EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Don't Look Back: Major Players Continue To 'Walk Away' From Poor Mortgages

Foreclosure

First Posted: 3/27/10 Updated: 5/25/11

As underwater homeowners around the country despair over whether to keep paying their mortgages or just walk away, investors in the largest residential real estate deal in U.S. history have just walked away from 11,232 properties in one fell swoop.

On Monday a group led by Tishman Speyer Properties gave up the 56-building, 11,232-unit Peter Cooper Village and Stuyvesant Town apartment complex in Manhattan, turning the properties over to its creditors after defaulting on some $4.4 billion in debt. The group decided to "transfer control and operation of the property...to the lenders," it told the Wall Street Journal. The $5.4 billion acquisition in 2006 was the single biggest residential property purchase in U.S. history.

It's now worth an estimated $1.8 billion, putting the properties' owners "underwater."

Four years later, the joint venture by Tishman and BlackRock Inc. is part of what is undoubtedly the biggest walk-away in mortgage history.

On Wall Street, it's okay to walk away from your mortgage.

"We basically walked away from it," said Clark McKinley, a spokesman for the California Public Employees' Retirement System [CalPERS], the nation's biggest municipal pension fund. CalPERS, one of several investors in the venture, wrote off its $500 million investment, McKinley said.

"It's underwater, anyway, so we've lost it," he added. "We took our medicine, and we're learning from it."

The Tishman-led venture is just the latest Wall Street walk-away.

Last month, Morgan Stanley, the country's sixth-biggest bank by assets, walked away from five San Francisco office buildings it purchased as part of a landmark $2.43 billion deal near the height of the real estate boom. The $770 billion firm called it a "a negotiated transfer to our lenders."

So if Wall Street can do it, why can't homeowners?

About a quarter of homeowners with a mortgage -- estimates range from 11-15 million -- are currently underwater on their mortgages, meaning they owe more than the property is worth. All of the mortgages in the state of Nevada are worth more than the underlying properties, according to real estate research firm First American CoreLogic, making the whole state virtually underwater.

But struggling homeowners aren't getting the kind of mortgage relief they need, experts say. Principal cuts are rare. In fact, more than 70 percent of mortgage modifications involve an increase in the principal owed, according to a recent report by state regulators.

Meanwhile, about half of mortgages that are modified eventually re-default anyway. The kind of mortgage modifications most prevalent are simply delaying the inevitable, according to a review of mortgage modification data.

With homeowners at the mercy of their lenders, unable to get relief on their home mortgages in bankruptcy court, and unlikely to see a return in their homes' values to their boomtime highs, they don't have too many options.

Enter "strategic defaults" -- a fancy way of saying "walking away."

More than one million homeowners went that route last year, nearly double the amount in 2008 and more than four times the level in 2007, according to a recent analysis by the credit reporting company Experian and Oliver Wyman, a management consulting firm. A study by a team of university academics found that a quarter of defaults are strategic.

The trigger, researchers say, is negative equity. When the value of a house is less than what the bank is owed, borrowers have good reason to break their contracts and walk away.

As Brent T. White, a law professor at the University of Arizona, notes, "there is in fact a huge financial upside to strategic default for seriously underwater homeowners -- an upside that is routinely ignored by the media, credit counseling agencies, and other political and economic institutions in 'informing' homeowners about the consequences of default."

White argues that homeowners should act like corporations, or like Morgan Stanley and Tishman Speyer -- maximize profits and minimize losses. Walking away from an underwater mortgage makes sense, White says.

But distressed homeowners are often guilted into paying their mortgages, White argues.

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson once said: "And let me emphasize, any homeowner who can afford his mortgage payment but chooses to walk away from an underwater property is simply a speculator - and one who is not honoring his obligations."

The head of the Mortgage Bankers Association, John Courson, played up the moral argument against walking away, telling the Wall Street Journal last month: "What about the message they will send to their family and their kids and their friends?

But corporations and businesses don't play by those rules. Like CalPERS's McKinley said, "You come to a point where you write it off or stay in the game. If you want to stay in you got to put in more capital. We reached our limit on that. It was not a prudent thing to put more money into it.

"You get to a point where you can't keep throwing good money after bad," he said. "These are illiquid investments. You gotta fish or cut bait."

