Posts Tagged ‘Modifications and Workouts’

Mortgage Modification/Cramdown Bill Update

From Today’s Washington Post:

Days before an expected vote, Senate leaders yesterday touted their version of a proposal to allow bankruptcy judges to modify mortgages, but have yet to secure the support of the financial services industry and face fierce opposition that could derail the proposal again.

The characterization of the opposition being “fierce” is unfortunate, but it appears to be accurate:

“I hope we can muster the courage and find the votes, although I know it will be hard,” (Senate Majority Whip) Durbin (D-Ill) said on the Senate floor yesterday. Durbin has been pushing the measure for more than two years. “It’s hard to imagine that today the mortgage bankers would have clout in this chamber, but they do.”

More here.

For more on the President’s Foreclosure Prevention Plan, click here.

  • Share/Bookmark

Does the Cramdown Bill Have a Chance of Passing?

A report from Housing Wire suggests that the answer may be ‘no’.

“[Senator Richard] Durbin [D-Ill]  had a hell of a time coming up with a bill that’d pass the Senate,” said Burt Ely, a banking expert and principal of Ely & Co. “He’s watered it down so much that his proposal now limits the accessibility or intention of the bill. Even if he got it passed, the gulf is so big it wouldn’t even get out of [the House] conference committee to be enacted into law.”

Not surprisingly, consumer advocates are seeing red.

“With Durbin, Dodd and Reid doing the bidding for the banks, this current state of the cramdown bill will have virtually no impact for at-risk borrowers,” says Bruce Marks, CEO of Neighborhood Assistance Corp. of America, a mortgage broker and consumer activist. “The Senate Democrats have made no measurable actions this year to help the housing crisis.”

More here.

  • Share/Bookmark

HR 1106 is About Fairness (or “What About Bob?”)

Word out of Washington is that HR 1106 will be voted on next week.  Today’s debates and votes were procedural in nature.

Apparently, this gives more time for the highly-paid bank lobbyists to organize their “packs” and convince House Members that allowing Chapter 13 debtors to cram down the mortgage on their principal residences will bring their the world ever closer to financial ruin.  From The Huffington Post:

“We continue to be opposed to the bill and that hasn’t changed, but we do live in the real world, and we do understand that this is very likely to happen, and we owe it to our members to recognize that reality and to limit the damage as much as possible,” said Francis Creighton, a lobbyist for the Mortgage Bankers Association, which spent $4.2 million on lobbying last year. “We’re encouraged by the fact that the bill is moving to limit the damage of cram-down rather than make it worse.”

At the very least, you can see that my quip about them being “highly paid” was not altogether gratuitous.   But what is this about the “damage” of cram-down?  Give me a break.

Perhaps Mr. Creighton and his fellow highly paid lobbyists are not aware that cram-down is already happening in the bankruptcy system and so far, vast bread-lines have not formed because of it.  Indeed, if the facts justify it, I can propose a cram-down for anyone with the following: investment property; an owner occupied two or three family home; a family home that also has commercial space (such as a store front with living space above it – very popular in some towns on the Cape); a car (subject to certain limitations imposed by BAPCPA – which are not particularly relevant for this discussion); and a boat.  Actually, we can cram down any boat big or small provided the facts justify it.  I just cannot do it on people with single family residences.  Congress is trying to change that.

So why is the lending industry spending hoards and hoards of cash to stop it? Again, from The Huffington Post:

[T]he mortgage industry contends the measure will impose steep and unpredictable costs on its companies, which will be forced to pass them along to borrowers in the form of higher fees and interest rates. The industry spent millions last year on a successful lobbying effort to kill the bill….

Higher fees and interest rates? Perhaps they if spent less on lobbying, they would not need to charge higher fees and interest rates.  But putting my comedic skills aside for a moment….consider this illustration:

Bob and his wife live in West Roxbury.* He has worked as a State Employee for 15 years, and his wife took a job as a manager of a Circuit City after they had their third child, who is now 5.  His wife will soon be unemployed and will be trying to get back to work in retail which is (to put it mildly) struggling.  Bob is not sure he’s going to survive the the budget cuts his department is facing.  In 2004, they refinanced their home to pay bills and to get what they thought was a lower rate for a few years.  And it was…but for only two years, but they assumed (and in hindsight now see that they assumed incorrectly) that they could refinance their way out of it.  The house is now worth $250,000.  The mortgage totals $350,000.

If Bob lives in a single family home on a nice lot, he cannot currently cram down the mortgage in chapter 13.

If Bob lives in a two-family home, where he and his family reside in the larger of the two units and the second is rented out to tenants (who may, or may not be current on their rent), currently he can cram it down.

So this claim that “if bankruptcy judges can modify loans, the world and all you know and love will end as we know it” is really just fear-mongering.  Why do we know this?  Because cram downs are already allowed.  Just not for Bob and his family if he is living in a single family home.  The only question left: why the fear-mongering?

HR 1106 is not about cram downs – it’s about fairness in the bankruptcy system.  Please make sure your leaders know this.

*Fictional characters in a nonfictional town.  Any resemblence with actual people in West Roxbury (or anywhere else) is entirely coincidental…with that said though, if this is you, we should talk more about your options.

