Seattle Bubble

News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Seattle Bubble - News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Entries Tagged as 'Financing'

What’s Behind Rising FHA Defaults?

By Jillayne Schlicke on September 21st, 2009 at 9:00 AM · 60 Comments

Note from The Tim: Jillayne Schlicke has been a valued member of the Seattle Bubble community for quite some time, and I’m happy to welcome her as a guest poster. Jillayne has many years experience in the lending industry and offers some great insights. She currently provides continuing education for real estate professionals through her company CE Forward.

I’d like to thank The Tim for inviting me to create occasional guest posts for Seattle Bubble readers. SB’s bloggers and commenters have taught me how to critically analyze local real estate statistics. SB was a safe place I could go on a Friday night when my kids were elsewhere and I was craving an understanding of what was happening during the 2007-08 meltdown. I am honored to give back to the SB community.

The rising default rate on FHA loans is concerning but I’m not terribly surprised. It’s really no secret that the government is using Fannie, Freddie and FHA to help keep the banks afloat by allowing zombie banks to pawn off their toxic crap to the agencies. Ultimately the taxpayer is paying the price as we see Fannie and Freddie continuing to run a red balance sheet and FHA headed down the same path.

FHA originations were all but dead during the real estate bubble because so many LOs favored subprime lending where underwriting guidelines were non-existent. But long ago, in a land far, far away, when we were rocking out to Duran Duran, Echo and the Bunnyman, and Joy Division, I was processing FHA loans for a mortgage banker in Seattle. When rates came down to a low of 13% I had about 100 files in process. I was trained to pre-underwrite my files so underwriting recruited me and I became a young underwriter at age 23, just old enough to go drinking after work with the crew. I’ll never forget Barbie Owens who had the entire FHA underwriting manual embedded into her brain Matrix-style (I know Jujitsu!) She could recite entire paragraphs from the manual verbatim. Imagine 20 female underwriters, all of us smoked, and none of the windows opened. That was mortgage banking in the 80s. But I digress.

Back in the 1980s, underwriting was serious business. We were treated like gods by the loan originators who worked in fear of us declining their deal. Only David Korch knew how to play it. He brought us ice cream bars on hot, sunny days. New underwriters were given bunny files; easy conventional refinances, to cut our teeth. Then we were sent to FHA training. FHA had a field office in Seattle with real humans who would actually answer the phone and our questions. At least once a year a representative from FHA would take new underwriters through a six week FHA underwriting course called Direct Endorsement 101. After we finished we could underwrite FHA credit only (on all FHA loans the appraisal goes through a separate underwriting process) as long as a senior FHA underwriter signed our files.

If an FHA loan went into default, it was presented as a case study in meetings so that all of us could learn from our mistakes. If an FHA underwriter had too many defaults against her identifying number, she was put on probation.

This all changed during the subprime days when FHA’s business went down to literally nothing. Today, FHA allows the FHA-approved lenders to appoint and train their own underwriters! Does anyone see the problem with that policy?

Let’s revisit early 2008. Wholesale lenders are dropping like flies, and six figure income mortgage brokers are sweating bullets trying to figure out how to make their next boat, BMW, second home, first home, and condo-in-Hawaii payment month after month. They see the writing on the wall and the future, as far as they could see, was FHA. Thousands of mortgage brokers rushed to become approved to originate FHA loans and hundreds of wholesale lenders and banks had to quick beef up their underwriting departments to handle the onslaught of FHA loans being hurriedly thrown at them.

Many of those underwriters only knew subprime loans and had never seen an FHA file, never read the FHA Single Family Mortgage Insurance Manual for 203b loans and suddenly lenders were making folks FHA underwriters overnight.

And now we’re wondering why default rates are so high.

FHA doesn’t make subprime loans. They will allow loans to people with less than perfect credit but this is definitely not subprime territory.

We have three main problems leading to this dramatic rise in FHA defaults:

  1. Pressure from government to use FHA for purposes of taking toxic loans off the bank’s balance sheets;
  2. Lack of education, training, and mentoring of new underwriters during the recent, dramatic rise in FHA originations; and,
  3. Lack of a large enough down payment from the homeowner to insure against falling home prices.

Negative equity combined with job loss, business failure, or other financial distress means higher FHA defaults are in our future as long as home values continue to drop, we allow banks to put underwriters into service with no training, and we let the politicians use FHA as a toxic waste dump.

