Mortgage crimes are focus of new task force

A new special task force to investigate and prosecute those responsible for bad mortgages during the housing boom will be part of President Obama’s 2012 agenda.

FHFA: House Prices Rose 1% in November

The Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA)
Home Price Index (HPI) rose 1.0 percent from October to November reflecting an
increase in U.S. housing prices on a seasonally adjusted basis. As can be seen
in the figure below, the there is little difference between seasonally adjusted
and unadjusted FHFA figures.  The estimated
figure for October was revised down from a -0.2 change as first reported to -0.7.
 The current index is 183.8 a drop of 1.8
percent from November 2010 when the index was at 187.3. 

The current HPI is 18.8 percent below
the peak it reached in April 2007 and indicates that prices have returned to
roughly the same range as existed in February 2004.

The HPI is calculated using purchase
prices of houses with mortgages that have been sold to or guaranteed by Freddie
Mac or Fannie Mac.  The index is based on
100 representing prices for homes in the first quarter of 1991.

The HPI rose for all regions
except the Middle Atlantic division (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania) which
fell 0.2 percent.  The biggest increase
was in the West South Central Division (Oklahoma, Arkansas, Texas, and Louisiana)
which rose 2.1 percent.  West South
Central and West North Central (North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota,
Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri) were the only regions to increase on a
year-over-year basis.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

Applications Fall 5% during Holiday Shortened Week

Mortgage applications were down during
the week ended January 20 according to the Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey
conducted by the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA).  The Market Composite Index, a measure of
application volume fell 5 percent on a basis that was adjusted seasonally and
to account for the week shortened by the Martin Luther King holiday.  On a non-seasonally adjusted basis the
Composite fell 13.8 percent from the previous week which ended January 13.

The
seasonally adjusted Purchase Index was down 5.4 percent and the unadjusted
Purchase Index 9.7 percent.  The latter
was 6.5 percent lower than during the same week in 2011.  The index measuring applications for
refinancing was down 5.2 percent. 

The
four week moving averages for all indices remained positive.  The Composite Index was up 4.12 percent, the
Refinance Index increased 4.85 percent and the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index
rose 0.47 percent.

Refinancing
continued to represent the majority of mortgage activity, falling slightly from
82.2 percent of all applications the previous week to 81.3 percent.  Applications for adjustable rate mortgages
were at a 5.3 percent level compared to 5.6 percent a week earlier. 

Looking
back at the month of December, MBA found that refinancing borrowers applied for
30-year fixed-rate mortgages (FRM) in 56.6 percent of cases and 24.3 percent of
applications were for a 15-year FRM.   ARMs represented 5.3 percent of applications in
December.  The
share of refinance applications for “other” fixed-rate mortgages with
amortization schedules other than a 15 or a 30-year term was 13.8 percent of
all refinance applications.

Purchase Index vs 30 Yr Fixed

Click Here to View the Purchase Applications Chart

Refinance Index vs 30 Yr Fixed

Click Here to View the Refinance Applications Chart

The average contract interest rate for 30-year FRMs with
conforming loan balances of $417,500 or less increased to 4.11 percent from
4.06 percent with points down one basis point to 0.47 point.  The effective rate increased from the
previous week.  The rate for jumbo
30-year FRM with balances over $417,500 decreased from 4.40 percent with 0.37
point to 4.39 percent with 0.40 point. 
The effective rate also decreased. 
The rate for FHA-backed 30-year FRM rose to 3.97 percent from 3.91
percent while points were down from 0.59 to 0.57 point.  The effective rate increased.

The
average rate for 15-year FRM increased to 3.40 percent from 3.33
percent, with points increasing to 0.40
from 0.39 and the effective rate increased as well. The rate for the 5/1 hybrid ARM was
up one basis point to 2.91 percent with points decreasing to 0.41l from
0.45.  The effective rate increased.

All
rates quoted are for 80 percent loan-to-value mortgages and points include the
application fee.

 The
MBA survey covers over 75 percent of all U.S. retail residential mortgage
applications, and has been conducted weekly since 1990.  Respondents
include mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts.  Base period and
value for all indexes is March 16, 1990=100.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

Square Feet: In New York, Anxiety Over Billions in Maturing Real Estate Loans

In New York City alone, nearly $70 billion worth of commercial mortgages that were issued as collateral for bonds in 2007 are maturing this year.



