FDIC Adds 54 “Problem” Banks to Its Watch List

The FDIC said Tuesday that the number of banks on the agency’s so-called “Problem List” has risen to 829, up from 775 at the end of the first quarter of 2010.

The number of troubled institutions now under the FDIC’s watchful eye is the highest it’s been since March 1993, when there were 928 and the savings and loan crisis was in full swing. It’s a dire comparison, but the FDIC notes that the second-quarter additions represent the smallest net increase in “problem” banks since the first quarter of 2009.

During the April-to-June quarter of this year, 45 insured institutions went under. The failed-bank tally for the year currently stands at 118.

The FDIC does not release the names of the banks on its watch list, for fear that the stigma attached would cause a run on those banks. The agency says a “vast majority” are able to get back on their feet.

The total assets of “problem” institutions declined from $431 billion to $403 billion, despite the increase in the number of names on the list.

The elevated number of bank closings since the nation’s housing crisis and recession set in have severely depleted the FDIC’s deposit insurance fund, but the agency said Tuesday that the fund’s balance has increased for the second quarter in a row.

The net worth of the fund improved from negative $20.7 billion at the end of March to negative $15.2 billion during the second quarter. The FDIC explained that the improvement stemmed primarily from assessment revenues and from a reduction in the contingent loss reserve, which covers the costs of expected failures. The reserve declined from $40.7 billion to $27.5 billion during the quarter.

The FDIC’s liquid resources – cash and marketable securities – stood at $44 billion at the end of the second quarter, a decline from $63 billion at the end of Q1. The decline in cash balances reflects previously anticipated outlays, primarily related to three bank failures in Puerto Rico on April 30th, according to the agency.

“As we expected,” FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair said, “demands on cash have increased this year. But our projections indicate that our current resources are more than enough to resolve anticipated failures.”

More banks may be deemed as “problem,” but the FDIC says the banking sector overall enjoyed its best quarter since the start of the recession.

Commercial banks and savings institutions insured by the FDIC reported an aggregate profit of $21.6 billion in the second quarter of 2010, a $26 billion improvement from the $4.4 billion net loss the industry posted in the second quarter of 2009. This is the highest quarterly earnings total since the third quarter of 2007.

Chairman Bair says the Q2 results are evidence that the banking sector “is moving along the road to recovery.”

“Nearly two out of every three banks are reporting better year-over-year earnings,” Bair said. “As long as economic conditions remain supportive, most institutions should maintain profitability and increase their capacity to lend.”

The primary factor contributing to the year-over-year improvement in quarterly earnings was a reduction in provisions for loan losses. While quarterly provisions remained high, at $40.3 billion, they were $27.1 billion (40.2 percent) lower than a year earlier.

The FDIC also noted signs of improvement in asset-quality trends as the amount of loans and leases that were noncurrent (90 days or more past due or in nonaccrual status) fell for the first time since the first quarter of 2006. Insured banks and thrifts charged off $49 billion in uncollectible loans during the quarter, down $214 million (0.4 percent) from a year earlier.

Pending Home Sales Dip 2.6% in June

After tumbling 30 percent in May in the wake of the expiration of the homebuyer tax credit, pending home sales continued to edge down in June, hitting the lowest level recorded in more than a year, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) reported Tuesday.

NAR’s Pending Home Sales Index (PHSI), a forward-looking indicator based on contracts signed during the month, declined 2.6 percent to 75.7 in June from an upwardly revised level of 77.7 in May. In addition, the June 2010 index was 18.6 percent below June 2009’s level of 93.

According to NAR, an index of 100 is equal to the average level of contract activity during 2001, which was the first year to be examined as well as the first of five consecutive record years for existing-home sales.

Lawrence Yun, NAR chief economist, said the continued month-to-month drop in the PHSI means we are in a “pausing situation” for home sales activity. He said the weak contract signing in both May and June implies that closing activity will remain underperforming at least through August.