  • Share/Bookmark

Tell Congress: It’s Now or Never

Tomorrow (February 26) the House will vote on HR 1106, a housing package that includes the judicial modification provision of HR 200. That provision would let homeowners turn to the bankruptcy courts to allow them to modify the mortgages securing their principal residence. Currently, bankruptcy provides no remedy for homeowners who are trying to save their home from foreclosure.

While there are a number of complicated issues affecting our economy, the housing crisis continues to devolve.  The Washington Times reports that there is no relief in sight from foreclosures and the falling home values that help fueling it.  We can encourage Congress to do nothing, while the economy continues a downward spiral. Or we can tell them to pass this bill and give homeowners the chance they deserve in bankruptcy.

House approval is not guaranteed. The American Banks Association and the Financial Services Roundtable have sent letters to house leaders urging that the bankruptcy modification provisions be removed from the “Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009.”  The “buzz” I am hearing is that the lender lobbyists are showing up in “packs” in Member offices urging opposition to the judicial loan modification proposals.  “Packs.”  What the hell are they so scared of that they have to travel in packs?  According to a report from CNN, two-thirds of mortgage servicers have agreed to the foreclosure mitigation plan outlined by the Secretary of the Treasury.

[T]he prospect of a law amending the bankruptcy code to allow judges to dictate new terms on mortgages in the event of an individual filing bankruptcy, was also likely a significant factor in the companies’ willingness to cooperate with the administration’s plans.

The House is working on legislation which would be aimed at helping people in bankruptcy to hang on to their primary residences. It could see bankruptcy judges compelling mortgage-servicing companies to accept new terms on an individual’s mortgage.

Other than Citigroup, other large banks remain opposed to the bankruptcy-law change, arguing that it would lead to borrowers to seek bankruptcy at the first sign of trouble, rather than consider other options that might be more costly.

I don’t buy that – mainly because when I meet with clients, they are the first to tell me that filing bankruptcy is the last thing they wanted to do.   So to the lenders and their servicers, I say this: if the remaining one-third of you do not want bankruptcy judges modifying their loans, modify the loans so that the homeowner doesn’t have to file bankruptcy.  And for those two-thirds who have expressed a willingness to modify the loans, do it.  Let’s cut the crap and just do it.

Will it increase bankruptcy filings?  The Congressional Budget Office says yes.  But they also say that more than 1 million homeowners facing foreclosure could benefit from this legislation.  I view that as 1 million less people who will lose their home if this bill fails.  These people are our neighbors, our friends and our colleagues.

So what can you do?  Contact your member of Congress by phone or fax.

Email your friends and family.  Ask them to contact their congressional representative by phone or fax.

What do you tell them?  Try something like this:

We cannot end the financial crisis without stemming the rising tide of foreclosures. Court-supervised loan modification is an essential component of an effective and comprehensive plan to meet that challenge.  And unlike every other solution being considered in Washington, it comes at no cost to U.S. taxpayers.

If we are successful tomorrow, we move over to the Senate.  If we are not, that is it.  No second chance.  So please don’t wait.  Support HR 1106.

And if you do not support it, I’ll remember.  I’ll remember it when my friend loses her home because she lost her job.  I’ll remember it when my house value plummets because the home next door is vacant and abandoned because the previous owner could not afford the payments.  I’ll remember it on election day.

Ok, so maybe that last bit is a little over the top, but you get my point.  It really is now or never.  And Congress really needs to know this now.

For more thoughts, check out Real Clear Politics:  Let Bankruptcy Courts Change Mortgages

Previous posts on the subject:

The President’s “Plan”

Mortgage Modification Legislation Update: Citigroup Supports the Bill

Keep the Bankruptcy Option On the Table

Changing Chapter 13: Some Facts on the Pandora’s Box

Mortgage Modification Update: Not So Hopeful

  • Share/Bookmark

The President’s “Plan”

I am no economist, but there’s something about the President’s mortgage foreclosure rescue plan that just has not been sitting well with me.  I have not been able to put my finger on it and do the research to put together a thoughtful article.  Fortunately, I can stay focused on my clients and share with you this article from BusinessWeek by Peter Coy and Theo Francis who point out that the plan doesn’t address the danger of negative equity, and that homeowners with negative equity “might just walk away.”

Even for those who want to keep their homes at the moment, reducing monthly payments without addressing negative equity may just postpone the inevitable. “The reality is, people lose jobs, especially in a recession. People get transferred, people have to move at some point,” says Sean O’Toole, founder and CEO of ForeclosureRadar.com, which tracks California foreclosures. “By lowering payments and not principal balance, you’re guaranteeing the extension of this crisis for years to come.”

More here.

  • Share/Bookmark

Another Foreclosure Workshop Planned

From the Boston Globe:

The Federal Reserve Bank will sponsor a second workshop aimed at preventing foreclosures by bringing borrowers and lenders together to find alternatives.