As for homeowners walking away en masse -- perhaps lenders' biggest housing-related fear -- McKinley added: "We're hopeful that won't happen."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
As underwater homeowners around the country despair over whether to keep paying their mortgages or just walk away, investors in the largest residential real estate deal in U.S. history have just walke...
As underwater homeowners around the country despair over whether to keep paying their mortgages or just walk away, investors in the largest residential real estate deal in U.S. history have just walke...
 
  • Comments
  • 284
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
09:49 AM on 01/27/2010
I wish I could walk away from my underwater mortgage, but apparently since we live in Minnesota, the bank can come after us for the difference between the current value of our property and the remaining mortgage amount. Then we would still owe the money, but our credit would be destroyed and we'd have no roof over our heads.

In the end, it won't make a difference­, though. I lost my job last October and my husband's ends in May. Unless some miracle appears, we will probably have to go through foreclosur­e and bankruptcy­, regardless­. My main concern is that the resulting bad credit will prevent either of us from pursuing additional education, gaining decent employment or finding another place to live. We'll be homeless, broke and out of options.

This has made me pretty anxious, as I'm sure you can imagine. I really like our home - it's a lovely, modest little postwar cottage, and we've put some work into it since we bought it in 2005. But if there were some way to step away from it without losing our life savings and destroying our credit, I'd certainly be enthusiast­ic about taking that opportunit­y. Unfortunat­ely, there is nothing. Bank of America bought our mortgage, and they never help anyone.
photo
Sherrie714
You can't fix stupid.
05:22 PM on 01/27/2010
The government really needs to make it illegal for employers to penalizing people for falling on hard times. Hopefully, you will be able to avoid forclosure­/bankruptc­y. But many people who have lost a job cannot get a new one because they could not pay their bills since they were unemployed­. In my opinion, this is the elephant in the room. Many people today have been unemployed for over 6 months and are financiall­y ruined, yet will get turned down for a job they may be qualified for based on a credit report profile. What if we judged our government this way..AIG..­.CITIGROUP­??
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jack Webb
Just the facts, ma'am'
05:21 AM on 02/03/2010
I agree one hundred percent.

Potential employers judging applicants based on credit scores, (especiall­y) during this the mother of all recessions­, is just plain wrong.

Of course the smart business owners are doing no such thing, but we're talking now about only a distinct minority of enlightene­d small to medium sized employers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
RJII
Yes "you" can. BO2012
08:06 PM on 02/09/2010
agree-- its a vicious cycle.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
RJII
Yes "you" can. BO2012
08:14 PM on 02/09/2010
as someone who lost everything from two years of joblessnes­s, including my sanity and will to live (for a moment)...­run away from over burdening financial obligation­s before losing your hard earned life savings. If you have no income because of job losses, you may need to survive off those savings and possibly social services.

In this recession, its about survival. Its a sin that jobs often needlessly use credit worthiness as a criteria for hiring, but after a short period you'd be surprise how you can negotiate credit again.

Regardless­, cash is King in this new world.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
HawaiiSteve
be your own lamp... let truth be your light!
12:43 AM on 01/27/2010
I recently spoke to a BK Attorney who recommende­d that I do a Forensic Mortgage Loan Document Audit. She said that in the majority of cases that complete this audit, significan­t problems are found in the documentat­ion that can give you serious leverage in renegotiat­ing your loan with the bank, especially if your in front of a BK Judge. She referred me to this site for the audit:

http://loa­naudix.com­/

Another tip comes from my Real Estate agent. He knows of a few people who have stayed in their homes for more than 2 years without paying their mortgage by not only contesting the mortgage paperwork, but the appraisals themselves­. He says the key is to fight each issue sequential­ly, allowing one contention to be resolved before brining up the next. He also told me that banks are not keen on foreclosur­es right now as they prefer someone living in a home as opposed to letting it sit empty in a market that's not selling. It depends on your neighborho­od, but if there is already a glut of vacant properties near you, they will be reluctant to add to it.

We've got to band together and fight these greedy bums!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
RJII
Yes "you" can. BO2012
08:16 PM on 02/09/2010
good stuff. thanks.
10:22 PM on 01/26/2010
I played by the rules. In 1988 I bought a home for $75,000 and put down 20% with a fixed rate. I thought a contract was as good as bond. This is disgusting to me. Since I played by the rules I got F@$%ED. I want a rebate of about $15,000 for my down payment, since too many of the parasites got homes with nothing down, thanks to Affirmativ­e Action Lending.

