View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Progress Report on the Mobile Consnmer lose Survey Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Jone 1967  G-  755  47  '48   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  ’55  ’60  '65   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  INQUIRY INTO CONSUMER  INSTALMENT LENDING  A Progress Report on the  Mobile Consumer Loan Survey  Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta  June 1967  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Introduction ......................................................................................................................................  1  Consumer Credit Quality - A Search for an Answer, Monthly Review, November 1966 .................................................................................. 2 The Mobile Story of Consumer Instalment Lending, Monthly Review, April 1967........................................................................................... 6 Table I. Borrower and Loan Characteristics for Loans Made............................. 9 Table II. Borrower and Loan Characteristics for Loans Repaid .................... 10  Table III. Borrower and Loan Characteristics for Loans Written Off . . 11 Table IV. Number of Borrowers by Occupation for Loans Made......................... 12 < v Table V. Number of Borrowers by Occupation for Loans Repaid........................ 12 Table Vi. Number of Borrowers by Occupation for Loans Written Off. . • 13 Table VII. Number of Auto Loans Made................................................ ............................ 14  Table VIII. Number of Auto Loans Repaid........................................................................ 17 Table IX. Number of Auto Loans Written Off ............................................................... 20  Table X. Number of Nonauto Loans Made............................................................................. 23 Table XI. Number of Nonauto Loans Repaid................................................................... 26  Table XII. Number of Nonauto Loans Written Off..................................................... 29 Survey Questionnaire ...................................................................................................................   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  32  F25557  INTRODUCTION  A major development in the American postwar economy has been the rapid growth of consumer credit. Consumers’ willingness to borrow more, coupled with a broadening in the ability and willingness of lend­ ers to make such credit available, is evidenced by the 18-fold increase in total outstandings since 1945. This gain, which exceeds the advance in personal income, raises important questions concerning the quality of the nation's consumer credit. For example, has the increased use of consumer credit come primarily from marginal borrowers who have been coaxed into debt, thereby leading to a greater possibility of defaults? Or have attitudes toward consumer indebtedness and the ability of con­ sumers to repay paralleled the rapid advances in consumer credit?  Realizing that existing aggregate measures fail to identify these and other changes in credit conditions, the Federal Reserve System be­ gan a study in 1962 to measure more accurately consumer credit quality. Since this study is based primarily upon the premise that loan quality ultimately depends upon the individual borrower, comprehensive borrow­ er and loan data are essential. A questionnaire to obtdin these data from the instalment loan departments of 28 commercial banks was designed and tested in a preliminary nationwide survey. The second phase of the study is to develop similar data for borrowers in different metropoli­ tan areas. With these data, it may then be possible to identify changes in credit conditions in different areas, as well as to develop a nation­ al index of credit quality. The articles in this booklet present some preliminary results from the survey of Mobile, Alabama, the first metropolitan area to be studied. Summary tabulations of the data collected from Mobile banks are also included.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  Consumer Credit Quality— A Search for an Answer The postwar growth in the level of outstanding consumer credit has been spectacular. Aided by a stimulative monetary credit policy, most sectors of the economy have shared in the growth. Consumers added to their present consumption at the expense of future income; merchants and retailers increased their sales; lenders received interest income from extending credit; and other segments felt the impact through the growth in aggregate demand. This continuing uptrend in the use of consumer credit is reflected in a current level of outstanding debt in excess of $90 billion. Not only has the level of debt grown, but the ratio of consumer credit to disposable personal income has advanced, indicating that consumer credit has become increasingly more pervasive. Has this growth in private indebtedness been so rapid as to warrant grave concern and worry? Whether or not the current level of out­ standing debt has become excessive depends upon the prospects of its repayment. If the growth in debt has been offset by an increase in the ability and desire to repay, there may be little need for worry. However, many persons fear that more and more marginal borrowers have been coaxed into borrowing, leading to the greater possibility of defaults. This idea is often given as an indication of the deterioration of credit “quality.” While it is difficult, if not impossible, to define credit quality exactly, at least two meanings are commonly associated with its current usage. One focuses on the likelihood of an individual loan, or a portfolio of loans, being repaid. Another meaning, which uses aggregate figures, cen­ ters around the likely effect of a change in the overall performance of the economy on the number of loan foreclosures and repossessions. A sharp increase in foreclosures and repossessions would be direct evidence of a deterioration in credit quality, of course. Attempts to gauge such an occurrence in advance of its actual happening have led to the wide­ spread use of aggregate measures to assess the strain of private debt on the economy. One measure, the ratio of instalment repayments to dis­ posable personal income, has increased, along with the growth in the level of outstanding credit. Today, about 14.5 cents out of each dollar of the consumer’s take-home pay is committed to repaying instalment debt, compared with 10 cents a