Monthly Archives: February 2012

Wells Fargo’s Directors Ordered to Face Foreclosure Claims

By Jef Feeley – Bloomberg
Wells Fargo Stagecoach

Wells Fargo Stagecoach (Photo credit: Noel C. Hankamer)

Feb 14, 2012 1:56 PM ET

Directors of Wells Fargo & Co., the largest U.S. mortgage lender, must face investors’ claims the bank failed to properly disclose details of its foreclosure practices to government investigators, a judge ruled.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco rejected Wells Fargo’s request to dismiss shareholders’ allegations that directors wrongfully failed to disclose their opposition to a government probe of the bank’s mortgage lending and foreclosure policies.

“The fact that the company was allegedly stymieing the government regulators is certainly material to stockholders when considering whether to authorize a more serious internal investigation,” Illston said in Feb. 9 ruling.

That same day, Wells Fargo and four other banks reached a $25 billion settlement with state and federal officials to end a probe of abusive foreclosure practices stemming from the collapse of the U.S. housing bubble.

The accord included $20 billion in various forms of mortgage relief plus payments of $5 billion to state and federal governments. Wells Fargo officials said the bank’s share of the accord would total $5.3 billion. Other banks involved in the settlement included JP Morgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp. and Ally Financial Inc.

“The plaintiff’s allegations are false, said Wells Fargo spokesman Ancel Martinez in an e-mailed message. ‘‘Our directors acted appropriately in all respects and we look forward to our day in court.’’

Continuing Litigation

Even after agreeing to resolve the government’s investigation into banks’ handling of foreclosures, which included so-called robo-signing of mortgage documents, lenders still face years of litigation and billions of dollars in liability over their practices.

Government officials can pursue claims related to the packaging of loans into securities, criminal-enforcement actions and fair-lending violations, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said last week. The banks also face lawsuits from state attorneys general and investors.

Lawyers for a pension fund and trust that invested in Wells Fargo filed a so-called derivative suit against the bank alleging directors misled investors about their opposition to the government investigation of the company’s foreclosures and the need for further internal probes of Well Fargo’s practices.

Shareholders don’t seek individual awards in derivative suits. Any recovery in the case from insurance covering directors and officers will go into the bank’s coffers.

Opposition Undisclosed

Wells Fargo officials misled investors in proxy statements about its efforts to cooperate with government investigators to persuade shareholders to vote down a proposal calling for further internal reviews of the bank’s foreclosure practices, lawyers for the funds said in the suit.

The investors’ suit ‘‘sufficiently alleged that defendants breached their duty of loyalty by failing to disclose that, in the course of government investigations, Wells Fargo had opposed” investigators’ requests for information and “refused to provide details concerning the company’s policies,” Illston concluded in her 13-page ruling.

“If, as alleged, defendants did not disclose material information with the board’s control,” directors could be found to have violated their “duty of loyalty to the company,” she added.

Illston dismissed investors’ claims that Wells Fargo officials engaged in “abuse of control” and “gross mismanagement” by failing to disclose their attempts to oppose the government investigation and that bonuses given to executives, such as Chief Executive Officer John Stumpf, amounted to “corporate waste.”

The case is Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. Retiree Medical Trust v. John G. Stumpf, C 11-2369-SI, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco).

To contact the reporter on this story: Jef Feeley in Wilmington, Delaware, at jfeeley@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at mhytha@bloomberg.net.

More Time Allowed for Foreclosure Review Requests

Seal of the United States Office of the Comptr...

Image via Wikipedia

Mortgage Daily Review
Feb 15 2012, 10:53AM

Homeowners who think they may have been financially injured due to the actions of mortgage servicers during a foreclosure have additional time to request a review of their cases.  The deadline for the Independent Foreclosure Review authorized by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve originally schedule for April 30 has been extended to July 31.

To be eligible for a review a borrower had a mortgage on the primary residence serviced by a participating company which was in active foreclosure between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2010.  There are no costs associated with the review.