The workshop, scheduled for February 14 at the Connecticut Convention Center in Hartford, is modeled after a successful event held at Gillette Stadium in Foxborough in August. More than 2,200 borrowers met face-to-face with lender representatives, and about 35 percent of borrowers received loan modifications or workout offers, according to the Boston Fed.

Remember the Gillette workshop? I remember hearing that people were walking away feeling a bit disgruntled. One client told me that he saw people waiting for hours and never spoke with their lender. I also remember hearing later on that mortgages were not getting modified in any meaningful way.

There’s more about this upcoming event here.

If you’re thinking about going to this event, contact us. We have access to tools that may lead you to a more affordable housing payment, and we might be able to save you the trip to Hartford.

In related news from Bloomberg:

The Federal Reserve will ease terms on residential mortgages acquired in the rescues of Bear Stearns Cos. and American International Group Inc., seeking to stem foreclosures.

The Fed policy is targeting borrowers who are 60 days or more overdue on loan payments and covers modifications of interest rates and payment plans. The program uses the Fed’s authority in the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program and was released today by the House Financial Services Committee.

“It reflects the understandable desire of the Federal Reserve to have some cooperation” with the Obama administration, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank told reporters today in Washington. “This is a very big deal.”

  • Share/Bookmark

Before Foreclosure Rescue Scammers Start Knocking…

I came across an interesting story (and video) over at CNBC.com: Fraud at your Front Door which discusses foreclosure rescue scam artists who are knocking at the front door of homeowners facing foreclosure. I have met clients who have told me they have been approached by individuals how have been at their doors offering assistance. But there’s no rescue. They’s only a rip-off.

Not only do the homeowners lose money, they lose time to productively work with their lender. I heard a lender attorney recently say that homeowners have told them that “…we paid this person to help us.” But the person is not helping them, and as this CNBC story points out, in many cases, the “helper” doesn’t even contact the lender. In addition to losing valuable time and money, the homeowner may also lose credibility with the lender.

The story recommends that if your lender is unwilling to relax the payments to help you, seek a qualified real estate attorney or non-profit credit counselor. But there are also local mortgage counselors who will help you with a modification request (click here for ESAC located in Boston). And I also think you should not rule out speaking to a bankruptcy attorney so you can discuss your options. Or, I encourage you to contact us if your lender is unwilling to work with you.

  • Share/Bookmark

So You Think It’s a Good Time to Buy a House?

Contrary to what you may hear in advertisements, 2009 may not be a good time to buy a home unless you are planning on living there for several years. This bit of news is not actually a huge shock for me, but it is not helpful for several of my clients whose success depends – at the very least – on people buying real estate in 2009.

This is again, another reason why we need meaningful reform out of Washington soon. Undoubtedly, the proposed changes to the Bankruptcy Code which would allow judges to reduce mortgages of consumers could help. But some contend that the reform will accelerate “lenders’ losses on home-equity, automobile and credit-card loans.” I’m not so that is a particularly bad thing.

About 10 years ago, I had abdominal surgery. As luck would have it, one of the sutures that was designed to dissolve didn’t. Instead, it got infected. It was very painful.

Admittedly, I’m a big baby when it comes to pain (my staff will back that up). This pain was far too much to handle….so my friend put me into a cab and we went to the emergency room. When the doctor came in, he examined the incision, looked at me square in the eye and offered these words:

(more…)

  • Share/Bookmark

Mortgage Modification Legislation Update: Citigroup Supports the Bill

Big news out of Washington, from the Washington Post:

Financial giant Citigroup Inc has agreed to support a controversial rewrite of U.S. bankruptcy law aimed at helping troubled mortgage borrowers, three Democratic senators said on Thursday.

Senators Richard Durbin of Illinois, Charles Schumer of New York and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut said the legal reform would help “millions of families save their homes.”

Citigroup has agreed to support, under certain conditions, a rewrite of bankruptcy law. Under the change, known as “cramdown,” bankruptcy courts could alter the terms of mortgages, subject to certain conditions, the senators said.

More here

  • Share/Bookmark

Keep the Bankruptcy Option on the Table

The new Congress will be introducing legislation that will allow homeowners in bankruptcy to “cram down” their mortgages on their principal residences. When a home is worth less than the amount owed on the mortgage (or as I typically see, mortgages), a cram down will enable the homeowner to reduce the amount owed to the value of the property. Currently, debtors can only do this on investment property, and on property that is not solely the primary residence of the debtor (i.e., a multi-family dwelling).

From a Reuters report:

Courts can generally cut through complex mortgage contracts more aggressively than the private sector, said Wade Henderson, head of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, who has testified before Congress on the issue.

“The continued erosion of the housing market has probably made adopting this proposal inevitable,” he said.

I also invite readers to check out Calculated Risk, and Tanta’s discussions on cram downs. You’ll find those links here.

The final version of what the new President will sign remains to be seen. However, any homeowner facing foreclosure should start exploring whether bankruptcy is an option now and plan ahead (and if you’re in bankruptcy, you should consider speaking with your attorney about whatever options you may have). I know that no one wants to file bankruptcy. But if it comes down to whether you can actually keep your home, you would be foolish to not keep all of your options on the table, including the option to file for bankruptcy protection.

  • Share/Bookmark