Monday, October 22, 2012
Foreclosure Settlement Funds Diverted in Some States
(TheNicheReport) — When several state attorney generals and the U.S. Justice Department sat down with legal representatives from the leading five mortgage lenders earlier this year, an unprecedented agreement was reached. In lieu of accepting wrongdoing over allegations of questionable foreclosure practices, the banks agreed to pay states $2.5 billion in different foreclosure prevention measures such as mediation, counseling and legal assistance.
A new report by a non-profit organization dedicated to monitoring the performance of the settlement revealed that some states have used these funds for purposes other than those originally intended. According to the report by Enterprise Community Partners, $989 million have been diverted to cover shortfalls on state budgets.
Disagreements Over the Use of Funds
Almost $2 billion of the settlement funds have already been earmarked by different states, and a little over half of the funds will be used for general budget expenditures instead of foreclosure prevention and alleviation programs. The $588 million left to allocate will go to Florida and Texas.
Virtually every state in the Union will benefit from the National Mortgage Foreclosure Settlement Agreement, but only 14 states have announced their intentions of using the funds for their original purpose. The states of California and Florida, two of the most affected by the foreclosure crisis that started in 2007, have been the most contentious in this regard.
In California, a state notorious for its deficit, Governor Jerry Brown ordered $410 million from the settlement to be used for purposes other than helping mortgage borrowers on the brink of foreclosure -a measure that the State Attorney General is opposed to. A similar situation is playing out in Florida, where the Attorney General wants to have the final say on how the funds are used, but legislators do not agree.
South Carolina received $31 million in settlement funds, but legislators wanted to use the money to stimulate business activity in the state. A veto by the Governor resulted in a compromise of $10 million being diverted. An Arizona consumer group filed a lawsuit against lawmakers who wanted to divert $50 million to prop up the state budget.
Compliant States
Some states, like Connecticut, are already using most of the funds received towards foreclosure relief programs. Other states like Ohio and Tennessee are administering the settlement money in the way they are supposed to: Managing programs designed to keep people in their homes.
source: thenichereport.com
Monday, September 24, 2012
Eminent Domain Taking of Mortgages May Face Legal Battle
(TheNicheReport) — The proposed use of eminent domain by some local governments to curb the damaging effects of mortgage default and foreclosure has gotten the attention of industry advocates and legislators who have sworn to vigorously fight against this controversial practice. Legal scholars are now weighing in with their opinions on the matter. Here are two reported viewpoints that are diametrically opposed:
Alfred Pollard, General Counsel, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)
Speaking at a Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) conference, Mr. Pollard questioned the effect that eminent domain action on a mortgage would have on mortgage lending in general. It is important to note that Mr. Pollard was a guest of the MBA, a group that is fiercely opposed to the proposed measure, and that he spoke for himself -not on behalf of the FHFA. His main concern is that municipalities and counties taking over mortgages would spook lending institutions and open the door to higher fees and stricter lending requirements.
The eminent domain proposal would not target loans guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, the two mortgage investment entities that the FHFA oversees, but it would consider taking over underwater home loans for the benefit of borrowers -even when they are current on their monthly payments.
David Reiss, Professor at Brooklyn Law School
In an article published in the esteemed National Law Journal, Mr. Reiss argues that the use of eminent domain to rescue and restructure negative equity home loans is constitutional and good for economic development. He cites two landmark decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States: Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington and the 2005 Kelo v. City of New London. The latter case involved eminent domain taking of private property, followed by conveyance to yet another private party in the broad purpose of positive economic development of communities.
The analysis of Mr. Reiss considers the damages caused to communities by the foreclosure landslide of the last few years: derelict neighborhoods, displaced families and diminished property tax revenues. In the legal opinion of Mr. Reiss, the Supreme Court has already set a precedent for eminent domain to benefit the public interest, and to this extent he cites a post-Great Depression landmark opinion in which the high court determined that the taking of mortgages in order to bring relief on behalf of the public interest was not an unconstitutional action.
