Posts Tagged ‘finance’

Short Sales On The Rise; Banks Offering Incentives to Borrowers

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012

Borrowers can avoid this exit with a short sale!

For 5 years now we’ve been a huge champion of the short saleWe’ve been banging and banging away at the banks because they didn’t share our opinion.

There has long been an institutional reluctance among our nation’s lenders to embrace the short sale, but it appears they are finally coming around.

According to Corelogic’s most recent numbers, short sales accounted for 9 percent of all residential transactions last November.

In January of 2008, they represented only 2 percent. That’s a 350% increase in the amount of homes sold at short sale.

Hallelujah.

It may have taken them a while, but the banks are finally letting go of the arcane notion that foreclosing on a delinquent borrower is always the best option for them.

The short sale has and will always be a much better alternative for the banks. In many cases, when modification isn’t an option, a short sale is better for the existing homeowners  as well.

It’s good for the banks because it’s the fastest way to bring down their massive backlog of foreclosures.

Now that more and more foreclosures are lingering in the courts, banks now realize its the simplest way to get these homes back on the market, sometimes in just a few months.

They may not get back the full value of the home but their losses are about 15 percent less than if the home was foreclosed on, according to Bloomberg News.

It’s good for the borrower because they can walk away, legally, with little or no debt at all. Some banks are even offering cash incentives, as much as $35,000 in some cases, to entice homeowners to sell back their homes.

It’s win-win! In fact, it’s better than that. It’s win-win-win! The stress, the headaches, the months and years of inaction, can be put to bed with a short sale.

A short sale, in short, is quite simple. A distressed homeowner can sell the bank their home for less than what they originally owe. Banks will often agree to not go after a deficiency judgment if borrowers agree to a short sale.

JP Morgan, who approves about 5,000 short sales a month,  is giving the largest incentives, but more and more lenders are now agreeing to them.

There’s a ripple effect here that’s good for everyone. The seller gets to leave foreclosure hell once and for all, and can get money to help them transition into a rental and start fresh.

A new family gets to buy the home at a nice discount, and the neighbors don’t have to live next to an abandoned home or deal with having a non-caring faceless entity, namely the banks as their neighbor.

The lawn guy, the bug guy get back to work, and the new owners buy new furniture, new drapes, and suddenly the economy is bouncing back!

Banks might have thought foreclosing was the right idea. It wasn’t then, it isn’t now, and it will never be.

 

Give Orman Credit For Trying to Change Credit Score

Thursday, February 2nd, 2012

I have to give Suze Orman credit.

One thing that’s taken a huge hit in the housing crisis is people’s credit scores. I’ve seen it with plenty of good responsible homeowners.

The reality is that most people who overextended themselves during this financial crisis did so because they had good credit scores.

In fact when I used to ask people in a seminar who had bad credit prior to the financial meltdown no one would raise their hand.

In fact it was only people who had good credit that got themselves in trouble.

The way you build your credit seems antiquated and doesn’t always reward you for being good with your money.  If you try to live frugally, use only debit cards and curtail your borrowing, you should be rewarded.

Yet someone who lives beyond their means, yet pays the minimum on their cards, will in fact end up with a better credit score, even if you’re on the verge on bankruptcy.

This goes right to the root of the problem, where we preach the benefits of spending wisely, yet reward people for living on borrowed money. It’s entirely counterproductive to the financial recovery of this nation.

Orman and I agree that people should be rewarded not for how much money they borrow and repay but for how much money they spend without using credit in the first place.

Orman realizes this and is trying to do something about it.

She’s begun offering a pre-paid debit card called The Approved Card”, and she’s managed to convince at least one of the credit rating agencies (Transunion) to watch the spending habits of people using it.  She hopes that TransUnion will ultimately decide to use this information to help adjust a person’s credit score.

Right now TransUnion is only monitoring the data, and they are not putting it on people’s credit scores — yet.

“TransUnion is committed to supporting Suze’s efforts to understand the impact of pre-paid card use on an individual’s credit health,” a company spokesman told the Chicago Tribune, “Our goal is to help Suze understand whether including this data in a consumer’s credit report would impact access to credit products.”

A person’s credit score can ultimately have a tremendous impact not only on an individual’s finances but also on our entire American psyche of living beyond our means. For generations it has been okay for our economy to continue to grow on borrowed money.

It’s why too many people got mortgages they couldn’t afford, and it’s part of the reason we’re in the mess were in now.

Thus, I think all the credit agencies as well as various agencies in the government should consider transcending the norms of how credit scores are determined and maybe not allowing FICO, which is a private company, to dictate what is in their best interest and not necessarily the best interest of our families and our country.

Three cheers for Suze Orman.

Freddie Mac — Playing Two-Face to the American Homeowner?

Tuesday, January 31st, 2012

 

Aaron Eckart as "Two-Face"

Aaron Eckhart might have played Two-Face in the last Batman movie, but Freddie Mac seems to have settled into the role these days.

Non-profit ProPublica and National Public Radio allege that Freddie Mac, which was set up to make home loans more accessible, was in fact betting against homeowners.

It’s a highly disturbing, and completely shocking report. ProPublica’s Jessie Eisinger and Chris Arnold of NPR claim that the government-owned mortgage company was investing in securities that paid substantially more if people continued to pay off high-interest mortgages.

