LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEY CALIFORNIA, LOAN MODIFICATION CALIFORNIA ARIZONA NEVADA, ORANGE COUNTY, AVOID BANKRUPCTY OR FORECLOSURE
California Loan Modification, Loan Modification News Blog, Loan Modification Attorneys in California, Foreclosure, Bankruptcy,
Foreclosure Help, Bankruptcy, Bad Credit, Mortgage Refinance, Short Sale, Refinance Loan, Loan Modification, Home Foreclosure, Short Sales, Loans with Bad Credit, Short Selling, Foreclosures, Bad Credit Loans
 
LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEY, BANKRUPTCY, FORECLOSURE
CALIFORNIA LOAN MODIFICATION, MORTGAGE MODIFICATION, BAD CREDIT, NEVADA, ARIZONA
LOAN MODIFICATION, SHORT SALE, BAD LOANS, BAD CREDIT MORTGAGE, HOME FORECLOSURE, FORECLOSURE HELP,
AVOID BANKRUPTCY, AVOID FORECLOSURE, HAVE YOU BEEN TURNED DOWN BY YOUR BANK?

You Have Questions and We Have Answers! - "We Are Attorneys!
"
(888) 678-NOBK
Call Today! (888)678-6625

Read Our Reviews: YAHOO
GOOGLE
Email:
Begin@LOANMODIFICATIONS
ATTORNEYSATLAW.COM
ServicesLoan Modification Services for your home loanCredit Counseling on your mortgageBankruptcy analysis because of a bad mortgageLitigation ServicesContractsContract Negotiation Services
 
CONTACT US:


LOAN
MODIFICATION
ATTORNEYS
AT LAW .com


(888)678-6625
(888)678-NOBK

J. Scott Souders, ESQ.
California State
Bar Number 069425
Since 1976

Mike Garcia
Real Estate Mortgage Advisor
Since 1997

 
E-MAIL: Begin@LOANMODIFICATIONS
ATTORNEYSATLAW.COM



This Business was Awarded

Best in Business

Orange County CA, Visit: OrangeCountyCA
BusinessDirectory.com

   
 


 
ARTICLES:
Popular Articles from Free Sources

The Loan Modification Business is changing by the day, to get the up to date information about your case please give us a call. The information and notices contained on this website are intended as general research and information and are expressly not intended, and should not be regarded, as financial or legal advice. The articles below are from article base and other free sources

ARTICLE 1:
Sub Prime Loan Modification

ARTICLE 2:
Why Do Lenders Prefer a Loan Modification Over a Foreclosure?

ARTICLE 3:
Hope Now Loan Modifications, Loan Modification as a Chapter 13 Buyout Alternative
ARTICLE 4:
Loan Modification Options-Things You Should Know!
ARTICLE 5:
FTC: Foreclosure Rescue Scams: Another Potential Stress for Homeowners in Distress
ARTICLE 6:
Forbearance and Loan Modification
ARTICLE 7:
Mortgage Loan Modification Assistance - How to Modify My Loan
ARTICLE 8:
Loan Modification Help-What Is The Best Way To Get My Loan Modified
ARTICLE 9:
Tips and Tricks of a Loan Modification
ARTICLE 10:
Loan Modification Glossary
ARTICLE 11:
GAO-09-837, Troubled Asset Relief Program: Treasury Actions Needed to Make the Home Affordable Modification Program More Transparent and Accountable
ARTICLE 12:
TG-252: Making Home Affordable Program on Pace to Offer Help to Millions of Homeowners; Public Release of Data Provides Transparency on Servicer Performance
  Academic:
Information Article 1:
About a Foreclosures
Information Article 2:
About a Refinancing
Information Article 3:
About a Mortgage or Home Loan
  Information Article 4:
About Loan Modification
  Information Article 5:
About a Short Sale
  Information Article 6:
About a Debt Negotiation
  Information Article 7:
About Bad Credit and Credit
 




CALL US TODAY!
(888) 678-6625



ALL ABOUT CALIFORNIA

ALL ABOUT ORANGE COUNTY


LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEY CALIFORNIA, LOAN MODIFICATION CALIFORNIA ARIZONA NEVADA, ORANGE COUNTY, AVOID BANKRUPCTY OR FORECLOSURE, CALIFORNIA LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEY,, LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEYS IN CALIFORNIA, (888)678-6625, FORECLOSURE LOAN MODIFICATION, FORECLOSURE LOAN MODIFICATION, BANKRUPTCY LOAN MODIFICATION, HOME LOAN MODIFICATION, (888)678-6625, LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW ORANGE COUNTY, LOAN MODIFICATION ORANGE COUNTY, LOAN MODIFICATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW, FORECLOSURE LOAN MODIFICATION ORANGE COUNTY, FORECLOSURE LOAN MODIFICATION, BANKRUPTCY LOAN MODIFICATION ORANGE COUNTY, BANKRUPTCY LOAN MODIFICATION, HOME LOAN MODIFICATION ORANGE COUNTY, HOME LOAN MODIFICATION, REFINANCE ORANGE COUNTY, REFINANCE, FORECLOSURE ORANGE COUNTY, FORECLOSURE, Bankruptcy, Bad Credit, Mortgage Refinance, Short Sale, Refinance Loan, Loan Modification, Home Foreclosure, Short Sales, Loans with Bad Credit, Short Selling, Foreclosure Sale, Loans for people with bad credit, bad credit refinance, Foreclosure Help, Debt Negotiation, , loan modification, foreclosure help, mortgage help, mortgage modification, real estate lawyer, mortgage Loan modification, loan modification programs, mortgage foreclosure help, federal loan modification, mortgage, loans, mortgage loan, mortgage loans, loan modification agents, avoid foreclosure, foreclosure assistance, and foreclosure help by approved loan modification attorney, Loan Modification Lawyer in Orange County, CA - Mortgage Modification Attorney, Los Angeles Family Lawyer | Experienced Attorneys Protecting Your Legal Rights and Values, California, , Aliso Viejo 92656, 92698, Anaheim 92801, 92802, 92803, 92804, 92805, 92806, 92807, 92808, 92809, 92812, 92814, 92815, 92816, 92817, 92825, 92850, 92899, Atwood, 92811, Brea, 92821, 92822,92823, Buena Park, 90620 ,90621,90622, 90624, Capistrano Beach, 92624, Corona del Mar, 92625, Costa Mesa, 92626, 92627, 92628, Cypress, 90630, Dana Point, 92629, East Irvine, 92650, El Toro, 92609, Foothill Ranch, 92610, Fountain Valley, 92708, 92728, Fullerton, 92831, 92832, 92833, 92834, 92835, 92836, 92837, 92838, Garden Grove, 92840, 92841, 92842, 92843 ,92844, 92845, 92846, Huntington Beach , 92605, 92615, 92646, 92647, 92648, 92649, Irvine, 92602, 92603, 92604, 92606, 92612, 92614, 92616, 92617, 92618, 92619, 92620, 92623, 92697, La Habra, 90631, 90632, 90633, La Palma, 90623, Ladera Ranch, 92694, Laguna Beach , 92651, 92652, Laguna Hills ,92653, 92654,92607,92677, Laguna Woods, 92637,Lake Forest, 92630, Los Alamitos, 90720, 90721, Midway City, 92655, Mission Viejo, 92690, 92691, 92692,Newport Beach , 92658, 92659, 92660, 92661, 92662, 92663, 92657, Orange, 92856, 92857, 92859, 92862, 92863, 92864, 92865, 92866, 92867, 92868, 92869, Placentia, 92870, 92871, Rancho Santa Margarita 92688, San Clemente, 92672, 92673, 92674, San Juan Capistrano, 92675, 92693, Santa Ana , 92701, 92702, 92703, 92704, 92705 ,92706, 92707, 92711, 92712, 92725.92735, 92799, Seal Beach , 90740, Silverado 92676, Stanton, 90680, Sunset Beach 90742, Surfside 90743, Trabuco Canyon, 92678, 92679, Tustin ,92780, 92781,92782, Villa Park, 92861, Westminster, 92683, 92684, 92685, Yorba Linda, 92885, 92886, 92887


"How do you become famous? Helping people! Changing their lives and making a difference in their lives. Loving them" - Eric Brenn
 
 

We are Attorneys
that Help Homeowners

that have been turned down for modification.
______________________________________________________
We use our legal expertise for loan modifications to
avoid foreclosure and bankruptcy court.

A Loan Modification is a permanent change in one or more of the terms of a mortgagor's loan, allows the loan to be reinstated, and results in a payment the mortgagor can afford.

Loan Modification is arguably the most effective tool you can use if you are behind on your mortgage and in midst of a financial hardship to save your home from entering foreclosure. With a loan modification, the mortgage loan is restructured so that it is affordable and can fit comfortably into your budget rather than being an overwhelming monthly drain on already tight finances.

Loan modification agreements come in different forms but quite frequently they involve the reduction of mortgage's interest rate for a specified period of time so the homeowner can continue to make payments and stay in the home. Loans can also be modified so they have a longer amortization term (e.g. 40 year instead of 30 year) which will cause the payments to decrease. Principal writedowns are rare, but they do indeed happen where the bank actually writes down some of the principal amount.



Is Your Lender or Servicer Not Helping You or Being Abusive...

Lenders and servicers are very busy with desperate homeowners trying to save their homes from foreclosure. Unfortunately, they do not have the man power or the capabilities to save everyone.

Many people are simply getting lost in the system and suffering an unnecessary foreclosure when they could have worked it out with their lender.

However, when a lawyer is involved, it seems as if the calls start to get answered and the letters responded to. Often this can make the difference between saving your home and losing your home.

With an attorney involved, you have an important ally in your corner to get you the mortgage help you need, FAST!

Do I Really Need an Attorney?

There are many people advertising loan modifications services on the Internet and through other media outlets. While some of these people may be well-meaning and competent, troubled borrowers need to keep in mind that there is a virtual "army" of out-of-work loan officers, brokers, escrow officers, and underwriters out there looking to make money. Many of these mortgage professionals are the same ones who sold the toxic loans that now need modification. Extreme caution should be exercised when hiring someone to get you out of a bad loan. To avoid falling victim to a predatory lender twice, we suggest hiring an attorney, whether our firm or another.

These are just a few of the questions you should get the answers to before you call your lender/servicer. We are ready to answer your questions now.
Call 1(888) 678-NOBK (6625) Today


NOTE: The information and notices contained on this website are intended as general research and information and are expressly not intended, and should not be regarded, as financial or legal advice. We attempt to ensure that the material contained on the website is accurate and complete at the date first published, however you should recognize that information contained on this website may become out of date over time. Readers who have a particular question about real estate, mortgages, financing, or foreclosure, or who believe they require legal counsel, should seek the advise of an attorney



 WHO QUALIFIES FOR A LOAN MODIFICATION?

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - FAQ

Question 1: How do I know if I qualify for a mortgage modification?

Answer: Under the government plan for a "Home Affordable Modification" you must:
  • Be an owner-occupant in a 1-4 unit property.
  • A loan originated before January 1 2009.
  • A mortgage payment (including taxes, insurance and home owners association dues) that is more than 31% of your gross income, and have a mortgage payment that is no longer affordable.
Who is to say what you can afford: the bank, the government, or you and your family?

Are there exceptions to these requirements?


Question 2: Must I be behind on my mortgage payments to be eligible?

Answer: No. Responsible borrowers who are struggling to remain current on their mortgage are eligible.

Who decides if you are responsible and struggling?

Question 3: Is my lender required to modify my loan?

Answer: If you have missed 2 or more payments and your lender/servicer is participating in the "Making Home Affordable Program", your lender/servicer must evaluate your loan to determine if you qualify.

Question 4: In utilizing the Loan Modification option to bring an asset current, can the mortgagee include all fees and corporate advances?

Answer: Mortgagee Letter 2008-21 states in part: Legal fees and related foreclosure costs for work actually completed and applicable to the current default episode may be capitalized into the modified principal balance.

Question 5: May a mortgagee perform an interior inspection of the property if they have concerns about property condition?

Answer: Yes, the mortgagee may conduct any review it deems necessary to verify that the property has no physical conditions which adversely impact the mortgagor's continued ability to support the modified mortgage payment.

Question 6: Can a mortgagee include late charges in the Loan Modification?

Answer: Mortgagee Letter 2008-21 states that accrued late charges should be waived by the mortgagee at the time of the Loan Modification.

Question 7: When utilizing a Loan Modification option, can a mortgagee capitalize an escrow advance for Homeowner's Association fees?

Answer: HUD Handbook 4330.1 REV-5, Paragraph 2-1, Section B, Escrow Obligations states: Mortgagees must also escrow funds for those items which, if not paid, would create liens on the property positioned ahead of the FHA-insured mortgage.

Question 8: Is there a new basis interest rate which mortgagees may assess when completing a Loan Modification?

Answer: Yes, Mortgagee Letter 2008-21 states that the new basis interest rate is 200 points above the monthly average yield on US Treasury Securities, adjusted to a constant maturity of 10 years.

Question 9: Will HUD subordinate a Partial Claim, should a mortgagor subsequently default and qualify for a Loan Modification?

Answer: If a mortgagor subsequently defaults and qualifies for a Loan Modification, HUD will subordinate the Partial Claim.

Question 10: Are mortgagees required to perform an escrow analysis when completing a Loan Modification?

Answer: Yes, mortgagees are to perform a retroactive escrow analysis at the time the Loan Modification to ensure that the delinquent payments being capitalized reflect the actual escrow requirements required for those months capitalized.

Question 11: Is the mortgagor eligible for the upfront premium refund at payoff of a modified loan?

Answer: It depends upon when the closing date occurred. For assets closed:

After July 1, 1991 but before January 1, 2001, the 7-year unearned premium refund schedule shown in Mortgagee Letter 1994-1 remains in effect,

On or after January 1, 2001 that are subsequently refinanced, the 5-year refund schedule shown in the attachment of Mortgagee Letter 2000-46 applies, or

On or after December 8, 2004, refunds of upfront MIP are eliminated except, when the mortgagor refinances to another FHA insured mortgage. The refund schedule attached to Mortgagee Letter 2005-03 has been modified to a 3-year period.

Question 12: Can a mortgagee qualify an asset for the Loan Modification option when the mortgagor is unemployed, the spouse is employed, but the spouse name is not on the mortgage?

Answer: Based upon this scenario, the mortgagee should conduct a financial review of the household income and expenses to determine if surplus income is sufficient to meet the new modified mortgage payment, but insufficient to pay back the arrearage. Once this process has been completed the mortgagee should then consult with their legal counsel to determine if the asset is eligible for a Loan Modification since the spouse is not on the original mortgage.


FACT OR FICTION
4 QUESTION QUIZ
1) Lenders are giving principal reductions = Fiction.
In the first half of 2008, less than a quarter of 1% of loan modifications had a principle reduction. The lenders prefer to give an affordable payment and lower interest rate instead of lowering the principal balance.

2) Anyone can get a loan modification = Fiction. There must be a hardship and / or a reason that the borrower can no longer afford the payments whether its an adjustable rate or not.

3) Loan modifications are only a temporary fix. = Fiction. Even though some loan modifications are temporary, there are permanent solutions that will keep your payments affordable for up to 40 years.

4) A lower mortgage payment is always the answer. = Fiction. Many homeowners also have thousands of dollars in unsecured debt. If you already have a low interest rate on your home loan and credit card payments are high, debt settlement may be a way to keep you in your home.


Loan Modification has become the solution of choice for people facing unaffordable mortgages and foreclosure, but as the market for mortgage assistance grows, the number of misinformed homeowners is also rising steadily. A lot of people enter loan modifications with serious misconceptions, and end up making the wrong decisions, based on inaccurate information.

So how do you tell fact from fiction? Can a loan modification really stop foreclosure and solve all your mortgage problems? This guide shows you some of the most common myths about loan modification, and the truth behind them.

Myth #1: You can do it on your own.


Technically, you can—but it takes a lot more work and the results probably won’t be the same. Loss Mitigation is one of a bank’s busiest departments; a typical loss mitigation officer can handle as many as 800 cases at a time.

These people are overwhelmed and do not have time to deal with your problem adequately. It’s not uncommon to be passed from one agent to another, and never get any real answers.

A loan modification attorney, on the other hand, can talk directly to your lender, and use significant leverage to get your file to the top of the agents’s stack. When a lawyer represents you, the calls get returned faster, you get more personalized service, and you gain the capability to actually obtain the type of loan you can need.

Myth #2: Your lender would rather foreclose than modify your loan.

In some cases, foreclosure is the more practical option. But according to a Tower Group study, lenders lose substantial money with every foreclosure, and are required to increase their reserves in addition. The banks already own too many foreclosure properties and have too many non-performing loans on their books. They would much prefer to adjust your mortgage to something affordable and convert your loan into a performing asset. Don’t be intimidated by threats of foreclosure.

Myth #3: You can’t stop the foreclosure process.

It’s true that your chances dwindle the longer you wait, but until your home is auctioned off, no one can really kick you out. A loan modification can stop the process as close as seven days before the sale date. This buys you enough time to get back on your feet while your lawyers work out a better arrangement with your lender. Of course, it’s always better if you take steps early on.

Myth #4: It’s an instant solution to mortgage problems.