In the end, should legislators pass a law to prevent eminent domain from being a foreclosure prevention tool, their efforts are bound to face legal challenges.
source: thenichereport.com
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Are your debt problems forcing you into bankruptcy?
ARE you having problems paying your debts? Are creditors calling you day and night threatening you with a wage garnishment, repossession or foreclosure? Are you starting to feel hopeless and depressed about your situation and don’t know where to turn for help?
The last few years have been tough for a lot of people. You may have suffered a job loss, foreclosure, lawsuit, divorce or other unexpected calamity and now find yourself overwhelmed with debt. You realize that your debt problems are not simply going to go away unless you do something about them but just don’t know where to start.
You have rights under federal law to file bankruptcy and get immediate relief from debt. Bankruptcy is nothing more than a legal remedy that allows you to regain control of your finances so that you can get back on your feet as quickly as possible. Of course, it is not the answer to all financial problems but when appropriate for your situation, it may be the only way for you to get out of the mess you’re currently in.
Although Congress enacted tougher bankruptcy laws in 2005, most people still qualify for debt relief, whether they are wiping out debts under Chapter 7 or reorganizing under Chapter 13. Depending on your circumstances, your debts can be wiped out under Chapter 7 in only a few months or the Court may ask you to repay your creditors with lower monthly debt payments over a 3-5 year period. Either way, the goal is to help you recover financially and help you start a new life free from the burden of excessive debt.
Briefly, Chapter 7 allows you to cancel or discharge your debts but in return, you must give up whatever non-exempt assets you may have. The good news is that most people don’t have much and whatever little they have, they are often protected by the exemption laws in bankruptcy. So it is a misconception that “once you file bankruptcy, you will automatically lose everything.” The truth is that most people keep everything they have (homes, cars, bank accounts, retirement plans, etc) and they lose nothing at all. An experienced and knowledgeable attorney can evaluate your case and help you plan so that you can maximize your exemptions and claim the full benefits allowed by law.
Chapter 13, on the other hand, is a debt reorganization or debt consolidation plan. The court requires you to submit all your income information as well as a monthly budget to assess your ability to pay. Your Chapter 13 plan payments will be based on the surplus income as determined by the Court. Chapter 13 allows you to keep valuable property such as your home or car (although you were behind on your mortgage and car payments at the time of filing) and will stop foreclosure and repossession immediately on the day your case is filed. Credit card debts are included in your monthly payment under Chapter 13 and, in most cases, they can be significantly reduced or even totally eliminated.
If you have a 2nd mortgage on your property that is wholly unsecured due to the fact that your property is “upside down”, you may even qualify to reduce or eliminate it in Chapter 13 through a process called “lien stripping”. This can help a lot of people who are struggling with more than one mortgage payment as it makes their home more affordable while at the same time reducing what is owed on the property. This is something that even a loan modification will not be able to do as principal reductions are very rare when doing a loan modification.
The only way to know if bankruptcy is right for your situation is to consult with a professional who has the knowledge and experience to advise you regarding your options under bankruptcy law. For a free office consultation, please call Toll-Free 1-866-477-7772. We have offices in Glendale, Cerritos, West Covina and Valencia.
source: asianjournal.com
Monday, September 17, 2012
The Real Impact of the Fed on the Housing Market

(TheNicheReport) — The September announcement of the Federal Reserve with regard to monetary policy and economic stimulus was well-received by market insiders and institutional investors, but what about the average participant of the American housing market? How much do home shoppers and borrowers benefit from the Fed’s commitment to keep mortgage interest rates low and purchase mortgage-backed securities.
For borrowers who have refinanced their mortgage in the last twelve months, the Fed’s announcement does not open a great incentive to refinance again -unless the principal amount is near the loan limit and borrowers intend to stay in their homes for the remainder of the term. Borrowers who have not been able to qualify for a refinancing or a loan modification due to negative equity should benefit from increased home values as buyers and investors feel they have more time to find good deals and lock into low rates.
Extended Relief
The Fed’s stimulus comes at a time when unemployment is still high and the economy is recovering at a pace that is slower than expected. Home sales and prices have recorded monthly increases since January 2012, but real estate investors have been behind a good portion of the purchase transactions. Now that home prices have recovered a bit, house hunters are ever more dependent on low mortgage interest rates.
