CoreLogic: Home Prices Show Third Consecutive Monthly Increase

Home prices were up for the third
consecutive month
in May as measured by CoreLogic’s Home Price Index
(HPI.)  The three months of increases were
noted for both annual and month-over-month numbers.

The HPI increased by 1.8 percent
compared to April figures and was 2.0 percent higher in May 2012 than in May
2011.  Those numbers are for all home
sales including those of distressed homes, both short sales and real estate
owned (REO) transactions.

When distressed sales are removed from
the calculation home prices were up year-over-year by 2.7 percent and were 2.3
percent higher in May than in April. 
This is the fourth consecutive month-over-month increase.

CoreLogic’s forward-looking Pending HPI
which is based on Multiple Listing Service data measuring price changes in the
most recent month indicates that house prices, including distressed sales, will
rise by at least 1.4 percent from May to June and by 2.0 percent if distressed
sales are not included.

“The recent upward trend in
U.S. home prices is an encouraging signal that we may be seeing a bottoming of
the housing down cycle,” said Anand Nallathambi, president and chief
executive officer of CoreLogic. “Tighter inventory is contributing to
broad, but modest, price gains nationwide and more significant gains in the
harder-hit markets, like Phoenix.”

“Home price appreciation in the
lower-priced segment of the market is rebounding more quickly than in the upper
end,” said Mark Fleming, chief economist for CoreLogic. “Home prices
below 75 percent of the national median increased 5.7 percent from a year ago,
compared to only a 1.8 percent increase for prices 125 percent or more of the
median.”

Since home prices peaked in April
2006 the national HPI including all sales has fallen 30.1 percent and non-distressed
sale prices are down 22.2 percent.

The highest price appreciation
including distressed sales was seen in Arizona (12.0 percent), Idaho (9.2
percent) and South Dakota (8.7 percent). 
When distressed sales are excluded the greatest appreciation was noted
in Montana (9.1 percent), South Dakota (8.5 percent), and Arizona (7.3
percent).

…(read more)

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

OCC Notes Fewer Banks Tightening Underwriting Standards

The Office of Comptroller of the Currency
(OCC) recently completed its 18th annual “Survey of Credit
Underwriting Practices
.” The survey seeks to identify trends in lending
standards
and credit risks for the most common types of commercial and retail
credit offered by National Banks and Federal Savings Associations (FSA).  The latter was included for the first time in
this year’s survey.

The survey covers OCC’s examiner
assessments of underwriting standards at 87 banks with assets of three billion
dollars or more.  Examiners looked at
loan products for each company where loan volume was 2% or more of its
committed loan portfolio.  The survey covers
loans totaling $4.6 trillion as of December 31, 2011, representing 91% of total
loans in the national banking and FSA systems at that time.  The large banks discussed in the report are
the 18 largest by asset size supervised by the OCC’s large bank supervision
department; the other 69 banks are supervised by OCC’s medium size and
community bank supervision department. 
Underwriting standards refer to the terms and conditions under which
banks extend or renew credit such as financial and collateral requirements,
repayment programs, maturities, pricings, and covenants.

The results showed that underwriting
standards remain largely unchanged
from last year.  OCC examiners reported that those banks that changed
standards generally did so in response to shifts in economic outlook, the
competitive environment, or the banks risk appetite including a desire for
growth.  Loan portfolios that experienced
the most easing included indirect consumer, credit cards, large corporate,
asset base lending, and leverage loans. 
Portfolios that experienced the most tightening included high
loan-to-value (HLTV) home equity, international, commercial and residential
construction, affordable housing, and residential real estate loans.

Expectations regarding future health of
the economy
differed by bank and loan products but examiners reported that
economic outlook was one of the main reasons given for easing or tightening
standards.  Others were changes in risk
appetite and product performance. Factors contributing to eased standards were changes
in the competitive environment, increased competition and desire for growth and
increased market liquidity. 

The survey indicates that 77% of
examiner responses reflected that the overall level of credit risk will remain
either unchanged or improve over the next 12 months.  In last year’s survey 64% of the responses
showed an expectation for improvement in the level of credit risk over the
coming year. Because of the significant volume of real estate related loans,
the greatest credit risk in banks was general economic weakness and its results
and impact on real estate values.   