Loan modifications really work, but they take time, the right expertise, and money. Depending on how far behind you are, the process can take anywhere from one to three months. But since it stops the foreclosure process, you won’t have to worry about losing your home while the modification is under way. If you submit your paperwork on time and cooperate with your lawyer, you can speed up the process and avoid complications.

Myth #5: You need good credit to qualify.

Standard requirements vary from lender to lender, but the bottom line is that the loan modification should make financial sense to your bank. Your credit rating doesn’t have anything to do with it. Your lender will want proof that falling behind was a temporary snag, and that you can afford to stay on track if they do modify your loan. This means you have to have a job and a valid proof of hardship. You don’t need to disclose your credit rating in most circumstances

Myth #6: Loan Modification companies are scams. Companies take your money, but don’t really do any thing.

In any business there are always some unscrupulous people, but you can find legitimate organizations that will help you. The important idea in loan modification is to work only with an experienced and knowledgeable law firm or attorney who has a track record of success. You should thoroughly check on the background of anyone who claims to be able to do a loan modification before you spend your money.

To get in touch with a good loan modification attorney today
(888) 678-6625

  STEPS IN PREVENTING FORECLOSURE

1.                  Identify any deadlines, especially a foreclosure sale date, as a completed foreclosure sale will usually end a homeowner's ability to take preventative action. The mortgage loan services should be contacted to obtain this information.

2.                  Determine the cause of the default and what financial issues need to be resolved to get back on track and prevent foreclosure.

3.                  Evaluate current income through tax returns and other proof and expenses through examination of bills to determine a realistic budget and what amount is available to make mortgage payments.

4.                  Look for ways to increase income or sell assets that could be devoted to mortgage payments.

5.                  Reduce other financial obligations such as other mortgages, property taxes and liens, property insurance, PMI, utility payments, credit cars and other unsecured debts, and student loans to devote more to the foreclosure avoidance plan.
 

6.                  Begin saving based on the identified budget toward the foreclosure avoidance plan.

7.                  Determine amount of mortgage payments, any arrears, and the total due on the mortgage.

8.                  Request a delay of the foreclosure sale by providing preliminary information about a workout plan or an offer of partial payment. Get an agreement in writing.

9.                  Determine the type of loan and what workout options apply both to retain the home and, if applicable, when giving up the home. The options might include repayment plans, forbearance plans to suspend or temporarily reduce the mortgage payment, short sales, deed transfer in lieu of foreclosure, assumption of the mortgage by a third party, modification of the original loan due to a reduction in net income. Examples may include reduction in the interest rate, extension of the loan period, capitalization of the missed payments and reamortization, balance reduction.

10.              Other related options might include bankruptcy, litigation of loan errors or abusive practices.

 

To get in touch with a good loan modification attorney today (888) 678-6625

There is something wrong with our system when millions of homeowners can't afford to make their mortgage payments, meanwhile the lenders and investment banks are getting bailouts with our tax dollars.

Here you will find honest answers to your mortgage modification questions. And the latest information on who qualifies for the government Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan.

Call today at 1(888) 678-NOBK(6625).
Do not miss your chance to get a mortgage modification just because you got the wrong information.

 

LOAN MODIFICATION NEWS

New California Law SBx2 7 Will Delay Foreclosure.

Don't be threatened while you are working with your lender/servicer to modify your mortgage.Here are some tips for homeowners.

DON'T pay money to people who promise to work with your lender to modify your loan. It is unlawful for foreclosure consultants to collect money before (1) they give you a written contract describing the services they promise to provide and (2) they actually perform all the services described in the contract, such as negotiating new monthly payments or a new mortgage loan. However, an advance fee may be charged by an attorney, or by a real estate broker who has submitted the advance fee agreement to the Department of Real Estate, for review.

DO call your lender yourself. Your lender wants to hear from you, and will likely be much more willing to work directly with you than with a foreclosure consultant.

DON'T ignore letters from your lender. Consider contacting your lender yourself, many lenders are willing to work with homeowners who are behind on their payments.

DON'T transfer title or sell your house to a “foreclosure rescuer.†Fraudulent foreclosure consultants often promise that if homeowners transfer title, they may stay in the home as renters and buy their home back later. The foreclosure consultants claim that transfer is necessary so that someone with a better credit rating can obtain a new loan to prevent foreclosure. BEWARE! This is a common scheme so-called “rescuers†use to evict homeowners and steal all or most of the home's equity.

DON'T pay your mortgage payments to someone other than your lender or loan servicer, even if he or she promises to pass the payment on. Fraudulent foreclosure consultants often keep the money for themselves.

DON'T sign any documents without reading them first. Many homeowners think that they are signing documents for a new loan to pay off the mortgage they are behind on. Later, they discover that they actually transferred ownership to the “rescuer.â€

DO contact housing counselors approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), who may be able to help you for free. For a referral to a housing counselor near you, contact HUD at 1-800-569-4287 (TTY: 1-800-877-8339) or www.hud.gov.


Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan

You may be eligible for a loan modification or other relief. This relief could include, an interest rate reduction, a conversion into a standard fixed rate loan, a principal reduction, a deduction of all delinquent payments, and absolution of all late payment penalties and fees. Certain conditions do apply.

Millions of responsible Homeowners can get relief even if your lender tells you that you don't qualify for a modification.

As many as 7-9 million Homeowners' are specified for relief, but there are exceptions to these guidelines.

Statement by
Timothy F. Geithner
U. S. Secretary of the Treasury
before the
Senate Banking Committee
May 20, 2009
 

Since January, the Administration has spent considerable effort developing and implementing a comprehensive plan for stabilizing our housing market. Working with the Federal Reserve, along with enacting programs to help provide more financial strength to the GSEs, we helped bring overall mortgage interest rates down to historic lows.

We launched a new program called Making Home Affordable to make it possible for millions of American homeowners to refinance and take advantage of those lower interest rates.

And we put in place a program to reduce the monthly mortgage payments for eligible borrowers. This loan modification program ensures monthly mortgage payments are at most 31 percent of a person's income for five years.

On April 6, building on MHA, Treasury announced a major inter-agency effort to combat mortgage rescue fraud and put scammers on notice that we will not stand by while they prey on homeowners seeking help to avoid foreclosure.

On April 28, Treasury announced a Second Lien Program so that, when a Home Affordable Modification is initiated on a first lien, servicers participating in the Second Lien Program will automatically reduce payments on the associated second lien according to a pre-set protocol. Servicers alternatively have the option to extinguish the second lien in return for a lump sum payment under a pre-set formula determined by Treasury, allowing servicers to target principal extinguishment to the borrowers where extinguishment is most appropriate. Treasury also announced steps to incorporate the Federal Housing Administration's (FHA) Hope for Homeowners into MHA.

And on May 14, Treasury announced new details on Foreclosure Alternatives and Home Price Decline Payments. The Foreclosure Alternatives are meant to prevent costly foreclosures by providing incentives for servicers and borrowers to pursue short sales and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure in cases where a borrower is eligible for a MHA modification but unable to complete the modification process. The Home Price Decline Protection Incentives will provide additional payments based on recent home price declines, and therefore will incentivize additional modifications in areas where home prices have been falling. 

To date, MHA's progress has been substantial. Fourteen servicers, including the five largest, have signed contracts and begun modifications under our program.  Between loans covered by these servicers and loans owned or securitized by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, more than 75 percent of all loans in the country are now covered by MHA.  The 14 participating servicers have extended offers on over 55,000 trial modifications and mailed out over 300,000 letters with information about trial modifications to borrowers and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have acquired thousands of refinancings for high loan-to-value (LTV) borrowers.

Since the launch of its new automated underwriting system on April 4, Fannie Mae has had over 233,000 eligible refinance applications through DU Refi Plus, with over 51,000 of these having LTVs between 80 and 105 percent. More than 3,650 Home Affordable Refinance loans have closed and been delivered to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac already. These application volumes indicate the desire of homeowners to take advantage of the Administration's program. 

Since the Treasury released guidelines for servicers under MHA on March 4, close to 3 million borrowers have accessed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan look-up tools online to see if they have a loan eligible for refinancing.  Just two weeks after the guidelines were released Treasury also launched www.makinghomeaffordable.gov, a website dedicated to helping empowering homeowners with the tools to gather information about the program and determine whether they might be eligible. The site has received more than 17.7 million page views in less than two months.

AP IMPACT: Gov't mortgage partners sued for abuses

WASHINGTON Billions of dollars the government is spending to help financially pressed homeowners avert foreclosure are passing through and enriching companies accused of preying on the people they're supposed to help, an Associated Press investigation has found.

The companies, known as mortgage servicers, are middlemen who collect monthly payments from homeowners and funnel the money to the banks or investors who hold the loans. As the only link between borrowers and lenders, they're in the best position to rework the terms of loans under the government's $50 billion mortgage-modification program. The servicers are paid by the government if the changes keep homeowners from falling behind on payments for at least three months.

But the industry has a checkered history. The AP found that at least 30 servicers have been accused in lawsuits of harassing borrowers, imposing illegal fees and charging for unnecessary insurance policies. More recently, the companies also have been criticized for not helping homeowners quickly enough delays that lead to more fees for homeowners and profits for servicers.

The biggest players in the servicing industry Bank of America, Wells Fargo & Co., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. all face litigation, some of which has led to settlements with homeowners. All will receive federal money to modify loans.

But the industry's smaller players, which specialize in servicing riskier subprime loans and loans already in default, face harsher accusations that they systematically abused borrowers.

"The irony is, in essence, the government is paying servicers to do their job, which is to do loan modifications where appropriate," said Kurt Eggert, a law professor at Chapman University in Orange, Calif. "And that's not a part of their job they were ever especially good at."

The government says it has no choice but to partner with the servicers because they are the only link between borrowers and the investors who indirectly own their mortgages through securities. The companies acknowledge there have been abuses in their industry but argue many cases hinge on technicalities. They say borrowers facing foreclosure often sue out of desperation, trying to slow down the foreclosure process with frivolous allegations.

When President Barack Obama announced the plan, called the Home Affordable Modification Program, in March, he said it would help up to 4 million homeowners avoid foreclosure. But only about 200,000 loan modifications are under way. Last week, 25 mortgage-servicing executives were summoned to the Treasury Department for meetings at which they promised to deliver 300,000 more loan modifications by Nov. 1.

Under the loan-modification program, 38 servicers will earn fees to help reduce the monthly payments of homeowners facing foreclosure. The goal is to modify mortgages so homeowners' payments don't exceed 38 percent of their gross monthly income.

Without government aid, servicers don't have enough financial incentive to modify mortgages. Each year, they earn about one-quarter to one-half percent of the value of the loans they service, so the larger the mortgage, the more they make. They earn less if the loan is modified, usually by lowering the interest rate or principal or adjusting the term.

The servicers also make money through late fees, or by foreclosing. The paperwork necessary to execute a foreclosure can generate hundreds of dollars in fees for some servicers.

Under the Treasury program, the servicers could pocket more than $5,500 for each loan they modify. But they won't be paid until the homeowners have made timely payments for three months. The servicers will also get government money to give to mortgage investors to compensate them for reducing the loans. How much will depend on what it costs the investors to modify the loan.

The largest mortgage servicing abuse lawsuit was brought against Select Portfolio Servicing, which was accused of imposing illegal fees and charging borrowers for insurance they did not need.

The company paid $55 million in 2003 to settle charges brought by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Trade Commission. It is eligible for up to $660 million under the Obama plan some to keep and some to pass on to investors and homeowners.

Most complaints against servicers allege similar abuses. Servicers often dispose of the harshest charges by settling without admitting guilt, as Select Portfolio did in 2003.

An AP analysis of the 38 servicers the government is paying to help vulnerable homeowners found that:

_ At least 30 face lawsuits from homeowners and advocates claiming they charged illegally high fees, prematurely foreclosed on homes and engaged in illegal collection practices. Most of the suits allege violations of laws that protect homeowners in foreclosure and prevent debt-collection abuse. Treasury's program requires servicers to comply with these laws.

_ At least 14 have been accused of misleading customers before the program began about whether they would qualify for loan modifications or how low their new payments might be. In many such cases, servicers are accused of telling borrowers not to make payments because their applications for modifications were pending and moving to foreclose anyway.

_ At least three of the companies settled federal predatory collection allegations by pledging to correct their behavior. They have since been sued hundreds of times by homeowners who allege the same illegal practices.

"There is no question that there have been significant abuses by servicers, and a big part of that is there's no one who is carefully monitoring their work to make sure that they're not taking advantage of borrowers," Eggert said.

In the past, loan servicing was a sleepy corner of the mortgage industry. Servicers did little more than open envelopes containing mortgage payments and forward money to investors.

The business became far more profitable during the housing boom. The proliferation of mortgages sold to risky, or subprime, borrowers created an opening for the servicing business. They specialized in collecting from people less likely to make timely payments, and profited as late fees mounted.

Servicers wanted this business so much that they sometimes bid more than they could reasonably expect to make back for handling a pool of loans, said Daniel Hedges, an attorney with Mountain State Justice Inc., a nonprofit West Virginia law office that represents homeowners facing foreclosure. As a result, some servicers began adding fees that weren't due or otherwise overcharging borrowers, he said.

As borrowers fell behind on their loans, the servicers pocketed more late fees, foreclosure fees and negotiation fees. Some even profited from foreclosures.

In February 2005, Janet Simmons was more than $30,000 behind on her mortgage. Bayview Loan Servicing began foreclosure proceedings on her home, located on 3.1 acres in rural Rockingham County, Va., between Washington and Charlottesville.

But Bayview which stands to receive up to $44.3 million from Treasury's loan-modification program foreclosed without providing required written notice, the Virginia State Supreme Court found. Bayview never sent Simmons a letter by certified mail, as required under her loan.

Unbeknownst to Simmons, the home was sold at auction in July 2005. She didn't find out she had lost the house until the new buyer asked why she was doing yard work on a home she no longer owned, said her lawyer, Kevin Rose.

The courts awarded Simmons $156,809 the difference between what her home was worth and what it had received in a foreclosure sale.

Simmons could not be reached for comment. A spokesman for Bayview did not return repeated phone calls requesting comment.

Rose said he gets "a lot of calls where it's clear something was done wrong (by the servicer) and it's clear you could reverse the foreclosure."

But Rose and other housing lawyers said many cases of servicer abuse go unreported and unpunished regardless of the evidence. In many states, there are no clear laws awarding legal fees to borrowers' attorneys when servicers have acted improperly, Rose said.

"Servicers have flown under the regulatory radar," said Julia Gordon, senior policy counsel with the Center for Responsible Lending, a Durham, N.C.-based advocacy group.

For six years, Jerry Turner made payments to Select Portfolio for a Charleston, W.Va., house he no longer owned.

In 2000, Turner was promised a loan modification in a court settlement. His mortgage belonged to a bank-owned pool of loans eventually serviced by Select Portfolio. Instead of lowering Turner's payments as the court had ordered, the bank foreclosed on Turner's home, court documents show. The bank then took the house back at auction.

Select Portfolio never told Turner his house had been sold. Instead, it continued sending him monthly invoices and cashing his checks. He didn't find out he had lost the house until it was sold a second time, at auction because Select Portfolio hadn't paid property taxes on the home.

"I had excellent credit at one time," Turner said. "Now, I can't borrow money on the house, I can't leave it, and it's been tied up so much I don't know what to do."

Turner's case against Select Portfolio is pending in West Virginia state court.

Borrowers facing foreclosure often don't know who holds their mortgage. They have few options other than to sue their servicers for mishandling collections or failing to give adequate notice before foreclosing.

Servicers sometimes face frivolous lawsuits. But many servicers in line for government money are accused of ongoing, systematic abuses.

As part of its 2003 settlement with regulators, Select Portfolio, promised to end practices including collecting illegal fees and forcing borrowers to buy insurance. But the company, now owned by the investment bank Credit Suisse Group, has since been named in dozens of lawsuits alleging similar violations. A 2008 complaint in West Virginia state court, for example, alleged that the company charged homeowners thousands of dollars in unauthorized late fees and other charges.

Select Portfolio spokesman Craig Bullock said the company doesn't comment on inquiries "about our practices and so forth."

Another servicer, Ocwen Financial Corp., was found in 2004 to be engaged in illegal, unsafe and unsound collection practices. Ocwen settled with regulators by promising to comply with laws on foreclosure and debt collection and to try to find out if homeowners had insurance before charging them for its own, costlier insurance.

Ocwen, which is in line to receive up to $553.4 million from the Treasury, faces a federal class-action complaint for harassing homeowners with excessive phone calls, charging illegal fees and adding unnecessary insurance premiums to borrowers' bills.

Ocwen engaged in "a nationwide scheme of illegal, unfair, unlawful, and deceptive business practices," the complaint contends.

Paul Koches, Ocwen's general counsel, disputed the allegations and noted the court has rejected one part of the lawsuit concerning illegal fees. "We have a deep and continuing commitment to foreclosure prevention," he wrote in an e-mail.

The charges against Select Portfolio and Ocwen are unusual in their scope and severity. But at least 28 other companies on Treasury's list also have been charged with, and in many cases settled, similar accusations.

Treasury says it has no choice but to work with all servicers, no matter how dubious their records. Refusing to work with a particularly bad player would "deprive homeowners who have mortgages with that servicer from getting modifications," Treasury spokeswoman Jenni Engebretsen said in a statement.