DeMarco Outlines Justification against GSE Principal Reduction

Acting Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)
Director Edward J. DeMarco responded Friday to a request from 16 House
Democrats to explain the statutory authority that DeMarco has claimed prohibits
FHFA from offering principal reduction as part of loan modifications on loans
it owns or guarantees.  The request was
made last November after DeMarco told the House Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform that his agency had concluded that “the use of principal reduction within the context of a loan
modification is not going to be the least-cost approach for the taxpayer.”  When a committee member pointed out that several
banks are already implementing principal reduction programs in an attempt to
help delinquent or underwater homeowners and citing specific examples, DeMarco said “I believe that the decisions that we’ve made with regard
to principal forgiveness are consistent with our statutory mandate,” and committed
to providing documentation of that statutory authority to the Committee.

In
a letter sent to the Committee’s ranking member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) DeMarco laid
out the statutory requirements as originating in three congressional mandates;
first FHFA’s role as conservator and regulator of the government sponsored
enterprises (GSEs) which requires it to preserve and conserve the assets and
properties of the GSEs; second, maintaining the GSE’s pre-conservatorship missions
and obligations to maintain liquidity in the housing market; and third, under
the Emergency Economic  Stabilization Act
of 2008 (EESA), FHFAs statutory responsibility to maximize assistance to
homeowners to minimize foreclosure while considering the net present value
(NPV) of any action to prevent foreclosures.

The focus of the letter, however, is not
the statutory framework but rather why FHFA has decided that principal
forgiveness does not meet its core responsibility within that framework to
preserve and conserve the assets of the GSEs.

DeMarco’s rationale relies on an internal
analysis provided to him in December 2010 and updated in June 2011 which shows
that the use of principal reduction as a loss mitigation measure for GSE loans
under with the Making Home Affordable (HAMP) program or the FHA Short Refi
program would cost the Enterprises more than the benefits derived and
recommended that, instead the GSEs should more aggressively pursue propriety
loan modifications
that reduce the interest rate, extend the mortgage term, and
provide for substantial principal forbearance and promote HARP refinance
transactions for borrowers who are current on their mortgages but underwater in
respect to their equity. 

The GSEs collectively guarantee or hold
about 30 million loans and, using the FHFA Home Price Index to estimate home
values it appears that less than two million of these loans are secured by
properties valued at less than the outstanding debt; i.e. underwater.  Of these loans, more than half are performing
and about one-half million are severely delinquent or in foreclosure.  The table below clearly shows that high LTV
loans are only a small proportion of the GSE’s loans and that most of the loans
are either current or severely delinquent.

Using the Treasury HAMP NPV model the
FHFA study team compared the economic effectiveness of forgiving principal down
to a mark-to-market LTV (MTMLTV) level of 115 percent versus forbearance of the
same amount of principal for all loans with a MTMLTV greater than 115 percent.  The model suggested no better result from principal
reduction than from forbearance and showed the latter as slightly more
effective in reducing GSE losses.  The
team also evaluated the accounting and operational implications of the
principal reduction to measure those costs against benefits to borrowers.  The costs were found to include, in addition
to the immediate losses, the costs of modifying technology, providing training
to servicers, and the opportunity cost of diverting attention away from other
loss mitigation activities.

Principal forbearance, in
contrast, requires no systems changes and is a common approach in government
credit programs, including FHA. The borrower is offered changes to the loan
term and rate as well as a deferral of principal, which has the same effect on
the borrower’s monthly payment as principal reduction, but provides the investor
with potential recovery. The forborne principal is paid in full or part upon
sale of the property or payoff of the loan. This traditional approach would
minimize the Enterprise losses and treat GSE borrowers in a manner that is
consistent with other government programs.

Given the large portion of the
high LTV borrowers that are current on their mortgages, a principal reduction
program for this segment, such as the FHA Short Refi program, simply transfers
performing GSE borrowers over to FHA, at a cost to the GSEs. A less costly
approach for the Enterprises to assist these borrowers is to provide a GSE
refinance alternative, such as HARP. Clearly, the HARP program has been
underutilized to date, suggesting that the program features should be revisited
to remove barriers to entry wherever possible.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.