Eighty-four of the surveyed banks (97
percent) originate residential real estate loans.  There is a slow continued trend from
tightening to unchanged standards with 65 percent of the banks reporting
unchanged residential real estate underwriting standards.  Despite the many challenges and uncertainties
presented by the housing market, none of the banks exited the residential real
estate business during the past year however examiners reported that two banks
plan to do so in the coming year.  Additionally,
examiners indicated that quantity of risk inherent in these portfolios remained
unchanged or decreased at 81% of the banks.

Similar results were noted for
conventional home equity loans with 68% of banks keeping underwriting standards
unchanged and 18% easing standards since the 2001 survey.  Of the six banks that originated high
loan-to-value home equity loans, three banks have exited the business and one
plans to do so in the coming year

Commercial real estate (CRE) products
include residential construction, commercial construction, and all other CRE
loans.  Almost all surveyed banks offered
at least one type of CRE product and these remain a primary concern of examiners
given the current economic environment and some banks’ significant
concentrations in this product relative to their capital.  A majority of banks underwriting standards
remain unchanged for CRE; tightening continued in residential construction and
commercial (21 percent and 20 percent respectively).  Examiners site cited the distressed real
estate market, poor product performance, reduced risk appetite and changing
market strategy as the main reasons for the banks net tightening.

Nineteen banks (22 percent) offered
residential construction loan products but recent performance of these loans
has been poor and many banks have either exited the product or significantly
curtailed new originations.

Of the loan products surveyed 17% were originated
to sell, mostly large corporate loans, leveraged loans, international credits,
and asset based loans.  Examiners noted
different standards for loans originated to hold vs. loans originated to sell
in only one or two of the banks offering each product.  There has been continued improvement since
2008 in reducing the differences in hold vs. sell underwriting standards and
OCC continues to monitor and assess any differences.

…(read more)

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

OIG Finds FHLBanks Corrected Foreign Credit Exposure, more Supervision Needed

The Office of the Inspector General
(OIG) of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) issued a report this morning
that was mildly critical of the FHFA’s oversight of Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks)
granting of unsecured credit to European banks.   OIG said that extensions of unsecured credit
in general increased by the FHLBanks during the 2010-2011 period, even as the
risks for doing so were intensifying.

FHFA regulates the FHLBanks and has
critical responsibilities to ensure that they operate in a safe and sound
manner.  FHFA’s OIG initiated an
evaluation to assess the regulator’s oversight of the Banks unsecured credit
risk management practices.

Unsecured credit extensions to European
institutions
and others grew from $66 billion at the end of 2008 to more than
$120 billion by early 2011 before declining to $57 billion by the end of that
year as the European sovereign debt crisis intensified.  During this period extensions of unsecured
credit to domestic borrowers remained relatively static but extensions to
foreign financial institutions fluctuated in a pattern that mirrored the
FHLBanks’ total unsecured lending.  That
is, it more than doubled from about $48 billion at the end of 2008 to $101
billion as of April 2011 before falling by 59 percent to slightly more than $41
billion by the end of 2011.

FHFA OIG also found that certain
FHLBanks had large exposures to particular financial institutions and the
increasing credit and other risks associated with such lending.   For example, one FHLBank extended more than
$1 billion to a European bank despite the fact that the bank’s credit rating
was downgraded and it later suffered a multibillion dollar loss.

During the time period in question OIG
found there was an inverse relationship between the trends in lending to
foreign financial institutions and the Banks advances to their own members.  Since mid-2011 the extensions to foreign
institutions have declined sharply but the advances have continued their
longstanding decline.  OIG said it
appears that some FHLBanks extended the unsecured credit to foreign
institutions to offset the decline in advance demand and that they curtailed
those unsecured extensions as they began to fully appreciate the associated
risks.

At the peak of the unsecured lending,
about 70 percent of the FHLBank System’s $101 billion in unsecured credit to
foreign borrowers was made to European financial institutions and 44 percent
were to institutions within the Eurozone. 
About 8 percent of unsecured debt ($6 billion) was to institutions in
Spain, considered by S&P to be even riskier than the Eurozone as a whole.

Some banks within the FHL System had
extremely high levels of unsecured credit extended to foreign borrowers.  The Seattle Bank’s exposure to foreign
borrowers as a percentage of its regulatory capital was more than 340 percent
in March 2011; Boston was at 300 percent, and Topeka 360 percent.  All three had declined substantially by the
end of 2011 but Seattle and Topeka remained above 100 percent.

OIG said that the vast majority of the
Banks’ extensions of unsecured credit appeared to be within current regulatory
limits (although OIG said these limits may be outdated and overly permissive),
some banks did exceed the limits and OIG found the three banks (which for some
reason it treated anonymously) definitely did so and blamed that on a lack of
adequate controls of systems to ensure compliance.

