Monday, February 12, 2007

Merger-mania will make things worse for borrowers

If you have a sub-prime mortgage loan and aren’t keeping close track of what your mortgage servicer is doing, you better start. As the lenders scramble to buy up failing originators, loans will be moving in and out of the hands of servicers like cards in a game of gin rummy.

Even if you’re not facing foreclosure (like nearly 20% of recent sub-prime loans), get ready for the tsunami of transferred and messed-up mortgage accounts, and keep in mind the servicer who obtains your loan will believe anything and everything on the computer, no matter how screwed up it is. On top of that, the search for profitability will lead to adventures in fee creation as well as opportunistic equity recovery in order to balance out the really upside-down loans in a portfolio.

Contrary to what some industry observers have said, the servicers aren’t exactly in a panic about the 2+ million coming foreclosures of bad loans. In fact, the real predators are positioning themselves to take advantage of the mess, bargaining behind closed doors to divide up the spoils and offer troubled lenders a way out of their servicing-related overhead.

The industry would like Washington to believe that the closing of doors and shrinking profits are evidence of a market that can and will rid itself of bad or weak players. A few of the sub-prime lenders who made bad loans are going out of business and that seems to satisfy the Mortgage Bankers Association’s Chief Economist, Douglas G. Duncan. This is the same person who, in his prepared testimony before the Senate Committee on Banking, had the gall to claim: “The primary reason for defaults are family and economic difficulties – not product choices.” To support this half-truth, he points to a Freddie Mac study that looked at reasons for delinquency based on data from their “Workout Prospector® system.” Here’s what his table of reasons looks like:

Unemployment or curtailment of Income 41.5%
Illness or Death in Family 22.8%
Excessive Obligation 10.4%
Marital Difficulties 8.4%
Extreme Hardship 3.3%
Property Problem or Casualty Loss 2.1%
Inability to sell or rent property 1.6%
Employment Transfer or Military Service 0.9%
All Other Reasons 9.0%

Of course the data is from 2002 through 2005 and doesn’t touch the 2006 disaster – but that’s not the disingenuous part. What isn’t going to be one of the options the users of “Workout Prospector®” can enter into the system would be things like “Predatory Loan,” “Borrower Scammed by Lender,” “Illegally constructed loan,” or “Opportunistic Servicer.” And let's not forget, most sub-prime loans aren't touched by either Freddie or Fannie, so the data is even more misleading.

Duncan goes on to promote the “everyone loses in a foreclosure” mythology, conveniently ignoring the fact that the home being foreclosed on is going to be sold to someone, and that someone is probably going to get a new loan to buy it.

He even put this jewel in his prepared testimony: “Servicers do not have an incentive to intentionally cause foreclosures, because profitability rests in keeping loans current and, as such, the interests of borrowers and lenders are mostly aligned.”

His duplicity is glaring; “profitability” for servicers involves far more than keeping loans current and a substantial portion of it comes from fees and charges (legitimate or otherwise). Not to mention the discounted acquisition price some servicers pay for loans the previous servicer doesn’t want to handle.

So at least in Senate Committee testimony, the industry is as fundamentally sly as they are in the loan origination process.

Which brings me back to the original point – the troubles in the sub-prime lending marketplace are going to land in the laps of the borrowers, not the lenders and servicers. Trust me, these predators are not going to slink back under a rock somewhere and not try to minimize their losses.

Washington is going be dancing to the tune of the lobbyists, and the lending industry will spend millions in the coming election year to make sure they don’t have too much interference. And in the mean time, they’re going to grind as many of the garbage loans into mulch as fast as they can.

Anyone with a sub-prime loan best be equipped to prove every stinkin’ payment and stay on top of every little detail in their loan every month. And you’d better at least find an attorney and get him or her ready, because you are a target, especially if you have equity in your home.

The Honorable Judge Roy Bean

1 comment:

Mike Dillon said...

“Servicers do not have an incentive to intentionally cause foreclosures, because profitability rests in keeping loans current and, as such, the interests of borrowers and lenders are mostly aligned.” - Douglas Duncan

I have to say that I find this "statement" more and more entertaining every time I see/hear/read it. All one has to do in order to totally blow this theory out of the water is read the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in any prospectus governing any Trust, REMIC, REIT or other RMBS.

For instance, one merely has to focus on the bottom of page S-41 under the heading "Servicing and Other Compensation and Payment of Expenses" of the prospectus for the Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Trust Series 2002 AFC-1 to begin to understand how seemingly innocuous the statement that starts the ball rolling really is.

"As additional servicing compensation, the Servicer is entitled to retain all service-related fees, including assumption fees, modification fees, extension fees and late payment charges, to the extent collected from mortgagors, together with any interest or other income earned on funds held in the Collection Account and any escrow accounts."

That single sentence removes any and all incentive for a servicer to keep a borrower current in their mortgage payments. To do so would be decimating the servicer's bottom line. As a servicer, would you want to make $2.50 per month servicing fee per loan or would you rather make $2.50 servicing fee PLUS an additional $50 late fee per loan? Sounds like chump change when you talk about individual loans, right? OK, $2.50x 100,000 = $250,000.00 per month. NOW - $2.50 PLUS $50 x 100,000 = $5,250,000.00 per month. $250k or $5.25M? Gee, that's a tough call.

What? You say that after I, as a servicer, manufacture the defaults and start the equity stripping process/financial bleeding of the borrower I can bring my legal team friends in to eat up even MORE equity and then launder - I mean FORECLOSE - the property wiping out the old borrower, selling the property that I purchase at the auction with my right of first refusal as agreed to in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, and getting the property off my books when the new owner/borrower closes on it? Where do I sign up?!?! Oh wait...You haven't even told me about the myriad of insurance policy claims that I can make if/WHEN the borrower defaults on the loan.

Thanks for keeping an eye on things, Judge. If anyone would care to take a closer look at the Mortgage Servicing Fraud process through the eyes of an MSF victim please feel free to stop my my site and take a look around. Some of my court docs, like the permanent injunctions and contempt orders against Fairbanks/SPS are posted on the site as well. There may also be some news about some pending litigation up there in the not too distant future as well.

Mike Dillon
www.getdshirtz.com