“There could be a couple of additional months of slow home-sales activity before picking up later in the year, provided the job market continues to improve,” Yun said. “Over the short term, inventory will look high relative to home sales. However, since home prices have come down to fundamentally justifiable levels, there isn’t likely to be any meaningful change to national home values.”

While pending home sales fell on a national basis, Yun said some areas such as Washington, D.C.; Maryland suburbs; and Virginia suburbs posted pending home sales equal with year-ago levels, when the first round of the tax credit served as a motivating factor for potential buyers. In addition, he said markets in Texas are holding up nicely.

Yun noted that the D.C. region and the Texas market are the healthiest in terms of their labor markets. This, he said, attests to the fact that employment growth and job market improvement is a key to a sustained recovery in the housing market.

“We really need to see stronger job creation to have a meaningful recovery in the housing markets,” he said.

Despite the strength seen in some local markets, the PHSI fell in all but one area when looked at on a larger regional basis.

Pending home sales in the Northeast tumbled 12.2 percent from May and were 25.4 percent lower than June 2009. In the Midwest, the PHSI fell 9.5 percent from the month prior and plummeted 27.8 percent from year-ago levels. The index in the West slipped 0.2 percent on a month-to-month basis and was 14.2 percent below June of last year. The only region to show an improvement was the South, where pending home sales rose 3.7 percent from May to June. However, the South’s PHSI was still 14.2 percent below year-ago levels.

Shadow Inventory Could Take Four Years to Clear: Morgan Stanley

If you are trying to hang onto your house because you think prices may be going up again soon, you might want to reconsider that idea. The article below makes a fairly compelling case for a very slow recovery with further downside in the near term highly likely.

-Editor.

The shadow inventory of homes with delinquent mortgages yet to move through the foreclosure process would take 47 months to clear at the current sales rate in the market, according to a newly-published housing finance report from Morgan Stanley.

The report which takes a broad overview of the market, shows the trend for originations flattening, as credit availability remains “negative” and the desire of Americans to form households is “neutral”.

The inaugural issue of Housing Market Insights is aptly titled: “The Long Road Home” as is generated by the investment bank’s securitized credit department. Mixed with the above consumer sentiment and market realities, the analysts also note some hard figures.

Roughly 7.5m first-lien borrowers fell behind on their mortgage as of March 2010, about 15% of the 51m total borrowers. Of the 7.5m, more than 5m made a payment in the last three months, which means more than 10% of all mortgage borrowers are seriously delinquent, according to the report.

While many believe the shadow inventory represents the foreclosed inventory that has yet to reach the market. Since the US government introduced delays in the foreclosure process, such as the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) and the Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) program, Morgan Stanley measures the “shadow inventory” as the amount of homes that will need to be liquidated through the REO process.

The shadow inventory includes all loans behind by 90 days or more, already in foreclosure and a vast majority of laons that are 30-to-60 days delinquent. Morgan Stanley even includes a portion of current loans that will eventually default.

Morgan Stanley put the total number of homes in the shadow inventory at 8m at the end of Q110, and at the current sales rate, that would take 47 months to move through.

Morgan Stanley is not the only firm trying to measure the shadow inventory. Barclays Capital reported that it could peak at 4.7m in the summer of 2010. The research firm, Capital Economics, said the shadow inventory could reach 5.5m by the end of 2011.

“Given the sheer number of potential homes for sale and the weak pace at which demand is trending, the bottom of the housing market may last another 3-4 years, during which annual appreciation may reach only as high as inflation or income growth, meaning real asset values will remain unchanged or lower throughout this period,” according to the Morgan Stanley report.

Cleveland Fed Examines Link Between Foreclosure and Unemployment

According to an article released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland this week, much can be gleamed by studying the historic link between foreclosure and unemployment rates—including the fact that according to past patterns, we can expect the current high foreclosure rate to persist for some time.