→ 60 CommentsCategories: Features
Tags: , , , ,

125% Refinance: Pricing You IN for a Decade or More

By The Tim on July 2nd, 2009 at 9:20 AM · 145 Comments

Astute readers have no doubt have learned by now of yesterday’s announcement by HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan that the federal government’s “Making Home Affordable” plan will now allow mortgages owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to be refinanced with loan-to-value ratios of up to 125%.

I won’t go into all the details of the announcement since you can find good coverage of the changes over at the P-I or Rain City Guide. Instead, I thought it would be interesting to see what the long-term financial picture might look like for someone who plans to take advantage of this program.

Let’s take a look at some hypothetical home borrowers who currently owe $400,000 in various mortgages with difficult terms or high rates, and whose home is presently worth $320,000. They jump on the new FHFA Home Affordable Refinance Program and refinance into a single 30-year fixed-rate loan at a 5.75% interest rate with a 125% loan-to-value ratio.

I hope that our hypothetical couple doesn’t want to move any time in the next 13 years, because under a relatively optimistic home value appreciation scenario that’s how long it will take before they will be able to sell without bringing money to the table:

125% Loan-to-Value Home Refinance

Note that the home sale proceeds line assumes paying 6% of the sale price to real estate agents, as well as an additional 2% to account for excise taxes and other costs of selling. You can also download the spreadsheet I used to create these charts and tweak the values yourself.

With the home value appreciation tweaked to a slightly less rosy scenario, it takes 17 years before our couple can break even selling their house:

125% Loan-to-Value Home Refinance

According to a 1993 study by the Census Bureau (pdf) only ~10% of home owners stayed in one house for over ten years. A 2001 study (pdf) by the NAR-funded Joint Center for Housing Studies put the median length of home ownership at 8.2 years. Refinancing one’s home into a 30-year loan for 125% of the house’s value will most likely lock the borrower into their present home for a period of time longer than 90% of people usually stay in their homes.

If the goal of this new 125% loan-to-value program is to financially imprison people in their current homes for a decade or more, then it looks like it could be a rousing success. However, I’m not sure how many currently struggling home borrowers would really consider that to be much of a “help.”

→ 145 CommentsCategories: Features
Tags: , , , ,

The Consequences of a Market Full of Monthly Payment Buyers

By The Tim on June 12th, 2009 at 11:26 PM · 50 Comments

Here’s a brief quote from a post that appeared here in 2006 titled The Monthly Payment Buyer:

In my opinion, it’s no wonder that home prices have gotten so out of whack with true fundamentals, when the first question someone asks in the home buying process is not “Is this house worth $XXX,000?” but rather “Can I afford $X,000 per month (no matter what kind of financing it takes)?” Obviously a monthly payment must be affordable, but should that really be the sole determining factor in whether a house is worth buying?

With interest rates bouncing up in the last few weeks from their artificial lows in the 4s, it’s interesting to consider how this might affect the housing market.

Following is a chart that shows how the monthly payment (principal + interest only) on a $350,000 mortgage grows as interest rates rise:

Effect of Rising Interest Rates on Mortgage Payments

Since most people are still “monthly payment buyers” when it comes to buying real estate, perhaps more informative is the following chart, which shows how much mortgage a fixed $1,750 payment (principal + interest only) buys as interest rates rise:

Effect of Rising Interest Rates on Mortgage Size

A mere 1-point jump in interest rates from 4.5% to 5.5% drops the amount that can be afforded by over 10%. Another 1-point jump up to 6.5%—a rate considered great just a few years ago—knocks another 10% off.

If suddenly everyone in the buying pool can afford 10% less for a home, what effect do you suppose that might have on prices?

→ 50 CommentsCategories: Features
Tags: , , ,

Mortgage Market “Seized Up”

By The Tim on May 28th, 2009 at 12:02 PM · 58 Comments

There’s been a lot of chatter since yesterday afternoon about treasury rates, mortgage rates, the yield curve, and so forth—and for good reason. Here’s a good write-up from Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis on what’s going on: Mortgage Market Locks Up

Yesterday 10 year treasury yields went soaring and the mortgage market literally seized up. Mark Hanson at the Field Check Group has this report that I can share.

As Bad As You Can Imagine

With respect to yesterday’s episode in the mortgage market — yes, it is as bad as you can imagine. Yesterday, the mortgage market was so volatile that banks and mortgage bankers across the nation issued multiple midday price changes for the worse, leading many to ultimately shut down the ability to lock loans around 1pm PST. This is not uncommon over the past five months, but not that common either. Lenders that maintained the ability to lock loans had rates UP as much as 75bps in a single day.