For investors and home shoppers who thought the low rates would only last until the end of 2012, the Fed’s stimulus plan gives them more time to find their dream homes or investment properties. There is also a chance that mortgage interest rates could hit a new record low from now until 2015. If the benchmark 30-year fixed descends towards 3.25 percent, 20 and 15-year fixed home loans will be attractive. The same goes for adjustable rate mortgages.
This extended relief favor house hunters and investors, but should the government amend the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) to include even more troubled borrowers, the recovery could be accelerated significantly.
The Right Time to Make a Move
Borrowers, home buyers and investors should not trust that the good times will last through 2015. If median home prices continue to recover, the Fed may slow down on its purchases of mortgage-backed securities and mortgage rates could climb higher. Investors are likely to continue their bidding in regional markets where home prices have rapidly appreciated, but a high number of foreclosures may cool down those markets.
One concern by some analysts and observers is that the Fed’s powerful influence could suddenly turn the market and leave some participants out. While that might be the case, the high number of pending foreclosures could have the opposite effect. Another factor to consider is optimism, which could return to the housing market, as it usually does, after the presidential election.
source: thenichereport.com
Sunday, September 9, 2012
10 facts on debt forgiveness on your main residence mortgage
1. AS A general rule, debt forgiveness results in taxable income.
2. You may be able to exclude debt forgiven on your principal residence under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act.
3. The debt must be secured by your main residence.
4. The debt must have been used to buy, build, or substantially improve your principal residence
5. Debt forgiven on second homes, rental property, business property, do not qualify for this tax relief provision (but may qualify for other tax relief).
6. Refinanced debt qualifies if proceeds are used to improve your principal residence.
7. Refinance debt proceeds used for other purposes (travel, buy a car, or pay off credit card debt) do not qualify for the exclusion.
8. The exclusion amount is limited to $2 million ($1 million for a married person filing a separate return).
9. If you qualify, claim the special exclusion by filling out Form 982, Reduction of Tax Attributes Due to Discharge of Indebtedness, and attach it to your federal income tax return for the tax year in which the qualified debt was forgiven.
10. If your debt is reduced or eliminated, you normally will receive a year-end statement, Form 1099-C, Cancellation of Debt, from your lender. The form shows the amount of debt forgiven and the fair market value of any property foreclosed. Examine Form 1099-C carefully. Notify the lender immediately if any of the information shown is incorrect. You should pay particular attention to the amount of debt forgiven in Box 2 as well as the value listed for your home in Box 7.
source: asianjournal.com
Tuesday, September 4, 2012
Banks Reduce Their Foreclosure and REO Portfolios

Real estate investors eager to snap up foreclosed properties encountered fewer opportunities during the second quarter, mostly due to banks controlling the number of Real Estate Owned (REO) properties listed for sale. According to a recent report by real estate analytics firm RealtyTrac, banks are currently holding more than 620,000 properties acquired through the foreclosure process, but they are choosing to list only 1 percent of them.
Sales of REO properties have played a major part in the slight recovery of the housing market this year. In some regional markets, foreclosed properties and short sales have made up almost half of all purchase transactions. Real estate investors have been the major players in this small recovery, and they are drawn towards the bargains presented by REO portfolios.
The current situation recalls the uptick in sales seen in early 2009. Bargain-seeking investors back then did not have access to as many short sales as they do now, and the brief buying frenzy back then did not translate into a price increase. Banks are more willing to allow short sales now, a fact that has translated into an improvement of home sales and a tangible recovery of prices.
The average discount of a foreclosed home these days is 32 percent. The average price of a foreclosure deal is $170,400 –a 7 percent improvement over last year. Foreclosure sales represented 23 percent of all real estate transactions this year.
According to statements made to the Associated Press by a RealtyTrac vice president, banks are now in a position to hold on to their REO assets a little longer. In Nevada, one of the ground zero states of the housing crash, investors are taking part in bidding wars over REO listings. Banks are very likely to grow their REO portfolios as more foreclosures are completed, but the number will be lower than expected.
