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 'principal'

Cramdowns Rejected by Senate, Appraisals Insulated from Banks

By The Tim on May 1st, 2009 at 9:18 AM · 126 Comments

Two good news stories on the national front that are worth sharing this morning.

Story 1: Senate Defeats Mortgage ‘Cram-Down’ as Democrats Balk

The U.S. Senate rejected a measure that would let bankruptcy judges cut mortgage terms to help borrowers avoid foreclosure, a victory for banks and credit unions that said the legislation would increase loan costs.

The proposed “cram-down” amendment to a housing bill was defeated today in a 51-45 vote, with 12 Democrats among the 51 opponents.

Banks that refused to negotiate a compromise were “greedy, stubborn and unreasonable,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat.

“The answer is not to incentivize bankruptcy by making it the means to save one’s home,” [Arizona Republican Senator Jon] Kyl said.

This is good news, in my opinion. Banks should be eating the losses on these homes in the open market, not by writing down the principal to help the home “owner” stay in a house they obviously simply cannot afford. So you lost “your” home—yeah it sucks, but go find a cheap rental and move on. Maybe next time you buy a house you’ll be more prudent.

Note, I am not saying that everyone who is being foreclosed on bought more house than they could afford, or used their home as an ATM. I figure that probably describes at least 70% of the current foreclosures, and such people are the primary reason for the “foreclosure crisis” we’re currently watching unfold.

[Update: As I mention in the comments below, I also believe we should be prosecuting the banks and the people at the banks for the massive fraud they willingly and knowingly perpetuated through these loans during the boom.]

Story 2: Realtors, Mtge Brokers Push For Delay In New Appraisal Rules

Realtors and mortgage brokers are in an 11th-hour push to delay by a year new Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) rules governing real-estate appraisals.

The rules, which take effect May 1, have sparked criticism from many corners of the real-estate industry.

The National Association of Realtors complained in a letter last week that the industry was given scant guidance and too little time to implement the rules. Appraisers worry the rules, which will put middlemen between loan originators and appraisers, will squeeze their fees. Meanwhile, mortgage brokers say the changes will make them uncompetitive.

“This is going to be devastating for everyone,” Marc Savitt, the president of the National Association of Mortgage Brokers, said Monday.

The rules arose from an investigation by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo into alleged collusion between mortgage lenders and appraisers to pump up home values. Fannie and Freddie, which became targets of probe, agreed in early 2008 to require all appraisers on mortgages they buy or guarantee to adhere to a new code of conduct.

The rules are intended to reduce collusion and fraud in the appraisal industry, which has been blamed for generating wildly inflated home values during the housing boom. The new code requires lenders to go through third-parties, known as appraisal management companies, to order appraisals. Lenders with in-house appraisal staff must set up safeguards to ensure loan officers don’t influence the home appraisal process.

Oh yeah, that sounds really “devastating,” doesn’t it? Shouldn’t safeguards like this have been in place from the start? I can think of one reason that banks and real estate agents would not be on board with this: they like being able to influence appraisals.

It’s nice to read some good news for a change when it comes to all the meddling the government has been doing in the housing market lately.

→ 126 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

HUD pushes for principal reduction up to 30%

By S-Crow on April 1st, 2009 at 9:23 PM · 25 Comments

(I didn’t want this story to get lost in the midst of all the headlines the past few days.)

From the National Mortgage News headlines:

“The Department of Housing and Urban Development is seeking expanded loss mitigation authority allowing the principal amount of an FHA-insured mortgage to be reduced by up to 30% to help homeowners avoid defaults.”

FHA has some poorly performing loans. Many of these loans that are delinquent have a history of defaulting shortly after origination whether it be a refinance or modification.

If the principal reduction takes place what will be some of the “strings” attached, if any? Two questions that immediately come to mind are:

  • Will the borrower have to pay back any principal in a future date or after a sale ?
  • Will the IRS treat the reduction as income?

The program of principal reduction may help keep people in their homes, at least in the short term, and reduce foreclosures. However, I’m opposed to principal reduction, in part, because in my experience a substantial number of people were irresponsible in serial refinancing and overall poor financial planning. On the other hand, principal reduction may save FHA from paying out to lenders for losses that may exceed the amount of the principal reduced to keep borrowers in their home (in foreclosure, HUD may end up taking a larger loss).

Responsible homeowners may be torn about hearing that their neighbor received a principal reduction. How would you react when a neighbor walks by your house while you are working in the yard on a Saturday morning and strikes up an innocent conversation with you about their good fortune of having their FHA loan principal reduced up to 30%? Sure it may have saved a potential foreclosure, but to the core, it has to be frustrating for the homeowner that is working their tail off to make a living and pay their mortgage as scheduled. It may be even more frustrating for a recently unemployed homeowner that is using ‘rainy-day’ savings or selling investments (what is left of it) to pay their mortgage and living expenses.

In other news: In real estate, I have always been an advocate of just watching what people do vs. listening to what they say. Jillayne Schlicke has a perfect example of this in a Forum commentary today (click her links).

S-Crow

→ 25 CommentsCategories: News
Tags: ,