Blog Archives

Bondi: Don’t cut homeowners’ mortgage principal

 Mary Shanklin, Orlando Sentinel8:59 p.m. EDT, May 15, 2011

The attorney general of Florida — a state where almost half of all mortgaged homes are underwater — opposes efforts that would force the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers to reduce the principal on loans owed by struggling U.S. homeowners.

Attorneys general in all 50 states are part of a group now negotiating a settlement with the five lenders, which are accused of falsifying and otherwise mishandling loan documents and mortgage modifications. Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi is one of seven members of the group who oppose a key negotiating point: Cut the mortgage principal for qualified homeowners.

For example, a delinquent homeowner who owes Bank of America $200,000 on a house now worth $100,000 could find the mortgage’s principal amount reduced by an as-yet-undetermined amount through the general proposal under discussion — an appealing proposal for the 2 million Floridians with such “underwater” loans.

The federal government for about a year has been pushing banks such as BOA and Wells Fargo to reduce the mortgage principal for qualified borrowers in danger of foreclosure. But nearly all mortgage modifications still involve only interest-rate reductions or extensions of the loans’ terms — for example, converting a 30-year mortgage to a 40-year mortgage.

Bondi and several attorneys general from other states say principal reduction oversteps the mission of the group that is negotiating with the five banks, and she fears it could turn into a free-for-all of underwater homeowners. The Mortgage Foreclosure Multistate Group should stick to addressing the wrongdoings of loan servicers, she said, instead of trying to dictate how lenders modify problem home loans.

Pushing lenders to forgive part of their mortgage holders’ debt could encourage even responsible homeowners to stop making payments on their loans, in the hope they can eventually get their bank to erase part of their mortgage, Bondi wrote in a recent letter to the head of the working group.

“Some homeowners may simply default on their loan and use the States’ agreement to obtain a principal reduction — whether or not they actually made an effort to maintain their mortgage,” wrote Bondi, who serves on the negotiating group’s executive board.

She called it a potential “moral hazard” that “rewards those who simply choose not to pay their mortgage — because they can simply take advantage of lenders’ obligation to honor virtually automatic principal write-downs.”

A spokesman for the head of the Mortgage Foreclosure Multistate Group said no one wants to push the easy button for everyone who is underwater on their mortgage, allowing them to skip out on their obligation. The group instead wants to find a way for families to stay in their homes, if possible, in addition to settling the complaints of fraudulent loan documents, said Geoff Greenwood, spokesman for Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, who leads the national group.

“I don’t think the intent was ever an across-the-board reduction, but instead it was to find a meaningful structure that would realistically keep some people in their homes who otherwise wouldn’t be able to stay,” he said. “We want to establish this in a way so that people can’t game the system.”

Bondi came to her position on mortgage reductions as the chief legal officer of a state in which 47 percent of all mortgaged homes are worth less than their loan amounts, according to a fourth-quarter report by the analytics company CoreLogic. Only Nevada and Arizona have higher rates.

In the Conway section of southeast Orlando, Dan Dillard’s pool has turned a greenish hue. The button on his doorbell is missing. He has rented rooms to adult students from Korea, Saudi Arabia and Peru to help him cover a mortgage that has been a challenge since his 2008 divorce. Two previous mortgage modifications lengthened the loan term but kept his payments at $1,646 a month to recoup back taxes and other debt. Now he faces foreclosure.

The information manager for Wycliffe Bible Translators says he would like to stay in the shaded home with his two teenage children who still live there. But he figures the only way he could realistically keep his house is if his lender, Orlando Federal Credit Union, shaved $35,000 off his the $250,000 principal he owes. He estimates the home might be worth $170,000.

“It is absolutely better for any financial institution to run the numbers and modify, even if that means cutting the principal,” Dillard said. “At the end of the day, a modification gives them more money than all losses they will encounter through foreclosure.”

Cutting loan principal is the method least-used by lenders to modify mortgages. Lenders prefer to cut interest rates or stretch out the payments instead. Of more than 17,000 mortgages modified in Florida during the fourth quarter of last year, only 4 percent got a new mortgage payment based at least in part on a reduction in the loan’s principal, according to the U.S. Office of Thrift Supervision. About 90 percent had reduced or frozen interest rates, while 60 percent had longer loan terms.

Bondi wants no part of dictating to lenders how they retool their troubled mortgages. She said any such intervention could actually imperil homeowners because they could be at risk of defaulting yet again under the new mortgage terms. She cited concerns that they could end up with more debt, depleted savings and worsened credit scores if they couldn’t pay their modified mortgages.

Principal reductions, however, are viewed by some industry experts as the best tool to repair mortgages in a way that homeowners can then manage.