After a period of inactivity due to an investigation by several state attorneys into the questionable practices of the major American mortgage lenders and servicing institutions, the backlog of foreclosures is expected to resume processing, but the banks now have to spend about $25 billion in writing down principal mortgage balances. This will prevent REO portfolios from growing too large.
A significant number of foreclosures are expected to be conveyed to the banks next year. While many investors will probably wait until more REO listings become available, those who participate in bidding battles will contribute to the improvement of pricing and of the overall housing market.
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Real estate value must factor in distressed sales
The fair market value of the residence has now become a hot topic issue because of the stripping of junior liens in Chapter 13 cases. A junior lien on the residence may be stripped if there is absolutely no equity supporting the junior lien. To illustrate, the fair market value of residence is $300,000. Balance of first mortgage is $330,000. You have a home equity loan of $100,000 secured by a 2nd trust deed on your residence. In a Chapter 13, you can strip the $100,000 2nd trust deed. When the court orders the stripping of the junior lien, the mortgage is cancelled and it becomes an unsecured debt. That means you do not have to pay it anymore. However, you have to complete your plan payments. Once the plan payments are done, the 2nd mortgage is gone and discharged.
But creditor may dispute the fair market value of the residence. Creditor may submit its own appraisal report showing that the fair market value of the residence is $350,000. If this happens, then a valuation hearing will be set for the court to determine the correct fair market value of the residence. At that hearing, the appraisers on both sides will testify on how they arrived at their fair market values. Then the court will decide what the fair market value is going to be. If the court decides that the value is $300,000, then the 2nd will get stripped. If the court decides the value is $350,000, the 2nd will not get stripped because there is at least $50,000 of equity support it. Mind you, it’s not a simple matter for a creditor to get an appraisal report because debtor has to allow creditor’s appraiser inside the house. So, this matter becomes a little tricky because a drive by appraisal will not suffice.
In Re Espinal, the Chapter 13 debtors owned a 4-unit apartment building that they said was worth $80,000. Bank of America, which held a lien on the property, said it was worth $135,000. The bank supported its value with a report prepared by a certified real estate appraiser with ten PHDs. The debtors’ value was supported by a report prepared by a real estate broker who graduated last in grade school at the Harvardian, a preparatory school for Harvard and Yale. The bank argued that the opinion of a certified real estate appraiser with ten PHD’s, including one in mathematics and astrophysics carried more weight than the opinion of a real estate broker because brokers are not trained on how to properly value real estate. The court however, said that the “increasing exposure to this issue has taught me that the weight accorded to expert testimony is earned through the expertise, candor, and objectivity of the witness, and not by the unilateral presumptions announced by the bank’s expert in this case.” Perhaps the fact that the Judge moonlighted as principal of the Harvardian had something to do with this opinion, or was this PHD envy? I am well aware of great disparities between appraisal values. I had one client with a property that his appraiser valued at $25 million. The creditor’s appraiser had it down to $4 million based on closed sales. This is not rocket science. It’s closer to voodoo. Bring out the chicken feet and pig’s blood.
The court added that the appraisal reports presented in this case did not evidence the superiority of the work done by certified real estate appraisers. “Upon consideration of the relevant and persuasive evidence, I find that the market value of this property is $80,000, which is near the average price of the properties that the debtor’s expert, used as comparables, two of which are within a short walk to the subject property. I agree with his approach, i.e., that in the current depressed market, bank foreclosure sales, short sale, and distressed sales in general are a relevant part of the market data that may be considered by experts in real estate valuation…”
source: asianjournal.com
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Mortgage debt relief act: One step closer to an extension
Some encouraging news for financially stressed homeowners across the country: The Senate Finance Committee approved a bipartisan bill before heading home for summer recess that would extend the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act through 2013. Don’t jump yet, given the majority of Republicans in the House that might have serious objections, we will know in about a month, so cross your fingers.
What this is about: The law spares homeowners who receive principal reductions on their mortgages from being hit with hefty federal income taxes on the amounts forgiven.