AP Real Estate Writer Alan Zibel contributed to this report.

Banks Fall Short on Mortgage Help

Govt. Report Shows 15 Percent of Eligible Borrowers Offered Help; Bank of America, Wells Fargo Lag Behind Other Big Banks

By MATTHEW JAFFE and ALICE GOMSTYN

August 4, 2009

The Treasury Department today released the first report on the performance of loan servicers in the Obama administration's home mortgage modification program -- and the numbers weren't pretty.

Only 15 percent of eligible homeowners have been offered assistance under the Home Affordable Modification Program thus far, according to the report, and some loan servicers have yet to modify a single loan.

"There are some institutions that have done an infinitesimally small amount," Assistant Treasury Secretary for Financial Institutions Michael Barr told reporters on a conference call this morning.

"We are going to be requiring ramped-up effort across the board," he noted. "We're going to pay more specific attention to ensuring that institutions that have been slow out of the blocks ramp up more quickly and more effectively."

Among the companies that have not modified any loans were American Home Mortgage Servicing and National City Bank. Bank of America had a 4 percent assistance rate for trial modifications, with Wells Fargo marginally better at 6 percent.

"We're disappointed in the performance of some of the servicers," Barr said. "We think they could have ramped up better, faster, more consistently and done a better job of serving borrowers and bringing stabilization to the broader mortgage markets and economy and we expect them to do more."

Wells Fargo defended its loan modification results in an interview with ABCNews.com today.

"I think what's important to keep in mind is the HAMP program is a very good program but, relative to the first seven months of 2009, it's just a piece of the overall story," said Mike Heid, co-president of Wells Fargo Home Mortgage.

Heid said that, from January to July, the bank modified a total of 240,000 loans. More than 20,000 were modified through HAMP while the rest of the modifications took place through separate Wells Fargo programs.

Bank of America also touted its own loan modification programs, saying that it modified 150,000 home mortgages in the first half of the year.

American Home Mortgage said in a written statement that it had joined HAMP late last month and will begin loan modifications under the program soon. The company said it had completed 64,000 loan modifications through its own programs between July of 2008 and this June.

At least two loan servicers and their parent banks, meanwhile, are drawing fire for not participating in the government's program at all: Litton Loan Servicing, which is owned by Goldman Sachs, and Barclays' HomEq Servicing Corp.

"No program can work unless people actually sign on and do it," said Gloria Swieringa of ACORN, a non-profit low-income advocacy group. "It's like leading a horse to water and not letting him drink."

ACORN has labeled mortgage servicers that don't participate in the program as "homewreckers," but both Litton and HomEq could escape the designation soon.

A HomEq spokesman told ABCNews.com that the company has signed an agremeent to participate in HAMP and expects "confirmation of our HAMP servicer status momentarily." Litton said in a statement today that it hopes to "formalize its participation in the Treasury program soon."

Litton said it has offered more than 35,000 trial modifications using terms "consistent with the Treasury program" since it was announced. Litton modified another 44,000 loans, the company said, in the 12 months before the start of the program.

Under the government's program, some servicers helped as many as one in five qualified borrowers with a trial loan, according to today's report. JPMorgan Chase had a 20 percent trial loan modification rate, as did GMAC Mortgage Inc. Saxon Mortgage Services came in at 25 percent and Aurora Loan Services 21 percent. CitiMortgage Inc. has begun modifications for 15 percent of its eligible borrowers.

"There are many servicers that are performing at quite high levels and our expectation is that other servicers will come up to that high level," Barr said.

Loan Modifications: Banks Have a Long Way to Go

Upon unveiling the plan in February, the administration said that the $50 billion program was intended to help 3 to 4 million borrowers.

They've got a long way to go: As of now, 235,000 loan modifications have begun. Officials said today that they want to reach 500,000 borrowers by Nov. 1.

"It's increasing by 30,000 or more a week," White House economic advisor Lawrence Summers said on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday. "We expect it to be half a million by Nov. 1 and we're going to be holding the banks accountable for performance under that program."

Barr said today that, so far, the pace of modifications is too slow.

"We are more than on track to reach 3 to 4 million borrowers over the next three years," he said, "but, in our estimate, that is not fast enough and it's not good enough. We can do better. We want banks to reach borrowers more quickly and we are significantly increasing our efforts to reach borrowers as fast as humanly possible."

Queens, N.Y., homeowner Jean-Andre Sassine said he was surprised to see JPMorgan Chase's relatively high loan modification totals. JPMorgan Chase has offered loan modifications to 30 percent of program-eligible homeowners who are more than 60 days delinquent on their mortgage bills and begun modifications for 20 percent of homeowners, according to the government's report

"That sounds great on paper," Sassine said. "Yet, I'm having such a hard time reaching someone."

A Chase customer, Sassine said he has made countless phone calls to the bank, asking for a loan modification after losing his job last year.

Thus far, he's had no luck. Either his calls aren't returned or they get lost in a maze of transfers to various departments, Sassine said.

A JPMorgan Chase spokesman said he didn't have information on Sassine's case specifically, but acknowledged that the bank still has work to do on its loan-modification system.

"We've done a lot of modifications for borrowers and we know there's unprecedented levels of volume in the industry and there are some people we may not be doing as quickly as they would like or as we would like," spokesman Tom Kelly said. "But we've been adding staff, we've been adding technology, we've been adding space for staff aggressively for the last six months, so we continue to get better at it."

Are Banks Really Trying?

Other banks, too, say they've continued to devote more resources to mortgage modifications but such claims are met with skepticism by advocates like Ira Rheingold, the executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.

Rheingold said mortgage servicers won't make real strides in foreclosure prevention until they have stronger incentives motivating them. Right now, under HAMP, servicers receive $1,000 from the government for every borrower that makes payments for three straight months. For three years of regular payments, servicers receive up to $4,500.

In addition, Freddie Mac is conducting random audits to find out whether borrowers are being improperly rejected for loan modifications.

Rheingold and others argue that struggling homeowners should have the option of having their loans modified by a bankruptcy judge -- an idea often referred to as a "cramdown."

The threat of having bankruptcy judges order loan modifications, he said, should be enough to motivate mortgage servicers to pursue more modifications on their own, early on.

"It's an incentive to get the mortgage industry off their collective rear ends and really get moving here because suddenly [homeowners] will get some leverage," Rheingold said.

For now, future reports on loan modifications will help make clear if the government's existing efforts to improve the program are working.

"The proof's going to be in the pudding," Barr said.


PennyMac Goes Public

Los Angeles Business Journal Staff

PennyMac, the company started by former Countrywide Financial Corp. executives, raised $320 million in an initial public offering Wednesday.

The Calabasas company, founded last year to invest in distressed mortgages, sold 16 million shares at a price of $20 each, said PennyMac spokeswoman Ray Johnson. The proceeds fell short of the $400 million the company hoped to raise.

This marks the first local IPO since North Hollywood hospital patient management company IPC the Hospitalist Co. Inc. went public in January 2008.

PennyMac, short for Private National Mortgage Acceptance Co., has said it intends to use proceeds from the IPO to invest in three areas: mortgage portfolios from failed banks being liquidated by regulators, loans acquired through the U.S. Treasury Dept."s Public-Private Investment Program and loans directly acquired from other banks.

Backed by money manager BlackRock Inc. and hedge fund Highfields Capital Management, PennyMac has raised more than $500 million from private investors that it has used to buy portfolios of distressed mortgages, which it plans to revive through loan modification and other programs.

To go public, the company created a subsidiary structured as a real estate investment trust, known as PennyMac Mortgage Investment Trust, which will effectively be the operating arm of the company.

PennyMac has been controversial, with critics assailing its founders as profiting from risky mortgage loans they promoted while at Countrywide. PennyMac was started by Stanford Kurland, the former No. 2 executive at Countrywide behind Chief Executive

Angelo Mozilo. At least 10 other PennyMac executives came from Countrywide.

A major subprime lender, Countrywide suffered considerable loan losses before being sold at a fire-sale price last year to Bank of America Corp. Mozilo and two other former Countrywide executives were recently sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission for allegedly misleading shareholders as the company was deteriorating. No PennyMac executives were named in the SEC lawsuit.

PennyMac"s offering was underwritten by Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank. The stock will trade on the New York Stock Exchange beginning Thursday under the symbol PMT.

Under Operation Loan Lies, 189 lawsuits, cease-and-desist orders and other legal actions have been filed in 20 states. In Southern California, prosecutors have moved against 14 firms and 21 people.

By Nathan Olivarez-Giles
July 16, 2009
For Rene Ruelas, the calls came faster than weeds sprouting in the yard of an empty house.

Foreclosure was looming for the Buena Park home that Ruelas shared with his wife, Rose, and four children. The longshore mechanic was headed into his fourth month without a paycheck because of a workers' compensation dispute as he recovered from his second knee surgery in a year. He was desperate.

The DVD -- along with a flurry of lawsuits -- was unveiled Wednesday as a part of Operation Loan Lies, a nationwide crackdown by federal, state and local authorities on those who prey on homeowners desperate for mortgage relief.

"At the moment, there are more scammers than there are government officials going after them," California Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown said at a news conference in downtown Los Angeles. "There are more of these rats coming out of these holes than we can stomp on, but we'll keep doing the best we can."

Although the announcement was made Wednesday, the operation has been underway for weeks, FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz said.

So far, 189 lawsuits, cease-and-desist orders and other legal actions have been filed in 20 states as a result of Operation Loan Lies, officials said.

In Southern California, prosecutors have taken legal action against 14 companies and 21 people accused of running loan-modification scams that ripped off thousands of struggling homeowners looking to avoid foreclosure.

In documents filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles and Orange counties, Brown and the FTC alleged that the California firms charged $500 to $5,500 in upfront fees, often promising to get lenders to modify mortgages to make payments more affordable -- and never delivered.

For a upfront fee of $3,500, one alleged victim was promised a 40% reduction in her mortgage principal and a $2,000 reduction in her monthly payment by U.S. Homeowners Assistance, one of the lawsuits said. After learning in April 2008 that her loan modification request had been denied, the woman discovered that the Irvine company had forged her signature and falsified her financial information, the suit said.

Leibowitz said that homeowners should be wary of loan consultants requiring payment before services are performed. Federal and California lawmakers are working on rules to block loan modification services from demanding upfront payments.

Hundreds of thousands of homeowners have been victimized by loan modification scams, Leibowitz said, estimating monetary losses in the hundreds of millions of dollars. And the fraudulent schemes are more rampant in Southern California than in any other part of the U.S., he said.

"Part of the reason why we're out here today is because California consumers have been among the most hard hit and also because a lot of these malefactors are based in Orange County," Leibowitz said. "It's one of the hotbeds of mortgage scam activity."

Brown and the FTC are demanding millions in civil penalties and restitution for homeowners as well as permanent injunctions to prevent the defendants and companies from offering mortgage-relief programs.

Twenty-three state and local agencies from 18 states are working with the FTC under the effort, and that number is expected to grow dramatically by the end of the year, Leibowitz said.

nathan.olivarezgiles

@latimes.com


New California Law Passed To Delay Foreclosure For 90 Days (SB7).
This bill will provide California homeowners fair chance at a mortgage loan modification before a foreclosure can take place.

The FTC directs you to free counseling offered

 SEC. 4.  Section 2923.53 is added to the Civil Code, to read:
   2923.53.  (a) A mortgage loan servicer that has implemented a comprehensive loan modification program that meets the requirements
of this section shall have the loans that it services exempted from the provisions of Section 2923.52, upon order of the commissioner. A
comprehensive loan modification program shall include all of the following features:
   (1) The loan modification program is intended to keep borrowers whose principal residences are homes located in California in those
homes when the anticipated recovery under the loan modification or workout plan exceeds the anticipated recovery through foreclosure on
a net present value basis.
   (2) The loan modification program targets a ratio of the borrower' s housing-related debt to the borrower's gross income of 38 percent
or less, on an aggregate basis in the program.
   (3) The loan modification program includes some combination of the following features:
   (A) An interest rate reduction, as needed, for a fixed term of at least five years.
   (B) An extension of the amortization period for the loan term, to no more than 40 years from the original date of the loan.
   (C) Deferral of some portion of the principal amount of the unpaid principal balance until maturity of the loan.
   (D) Reduction of principal.
   (E) Compliance with a federally mandated loan modification program.


The net of this story is that Goldman Sachs (GS) has agreed to pay the state of Massachusetts $60 million to settle a dispute regarding Goldman"s predatory lending practices in and around Boston. $50 million will be made available to reduce the loan principle on 714 individual mortgages. Of note is that the agreement called for reductions in principal of as much as 30% for traditional mortgages and up to 50% on second mortgages. Also of note is that the State of Massachusetts gets to keep $10mm for their efforts. Not bad for Attorney General Martha Coakley.

This means next to nothing for Goldman Sachs. However, a very dangerous precedent has been set. In the critical years 2005-2007 Goldman was ranked 15th in the League Tables for sub prime and Alt-A origination/securitization. Goldman"s management must be pleased as punch with that poor showing today. Those that ranked high on that list are no doubt consulting with their attorneys.

If Goldman gets its hand slapped for $60mm over 714 mortgages what does this mean for Countrywide Financial (CFC)? They were very big in Boston. Merrill Lynch was at the top of those securitization tables. That is what got Stan O"Neal fired. If the settlement in Boston is representative of what will be forthcoming then Bank of America (BAC) is going to be facing a very big number. And that is just Massachusetts. The AGs in the all of the other states, especially Florida, Nevada, Arizona and California must be licking their chops at this news.

One hears a lot about loan modifications these days. So far there are two basic approaches:

I) The borrower is given relief in the form of a lower interest rates and stretched-out maturities. The homeowner stays in the home.

II) The bank will accept a deed in lieu of the mortgage. The homeowner is out of the home.

There have been very few cases where a homeowner is allowed to stay in the home and achieve a principal reduction. The Boston settlement opens the floodgate for principal reduction. It is the essence of the agreement. All 714 borrowers are now eligible for principal reduction and the money is just sitting there waiting to be collected.

One can imagine the conversations between neighbors in Boston:

A: Good news finally! I just got 35% net off my first and second mortgage.

B: Wow! How did you manage that?

A: I was lucky enough to get my mortgages through Goldman Sachs. They did a deal with the Mass AG and I win the lotto!

B: I have my mortgages with Indy Mac Bank (IDMCQ.PK) can I get reduction too?

A: Sure. Here is the number to call. Now lets party!

This is lining up badly for the banks. The States are broke. They will see this as a source of revenue. Politicians will also like it. They will be able to claim that they are helping their constituents. Word on this will spread quickly from borrower to borrower. Every one of them will be looking for a break.

The settlement makes an important distinction between first and second mortgages. The rights of the second mortgages are clearly subordinated in the deal. This is how a bankruptcy court would treat the two classes of debt. This provides a clue on how these "seconds" will be treated in the future.

One of the largest sources of these second mortgages is the Mortgage Insurance Industry. They provide a guaranty of payment on the first loss of 20%. This product competed with the second mortgage industry. It created the same result for the borrower, the ability to buy a home with no money down. Precisely what Goldman is paying up for. In this case what quacks, walks and swims like a duck is likely to be treated like a duck.

Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) hold tens of billions of these insured or "enhanced" mortgages. FHFA recently reported that the Agencies collectively held or guaranteed 30.2 million mortgages. Of that amount 16%, or 4.8 million are identified as Non Prime . Put differently, the Agencies hold 6,000 times more non-prime mortgages then Goldman originated in Boston.

At this point it is not at all clear what the broader implications of the Goldman settlement will be. This development has put the issues of lender liability and principal reduction on the table. It is unlikely they will come off the table anytime soon.

SEC. 4.  Section 2923.53 is added to the Civil Code, to read:   2923.53.  (a) A mortgage loan servicer that has implemented acomprehensive loan modification program that meets the requirementsof this section shall have the loans that it services exempted fromthe provisions of Section 2923.52, upon order of the commissioner. Acomprehensive loan modification program shall include all of thefollowing features:   (1) The loan modification program is intended to keep borrowerswhose principal residences are homes located in California in thosehomes when the anticipated recovery under the loan modification orworkout plan exceeds the anticipated recovery through foreclosure ona net present value basis.   (2) The loan modification program targets a ratio of the borrower's housing-related debt to the borrower's gross income of 38 percentor less, on an aggregate basis in the program.   (3) The loan modification program includes some combination of thefollowing features:   (A) An interest rate reduction, as needed, for a fixed term of atleast five years.   (B) An extension of the amortization period for the loan term, tono more than 40 years from the original date of the loan.   (C) Deferral of some portion of the principal amount of the unpaidprincipal balance until maturity of the loan.   (D) Reduction of principal.   (E) Compliance with a federally mandated loan modificationprogram.The net of this story is that Goldman Sachs () has agreed to pay the state of Massachusetts $60 million to settle a dispute regarding Goldman"s predatory lending practices in and around Boston. $50 million will be made available to reduce the loan principle on 714 individual mortgages. Of note is that the agreement called for reductions in principal of as much as 30% for traditional mortgages and up to 50% on second mortgages. Also of note is that the State of Massachusetts gets to keep $10mm for their efforts.

Not bad for Attorney General Martha Coakley. This means next to nothing for Goldman Sachs. However, a very dangerous precedent has been set. In the critical years 2005-2007 Goldman was ranked 15th in the League Tables for sub prime and Alt-A origination/securitization. Goldman"s management must be pleased as punch with that poor showing today. Those that ranked high on that list are no doubt consulting with their attorneys. If Goldman gets its hand slapped for $60mm over 714 mortgages what does this mean for Countrywide Financial ()? They were very big in Boston. Merrill Lynch was at the top of those securitization tables. That is what got Stan O"Neal fired. If the settlement in Boston is representative of what will be forthcoming then Bank of America () is going to be facing a very big number. And that is just Massachusetts. The AGs in the all of the other states, especially Florida, Nevada, Arizona and California must be licking their chops at this news.One hears a lot about loan modifications these days. So far there are two basic approaches:I) The borrower is given relief in the form of a lower interest rates and stretched-out maturities. The homeowner stays in the home.II) The bank will accept a deed in lieu of the mortgage. The homeowner is out of the home.There have been very few cases where a homeowner is allowed to stay in the home and achieve a principal reduction. The Boston settlement opens the floodgate for principal reduction. It is the essence of the agreement.

All 714 borrowers are now eligible for principal reduction and the money is just sitting there waiting to be collected. One can imagine the conversations between neighbors in Boston:A: Good news finally! I just got 35% net off my first and second mortgage. B: Wow! How did you manage that? A: I was lucky enough to get my mortgages through Goldman Sachs. They did a deal with the Mass AG and I win the lotto! B: I have my mortgages with Indy Mac Bank () can I get reduction too?A: Sure. Here is the number to call. Now lets party!This is lining up badly for the banks. The States are broke. They will see this as a source of revenue. Politicians will also like it. They will be able to claim that they are helping their constituents. Word on this will spread quickly from borrower to borrower. Every one of them will be looking for a break.The settlement makes an important distinction between first and second mortgages. The rights of the second mortgages are clearly subordinated in the deal. This is how a bankruptcy court would treat the two classes of debt. This provides a clue on how these "seconds" will be treated in the future. One of the largest sources of these second mortgages is the Mortgage Insurance Industry. They provide a guaranty of payment on the first loss of 20%. This product competed with the second mortgage industry. It created the same result for the borrower, the ability to buy a home with no money down. Precisely what Goldman is paying up for. In this case what quacks, walks and swims like a duck is likely to be treated like a duck.Fannie Mae () and Freddie Mac () hold tens of billions of these insured or "enhanced" mortgages. FHFA recently reported that the Agencies collectively held or guaranteed 30.2 million mortgages. Of that amount 16%, or 4.8 million are identified as Non Prime . Put differently, the Agencies hold 6,000 times more non-prime mortgages then Goldman originated in Boston.At this point it is not at all clear what the broader implications of the Goldman settlement will be. This development has put the issues of lender liability and principal reduction on the table. It is unlikely they will come off the table anytime soon.

Senate defeats 'cramdown' legislation
Posted: 04/30/09 04:01 PM [ET]

The Senate on Thursday shot down a controversial housing bill supported by the White House yet widely opposed by the financial industry.

The bill, known as cramdown in the financial industry, would have allowed homeowners to turn to bankruptcy judges to write down the principal and interest payments for their primary home mortgages.

Democrats fell 15 votes short of the 60 necessary to pass the bill, with 12 Democrats including Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) voting no.

The 45-51 vote was a stinging loss for Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who has tried and failed to pass the bankruptcy measure through the Senate for two years. Durbin spent weeks in negotiations with Senate staff and industry officials but could not produce a compromise that would pass the Senate.

It passed the House in March, but immediately ran into trouble in the Senate. Supporters argue that it is an important tool to force mortgage servicers to modify loans and reduce the mounting foreclosures that continue to dog the housing market.

Senate Democratic leadership, recognizing that it would not pass, stripped the measure from a separate housing bill that would support the housing market and increase the borrowing authority of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

I don"t know what the next step will be, said Durbin before the vote. It"ll surely be the conference committee and hopefully the House can keep some aspect of bankruptcy reform in this. If we fail ... we"ll wait another year and face a worse crisis and hope that the banks won"t have as much clout.

At times over the past two weeks, Durbin and industry officials appeared on the verge of a compromise package. But even with the outlines of a compromise with the industry in sight, industry sources cautioned that it was unclear it would ever win the 60 votes necessary for passage.

Republicans have remained steadfastly opposed to the bill, and centrist Democrats have repeatedly raised concerns.

It would result in higher interest rates for all home mortgages, exactly what we don"t want, said Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.).

While JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo, Bank of America and The Credit Union National Association discussed a compromise with Durbin, the financial industry trade associations were broadly opposed to the measure. Senate Democrats took aim at the banking lobby on Thursday.

They"re being almost lemming-like, for their immediate, short-term interests, said Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.).

A dozen trade associations, including the American Bankers Association, Financial Services Roundtable and Independent Community Bankers of America, wrote to senators this week that the bill would make things worse by adding even more risk to the mortgage market.

Obama supports the bankruptcy provision, but the administration did not mount a full lobbying push on Capitol Hill. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner gave the bill lukewarm support in congressional testimony.

Administration officials have said that while it was part of the president"s efforts to support the housing market, it was not necessarily the centerpiece.

Industry officials had discussed limiting the bankruptcy provision to subprime or nontraditional loans, but Schumer and other Democrats squashed that effort early in the talks.

Democrats voting against the measure were: Sens. Max Baucus (Mont.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Robert Byrd (W.Va.), Byron Dorgan (N.D.), Tim Johnson (S.D.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Blanche Lincoln (Ark.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Jon Tester (Mont.), Tom Carper (Del.) and Specter.

J. Taylor Rushing contributed to this article.

 

Change to bankruptcy law passes House

Proposal, which faces tough Senate fight, would allow judges to reduce principal on a mortgage for a primary residence.

In an attempt to ease the foreclosure crisis, the House on Thursday approved a major change to bankruptcy law, giving judges new powers to modify home mortgages.

The revision, which was approved 234-191 as part of a broader housing bill, would allow bankruptcy judges to reduce -- or ''cram down''-- the principal owed on an existing mortgage for a primary residence.

First, however, homeowners would have to seek a voluntary modification from their lender and share any profits if they sell the house within five years.

The legislation faces a tougher road in the Senate, although supporters there were optimistic that the nationwide surge in foreclosures would help them pass it as early as next week.

UPDATED APRIL 22 2009
REPORTED BY BLOOMBERG NEWS


Senate Democrats led by Richard Durbin are working with the banking industry on the so-called cram-down bill, which passed the House in March, to determine which loans are covered or when the provision expires. The National Association of Federal Credit Unions, representing more than 800 lenders, will not support or defend a proposal from Durbin"s staff until getting additional details, the group said today in a letter released in Washington.

The association remains concerned about any legislation that includes broad cram-downs of all mortgages in bankruptcy, President Fred Becker wrote Durbin, the second-ranking Senate Democrat. Credit unions are pressing Congress to explain how second mortgages and private mortgage insurance contracts are affected before endorsing a bill.

The Obama administration said revamping U.S. bankruptcy law is a key part of its anti-foreclosure initiative announced Feb. 18. The plan targets as many as 9 million homeowners to help modify or refinance their mortgages. The White House plans to spend $75 billion, mostly from the $700 billion financial rescue package, to assist borrowers aiming to stay in their homes.

Democrats have five weeks to complete negotiations and vote on mortgage legislation under a schedule set by Senate leader Harry Reid, said his spokesman, Jim Manley. The Financial Services Roundtable, taking part in talks on behalf of 100 banking, insurance and investment companies, said opposition persists.

"Uphill Battle"

The cram-down bill continues to face an uphill battle and there are a lot of conflicting interests operating on the stage, said Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the Washington-based industry group. There is no deal yet and the rest of the banking industry continues to oppose it.

Republicans opposed Durbin"s bill last year, and the bankruptcy provision died amid veto threats from President George W. Bush. Investors have said giving judges the authority to reduce principal payments or adjust payment plans may cripple the secondary mortgage market and artificially raise interest rates. Citigroup Inc. abandoned its opposition to endorse the Democratic proposal on Jan. 8.

U.S. foreclosure filings rose to a record 803,489 in the first quarter, 24 percent more than a year earlier, RealtyTrac, the Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac, a seller of default data, said in a report last week.

ABOUT LOAN MODIFICATION:

Loan modification is a process whereby a homeowner's mortgage is modified and both lender and homeowner are bound by the new terms. The most common modifications are lowering the interest rate, reducing the principal balance, 'fixing' adjustable interest rates, increasing the loan term, forgiveness of payment defaults & fees, or any combination of these.

History

According to the FDIC chairman, Sheila C. Bair, looking back as far as the 1980s, "the FDIC applied workout procedures for troubled loans out of bank failures, modifying loans to make them affordable and to turn non-performing into performing loans."

The US housing boom of the first half of this decade ended abruptly in 2006. Housing starts, which peaked at more than 2 million units in 2005, have plummeted to just over half that level, with no recovery in sight. Home prices, which were increasing at double-digit rates nationally in 2004 and 2005, are now falling in many areas across the country (see Chart 1). As home prices decline, the number of problem mortgages, particularly in sub-prime and Alt-A portfolios, is rising. As of third quarter 2007, the percentage of sub-prime adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) that were seriously delinquent or in foreclosure reached 15.6 percent, more than double the level of a year ago (see Chart 2). The deterioration in credit performance began in the industrial Midwest, where economic conditions have been the weakest, but has now spread to the former boom markets of Florida, California, and other coastal states.

Chart 1

Image:US_Housing_Market_Activity_2007.gif?

Chart 2

Image:Rise_Mortgage_Credit_Distress_2007.gif

During 2007, investors and ratings agencies have repeatedly downgraded assumptions about sub-prime credit performance. A Merrill Lynch study published in July estimated that if US home prices fell only 5 percent, sub-prime credit losses to investors would total just under $150 billion, and Alta credit losses would total $25 billion. On the heels of this report came news that the S&P/Case-Shiller Composite Home Price Index for 10 large US cities had fallen in August to a level that was already 5 percent lower than a year ago, with the likelihood of a similar decline over the coming year.

The complexity of many mortgage-backed securitization structures has heightened the overall risk aversion of investors, resulting in what has become a broader illiquidity in global credit markets. These disruptions have led to a precipitous decline in sub-prime lending, a significant reduction in the availability of Alta loans, and higher interest rates on jumbo loans (see Chart 3). The tightening in mortgage credit has placed further downward pressure on home sales and home prices, a situation that now could derail the US economic expansion.

Chart 3

Image:Available_Subprime_Credit_Decline_2007.gif

Residential mortgage credit quality continues to weaken, with both delinquencies and charge-offs on the rise at FDIC-insured institutions.

This trend, in tandem with upward pricing of hybrid [[adjustable rate mortgage|adjustable-rate mortgage] (ARM) loans, falling home prices, and fewer refinancing options, underscores the urgency of finding a workable solution to current problems in the sub-prime mortgage market. Legislators, regulators, bankers, mortgage servicers, and consumer groups have been debating the merits of strategies that may help preserve home ownership, minimize foreclosures, and restore some stability to local housing markets.

On December 6, 2007, an industry-led plan was announced to help avert foreclosure for certain sub-prime homeowners who face unaffordable payments when their interest rates reset. This plan provides for a streamlined process to extend the starter rates on sub-prime Arms for at least five years in cases where borrowers remain current on their loans but cannot refinance or afford the higher payments after reset. An important component of the industry-led plan is detailed reporting of loan modification activity. Working with the Treasury Department and other bank regulators, the FDIC will monitor loan modification levels and seek adjustments to the protocols if warranted.

Purpose

Sheila Bair has “long advocated a systematic and streamlined approach to loan modification that puts borrowers into long-term, sustainable mortgages. I support the industry plan as a means to allow borrowers to remain in their homes, provide investors with higher returns than can be obtained under foreclosure, and strengthen local neighborhoods where foreclosures are already driving down property values. It is my hope that this plan will be implemented in a way that delivers real progress on these important policy goals.”

Under the financial rescue package, the Treasury plans to directly inject $250 billion of capital into US banks in exchange for preferred shares. Nine of the largest US banks were essentially arm-twisted into signing on for the first $125 billion in capital infusions. "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity ... are in a state of shocked disbelief," said the former Fed chief. "Specifically, the government could establish standards for loan modifications and provide guarantees for loans meeting those standards," Bair said. "By doing so, unaffordable loans could be converted into loans that are sustainable over the long term."Bair made clear that she considers existing voluntary loan modification programs inadequate. "We are falling badly behind and more needs to be done," she said on a day when RealtyTrac announced US home foreclosure filings in the third quarter 2008 were 71% above the comparable period a year earlier.

Streamlined modification process

The adoption of this streamlined modification framework is an additional tool that servicers will now have to help avoid preventable foreclosures. This framework will not only help homeowners who receive a streamlined modification, but will also further address servicer capacity concerns by freeing up resources, helping ensure that borrowers do not fall through the cracks because servicers aren't able to get to them.

This is the first time the industry has agreed on an industry standard. The benchmark ratio for calculating the affordable payment is 38 percent of monthly gross household income. Once the affordable payment is determined, there are several steps the servicer can take to create that payment – extending the term, reducing the interest rate, and forbearing interest. In the event that the affordable payment is still beyond the borrower’s means, the borrower’s situation will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis using a cash flow budget. This program resulted from a unified effort among the Enterprises, Hope Now and its 27 servicer partners, Treasury, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and FHFA. In addition, we’ve drawn on the FDIC’s experience and assistance from developing the IndyMac streamlined approach and have greatly benefited from the FDIC’s input and example. To accommodate the need for more flexibility among a larger number of servicers, the Streamlined Modification Program does differ from the IndyMac model in a few areas. However, it uses the same fundamental tools to achieve the same affordability target.

The Streamlined Modification Program (SMP) was developed in collaboration with the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the Department of Treasury, Freddie Mac, and members of the HOPE NOW Alliance.

SMP Eligibility Criteria Include

  1. Conforming conventional or jumbo conforming mortgage loans originated on or before January 1, 2008;
  2. At least three payments past due;
  3. The loan is secured by a one-unit property that is the borrower's primary residence;
  4. Current mark-to-market LTV of 90 percent or more; and
  5. Property is not abandoned, vacant, condemned, or in a serious state of disrepair.
  6. SMP is designed to reduce distressed borrowers' monthly mortgage payments to an amount equal to 38 percent of their monthly gross income. To do so, servicers may, in the following order:
  7. Capitalize accrued interest, escrow advances and costs,if allowed by state law;
  8. Extend the term of the mortgage loan by up to 480 months;
  9. Reduce the mortgage loan interest rate in increments of .125% to a fixed rate that is not less than 3% (if this exercise results in a below market rate, it will, after 5 years, step up in annual increments to a market rate);
  10. As a last resort, provide for principal forbearance, which will result in a balloon payment fully due and payable upon borrower's sale of the property or payoff or maturity of the loan.

Borrowers meeting the SMP eligibility requirements enter into a trial period in which they must make monthly loan payments equal to the proposed modified payment. Timely payments must be made for three consecutive months before a borrower's loan can be modified under the SMP.

The "Streamlined Modification Plan," or SMP, which is an expansion of what many

lenders are already doing, will be implemented by December 15, 2008.

IndyMAC Plan

With the Bush administration refusing to enact FDIC Chairwoman Sheila Bair's controversial loan modification plan, lawmakers are taking matters into their own hands.

  • Offer proactive workout solutions designed to address borrowers who have the willingness but limited capacity to pay.
  1. Return the loan to a current status.
  2. Capitalize delinquent interest and escrow.
  3. Modify the loan terms based on waterfalls, starting at a front-end 38 percent HTI ratio down to a 31 percent HTI ratio subject to a formal NPV floor.
  4. Reduce interest rate to as low as 3 percent.
  5. Extend, if necessary, the amortization and/or term of the loan to 40 years.
  6. Forbear principal if necessary.
  • Provide borrowers the opportunity to stay in their home while making an affordable payment for the life of the loan.
  1. Require the borrower to make one payment at the time of the modification.
  2. Cap the interest rate at the Freddie Mac Weekly Survey rate effective as required to meet the target HTI ratio, fixing the adjusted rate and monthly payment amount for 5 years.
  3. Step up the initial interest rate gradually starting in year 6 by increasing it one percentage point each year until reaching the Freddie Mac Weekly Survey rate cap.
  • Use a financial model with supportable assumptions to ensure investor interests are protected.
  1. Input borrower specific income information into the NPV Tool, which provides a real-time workout solution.
  2. Perform automated loan level underwriting across large segments of the portfolio to support pre-approved bulk mailings.
  3. Verify income information the borrower provided via check stubs, tax returns, and/or bank statements.
  4. Compare the cost of foreclosure to mitigate losses.
  5. Mandate that the cost of the modification must be less than the estimated foreclosure loss.
  • Borrower eligibility
  1. The loan is at least 60 days delinquent where the loan is considered one day delinquent on the day following the next payment due date. Many servicing contracts often contain a standard clause allowing the servicer to modify seriously delinquent or defaulted mortgages, or mortgages where default is “reasonably foreseeable”.
  2. Foreclosure sale is not imminent and the borrower is currently not in bankruptcy, or has not been discharged from Chapter 7 bankruptcy since the loan was originated.
  3. The loan was not originated as a second home or an investment property.

We (IndyMac Bank) commend FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair for her leadership in developing a systematic loan modification protocol. FHFA, the GSEs and HOPE NOW relied heavily on the IndyMac model in developing this new protocol.

Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac Plan

In the task at hand to make headway against foreclosures and the depressed housing market. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac entered a new phase on December 9, 2008 for a fast-track program meant to make "hundreds of thousands of mortgages affordable to people who can't currently meet their monthly payments."

Through the SMP, servicers may change the terms of a loan to reduce a borrower's first lien monthly mortgage payment, including taxes, insurance and homeowners association payments, to an amount equal to 38 percent of gross monthly income. The changes in terms may include one or more of the following:

  1. Adding the accrued interest, escrow advances and costs to the principal balance of the loan, if allowed by state law;
  2. Extending the length of the mortgage loan as appropriate;
  3. Reducing the mortgage loan interest rate in increments of 0.125 percent to an interest rate that is not less than 3 percent. If the new rate is set below the market interest rate, after five years it will step up in annual increments to either the original loan interest rate or the market interest rate at the time of the modification,whichever is lower;
  4. Forbearing on a portion of the principal, which will require the borrower to make a balloon payment when the loan matures, is paid off, or is refinanced.

Eligibility Requirements

  1. Conforming conventional and jumbo conforming mortgage loans originated on or before January 1, 2008;
  2. Borrowers who are at least three or more payments past due and are not currently in bankruptcy;
  3. Only one-unit, owner-occupied, primary residences; and
  4. Current mark-to-market loan-to-value ratio of 90 percent or more.

New Servicer Guidance

Fannie Mae's foreclosure prevention efforts have generally been made available to a borrower only after a delinquency occurs. Under Fannie Mae's new guidance, loan servicers can use foreclosure prevention tools to assist distressed borrowers when a borrower demonstrates the need. As noted above, these guidelines apply to borrowers who are still current in their payments, but whose default is reasonably foreseeable. This new guideline is effective immediately.

Hope for Homeowners Plan (HUD) / FHA)

The H4H Program is effective for endorsements on or after October 1, 2008, through September 30, 2011.

  • Affordability versus value: lenders will take a loss on the difference between the existing obligations and the new loan, which is set at 96.5 percent of current appraised value. The lender may choose to provide homeowners with an affordable monthly mortgage payment through a loan modification rather than accepting the losses associated with declining property values.
  • Borrower eligibility: Lenders that determine the H4H program is a feasible and effective option for mitigating losses will assess the homeowner’s eligibility for the program:
  1. The existing mortgage was originated on or before January 1, 2008;
  2. Existing mortgage payment(s) as of March 1, 2008 exceeds 31 percent of the borrowers gross monthly income for fixed-rate mortgages; For Arms, the existing mortgage payment(s) exceeds 31 percent of the borrowers gross monthly income as of March 1, 2008 OR the date of the new loan application.
  3. The homeowner did not intentionally default, does not have an ownership interest in other residential real estate and has not been convicted of fraud in the last 10 years under Federal and state law; and
  4. The homeowner did not provide materially false information (e.g., lied about income) to obtain the mortgage that is being refinanced into the H4H mortgage.

Original Cost of Program

  1. 3 percent upfront mortgage insurance premium and a 1.5 percent annual premium,
  2. Equity and appreciation sharing with the Federal government, and
  3. Prohibition against new junior liens against the property unless they are directly related to property maintenance.
  • Please also view the HUDS fact sheet (PDF) for full details

Updated Hope for Homeowners Improvements

  1. Eliminates 3% upfront premium
  2. Reduces 1.5% annual premium to a range between .55% and .75%, based on risk-based pricing (also makes technical fix to permit discontinuation of fees when loan balance drops below certain levels, consistent with normal FHA policy)
  3. Raises maximum loan to value (LTV) from 90% to 93% for borrowers above a 31% mortgage debt to income (DTI) ratio or above a 43% ratio
  4. Eliminates government profit sharing of appreciation over market value of home at time of refi. Retains government declining share (from 100% to 50% after five years) of equity created by the refi, to be paid at time of sale or refi as an exit fee
  5. Authorizes payments to servicers participating in successful refis
  6. Administrative simplification: (a) eliminates borrower certifications regarding not intentionally defaulting on any debt, (b) eliminates special requirement to collect 2 years of tax returns, (c) eliminates originator liability for first payment default, (d) eliminates March 1, 2008 31% DTI test, (e) eliminates prohibition against taking out future second loans, (f) requires Board to make documents, forms, and procedures conform to those under normal FHA loans to the maximum extent possible consistent with statutory requirements.

Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP)

The systematic foreclosure prevention and mortgage modification program under this section shall be a program established by the Secretary, in consultation with the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that—

  1. Provides lenders and loan servicers with certain compensation to cover administrative costs for each loan modified according to the required standards; and
  2. Provides loss sharing or guarantees for certain losses incurred if a modified loan should subsequently re-default.

Commitment of Resources

The comprehensive plan established pursuant to subsection (a) shall require the commitment of funds made available to the Secretary under title I of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 in an amount up to $100,000,000,000 but in no case less than $40,000,000,000.

In a press conference Tuesday, Federal Housing Finance Agency director James Lockhart said the program would target high-risk borrowers — those 90 or more days delinquent on their mortgages — and employ various modification strategies to get borrowers down to an “affordable” mortgage payment, defined as 38 percent of a household’s monthly gross income on a first mortgage payment.

How to Get a Loan Modification

  1. Call your lender
  2. Call Hope Now Hotline
  3. Go through an attorney based loan modification specialist

Loan Modification Companies

Loan modification companies assess borrowers’ ability to pay through analysis of wage statements, investment accounts, bank accounts and tax returns, among other data. They then make proposals to the lending institutions for restructuring of mortgage terms in a fashion that will enhance the likelihood of repayment.

Loan modification companies can be engaged by borrowers to negotiate on their behalf. They also can be hired by lenders to help salvage troubled loans. A given loan modification company may rely primarily on one or the other sources of clients, or both.

Lenders have an interest in offering concessions to troubled borrowers because the costs of foreclosure are high. Among other things, borrowers do not want to take possession of illiquid real estate, especially in falling markets.

Billing

Loan modification companies’ fees may be billed either to the borrower or to the lender. If the company is engaged by the borrower, the borrower may be assessed the fee, sometimes up front and without guarantees of results. In other cases, even if the borrower engages the company’s services, the lender may be charged the fee, in the case of a successful re-negotiation.

Results

If the request for a loan modification is rejected, you may want to try it again in a couple months. Some lenders do not document the loan modification attempt you make. They are often motivated by changes in the housing market and their intent changes as more and more loans go into default. It does not hurt to try again. It is smart to work with a loan modification specialist, a seasoned loan officer or an attorney who specializes in real estate, mortgage lending and loan modifications. They understand how to speak to loss mitigation department, personnel and can get a general idea of the mood and trends of your lenders loss mitigation department.

A loan adjustment that is required by a Relief Act or a decision or order of a court is not subject to any limitations on modification provided in this Subsection 5.3(4)(Please Review link provided)and may be entered into without regard to whether the Mortgage Loan is in payment default.

ABOUT DEBT NEGOTIATION

Debt Negotiation is the process of negotiating with a creditor to pay off a percentage of a balance owed on old bills, invoices, lawsuits, liens, medical bills, utility bills, and judgments. This process is commonly used in debt settlement and debt arbitration. Since 30% of the 1.6 million bankruptcies filed in 2005 occurred on debt that was current, it is often in the best interest of creditors to negotiate management debt repayment schedules with debtors experiencing hardship. They do this through their own programs, promoted through credit counseling, or through independent debt arbitrators using debt negotiation.

ABOUT A SHORT SALE

In real estate, a short sale is a sale of real estate in which the proceeds from the sale fall short of the balance owed on a loan secured by the property sold. In a short sale, the bank or mortgage lender agrees to discount a loan balance due to an economic or financial hardship on the part of the mortgagor. This negotiation is all done through communication with a bank's loss mitigation or workout department. The home owner/debtor sells the mortgaged property for less than the outstanding balance of the loan, and turns over the proceeds of the sale to the lender, sometimes (but not always) in full satisfaction of the debt. In such instances, the lender would have the right to approve or disapprove of a proposed sale. Many Short Sales leave a deficiency balance for which the Mortgagor / Borrower is still liable. In 99% of all cases it is not a settlement-in-full. A deficiency balance will remain as a potential liability for the Mortgagor / Borrower. The bank's opportunity of pursuit of a deficiency judgment will vary from state to state.

Extenuating circumstances influence whether or not banks will discount a loan balance. These circumstances are usually related to the current real estate market and the borrower's financial situation.

A short sale typically is executed to prevent a home foreclosure, but the decision to proceed with a short sale is predicated on the most economic way for the bank to recover the amount owed on the property. Often a bank will allow a short sale if they believe that it will result in a smaller financial loss than foreclosing as there are carrying costs that are associated with a foreclosure. A bank will typically determine the amount of equity (or lack of), by determining the probable selling price from a Broker Price Opinion BPO or through a valuation of an appraisal. For the home owner, advantages include avoidance of a foreclosure on their credit history and partial control of the monetary deficiency. A short sale is typically faster and less expensive than a foreclosure. In short, a short sale is nothing more than negotiating with lien holders a payoff for less than what they are owed, or rather a sale of a debt, generally on a piece of real estate, short of the full debt amount. It does not extinguish the remaining balance unless settlement is clearly indicated on the acceptance of offer.

Short sales are common in standard business transactions in recognition that creditors are not doing debtors a favor but, rather, engaging in a business transaction when extending credit. When it makes no business sense or is economically not feasible to retain an asset, businesses default on their loans (called bonds). It is not uncommon for business bonds to trade on the after-market for a small fraction of their face value in realization of the likelihood of these future defaults.

Negotiations

Lenders have a department (typically called "loss mitigation") that processes potential short sale transactions. Today, lenders may accept short sale offers or requests for short sales even if a Notice of Default has not been issued or recorded with the locality where the property is located. Given the unprecedented and overwhelming number of losses that mortgage lenders have suffered from the current foreclosure crisis, they are now more willing to accept short sales than ever before. This is great news for borrowers who are "underwater" or in other words those who owe more on their mortgage than their property is worth and are having trouble selling to avoid foreclosure because of this. They are type of distressed borrower who needs a short sale the most.

Lenders have a varying tolerance for short sales and mitigated losses. The majority of lenders have a predetermined criteria for such transactions. Other distressed lenders may allow any reasonable offer subject to a loss mitigator's approval. Multiple levels of approvals and conditions are very common with short sales. Junior liens - such as second mortgages, HELOC lenders, and HOA (special assessment liens) - may need to approve the short sale. Frequent objectors to short sales include tax lien holders (income, estate or corporate franchise tax - as opposed to real property taxes, which have priority even when unrecorded) and mechanic's lien holders. It is possible for junior lien holders to prevent the short sale. If the lender required mortgage insurance on the loan, the insurer will likely also be party to negotiations as they may be asked to pay out a claim to offset the lender's loss in the short sale. The wide array of parties, parameters and processes involved in a short sale makes it a relatively complex and highly specialized type of real estate transaction which is why unfortunately short sale deals have a high failure rate and often do not close on time to save homeowners from foreclosure when they are not handled by a knowledgeable and experienced professional. The best sources of knowledge and expertise in short sales are short sale negotiators, loss mitigation specialists, and real estate lawyers who specialize in short sale.

Credit reporting

A short sale does adversely affect a person's credit report, though the negative impact is typically less than a foreclosure. Short sales are a type of settlement. Like all entries except for bankruptcy, short sales remain on a credit report for seven years. Depending upon other credit information it is typically possible to obtain another mortgage 1-3 years after a short sale.

While it is frequent if not common for a lender to forgive the balance of the loan in question, it is unlikely that a lien holder that is not a mortgagee will forgive any of their balance. Further, it is common for a lender to omit updating mortgage balances to reflect a zero balance after a short sale. However, willfully misrepresenting information on a credit report can constitute libel in some jurisdictions, and lenders may be sued in civil court for engaging in this behavior.

ALL ABOUT HOME LOANS, MORTGAGE:

This article is about the legal mechanisms used to secure the performance of obligations, including the payment of debts, with property. For loans secured by mortgages, such as residential housing loans, and lending practices or requirements

A mortgage is the transfer of an interest in property (or the equivalent in law - a charge) to a lender as a security for a debt - usually a loan of money. While a mortgage in itself is not a debt, it is the lender's security for a debt. It is a transfer of an interest in land (or the equivalent) from the owner to the mortgage lender, on the condition that this interest will be returned to the owner when the terms of the mortgage have been satisfied or performed. In other words, the mortgage is a security for the loan that the lender makes to the borrower.

This comes from the Old French "dead pledge," apparently meaning that the pledge ends (dies) either when the obligation is fulfilled or the property is taken through foreclosure.

In most jurisdictions mortgages are strongly associated with loans secured on real estate rather than on other property (such as ships) and in some jurisdictions only land may be mortgaged. A mortgage is the standard method by which individuals and businesses can purchase real estate without the need to pay the full value immediately from their own resources.

The cost to the borrower is measured by the annual percentage rate (APR), which is an effective annual rate of interest and fees paid by the borrower.

Participants and variant terminology

Legal systems in different countries, while having some concepts in common, employ different terminology. However, in general, a mortgage of property involves the following parties.

Mortgage lender

Mortgagee is a party to whom property is mortgaged, usually a lender. Mortgage provides security to the lender. Given the large sum of money involved in financing a property, a mortgage lender will usually want security for the loan that will provide a claim upon that security and will take precedence over other creditors. A mortgage accomplishes this security.

The lender loans the money and registers the mortgage with the title to the property. The borrower gives the lender the mortgage as security for the loan, receives the funds, makes the required payments and maintains possession of the property. The borrower has the right to have the mortgage discharged from the title once the debt is paid. If the mortgagor fails to repay the loan according to the conditions set forth by the lender, then the mortgagee reserves the right to foreclose on the property.

Borrower

Mortgagor is a party who mortgages property. A mortgagor owes the obligation secured by the mortgage. Generally, the debtor must meet the conditions of the underlying loan or other obligation and the conditions of the mortgage. Otherwise, the debtor usually runs the risk of foreclosure of the mortgage by the creditor to recover the debt. Typically the debtors will be the individual homeowners, landlords or businesses who are purchasing their property by way of a loan.

Most buyers of real property would have difficulty saving enough money to make an outright purchase of real estate. The use of debt increases a buyer's ability to buy through a combination of down payment and debt. As a result a real estate transaction seldom occurs without buyers relying on borrowed funds.

Borrowing for investment purposes

Aside from the absence of large amount of available money, there are several reasons why an investor (including a buyer of real estate) might borrow funds. Some of these include:

  • To diversify investments and reduce overall risk by using only part of the available funds for any one investment. However the mortgage loan enables him to purchase more assets than he would otherwise been able to, and therefore in general increases investment risk rather than reducing it.
  • To invest the borrowed funds at a higher rate of interest (yield) than the borrowing rate; for example, a sum is borrowed at an annual interest rate of 7% per year and used to invest in a project that returns 10% per year. This is likely to be speculative and there is usually a possibility that the project may turn out to return less than 7% per year or to lose money.
  • To free up equity for other purposes; for example, a commercial enterprise may prefer to use funds to purchase inventory or equipment instead of investing only in land and buildings.
  • To obtain a tax benefit. In some countries (such as Canada), mortgage interest is not tax deductible, but loans made for investment purposes are.

Other participants

Because of the complicated legal exchange, or conveyance, of the property, one or both of the main participants are likely to require legal representation. The terminology varies with legal jurisdiction; see lawyer, solicitor and conveyancer.

Because of the complex nature of many markets the debtor may approach a mortgage broker or financial adviser to help them source an appropriate creditor, typically by finding the most competitive loan.

The debt is, in civil law jurisdictions, referred to as hypothecation, which may make use of the services of a hypothecary to assist in the hypothecation.

Default on divided property

When a tract of land is purchased with a mortgage and then split up and sold, the "inverse order of alienation rule" applies to decide parties liable for the unpaid debt.

When a mortgaged tract of land is split up and sold, upon default, the mortgagee first forecloses on lands still owned by the mortgagor and proceeds against other owners in an 'inverse order' in which they were sold. For example, A acquires a 3-acre (12,000 m2) lot by mortgage then splits up the lot into three 1-acre (4,000 m2) lots (A, B, and C), and sells lot B to X, and then lot C to Y, retaining lot A for himself. Upon default, the mortgagee proceeds against lot A first, the mortgagor. If foreclosure or repossession of lot A does not fully satisfy the debt, the mortgagee proceeds against lot B, then lot C. The rationale is that the first purchaser should have more equity and subsequent purchasers receive a diluted share.

Legal aspects

Mortgages may be legal or equitable. Furthermore, a mortgage may take one of a number of different legal structures, the availability of which will depend on the jurisdiction under which the mortgage is made. Common law jurisdictions have evolved two main forms of mortgage: the mortgage by demise and the mortgage by legal charge.

Mortgage by demise

In a mortgage by demise, the mortgagee (the lender) becomes the owner of the mortgaged property until the loan is repaid or other mortgage obligation fulfilled in full, a process known as "redemption". This kind of mortgage takes the form of a conveyance of the property to the creditor, with a condition that the property will be returned on redemption.

Mortgages by demise were the original form of mortgage, and continue to be used in many jurisdictions, and in a small minority of states in the United States. Many other common law jurisdictions have either abolished or minimized the use of the mortgage by demise. For example, in England and Wales this type of mortgage is no longer available, by virtue of the Land Registration Act 2002.

Mortgage by legal charge

In a mortgage by legal charge or technically "a charge by deed expressed to be by way of legal mortgage", the debtor remains the legal owner of the property, but the creditor gains sufficient rights over it to enable them to enforce their security, such as a right to take possession of the property or sell it.

To protect the lender, a mortgage by legal charge is usually recorded in a public register. Since mortgage debt is often the largest debt owed by the debtor, banks and other mortgage lenders run title searches of the real property to make certain that there are no mortgages already registered on the debtor's property which might have higher priority. Tax liens, in some cases, will come ahead of mortgages. For this reason, if a borrower has delinquent property taxes, the bank will often pay them to prevent the lienholder from foreclosing and wiping out the mortgage.

Equitable mortgage

In an equitable mortgage the lender is secured by taking possession of all the original title documents of the property and by borrower's signing a Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deed (MODTD). This document is an undertaking by the borrower that he/she has deposited the title documents with the bank with his own wish and will, in order to secure the financing obtained from the bank.

History

At common law, a mortgage was a conveyance of land that on its face was absolute and conveyed a fee simple estate, but which was in fact conditional, and would be of no effect if certain conditions were met – usually, but not necessarily, the repayment of a debt to the original landowner. Hence the word "mortgage" (a legal term in French meaning "dead pledge"). The debt was absolute in form, and unlike a "live pledge" was not conditionally dependent on its repayment solely from raising and selling crops or livestock or simply giving the crops and livestock raised on the mortgaged land. The mortgage debt remained in effect whether or not the land could successfully produce enough income to repay the debt. In theory, a mortgage required no further steps to be taken by the creditor, such as acceptance of crops and livestock in repayment.

The difficulty with this arrangement was that the lender was absolute owner of the property and could sell it or refuse to re-convey it to the borrower, who was in a weak position. Increasingly the courts of equity began to protect the borrower's interests, so that a borrower came to have an absolute right to insist on re-conveyance on redemption. This right of the borrower is known as the "equity of redemption".

This arrangement, whereby the lender was in theory the absolute owner, but in practice had few of the practical rights of ownership, was seen in many jurisdictions as being awkwardly artificial. By statute the common law's position was altered so that the mortgagor would retain ownership, but the mortgagee's rights, such as foreclosure, the power of sale, and the right to take possession, would be protected.

In the United States, those states that have reformed the nature of mortgages in this way are known as lien states. A similar effect was achieved in England and Wales by the Law of Property Act 1925, which abolished mortgages by the conveyance of a fee simple.

Foreclosure and non-recourse lending

In most jurisdictions, a lender may foreclose on the mortgaged property if certain conditions – principally, nonpayment of the mortgage loan – apply. Subject to local legal requirements, the property may then be sold. Any amounts received from the sale (net of costs) are applied to the original debt.

In some jurisdictions, mortgage loans are non-recourse loans: if the funds recouped from sale of the mortgaged property are insufficient to cover the outstanding debt, the lender may not have recourse to the borrower after foreclosure. In other jurisdictions, the borrower remains responsible for any remaining debt, through a deficiency judgment. In some jurisdictions, first mortgages are non-recourse loans, but second and subsequent ones are recourse loans.

Specific procedures for foreclosure and sale of the mortgaged property almost always apply, and may be tightly regulated by the relevant government. In some jurisdictions, foreclosure and sale can occur quite rapidly, while in others, foreclosure may take many months or even years. In many countries, the ability of lenders to foreclose is extremely limited, and mortgage market development has been notably slower.

At the start of 2008, 5.6% of all mortgages in the United States were delinquent. By the end of the first quarter that rate had risen, encompassing 6.4% of residential properties. This number did not include the 2.5% of homes in foreclosure.

Mortgages in the United States

Types of mortgage instruments

Two types of mortgage instruments are commonly used in the United States: the mortgage (sometimes called a mortgage deed) and the deed of trust.[7]

The mortgage

In all but a few states, a mortgage creates a lien on the title to the mortgaged property. Foreclosure of that lien almost always requires a judicial proceeding declaring the debt to be due and in default and ordering a sale of the property to pay the debt.

Security deed

The deed to secure debt is a mortgage instrument used in the state of Georgia. Unlike a mortgage, however, a security deed is an actual conveyance of real property in security of a debt. Upon the execution of such a deed, title passes to the grantee or beneficiary (usually lender), however the grantor (debtor) maintains equitable title to use and enjoy the conveyed land subject to compliance with debt obligations.

Security deeds must be recorded in the county where the land is located. Although there is no specific time within which such deeds must be filed, the failure to timely record the deed to secure debt may affect priority and therefore the ability to enforce the debt against the subject property.

The deed of trust

The deed of trust is a deed by the borrower to a trustee for the purposes of securing a debt. In most states, it also merely creates a lien on the title and not a title transfer, regardless of its terms. It differs from a mortgage in that, in many states, it can be foreclosed by a non-judicial sale held by the trustee. It is also possible to foreclose them through a judicial proceeding.

Most "mortgages" in California are actually deeds of trust. The effective difference is that the foreclosure process can be much faster for a deed of trust than for a mortgage, on the order of 3 months rather than a year. Because the foreclosure does not require actions by the court the transaction costs can be quite a bit less.

Deeds of trust to secure repayments of debts should not be confused with trust instruments that are sometimes called deeds of trust but that are used to create trusts for other purposes, such as estate planning. Though there are superficial similarities in the form, many states hold deeds of trust to secure repayment of debts do not create true trust arrangements.

Mortgage lien priority

Except in those few states in the United States that adhere to the title theory of mortgages, either a mortgage or a deed of trust will create a mortgage lien upon the title to the real property being mortgaged. The lien is said to "attach" to the title when the mortgage is signed by the mortgagor and delivered to the mortgagee and the mortgagor receives the funds whose repayment the mortgage secures. Subject to the requirements of the recording laws of the state in which the land is located, this attachment establishes the priority of the mortgage lien with respect to most other liens on the property's title. Liens that have attached to the title before the mortgage lien are said to be senior to, or prior to, the mortgage lien. Those attaching afterward are said to be junior or subordinate. The purpose of this priority is to establish the order in which lien holders are entitled to foreclose their liens in an attempt to recover their debts. If there are multiple mortgage liens on the title to a property and the loan secured by a first mortgage is paid off, the second mortgage lien will move up in priority and become the new first mortgage lien on the title. Documenting this new priority arrangement will require the release of the mortgage securing the paid off loan.

ABOUT MORTGAGE LOANS:

A mortgage loan is a loan secured by real property through the use of a note which evidences the existence of the loan and the encumbrance of that realty through the granting of a mortgage which secures the loan. However, the word mortgage alone, in everyday usage, is most often used to mean mortgage loan.

A home buyer or builder can obtain financing (a loan) either to purchase or secure against the property from a financial institution, such as a bank, either directly or indirectly through intermediaries. Features of mortgage loans such as the size of the loan, maturity of the loan, interest rate, method of paying off the loan, and other characteristics can vary considerably.

Mortgage loan basics

Basic concepts and legal regulation

According to Anglo-American property law, a mortgage occurs when an owner (usually of a fee simple interest in realty) pledges his interest as security or collateral for a loan. Therefore, a mortgage is an encumbrance on property just as an easement would be, but because most mortgages occur as a condition for new loan money, the word mortgage has become the generic term for a loan secured by such real property.

As with other types of loans, mortgages have an interest rate and are scheduled to amortize over a set period of time; typically 30 years. All types of real property can, and usually are, secured with a mortgage and bear an interest rate that is supposed to reflect the lender's risk.

Mortgage lending is the primary mechanism used in many countries to finance private ownership of residential property. For commercial mortgages see the separate article. Although the terminology and precise forms will differ from country to country, the basic components tend to be similar:

  • Property: the physical residence being financed. The exact form of ownership will vary from country to country, and may restrict the types of lending that are possible.
  • Mortgage: the security created on the property by the lender, which will usually include certain restrictions on the use or disposal of the property (such as paying any outstanding debt before selling the property).
  • Borrower: the person borrowing who either has or is creating an ownership interest in the property.
  • Lender: any lender, but usually a bank or other financial institution.
  • Principal: the original size of the loan, which may or may not include certain other costs; as any principal is repaid, the principal will go down in size.
  • Interest: a financial charge for use of the lender's money.
  • Foreclosure or repossession: the possibility that the lender has to foreclose, repossess or seize the property under certain circumstances is essential to a mortgage loan; without this aspect, the loan is arguably no different from any other type of loan.

Many other specific characteristics are common to many markets, but the above are the essential features. Governments usually regulate many aspects of mortgage lending, either directly (through legal requirements, for example) or indirectly (through regulation of the participants or the financial markets, such as the banking industry), and often through state intervention (direct lending by the government, by state-owned banks, or sponsorship of various entities). Other aspects that define a specific mortgage market may be regional, historical, or driven by specific characteristics of the legal or financial system.

Mortgage loans are generally structured as long-term loans, the periodic payments for which are similar to an annuity and calculated according to the time value of money formulae. The most basic arrangement would require a fixed monthly payment over a period of ten to thirty years, depending on local conditions. Over this period the principal component of the loan (the original loan) would be slowly paid down through amortization. In practice, many variants are possible and common worldwide and within each country.

Lenders provide funds against property to earn interest income, and generally borrow these funds themselves (for example, by taking deposits or issuing bonds). The price at which the lenders borrow money therefore affects the cost of borrowing. Lenders may also, in many countries, sell the mortgage loan to other parties who are interested in receiving the stream of cash payments from the borrower, often in the form of a security (by means of a securitization). In the United States, the largest firms securitizing loans are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are government sponsored enterprises.

Mortgage lending will also take into account the (perceived) riskiness of the mortgage loan, that is, the likelihood that the funds will be repaid (usually considered a function of the creditworthiness of the borrower); that if they are not repaid, the lender will be able to foreclose and recoup some or all of its original capital; and the financial, interest rate risk and time delays that may be involved in certain circumstances.

Mortgage loan types

There are many types of mortgages used worldwide, but several factors broadly define the characteristics of the mortgage. All of these may be subject to local regulation and legal requirements.

  • Interest: interest may be fixed for the life of the loan or variable, and change at certain predefined periods; the interest rate can also, of course, be higher or lower.
  • Term: mortgage loans generally have a maximum term, that is, the number of years after which an amortizing loan will be repaid. Some mortgage loans may have no amortization, or require full repayment of any remaining balance at a certain date, or even negative amortization.
  • Payment amount and frequency: the amount paid per period and the frequency of payments; in some cases, the amount paid per period may change or the borrower may have the option to increase or decrease the amount paid.
  • Prepayment: some types of mortgages may limit or restrict prepayment of all or a portion of the loan, or require payment of a penalty to the lender for prepayment.

The two basic types of amortized loans are the fixed rate mortgage (FRM) and adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) (also known as a floating rate or variable rate mortgage). In many countries, floating rate mortgages are the norm and will simply be referred to as mortgages; in the United States, fixed rate mortgages are typically considered "standard." Combinations of fixed and floating rate are also common, whereby a mortgage loan will have a fixed rate for some period, and vary after the end of that period.

Historical US Prime Rates

In a fixed rate mortgage, the interest rate, and hence periodic payment, remains fixed for the life (or term) of the loan. In the US, the term is usually up to 30 years (15 and 30 being the most common), although longer terms may be offered in certain circumstances. For a fixed rate mortgage, payments for principal and interest should not change over the life of the loan, although ancillary costs (such as property taxes and insurance) can and do change.

In an adjustable rate mortgage, the interest rate is generally fixed for a period of time, after which it will periodically (for example, annually or monthly) adjust up or down to some market index. Common indices in the US include the Prime rate, the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR), and the Treasury Index ("T-Bill"); other indices are in use but are less popular.

Adjustable rates transfer part of the interest rate risk from the lender to the borrower, and thus are widely used where fixed rate funding is difficult to obtain or prohibitively expensive. Since the risk is transferred to the borrower, the initial interest rate may be from 0.5% to 2% lower than the average 30-year fixed rate; the size of the price differential will be related to debt market conditions, including the yield curve.

Additionally, lenders in many markets rely on credit reports and credit scores derived from them. The higher the score, the more creditworthy the borrower is assumed to be. Favorable interest rates are offered to buyers with high scores. Lower scores indicate higher risk for the lender, and higher rates will generally be charged to reflect the (expected) higher default rates.

A partial amortization or balloon loan is one where the amount of monthly payments due are calculated (amortized) over a certain term, but the outstanding principal balance is due at some point short of that term. This payment is sometimes referred to as a "balloon payment" or bullet payment. The interest rate for a balloon loan can be either fixed or floating. The most common way of describing a balloon loan uses the terminology X due in Y, where X is the number of years over which the loan is amortized, and Y is the year in which the principal balance is due.

Other loan types:

  • Assumed mortgage
  • Balloon mortgage
  • Blanket loan
  • Bridge loan
  • Budget loan
  • Buydown mortgage
  • Commercial loan
  • Endowment mortgage
  • Equity loan
  • Flexible mortgage
  • Foreign National mortgage
  • Graduated payment mortgage loan
  • Hard money loan
  • Jumbo mortgages
  • Offset mortgage
  • Package loan
  • Participation mortgage
  • Reverse mortgage
  • Repayment mortgage
  • Seasoned mortgage
  • Term loan or Interest-only loan
  • Wraparound mortgage
  • Negative amortization loan
  • Non-conforming mortgage

Loan to value and downpayments

Upon making a mortgage loan for purchase of a property, lenders usually require that the borrower make a downpayment, that is, contribute a portion of the cost of the property. This downpayment may be expressed as a portion of the value of the property (see below for a definition of this term). The loan to value ratio (or LTV) is the size of the loan against the value of the property. Therefore, a mortgage loan where the purchaser has made a downpayment of 20% has a loan to value ratio of 80%. For loans made against properties that the borrower already owns, the loan to value ratio will be imputed against the estimated value of the property.

The loan to value ratio is considered an important indicator of the riskiness of a mortgage loan: the higher the LTV, the higher the risk that the value of the property (in case of foreclosure) will be insufficient to cover the remaining principal of the loan.

Value: appraised, estimated, and actual

Since the value of the property is an important factor in understanding the risk of the loan, determining the value is a key factor in mortgage lending. The value may be determined in various ways, but the most common are:

  1. Actual or transaction value: this is usually taken to be the purchase price of the property. If the property is not being purchased at the time of borrowing, this information may not be available.
  2. Appraised or surveyed value: in most jurisdictions, some form of appraisal of the value by a licensed professional is common. There is often a requirement for the lender to obtain an official appraisal.
  3. Estimated value: lenders or other parties may use their own internal estimates, particularly in jurisdictions where no official appraisal procedure exists, but also in some other circumstances.

Equity or homeowner's equity

The concept of equity in a property refers to the value of the property minus the outstanding debt, subject to the definition of the value of the property. Therefore, a borrower who owns a property whose estimated value is $400,000 but with outstanding mortgage loans of $300,000 is said to have homeowner's equity of $100,000.

Payment and debt ratios

In most countries, a number of more or less standard measures of creditworthiness may be used. Common measures include payment to income (mortgage payments as a percentage of gross or net income); debt to income (all debt payments, including mortgage payments, as a percentage of income); and various net worth measures. In many countries, credit scores are used in lieu of or to supplement these measures. There will also be requirements for documentation of the creditworthiness, such as income tax returns, pay stubs, etc.; the specifics will vary from location to location.

Some lenders may also require a potential borrower have one or more months of "reserve assets" available. In other words, the borrower may be required to show the availability of enough assets to pay for the housing costs (including mortgage, taxes, etc.) for a period of time in the event of the job loss or other loss of income.

Many countries have lower requirements for certain borrowers, or "no-doc" / "low-doc" lending standards that may be acceptable in certain circumstances.

Standard or conforming mortgages

Many countries have a notion of standard or conforming mortgages that define a perceived acceptable level of risk, which may be formal or informal, and may be reinforced by laws, government intervention, or market practice. For example, a standard mortgage may be considered to be one with no more than 70-80% LTV and no more than one-third of gross income going to mortgage debt.

A standard or conforming mortgage is a key concept as it often defines whether or not the mortgage can be easily sold or securitized, or, if nonstandard, may affect the price at which it may be sold. In the United States, a conforming mortgage is one which meets the established rules and procedures of the two major government-sponsored entities in the housing finance market (including some legal requirements). In contrast, lenders who decide to make non-conforming loans are exercising a higher risk tolerance and do so knowing that they face more challenge in reselling the loan. Many countries have similar concepts or agencies that define what are "standard" mortgages. Regulated lenders (such as banks) may be subject to limits or higher risk weightings for nonstandard mortgages. For example, banks in Canada face restrictions on lending more than 75% of the property value; beyond this level, mortgage insurance is generally required (as of April 2007, there is a proposal to raise this limit to 80%).

Repaying the capital

There are various ways to repay a mortgage loan; repayment depends on locality, tax laws and prevailing culture.