Securitization research by Deutsche Bank last year showed that mortgage modifications with principal reductions had a redefault rate of about 40 percent after three years, compared with a rate of about 57 percent for mortgages modified with lower interest and longer terms only.

Dillard made the last payment on his Conway home of eight years in November. He said he also finds it hard to justify spending money on a house that he’s likely to lose. The credit union will end up getting back a property that needs repairs and maintenance. By the time it settles the lawyers’ fees and court costs, makes the necessary repairs, pays the property taxes and markets the house, it will lose far more than, say, a $35,000 reduction in principal, Dillard said.

The single dad, who has no other debt, is exploring bankruptcy because he doesn’t want to pay what could be the $80,000 balance on his mortgage after the house sells. He is concerned about his credit but said he and his children will be fine.

“Orlando loses. My neighborhood loses. I don’t lose — I’m a Christian man, and I’m trying to do the right thing,” Dillard said. “At the end of the day, we will be OK.”

mshanklin@tribune.com or 407-420-5538

WAMU Predatory Lending Practices: “Stated Income & No Doc” Pay Option ARMs

Posted on April 29, 2011 by Patrick

We, of The Diligence Group, usually make it our practice to steer severely clear of writing articles that do not strictly educate or inform.  Nor do write articles that have a political bent.  Today, however, is an exception.

I recently read an article about the “recently revealed” predatory lending practices of WAMU; practices that we have been exposing via our reports for some time.  According to the article, WAMU made it its mission in life to sell as many Pay Option ARMs as possible, frequently holding internal focus groups to brainstorm marketing activities, and providing additional financial rewards to loan officers who sold Pay Option ARMs to an unsuspecting and uninformed public, in abundance.

Excerpts of an article written by the Palm Beach Post state:

“One loan officer told a congressional committee last year that he expected the majority of homeowners with Option ARMs to sell or refinance before their payments increased.  That became impossible as the real estate market imploded.

Another favorite Washington Mutual loan was one that required no proof of a borrower’s earnings.  The so-called “stated-income” loans were ripe for fraud and perpetuated by rewards given to loan personnel, the report surmises.

“Because of the compensation systems rewarding volume versus quality and the independent structure of the originators, I am confident at times borrowers were coached to fill out applications with overstated incomes or net worth to meet the minimum requirements,” said Jim Vanasek, Washington Mutual’s chief risk manager during a congressional hearing last year.”

From what we at The Diligence Group have been seeing via our investigations, and hearing from homeowners, WAMU loan officers coached no-one relative to the completion of  their loan applications, but simply filled in the blanks themselves, submitted the loans to underwriting for rubber-stamped approval, and eagerly awaited with sweaty palms, the  arrival of cash upon the loans closure.  We recently performed an initial, pre analysis review for a borrower who hails from Brazil and who is a Naturalized US Citizen.  He was shocked to discover that the WAMU  loan he received was not a 30-year fixed rate product, but a Pay Option ARM that has the capacity to increase his mortgage balance to 115% of his original loan amount.  His mortgage balance has already increased over $43,000 in the five years that have elapsed since the closure of his loan, a loan balance that rises steadily with each mortgage payment he makes.  What is horrifying is that this man represents but one drop of water in a veritable sea of borrowers who were targeted, by WAMU, for predatory financing.  He has attempted to modify his loan several times and has received the same disgraceful “Who’s on First?” addle, incompetent, and nonsensical treatment as every other homeowner in America who is trying to modify their mortgage.

What this underwriter considers particularly vexing, is the apparent lack of reasonable recourse that is available to the American Mortgage Consumer, and total lack of responsible government oversight.  I mean, how is it possible that a customer who is burned by a hot cup of coffee in a McDonalds restaurant, is awarded millions of dollars in compensation for “pain and suffering,” but a homeowner who was actively lied to, targeted, and sold a loan product that was harmful by design, have no legal recourse?  Where is the requirement that right and justice prevail?

The fact that there are no government agencies overseeing the modification activities of lenders and Servicers that received Billions in TARP funds is particularly egregious.  Let us be honest, the vast majority of lenders and Servicers who were fortunate enough to remain in business,  received billions from the long suffering US taxpayer, and are legally required to follow HAMP’s modification guidelines, but are not being required to do so.  What is even more outrageous, is that Mortgage Servicers are making billions of dollars in profits because the system rewards them financially for not modifying loans, thus encouraging them to continue to run roughshod over financially distressed homeowners.  If distressed homeowners are not receiving modifications, it is certainly not due to lack of effort on the part of their attorney or modification representatives, it is because Servicers are actively permitted to get away with conduct that can only be described as heinous

