Like the characters in "The Blair Witch Project", the banks are running scared!

Well what a wild week it has been.  When we came to work on Monday we feared President Obama would put the housing crisis to bed without ever holding the banks’ feet to the fire.

The settlement with the banks, which we have blogged about ad nauseam this week, seemed as sure as a chip-shot field goal.

But thanks to President Obama’s suddenly get-tough approach, as evidenced by his State of the Union speech, we’ve seen the banks’ kick go wide-right and now all bets are off.

Can There Be Real Change In Mortgage Industry?

Now we are not completely sold that things will play out exactly as homeowners would like, this is of course the federal government we’re talking about, but for the first time we have a true sense of optimism. The President may finally be seeing things our way, and we want to throw our full support behind him.

There is no doubt cages have been rattled in the mortgage industry, and nerves have been frayed. If Obama’s plan to re-write the foreclosure rules didn’t have some kind of teeth, then we doubt we’d be seeing the type of reverberation thorough the media and the top echelons of government that we’ve detected in the last few days.

Banks Are Fearful of Settlement Collapse

The settlement could be falling apart at the seems, at least JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon thinks so.  He told CNBC this morning that Obama’s announcement to investigate the packaging and servicing of mortgage loans could stop the settlement cold.

“It has a pretty good chance of derailing it,” Dimon said in a televised interview from Switzerland, adding later, “I think it would be better for America if the settlement took place.”

Guess Dimon hasn’t been reading the South Florida Law Blog. You and I know it would be better for the BANKS if a settlement took place now, and we suspect Dimon knows that too.

From the moment the details of the settlement became public, there was push back from some of the Attorneys General, the legal community, and the media.

The New York Times mirrored our thoughts, in this Op-Ed piece published in Thursday’s paper they also wondered if this was finally the investigation that would end with criminal prosecution and dare we say, jail time.

New York AG Promises to Leave No Stone Unturned

The importance of the appointment of New York AG Eric Schneiderman, which we mentioned yesterday, can not be understated. His new unit, which will answer to the existing Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force, will be composed of members of the Department of Justice, the SEC and the IRS. It will also be working with the existing hierarchies of those organizations.  So his reach will be far and wide, and we believe this investigation has the potential to do some real good.

Schneiderman, along with California AG Kamala Harris, have been some of the most outspoken critics of the settlement, and he is promising a thorough investigation of ‘every aspect of the conduct that created the bubble and crash’.

To us, those words ring true. Obama is embracing real change with his appointment, and we can’t wait to see what happens next.

The President is well aware of the uphill battle he faces when it comes to convincing voters and campaign financers that his economic policies and regulations have not only been what we needed the past three years, but also what we need in the next four. According to The New York Times, President Obama has already started reaching out to the skeptical financial industry on Wall Street, hoping to win back one of his most vital sources of campaign cash.

While many on Wall Street view the President’s financial rhetoric as unfair to their industry, his apparent goal is to prove that his fiscal policies have helped to bring the banks and financial markets back to health and toward sustained growth.

The argument goes that the economy would have been dramatically worse at this stage had the Obama administration not taken the action it did in the wake of the real estate and financial crisis.

But how do you prove a negative? You can’t.

Historically, recessions have been ended by a wave of homeowner refinancing that predictably follows a lowering of interest rates. The President faces a number of obstacles to accomplishing a refinancing boom, however.

First, the number of homeowners who are underwater continues to rise.

Second, the banks have no motivation to lower interest rates of homeowners who are stuck in their homes.

Our current refinancing and banking system is stacked against the premise (and promise) that refinancing would push cash back into the economy, spur a consumer stimulus, and in turn promote spending, job creation and financial growth.

Too many people with good credit and jobs are stuck with high interest rate loans. The President would be wise to focus on developing a system for refinancing homeowners to stimulate an organic bailout of our financial crisis.

The fact that the President has more work to do to bring the country out of its funk and needs a different path to economic growth is backed up by a recent Time Magazine article debunking the myths of the new American economy.

Myth #1: This is a temporary blip, and then it’s full steam ahead.
The vast majority of economists do not believe we are on the way to a double-dip recession, but avoiding a double-dip is not the same as stimulating economic growth strong enough to revive the job market. The fact is that estimates point toward a five year recovery time before we return to a healthy unemployment rate of 5%.