At the same time, they were tightening the grip on credit, making it difficult for homeowners to refinance and get out of such mortgages.

So what was good for Freddie Mac’s bottom line was diametrically opposed to what was right for some people who had mortgages with them.

Heath Ledger as "The Joker"

It’s a scheme so devious The Joker wishes he thought of it first.

Now Freddie Mac officials claim there was a Chinese wall set up between the staffers responsible for their investments and those who dealt with credit regulations.

They deny there was any intent to manipulate credit regulations to enhance their pockets, and the investigation offered no evidence that there was.

Yet they’ve already agreed to stop making these risky investments, known as inverse floaters, after the Federal Housing Finance Agency leaned on them once the investigation became public.

Even if you buy Freddie Mac’s explanation, it doesn’t soften the blow. The conflict of interest here is unequivocal.  The company is now essentially, owned by the taxpayers, and has a direct impact on who and who can not get a home loan.

So even if this just a case of the left hand not knowing what the right was doing, it’s inexcusable. The possibility that the company could have profited off homeowners misfortune, intentional or not, can not be left alone.

The banks have long been resistant to refinancing.  Why? Well they never wanted to refinance, never had to refinance, and let’s face it, they’re just greedy bastards. Now Freddie Mac looks no better than their corporate brethren.

At a time when President Obama is finally talking tough about holding lenders accountable, there must be sanctions for the government- run company run amuk.

If the American public is going to take Obama seriously, he must bring the hammer down just as firmly on his own house as he intends to do on private banks.

Eric Schneiderman: This Millennium’s Elliot Ness?

Sunday, January 29th, 2012

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman

We here at the South Florida Law Blog decided to clock in a few hours this weekend, because if we didn’t we’d probably fall behind President Obama’s new man-in-the trenches Eric Schneiderman.

The New York Attorney General, only days into his appointment as the head of the newly-formed Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group has already issued subpoenas to 11 financial companies.

President Obama only announced this new investigative unit during Tuesday’s State of the Union, yet the “check”, or in this case the subpoena, is already in the mail.

If you were skeptical that Obama was still interested in the status-quo when it comes to the banks and doing business, may we present Exhibit A.

Eric Schneiderman is turning himself into a modern-day Elliot Ness.

You remember Ness don’t you?

The federal agent whose team of “Untouchables” couldn’t be bought off and helped bring down Al Capone?

Schneiderman too has the era of a man who will not be co-opted. If anyone can stay above the fray and not be reeled in by the banks and their money, he can.

Investigation Going After Cause of Housing Crisis

Schneiderman has stood up to the President before, openly opposing the settlement agreement that we here at the South Florida Law Blog  have railed against.  And now he is Obama’s point man for placing blame and creating accountability for causing the worst economic crisis in the US since the Depression.

Elliot Ness

The Huffington Post is reporting that outside of claims directly relating to robo-signing fiasco, the banks will not be released from the threat of prosecution for the vast majority of securities-related crimes.

Schneiderman said Friday that the settlement will not interfere with his investigation because the settlement money will be for conduct by the banks that took place after the housing market collapsed.

“Our working group is focusing on the conduct that related to the pooling and creation of mortgage backed securities,” he explained, “The conduct that created the crash, not the abuses that happened after the fact.”

For the first time we’re seeing someone attack the cause of the housing crisis, and not just the effect, which is why we’re optimistic.

Schneiderman added he’s confident the liability releases the banks would be granted in the settlement have been “narrowed.” In other words, his investigation and the settlement are no longer tied to each other. Which means he is free to go after the banks for their list of crimes, which is MASSIVE.

Banks Will Not Skate Under Schneiderman

Schneiderman wants to “make sure that we’re not releasing claims that obviously now are even more important to me because I’m investigating them.” Just like Ness, Schneiderman will find having the IRS on his side will likely give him the upper hand since it is now well accepted that the banks engaged in systematic tax fraud.

You need look no further than Oppenheim Law’s recent law-review article, “Deconstruction the Black Magic of Securitized Trusts” to see the world Schneiderman is now stepping into to fix.

The banks systemically and fundamentally failed to follow the rules which were set up to protect the homeowner.  The improper securitization of “mortgage backed securities” was in fact never mortgage-backed, and due process took a back-seat in favor of expediency.

Bottom line, Schneiderman will have his hands full for quite some time.

Not a Prison Big Enough

Mitt Romney likes to remind us that “corporations are people, too. But Romney better hope that is not true, because there is no jail or prison big enough to hold the banks for the rampant fraud they have committed.    The truth is you can’t punish the banks the way you would a person, you have to hit them in the pocketbook.

And not just the shareholders, who up to now have received the brunt of the hit the banks have taken so far, thanks to their stocks going down the toilet.

You have to punish the officers, the directors, and the bondholders too, and we suspect Schneiderman shares our opinion on this.

President Obama,  who only a year ago was trying to push Schneiderman away, has finally committed to a  thorough and in-depth investigation and potential criminal liability for those institutions responsible for the current state of the housing market.

Schneiderman just might make Elliott Ness proud.


Bad Behavior has blocked 6340 access attempts in the last 7 days.