decade ago and only 4 cents immediately following World War II. Measuring credit quality by aggregate figures has serious limitations. Attitudes toward borrowing have changed. The proportion of the popu­ lation making purchases on credit has grown. In addition, an average increase of 6 percent per year in per capita income over the past 20 years has caused a shift in consumer spending patterns. Today’s con­ sumer, differing in many respects from his counterpart of 20 years ago, buys a larger proportion of items with credit. Growth in the ratio of repayments to personal income may not signal a lowering of quality, but merely an increase in the proportion of credit-type purchases. In the final analysis, the quality of credit is determined by the bor­ rower’s repayment of an obligation in accordance with the original con-  MONTHLY REVIEW •  NOVEMBER 1966  2  tract. Perhaps the rise in consumer credit has been ac­ companied by an increase in the creditworthiness of bor­ rowers. If so, the quality of credit measured in the aggre­ gate may not be the same as that derived from adding the qualities of individual loans. The most realistic approach to solving the dilemma of credit quality is based on the disaggregation of data. This method employs either a detailed analysis of individual loans, which are then added together for a measure of the quality of total outstanding credit, or an analysis based on average values or the distribution of certain characteris­ tics for entire portfolios of loans. The ability of presentday computers to handle large amounts of detailed infor­ mation makes both of these approaches feasible. But what specific characteristics of borrowers are most important in judging loan quality? A great deal can be learned from the individual lender whose portfolio quality depends largely upon his judgment of those borrowers who will most likely repay. In practice, he knows that some risks must be taken in order to compete for loan business. But after deciding the level of risk, he must then deter­ mine on what basis loans will be accepted or rejected. Bankers have generally scored each loan application by a number of borrower characteristics. But even the most experienced banker is not sure of the individual merits of these characteristics. To test the reliability of these “rules of thumb,” and also, to take a closer look at the quality of consumer credit, the Federal Reserve System is con­ ducting a special study. The objective is to determine if the loan portfolio outstanding at any particular time is stronger or weaker than that which existed at some earlier date. Once the measurement technique is developed, the System hopes to be able to measure changes in the quality of loan portfolios from year to year. To accomplish this task, a questionnaire was designed to get borrower and loan characteristics for individual consumer loans at banks. This questionnaire was first de­ veloped and tested in 24 banks across the United States to work out problems in design and data processing and to provide data for preliminary analysis. Following the pilot phase of the study, consumer loans in an entire metropoli­ tan area are being sampled. With these data, changes in quality that take place in that area can be identified. It will also be possible to compare various areas for regional differences in credit quality and to develop a national index, or measure of consumer credit conditions. Mobile, Alabama, was the first metropolitan area selected for this study. However, banks in Cleveland, Ohio, have since started supplying data to the Federal Reserve System, and other banks will soon be participating in the study. Personnel in the Consumer Loan Department of each Mobile bank participating in the survey are completing four types of questionnaires. One obtains data on indi­ vidual borrower and loan characteristics for about onetenth of all new loans made during each working day. A similar questionnaire samples loans as they are repaid. In­   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  formation is acquired for loans when the borrower de­ faulted. Questionnaires are also completed for part of. the rejected loans. As the questionnaires are received at this Bank for analysis, the information is transferred to punched cards and fed into our computer. A large quantity of data is processed, showing the average and percentage break­ downs for a number of different classifications of bor­ rower and loan characteristics. Thus far, over 5,000 individual questionnaires have been received from Mobile banks. For purposes of this report, all personal loans, repair and modernization, and other consumer goods loans have been grouped into a single category—nonautomobile loans. However, the same information is also available for automobile loans. Mobile, Alabama  One of the reasons Mobile was selected as the first area to be studied is that its population of 412,000 contains a good cross section of American consumers. Engaging in industry, shipping, farming, and tourism, Mobile has been similar to the nation in the growth of retail trade and consumer indebtedness. The large increase in Mobile’s credit is the result of a rapid growth in personal income and spending on more credit-type purchases. Personal in­ comes have increased approximately 7 percent per year. Similarly, per capita incomes, probably a better indicator of the economic well-being of Mobile residents, have moved steadily upward. Meanwhile, retail spending has advanced at about the same rate. Although some important differences exist between Mobile and the U.S., the composition of Mobile’s com­ mercial bank consumer credit resembles that of the nation. Automobile loans, the largest single component of in­ stalment credit outstanding, account for about one-half of the total in both Mobile and the nation. Since mid-1962, Consumer Instalment Debt Held by Commercial Banks Mobile, Alabama June 1962—July 1966 Millions of Dollars  Millions of Dollars  3  these loans have contributed only about one-third of the growth in Mobile’s consumer debt, while accounting for two-thirds of the nation’s. However, personal loans have advanced more rapidly in Mobile than in the nation. The growth rates in other consumer goods and repair and mod­ ernization loans have been about the same in Mobile and the U.S. Since mid-1962, instalment debt at Mobile banks has grown by nearly 40 percent, or about 10 percent an­ nually. During the same period, the national figure was about 18 percent per year, on average. The 1,683 nonautomobile loans in our study revealed that the typical borrower from the commercial banks in Mobile was 41 