Refinancing borrowers with strong credit and jobs could help speed up the process.

Myth #2: We can buy our way out of this.
Widespread government stimulus for loan modifications isn’t effective if homeowners don’t have jobs that allow them to make payments at all. There has been a decline in foreclosures, but the supply of foreclosed homes continues to undermine the national real estate market and dampen consumer spending.

The previous federal stimulus attempts have focused too much on homeowners who were already in trouble with their mortgages. While these homeowners certainly need help, shifting the focus to encourage refinancing of borrowers not underwater on their mortgages would allow this group to put its savings back into the economy. As the saying goes, “A rising tide lifts all boats.”

Myth #3: The private sector will make it all better.
Companies are making plenty of money. The problem is that they aren’t spending it to hire American workers. According to Time, American companies generated $1.68 trillion in profit in the last quarter of 2010 alone. Clearly, it’s a myth that American companies are waiting for economic and regulatory “certainty” before investing at home.

Myth #4: We’ll pack up and move for new jobs.
Most people couldn’t afford to move if they wanted to because they are underwater on their mortgages. While there are currently 3 million job openings, an additional problem is that the current labor pool’s skill set doesn’t match up with available jobs.

Myth #5: Entrepreneurs are the foundation of the economy.
New business creation has been shrinking since the 1980s. Is it coincidence that this started just when the financial sector began to explode? Lenders still aren’t lending, and the old methods of self-funding new business ventures through home equity loans or maxing out credit cards are no longer viable.

‘Hope’ was the foundation of President Obama’s victory in 2008.

The reality is Americans are still hoping for change.

The question is whether the President, or anyone for that matter, will be able to deliver.

Right now, it looks like if you want a bailout you better have your own plan in mind.

From The Trenches,

Roy Oppenheim

Mortgage Rates Set Fresh 2011 Low After Jobs Report

Fixed rate home mortgage loans dropped for the eighth straight week to a new low for 2011 amid concerns of another economic slowdown this year, according to data from Freddie Mac and a report by The Wall Street Journal.

The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 4.49%, down from 4.55% last week and 2010’s  4.72% average. Rates on 15-year fixed-rate mortgages fell from 3.74% to 3.68%.  15-year fixed-rate mortgages averaged 4.17% in 2010.

Lawyers Get More Time to Finish Foreclosures

Florida foreclosure defense is translating into more time for plantiff bank attorneys to complete a foreclosure, according to an article in the Palm Beach Post.

Due to the reality of Florida’s overloaded court system and swirling questions surrounding the validity of foreclosure paperwork, Fannie Mae is now allowing bank attorneys up to 450 days (about 15 months) for lawyers to complete a foreclosure before fines are levied.  The previous time limit was 185 days, or about six months.

The increased time needed to complete a foreclosure legally and correctly against a homeowner is due in large part to Florida foreclosure defense attorneys working to protect the rights of South Florida homeowners, according to Roy Oppenheim.

Obama Blames Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Chase for Modification Failures

The three largest U.S. mortgage lenders are getting some heat from the Obama administration for the failures of the federal foreclosure-prevention program, according to The Associated Press.

The lackluster performance of Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Chase with helping homeowners lower their mortgage payments has led the Obama administration to remove financial incentives it had given these lenders.

Only about one-third of the 1.4 million people who applied for mortgage modifications through the federal program have had their payments lowered permanently.

Angry Homeowners ‘Foreclose’ on Lenders

Owners of a house in Florida have engineered a “reverse foreclosure” against a Bank of America branch in Naples, according to The New York Times.

The homeowners paid $165,000 in cash to buy their home from the bank and never borrowed against it. But last February, the bank began foreclosure proceedings against them.  The homeowners hired a Florida foreclosure defense attorney and the case against them was dropped, however they were able to recover a judgment for $2,500 in attorney’s fees against the bank.

When the bank didn’t pay, the homeowners’ lawyer showed up at the bank with sheriff deputies and a moving truck to clean out the building.

The bank eventually settled with the homeowners for more than $5,700 to cover the fees and additional costs.

Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com called Barofsky “easily one of the most impressive and courageous political officials in Washington” for his willingness to stand up to some of the most powerful people, institutions, and special interest lobbies in Washington and Wall Street.

