying with them. Lloyds used to be a decent bank, once, with a particular emphasis on good customer service. Then there was the merger with TSB, and all that changed. Halifax have been really good, but I don't expect that to survive the takeover.

I'm one of the lucky ones with a moneyback current account, so I'll lose the £60-ish a year they give me, I'm quite sure, and I don't suppose there's anything similar left out there with a half-decent provider. Given recent Foolish comments on the subject of good current accounts, my first inclination is First Direct. Anyone have any comments or Awful Warnings before I jump ship?

MalcolmXtra 18 Sep 2008 , 9:52am

Let's put this into a little perspective.

For years HBOS and other major institutions partook in massively irresponsible borrowing and lending policies which resulted in the housing bubble and credit crunch. Meanwhile 'backwardly traditional' LloydsTSB looked staid by plodding along in their wake with more responsible borrowing and lending policies.

Now all the irresponsibility has come home to roost, and who benefits... LloydsTSB. They get HBOS at a knockdown price, become the countries biggest bank without a whimper from the monopolies commission and with the backing of the Government and sanity is restored.

This entire mess was created by irresponsible banks like HBOS. Their shareholders benefited for years from their irresponsibility. There are no tears shed here. The parallels with Lloyds names of just a few years ago is uncanny. It is called payback. What goes around comes around.

Well done LloydsTSB. They were positioned to take over Northern Rock, the government blocked it and now the taxpayer is paying the price. They again positioned themselves to take over HBOS and this time the gov't caved in and backed them as the least worst case scenario. It took many years of responsibility to get to that position. Well done LloydsTSB.

bungalowgill 18 Sep 2008 , 10:00am

As a mortgage broker I can confirm HBOS were a good lender to deal with and Lloyds TSB/C&G are not so efficient to put it mildly. Ultimately the consumer will have less choice and pay higher rates because they have too large a market share and the other lenders tend to copy each other. Why lend with a small margin, when they can all lend with a larger margin, not quite a cartel, but watch this space..

pjpunter7 18 Sep 2008 , 10:11am

" quite simply, the government cannot afford for it to fail due to the impact that it would have on the economy. "

Fair enough, you believe the Government would be prepared to bail this bank out with taxpayers' money, because of the natioinal interest, if it came to the crunch.

Isn't it a pity that people didn't think about the " national interest" when Thatcher and others were selling off so many of the nation's vital assets ( energy, water, railways, airports, docks)?

Customers of all these organisations have never been so badly treated, in my experience.
I get the impression sometimes that Fool panders to the shareholding mentality with some quite amateurish advice, and then leaves it up to the poor old customer ( that's all of us) to pick up the pieces.
Isn't it time to ditch the self-serving, inexperienced whipper-snappers who have all gone through the same business school of "gimmee, gimmee, gimmee, and blow the rest of ye"?
They've had their chance, made their buck, and left a terrible mess, imo. Time for a huge reality check, I say.

T1mP 18 Sep 2008 , 10:13am

MalcolmXtra: you wouldn't be a Lloyds employee, by any chance?

Financial responsibility in a financial institution is a reasonable thing to expect, I agree, but I wouldn't have said that HBOS was the opposite side of that coin.

From the point of view -- subjective, I admit -- of a normal punter looking for decent service (I run my current account in credit -- if only just -- and am primarily interested in a service that at least feels like it wants to provide me with a service that I find acceptable and I don't feel minimised, let down or disregarded by, I find HBOS excellent in this respect. By contrast, LloydsTSB's customer service is considered to be, by pretty much everyone I know, to be very poor indeed. If your argument is that LloydsTSB are in the solid financial position they're in because they have saved billions by not "wasting" money on good customer service, then I shall applaud their financial management from a distance but will not be inclined to get up close and personal with them.

I never did work out what went wrong with them: Lloyds and TSB separately were both decent companies. Somehow, the whole was /less/ than the sum of its parts...

deeplyblue 18 Sep 2008 , 10:15am

I'm predicting that with the demise of the Halifax will come the demise of the interest-bearing current account. It was the ex-building societies which brought that in, and with the Halifax, the Abbey and Alliance & Leicester all gone under the control of traditional banks, I'll bet that we will be paying for our current accounts inside 18 months.