A recent class action lawsuit alleges that a Servicer was denying modification assistance to elderly homeowners, homeowners whose sole source of income was derived from Social Security payments.  These homeowners were denied modifications because,  according to the Servicer,  the borrowers did not comply with the Servicers documentation requirements – requirements  that demanded that elderly homeowners provide audited Profit and Loss Statements, Balance Sheets and Corporate tax returns – documents that only Corporations would logically, be required to possess.  How is it that lenders, who granted these loans in the first place, had no problem receiving borrower documentation via fax, email, regular mail and express delivery, but Servicers always seem to be denying modifications to homeowners, declaring that required paperwork was not received (even after it was sent 5 or 6 times via registered mail).  Are these Servicers so disorganized and incompetent that they cannot be trusted with simple documentation?  If such is the case, how can they be trusted to successfully manage a borrower’s mortgage and escrow account? 

Clearly, the only conclusion that a reasonable person can draw, considering the widespread and very public nature of the abuse, is that the same legislators who played “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” with the Financial industry are continuing to avert their eyes.  It is unfortunate that these games continue to be played at the expense of the American Homeowner and Taxpayer.  We certainly deserve more effective representation, and better solutions than this.

I encourage those of you who read this missive, to think, just for a moment, what the harvest might be to the economy, overall,  if the Federal Government mounted a serious, thoughtful, intelligent, and mandated approach to resolving the foreclosure crisis.  Not another bail out mind you, but the simple requirement that Servicers do nothing more than follow the rules and modify eligible loans.  No games, no dual tracking, no ineptitude, no dithering incompetence, or further abuses permitted.  Might not the economy actually grow?  Might not homeowners, who are being bankrupted by foreclosure and legal fees, be able to spend their money on other things, like washing machines, refrigerators, automobiles and other durable goods?  Might not home values begin to stabilize, and the housing market begin to recover?  Might not jobs begin to become available once more, and employment opportunities abound once again?  Alas, until our legislators arise one morning and decide to solve the foreclosure crisis our Nation will continue to languish, and the economic outlook for all, unless you are a Mortgage Loan Servicer or investment banker, will continue to be bleak.  It is a shame.

Until the occurrence of the miracle outlined above takes place, The Diligence Group will continue to do what it does best.  Investigate and evidence acts of predatory lending, bias, targeting, negligence, ineptitude, and deceit relative to the origination, appraisal, closure, Servicing and Securitization of mortgage loan transactions. We will continue to support Attorneys and like professionals who seek to effort Fair Housing Complaints, Class Action Suits, and Securitization claims.  While justice may not be swift, hopefully it will be realized, even if it is only realized one loan at a time.  It is simply sad that Mortgage Servicers have been permitted to take over where the Mortgage Lenders took off, and are continuing to drain the lifeblood, and exploit unabated, the American Consumer.

-FS

http://diligencegroupllc.net/

Since August 2007, which marked the beginning of the “foreclosure crisis”, MainStreet has provided guidance, direction and peace of mind to over 150 families. These families are from every walk of life and each of their mortgage situations is as unique as each individual tied to it. MainStreet Resolutions is Your Path to A Fresh Start!

Call US TODAY

to See How We Can Help.

1-888-728-3020

Are you in default or foreclosure?  If you suspect you have been the victim of Predatory Lending here in Florida, suspect you might be a victim of fraud, suspect the lender who provided your mortgage may have been less than honest, or may have even purposely overvalued your property in the Appraisal, please contact me, Tiffany Arthur at tiffanylarthur@aol.com or visit my website for more information at www.mainstreetresolutions.com We are interested in helping the homeowner find a permanent resolution to keep them in their home.

A.I.G. to Sue 2 Firms to Recover Some Losses

By LOUISE STORY
Published: April 27, 2011

The American International Group, the giant insurer rescued by the federal government during the financial crisis, on Thursday will file the first of what could be a series of lawsuits against Wall Street firms, contending that it was the victim of fraud.

The initial suit, against ICP Asset Management and Moore Capital, will claim that A.I.G. suffered losses insuring mortgage securities created by ICP. The suit says ICP manipulated those securities in a way that benefited itself and Moore Capital, which is not accused of fraud, but harmed A.I.G.

Though the insurer received a hefty bailout, much of that money ultimately flowed to banks. Now, A.I.G. is trying to “recoup potentially billions of dollars from the fraudulent conduct of these defendants and other parties,” according to a copy of the suit obtained by The New York Times.

Because A.I.G. is still largely owned by the government, taxpayers would share in any recovery. A.I.G. informed the Treasury Department of the suit on Wednesday but made the decision to sue on its own, according to a person with knowledge of the litigation. A.I.G. did not notify the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, which orchestrated its $182 billion bailout in 2008, because the company has repaid the Fed and is no longer tightly overseen by that regulator. Read more here…