link]
Credit quality at the State Employees’ Credit Union is showing some negative trends, which is a notable signal given the institution’s importance.
Raleigh-based SECU has 2.8 million members and assets topping $50 billion, making it the second-biggest U.S. credit union. SECU doesn’t operate outside of North Carolina, and unlike most commercial banks, it doesn’t focus on wealthy clients or make business loans. So its finances tell a story about how middle-income, working-class North Carolinians are faring.
The credit union is well capitalized, and its results don’t suggest any threatening financial problems, everyone agrees. But former CEO Jim Blaine, in his almost daily blog [link] about the credit union he led from 1979 to 2015, questions why SECU is reporting significantly more soured loans than in previous years. For example, the credit union reported losses of $72 million in the first quarter this year, compared with $47 million a year earlier, $20 million in 2022 and $17 million in 2021.
Blaine also notes that SECU has reported a higher loan loss ratio
over the past few years than the overall industry, which reverses a
decades-old history of fewer charge offs than other U.S. credit unions.
During the recession years of 2008-10, for example, the industry wrote
off about 1% of its loans, while SECU’s ratio never topped 0.3%. [link]
SECU officials have said that a tougher economy for many members has caused an uptick in loan problems. But this is an industry-wide issue and SECU shouldn’t be singled out for unusually poor performance, concludes William Hunt, an analyst with Callahan, an independent consulting firm that does business with many credit unions.
SECU officials referred Business North Carolina questions to Callahan.
Blaine cited data covering all credit unions, including many small ones that have very few bad loans, Hunt says in an email. He says a better comparison is with U.S. credit unions with assets exceeding $10 billion.
SECU’s annualized loan-loss ratio was 0.86% as of March 31, compared with 1.44% for the $10 billion-plus peers, Hunt says. That means the N.C. credit union is charging off $8.60 for every $1,000 it lends, versus $14.40 at the other institutions.
Hunt says that SECU’s loan ratio has benefited from its 75% concentration in first mortgage loans, which is unusually high for credit unions. Home loans have lower charge-off rates than auto and other consumer loans, he says.
It’s true that losses on those auto and consumer loans are increasing at SECU and many institutions, which also may stem from changing industry accounting rules that started early last year, Hunt says.
From 2010-2020, SECU’s loss ratio averaged 0.31%, or $31 per $10,000 in loans. Since 2019, the ratio has increased 80% at SECU, compared with 60% at the peer institutions, according to Callahan’s statistics. “Most institutions are dealing with worsening asset quality in the current macroeconomic environment,” Hunt says.
Delinquencies at SECU have increased to 2.07% of all loans as of
March 31, compared with 1.18% at the large peer group. The rate is 0.95%
at Truliant Federal Credit Union, which is North Carolina’s
second-largest, and 0.56% at No 3 Coastal Federal Credit Union.
Delinquencies refer to borrowers who are at least 60 days behind on
their payments. [link]
SECU’s delinquency rates “have historically been far higher than peers,” Hunt says, which “aligns with SECU’s stated mission to serve North Carolinians of all backgrounds.” The credit union works closely with members to avoid charge offs, he adds, calling it “crucial work that keeps struggling members in their homes and cars.”
Blaine’s questioning continues his campaign to spotlight changing policies at SECU that he says have hurt its culture and threaten its future. He’s particularly criticized SECU’s decision to offer better loan terms for members with strong credit histories. Traditionally, it offered the same interest rate on its loans for all members.
Blaine’s efforts helped three dissident board members oust SECU incumbent directors at last year’s annual meeting. With four board seats to be voted on this year, the credit union has revised its rules to enable electronic voting, which it says will encourage greater participation. The board has 11 members.
Mike Lord, who was SECU’s CEO from 2016-21, says changing policies at the credit union have hurt its credit quality. He cites the use of credit scoring to enable risk-based lending and “a terrible, unsuccessful implementation by the SECU Board and management to centralize delinquency collections, rather than have them remain in the branches and handled at the local level.”
Hunt says “SECU has a longstanding reputation as a place where North Carolinians can go for a loan, and they will work to help borrowers of all backgrounds… Of course, when asset quality issues are more pervasive economically, a portfolio with more lower-credit borrowers is likely to see loan losses jump a bit faster than the average, especially on the consumer side.”
SECU earned $65.7 million in the first quarter, compared with $143.6 million a year ago. Net incomes totaled $364 million last year, compared with $626 million in 2022 and $557 million in 2021.
Loans totaled $33.9 billion as of March 31, an 11.3% increase from a year earlier. Home loans accounted for about $26.3 billion, more than two-thirds of the total.
... is it "the Lord's" doings? Nah...
4 more in 24!
ReplyDelete"SECU officials referred Business North Carolina questions to Callahan." ???? Granted Callahan is an industry "store" of data, but LA has access the same info. Why wouldn't ELT engage in this article ? Missed an opportunity to here explain / discuss what's happening in the business journal which tens of thousands of members will read.
ReplyDeletefor those who need a reminder that some things never change ... no matter what ...