More information and a list of participating servicers can be found at: www.federalreserve.gov/consumerinfo/independent-foreclosure-review.htm or www.occ.gov/independentforeclosurereview.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Promotes National Consumer Protection Week

Seal of the United States Office of the Comptr...

Image via Wikipedia

WASHINGTON — The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) promoted awareness of consumer protection resources during today’s National Consumer Protection Week (NCPW) event on Capitol Hill.

“Consumers need timely, useful information to make sound financial decisions and protect themselves from unfair, deceptive, and fraudulent practices,” Acting Comptroller of the Currency John Walsh said. “National Consumer Protection Week highlights important sources of information and resources that consumers can use every day.”

The OCC joined the Federal Trade Commission and other federal agencies on Capitol Hill to distribute educational materials about a range of consumer protection and financial services issues. The OCC highlighted its Web site HelpWithMyBank.gov that provides answers to common questions about banking in English and Spanish. OCC material is also available at the NCPW Web site http://www.ncpw.gov.

During this year’s event, many attendees sought information about the ongoing independent foreclosure review, which the OCC and the Federal Reserve ordered in April 2011. The Independent Foreclosure Review provides the opportunity for people to request a review of their case if they believe they suffered financial injury as a result of errors, misrepresentations, or other deficiencies in a foreclosure action on their primary homes in 2009 or 2010 by one of the 14 servicers covered by the enforcement actions. More information is available at www.independentforeclosurereview.com. More than 4 million letters were sent to potentially eligible people with instructions on how to request a review. Individuals who believe they are eligible and have not received a letter, should call 1-888-952-9205, Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and Saturday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET). Requests for review must be returned by mail no later than July 31, 2012.

SOURCE: http://www.occ.gov

Mortgage Delinquency Spikes in TransUnion Q4 Report

Feb 14 2012, 10:02AM

TransUnion is reporting that serious mortgage delinquencies rose during the fourth quarter of 2011 for only the second time since the end of 2009.  The rate increased 13 basis points from 5.88 percent in the third quarter to 6.01 percent.

The increase was widespread; 37 percent of the states reported increases as did 64 percent of metropolitan areas.  The latter figure is unchanged from Quarter 3 but up substantially from the 21 MSAs that experienced an increase in Quarter 2.  New Jersey and Vermont had the largest annual increases.  Their delinquency rates rose between Quarter 4, 2010 and Quarter 4, 2011 by 11.98 percent and 11.11 percent respectively.  South Dakota had an increase of 10.36 percent.  Arizona, California, and Wyoming had the greatest decreases in their rates, all three in the range of 20 percent.

The highest serious delinquency rates, defined as over 60 days, were reported in Florida (14.27 percent), Nevada (12.08 percent) New Jersey (8.32 percent) and Arizona (7.50 percent) and the lowest rates in North Dakota (1.50 percent), South Dakota (2.45 percent), Nebraska (2.57 percent) and Alaska (2.77 percent).

“To see that, quarter over quarter, fewer homeowners were able to make their mortgage payments is not welcome news,” said Tim Martin, group vice president of U.S. Housing in TransUnion’s financial services business unit.

More here…

Obama Housing Plans vs Reality

by Cora Currier
ProPublica, Feb. 14, 2012, 2:36 p.m.

The Obama administration recently unveiled a string of proposals to help struggling homeowners and get the housing market back on its feet — part of the administration’s “We Can’t Wait” election year to-do list. Of course, the White House has made big promises before about helping homeowners, only to see them disappoint time and again.

Here are the latest proposals, whether they are anything new and whether they stand a chance of going anywhere.

President Obama wants to allow homeowners whose mortgages are backed by private-sector companies to refinance at lower rates through the Federal Housing Administration. (The FHA insures many mortgages, and it is not the same as the FHFA, the regulatory agency in charge of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.) The president stressed that the proposal would help only “responsible” homeowners who were current on their payments — to counter Republican complaints that his housing policies reward foolhardy borrowers.

