Mortgage Mod, Short-Sale Sham Continues

COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary

why-the-paperwork-appears-sloppy

why-short-sales-are-being-rejected

Price declines are “geographically expanding,” with 78 out of the 100 largest metropolitan areas experiencing declines, CoreLogic said. That was up from 58 in July.

Paul S. Willen, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said Monday that the series of government programs aimed at helping borrowers avoid foreclosure amount to “three years of failed policy.”

Mr. Willen, speaking in Virginia at a housing policy conference organized by the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, said it was unlikely that banks could be persuaded to modify loans voluntarily.

Editor’s Note: Stop acting surprised! As explained in our recent articles, the incentive to avoid anything but the appearance of short-sale approvals and mortgage modifications is just not there. Quite the contrary. Under the accounting rules the banks keep these ridiculous illusory “assets” on their books at face value even if they foreclose. But if they modify or approve a short-sale they must show a loss. Each loss is magnified by the price earnings ration of the stock trading on the financial markets and has an effect on their debt obligations as well.

From management’s perspective it just doesn’t make sense to do anything but protect the share value so the shareholders don’t sue them for lying up to this point about the assets and about their earnings. And let’s not forget those bonuses for “good performance.” Despite the actuality of horrendous losses that go unreported in each foreclosure, the companies are allowed to report earnings that give the false impression of a profitable viable company. But the illusion goes further than that. In most cases these “assets” were not owned by the banks to begin with.

If forced to declare the losses, they will pass it on to the investors who in turn will have additional fuel for the fires of litigation that are already burning. It seems the investors have figured out what borrowers knew all along — the entire deal was a sham. Neither the investor/lender nor the homeowner/borrower would have signed onto the deal if they knew the truth about the transaction.

October 25, 2010

Mortgage Modifications Slow in September

By DAVID STREITFELD and BINYAMIN APPELBAUM

Even as banks, borrowers and regulators battle over how much faulty documentation by lenders should impede foreclosures, fresh evidence came Monday that the housing market remained very wobbly.

Only 28,000 defaulting borrowers received permanent loan modifications in September, the Treasury Department said. That was the lowest number since last fall when the program to help struggling homeowners stay in their homes was just getting started.

Would-be sellers also had a tough go of it recently on two fronts. Home sales continued to fall sharply from 2009 levels and prices started to drop again after a period of equilibrium, according to separate reports from the National Association of Realtors and CoreLogic, a housing data company.

The three sets of monthly data indicate a period of continued stress for the housing market, which in recent weeks has also had to contend with the short-term effects of a freeze on foreclosures. Lenders were forced to impose the freezes as they began to try to straighten out various errors, oversights and shortcuts in the processing of foreclosures.

“Housing is no longer in free fall, but that’s the best you can say about it,” the economist Joel L. Naroff said.

About 4.4 million households are in severe default, although formal foreclosure proceedings have in many cases not yet begun.

The data from the government’s signature effort to help homeowners get new mortgages — formally called the Making Home Affordable Program — shows a program whose effects are, at least for the moment, dwindling.

Fewer than 500,000 households have gotten modifications through the Treasury program, which offers incentives to lenders to participate. An additional 700,000 or so homeowners enrolled in modification programs but did not emerge with a new loan.

In September, 35,000 borrowers enrolled in the program. They will need to make the trial payments before being granted permanent status.

The program was “oversold as a silver bullet,” said Edward Delgado, a former executive with Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. “It helped some owners, but the numbers pale in comparison to those facing foreclosure.”

In its modification report, the government stressed the good news that only 11 percent of those who had received permanent modifications later defaulted.

Most of these borrowers remain heavily in debt, however, paying more than 63 percent of their monthly gross income for their house, car, alimony and installment loans. Some analysts believe the redefault rate will increase sharply over time.

Paul S. Willen, a senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, said Monday that the series of government programs aimed at helping borrowers avoid foreclosure amount to “three years of failed policy.”

Mr. Willen, speaking in Virginia at a housing policy conference organized by the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, said it was unlikely that banks could be persuaded to modify loans voluntarily.

Banks, he said, continue to pursue foreclosures in most cases because they regard modifications as expensive and ineffective. Mr. Willen sees two possible solutions: Require banks to modify loans, basically imposing the cost on them; or pay banks to modify loans, imposing the cost on taxpayers.

“We know how to prevent foreclosures,” Mr. Willen said. “We just need to be prepared to spend the money.”

Sheila C. Bair, chairwoman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, suggested that banks should be allowed to foreclose more easily in cases where they could show that they had offered to reduce the monthly payment. Ms. Bair said that such a legal “safe harbor” could encourage banks to offer modifications.

“We know from experience that reducing the monthly payment through modification raises the chance that the borrower will make good on the loan,” Ms. Bair said at the conference in Virginia. “We also know that in too many instances, servicers have not made meaningful efforts to restructure loans for borrowers who have documented that they are in economic distress.”

Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Fed, said in a speech at the conference that preliminary results from the Fed’s scrutiny of the way banks handle foreclosures will be available next month.

“We take violations of proper procedure seriously,” Mr. Bernanke said.

The housing market stabilized in late 2009 and early 2010, in part because of government intervention, but that era seems to be ending, the data released on Monday indicate. Sales weakened over the summer, and prices are now beginning to fall.

Housing sales in September were 19 percent lower than in September 2009, the National Association of Realtors reported. Two months earlier, in July, sales dropped 26 percent from the previous year.

Last fall, buyers were compelled to act by the pending expiration of an $8,000 tax credit. (The credit was later extended until the spring.) September sales were 10 percent higher than August’s, the association said.

It would take 10.7 months to sell all the homes on the market now, which is about twice as long as in a normal market. The sales and inventory rates, while slightly better than they were during the summer, foreshadow a drop in prices this winter.

CoreLogic, the housing data company, said Monday that housing prices fell 1.5 percent in August from August 2009. It was the first year-over-year drop in the index in 2010.

Price declines are “geographically expanding,” with 78 out of the 100 largest metropolitan areas experiencing declines, CoreLogic said. That was up from 58 in July.

4 Responses

  1. I’ve applied for 8 modifications on 5 different occasions on investment real estate. Their reasons for denial: 1) You don’t have 100% occupancy (Servicer’s rule). Now that’s Bologna Sandwiches as if I were to buy them (multi-unit property) new (and when I bought them) the bank only counts 50% occupancy to qualify for the loan. 2) Don’t have enough revenue to make the CURRENT payments. Duh! Rent roll is down 35% with the vacancy rate.

  2. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Susan Carter, PropTrackr. PropTrackr said: Mortgage Mod, Short-Sale Sham Continues « Livinglies's Weblog: As explained in our recent articles, the … http://bit.ly/9mJT3E #shortsale […]

  3. The Banks should put a sign on the front door :
    NO LOANS , at least until 11/2/2010 , and CoreLogic
    better come up with higher prices , before the go
    in trouble. AG Cuomo NY will watch them.

  4. I’m convinced they want to control all the titles to every home, either directly or through ‘foreclosure investor pools’.

    That way, when their hyperinflation by printing trillions of non-existent money, hits general circulation, the inflated valuations on their cooked books will again look like they are all whole and balanced; and no one will then notice or care.

    Plus the added benefit of inflation-adjusting rent payments (just like the ARMS of old) and they can cover their Trillions of false printings and securitization ‘streams’ up, and no one would be the wiser in 5 years.

    Cover-up!

    Bernie Madoff should be truly and righteously jealous.

    Let’s continue to expose these banks now; and cancel all bank mortgages for fraud and decoupling nullity, before they reach their goal….. or apologize to Bernie.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: