Posts Tagged ‘foreclosure’

Homes lost to foreclosure on track for 1M in 2010

Thursday, July 15th, 2010

– More than 1 million American households are likely to lose their homes to foreclosure this year, as lenders work their way through a huge backlog of borrowers who have fallen behind on their loans.

Nearly 528,000 homes were taken over by lenders in the first six months of the year, a rate that is on track to eclipse the more than 900,000 homes repossessed in 2009, according to data released Thursday by RealtyTrac Inc., a foreclosure listing service.

“That would be unprecedented,” said Rick Sharga, a senior vice president at RealtyTrac.

By comparison, lenders have historically taken over about 100,000 homes a year, Sharga said.

The surge in home repossessions reflects the dynamic of a foreclosure crisis that has shown signs of leveling off in recent months, but remains a crippling drag on the housing market.

The pace at which new homes falling behind in payments and entering the foreclosure process has slowed as banks continue to let delinquent borrowers stay longer in their homes rather than adding to the glut of foreclosed properties on the market. At the same time, lenders have stepped up repossessions in an effort to clear out the backlog of distressed inventory on their books.

The number of households facing foreclosure in the first half of the year climbed 8 percent versus the same period last year, but dropped 5 percent from the last six months of 2009, according to RealtyTrac, which tracks notices for defaults, scheduled home auctions and home repossessions.

In all, about 1.7 million homeowners received a foreclosure-related warning between January and June. That translates to one in 78 U.S. homes.

Foreclosure notices posted monthly declines in April, May and June, but Sharga said one shouldn’t read too much into that.

“The banks are really sort of controlling or managing the dial on how fast these things get processed so they can ultimately manage the inventory of distressed assets on the market,” he said.

On average, it takes about 15 months for a home loan to go from being 30 days late to the property being foreclosed and sold, according to Lender Processing Services Inc., which tracks mortgages.

Assuming the U.S. economy doesn’t worsen, aggravating the foreclosure crisis, Sharga projects it will take lenders through 2013 to resolve the backlog of distressed properties that have on their books right now.

And a new wave of foreclosures could be coming in the second half of the year, especially if the unemployment rate remains high, mortgage-assistance programs fail, and the economy doesn’t improve fast enough to lift home sales.

The prospect of lenders taking over more than a million homes this year is likely to push housing values down, experts say.

Foreclosed homes are typically sold at steep discounts, lowering the value of surrounding properties.

“The downward pressure from foreclosures will persist and prices will be very weak well into 2012,” said Celia Chen, senior director of Moody’s Economy.com.

She projects home prices will fall as much as 6 percent over the next 12 months from where they were in the first-quarter.

Economic woes, such as unemployment or reduced income, continue to be the main catalysts for foreclosures this year. Initially, lax lending standards were the culprit. Now, homeowners with good credit who took out conventional, fixed-rate loans are the fastest growing group of foreclosures.

There are more than 7.3 million home loans in some stage of delinquency, according to Lender Processing Services.

Lenders are offering to help some homeowners modify their loans. But many borrowers can’t qualify or they are falling back into default. The Obama administration’s $75 billion foreclosure prevention effort has made only a small dent in the problem.

More than a third of the 1.2 million borrowers who have enrolled in the mortgage modification program have dropped out. That compares with about 27 percent who have received permanent loan modifications and are making payments on time.

Among states, Nevada posted the highest foreclosure rate in the first half of the year. One in every 17 households there received a foreclosure notice. However, foreclosures there are down 6 percent from a year earlier.

Arizona, Florida, California and Utah were next among states with the highest foreclosure rates. Rounding out the top 10 were Georgia, Michigan, Idaho, Illinois and Colorado.

Tags:
Posted in Foreclosures | No Comments »

Biggest Defaulters on Mortgages Are the Rich

Friday, July 9th, 2010

The housing bust that began among the working class in remote subdivisions and quickly progressed to the suburban middle class is striking the upper class in privileged enclaves like this one in Silicon Valley.

Whether it is their residence, a second home or a house bought as an investment, the rich have stopped paying the mortgage at a rate that greatly exceeds the rest of the population.

More than one in seven homeowners with loans in excess of a million dollars are seriously delinquent, according to data compiled for The New York Times by the real estate analytics firm CoreLogic.

By contrast, homeowners with less lavish housing are much more likely to keep writing checks to their lender. About one in 12 mortgages below the million-dollar mark is delinquent.

Though it is hard to prove, the CoreLogic data suggest that many of the well-to-do are purposely dumping their financially draining properties, just as they would any sour investment.

“The rich are different: they are more ruthless,” said Sam Khater, CoreLogic’s senior economist.

Five properties here in Los Altos were scheduled for foreclosure auctions in a recent issue of The Los Altos Town Crier, the weekly newspaper where local legal notices are posted. Four have unpaid mortgage debt of more than $1 million, with the highest amount $2.8 million.

Not so long ago, said Chris Redden, the paper’s advertising services director, “it was a surprise if we had one foreclosure a month.”

The sheriff in Cook County, Ill., is increasingly in demand to evict foreclosed owners in the upscale suburbs to the north and west of Chicago — like Wilmette, La Grange and Glencoe. The occupants are always gone by the time a deputy gets there, a spokesman said, but just barely.

In Las Vegas, Ken Lowman, a longtime agent for luxury properties, said four of the 11 sales he brokered in June were distressed properties.

“I’ve never seen the wealthy hit like this before,” Mr. Lowman said. “They made their plans based on the best of all possible scenarios — that their incomes would continue to grow, that real estate would never drop. Not many had a plan B.”

The defaulting owners, he said, often remain as long as they can. “They’re in denial,” he said.

Here in Los Altos, where the median home price of $1.5 million makes it one of the most exclusive towns in the country, several houses scheduled for auction were still occupied this week. The people who answered the door were reluctant to explain their circumstances in any detail.

At one house, where the lender was owed $1.3 million, there was a couch out front wrapped in plastic. A woman said she and her husband had lost their jobs and were moving in with relatives. At another house, the family said they were renters. A third family, whose mortgage is $1.6 million, said they would be moving this weekend.

At a vacant house with a pool, where the lender was seeking $1.27 million, a raft and a water gun lay abandoned on the entryway floor.

Lenders are fearful that many of the 11 million or so homeowners who owe more than their house is worth will walk away from them, especially if the real estate market begins to weaken again. The so-called strategic defaults have become a matter of intense debate in recent months.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi-governmental mortgage finance companies that own most of the mortgages in America with a value of less than $500,000, are alternately pleading with distressed homeowners not to be bad citizens and brandishing a stick at them.

In a recent column on Freddie Mac’s Web site, the company’s executive vice president, Don Bisenius, acknowledged that walking away “might well be a good decision for certain borrowers” but argues that those who do it are trashing their communities.

Tags: ,
Posted in Foreclosures | No Comments »

BofA Begins Principal Reduction on Delinquent, Underwater Mortgages

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

Bank of America (BAC: 15.81 -0.50%) is starting to forgive principal when modifying underwater mortgages eligible for the National Homeownership Retention Program (NHRP).

BofA servicers will forgive principal for homeowners who owe “considerably more” on their mortgage than the current value of the home while being considered for the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). BofA announced NHRP in March 2010.

The bank will attempt a principal reduction as the first step in the servicer waterfall to reach the 31% debt-to-income ratio target – the amount of the borrower monthly income that goes toward the mortgage. Loans eligible for the NHRP include subprime, pay-option adjustable rate mortgages (ARM) and prime-quality two-year hybrid ARMs originated by Countrywide before Jan. 1, 2009. The amount of principal owed must exceed the property value by 20%, and the loan must be delinquent by 60 or more days.

Through the five-year NHRP, BofA sets up an interest-free forbearance account for the amount of principal owed above the current value of the home. For instance, if the borrower owes $250,000 on a home worth $200,000 and qualifies for the program, BofA will set up a separate account of $50,000 that will sit alone without collecting interest while the borrower makes payments on the $200,000 at the current market interest rate. There are no required payments on the $50,000 non-interest bearing mortgage account.