ReplyDeleteInside Job (2010 Full Documentary Movie)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2IaJwkqgPk
Well the 4 BOD nominees have been posted on the website..no surprises on who they are
ReplyDelete"SECU’s delinquency rates “have historically been far higher than peers,” Hunt says, which “aligns with SECU’s stated mission to serve North Carolinians of all backgrounds.” The credit union works closely with members to avoid charge offs, he adds, calling it “crucial work that keeps struggling members in their homes and cars.”"
ReplyDeleteNo disrespect to Mr Hunt but he's not there ...what should happen and what does happen can be complete opposites ...
"SECU’s delinquency rates “have historically been far higher than peers,” "
Really? Is this a true statement?
Just got an e-mail from the SECU nominating committee. Three guesses who they chose as the four candidates.
ReplyDeleteAnd not coincidentally, today this blog is once again blocked as “unsecure” by our local internet provider. Same thing happened last year in the months leading up to the election.. Hmmmm…
DeleteBecause SECU controls your internet provider…
DeleteWe now see where Chuck Stone’s allegiances are. Hope he enjoys it. He’ll be out in 2026 when we replace him too.
Delete@7:44. No, but they do control consultants and PR firms who coordinate efforts to frequently report sites they don’t like as malicious.
Delete@7:48 You cannot blame Chuck Stone for that. He’s in the minority on the committee too. The chair can’t control how everyone else votes.
DeleteChuck may be out voted ... wish we knew how it all went down.
Delete7:48 pm, how many votes do you think Chuck has on the nominating committee? Use your head - he’s outnumbered.
DeleteHe wouldn’t have agreed to have his name on that letter if he didn’t agree with the decision. If we’re going to take our credit union back we need people who actually believe in the cause.
DeleteWhat a disappointment. Money speaks. Crooked is as crooked does.
Deletehow does money speak? these are volunteers
DeleteSeriously, 9:35? As the committee chair, he is duty bound to list his name and honor the majority vote. Are you not realizing that, or are you stirring the pot?
DeleteThe credit union works closely with members to avoid charge offs, he adds, calling it “crucial work that keeps struggling members in their homes and cars.” This absolutely used to be the case, unfortunately when collections went centralized, we lost what made us different—the relationship with our delinquent members, locally. We were awesome collectors and kept charge off ratios way below “industry standard”. Why in the world do we measure ourselves to the industry? Rise above! We have always been known for doing things better, and it was the right thing to do! We’ve lost our soul, it was our secret sauce.
ReplyDeleteCentralization cost us the critical local connections that kept members in close contact.
DeleteBranches have been back to collecting consumer loans less than 60 days delinquent for over a year. Can’t keep blaming centralization for the lack of branch collection efforts.
DeleteCentral screwed it up and then sent the branches out to do the dirty work ...
Delete@4:31 does have a valid point
DeleteDo we really need to state the obvious here? Branches are severely understaffed and overworked. They simply do not have the time to collect. You can talk about collections being more efficient in the local branch, and sure that's true. But when you have 4 LOs seeing 60-100 members a day, what result do you expect? Collections becomes a total afterthought because it has to be. Can't have it both ways here.
Delete@4:31 You are obviously clueless. Yes, branches have been back at collecting 60 and below. But, that's after so many of our best collectors were absorbed centrally. Branches had to start from scratch, and many still don't have people in place due to turnover and little experience. That also doesn't take into account all of the changes that were implemented centrally and the lack of solid collections and follow-through for 60 and above centrally.
Delete@4:31…delinquency came down immediately when branches got back in <60 days. Branches could have direct, immediate results in lowering charge offs if could do more. Hands are tied when collection dept policies, procedures, and philosophy are different than branches. Increase in charge off ratios are direct result of centralization. Centralized collectors have no relationship with the members and members don’t answer non-local numbers. Collection efforts in branches worked so well for so many years, it’s time to admit that centralization of collections is not working— The proof is in the pudding (ratios).
ReplyDelete@2:15.. 1Q 2024 30-60 day delinquency increased 23% from 1Q 23, 40% if you exclude mortgage. how do you figure it went down immediately when branches got back < 60 days?
Delete3:01, we had so many members who had never been contacted at all and we busted our rears getting the delinquency caught up.We made a big difference and it was acknowledged by LA and we were thanked. Check your stats.Centralized collections were not a good idea for SECU. We work hard at getting in touch with our members. We care.
Delete4:31 does not understand how things work and has probably never collected loans. Branches run into constant issues because of the centralized collections.
ReplyDelete'a stitch in time saves nine'.... when things start to go awry, it's best practice is to get on it immediately ... DON'T WAIT! The longer you wait the worse it gets ...
ReplyDeleteIs the high delinquency the reason SECU is pushing hard to sell mortgages on the secondary market? I'm concerned that members will no longer qualify for homeownership due to the very restrictive rules for Fannie and Freddie. Is it possible that mortgage volume will decline due to moving this direction and how will that impact the organizations financial status going forward?
ReplyDelete