The Halifax's web access system allows for transfers between current accounts and savings accounts (when both are within the Halifax) in a matter of seconds). Let's hope that survives - we'll be needing it.

Pedros143 18 Sep 2008 , 10:15am

HBOS contained the old North West Securities people who were simply renamed and are well known in the industry for sailing close to the wind in both lending and underwriting. The arrogance shown by HBOS in the retail finance market in the last few years has finally come home to roost. I am sure Black Horse will be well pleased to be rid of this reckless lending competitor. The excellent IF.com sits like a pearl, in amongst the rest of the group. I hope Lloyds TSB recognise that it is everything they are not in online banking and keep and grow it.

Holman22 18 Sep 2008 , 10:17am

If someone were lucky enough to have £35k in a savings account at HBOS and £35k in a savings account with Llloyds, the government scheme would guarantee 100% of both.
What will be the guarantee position once they are all merged under Lloyds?

iwmorris 18 Sep 2008 , 10:35am

Well said Holman22

And even worse if a further £35 was lodged with Sainsburys Bank - which is administered by HBOS as far as I know.

iwmorris 18 Sep 2008 , 10:37am

Oops!!! 35K I meant to say.

Sorry!

gartons 18 Sep 2008 , 10:37am

Before anyone asks or comments, I don't work in the financial sector and I'm not a foaming at the mouth anti capitalist lefty.

Nothing has been said in this article or comments about the people who will lose their jobs as a result of the actions of the spivs and charlatans in the City.

In most towns there is a branch of Lloyds and HBOS, in fact in Halifax itself there are 2 branches of each bank. I doubt if this duplication will last long and therefore expect massive job cuts whilst some sleazy city boys enjoy the rewards of their actions. The whole thing stinks!

It’s time for more regulation in this gambling saloon, oops, I meant the city.

Dick160 18 Sep 2008 , 10:56am

Holman22 & iwmorris - from the BBC website

Under the terms of the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), the compensation for savers in bust banks goes up to £35,000 per "authorised institution", not per account.

If a newly merged bank became just one authorised institution with the Financial Services Authority (FSA) then you would have cover for only the first £35,000 of your money, not more.

But banks sometimes retain their separate authorisations with the FSA after a merger, as in the case of the RBS and the NatWest.

HBOSCustomer1 18 Sep 2008 , 10:56am

For over a year now HBOS have been having problems,they have been giving their own customers a raw deal. Their financial problems have landed on their customers door steps, they squeezed the small business end of the market. In some cases companies have gone out of business as a result of their overdraft being recalled. They do not have anyone in place to be answerable to your contact, it is a credit team that decides your fate, this credit team get bonuses for drawing the banking facilities already agreed. At present they hide behind 0800 numbers and you cannot speak to anyone in authority, if you do get a corporate director he advises that he has no power to answer. It has to go to a faceless team. No wonder they are in this mess, I hope the government take measures to ensure that HBOS customers get a fair deal now.

TonyBritten 18 Sep 2008 , 11:05am

HBOS WERE CONTINUALLY SAYING THEY HAD NO PROBLEMS AND WERE FINANCIALLY STRONG AND ACCUSATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OF SPECULATORS DRIVING DOWN THE PRICE. HOWEVER ALISTAIR DARLING SAID ON BBC NEWS 24 THIS MORNING THAT HBOS WERE IN TROUBLE AND WE HEAR FURTHER THAT TALKS HAD BEEN GOING ON TWIXT LLOYDS/HBOS FOR SOME TIME 'SO' SOME PEOPLE WERE FEEDING INFO TO THE CITY ABOUT THIS AND THAT IS WHY THE'SPECULATORS' WERE TAKING SHORT POSITIONS.
THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS THAT HBOS WERE TELLING LIES AND WERE IN TROUBLE AND GROUPS IN THE CITY MADE MONEY OUT OF IT.