The article abstract., penned by Timothy Dunne, VP at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, and Kyle Fee, a research assistant, based this statement on the “observation that states that experienced boom-bust housing cycles in the past (such as Texas, Oklahoma, Massachusetts, and California) had elevated foreclosure starts for years after the peak in foreclosure starts and inventory, and these previous boom-bust cycles were small in comparison to the current cycle.”

Other findings that the article reveals include the fact that typically high foreclosure rates precede high rates of

unemployment. In terms of the current downturn, the bank found that the foreclosure rate “began to rise sharply before the unemployment rate rose and well before the onset of the recession in December of 2007.” The bank attributes this to the fact that the nation also saw a decline in home prices and a weakening of loan quality, before the true recession began. These additional factors help to explain the earlier appearance of high foreclosure numbers.

Breaking down this data further, the article reported that the trends varied slightly for traditional prime, fixed-rate mortgages, which more closely followed the timing of the rise in the unemployment rate. The authors reported that, “For this group of loans, loan quality is generally higher, and the subsequent rise in the foreclosure start rate is more closely linked to economic weakness and job loss.”

According to the bank, this group of loans represents approximately 53 percent of first-lien mortgages prior to the start of the housing crisis. To back up this finding, the bank cites the government’s making Home Affordable Program, which stated that “60 percent of the program’s permanent mortgage loan modifications are the result of the loss of income.”

Following this logic, the bank found that “the obvious corollary is that the foreclosure start rate for loans other than prime, fixed rate mortgages, including subprime loans, led the cycle,” and that this group of loans saw higher foreclosure rates well before the unemployment rate began to rise and before the nation entered in recession.

Coming Soon: More Foreclosures

More than 1.7 million homeowners were verging on foreclosure this fall, making it likely that these houses will soon end up on the market one way or the other, driving down overall housing values.

“We’re going to be dealing with high levels of distressed (sales) in the marketplace for at least a couple of years,” says Mark Fleming, chief economist of researcher First American CoreLogic, which has been studying the problem.

Some real estate practitioners say they fear that this onslaught is coming.

“We’ve been in recovery mode for most of the year. How many foreclosures do they have to dump on the market to affect that? I don’t know,” says Deborah Farmer, owner of StarLight Realty in Tampa, Fla. “Any house priced under $225,000 will be affected by a large increase in foreclosures in this market.”

Source: Associated Press, Alan Zibel (12/17/2009)

Delinquent Mortgages Reach Record Levels

Not too much new here, but I’d thought I’d post it anyway. The only part that I’m not so sure about is whether the worst is over. If you’ve been reading older post, you’ll see that I believe we have further downside yet; primarily driven by all the foreclosures that have yet to work there way through the system.

Your comments are always welcome,
TRD

Daily Real Estate News  | November 20, 2009  |

Almost 10 percent of all mortgages on one- to four-unit properties are in some stage of foreclosure, up from 2.65 percent a year ago on a seasonally adjusted basis, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s National Delinquency Survey released Thursday.

The combined percentage of loans in foreclosure or at least one payment past due was 14.41 percent on a non-seasonally adjusted basis, the highest ever recorded in an MBA delinquency survey.

The bankers blamed the high foreclosure levels on unemployment. “Over the last year, we have seen the ranks of the unemployed increase by about 5.5 million people, increasing the number of seriously delinquent loans by almost 2 million loans and increasing the rate of new foreclosures from 1.07 percent to 1.42 percent,” says Jay Brinkmann, MBA’s chief economist.

Full story…

Foreclosures Spread to Middle Class

Forget the subprime-mortgage borrowers. This latest wave in the foreclosure crisis is hitting homeowners hurt by unemployment.