Déjà vu: This is only the latest in a long series of attempts by Obama to help homeowners refinance. There have been a few, minor attempts to push refinancing through the FHA. Via a separate program launched in 2009 that used Freddie and Fannie, more than 900,000 homeowners have refinanced, substantially fewer than the goal of 4 million homeowners.

Will it happen? Unlikely. This plan needs to get through a Congress that is staunchly opposed. “How many times have we done this?” said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.

Republicans have a number of objections. First, Obama wants the plan to be paid for with a fee on the banks in repayment for the bailout, a tactic that’s raised Wall Street hackles in previous budgets. Secondly, some Republicans balk at passing more risk on to the FHA, which is in danger of having to ask the Treasury for a subsidy for the first time in its nearly 70-year history. Even if the plan passes, its impact would likely be limited. For the Obama administration to instigate mass refinancing without Congress’ help, many say it would need to get Fannie and Freddie on board, a move the companies’ regulator has so far been reluctant to endorse.

Bill of rights

A so-called “homeowner’s bill of rights” aims to make things clearer for borrowers, requiring a standard set of forms and disclosure of fees and conflicts of interests. It also calls for help for those very close to foreclosure, including a right of appeal on the decision to foreclose. (Homeowners have claimed wrongful foreclosure for a wide variety of reasons, and have had little recourse to appeal mortgage servicers’ decisions.)

Déjà vu: This may be just a branding of efforts already under way across different agencies. The new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau says it is already developing a set of standard disclosure forms and rules aimed at preventing misleading or fraudulent practices by mortgage servicers. As for an appeal process, Treasury already has a system for complaints about foreclosures, and is reportedly expanding its review process for those denied eligibility for government loan modification programs. Advocates have criticized Treasury’s current review efforts as ineffective. And, separately, federal bank regulators are developing new standards for mortgage servicers.

Will it happen? According the White House’s announcement, a host of agencies that deal with housing will work to enact new rules in keeping with the bill of rights. But right now the bill of rights itself is simply a set of guiding principles that don’t yet have any teeth. (We’ve documented problems with enforcement on similar guidelines.) The Department of Housing and Urban Development and the CFPB did not respond to our queries on exactly how the bill of rights relates to existing efforts.

Loan modification

The administration’s plan to make it easier for homeowners to restructure their loans has two key elements. First, it lays out yet another push on principal reductions, which it argues are central to slowing the rate of foreclosures and stabilizing the market. The move triples the incentive for mortgage insurers, including Fannie and Freddie, to write down the amount owed by struggling borrowers. Secondly, it makes more borrowers eligible for HAMP, the administration’s loan modification program, and also will give some homeowners who were previously denied access to the program a chance to reapply.

Déjà vu: Like refinancing, incentives for principal reduction have been proffered again and again, with mixed success. As we’ve noted, a key obstacle is Fannie and Freddie, which guarantee mortgages and haven’t been willing to take the hit that lowering the amount a borrower owes entails even if doing so would ultimately prevent foreclosures. Meanwhile, HAMP has been beset with a host of enforcement and logistical problems.

Will it happen? As a tweak to an existing program, these changes don’t need to go through Congress. And as we explained last week, the mortgage settlement and these changes may actually breathe life into the disappointing HAMP program. But for principal reduction, the question remains: Will Fannie and Freddie give their OK? Without that, only a portion of homes in the U.S. could qualify.

Foreclosures to rentals

This plan takes foreclosed homes where mortgages were backed by Fannie and Freddie and sells them to investors who will put them on the market as rentals. Obama claims this will help heal neighborhoods blighted by empty buildings and evictions, and give a boost to real-estate sales.

Something new: This has been in the works since August 2011, and the Federal Reserve touted it recently as an important process, though Chairman Ben Bernanke cautioned it was no “silver bullet” for the housing market.

Will it happen? It’s already started, though it’s just an experiment for now. It will go through the FHFA, so it doesn’t need congressional approval. The FHFA has already put out its first call for investors for the pilot phase.