For the first three years of the NHRP, BofA reduces the separate account – the $50,000 in the example above – by 20% each year if the borrower remains current. Meaning after three years, $30,000 would be forgiven in the example. If, by then, house prices have gone up and the borrower is once again at a 100% loan-to-value ratio, BofA will no longer reduce the principal. If the borrower remains above 100% LTV, BofA will continue reducing payments for an additional two years.

BofA will not reduce the principal on the non-interest bearing mortgage account if the sum of both mortgages achieves 100% LTV.

“We believe the loss [through NHRP] will be smaller compared to foreclosure,” said Jack Schakett, credit loss mitigation executive for BofA Home Loans.

The Treasury Department announced a similar earned principal forgiveness program for HAMP that will go into effect later in the year. But it ends after three years, opposed to the five-year possibility offered by BofA. Schakett said about 80% of the borrowers in the NHRP will not need to receive principal forgiveness after three years.

Schakett added that of the BofA borrowers currently moving through the HAMP process, 45% had an LTV of more than 120%.

“Our tests have shown that many homeowners who are severely underwater on their mortgages will respond positively to a modification offer that includes reduction of their principal balance, increasing the rates of acceptance of HAMP trial modification offers, conversion to permanent modifications and long-term success of the homeowner,” Schakett said.

Schakett said the amount of borrowers who have strategically defaulted is more than they’ve ever experienced before. To meet the demand for modifications, BofA more than doubled its staff in the loss-mitigation department to reach out to these borrowers. The bank also opened the first of three “outreach” centers in Nevada, joining similar centers in California and Florida.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Family Protecton | No Comments »

A forensic analysis report would or should state as follows:

Thursday, April 15th, 2010

A forensic analysis report would or should state as follows:

1.     The title chain reveals the property is located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California and contains a purported assignment signed by Margaret Dalton, “Vice President”, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc (MERS) “as nominee” for “Hoecomings” (sic) Financial Network, Inc. with an execution date of March 5, 2010 and a notarization date of the same date, notarized by D. Pakusic in Duval County, Florida, naming United Independent Title as Trustee under the Deed of Trust and purporting to assign the Deed of Trust to JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association. in public records book ____, at page ____ of the County of _________, in the State of Florida. The document appears on its face to have been prepared by Malcolm-Cisneros, a Law Corporation located at 2112 Business Center Dr., Irvine, California 92612. Given the location of the property in California, the location of the law firm that prepared it in California and the location of of the other parties, the fact that it was “notarized” in Florida raises numerous forensic questions requiring production of additional documentation and facts.

2.     Location Issues: The property is located in the State of California, as are the Trustors under the Deed of Trust (DOT). Margaret Dalton is believed to be located in Irvine, California, possibly employed by or on the premises of the above-referenced Law Corporation. The Notary is located in Duval County, Florida which has no known connection with any of the parties. MERS offices are reported to be located in states other than California and the IT platform is reported to be located in the Midwest. Homecoming Financial Network, Inc. (which undersigned believes was intended by the referenced instruments and title chain) is authorized to do business in the State of California, but upon research does not appear to be a chartered bank, financial institution or lender. HFN is a mortgage originator acting on behalf of unknown sources of funds who may be located anywhere, since they are neither disclosed nor described in the closing documentation nor any document on record. Accordingly there is a question as to the identity of the creditor at the time of the origination of the loan, the identity of the creditor at the current time, and the identity of the creditor at all times between the origination of the loan and the present. There are also questions requiring additional documentation and fats to reveal whether the purported assignment was executed by or on behalf of anyone in Duval County, Florida where the instrument was notarized or in Irvine, California where the instrument may have been executed.

3.     Margaret Dalton’s employment is unknown but it does not appear that she has ever been an employee of MERS, nor that MERS is located where Margaret Dalton apparently signed the document. Previous investigations by the undersigned indicate that MERS is an electronic database privately owned and operated by fewer than 17 employees, which do not include Ms. Dalton. According to information received from MERS, the database platform operated by MERS for its members, has an access procedure consisting of a user ID and password. With such information any person could enter, alter or amend any entry in the MERS database. The procedure also provides access to an automated procedure wherein the user may name a person to serve as “vice-president” or “limited signing officer” for MERS. No record has been produced for this analysis indicating that Ms. Dalton was named as “vice-president” or whether she did so herself, nor whether she was authorized to do so or from whom said authority would be claimed. There is accordingly a question as to whether the document was in fact signed by Ms. Dalton, and if so whether she had authority to sign a document that conveyed an interest in real property.