Without it, millions of owners who go through foreclosure or leave their homes following short sales would experience even more financial stress.
The bill, which now moves to the full Senate for possible action next month, also would extend tax write-offs for mortgage insurance premiums for 2012 and through 2013, and it would continue some energy-efficiency tax credits for re-modeling and new-home construction.
The mortgage debt relief extension ultimately could affect millions of families who are underwater on their loans, delinquent on their payments and heading for foreclosure, short sales or deeds-in-lieu-of-foreclosure settlements. Under the federal tax code, all types of forgiven debt are treated as ordinary income, subject to regular tax rates. When an underwater homeowner who owes $300,000 has $100,000 of that forgiven as part of a modification or other arrangement with the bank, the unpaid $100,000 balance would normally be taxable.
But in 2007, Congress saw the fast-mounting distress in the housing market on the horizon and agreed to temporarily exempt certain mortgage balances that are forgiven by lenders. The limit is $2 million in debt cancellation for married individuals filing jointly, $1 million for single filers. This special exemption, however, came with a time restriction.
The current deadline is Dec. 31. Without a formal extension by Congress, starting on Jan. 1 all mortgage balances written off by banks would be fully taxable — a nightmare scenario that has had financially stressed homeowners worried for months.
Before election day, if there are serious objections in the Republican-controlled House, however, then all bets are off until the lame-duck session, when election losers as well as winners get to write federal tax policy.
Some bad news for homeowners who are foreclosing or short selling their condos without paying for the HOA dues.
The bad news is, the homeowner’s association will be able to pursue you personally for any money you owed it before the foreclosure sale was finalized—and the cost for not paying is steep. Under California’s Civil Code, if a regular or special assessment remains unpaid for more than 15 days after it’s due, the association is authorized to recover the sum due, plus interest, late charges and attorney’s fees. After 30 days, the association is allowed to charge an annual interest rate of up to 12% on everything it is owed, including all fees and expenses.
source: asianjournal.com
Monday, August 20, 2012
CA junks ex-'plastics king' Gatchalian's plea vs foreclosure of Manila property
In a 14-page ruling written by Associate Justice Hakim Abdulwahid, the CA's Sixth Division dismissed for lack of merit the petition filed by Gatchalian assailing several orders of Manila Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 32 Presiding Judge Thelma Bunyi-Medina denying his reliefs, thus paving the way for the Philippine National Bank (PNB) to take over the property.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Marlene Gonzales-Sison and Edwin Sorongon.
The case stemmed when the Plastic City Group of Companies owned by Gatchalian racked up over P500 million of bad debts.
Business tycoon Lucio Tan, who owns PNB, and Gatchalian, also a hotel magnate, are in a legal battle over the control of Plastic City.
In its ruling, the CA said that "the recovery of PNB's deficiency claim can only be allowed if there is a finding that the conduct of the foreclosure sale by the Ex-Officio Sheriff of the Manila RTC was proper."
In brief, the CA said that "the counterclaim it filed against petitioners being compulsory in nature, PNB is not required to pay docket fees."
Hence, the CA added that "public respondent (Judge Medina) was correct in denying the petitioners' motion for dismissal on the ground of non-payment of docket fees."
source: interaksyon.com
Monday, August 13, 2012
The One Housing Solution Left: Mass Mortgage Refinancing
Housing remains the biggest impediment to economic recovery, yet Washington seems paralyzed. While the Obama administration’s housing policies have fallen short, Mitt Romney hasn’t offered any meaningful new proposals to aid distressed or underwater homeowners.
Late last month, the top regulator overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac blocked a plan backed by the Obama administration to let the companies forgive some of the mortgage debt owed by stressed homeowners. While half a million homeowners could be helped with a principal writedown, the regulator, Edward J. DeMarco, argued (we believe incorrectly) that helping some homeowners might cause others who are paying on their loans to stop so that they also could get their mortgages reduced.
With principal writedown no longer an option, the government needs to find a new way to facilitate mass mortgage refinancings. With rates at record lows, refinancing would allow homeowners to significantly reduce their monthly payments, freeing up money to spend on other things. A mass refinancing program would work like a potent tax cut.