On March 29, before his departure from office, he wrote a piece for the New York Times titled “Where the Bailout Went Wrong.” The piece, so vicious in its criticisms of the TARP program and politicians in Washington,  prompted the Wall Street Journal to run excerpts from it along with their own commentary on the TARP fiasco.

Of the failed bailout Barofsky wrote:
“Two and a half years ago, Congress passed the legislation that bailed out the country’s banks. The government has declared its mission accomplished, calling the program remarkably effective ‘by any objective measure.’  On my last day as the special inspector general of the bailout program, I regret to say that I strongly disagree . . . Almost immediately [after passage], as permitted by the broad language of the act, Treasury’s plan for TARP shifted from the purchase of mortgages [that would have helped everyday homeowners] to the infusion of hundreds of billions of dollars into the nation’s largest financial institutions, a shift that came with the express promise that it would restore lending.”

Free money to banks, “free for all” (except homeowners)
The Treasury, however, provided the money to banks with no effective policy or effort to compel the extension of credit. There were no strings attached: no requirement or even incentive to increase lending to home buyers, and against our strong recommendation, not even a request that banks report how they used TARP funds.

Barofsky concluded with the following:
“[The] Treasury’s mismanagement of TARP and its disregard for TARP’s Main Street goals – whether born of incompetence, timidity in the face of a crisis or a mindset too closely aligned with the banks it was supposed to rein in – may have so damaged the credibility of the government as a whole that future policy makers may be politically unable to take the necessary steps to save the system the next time a crisis arises. This avoidable political reality might just be TARP’s most lasting, and unfortunate, legacy.”

Crash, burn, what next?
These failings of the Treasury have also resulted in larger banks that control a larger portion of our economy. This asks the question, why should the banks do anything different the next time around? In exchange for almost crashing the entire world economy, they come out larger, richer, and virtually guaranteed of future bailouts if governments want to avoid economic depression. Indeed, according to Barofsky, credit rating agencies are now taking into account the likelihood of future bailouts when determining the financial health of a company.

We salute Neil Barofsky and wish a great public servant the very best.

From The Trenches
Roy Oppenheim

PS: I’m flattered to be nominated in three categories for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel’s Best of Blog Awards this year! If you like the South Florida Law blog or our Twitter feed @OpLaw, please take a minute and vote! You can vote for each category once per day. Thanks!

Small wonder that HAMP has turned into an embarrassing failure for the Obama administration.

This past weekend, I was in our Nation’s capital. It is always interesting to see things from the inside looking out, as opposed to from the outside looking in. It is like being in a house of mirrors.

One thing is apparent: the Beltway economy is not suffering like places such as Florida, Nevada, and Detroit. As a result, our elected representatives and the administration may not truly understand the depth of the housing crisis. I think they still blame the greed of “over ambitious” homeowners and speculators as opposed to the real driving force: Wall Street, the over-sized “too big to fail” banks and themselves. The buzz, of course, was the fact that Fannie Mae may have been playing its own political three card “monty” with homeowners over the past year. Simply put: whistleblower Caroline Herron, a former Fannie Mae executive and consultant, is suggesting the administration pushed for temporary modifications knowing full well that many of the loan modifications would fail prior to becoming permanent. In fact, Congress is now pushing for hearings.

Fannie Mae executives bungled their responsibilities of the federal government’s massive foreclosure-prevention campaign, creating a bureaucratic muddle characterized by “mismanagement and gross waste of public funds,” according to the suit Herron filed. The suit alleges that the homeowner-relief effort was marred by delays, missteps and executives’ preoccupation with their institution’s short-term financial interests. “It appeared that Fannie Mae officers were focused on maximizing incentive payments available to Fannie Mae under various federal programs – even if this meant wasting taxpayer money and delaying the implementation of high-priority Treasury programs,” Herron claims in the lawsuit.

The problem started with a skewed financial incentive at the heart of HAMP. The government paid Fannie bonuses for trial modifications that lasted three months, but apparently provided no incentive to move those homeowners into permanent modifications. Under pressure to show that they could turn a profit after the massive bailouts of 2008 and continuing bailouts in 2009, Fannie Mae executives apparently focused on earning those bonus payments.

The result: very few permanent modifications.