Capital and interest

The most common way to repay a loan is to make regular payments of the capital (also called principal) and interest over a set term. This is commonly referred to as (self) amortization in the US and as a repayment mortgage in the UK. A mortgage is a form of annuity (from the perspective of the lender), and the calculation of the periodic payments is based on the time value of money formulas. Certain details may be specific to different locations: interest may be calculated on the basis of a 360-day year, for example; interest may be compounded daily, yearly, or semiannually; prepayment penalties may apply; and other factors. There may be legal restrictions on certain matters, and consumer protection laws may specify or prohibit certain practices.

Depending on the size of the loan and the prevailing practice in the country the term may be short (10 years) or long (50 years plus). In the UK and US, 25 to 30 years is the usual maximum term (although shorter periods, such as 15-year mortgage loans, are common). Mortgage payments, which are typically made monthly, contain a capital (repayment of the principal) and an interest element. The amount of capital included in each payment varies throughout the term of the mortgage. In the early years the repayments are largely interest and a small part capital. Towards the end of the mortgage the payments are mostly capital and a smaller portion interest. In this way the payment amount determined at outset is calculated to ensure the loan is repaid at a specified date in the future. This gives borrowers assurance that by maintaining repayment the loan will be cleared at a specified date, if the interest rate does not change.

Interest only

The main alternative to capital and interest mortgage is an interest only mortgage, where the capital is not repaid throughout the term. This type of mortgage is common in the UK, especially when associated with a regular investment plan. With this arrangement regular contributions are made to a separate investment plan designed to build up a lump sum to repay the mortgage at maturity. This type of arrangement is called an investment-backed mortgage or is often related to the type of plan used: endowment mortgage if an endowment policy is used, similarly a Personal Equity Plan (PEP) mortgage, Individual Savings Account (ISA) mortgage or pension mortgage. Historically, investment-backed mortgages offered various tax advantages over repayment mortgages, although this is no longer the case in the UK. Investment-backed mortgages are seen as higher risk as they are dependent on the investment making sufficient return to clear the debt.

Until recently it was not uncommon for interest only mortgages to be arranged without a repayment vehicle, with the borrower gambling that the property market will rise sufficiently for the loan to be repaid by trading down at retirement (or when rent on the property and inflation combine to surpass the interest rate).

No capital or interest

For older borrowers (typically in retirement), it may be possible to arrange a mortgage where neither the capital nor interest is repaid. The interest is rolled up with the capital, increasing the debt each year.

These arrangements are variously called reverse mortgages, lifetime mortgages or equity release mortgages, depending on the country. The loans are typically not repaid until the borrowers die, hence the age restriction. For further details, see equity release.

Interest and partial capital

In the US a partial amortization or balloon loan is one where the amount of monthly payments due are calculated (amortized) over a certain term, but the outstanding capital balance is due at some point short of that term. In the UK, a part repayment mortgage is quite common, especially where the original mortgage was investment-backed and on moving house further borrowing is arranged on a capital and interest (repayment) basis.

Foreclosure and non-recourse lending

In most jurisdictions, a lender may foreclose the mortgaged property if certain conditions - principally, nonpayment of the mortgage loan - obtain. Subject to local legal requirements, the property may then be sold. Any amounts received from the sale (net of costs) are applied to the original debt. In some jurisdictions, mortgage loans are non-recourse loans: if the funds recouped from sale of the mortgaged property are insufficient to cover the outstanding debt, the lender may not have recourse to the borrower after foreclosure. In other jurisdictions, the borrower remains responsible for any remaining debt. In virtually all jurisdictions, specific procedures for foreclosure and sale of the mortgaged property apply, and may be tightly regulated by the relevant government; in some jurisdictions, foreclosure and sale can occur quite rapidly, while in others, foreclosure may take many months or even years. In many countries, the ability of lenders to foreclose is extremely limited, and mortgage market development has been notably slower.

Mortgage lending: United States

United States mortgage process

In the US, the process by which a mortgage is secured by a borrower is called origination. This involves the borrower submitting an application and documentation related to his/her financial history and/or credit history to the underwriter. Many banks now offer "no-doc" or "low-doc" loans in which the borrower is required to submit only minimal financial information. These loans carry a higher interest rate and are available only to borrowers with excellent credit. Sometimes, a third party is involved, such as a mortgage broker. This entity takes the borrower's information and reviews a number of lenders, selecting the ones that will best meet the needs of the consumer.

Loans are often sold on the open market to larger investors by the originating mortgage company. Many of the guidelines that they follow are suited to satisfy investors. Some companies, called correspondent lenders, sell all or most of their closed loans to these investors, accepting some risks for issuing them. They often offer niche loans at higher prices that the investor does not wish to originate.

If the underwriter is not satisfied with the documentation provided by the borrower, additional documentation and conditions may be imposed, called stipulations. The meeting of such conditions can be a daunting experience for the consumer, but it is crucial for the lending institution to ensure the information being submitted is accurate and meets specific guidelines. This is done to give the lender a reasonable guarantee that the borrower can and will repay the loan. If a third party is involved in the loan, it will help the borrower to clear such conditions.

The following documents are typically required for traditional underwriter review. Over the past several years, use of "automated underwriting" statistical models has reduced the amount of documentation required from many borrowers. Such automated underwriting engines include Freddie Mac's "Loan Prospector" and Fannie Mae's "Desktop Underwriter". For borrowers who have excellent credit and very acceptable debt positions, there may be virtually no documentation of income or assets required at all. Many of these documents are also not required for no-doc and low-doc loans.

  • Credit Report
  • 1003 — Uniform Residential Loan Application
  • 1004 — Uniform Residential Appraisal Report
  • 1005 — Verification Of Employment (VOE)
  • 1006 — Verification Of Deposit (VOD)
  • 1007 — Single Family Comparable Rent Schedule
  • 1008 — Transmittal Summary
  • Copy of deed of current home
  • Federal income tax records for last two years
  • Verification of Mortgage (VOM) or Verification of Payment (VOP)
  • Borrower's Authorization
  • Purchase Sales Agreement
  • 1084A and 1084B (Self-employed Income Analysis) and 1088 (Comparative Income Analysis) - used if borrower is self-employed

Predatory mortgage lending

There is concern in the US that consumers are often victims of predatory mortgage lending. The main concern is that mortgage brokers and lenders, operating legally, are finding loopholes in the law to obtain additional profit. The typical scenario is that terms of the loan are beyond the means of the borrower. The borrower makes a number of interest and principal payments, and then defaults. The lender then takes the property and recovers the amount of the loan, and also keeps the interest and principal payments, as well as loan origination fees.

Option ARM

An option ARM provides the option to pay as little as the equivalent of an amortized payment based on a 1% interest rate, (please note this is not the actual interest rate). As a result, the difference between the monthly payment and the interest on the loan is added to the loan principal; the loan at this point has negative amortization. In this respect, an option ARM provides a form of equity withdrawal (as in a cash-out refinancing) but over a period of time.

The option ARM gives a number of payment choices each month (for example, the equivalent of an amortized payment where the interest rate 1%, interest only based on actual interest rate, actual 30 year amortized payment, actual 15 year amortized payment). The interest rate may adjust every month in accordance with the index to which the loan is tied and the terms of the specific loan. These loans may be useful for people who have a lot of equity in their home and want to lower monthly costs; for investors, allowing them the flexibility to choose which payment to make every month; or for those with irregular incomes (such as those working on commission or for whom bonuses comprise a large portion of income).

One of the important features of this type of loan is that the minimum payments are often fixed for each year for an initial term of up to 5 years. The minimum payment may rise each year a little (payment size increases of 7.5% are common) but remain the same for another year. For example, a minimum payment for year 1 may be $1,000 per month each month all year long. In year 2 the minimum payment for each month is $1,075 each month. This is a gradual increase in the minimum payment. The interest rate may fluctuate each month, which means that the extent of any negative amortization cannot be predicted beyond worst-case scenario as dictated by the terms of the loan.

Option ARM mortgages have been criticized on the basis that some borrowers are not aware of the implications of negative amortization; that eventually option Arms reset to higher payment levels (an event called "recast" to amortize the loan), and borrowers may not be capable of making the higher monthly payments; and that option Arms have been used to qualify mortgages for individuals whose incomes cannot support payments higher than the minimum level.

Costs

Lenders may charge various fees when giving a mortgage to a mortgagor. These include entry fees, exit fees, administration fees and lenders mortgage insurance. There are also settlement fees (closing costs) the settlement company will charge. In addition, if a third party handles the loan, it may charge other fees as well.

The United States mortgage finance industry

Mortgage lending is a major category of the business of finance in the United States. Mortgages are commercial paper and can be conveyed and assigned freely to other holders. In the US, the Federal government created several programs, or government sponsored entities, to foster mortgage lending, construction and encourage home ownership. These programs include the Government National Mortgage Association (known as Ginnie Mae), the Federal National Mortgage Association (known as Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (known as Freddie Mac). These programs work by buying a large number of mortgages from banks and issuing (at a slightly lower interest rate) "mortgage-backed bonds" to investors, which are known as mortgage-backed securities (MBS).

This allows the banks to quickly re-lend the money to other borrowers (including in the form of mortgages) and thereby to create more mortgages than the banks could with the amount they have on deposit. This in turn allows the public to use these mortgages to purchase homes, something the government wishes to encourage. The investors, meanwhile, gain low-risk income at a higher interest rate (essentially the mortgage rate, minus the cuts of the bank and GSE) than they could gain from most other bonds.

Securitization is a momentous change in the way that mortgage bond markets function, and has grown rapidly in the last 10 years as a result of the wider dissemination of technology in the mortgage lending world. For borrowers with superior credit, government loans and ideal profiles, this securitization keeps rates almost artificially low, since the pools of funds used to create new loans can be refreshed more quickly than in years past, allowing for more rapid outflow of capital from investors to borrowers without as many personal business ties as the past.

The greatly increased rate of lending led (among other factors) to the United States housing bubble of 2000-2006. The growth of lightly regulated derivative instruments based on mortgage-backed securities, such as collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps, is widely reported as a major causative factor behind the 2007 sub-prime mortgage financial crisis.

Second-layer lenders in the US

A group called second-layer lenders became an important force in the residential mortgage market in the latter half of the 1960s. These federal credit agencies, which include the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., the Federal National Mortgage Association, and the Government National Mortgage Association, conduct secondary market activities in the buying and selling of loans and provide credit to primary lenders in the form of borrowed money. They do not have direct contact with the individual consumer.

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation

The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, sometimes known as Freddie Mac, was established in 1970. This corporation is designed to promote the flow of capital into the housing market by establishing an active secondary market in mortgages. It may by law deal only with government-supervised lenders such as savings and loan associations, savings banks, and commercial banks; its programs cover conventional whole mortgage loans, participations in conventional loans, and FHA and VA loans.

Federal National Mortgage Association

The Federal National Mortgage Association, known in financial circles as Fannie Mae, was chartered as a government corporation in 1938, re-chartered as a federal agency in 1954, and became a government-sponsored, stockholder-owned corporation in 1968. Fannie Mae, which has been described as "a private corporation with a public purpose", basically provides a secondary market for residential loans. It fulfills this function by buying, servicing, and selling loans that, since 1970, have included FHA-insured, VA-guaranteed, and conventional loans. However, purchases outrun sales by such a wide margin that some observers view this association as a lender with a permanent loan portfolio rather than a powerful secondary market corporation.

Government National Mortgage Association

The Government National Mortgage Association, which is often referred to as Ginnie Mae, operates within the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition to performing the special assistance, management, and liquidation functions that once belonged to Fannie Mae, Ginnie Mae has an important additional function — that of issuing guarantees of securities backed by government-insured or guaranteed mortgages. Such mortgage-backed securities are fully guaranteed by the US government as to timely payment of both principal and interest.

Competition among US lenders for loanable funds

To be able to provide homebuyers and builders with the funds needed, financial institutions must compete for deposits. Consumer lending institutions compete for loanable funds not only among themselves but also with the federal government and private corporations. Called disintermediation, this process involves the movement of dollars from savings accounts into direct market instruments: US Treasury obligations, agency securities, and corporate debt. One of the greatest factors in recent years in the movement of deposits was the tremendous growth of money market funds whose higher interest rates attracted consumer deposits.

To compete for deposits, US savings institutions offer many different types of plans:

  • Passbook or ordinary accounts — permit any amount to be added to or withdrawn from the account at any time.
  • NOW and Super NOW accounts — function like checking accounts but earn interest. A minimum balance may be required on Super NOW accounts.
  • Money market accounts — carry a monthly limit of preauthorized transfers to other accounts or persons and may require a minimum or average balance.
  • Certificate accounts — subject to loss of some or all interest on withdrawals before maturity.
  • Notice accounts — the equivalent of certificate accounts with an indefinite term. Savers agree to notify the institution a specified time before withdrawal.
  • Individual retirement accounts (IRAs) and Keogh accounts—a form of retirement savings in which the funds deposited and interest earned are exempt from income tax until after withdrawal.
  • Checking accounts — offered by some institutions under definite restrictions.
  • Club accounts and other savings accounts—designed to help people save regularly to meet certain goals.

The mortgage loans industry and market

There are currently over 200 significant separate financial organizations supplying mortgage loans to house buyers in Britain. The major lenders include building societies, banks, specialized mortgage corporations, insurance companies, and pension funds. Over the years, the share of the new mortgage loans market held by building societies has declined. Between 1977 and 1987, it fell drastically from 96% to 66% while that of banks and other institutions rose from 3% to 36%. The banks and other institutions that made major inroads into the mortgage market during this period were helped by such factors as:

  • relative managerial efficiency;
  • advanced technology, organizational capabilities, and expertise in marketing;
  • extensive branch networks; and
  • capacities to tap cheaper international sources of funds for lending.

By the early 1990s, UK building societies had succeeded in greatly slowing if not reversing the decline in their market share. In 1990, the societies held over 60% of all mortgage loans but took over 75% of the new mortgage market – mainly at the expense of specialized mortgage loans corporations. Building societies also increased their share of the personal savings deposits market in the early 1990s at the expense of the banks – attracting 51% of this market in 1990 compared with 42% in 1989. One study found that in the five years 1987-1992, the building societies collectively outperformed the UK clearing banks on practically all the major growth and performance measures. The societies' share of the new mortgage loans market of 75% in 1990-91 was similar to the share level achieved in 1985. Profitability as measured by return on capital was 17.8% for the top 20 societies in 1991, compared with only 8.5% for the big four banks. Finally, bad debt provisions relative to advances were only 0.4% for the top 20 societies compared with 2.8% for the four banks.

Though the building societies did subsequently recover a significant amount of the mortgage lending business lost to the banks, they still only had about two-thirds of the total market at the end of the 1980s. However, banks and building societies were by now becoming increasingly similar in terms of their structures and functions. When the Abbey National building society converted into a bank in 1989, this could be regarded either as a major diversification of a building society into retail banking – or as significantly increasing the presence of banks in the residential mortgage loans market. Research organization Industrial Systems Research has observed that trends towards the increased integration of the financial services sector have made comparison and analysis of the market shares of different types of institution increasingly problematical. It identifies as major factors making for consistently higher levels of growth and performance on the part of some mortgage lenders in the UK over the years:

  • the introduction of new technologies, mergers, structural reorganization and the realization of economies of scale, and generally increased efficiency in production and marketing operations – insofar as these things enable lenders to reduce their costs and offer more price-competitive and innovative loans and savings products;
  • buoyant retail savings receipts, and reduced reliance on relatively expensive wholesale markets for funds (especially when interest rates generally are being maintained at high levels internationally);
  • lower levels of arrears, possessions, bad debts, and provisioning than competitors;
  • increased flexibility and earnings from secondary sources and activities as a result of political-legal deregulation; and
  • being specialized or concentrating on traditional core, relatively profitable mortgage lending and savings deposit operations.[6]

Mortgage types

The UK mortgage market is one of the most innovative and competitive in the world. Unlike some other countries, there is little intervention in the market by the state or state funded entities and virtually all borrowing is funded by either mutual organizations (building societies and credit unions) or proprietary lenders (typically banks). Since 1982, when the market was substantially deregulated, there has been substantial innovation and diversification of strategies employed by lenders to attract borrowers. This has led to a wide range of mortgage types.

As lenders derive their funds either from the money markets or from deposits, most mortgages revert to a variable rate, either the lender's standard variable rate or a tracker rate, which will tend to be linked to the underlying Bank of England (BoE) repo rate (or sometimes LIBOR). Initially they will tend to offer an incentive deal to attract new borrowers. This may be:

  • A fixed rate; where the interest rate remains constant for a set period; typically for 2, 3, 4, 5 or 10 years. Longer term fixed rates (over 5 years) whilst available, tend to be more expensive and/or have more onerous early repayment charges and are therefore less popular than shorter term fixed rates.
  • A capped rate; where similar to a fixed rate, the interest rate cannot rise above the cap but can vary beneath the cap. Sometimes there is a collar associated with this type of rate which imposes a minimum rate. Capped rate are often offered over periods similar to fixed rates, e.g. 2, 3, 4 or 5 years.
  • A discount rate; where there is set margin reduction in the standard variable rate (e.g. a 2% discount) for a set period; typically 1 to 5 years. Sometimes the discount is expressed as a margin over the base rate (e.g. BoE base rate plus 0.5% for 2 years) and sometimes the rate is stepped (e.g. 3% in year 1, 2% in year 2, 1% in year three).
  • A cashback mortgage; where a lump sum is provided (typically) as a percentage of the advance e.g. 5% of the loan.