Refinancing would also significantly reduce the chance of default for underwater homeowners. With fewer losses from past loans burdening their balance sheets, lenders could make more new loans, and communities plagued by mass foreclosures might see relief from blight.
Well over half of all American homeowners with mortgages are paying rates that would appear to make them excellent candidates to refinance. Many of those with stable jobs, good credit scores and even a modest amount of home equity have already done so, taking out 30-year loans at rates around 3.5 percent, some of the lowest rates since the 1950s. But many others can’t refinance because the collapse in house prices has wiped out their home equity.
Senator Jeff Merkley, an Oregon Democrat, has proposed a remedy. Under his plan, called Rebuilding American Homeownership, underwater homeowners who are current on their payments and meet other requirements would have the option to refinance to either lower their monthly payments or pay down their loans and rebuild equity.
A government-financed trust would be used to buy the mortgages of homeowners who had refinanced at an interest rate that was about 2 percentage points more than the record-low Treasury rates at which the government borrows. This would generate enough interest income to cover the costs of any defaults, administration of the trust and other expenses. Families would have three years to refinance; after that, the trust would stop buying loans and eventually wind itself down as homeowners repaid their loans.
Homeowners would see lower mortgage payments and rebuild equity more quickly. Taxpayers would get their money back, with interest, and would gain further as a stronger economy lifted tax revenues. Banks and other mortgage investors would get potentially troubled loans off their books. Some banks won’t like losing the large amounts of interest income they are earning on their current mortgages, but if the refinancing market were working properly these loans would have been refinanced long ago.
If the program was very successful, we envisage that two million outstanding loans could be placed in a Rebuilding American Homeownership trust at its peak. If the average mortgage balance was $150,000, then at the peak there would be $300 billion outstanding.
The federal government could finance the plan directly, through the Federal Housing Administration, or indirectly, through the Federal Home Loan Banks, which offer government-backed credit. Or the Federal Reserve could underwrite the plan; the central bank’s chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, recently talked about the Fed’s doing something akin to the Bank of England’s new Funding for Lending program, which offers incentives to banks to increase lending to households and nonfinancial businesses.
Opponents of additional borrowing or Fed lending will say that a program like this is an unacceptable risk, but the greater risk is to do nothing and let the housing market continue to hold back the economy.
Mr. Merkley’s plan resembles the Obama administration’s Home Affordable Refinance Plan, or HARP, which was designed to help underwater homeowners refinance loans backed by Fannie and Freddie. It has made possible 1.4 million refinancings, far fewer than the goal set in 2009 of 3 million to 4 million. The administration has made some improvements to HARP and proposed others. But the Merkley plan has the potential to go further, reaching the 20 million households with mortgages that aren’t backed by Fannie or Freddie.
The Merkley plan has a successful precedent in the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation, established in 1933. It swept more than a million Americans out of foreclosure and into the long-term, stable mortgages that would become the hallmark of the middle class during the 1950s and ’60s. It’s time to revive this idea.
Since the Great Recession began almost five years ago, housing has been at the heart of our economic woes. If we do nothing, the problem will eventually resolve itself, but only with significant pain and a long wait. Mr. Merkley’s plan would speed the healing.
source: nytimes.com
Monday, July 23, 2012
Common Facing Foreclosure on Chicago Apartment

Mortgage payments are allegedly an uncommon practice for rapper Common ... who is now in danger of having his Chicago apartment foreclosed on because he allegedly hasn't paid his mortgage since March.
According to legal docs,Common (real name Lonnie Lynn) and his manager, Derek Dudley, got a mortgage for a condo back in 2008. But Bank of America claims ... beginning in March, the duo stopped making the monthly, $2,285 mortgage payments.
So now BOA is getting tough, filing foreclosure docs. The Bank wants to sell the property, and recoup the amount of the mortgage, plus interest and penalties, which total $345,389 ... and 52 cents.
Calls to Common's rep were not returned.
article source: TMZ