years old, had lived in the area slightly over ten years, and had been with his firm for about the same time. His household income averaged a little over $6,500. Not all of the borrowers were indebted before they made their new loans, but those that were, owed $96 per month, on average. Their new debt to the bank aver­ aged $596, to be repaid in 15 months at the rate of $39 a month. The characteristics of the borrowers that defaulted were significantly different from those of all borrowers. On average, they were younger, had lived in the area a shorter time, had been on the job fewer years, and received some­ what lower incomes. The amounts of their new loans were higher, as well as their monthly payments. This general picture is useful in evaluating the differ­ ences between borrowers who defaulted and those who repaid their indebtedness, but some significant changes may be hidden in the averages. For example, while the average borrower that defaulted was one year younger than those who repaid their loans, borrowers between 20 and 30 years old had the highest default ratio. Similarly, nearly 70 percent of all borrowers that defaulted had lived in Mobile for five years or less, even though these short-term residents accounted for only 50 percent of the loans. Borrowers who worked for the same firm for five years or less also had a considerably worse repayment record than those who had been employed longer. These yardsticks of the quality of individual loans ap­ pear to measure the maturity and attitude of the borrower, as well as the stability of his income and whether he will still be in the area when the final payments come due. It is not clear, however, how these variables are interrelated or what is the relative importance of each in determining the quality of loans. The variables are obviously good proxy measures for the borrower’s maturity and attitude toward repayment. Nevertheless, income and indebtedness of the borrower are significant in that they measure the borrower’s ability to repay. The table shows that average incomes for bor­ rowers that defaulted were much less than for other borrowers. As expected, a more detailed review of writtenoff loans revealed that borrowers with low incomes (less than $2,000) had relatively poor repayment records. However, further analyses showed that borrowers with   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  Characteristics of Nonauto Consumer Loans at Mobile, Alabama, Area Banks1 July 1965—June 1966  Borrower and Loan Characteristics  Average Values Defaults  40.0 Age of Borrower 7.2 Years Residing in Area 8.6 Years with Firm Household Income (Yearly) $6,212 Monthly Preloan Debt (Indebted Borrowers Only3) $77 $685 Amount of Loan Number of Monthly 14.3 Payments Amount of Monthly $54 Payments  Loans Repaid  Difference1  41.0 10.4 10.5 $6,511  - 1.0 - 3.2 - 1.9 -$299  $96 $596  - $19 + $89  15.2  - 0.9  $39  + $15  ’Data based on simple averages. -’Difference between defaults and loans repaid. 3Includes reported monthly payments for auto, rent, mortgage, and other debts before bank, loan was made.  household incomes of $10,000 or more also had rela­ tively poor repayment records. Sixty-nine percent of all borrowers with high household incomes had more than one source of income, primarily a working spouse. Con­ versely, borrowers with household incomes of less than $10,000 had two or more sources of income in only 15 percent of the cases. Combining the two average level in­ comes may add to the family’s ability and desire to incur debt, but the additional income may not always be fully available for retiring debt. Thus, the income variable alone is perhaps not sufficient information on which to base credit quality. While the borrower’s household income measures his potential repayment ability, monthly instalment indebted­ ness both before and after the loan measure his approxi­ mate net ability to retire his debts. Borrowers not in­ debted before negotiating loans had better repayment records. Meanwhile, borrowers with preloan indebtedness of $60 to $100 had the highest default ratio. This level of indebtedness did not seem too great, but adding a new debt apparently overburdened many borrowers. These characteristics are normally used by bankers considering loan applications. Perhaps equally important in assessing the possibility that a loan will be repaid are the characteristics of the loan itself. Is the repayment period so long that future events place the loan in jeopardy? Is the loan too large or too small in relation to the borrower’s income or previous debt? Answers to these and other questions may give further insight into the quality of loans. The table shows that the average borrower who de­ faulted borrowed more money and tried to repay it with less, but larger, monthly payments. One might conclude that borrowers with larger, short-term loans have the worst repayment record. This is partly true in that relatively  4  more loans defaulted when they totaled $1,500 or more and were to be repaid with 12 monthly payments of $90 or more. Loan contracts placing greater pressures on bor­ rowers’ present incomes appear to reduce loan quality. However, borrowers with small loans requiring a few small monthly payments also had relatively poor repay­ ment records. Many had very low incomes and were faced with the problem of becoming overburdened. Measuring Future Credit Quality  The comparisons of borrower characteristics suggest that they are significant measures of the repayment potential of prospective borrowers. However, bank data may be utilized to measure many other aspects of credit quality. For example, a consideration of the importance of age, relative to income, may be desirable. What exactly do age, years residence, or other variables measure? Ap­ parently, the ultimate quality of a bank’s or a nation’s loan portfolio depends, in part, upon the borrower’s at­ titude toward indebtedness and repayment. Do these   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  variables provide proxy measures of attitudes or should other characteristics be reviewed? Is it possible to quantify a borrower’s attitude toward indebtedness? Just as attitude is important in evaluating credit quality, so is the borrower’s ability to repay. Bankers have a gen­ eral idea of the repayment capacity of their borrowers, but are they always fully aware of their current outstand­ ing indebtedness? Should they evaluate net, rather than gross, income of the borrower? How does the number of dependents affect a borrower’s repayment potential? So far, this study has raised many questions, but it has clarified enough issues