To make matters more confusing these rates are often combined: For example, 4.5% 2 year fixed then a 3 year tracker at BoE rate plus 0.89%.

With each incentive the lender may be offering a rate at less than the market cost of the borrowing. Therefore, they typically impose a penalty if the borrower repays the loan within the incentive period or a longer period (referred to as an extended tie-in). These penalties used to be called a redemption penalty or tie-in, however since the onset of Financial Services Authority regulation they are referred to as an early repayment charge.

"Self Cert" mortgage

Mortgage lenders usually use salaries declared on wage slips to work out a borrower's annual income and will usually lend up to a fixed multiple of the borrower's annual income. Self Certification Mortgages, informally known as "self cert" mortgages, are available to employed and self employed people who have a deposit to buy a house but lack the sufficient documentation to prove their income.

This type of mortgage can be beneficial to people whose income comes from multiple sources, whose salary consists largely or exclusively of commissions or bonuses, or whose accounts may not show a true reflection of their earnings. Self cert mortgages have two disadvantages: the interest rates charged are usually higher than for normal mortgages and the loan to value ratio is usually lower.

100% mortgages

Normally when a bank lends a customer money they want to protect their money as much as possible; they do this by asking the borrower to fund a certain percentage of the property purchase in the form of a deposit.

100% mortgages are mortgages that require no deposit (100% loan to value). These are sometimes offered to first time buyers, but almost always carry a higher interest rate on the loan.

Together/Plus mortgages

A development of the theme of 100% mortgages is represented by Together/Plus type mortgages, which have been launched by a number of lenders in recent years.

Together/Plus Mortgages represent loans of 100% or more of the property value - typically up to a maximum of 125%. Such loans are normally (but not universally) structured as a package of a 95% mortgage and an unsecured loan of up to 30% of the property value. This structure is mandated by lenders' capital requirements which require additional capital for loans of 100% or more of the property value.

Recent trends

July 28, 2008, US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced that, along with four large US banks, the Treasury would attempt to kick-start a market for these securities in the US, primarily to provide an alternative form of mortgage-backed securities. Similarly, in the UK "the Government is inviting views on options for a UK framework to deliver more affordable long-term fixed-rate mortgages, including the lessons to be learned from international markets and institutions". More specifically, Mr. George Soros issued a Wall Street Journal Opinion: Denmark Offers a Model Mortgage Market. - A survey of European Pfandbrief-like products was issued in 2005 by the Bank for International Settlements; the International Monetary Fund in 2007 issued a study of the covered bond markets in Germany and Spain, while the European Central Bank in 2003 issued a study of housing markets, addressing also mortgage markets and providing a two page overview of current mortgage systems in the EU countries.

History

While the idea originated in Prussia in 1769, a Danish act on mortgage credit associations of 1850 enabled the issuing of bonds (Danish: Realkreditobligationer) as a means to refinance mortgage loans . With the German mortgage banks law of 1900, the whole German Empire was given a standardized legal foundation for the emission of Pfandbriefe. An account from the perspective of development economics is available.

Mortgage insurance

Mortgage insurance is an insurance policy designed to protect the mortgagee (lender) from any default by the mortgagor (borrower). It is used commonly in loans with a loan-to-value ratio over 80%, and employed in the event of foreclosure and repossession.

This policy is typically paid for by the borrower as a component to final nominal (note) rate, or in one lump sum up front, or as a separate and itemized component of monthly mortgage payment. In the last case, mortgage insurance can be dropped when the lender informs the borrower, or its subsequent assigns, that the property has appreciated, the loan has been paid down, or any combination of both to relegate the loan-to-value under 80%.

In the event of repossession, banks, investors, etc. must resort to selling the property to recoup their original investment (the money lent), and are able to dispose of hard assets (such as real estate) more quickly by reductions in price. Therefore, the mortgage insurance acts as a hedge should the repossessing authority recover less than full and fair market value for any hard asset.

Islamic mortgages

The Sharia law of Islam prohibits the payment or receipt of interest, which means that practicing Muslims cannot use conventional mortgages. However, real estate is far too expensive for most people to buy outright using cash: Islamic mortgages solve this problem by having the property change hands twice. In one variation, the bank will buy the house outright and then act as a landlord. The homebuyer, in addition to paying rent, will pay a contribution towards the purchase of the property. When the last payment is made, the property changes hands.

Typically, this may lead to a higher final price for the buyers. This is because in some countries (such as the United Kingdom and India) there is a Stamp Duty which is a tax charged by the government on a change of ownership. Because ownership changes twice in an Islamic mortgage, a stamp tax may be charged twice. Many other jurisdictions have similar transaction taxes on change of ownership which may be levied. In the United Kingdom, the dual application of Stamp Duty in such transactions was removed in the Finance Act 2003 in order to facilitate Islamic mortgages.

An alternative scheme involves the bank reselling the property according to an installment plan, at a price higher than the original price.

Both of these methods compensate the lender as if they were charging interest, but the loans are structured in a way that in name they are not, and the lender shares the financial risks involved in the transaction with the homebuyer.

Other terminologies

Like any other legal system, the mortgage business sometimes uses confusing jargon. Below are some terms explained in brief. If a term is not explained here it may be related to the legal mortgage rather than to the loan.

Advance This is the money you have borrowed plus all the additional fees.

Base rate In UK, this is the base interest rate set by the Bank of England. In the United States, this value is set by the Federal Reserve and is known as the Discount Rate.

Bridging loan This is a temporary loan that enables the borrower to purchase a new property before the borrower is able to sell another current property.

Disbursements These are all the fees of the solicitors and governments, such as stamp duty, land registry, search fees, etc.

Early redemption charge / Prepayment penalty / Redemption penalty This is the amount of money due if the mortgage is paid in full before the time finished.

Equity This is the market value of the property minus all loans outstanding on it.

First time buyer This is the term given to a person buying property for the first time.

Loan origination fee A charge levied by a creditor for underwriting a loan. The fee often is expressed in points. A point is 1 percent of the loan amount.

Sealing fee This is a fee made when the lender releases the legal charge over the property.

Subject to contract This is an agreement between seller and buyer before the actual contract is made.

 

ALL ABOUT CALIFORNIA

The State of California is a state located in the western Pacific region of the United States and was the 31st admitted to the Union. It is the most populous state of the United States. It is bordered by Oregon to the north, Nevada to the east, and Arizona to the southeast in the United States, as well as Baja California in Mexico to the south. California's capital city is Sacramento, with the four largest cities being Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose, and San Francisco. California is known for its diverse climate and geography, as well as ethnically diverse population. The state has 58 counties.

Before becoming a part of the United States, Alta California was colonized by the Spanish Empire in 1769. After Mexican independence in 1821, Alta California remained as part of Mexico until 1846, when it was the independent California Republic for one brief week. Following the conclusion of the Mexican-American war of 1848, California was annexed by the United States and was admitted to the Union as the thirty-first state on September 9, 1850.

California is the third largest state by area in the US; its size gives it a diverse geography, which ranges from sandy and rocky beaches of the Pacific coast, to the rugged snowcapped Sierra Nevada mountains in the east, to desert areas in the southeast and the forests of the northwest. The center portion of the state is dominated by the Central Valley, one of the most productive agricultural areas in the world and the largest of any US state. The Sierra Nevada mountains contain Yosemite Valley, famous for its glacially-carved domes, and Sequoia National Park, home to the giant sequoia trees, the largest living organisms on Earth. The state is home to Mount Whitney, the highest point in the contiguous United States,[2] as well as the second lowest and hottest place in the Western Hemisphere, Death Valley. Many of the trees located in the California White Mountains are the oldest in the world; one Bristlecone pine has an age of 4,700 years.

The California Gold Rush began in 1848, dramatically changing California to accommodate an influx of population and an economic boom. The early 20th century was marked by Los Angeles becoming the center of the entertainment industry, in addition to the growth of a large tourism sector in the state. Along with California's prosperous agricultural industry, other industries include aerospace, petroleum, and computer and information technology. California ranks among the top ten largest economies in the world, and were it a separate country, it would be 34th amongst the most populous countries, just behind Poland, as well as the 6th World's largest economy.

California borders the Pacific Ocean, Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and the Mexican state of Baja California. With an area of 160,000 mi² (411,000 km²) it is the third largest state in the United States in size, after Alaska and Texas.

California's geography is rich, complex, and varied. In the middle of the state lies the California Central Valley, bounded by the coastal mountain ranges in the west, the Sierra Nevada to the east, the Cascade Range in the north and the Tehachapi Mountains in the south. The Central Valley is California's agricultural heartland and grows approximately one-third of the nation's food.[5] Divided in two by the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the northern portion, the Sacramento Valley serves as the watershed of the Sacramento River, while the southern portion, the San Joaquin Valley is the watershed for the San Joaquin River; both areas derive its name from the rivers that transit them. With dredging, the Sacramento and the San Joaquin Rivers have remained sufficiently deep that several inland cities are seaports. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta serves as a critical water supply hub for the state. Water is routed through an extensive network of canals and pumps out of the delta, that traverse nearly the length of the state, including the Central Valley Project, and the State Water Project. Water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta provides drinking water for nearly 23 million people, almost two-thirds of the state's population, and provides water to farmers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The Channel Islands are located off the southern coast.

The Sierra Nevada (Spanish for "snowy range") include the highest peak in the contiguous forty-eight states, Mount Whitney, at 14,505 ft (4,421 m), Yosemite National Park, and the deep freshwater lake, Lake Tahoe, the largest lake in the state by volume. To the east of the Sierra Nevada are Owens Valley and Mono Lake, an essential migratory bird habitat. In the western part of the state is Clear Lake, the largest freshwater lake by area entirely in California. Though Lake Tahoe is larger, it is divided by the California/Nevada border. The Sierra Nevada falls to Arctic temperatures in winter and has several dozen small glaciers, including Palisade Glacier, the southernmost glacier in the United States.

About 35% of the state's total surface area is covered by forests, and California's diversity of pine species is unmatched by any other state. California contains more forest land than any other state except Alaska. In the south is a large inland salt lake, the Salton Sea. Deserts in California make up about 25% of the total surface area. The south-central desert is called the Mojave; to the northeast of the Mojave lies Death Valley, which contains the lowest, hottest point in North America, Badwater Flat. The distance from the lowest point of Death Valley to the peak of Mount Whitney is less than 200 miles (322 km). Indeed, almost all of southeastern California is arid, hot desert, with routine extreme high temperatures during the summer.

Along the California coast are several major metropolitan areas, including Greater Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and San Diego.

By 2007, California's population has reached 37,700,000, making it the most populated state, and is the 13th fastest-growing state. This includes a natural increase since the last census of 1,909,368 people (that is 3,375,297 births minus 1,465,929 deaths) and an increase due to net migration of 774,198 people into the state. Immigration from outside the United States resulted in a net increase of 1,724,790 people, and migration within the country produced a net decrease of 950,592.[10] According to the Sacramento News & Review, California's population will increase to 50 million people by 2025.[11]

California is the second most populous state in the Western Hemisphere, exceeded only by São Paulo State, Brazil. More than 12 percent of US citizens live in California and its population is greater than that of all but 34 countries of the world. California has eight of the top 50 US cities in terms of population. Los Angeles is the nation's second-largest city with a population of 3,849,378 people, followed by San Diego (8th), San Jose (10th), San Francisco (14th), Long Beach (34th), Fresno (36th), Sacramento (37th) and Oakland (44th). Los Angeles County has held the title of most populous county for decades, and is more populous than 42 US states. The center of population of California is at the town of Buttonwillow in Kern County.

As of 2005, The gross state product (GSP) is about $1.62 trillion, the largest in the United States. California is responsible for 13% of the United States gross domestic product (GDP). As of 2005, California's GDP is larger than all but seven countries in the world (and all but eight countries by Purchasing Power Parity).

California is also the home of several significant economic regions, such as Hollywood (entertainment), the California Central Valley (agriculture), the Silicon Valley and Tech Coast (computers and high tech), and wine producing regions, such as the Napa Valley, Sonoma Valley and Southern California's Santa Barbara and Paso Robles areas.

The predominant industry, more than twice as large as the next, is agriculture, (including fruit, vegetables, dairy, and wine). This is followed by aerospace; entertainment, primarily television by dollar volume, although many movies are still made in California; music production and recording studios; light manufacturing, including computer hardware and software; and the mining of borax. Oil drilling has played a significant role in the development of the state.

Per capita personal income was $38,956 as of 2006, ranking 11th in the nation. Per capita income varies widely by geographic region and profession. The Central Valley is the most impoverished, with migrant farm workers making less than minimum wage. Recently, the San Joaquin Valley was characterized as one of the most economically depressed regions in the US, on par with the region of Appalachia.

Many coastal cities include some of the wealthiest per-capita areas in the US The high-technology sectors in Northern California, specifically Silicon Valley, in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties, are currently emerging from economic downturn caused by the dot.com bust, which caused the loss of over 250,000 jobs in Northern California alone. As of spring 2005, economic growth has resumed in California at 4.3%.

California levies a 9.3% maximum variable rate income tax, with 6 tax brackets. It collects about $40 billion per year in income taxes. California's combined state, county and local sales tax rate is from 7.25 to 8.75%. The rate varies throughout the state at the local level. In all, it collects about $28 billion in sales taxes per year. All real property is taxable annually, the tax based on the property's fair market value at the time of purchase. This tax does not increase based on a rise in real property values (see Proposition 13). California collects $33 billion in property taxes per year.

The state of California has 478 incorporated cities and towns, of which 456 are cities and 22 are towns. Under California law, the terms "city" and "town" are explicitly interchangeable; the name of an incorporated municipality in the state can either by "City of (Name)" or "Town of (Name)." Please find the list below:

A

City County Incorporated
Adelanto   San Bernardino   December 22, 1970  
Agoura Hills   Los Angeles   December 8, 1982  
Alameda   Alameda   April 19, 1854  
Albany   Alameda   September 22, 1908  
Alhambra   Los Angeles   July 11, 1903  
Aliso Viejo   Orange   July 1, 2001  
Alturas   Modoc   September 16, 1901  
Amador City   Amador   June 2, 1915  
American Canyon   Napa   January 1, 1992  
Anaheim   Orange   March 18, 1876  
Anderson   Shasta   January 16, 1956  
Angels Camp   Calaveras   January 24, 1912  
Antioch   Contra Costa   February 6, 1872  
Apple Valley *   San Bernardino   November 28, 1988  
Arcadia   Los Angeles   August 5, 1903  
Arcata   Humboldt   February 2, 1858  
Arroyo Grande   San Luis Obispo   July 10, 1911  
Artesia   Los Angeles   May 29, 1959  
Arvin   Kern   December 21, 1960  
Atascadero   San Luis Obispo   July 2, 1979  
Atherton *   San Mateo   September 12, 1923  
Atwater   Merced   August 16, 1922  
Auburn   Placer   May 2, 1888  
Avalon   Los Angeles   June 26, 1913  
Avenal   Kings   September 11, 1979  
Azusa   Los Angeles   December 29, 1898  

B

City County Incorporated
Bakersfield   Kern   January 11, 1898  
Baldwin Park   Los Angeles   January 25, 1956  
Banning   Riverside   February 6, 1913  
Barstow   San Bernardino   September 30, 1947  
Beaumont   Riverside   November 18, 1912  
Bell   Los Angeles   November 7, 1927  
Bell Gardens   Los Angeles   August 1, 1961  
Bellflower   Los Angeles   September 3, 1957  
Belmont   San Mateo   October 29, 1926  
Belvedere   Marin   December 24, 1896  
Benicia   Solano   March 27, 1850  
Berkeley   Alameda   April 4, 1878  
Beverly Hills   Los Angeles   January 28, 1914  
Big Bear Lake   San Bernardino   November 28, 1980  
Biggs   Butte   June 26, 1903  
Bishop   Inyo   May 6, 1903  
Blue Lake   Humboldt   April 23, 1910  
Blythe   Riverside   July 21, 1916  
Bradbury   Los Angeles   July 26, 1957  
Brawley   Imperial   April 6, 1908  
Brea   Orange   February 23, 1917  
Brentwood   Contra Costa   January 21, 1948  
Brisbane   San Mateo   November 27, 1961  
Buellton   Santa Barbara   February 1, 1992  
Buena Park   Orange   January 27, 1953  
Burbank   Los Angeles   July 8, 1911  
Burlingame   San Mateo   June 6, 1908  

C

City County Incorporated
Calabasas   Los Angeles   April 5, 1991  
Calexico   Imperial   April 16, 1908  
California City   Kern   December 10, 1965  
Calimesa   Riverside   December 1, 1990  
Calipatria   Imperial   February 28, 1919  
Calistoga   Napa   January 6, 1886  
Camarillo   Ventura   October 22, 1964  
Canyon Lake   Riverside   December 1, 1990  
Capitola   Santa Cruz   January 11, 1949  
Carlsbad   San Diego   July 16, 1952  
Carmel-by-the-Sea   Monterey   October 31, 1916  
Carpinteria