Banks approved 79 percent of loan relief requests

Serbian banks processed relief requests covering 2,321 loan accounts with total debt of around 2.3 billion dinars (~19.6 million euros) in the first quarter of 2026, according to National Bank of Serbia data. Relief was ultimately applied to 1,825 of those accounts, or 79 percent of all processed requests, with outstanding debt on them standing at 1.9 billion dinars (~16.2 million euros) at the moment the measures took effect.

Lenders also acted without being asked, applying relief to a further 913 loan accounts carrying about 968 million dinars (~8.3 million euros) in debt. Of the 496 requests that did not end in relief, banks turned down 310, while in 186 cases the borrowers themselves rejected the measure they were offered.

Who asks for relief, and why?

The breakdown of reasons shows this is an instrument for people who have lost their income rather than for borrowers shopping around for better terms. Job loss was cited in 53.7 percent of cases, a significant drop in income in 19.2 percent, serious illness in 8.7 percent, family difficulties in 2.3 percent, serious injury in 1 percent and divorce in 0.6 percent.

Cash loans dominate by product type with 76 percent of requests, followed by authorised current-account overdrafts at 7 percent, then working capital loans and credit cards at 6 percent each. Housing loans account for just 3 percent of requests but carry the highest approval rate at 81.5 percent.

The measure applied most often was an extension of the repayment term, either on its own or combined with other concessions: a lower interest rate, deferred instalments or a payment holiday with no interest accruing. For the borrower that means a smaller monthly instalment over a longer period, and a larger total interest bill by the end.

Why banks agree to a longer term

The obligation on banks to offer relief was introduced by the Law on the Protection of Financial Services Consumers in March 2025, and the central bank adopted the decision setting out the details in September of the same year. The framework has therefore only just completed its first full quarter of application, so these are the first figures showing how the system works in practice.

Economist Milan Beslac argues the recommendation is not binding, but that banks have recognised their own interest in it: by rescheduling, they collect everything they lent out along with the interest due, simply on a longer timetable than originally agreed. Instead of a write-off or expensive enforcement against collateral, the lender books the planned income over a longer horizon and avoids a build-up of non-performing loans on its balance sheet.

The National Bank of Serbia says it will continue to insist on the instrument being used and will order banks that fail to apply it to correct the irregularity, with sanctions to match. Housing loans get particular emphasis, where the aim is to prevent mortgages being enforced and families losing their homes over a temporary loss of income.

The process is simpler than borrowers tend to expect: the request goes to the bank that issued the loan, supported by evidence of the circumstance that caused the difficulty, and the bank is obliged to consider it and respond. Second-quarter figures will show whether the 79 percent approval rate holds, or whether it reflects a small pool of requests in the scheme’s opening phase.

Would you ask your own bank for relief if you lost your job, or would you look for refinancing elsewhere first?