Hillocks 18 Sep 2008 , 11:11am

I am not sure what sleazy city practices iwmorris is blaming for the demise of HBOS. Short selling is no worse than long selling: if you believe a share is going up you buy it and if you are right you can sell it at a profit. Even though the price may have gone up as a result of your purchase if it is big enough (or even as a result of false rumours you may have spread) nobody tends to call that sleazy. If you think a business is going down the pan as a result of bad management you can short it and if you get it right you make some money. If you get it wrong there is no limit to your potential losses. This is how the market works and going long or short are both equally acceptable ways of participating in it.

martastik 18 Sep 2008 , 11:26am

According to Interactive Investor, it was the LSE that was not accepting electronic trades in HBOS yesterday, as their systems could not handle the volumes!

Hillocks 18 Sep 2008 , 11:40am

Sorry, it was gartons' comments I was referring to.

complyman 18 Sep 2008 , 11:41am

This whole fiasco is as a result of greedy banks with unscrupulous practices ignoring the consequences of their actions. They encouraged debt and stupid increases in house prices that cannot be maintained. HBOS was exposed to the housing market as the biggest mortgage lender in the UK. Now house prices must drop dramatically like the US where in Florida they are selling buy one get one free. As for what happens to their former supermarket boss I hope he doesn't get a massive pay off.

MalcolmXtra 18 Sep 2008 , 12:02pm

"At 10:13 on September 18 2008, T1mP said:

MalcolmXtra: you wouldn't be a Lloyds employee, by any chance?"

T1mP, no I am not associated with LloydsTSB in any way other than being a satisfied customer. Rare as I appear to be on here I have had personal and business accounts with them for over 20 years and have always found them really good. I never understood why the 'customer service league tables' scored them badly as it was never my experience. Maybe I have been lucky??

No, my comments referred to responsible banking behind the scenes not customer service to the public. LloydsTSB simply didn't take the irresponsible, short-termist approach that so many like HBOS did. Whilst some banks went for growth and market share at all costs, LloydsTSB stayed clear of the bulk of the 'AAA' repackaged loans, didn't tend to mortgage lend at 6+ times earnings with no collateral and didn't massively leverage against their assets like HBOS, Northern Rock et al.

The Vatican Bank is so powerful because it thinks 'in centuries' rather than years or lifetimes. Swiss Banks do the same. The Rothchilds and Monarchy were not built in a few years. I am not putting LloydsTSB in the same bracket but what it shows is that a realistic long term business model will always win out over short term thinking. Bubbles are caused by irresponsible short term thinking.

What is happening now is right and just. Lehmans should be broke, HBOS should be taken over. Northern Rock should have been allowed to be taken over too. Unfettered and self-regulated (read unregulated) capitalism will always become corrupt and fail. The banking system needs this clearout then new regulations put in place and an FSA with powers (not run by the same bankers) to ensure they cannot let it happen again.

In the end, the taxpayer will foot the bill. Yet the taxpayer did not benefit from the irresponsibility of the heads of the banks who allowed all this to happen or the employees whose bonuses outshone their real worth... and don't get me started on the CEO's bonuses for failing to perform....

Rant, rave...

xxzarr 18 Sep 2008 , 12:05pm

If the Government or our dearest leader Gordon really wanted to prove how smart they are, they should get hold of Applegarth, ex boss of Northern Rock and drive him into penuary. Remove his wife and kids and put him in prison for a very long time. Same for the boss of HBOS and you know what, overnight in the banking world reality would set in. Theses reckless morons have caused some serious problems in the UK and I hope Dubya does the same over there. Because the hard pressed consumer will ultimately pay...I'm going to the pub

McLeodC 18 Sep 2008 , 12:51pm

The takeover means that HBOS shareholders won't have the opportunity of another AGM to tell the board what they think of them for leading the company into this situation. No doubt they'll all retire with huge payoffs.