4.     Given the above information, there is also a question as to whether the notarization was valid or void. Florida law provides that if the Notary knows that the person signing does not possess authority to sign or knows that the person is ignorant of their authority, that the oath administered is invalid and that the instrument is construed to be not notarized, despite the signature and stamp. Recording laws require notarization. Thus there is a question as to whether the document is or would be construed as a recorded instrument despite its obvious appearance in the title record. If it is not construed as a recorded instrument, then the chain of title should be amended to remove this document.

5.     The chain of title, as stated above, reveals a Deed of Trust (DOT) in favor of MERS as nominee. No issues are readily apparent as to the execution of the Deed of Trust. However, the content of the DOT raises factual issues that require further examination and the production of additional documents and information. Since MERS is an IT platform operated for the purposes of its private owners, it is not authorized by Florida Statutes nor California Statutes to serve as the equivalent of a recording record for instruments in the public records. It is a data entry and retrieval system that is private, not public. Since MERS was named as nominee and the MERS documentation available on the internet clearly state that under no circumstances will MERS ever claim an interest in the real property, the DOT, the note, nor will ever be the actual lender, beneficiary or mortgagee in any transaction, the effect of naming MERS raises factual issues since there are questions regarding title raised by the conflict between naming MERS and MERS disclaiming any such interest. There is no record of MERS accepting the position as nominee and if so under what circumstances. Those terms exist in agreements executed between members of MERS and one of the MERS corporations and are unavailable to the undersigned forensic analyst.

6.     The DOT and the above-referenced purported assignment refer to MERS as nominee for HFN, which was neither the creditor nor the lender at the time of the origination of the loan. Thus the DOT appears to name MERS (who disclaims any interest in the loan) on behalf of HFN (who served as a conduit for a table-funded loan transaction, probably as part of the securitization of the subject loan transaction) both of whom served principals that were not disclosed at the time of the origination of the loan nor, to the knowledge of the undersigned, to the present. The effect of misspelling the name of HFN on the purported assignment is unknown, but based upon advice from title agents consulted, it would be ordinarily required in any subsequent transaction, that the document be re-executed with the proper spelling. Whether this affects the legality of the instrument is unknown to the undersigned analyst.

7.     The purported assignment refers only to the DOT, which raises several questions. It is unknown whether an assignment of the note, as evidence of the underlying obligation, was executed at the same time as the purported assignment of the DOT. It is unknown whether all the necessary parties executed instruments required to authorize the assignments, and if so when this was accomplished. If there were no such other assignments then there is a question as to whether the instrument was effective, and if so, whether it intended to provide ownership of the security instrument (DOT) to one party while the ownership of the note remained or was transferred to another party, while at the same time the underlying obligation to yet another party may have existed between the Trustor as debtor and the source of funds for the origination of the loan, as creditor. Additional documentation and facts would be required to make these determinations.

Richard Simpson  phone 770-623-6341

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Legal Tips | No Comments »

Foreclosure Myths

Friday, April 9th, 2010

Myth: The bank wants your house

Truth: The bank almost never wants your house, they want the money they lent you paid back with interest. In fact, banks usually hate going through the foreclosure process and will bend over backwards to work with homeowners in avoiding a foreclosure. Often the bank’s flexibility still doesn’t go far enough in stopping the home foreclosure. Never confuse that with the bank “wanting” your house. Treating the bank with contempt or completely avoiding them because you think they “want” your house may only serve to hasten the result that neither of you want, that they “get” your house.