By Nancy Cook | NEWSWEEK

Published Oct 28, 2009

From the magazine issue dated Oct 28, 2009

The foreclosure crisis may be coming to a middle-class neighborhood near you. As joblessness continues to rise and as a person’sunemployment lasts on average 6.5 months, roughly 3.4 million homes are expected to go into foreclosure by the end of 2009. That’s up from 1.2 million homes in 2007, according to RealtyTrac, a subscription-based site that tracks foreclosures nationwide. “We’re not out of the woods yet,” says Rick Sharga, RealtyTrac’s senior vice president.

Sharga recently spoke to NEWSWEEK’s Nancy Cook about the various waves of the foreclosure crisis, the future of homeownership and why the Obama administration’s loan-modification program won’t stem this latest crop of foreclosures. Excerpts:

What’s this new “wave” in the foreclosure crisis?
The first wave was caused by bad loan products, while the second will be driven by unemployment. Right now, we’re at the beginning of wave two. There are virtually no more foreclosures that are the result of subprime lending. The demographics of the foreclosure crisis are changing and affecting people who were blue collar and entry to midlevel white collar. We’re now seeing foreclosures on properties with higher loan values. Probably the single best predictor of the areas hardest hit in next wave will be where you will see rising unemployment rates. The third wave is going to involve borrowers who had adjustable rate loans, in which they had the option of deciding what payment to make including interest-only payments. These loans are going to default at ridiculous rates, and that wave will go from the middle of next year until 2011.

If more middle-class people are expected to lose their homes, is the geography of the foreclosure crisis also expected to change?
We’re already seeing some shifts. Four or five states—California, Nevada, Florida, and Arizona—will always be among the top in the foreclosure parade. They overbuilt and overpriced those homes and sold them with horrific loans. What’s happening now is that you’re seeing places like Michigan and Ohio that were devastated by unemployment have an increase. Those foreclosures are much harder to salvage because those people have no income.

But even as the numbers of foreclosures rise, the housing market seems to be stabilizing.
We will see a L-shaped recovery in the housing market if this scenario plays out until 2013 and if the financial institutions meticulously manage the disposition of these properties. We won’t see a huge dip in home prices, but you also won’t have a huge run-up in the building part of the industry that contributed a fair number of jobs to the economy. The housing market will not feel healthy for a few years. This is not a short-lived recession.

What will this mean for the future of homeownership?
We had sort of gotten to an illogical point with the high levels of homeownership. In practice, it turns out that not everyone can afford a house. I think there is more of a realization among potential homeowners that they won’t do it until they can afford it.

If more people will rent, what will this mean for the rental market?
People assume that apartment rentals rates will go up, but in many markets in the country, the rental rates are the lowest they’ve been in years. In Las Vegas, Arizona, Florida, and California, people now rent a whole house instead of an apartment, so these cycles have an affect of lowering apartment rental prices and increasing vacancy rates.

Do you think the Obama administration has done enough to prevent foreclosures?
By sheer volume, the Obama administration’s plan is really having a minimal effect. The administration’s loan-modification program won’t have any success with the types of foreclosure you see now. If you’re unemployed, you don’t qualify for a loan modification.

Find this article at http://www.newsweek.com/id/220080

How to Qualify for a Loan Modification

(Online-Artikel.de) – Qualifying For Loan Modification Plan Newly Announced

The final aim of loan modification program is to modify mortgage terms. One should fulfill the eligibility criteria and qualify to avail the loan modification program. Obama’s home loan modification plan is like the twilight at the end of the tunnel. One has to qualify to avail the facilities of this plan. Some of the terms and conditions to qualify for this mortgage loan modification plan are as follows:

  • The current mortgage should be insured by either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
  • The home for which the home loan modification plan is being sought should be the primary residence of the applicant. If the house is being used for some other purpose, the application for the loan modification plan is going to be rejected.
  • The applicant should have received the current loan or mortgage before the 1st of January, 2009
  • The amount of the first mortgage or loan should be equal to or less than $729,750.
  • The monthly payment required to service the first mortgage should be more than 31% of the annual income.
  • One should be regular at filing the income tax returns. If the applicant is found to be irregular at filing the income tax returns the probability of the application getting rejected is very high.
  • If one has been late at paying the recent monthly payments, then again the chances of the mortgage modification approval are very bleak.
  • If one wants to avail the loan modification services one should be able to demonstrate and convince the authorities that the future monthly payments of the mortgage will not be possible unless and until the loan modification program is approved.
  • Most of the people want to modify mortgage just because they are not able to pay the monthly payments. If one fulfills the above-mentioned terms and conditions most of the loan modification companies will volunteer to offer professional loan modification services.