jerardchilton 18 Sep 2008 , 6:39pm

is it time to invest in Lloyds TSB? I'm fed up of losing money over bio companies and bored with the ftse 100 club but this seems a real opportunity.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

keith1942 18 Sep 2008 , 7:19pm

I feel Hillocks is missing the point on selling short. people are selling shares they havn't got then buy when the price as fallen thus at the end of trading cycle when accounts come to be settled they hand over shares they bought for peanuts and getting a much higher price from the original buyer.If the city regulator had some system were share certificates had to be produce before a sale could be made this would stabalize the finacial markets,this and bankers acting responsibly would probably save jobs and possibly reduce the risk of ressesion.

ribena67 18 Sep 2008 , 8:36pm

Don't you just love reading the details about HBOS with an advert for Birmingham Midshires running on the same page. How many know this is the same company?

spud77 19 Sep 2008 , 1:00pm

Q: syco291 "Does this mean that we wont have to put up with those dreadful Halifax adverts anymore?"

A: I'd rather see the end of those dreadful LTSB adverts; the most annoying theme tune possible IMHO!

deeplyblue
"I'm predicting that with the demise of the Halifax will come the demise of the interest-bearing current account. It was the ex-building societies which brought that in...."

Actually it was a bank that introduced interest bearing current accounts. The Co-operative Bank.

Interestingly the Co-op Bank is part of the Co-operative Group, run with an ethical, sustainable philosophy and recently posted a growth in profits. Perhaps other banks could learn a thing or two from being co-operative.

gillianswain 20 Sep 2008 , 3:55am

The merger between Lloyds and HBOS must have been in the offing for some while as it wouldn't have been possible to have got it through so quickly. Old style banking (Lloyds) has won over from indiscriminate lending (HBOS). Years ago when borrowing to buy a property you were allowed up to 3 times one persons salary and half of the second persons salary (or two and a half times both salaries)if memory serves me correctly. Then we hit the period where many banks offered to loan you anything, whether you had any assetts or not. After my late husband was made redundant the banks still sent him letters offering him "gold card memberships" and loans of £30,000 etc. We have now re-discovered what our parents taught us (1) don't buy what you can't afford and (2) avoid going into debt wherever possible. The shame of it is that so many people are going to lose their jobs, homes etc just because of a "live now pay later" and "keeping above the Jones's" lifestyle. Not buying your child the latest computer, trendy trainers etc doesn't mean that you don't love them and the fact that you can't afford to buy them everything they might want teaches them the realities of life (which sadly many adults will now be facing). Obviously, if you are lucky enough or have worked hard enough and been prudent enough to have more than £35,000 in your bank account then you will have to check which banks are merged so that you don't have more than £35,000 in the one combined institution. Obviously, if we are going to have bigger combined banks then the government will need to increase this figure if it is to keep the confidence of those customers. It is going to take some time for all of us to feel quite as confident in banks again and perhaps teaches us not to "keep all our eggs in one basket" (sorry to keep quoting but they are very apt). I also think the banks would do better to go back to old style banking where you can actually speak to human beings and be made to feel valued as a customer rather than the attitude of many banks which appears to be "we have your money and now you don't matter" and "we are too big and imposrtant to care about you". A run on the banks last Wednesday could have left many of them in a terrible state. If a bank as big as HBOS could be brought down whether by rumours, speculators, imprudent lending or just customers withdrawing their cash then it can happen to any bank, so if you work for a bank it's good to remember that your customers are your livelihood (and yes, I once worked for a Building Society and did practice what I preach). We have become a rather greedy, impolite and suspitious society it seems to me. I think a return to some of the old polite, caring ways might do us all some good (myself included).....but I think I am probably being too idealistic to hope it might happen.

Hillocks 22 Sep 2008 , 10:25am

Sorry, Keith1942, but I have not missed the point. I know how shorting works and it is a way of saying that you believe a share is overpriced. It is not responsible for a recession - if the underlying value is there the shorters will get their fingers burnt. You can manipulate the market either way in the short term - neither way is wose than the other.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.