Myth: The bank will not take my payments, I can do nothing else
Truth: At some point many banks say if you do not pay all of your arrears in full they will not accept a partial payment. Maybe a month later you get that figure together only to find the bank sends it back because another month has gone by and now the “all or nothing” requirement has grown. Do not fear! If you and the bank can not get together on a solution for stopping foreclosure a mortgage negotiation professional can set up a plan for you to pay just a portion of the arrears now if along with the partial mortgage arrears payments you set a plan to pay future current payments and catch up on the remaining arrears over time, sometimes months, sometimes the life of the balance of the loan or extending the loan. The foreclosure process stops and as long as you stick to the plan you keep the home. Don’t miss a payment under the new plan or the foreclosure process can pick up where it left off and banks rarely give second chances with this type of plan for avoiding foreclosure. If this fails you may still have the option of a Chapter 13 bankruptcy to save the house from foreclosure. Don’t forget when the bank stops accepting your mortgage payments do not spend all your money elsewhere, you will need it to save the house. Read more on this at “Who to pay when you can’t pay everyone”.

Myth: I received a foreclosure notice; I have to move out now
Truth: Most states have a very long foreclosure process, even after failure avoiding foreclosure you do not have to move. Following a foreclosure you must go through an eviction hearing. Eventually you will be physically removed. I’m not suggesting you hold out until the end, but making sure you know you get to stay and fight if you want. Time can be on your side if you take action early and don’t waste the opportunities for stopping the house foreclosure.

Myth: I’m in foreclosure, no bank will refinance me out of this foreclosure
Truth: If you have enough equity in your home, typically 60%-70%, specialty lenders will refinance the house to pay off the old bank and stop the foreclosure.

Myth: If I go through a foreclosure I can never buy a house again
Truth: From a banking point of view foreclosures can be viewed as one of the worst things ever on a credit report. Even so, some banks will make you a loan very soon after a foreclosure. Be prepared for very large down payments and high interest rates. Most often the terms of these loans prevent people from buying another house not that funding does not exist. In time provided you work hard to rebuild your credit you can go to a bank almost as if the foreclosure never happened, although expect that may take 4-7 years. Click here for an article about bad credit mortgages or applications for loans after foreclosure.

Myth: On the foreclosure auction day everyone in the world is going to invade my house
Truth: While some foreclosure sales may be held “at” the property no one will come inside unless you invite them.

Myth: A chapter 7 bankruptcy will stop my foreclosure and save the house
Truth: A chapter 7 bankruptcy will stop the home foreclosure on a temporary basis only.

Eventually you need to do something else to keep the house in the long run if you are facing foreclosure.

Myth: Homeowners can come up with all sorts of creative ideas for stopping home foreclosure and the bank will go along with the smart plans
Truth: Bank’s organizations in most cases involve complex bureaucracies and specific procedures. Most times the smartest plans remain destined for rejection. Stick to a plan within formats and parameters the bank works with everyday for avoiding foreclosure, get a foreclosure prevention professional to help you if needed.

_

Myth: I have to do everything I can to save the house and continue to live in it

Truth: Sometimes people need to move on or in some cases they just hate the house and have have no desire to save it. The whole foreclosure procedure can be avoided with a “deed in lieu of foreclosure” negotiation where you and the bank agree to the terms for giving the house back to them in a less adversarial manner. In exchange they may forgive some of the money you owe and you’ll have less heart ache. They agree to stopping the foreclsoure and you both walk away.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Legal Tips | No Comments »

The Dream Foreclosed

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

foreclosureBy Angie Moreschi:

The number of people dealing with foreclosures reached a record number of nearly 3 million in 2009.  Americans saw that dramatic increase despite efforts, like President Obama’s Making Home Affordable  Program, to reduce foreclosure filings. So, what’s going wrong? Why can’t our country stem the tide of foreclosures? Some state officials are taking a stab at changing the trend.

A group of state Attorneys General and banking regulators have released a proposal urging loan servicing companies to step it up. The report, by the State Foreclosure Prevention Working Group, said current efforts are failing to keep up with the number of borrowers falling behind on their loans.

It found that more than 70% of loan modifications resulted in an increase in the principal amount owed as unpaid interest, fees and other charges were rolled into the loan amount.  Only four in 10 borrowers who are at least two months behind on their payments are involved in any sort of loss-mitigation effort. The report warned that without more aggressive steps, including a focus on principal write-downs, foreclosures will continue to weigh on the economy.

