AUSTRALIAN RURAL BANK.

King Country Chronicle, Volume XX, Issue 2101, 9 April 1925, Page 7

AUSTRALIAN RURAL BANK.

RESULTS MOST DISAPPOINTING. In March, 1923, the Rural Bank loan of £1,000,000 was floated (says the Sydney Morning Herald). The purposes stated in the prospectus were to facilitate closer settlement on private estates, and provide financial assistance to agricultural and pastoral primary producers under (the conditions of the Rural Bank. The scheme as outlined in the report of the Government Savings Bank for the year ended June 30th, 1923, is for the subdivision of private estates situated within fifteen miles of a railway line, or shipping port, and operajtes under Section 64 of the Bank Act, under which the Commissioners are empowered to issue certificates setting out the amount they are prepared to lend on each farm to a satisfactory purchaser up to 80 per cent of the present value of the farm, to be subsequently reduced to 66 2-3 per cent of the value as improved by the further necessary improvements, which are stipulated as a condition of the loan. The latest report of the Government Savings Bank, that for the year ended June 30th, 1924, gives us some lniarmation of the progress made witli tlie facilitation of closer settlement on private estates effected by the loan lho urosress is Hot as much as could bo desfred. l**t year 104 estates were dealt with and 362 certificates « lS sued under Section 04 of the Bank Aqt, setting out the terms and conditions upon 8 which the Cornwould make advances on that numbei of farms to a total of £800,165. But progress was made m only amety-toui cases the purchasers of farms represented, by "these ninety-four certificates xskim- tor advances amounting to SS&S, and of vthese, by the close of the vear 53 had been completed toi to'talling £124,055. The bank , ws courteously supplied us *iuiti.c 4ures to date. Jfrom March fa, 1923, when the first application under -be* Sou 64 of rthe Bank Act was made, to m ,„Lr 6 1924 L 54 estates were respect certificates wereissued oheimg ad terms offered by the bank tor adw ees totalling £343,555, and oi *beU£ there had been completed on Decern bcr 6th, 73 purchases of iaims, wicn •utv-mces granted amounting to £170,h 21 months 73 farmers have been settled on private closer settle mem sub-divisions, witli .illiiic £i 70,740 out of the loan o fc1, 060,000 raised. Why the °i resultsV Vendors who Jiave_ applied for certificates for their estates, and have been dissatisfied with the amount proposed to be lent to the purchasers state that the. land valuations of the bank are considerably below the real value uf the land offered tor subdivsiou, and (that because of those low valuations it is impossible to bring about business. In these circumstances vendors say it is not worth their while to proceed with the sale. The bank replies that it must secure a safe investment, that the valuers it employs are practical men, and that while valuation is largely a matter oi opinion, it believes (that its valuers have placed reasonable values on the land submitted to the bank, furthermore the bank believes that it has saved would-be purchasers, unduly optimistic through the glamour of a good, season, from themselves. Among ithe acceptances it is pointed out arc a few cases where the vendors had originally rejected the bank's conditions, but afterwards agreed, to them. Another opinion, which is offered, independent of either bank, is that in some cases vendors, though apparently offering their land for sale, have not really desired to sell, and so have placed unduly high values on their land. Whatever reason the results are most disappointing.