Herron charges that Fannie Mae continued in headlong pursuit of “trial mods” knowing many had little chance of becoming permanent. As late as September 2009, barely one percent of trial modifications had converted to permanent modifications by the end of their three-month trial, a Congressional oversight panel found. Nevertheless, Fannie Mae preferred doing trials, Herron alleges, because it was eligible to receive incentive payments from the Treasury Department for trial modifications booked before the end of 2009.

As of February 2010, 83 percent of the one million active modifications being handled by HAMP were trials rather than permanent arrangements. The allegations suggest that the modifications resemble the sub-prime loan market prior to 2008. Government incentives pushed Fannie not only to prioritize trial mods over permanent settlements, but also to pull borrowers with no hope of rescue into the program in order to profit off of them.

Herron’s lawsuit accuses Fannie executives of “actively working against” the borrower. In fact, she alleges that Fannie was reluctant to move quickly in processing the modifications.
Small wonder that HAMP has turned into an embarrassing failure for the Obama administration. Although the President promised 3 million modifications, only now approximately 300,000 have been successful.

Roy Oppenheim
From the Trenches

With about 6 million folks going to lose their homes to foreclosure this year, I have been repeatedly asked what kind of grade I give the Obama administration in addressing the foreclosure crisis during the first 100 days. I would say a B or B-. Let me explain.

On the one hand, there has been some improvement in the overall credit markets and we are seeing a lot more refinances at historically low interest rates. However, only about 2 in ten families will qualify to refinance this year. That means a whopping 80% will have to proceed on a different course.

The so called “mortgage modifications” so far have been a failure. 50% of all modifications end up in foreclosure. That is the current number. Because the servicers have little control over their obligations to their investors, it is cheaper and safer for them to foreclose.

Short sales have gone way up and it seems that the servicers are more likely to agree to a short sale than a modification where the investor takes a crew cut!

I have always described the “Obama plan” as a three legged stool:

1. Refis;
2. Modifications; and
3. the threat of bankruptcy judge telling the lender that the principal amount of the loan is being reduced or “crammed down” their throats due to the decrease in the property values.

Of course, to date the third leg of the stool does not exist since it got hung up in the Senate. That will not likely change due to the lobbying done by the banking industry. Ironically, it appears that some of the very tax payer bailout money is now being used to pay expensive Washington lobbyists to keep this bill from coming to the Senate Floor. How ironic! Thus it appears that the long sort after weapon that foreclosure defense attorneys were awaiting is remaining elusive and will continue to hinder our ability to get better results in our loan modification negotiations.

So, would I have given the President an A if the bankruptcy laws had actually been changed in these first 100 days???  You bet ya!!!

Today, as many of my friends celebrate Good Friday and I continue to celebrate Passover, my office is a virtual ghost town. So I actually had a moment to take stock on changes that are occurring in our collective lives. First and foremost it is just hard to believe that the White House held a Passover Seder last night. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/obama-to-host-seder-dinner/ The Seder is the ceremonial meal whereby Jews retell  their miraculous story of their departure from Egypt while having a rather long ceremonial meal conducted in a certain order.  In some ways the Passover story can serve as an allegory for the Obama Administration in that just over a year ago it would have seemed that only by a “miracle” would we be sitting here right now with our first African American President.

President Obama Hosts First Ever Passover Seder at the White House

Further, as someone deeply entrenched in the real estate economy, as a foreclosure defense lawyer and owner of Weston Title, I would never have envisioned a sitting President calling on homeowners to refinance their homes.   And yesterday that is exactly what the President did! http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123932215927307049.html The President explained the low interest rate climate created by the Bailout and how families can actually create their own stimulus of the economy by pumping back the money they save through refinancing– directly into the economy.

But even before the President gave his three cheers to mortgage refinancing, we have been seeing an up tick in activity in the real estate market in general and in terms of banks contacting us to help them close their refinances. In fact, earlier in the week, I thought for a moment it was Christmas when all the phone lights on my office phone were lit up like a Christmas Tree. I had to use my cell phone to call out of the office.

The buyers who are closing are bottom fishers looking for great deals from short sales, foreclosures, builder specs and generally first time home buyers who have now concluded that buying is cheaper than renting.  Some high end buyers are anticipating a wave of inflation that may be here sooner than any one can imagine.

So with all the change that is going on… one thing that has not changed– and will not change is how capitalistic market forces that are merely reflections of our collective greed and fear are  working well once again.

Have a great weekend!