“Despite efforts of servicers, homeowners and the government, the foreclosure crisis continues to worsen. These signs point to more foreclosures in 2010 than in 2009,” the report said.

The states’ report is based on data from 13 mortgage servicing firms.  It offered a stark view of the housing market. Through the end of October, there were 1.7 million mortgages at least two months behind on payments, while the number of loans in the process of foreclosure increased by 52% between October 2008 and October 2009, the report said.

Key recommendations in the report include:

Reduce loan principal: State officials say that servicers should cut the loan balances of homeowners, in addition to reducing interest rates and extending the terms of the loan. This is especially true in places where property values have plummeted. Reducing principal will make it less likely that homeowners will default on their modified loans.

Pay attention to option ARMs: More than 40% of these complex mortgages are delinquent. Even worse, over the next two years, many will adjust, driving up borrowers’ monthly payments. Servicers need to address these loans before they fall into foreclosure.

Limit required paperwork: Many homeowners are not receiving permanent modifications under the president’s plan because they haven’t submitted all their documents. Treasury Department officials should reduce the amount of paperwork borrowers are required to file and speed up the debut of a central portal where homeowners can submit the forms. The portal is currently set to launch at the end of March.

Expand counseling and mediation efforts: State should expand their housing counseling and mediation programs, which require homeowners and servicers to meet before the completion of the foreclosure process.

Suspend foreclosure proceedings: Treasury officials should amend the president’s program so that the entire foreclosure process is halted when a borrower applies for the president’s program. Currently, only the sale is stopped.

Help the unemployed: Treasury officials and servicers should do more to assist the unemployed so they do not fall into foreclosure. A growing number of borrowers with good credit backgrounds are behind in their payments because of the weak economy.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Legal Tips | No Comments »

Giant Debt collector Law Firm our of Business

Monday, January 18th, 2010

Giant Debt Collector Law Firm Mann, Bracken Out of Business

A number of stories have recently appeared in bankruptcy and consumer rights blogs suggesting that the Atlanta based collection firm Mann, Bracken, LLC has gone out of business.   On his Caveat Emptor blog, Minnesota bankruptcy attorney Sam Glover has written several posts about the Mann, Bracken firm including one on December 22, 2009 stating that the calls to the firm’s phone number instructs callers to communicate directly with their creditors.   I called several numbers listed for Mann, Bracken but the calls were answered by a message that “all circuits are busy, try your call again later.”

Although based in Atlanta, Mann, Bracken has a national practice and it has apparently been growing by merging with other law firms.   I found a web site called paymbw.com which purports to be a payment gateway for debtors to make electronic check or credit card payments on debts being handled by Mann, Bracken.  This site notes that Mann, Bracken is the successor by merger to Wolpoff & Abramson L.L.P., and Eskanos & Adler P.C., two collection law firms well known to debtor’s lawyers.

The domain mbllc.com has a “coming soon” page and the registration information for that domain is private.   I looked up the contact information for the partners.  Douglas Mann’s shows him as an inactive lawyer affiliated with Mann, Bracken.  Chris Bracken’s registration shows a gmail.com email address, a business address at Mann, Bracken’s location, but the space for the law firm information is blank.  Two other partners – Bill Layng and Steve Knezo – are now affiliated with other law firms.

Atlanta TV station WSB sent a crew to the Mann, Bracken offices and found deserted premises along with handwritten placards stating that the firm has closed down.  According to WSB, Mann, Bracken was associated with a large debt collector called Axiant, which is now in Chapter 7.

Based on all the information I can gather, the law firm of Mann, Bracken is no more.  However the demise of this firm does not mean that debts owed to clients of Mann, Bracken or Axiant are no longer collectible.   Apparently another large debt buyer/collector, NCO, has purchased or is about to purchase Axiant’s accounts.

Richard Simpson 770-623-6341  http://www.helptoavoidmortgageforeclosure.co

Tags: , ,
Posted in Legal Tips | No Comments »