to guarantee that, as these and other data are studied, many more questions will become answerable for the first time. As information is collected during periods of changes in the rate of economic growth, it will become more possible to adequately measure and quantify changes in credit quality in local areas. Then, the quality of the national consumer loan portfolio can be better measured by totaling the regional changes. Robert E. Sweeney and Joe W. McLeary  5  r  The  Mobile Story of Consumer Instalment Lending k  J  “Let us all be happy and live within our means, even if we have to borrow the money to do it,” was Artemus Ward’s philosophy, and it might just as well be ours today. Buying a home, for ex­ ample, almost always requires the purchaser to go into debt. In recent years, more and more con­ sumers have borrowed to purchase automobiles and household appliances, make house repairs, take vacations, and for many other personal ex­ penses. Consequently, the volume of consumer in­ stalment indebtedness has expanded sharply. Perhaps more significant, however, is that over the last 20 years American consumers have in­ creased their indebtedness at a faster rate than their disposable income. Does this mean that more and more submarginal borrowers have been coaxed into the market by a lowering of lending standards? Has the quality of the na­ tion’s outstanding consumer loans deteriorated? Alternatively, could this rising volume of per­ sonal debt merely indicate that today’s borrowers are more creditworthy? Aggregate information such as the volume and level of personal debt and the ratio of consumer debt to disposable income does not reveal basic changes in attitudes and trends in consumer borrowing. Hence, the first step in answering questions concerning the quality of credit is to find out more about individual borrowers. For example, what age groups are most likely to use instalment credit, and for what purposes? Do persons with above-average incomes also borrow  for instalment purchases? And what about the distribution of borrowers by occupation? In order to answer such questions and to throw additional light on the characteristics of indi­ vidual borrowers, we have made a special study of instalment customers at Mobile, Alabama, banks. In connection with a longer-run project specific information relajpd to individual bor­ rower characteristics has been collected from these banks. Mobile Borrowers Almost everyone that lives in Mobile and is old enough to work is a prospective candidate for a bank loan. Not everyone wants a loan nor does everyone who applies for a loan get it. Even if the bank has an ample availability of funds, the loan is granted on the basis of its probability of repayment. We can get some idea of the import­ ance assigned to such characteristics as age, in­ come, occupation, etc., by looking at the collective consumer lending experience of Mobile banks since mid-1965. If a bank’s instalment loan cus­ tomers can be identified from the distribution of certain characteristics of the population, then significant shifts over time in the profile of an area’s economy would have important conse­ quences for the demand for consumer credit. A comparison of Mobile borrowers and residents should reveal what segments of the population banks serve. Our study of the characteristics of bank bor­ rowers and Mobile residents revealed that about  MONTHLY REVIEW   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  •  APRIL 1967  6  The ages of customers receiving consumer loans at Mobile banks closely parallel those of all residents in the area, Percent  10  0  30  20  . . . but while banks serve customers in all income brackets, proportionately more loans go to persons with incomes over $6,000, Percent  10  0  20  30  40  50  FAMILY INCOME jM' ' ‘ ■  $1,999 or Less - /■  $2,000 - 5,999  $6,000 - 9,999  $10,000 - 14,999  r  $15,000 and Over  . . . which probably explains the heavier concentration of borrowers in the professional-managerial group.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  0  10  Percent 20  30  40  half of the age 18 or over population is under 40, with nearly one-fourth of the total concentrated in the 30-39 age bracket. At the banks nearly one-fourth of the borrowers are also from 30-39 and slightly over half of the customers are less than 40. In general, these banks seemed to prefer lending to borrowers in the productive work years from 20 to 60. Loans to persons under 20 and over 60 are proportionally less than the number of residents in these age groupings. In 1960, nine out of ten families in Mobile had annual household incomes of $10,000 or less. Similarly, over 85 percent of the borrowers at Mobile banks also had household incomes of less than $10,000 annually. But while close to onehalf of all families had incomes between $2,000 and $6,000, only about two-fifths of the borrowers were in this range. Conversely, nearly 38 percent of the borrowers and 24 percent of the residents had incomes ranging between $6,000 to $10,000 annually. About 15 percent of Mobile’s families had incomes of $2,000 or less, but borrowers re­ porting incomes this low held only 3.5 percent of the total number of consumer loans at banks.1 Family income is one of the important gauges banks use in evaluating loans, and the chances of receiving a loan, other things constant, improves with the borrower’s income. And, of course, in­ come depends largely upon one’s occupation. Approximately one-third of Mobile’s workers are craftsmen, foremen, service workers, and laborers. Next in importance in terms of numbers employed are clerical and sales people, followed closely by the professional and managerial group. Close to one-fifth of the population is retired, not in the labor force, or unemployed. Mobile banks granted most loans to the professionalmanagerial group who received nearly twice as many loans as would be expected if the banks allocated their loans. on the basis of area job distribution alone. Others actively employed re­ ceived about their proportionate share of loans, while those not commonly considered in the labor market received only a small share.  Characteristics Vary With Loan Type Some differences in borrower and loan charac­ teristics were noted between those borrowing to lrThese comparisons may be distorted somewhat since the data on Mobile’s income distribution are based on 1960 information, while the loan figures are for 1965-66. Any changes that have occurred over this period, however, would probably have resulted in a shift toward a heavier concentration in the upper income groups, which would not materially affect the results presented.  