First things first, to qualify for Obama’s home loan modification plan, your mortgage must be insured by either Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. Currently, only these types of loans are eligible for the MHA plan. Also, the home must be your primary residence. Once you’ve met these two requirements, Obama’s home loan modification plan gives you choices. You may either refinance or modify your current mortgage. Homeowner’s who are current on their mortgage payments and have a loan balance less than 105% of the current value of the home are eligible for a refinance. If you have fallen behind on any payments, refinancing is not the route for you.

Do not lose hope. Obama’s home loan modification plan also provides for those who are experiencing financial difficulties and have fallen behind on their mortgage payments. A loan modification under the MHA plan is open to both those who are current on their payments and those who have missed a few payments. You must own the home as your primary residence and have a monthly payment, which is greater than 31% of your gross monthly income. Obama’s home loan modification plan is geared towards at-risk borrowers in danger of losing their homes. Help is given by adjusting various loan terms to make the monthly mortgage payment more affordable. What is considered affordable? By using a debt-to-income ratio, or DTI, lenders can compute a new monthly mortgage payment that does not exceed 31% of a borrower’s gross monthly income. Once the new payment is determined, the lender must then adjust various loan terms to arrive at that payment. A lender will first reduce the interest rate of the loan to as low as 2% to try to arrive at a 38% DTI threshold. If 38% cannot be reached by the interest rate alone, the lender can extend the term of the loan up to 40 years, or they can forbear principal on the loan. Once the 38% is reached, the lender and the Treasury will institute a dollar per dollar matching program to adjust the rate even more and bring the new monthly payment to the 31% DTI limit.

Once a loan modification is achieved, borrowers have a “trial run” of three months to ensure that the new payment and loan terms are realistic. After three months of on-time payments, the new mortgage terms will be fixed for five years. Obama’s home loan modification plan and the MHA plan is intended to stop the tide of foreclosures affecting the US economy and keep millions of American homeowners in their home. Loan modification program means the applicant applies to modify mortgage terms.

Loan Modification and Fighting Foreclosure

The following are some interesting comments I came across on another blog. If you are considering trying a loan mod, you will find these interesting, to say the least.
Your comments are always welcome,
TRD
October 21, 2009 04:37 PM ET | Permanent Link | Print

I recently went through nine months of trying to get my loan modified ["Why Obama's Housing Rescue Hasn't Prevented Record Foreclosures," usnews.com]. All I asked for was a reduction in the interest rate. Then, after approving the modification, Wells Fargo decided not to give it to me after all! I’m still waiting on the letter that is supposed to tell me why. The modification department personnel didn’t even have the decency to call me back after I left several messages over the course of a month. Wouldn’t it make more sense to keep me in my home (I have a good job) by just reducing the interest rate than to take my home and sell it for one third of what I purchased it for?

Comment by Carol of NV

It takes an irresponsible lender to create an irresponsible borrower. It does little good to modify someone’s mortgage if they no longer have a job. The time for write-downs, as opposed to write-offs, has largely passed. Foreclosure rates aren’t coming down anytime soon. Regarding “toxic assets,” if it’s toxic, it’s a liability, not an asset.