A good friend in the center of all of the mortgage capital markets turmoil said to me yesterday “feels like they [the Fed] have lost the battle…pretty obvious from the start but kind of scary to live through it … today felt like LTCM with respect to liquidity”.

For a local insider’s perspective, check Rhonda Porter’s post over at Rain City Guide: Mortgage Rates on the Move Up Today…way up.

And finally, here’s a post that goes into some of the mess going on behind the scenes that has led to this interesting development: It Is Failing: ALL OF IT

→ 58 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: , , , , ,

Government Loan Limits Lowered $60k for Seattle

By The Tim on November 10th, 2008 at 4:55 PM · 18 Comments

As astute market observers may recall, back in March (pre-complete-government-takeover) the conforming loan limit for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-backed loans was bumped from $417,000 to $567,500 for the Seattle area (King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties). At that time, the local press was touting the new limits at “a big dose of first aid” and the “shot in the arm” for the housing market, while here at Seattle Bubble we asked the question: Will Higher Government Loan Limits Boost Seattle’s Market?

Our conclusion was that the added lending restrictions attached to the “Temporary Jumbo Conforming” loans set the bar sufficiently high as to prevent the higher limits from having the (apparently intended) effect of preventing home prices from falling further. Given that the median price of homes in the Seattle area have fallen 6-8% in the intervening seven months, it would appear that this assessment was accurate. Of course, one could argue that perhaps without the higher conforming limit, prices would have dropped 10% or more in the same time, and there’s really no way to know whether that might be true.

If we assume that the Seattle area’s $567,500 temporary conforming limit did in fact somehow soften the blow, however slightly, then the latest news that this limit is being dropped to $506,000 is likely to be unwelcome. However, it should be noted that as far as I am aware, all the same restrictions are still in place including, but not limited to:

  • Fixed-rate loans are limited to 90% LTV/CLTV (loan to value/combined loan to value).
  • Minimum FICO for any loan is 660.
  • Minimum FICO for LTVs greater than 80% is 700.
  • No late mortgage payments in the preceding 12 months.
  • Full doc only.

While the $567,500 temporary limit was based on a calculation of 125% of the median home price (source), the new $506,000 limit is “set equal to 115 percent of local median house prices” (source). So the new loan limit translates to a drop in government-calculated median home price from $454,000 around March to $440,000 around October.

Interestingly, although the King County SFH median price was $440,000 in May, the Snohomish County SFH median has never breached $400,000, and Pierce County topped out below $300,000. This is explained in the announcement pdf:

In calculating loan limits, FHFA used median house price estimates calculated by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Those values have been estimated in a manner consistent with requirements of the National Housing Act, which requires that median prices for all counties in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) be set equal to the median price for the highest-cost county.

So will the new, lower limit put even more of a damper on Seattle area home sales? Or was the effect of the higher limit so negligible that the reduction won’t really matter?

→ 18 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: , , , , ,

Tens of Thousands of Subprime Loan Resets Coming to Seattle

By The Tim on August 25th, 2008 at 10:55 AM · 53 Comments

Interesting story from Kirsten Grind over at the Puget Sound Business Journal: Experts see more subprime-loan pain ahead

Another big wave of subprime mortgages will see interest rates reset to a much higher rate over the next six months in the Seattle area, an indication that the Puget Sound region might still be facing further economic trouble.

The large number of resets mean it’s possible that foreclosure rates could continue to rise across the state as homeowners struggle to make higher payments. Banks, already weighed down by bad loans, could face an even more hefty load of troubled mortgages on their books, according to experts.

The result could be a damper on some sectors of Washington’s economy — including the housing market — which has so far fared better than many states in recent months.

About 12,600 subprime loans are scheduled to reset in the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue area over the next six months, or about 52 percent of the subprime loans left to reset in the area…

In addition, a large chunk of Alt-A loans — known for little or no income documentation — will start resetting with the possibility of higher rates in about a year, a trend that mortgage experts are watching warily because less is known about their loan performance.

Reading the entire article, I can’t help but see an eerie similarity to what has already happened down in California. The “experts” quoted in the article claim that since home prices are only down 5-10% here, loan resets won’t be as big of a deal as they have been in the Golden State. But when most people put 0-3% down, it seems to me that a 5-10% drop in prices is more than enough to send those people into foreclosure.

I don’t think the Seattle-area will see as many foreclosures as San Diego or Sacramento, but I do think we’ll have our fair share, which will probably be more than any point in Seattle history.

(Kirsten Grind, Puget Sound Business Journal, 08.22.2008)

→ 53 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: , , , ,