7  purchase automobiles and those obtaining funds for other purposes. Individuals negotiating loans to purchase automobiles tended to be younger, with about one-third in the 20-29 age bracket. Over 55 percent of all auto loans were granted to those under 40. The largest proportion of auto loans were made to borrowers who had lived in the community and worked at the same firm less than five years. Because the population has become increasingly mobile in general, perhaps age and future job prospects or previous recommendations are used more often in judging loan applicants than years of residence or employment. Mobile residents that financed auto purchases recorded average loans of $1,750, with monthly payments of nearly $70 extending over a twoyear period. The amount of auto loans was fairly evenly distributed among all size categories, about 50 percent below $1,500 and 50 percent above that amount. Nearly three-fourths of all borrowers had monthly payments ranging be­ tween $30 and $89. Only one-fifth of the loans were for less than one year; the remaining loans were divided equally between 13-24 and 25-36 months each. Only a fraction of one percent of the loans exceeded 36 months. Mobile banks appear to be following the char­ acteristic trend of most banks to make more new car loans than used ones. Borrowers, however, have held their monthly payments below $90 by extending the repayment period. Consumer loans for other purposes averaged over $1,000 less per loan than auto loans. Threefifths of these loans were less than $500, and 80 percent were for $1,000 or less. Similarly, three out of five loans were to be repaid in 12 months or less. Monthly payments for about one-half of the “nonauto” loans averaged less than $30.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  The average “nonauto” borrower was slightly older, had worked for his present employer longer, but had fairly low household income. This group was comprised of relatively fewer young persons and more borrowers 60 years old and over. They seemed to be longer-term residents and em­ ployees. One-half had annual household incomes of less than $6,000. Hence, the “nonauto” borrower, although in a lower income bracket than the auto borrower, appears to be more mature and perhaps a better credit risk, as measured by job tenure and years residing in the area. Furthermore, his charac­ teristics seem to match more closely those of all Mobile residents. Banks Meet Needs Based on the tentative conclusions of the Mobile study, banks’ instalment lending activity appears to be serving most segments of the population. However, it is doubtful if an economic profile of the area itself could be used to accurately de­ scribe the structure of a bank’s instalment loan market. While the characteristics of Mobile’s population and banks’ instalment loan borrowers are similar, certain income, occupation, age groups, and variation among borrowers limit the scope of comparison. Individuals who borrow from banks may not be typical of instalment borrowers at all lending institutions. Nevertheless, banks are the most im­ portant instalment lenders, accounting for more than two-fifths of the nation’s outstanding con­ sumer credit. Consequently, the characteristics of those consumers who use bank instalment credit provide a clue to lending in an important part of the market. Robert E. Sweeney and Joe W. McLeary  8  TABLE I  BORROWER AND LOAN CHARACTERISTICS FOR LOANS MADE BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND DECEMBER 1966  Borrower and Loan Characteristics  ________ Loan Purpose Auto Nonauto •-Average Values------  Age of Borrower  38.1  40.2  Years Residing in Area  11.9  11.9  8.7  9.6  Total Household Income (Yearly)  $7,378  $6,790  Amount of Loan  $1,747  $  Years with Firm  Number of Monthly Payments  691 15.7  24.7  Amount of Monthly Payments  $  68  $  40  Monthly Preloan Debt (Indebted Borrowers Only)!./  $  99  $  102  Number of Loans in Sample  1/  715  2,946  Includes reported monthly payments for auto, rent, mortgage, and other debts before bank loan was made. The average amount is the average monthly payments for indebted borrowers only.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  9  TABLE II BORROWER AND LOAN CHARACTERISTICS FOR LOANS REPAID BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND DECEMBER 1966  Borrower and Loan Characteristics  ______Loan Purpose Auto Nonauto ■Average Values--------  Age of Borrower  37.3  41.0  Years Residing in Area  12.5  11.7  8.7  10.5  Total Household Income (Yearly)  $7,132  $6,574  Amount of Loan  $1,579  $  Years with Firm  15.2  22.9  Number of Monthly Payments  595  Amount of Monthly Payments  $  65  $  38  Monthly Preloan Debt (Indebted Borrowers Only)—'  $  86  $  96  Number of Loans in Sample  1/  382  2,402  Includes reported monthly payments for auto, rent, mortgage, and other debts before bank loan was made. The average amount Is the average monthly payments for indebted borrowers only.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  10  TABLE III  BORROWER AND LOAN CHARACTERISTICS FOR LOANS WRITTEN-OFF BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND I)EC EMBER 1966  Loan Purpose  Borrower and Loan Characteristics  Nonauto  Auto  •Average values  Age of Borrower  35.6  38.5  Years Residing in Area  14.4  9.2  7.5  8.0  Total Household Income (Yearly)  $5,245  $6 ,157  Amount of Loan  $1,199  $  Years with Firm  14.4  21.4  Number of Monthly Payments  709  Amount of Monthly Payments  $  48  $  54  Monthly Preloan Debt (Indebted Borrowers Only)!./  $  79  $  73  Number of Loans in Sample  18  92  1/ Includes reported monthly payments for auto, rent, mortgage and other debts before the bank loan was made. The average amount is the aver­ age monthly payments for indebted borrowers only.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  11  TABLE IV  NUMBER OF BORROWERS BY OCCUPATION FOR LOANS MADE BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND DECEMBER 1966V  Auto Loans  Occupational Group Professionals, Managers, etc.  White Collar Workers, Clerical, and Sales Blue Collar Workers Unemployed, Retired, Disabled  Unknown Total Borrowers  Nonauto Loans  125  518  70  274  133  465  10  95  177  740  515  2,092  1/ See footnote at bottom of Table VI.  TABLE V  NUMBER OF BORROWERS BY OCCUPATION FOR LOANS REPAID BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND DECEMBER 1966V  Occupational Group  Auto Loans  Nonauto Loans  Professionals, Managers, etc.  70  415  White Collar Workers, Clerical and Sales  35  221  Blue Collar Workers  55  428  8  67  106  613  274  1,744  Unemployed, Retired, Disabled  Unknown Total  1/ See footnote at bottom of Table VI.   