OIG reviewed a variety of FHFA internal
documents during the 2010-2011 period during which it found the Agency had
expressed growing concern about the Banks’ unsecured exposures to foreign
financial institutions.  But, even though
FHFA identified the unsecured credit extensions as an increasing risk in early
2010, it did not prioritize it in its examination process due to its focus on
greater financial risks then facing the FHLBank system especially their private
label mortgage-backed securities portfolios. 
In 2011, however, FHFA initiated a range of oversight measures focusing
on and prioritizing the credit extensions in the supervisory process and
increasing the frequency with which the Banks had to report on that part of
their portfolios.

OIG believes that FHFA’s recent initiatives
contributed to the significant decline in the amount of unsecured credit being
extended by the end of 2011.

The final findings issued by OIG in its
report are:

  1. Although
    FHFA did not initially prioritize FHLBank unsecured credit risks, it has
    recently developed an increasingly proactive approach to oversight in this
    area.
  2. FHFA
    did not actively pursue evidence of potential FHLBank violations of the limits
    on unsecured exposures contained in its regulations.
  3. FHFA’s
    current regulations governing unsecured lending may be outdated and overly
    permissive.

To correct
these deficiencies, OIG recommends that the Agency:

  • Follow up on any potential evidence of violations of
    the existing regulatory limits and take action as warranted;
  • Determine the extent to which inadequate systems and
    controls may compromise the Banks’ capacity to comply with regulatory limits;
  • Strengthen the regulatory framework by establishing
    maximum exposure limits; lowering existing individual counterparty limits; and
    ensuring that the unsecured exposure limits are consistent with the System’s
    housing mission.

…(read more)

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

OCC: Mortgage Performance Best Since 2008

Mortgage performance during the
first quarter of 2012 was the best in three years according to the Office of Comptroller
of the Currency’s (OCC’s) Mortgage
Metrics Report
.  Percentages of
mortgages that were 30 to 59 and 60 to 89 days delinquent were at the lowest
level since at least the first quarter of 2008 when Metrics was first published. 
The percentage of mortgages current and performing at the end of the
quarter was 88.9 percent up 1.1 percent from the previous quarter and 0.3
percent from a year earlier. OCC attributed the improvement in performance to
several factors including strengthening economic conditions, seasonal effects,
servicing transfers, and the ongoing effects of both home retention programs
and home forfeiture actions.

The quality of government guaranteed
mortgages
improved during the quarter with current and performing mortgages at
85.9 percent of the portfolio compared to 84.2 percent in the previous quarter but
down from 87.0 a year earlier.  Mortgages
serviced for the two government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac made up 59 percent of servicer portfolios and 93.7 percent of these
loans were current and performing, a percentage that has changed little over
the past year.

New foreclosures initiated during
the quarter were down 1.8 percent to 286,951 which OCC said reflected the
emphasis on home retention actions as well as a decrease in delinquencies.  Many servicers have also slowed new
foreclosures in response to changing servicing standards and requirements.  

Completed foreclosures increased to
122,979-up 5.9 percent from the previous quarter and 2.7 percent from the first
quarter of 2011.  The inventory of foreclosures in process increased from
the previous quarter to 1,269,921, but is down from 1,308,757 a year ago.  Deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure, and short-sales
brought the total number of home forfeiture actions to 185,781 during the
quarter, an increase of 1.9 percent from the fourth quarter of 2011 and 8.3
percent from a year earlier.

Servicers initiated 352,989 home
retention actions
during the quarter and have initiated more than 2.2 million
such actions including modifications, trial-period plans, and payment plans
over the last five quarters.  At the end
of the first quarter of 2012, 50.7 percent of modifications remained current or
were paid off.  Modifications made since 2008 that reduced borrower
monthly payments by 10 percent or more performed better (57.6 percent remained
current) than those that reduced payments by less than 10 percent (36.8
percent.)

On average, modifications
implemented in the first quarter of 2012 reduced monthly principal and interest
payments by $437, which is 31 percent more than modifications implemented
during the first quarter of 2011. HAMP modification reduced payments by $588 on
average and those modifications performed better than others, with 68.2 percent
remaining current compared to 53.4 percent of modifications done by others.  OCC said HAMP’s performance reflects the
significantly reduced monthly payments, the program’s emphasis on affordability
relative to borrower income, required income verification, and the successful
completion of a required trial period.

…(read more)

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