Comment by Rich of MO

Anyone who thinks that the government regulating more of this sector will provide for sustained improvement and long-lasting stability is not paying attention. If banks and lending institutions were willing to “bet their dollars” on a government-backed system of support and regulation, then why are the “successful” banks in such a hurry to pay off their bailout money? The free market will weed out the irresponsible; people will be taken advantage of, and people will get hurt; the lenders that “force” through these “bad” loans will be exposed and their prosperity as a business will suffer. Owning homes/property is not a right; it is a privilege, a privilege that most of us believe that you must work very hard to achieve and sustain. Government has as much business in lending regulation as they have in regulating what light bulbs I use in my home.

Comment by Conor of WA

Banks are also contributing to the foreclosure rate. Yes, they grant the loan modification trial period; after that some clients just cannot get a solid commitment nor even written communication from these banks. From personal experience—when I asked where should I go from here? They told me that my file was now in limbo, and I should return to paying the original mortgage premium. All the money I paid during the trial period has not been applied toward the mortgage account but deposited to a special account on which, I am sure, the bank accrues interest. My home is therefore in jeopardy of foreclosure through no fault of mine. My conclusion: Banks are sabotaging the loan modification program.

Comment by F. Wood of NY

I went through the loan modification program with my mortgage company and was denied based on lack of income. On a certain level, I see their point about me having no income as a guarantee of future payments, despite not being behind and living off my savings. Be that as it may, the program needs to allow people without income for a reasonable amount of time to modify their loans. Moreover, the rate of foreclosure will only really slow down once Congress allows homeowners to force banks into lowering the principle owed. In my area of West Atlanta, the landscape is littered with homes that sold for $400K-$600K. Since all of these homes have lost so much of their value, who exactly is going to buy them, and why should a short sell be the only option? Everyone (banks, buyers, sellers, builders, RE agents, et al.) is to blame.

Comment by Jay of GA

Do Loan Servicers Really Prefer Foreclosures?

By Mark Huffman
ConsumerAffairs.com

October 20, 2009

Foreclosure
FDIC Launches Foreclosure Prevention Initiative
Foreclosure: Losing the American Dream
Buying a Home in Foreclosure: What You Need to Know
Mortgage Crisis? Act Now to Avoid Foreclosure
Foreclosure Not Inevitable, Fast Action Needed
Avoiding Foreclosure Takes More Than Hope

News
Do Loan Servicers Really Prefer Foreclosures?
New North Carolina Law Tries To Slow Foreclosures
August Foreclosures Up 18 Percent Over 2008
Foreclosures Still Rising Along With Unemployment
Prevention Needed to Curb Foreclosure Rescue Scams
How Can You Benefit From The Obama Mortgage Plan?
Devil Is In the Details of Foreclosure ‘Bargains’
Foreclosures Rise 28 Percent in November
At Last: Bailout Trickling Down to Struggling Homeowners
Mortgagees Who Live In Home Less Likely To Default
Foreclosure Activity Increases At Double-Digit Pace
Lenders See Foreclosure Situation Worsening
One-Third Of Recent Home Buyers “Underwater”
Worst Foreclosure Activity Limited To Four States

More …

At the start of the foreclosure crises, personal finance experts urged struggling homeowners to contact their lenders if they started to fall behind on their mortgages. The lenders want to do everything they can, homeowners were told, to avoid a foreclosure.

Now, the experts aren’t so sure that’s the case.

Consumers who have jumped through a frustrating series of hoops to achieve a mortgage modification – a lower interest rates or more manageable payments – are convinced that old conventional wisdom is flawed.

Jason, of San Diego, says he’s become frustrated trying to complete a loan modification.

“I have gone through the modification process but have been denied, although no clear explanation was provided,” Jason told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I have been seeking assistance and guidance from quite a few bank representatives and have only received rude, misguided information.”

In the last year ConsumerAffairs.com has received hundreds of complaints from consumers who said they followed loan modification instructions, faxing requested documents repeatedly, only to have their applications disappear into a black hole.