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  12  TABLE VI NUMBER OF BORROWERS BY OCCUPATION FOR LOANS WRITTEN OFF BETWEEN JULY 1965 AND DECEMBER 19661/  Occupational Group  Auto Loans  Nonauto Loans  Professionals, Managers, etc.  2  16  ---  10  7  24  Unemployed, Retired, Disabled  ---  3  Unknown  5  29  14  82  White Collar workers, Clerical and Sales Blue Collar Workers  Total  1/ Professionals, Managers, etc.;also includes farmers, farm managers, and military officers.  Blue Collar Workers include craftsmen, foremen, operatives, service workers, and laborers.  NOTE:   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  Totals for Tables IV, V, and VI are based on information through third quarter 1966 only.  13  TABLE VII NUMBER OF AUTO LOANS MADE July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income  Age of Borrower  $1,999 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $2,0005,999  $6,0009,999  4 69 24 31 21 9 17 175  3 2 1 5 2 13  53 56 50 40 2 16 217  $10,00014,999  11 22 26 11 2 2 74  $15,000or more  Not Reported  Total  3 34 30 31 13 9 97 217  7 174 136 147 88 27 136 715  4 4 7 2  2 19  Amount of Loan  Age of Borrower  $199 or less  1 0-19 20-29 4 2 30-39 1 40-49 50-59 60 and over 1 Not Reported 5 Total 14  $200499  $500999  $10001499  1 18 5 18 13 5 18 78  4 31 27 17 14 9 24 126  23 26 31 11 4 16 111  $15001999  $20002499  $25002999  1 26 15 19 ’ 11 2 11 85  23 22 19 9 2 10 85  28 21 18 16 4 23 110  $3000 or more  Total 7 174 136 147 88 27 136 715  21 18 24 14  29 106  Amount of Monthly Payment  Age of Borrower  $14 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  2  1 2 5  $15-29  2 13 5 12 9 4 12 57  $30-59 4 66 57 58 31 15 54 285  $60-89  $90-119  1 68 50 53 36 6 33 247  19 19 15 9 1 23 86  $120-149  $150 or more  3 3 6 2  3 2 3 1  6 20  6 15  Total 7 174 136 147 88 27 136 715  14  TABLE VII continued - 2 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower  0  $1-49  0-19 13 20-29 4 30-39 8 40-49 6 50-59 60 and over 3 Not Reported 8 42 Total  $100-149  $50-99  10 8 9 3 5 2 37  $150-199  32 30 25 15  10 15 16 6  4 6 7 2  7 109  6 53  3 22  $200-249  $250 or more  2 2 1 1 1  Not Reported  7 102 70 78 55 18 106 436  1 1 3  4 9  7  Total 7 174 136 147 88 27 136 715  Amount of Loan  $199 Income or less ($) 1 0- 1,999 4 2,000- 3,999 1 4,000- 5,999 2 6,000- 7,999 1 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over Not Reported 5 Total 14  $200499 4 8 21 13 1 5 2 24 78  $500999 4 19 20 22 12 10 39 126  $10001499 1 11 19 22 11 17 2 28 111  $15001999  $20002499  1 3 20 26 14 7 1 38 110  $25002999  $3000 or more  1 6 11 19 13 8 4 23 85  4 11 23 11 16 8 33 106  1 4 13 13 14 11 2 27 85  Total 13 59 116 140 77 74 19 217 715  Amount of Monthly Payment  $14 or Income less ($) 0- 1,999 1 2,000- 3,999 1 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 1 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over Not Reported 2 Total 5   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29 4 7 14 9 1 2 2 18 57  $30-59  $60-89  5 35 48 56 29 24 3 85 285  3 13 42 50 38 33 6 62 247  $90-119  2 10 20 7 14 4 29 86  $120-149  1 1 3 1 2 12 20  $150 or more  Total 13 59 116 140 77 74 19 217 715  1 1 2  2 9 15  15  TABLE VII continued - 3 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income 0 —CST" 1 0- 1,999 7 2,000- 3,999 8 4,000- 5,999 5 6,000- 7,999 3 8,000- 9,999 4 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over 14 Not Reported 42 Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1-49 3 4 13 7 2 1 7 37  $50-99  1 6 .19 29 22 18 2 12 109  $100-149  2 9 14 10 12 1 5 53  $150-199  $200249  $250 or more  1 7 6 5 3 1 22  2  4  7  1 2 1 2 1 2 9  Not Reported 8 39 66 74 33 28 12 176 436  16  Total 13 59 116 140 77 74 19 217 715  TABLE VIII  NUMBER OF AUTO LOANS REPAID July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income  $1,999 or less  Age of Borrower  $2,0005,999  2 1 2  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $6,0009,999  3 29 14 17 8 5 6 82  1 6  $10,00014,999  20 33 19 12 1 7 92  Not Reported  $15,000 or more  2 9 7 2 4 2 26  Total  2 23 29 17 6 3 85 165  2 4 2 1 2 11  7 75 89 64 30 14 103 382  Amount of Loan  Age of Borrower  $199 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  1 3 4 2  10  $200499  2 16 12 9 1 3 7 50  $500999 1 14 14 11 9 3 22 74  $10001499 2 14 16 8 9 3 22 74  $15001999  $20002499  2 7 12 11 5 1 19 57  $2500 2999  8 9 6  $3000 or more  7 75 89 64 30 14 103 382  8  7 8 5 1 1 8 30  2 12 37  Total  15 10 3 1 13 50  Amount of Monthly Payment  Age of Borrower  $14 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29  2  1 10 10 9 1  2  3 34  $30-59  5 28 38 16 16 7 43 153  $60-89  1 29 22 23 7 5 32 119  $90-119  8 16 13 4 1 20 62  $120-149  $150 or more  2 2  1 1  4 8  1 1 4  Total  7 75 89 64 30 14 103 382  17  TABLE VIII continued  - 2 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  0  $1-49  4 11 2 5 3 1 8 34  $50-99  9 6 3 3 1 7 29  $100-149  6 6 5 2  12 22 12 6 1 7 60  1 2 2 2  1 20  $250 or more  $200-249  $150-199  Not Reported  2  4 1  1  1 1 9  7  1  3  7  34 47 35 14 10 79  75  89 64 30 14 103 382  222  Amount of Loan  $199 or less Income ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 5 4,000- 5,999 3 1 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over 1 Not Reported Total 10  $200499  $500999  $10001499  $15001999  3 6 10 7 5 1 1 17 50  2 6 9 18 5 3 1 30 74  6 8 8 8 8 2 34 74  4 3 13 3 5 2 27 57  $20002499  $2500- $300 2999 or more  Total 6  1 8 3 5 3 1 17 37  37 45  2  7 6 3 2 1 9 30  2 5 2 7 3 30 50  63 29 26 11 165 382  Amount of Monthly Payment  Income ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 0,000-14,999 .5,000 and over Not Reported Total  $14 or less   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  2  2  $15-29  2 6 10 5 4 1 6 34  $30-59 3 17 15 32 12 9 3 62 153  $60-89  10 15 20 8 8 1 57 119  $90-119 1 2 4 5 5 6 6 33 62  $120-149  $150 or more  Total 6 37 45 63 29 26 11 165 382  1 1  6 8  Total  2 1 1 4  18  TABLE VIII continued  - 3 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 0,000-14,999 .5,000 and over Not Reported Total  0  $1-49  1 10 8 1 2 1  1 4 7 5 2 2  11 34  8 29   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $50-99  8 11 17 4 7 4 9 60  $100-149  $150-199  $200-249  $250 or more  1  2 10 3 1  1 3 1 1  4 20  1 7  1  1 4 1 1 1 9  1  Not Reported  Total  4 14 15 26 13 13 6 131 222  6 37 45 63 29 26 11 165 382  19  TABLE IX  NUMBER OF AUTO LOANS WRITTEN OFF  July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income  Age of Borrower  $2,0005,999  $1,999 