Freddie Mac Says Mortgage Refund Demands Hit $3.2 Billion

Rick Green, Bloomberg

Freddie Mac, the mortgage-finance company operating under U.S. conservatorship, said its pending requests to lenders for refunds on faulty mortgages rose about 19 percent in the first quarter to $3.2 billion.

The new total included 38 percent that were outstanding for more than four months, the McLean, Virginia-based company said today in a securities filing. The sum represents the unpaid balance on requests to sellers and servicers of single-family home loans, and the increase is measured from the end of 2011. The total decreased from $3.4 billion in the first quarter of last year.

Costs tied to faulty mortgages have cost the nation’s biggest banks more than $72 billion since the start of 2007, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, and lenders say the threat of more “putbacks” is deterring them from making new home loans backed by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Most banks “are actively exiting the mortgage market and have steep declines in their mortgage portfolio,” Meredith Whitney, head of the self-named advisory firm, said today in a radio interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene and Ken Prewitt. “The big issue is, do you want to be in bed with an agency that is going to come back and sue you? No.”

A Federal Reserve survey released this week asked senior loan officers to explain why they were less likely than in 2006 to originate a conventional home loan that meets standards of the so-called government-sponsored enterprises. More than half the respondents “noted the higher risk of putbacks of delinquent mortgages by the GSEs as an important factor, and that factor was listed as the most important one by the largest number of banks,” the Fed reported.

Read more here

Share

FHFA Puppet Master Caught Lying To Congress About Write Downs

Fannie Mae backed principal reductions, internal documents show

Jim Puzzanghera, LA Times

Fannie Mae officials supported principal reductions for some struggling homeowners in 2009 and believed they would save taxpayer money, but a pilot program set to start a year later was abruptly canceled apparently for ideological reasons, according to internal documents obtained by two House Democrats.

The documents contradict congressional testimony in November by Edward DeMarco, the regulator for Fannie Mae, who has opposed principal reductions, said Reps. Elijah Cummings of Maryland and John Tierney of Massachusetts.

The lawmakers also said DeMarco, acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, withheld some of the documents from their request for information about principal reduction reports and other findings from the agency and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“Contrary to your testimony, we have now obtained a wide range of internal documents demonstrating that Fannie Mae officials conducted detailed, substantive analyses and concluded years ago that principal reduction programs have enormous potential to save U.S. taxpayers significant amounts of money by reducing overall losses from foreclosures following default,” Cummings and Tierney wrote in a letter Tuesday to DeMarco.

The lawmakers said the failure by Fannie Mae to launch a principal reduction program “was not merely a missed opportunity, but a conscious choice that appears to have been based on ideology rather than Fannie Mae’s own data and analyses.”

An FHFA spokeswoman said the agency had just received the letter and had no immediate comment.

Cummings and Tierney have been part of an aggressive campaign by congressional Democrats, Obama administration officials and housing advocates to get Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to start a wide-scale program to reduce the principal owed by struggling homeowners to help keep them out of foreclosure and heal the real estate market.

DeMarco has strongly resisted that push, leading to calls for him to be fired. He has argued there are less costly ways to assist distressed homeowners and that the FHFA’s must protect the $188 billion in taxpayer money pumped into Fannie and Freddie since they were seized by the government in 2008.

Read more here

Share

DeMarco Defers Decision On Principal Write-Downs

Fannie, Freddie leader’s mortgage-cutting dilemma

Kathleen Pender, San Francisco Chronicle

Ed DeMarco, the man who oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is still mulling whether to allow permanent principal reductions on mortgages owned or guaranteed by the taxpayer-supported entities.

DeMarco, acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said he would have a decision by the end of April, but on Friday his spokeswoman said the decision “is being deferred” while the agency “continues to work on its principal forgiveness analysis.”

Fannie and Freddie allow temporary reductions – known as principal forbearance – on some underwater loans.

But DeMarco is under intense pressure to let Fannie and Freddie permanently forgive principal for some borrowers.

The pressure is coming from troubled homeowners and their advocates, the Obama administration and some legislators (mostly Democrats) and economists. They say DeMarco is taking his job – preserving Fannie and Freddie assets – too zealously and is single-handedly blocking a recovery in the housing market.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, has called DeMarco an idiot for not reducing principal. “The private sector is doing more principal reductions than the brain-dead government,” she says.

Peter Goodman, business editor at the Huffington Post, labeled him “America’s most dangerous man.”

Van Jones, co-founder of Rebuild the Dream, called DeMarco an “ideologue” in an interview on KQED radio this month.

There are at least 11 million borrowers who owe more than their homes are worth. Jones and others would like to see lenders reduce all of these underwater loans to market value.

Many not theirs

But only about 4.5 million of those are owned or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie, and only a subset of them would be eligible for partial principal forgiveness if DeMarco allows it.

“This particular fight is about adding one more option to the modification menu for about 700,000 loans,” says Jed Kolko, chief economist with Trulia.

It would affect only homeowners with a Fannie or Freddie loan on their primary residence who are underwater and behind on their payments and qualify for the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program.
Read more here

 

 

Share

Louisiana sues 17 banks under RICO laws for MERS scheme

Tara Steele, AGBeat

In line with other states, Louisiana is suing the nation’s biggest banks for bypassing recording fees due in transfer of real estate title, but Louisiana stands out for taking a different route and suing under RICO laws, just like the government does to major crime syndicates.

 

Lousiana Sues MERS & Banks

Louisiana stands up to big banks

In the State of Louisiana, 30 judges representing 30 parishes are suing 17 banks, stating that the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) is a “scheme” set up to illegally defraud the government of transfer fees, and that mortgages transferred through MERS’ recording system are illegal as the promissory note of any mortgage is inseparable from the mortgage, which is what MERS does.

MERS was initially established by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac nearly 20 years ago in conjunction with several major banks as a means to expedite the loan recording process as it used to be done through individual county clerk offices which was slow, and the founders went ahead even though most states did not have laws that authorized them to bypass the required filing with clerks.

Several states like Delaware and Ohio, along with the City of Dallas have already sued MERS and their bank partners, claiming millions were bypassed in filing fees due, and that the banks should have known that their filing system could lead to improper filing. These claims have been supported by numerous studies, one of which asserts that MERS destroyed the entire chain of title in America and is at the core of the housing crisis.

RICO laws took down the Gambinos, may penalize banks as well

What is different with Louisiana’s lawsuit is that they are pulling out the big guns and suing under RICO laws (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), alleging wire and mail fraud and a scheme intended to defraud the parishes out of their lawfully owed recording fees. RICO laws have taken down the Gambino crime family, the Genovese crime family, Hell’s Angels, and the Latin Kings and carry treble damages, which is triple the amount of actual damages.

Read more here

 

Share