“I faxed papers repeated times and was told that I need to fax more or that they never received them so they can start a modification,” Maria, of Sussex, N.J., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “I made payments and they never credited my account. Now they calls in October 2009 and they tell me that they stopped the modification because I never faxed out the papers. Is this a joke!”

The same story

Regardless of the loan servicer, the story seems to be the same. Consumers start down a road they think will lead to a modified mortgage, only to meet a wall of incompetence and indifference at the mortgage company.

“We sent all information requested by certified mail,” Regina, of Whitefish Bay, Wisc., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “As the others have described, we have had to make contact. They do not respond. The usual answer is ‘Whoever told you that is wrong.’ I actually have a tape of one of their agents stating ‘I can’t be responsible for what someone else told you.’ Should not they be required to respond in writing? Is this not a government funded program?”

The Treasury Department did, in fact, begin a loan modification program in March 2009 to encourage loan servicers to modify troubled loans to prevent foreclosures. But the process has proved slow, and for many, frustrating. Meanwhile, foreclosures continue unabated.

A new report by the National Consumer Law Center says its no mystery why loan servicers seem to be dragging their feet in modifying troubled mortgages. The report suggests these companies actually stand to profit if the troubled property goes to foreclosure.

The report, “Why Servicers Foreclose, When They Should Modify, and Other Puzzles of Servicer Behavior,” reveals that servicers, unlike investors or homeowners, generally don’t risk losing money on foreclosures.

“One common sense solution to the foreclosure crisis is to modify the loan terms in more instances,” said Diane Thompson, a NCLC attorney and author of the report. “Foreclosures are a costly ordeal for the homeowner, the lender, and the community. Yet they continue to outstrip loan modifications because servicers have no incentive to help borrowers stay in their homes.”

Doesn’t own loan

In almost every case, the loan servicer doesn’t own the loan. It’s simply a company — usually a bank — hired to collect the money from the homeowner and deliver the funds to the investors who own the mortgage. The investors lose money if the property goes to foreclosure, but the servicer doesn’t.

Homeowners seeking to save their homes by modifying unaffordable loans typically deal with servicers. That is why the financial interests of servicers have the potential to hurt homeowners, the report says.

And too many of those financial incentives encourage servicers to ignore the interests of homeowners. For example, the report suggests that servicers often deny homeowners principal and interest rate reductions because as servicers they find it profitable to offer repayment plans or forbearance agreements that do little to reduce homeowners’ debt burdens.

“Loan modifications inevitably cost the servicer something,” the report says. “A servicer deciding between a foreclosure and a loan modification faces the prospect of near certain loss if the loan is modified, and no penalty, but potential profit, if the home is foreclosed.”

The NCLC report also found that the lack of third-party oversight allows servicers to pursue foreclosure instead of effective loan modifications that would benefit homeowners as well as investors. While credit rating agencies and bond insurers do monitor servicers, their oversight too often encourages servicers to foreclose.

The NCLC report includes a detailed examination of loans in foreclosure from 1995-2009 and how components of servicer compensation affected the likelihood and speed of foreclosure. It also looks at the rise of the servicer industry as a by-product of securitization; and the limited, but only effective oversight of servicers by credit rating agencies and bond insurers.

No incentives

“The people who could change the way servicers are doing business — Congress, the Administration, and the Securities and Exchange Commission — and the market participants who set the terms of engagement — credit rating agencies and bond insurers — have failed to provide servicers with the necessary incentives to reduce foreclosures and increase loan modifications,” Thompson said.

The report suggests that rule changes remove the financial incentives for servicers to block modifications and mandate loan modifications before a foreclosure as a matter of law. Until it does, the report says, the foreclosure crisis will continue.

“I feel that I have been set up to lose my house,” Alesea of Kinston, N.C., told ConsumerAffairs.com. “Where is the justice in this?”
Read more: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/10/foreclosures_preferred.html#ixzz0UWlc9DGe

Switch to our mobile site