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $6,0009,999  1 1 1  1  1 4  1  $10,GOO14, 999  $15,000 or more  Not Reported  Total  1 2  5 1 2 1  7 2 4 3  3  1 10  2 18  $3000 or more  Total  Amount of Loan Age of Borrower  $199 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  2  $200499  $500999  1  4  $20002499  $15001999  $10001499  2  1  2  1 2  7 Lo 4 oJ  3  2 18  2  1 1 3  $25002999  1 2  4  2  2  Amount of Monthly Payment Age of Borrower  $14 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29  $30-59  $90-119  $120-149  $150 or more  Total 7 2 4  5  2  2 3  2  $60-89  1 1  1 11  2 11  3 2  3  18  1  20  TABLE IX continued  - 2  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $1-49  0  1  $100-149  $50-99  $150-199  $200-249  $250 or more  Not Reported  1  1  5 2 3 2  7 2 4 3  1  2 14  2 18  1  1  1  1  Amount  $199 Income or less ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over Not Reported 2 Total 2  $200499  $500999  $10001499  : Loan  $15001999  $20002499  $25002999  $3000 or more  Total  1  2  1  1 3 1 1 2  1 2  10 18  1  1 2  1 3  3 4  Total  2 2  1 2  3  Amount of Monthly Payment  $14 or less Income ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over 2 Not Reported 2 Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29  1  $30-59  $60-89  $90-119  $120-149  $150 or more  1 3 1 1 2  1 2 1 1  2  1  6 11  Total  10 18  2 3  21  TABLE IX continued  - 3  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income <$) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 0,000-14,999 5,000 and over Not Reported Total  0   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1-49  $50-99  $100-149  $150-199  $200-249  $250 or more  Not Reported 1 2 1  1  1  1 3 1 1 2  1  9 14  10 18  1 1  1  1 1  1  Total  22  TABLE X  NUMBER OF NONAUTO LOANS MADE July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income  Age of Borrower  $1,999 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $2,0005,999  $6,0009,999  19 262 143 149 96 73 69 811  2 144 214 179 90 30 58 717  3 7 8 17 11 19 7 72  $10,GOO14,999  $15,000 or more  Total  3 84 96 113 84 54 601 1,035  2 13 13 8 7 7 50  33 74 66 42 11 35 261  Not Reported  27 532 548 537 331 194 777 2,946  Amount of Loan  Age of Borrower  $199 or less  0-19 4 122 20-29 30-39 85 82 40-49 50-59 59 60 and over 60 Not Reported 136 Total 548  $200499  $500999  $10001499  2 107 147 119 76 34 174 659  20 246 212 220 129 80 309 1,216  1 22 41 48 22 10 71 215  $2,500- $3000 2,999 or more  $20002499  $15001,999  12 21 27 13 4 27 104  6 12 18 11  27 532 548 537 331 194 777 2,946  9 19 19 14 5 20 86  8 11 4 7 1 11 42  29 76  Total  Amount of Monthly Payment  Age of Borrower  $14 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  5 73 59 47 41 43 121 389   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1529  18 244 202 186 105 81 239 1 ,075  $3059 4 158 204 217 129 52 275 1039  $6089  34 48 52 32 10 67 243  $90119  17 27 20 9 7 44 124  $120149  4 1 4 6 6 21  $150 or more  2 7 11 9 1 25 55  Total 27 532 548 537 331 194 777 2,946  23  TABLE X continued  - 2 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower  0  $1-49  $50-99  9 49 30 27 28 15 25 183  4 97 118 102 47 23 28 419  0-19 1 20-29 25 30-39 27 40-49 36 50-59 28 60 and over 26 Not Reported 67 Total 210  $100-149  $150-199  $200-249  1 34 23 31 9 4 13 115  57 72 36 18 6 17 206  $250 or more  9  10 14 7 3 3 5 42  10 10 6 1 5 41  Not Reported  Total  12 251 254 288 192 116 617 1,730  27 532 548 537 331 194 777 2,946  Amount of Loan  $200$199 Income or less 499 ($) 0- 1,999 34 27 100 158 2,000- 3,999 232 4,000- 5,999 117 211 6,000- 7,999 66 24 95 8,000- 9,999 21 79 10,000-14,999 10 15,000 and over 4 Not Reported 182 404 Total 548 1,216  $500999  $15001999  $10001499  6 43 90 125 74 77 11 233 659  $20002499  1 4 12 16 12 18 3 38 104  2 4 23 24 20 27 8 107 215  1 2 8 12 5 14 3 31 76  $25002999 1 2 3 7 6 8 2 13 42  $3000 or more  Total  72 315 496 470 247 261 50 1,035 2,946  2 11 9 11 17 9 27 86  Amount of Monthly Payment $14 or less Income ($) 0- 1,999 24 60 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 73 6,000- 7,999 57 20 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 17 15, 000 and over 2 Not Reported 136 Total 389   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29  $30-59  $60-89  32 160 227 167 78 53 10 348 1,075  13 83 148 180 107 121 14 373 1,039  2 11 28 43 20 36 10 93 243  $90-119  $120-149  $150 or more  Total  72 315 496 470 247 261 50 1,035 2,946  1 12 17 15 19 9 51 124  1 2 3 2 7 1 5 21  6 3 5 8 4 29 55  24  TABLE X continued 3 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income 0 ($) 9 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 27 4,000- 5,999 28 6,000- 7,999 33 12 8,000- 9,999 15 10,000-14,999 2 15,000 and over Not Reported 84 Total 210   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1-49  6 34 53 29 15 9 2 35 183  $50-99 2 56 109 103 54 49 6 40 419  $100-149 2 17 44 54 32 36 4 17 206  $150-199  3 19 34 22 24 3 10 115  $200- $250 249 or more  2 3 5 12 14 3 2 41  2 8 7 19 4 2 42  Not Reported 53 176 238 204 93 95 26 845 1,730  25  Total  72 315 496 470 247 261 50 1,035 2,946  TABLE XI  NUMBER OF NONAUTO LOANS REPAID July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income  Age of Borrower  $1,999 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $2,000 5,999  $6,0009,999  1 104 184 149 88 28 53 607  8 188 134 112 97 70 70 679  5 4 8 12 22 7 58  $15,000 or more  $10,00014,999  14 51 48 34 5 15 167  Not Reported  Total 12 381 467 433 309 164 636 2,402  3 70 89 104 67 37 488 858  5 12 11 2 3 33  Amount of Loan  Age of Borrower  $199 or less  0-19 6 20-29 79 30-39 92 78 40-49 50-59 54 60 and over 57 Not Reported 125 Total 491  $200499  $500999  5 195 186 164 125 61 253 989  1 79 99 119 86 30 153 567  $10001499  $15001999  $20002499  $25002999  4 14 16 6 2 16 58  6 13 6 8 4 21 58  1 9 3 1 1 6 21  17 45 39 21 7 46 175  $3000 or more  Total 12 381 467 433 309 164 636 2,402  9 8 8 2 16 43  Amount of Monthly Payment  Age of Borrower 0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  $14 or less  51 69 58 49 39 91 357   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29 6 165 166 148 112 71 225 893  $30-59  6 135 163 168 100 43 208 823  $60-89  24 45 43 29 9 52 202  $90-119  6 18 11 10 1 36 82  $120-149  4 3 2  5 14  $150 or more  Total 12 381 467 433 309 164 636 2,402  2 2 7 1 19 31  26  TABLE XI continued  - 2 -  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower  0  $1-49  $50-99  2 31 38 30 30 18 26 175  2 79 111 82 40 12 36 362  0-19 1 36 20-29 30-39 24 40-49 40 50-59 46 60 and over 36 Not Reported 66 Total 249  $100-149  $150-199  1 40 55 37 35 3 8 179  $200-249  16 26 24 9 2 5 82  $250 or more  4 9 13 5 1 1 33  Not Reported 6 175 199 197 137 90 490 1,294  5 10 7 2 4 28  Total 12 381 467 433 309 164 636 2 ,402  Amount of Loan  $199 Income or less <$) 40 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 91 86 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 71 8,000- 9,999 29 10,000-14,999 15 15,000 and over Not Reported 159 Total 491  $200499  $500999  15 120 201 172 73 56 8 344 989  2 34 102 103 48 49 10 219 567  $10001499  $15001999  $20002499  1 6 20 45 16 21 6 60 175  2 3 11 8 10 2 22 58  4 2 3 13 9 5 22 58  $25002999  2 3 2 3 1 10 21  $3000 or more  Total  58 258 421 415 192 167 33 858 2,402  1 5 7 3 4 1 22 43  Amount of Monthly Payment  Income <$) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over Not Reported Total  $14 or less  24 53 71 65 24 15 1 104 357   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $15-29 27 137 175 144 58 38 7 307 893  $30-59 7 57 146 145 76 75 11 306 823  $60-89  9 23 44 24 29 5 68 202  $90-119  1 5 10 10 9 3 44 82  $120-149  $150 or more  1  3  1 4  1 9 14  1 5 20 31  Total 58 258 421 415 192 167 33 858 2,402  27  TABLE XI continued 3  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income 0 ($) 0- 1,999 11 2,000- 3,999 38 4,000- 5,999 37 6,000- 7,999 40 8,000- 9,999 15 16 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over 2 Not Reported 90 Total 249   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1-49  $50-99  8 40 39 24 11 9 1 43 175  2 33 89 106 44 32 4 52 362  $100-149  6 42 61 28 29 4 9 179  $150-199  1 3 11 33 11 12 6 5 82  $200-249  2 8 9 8 4 2 33  $250 or more  2 2 7 9 3 5 28  Not Reported  36 138 199 141 67 52 9 652 1,294  28  Total 58 258 421 415 192 167 33 858 2,402  TABLE XII  NUMBER OF NONAUTO LOANS WRITTEN OFF July 1965 - December 1966  Annual Household Income Age of Borrower  $2,0005,999  $1,999 or less  $6,0009,999  Not Reported  $15,000 or more  $10,00014,999  Total  1  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  1 2  11 3 4 1 1 1 22  2 1 1 1  5  4 7  3 2 2  4 2 2 21  2 9  4 4 6 3 2 16 35  22 14 19 9 6 21 92  Amount of Loan Age of Borrower  $199 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  6 4 2 1 3 5 21  $200 499  $20002499  $15001999  $10001499  $500999  $25002999  $3000 or more  Total  1  1 12 3  1  2 5 3 2  7 4 2 6 35  1  2 2 1 1 7  6 18  2 1  2  2  3  2 5  1 3  22 14 19 9 6 21 92  Amount of Monthly Payment Age of Borrower  $14 or less  0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  1 4  3 4 12  $15-29  1 15 3 5 5 2  7 38  $30-59  4 5  7 2 6 24  $60-89  2 2 2 1 2 9  $90-119  $120-149  $150 or more  1  1  3  2  4  1 1  Total 1 22 14 19 9 6 21 92  1 4  29  TABLE XII continued  - 2  Monthly Preloan Debt  Age of Borrower 0-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 and over Not Reported Total  0  $1-49  $50-99  3 1  3 1 4 1 3  1  1  12  2  1  2  1 2  1 1 5  6  $100-149  $150-199  $200-249  $250 or more  Not Reported  Total  1 13 12 12 6 2 20 66  1  1 22 14 19 9 6 21 92  Amount of Loan  $199 Income or less ($) 0- 1,999 3 2,000- 3,999 4 2 4,000- 5,999 2 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 3 .0,000-14,999 .5,000 and over Not Reported 7 21 Total  $200499  2 6 8 3  $500999  3  2 5 1 2  13 35  8 18  $10001499  $15001999  $20002499  1  1 1 1  2  3 7  3  2 5  3  $2500- $3000 2999 or more  1  Total 5 10 12 16 5 9  1  2 3  35 92  Amount of Monthly Payment  Income ($) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 .0,000-14,999 .5,000 and over Not Reported Total  $14 or less   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  2 2 1 2  5 12  $15-29  2 7 8 2 1 2  16 38  $30-59  $60-89  $90-119  $120-149  $250 or more  Total  2  1  4  3 2 1  1  1  5 10 12 16 5 9  7 24  3 9  1 4  2 4  35 92  1 1 3 8  1 1  30  TABLE XII continued - 3  Monthly Preloan Debt  Income <$) 0- 1,999 2,000- 3,999 4,000- 5,999 6,000- 7,999 8,000- 9,999 10,000-14,999 15,000 and over Not Reported Total  0__   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  $1-49  $50-99  3 12  $100-149  $150-199  $200-249  $250 or more  Not Reported  Total  2 7 6 11 2 7  5 10 12 16 5 9  31 66  35 92  31  STFIN-92 (9-65)  NATIONAL BANK MOBILE, ALABAMA  Branch____ _________________________ Dote. Month  This questionnaire is:  Old  Loon p~|  Year  Write-Off □  Reject p~~[  DIRECTIONS  If answer is available, please fill in the appropriate line or box. If answer is unknown, pleose place X in column. If question does not apply, please place 0 in column. For the question //t.s bank. balances, if account(s) exists but the amount is unavailable, please place in column.  1. 2. 3. ’4.  O  x  Please ansa cr all i/nesliuns.  PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS Borrower is  Male J'  LOAN INFORMATION  J Female [2  |  Loan made: purpose__  Age in years_______________________ .or.  Number of years residence. Here  $.  Regular monthly payments.  .of $-  Previous Address  | No|2  Yes|  Telephone in home  Amount of the note  ]  Each  Number  Special large payments $. Pi eh-up  Is borrower:  | Single p~~[  Morried |1 Separated |3  Widowed |4  |  with the proceeds of thi s loan  j  To this bonk  $___  FINANCIAL SITUATION  To others  $___  Employer | '  | Himself |2  |  Firm’sbusiness____________________________________ His title or job______________________________ _______  | Mo'D Yr.Q  Other income from__________________________________  'His bank balances  Yes □  No  Automobile  New □  Used  | Mo.|  Checking  | Yr.|  |  Savings  Direct [*  |  $____________  Cash down payment  $.  Allowed on trade-in  $-  Principal balance financed  $.  Note was dated_____  Elsewhere  $_______________ $------------------------  IF OLD LOAN BEING CLOSED OUT  Monthly Payment  Unpaid Balance  Automobile  $___________  Other, total  $.  j  Dealer cost of car, etc. financed  $_______________ $______________  OBLIGATIONS  19  Description  Dealer |'  With us  Installment debts (Not being refinanced)  Q  Other property_____________  Loan made through  Spouse's earnings $__________ Wk.|' j Mo.|2 | Yr.|3 |  Amounts to $________________ Wk.|  Co-maker Previous Co.  This Co.'  Wk. |  Eliminated  IF SECURED, is it by:  Number of years with firm.  His earnings $  Monthly Pmts.  Amount Paid Off  Number of dependents______________________  Work for:  Final  Old debts paid off  Month and Year  Does ledger show work by Collection Department  Yes  □  Amount refinanced  $______________  Any amount charged off  $______________  Basically weak loan  Yes  |  No|2  J  Monthly payment  for   https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis  . or $.  $. Mortgage  Rent  Account Number.  32 This form completed by.  Nome  9KK n