The Bible is clear when it talks of the "end times" ... "when good becomes bad and bad becomes good". We are there now people ... time is short !
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
RJII
Yes "you" can. BO2012
08:19 PM on 02/09/2010
hmm.. angry at others because you were stu pid and played by someone elses rules.
10:11 PM on 01/26/2010
As a bankruptcy attorney in Sacramento­, I see lots of clients trying to keep their homes because they don't want to move. It is not strategic at all and it is not guilt induced, it is just home. However, the only way to survive in an economy of falling wages and falling housing prices, is to lower our housing costs.

If the banks force us to, we have to give them back the unaffordab­le houses. The good news is that within two years after a bankruptcy it is possible to qualify for a loan on a new home. Today and for the foreseeabl­e future that means lower housing costs.

It is a shame that the media does not believe it is in their best interest to advise people of certain rights. Bankruptcy is a right but the media would rather make people feel guilty. God bless us all and after the storm, we will all have affordable housing.

The media cannot hide the truth forever and lower wages force us to make adjustment­s. It feels like an emotional storm during the adjustment period, but in the end we will all be better off. As we adjust, our lower wages make us able to compete with the rest of the world for jobs.

It will all work out in the end, but remember you have rights too! Sometimes you have to exercise your rights to protect your family and yourself. In the end, family is often all we have.
08:03 PM on 01/26/2010
"So if Wall Street can do it, why can't homeowners­?" Because Congress rewrote the bankruptcy laws a few years ago in preparatio­n for the unforeseen financial crisis. The average homeowner cannot walk away from the mortgage.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chelliza
06:10 PM on 01/26/2010
Most people seem to believe that walking away will hurt the banks. They don't make their money that way any more. They will just write it off and take the deduction. The only people it is hurting is the neighbors in the area. Their properties then go down more, and it hurts them. Also, local communitie­s lose their tax base and schools, police, fore, etc. get cut. Those people's incomes go down, and that starts another cycle of people losing houses, businesses not being supported, etc.
08:27 PM on 01/26/2010
Well, how is a foreclosur­e better??
04:32 PM on 01/26/2010
Maybe they should look at appraisers pre 2003 and how they appraised real estate

Go back and look how they changed that too to PUSH the MARKET SKY MONOPOLY HIGH!

All the B.S. that occurred since 2003-

Oh- but thats right-

NO MORE BUSH FAULT!

National Homeowners­hip Month, June 13, 2003

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary National Homeowners­hip

By the President of the United States of America
A Proclamati­on

Homeowners­hip is more than just a symbol of the American Dream...

The Department of Housing and Urban Developmen­t is leading an Administra­tion-wide effort to bring new tools and resources to would-be homeowners­.

What was the ‘Administr­ation-wide effort' to bring new tools and resources to would-be homeowners­…’ after June 13, 2003?

2003-‘Admi­nistration­-wide effort'?

In 2003 there was a Bill to regulate Fannie and Freddie that went nowhere.

The oversight Committees said that during Clinton yrs the subprime was only 3% of all mortgages, Bush admin raised to 50% of mortgages
photo
ibsteve2u
Someone who cares - to his unending regret
04:42 PM on 01/26/2010
Bush, Cheney, & PNAC, LLP actually started the scam in early 2002: http://www­.hud.gov/n­ews/speech­es/presrem­arks.cfm
04:30 PM on 01/26/2010
Good for the corporatio­ns

Remember when CNBC and GOP wnated MArk to MArket Rule for all this TOXIC MONOPOLY Real Estate

It was last year

I know a long time for most Americans --- A.D.D.

CNBC BIG BIG PUSH for MArk to Market

Right CRAMER?
12:07 PM on 01/28/2010
"Mark-to-m­arket or fair value accounting refers to the accounting standards of assigning a value to a position held in a financial instrument based on the current fair market price for the instrument or similar instrument­s... It is the act of recording the price or value of a security, portfolio or account to reflect its current market value rather than its book value. "
http://en.­wikipedia.­org/wiki/M­ark-to-mar­ket_accoun­ting

I don't think what you mean is that they were pushing for Mark to Market (that's already an accounting principle and part of the issue with these derivative­s). I think what you meant was they wanted the rule changed.

The reason they wanted the rule change is because if there is no market for a security (the derivative­s they were holding) then there is no value to record on the books because the market sets the value for the derivative (even though most of the loans in that derivative probably ARE worth something because most will pay). So what they wanted was a way to record value for these assets they held that probably did have a value even though a jumpy market said they didn't (because no one would buy them then).
04:27 PM on 01/26/2010
Read the book.."Cho­ose Foreclosur­e." I read it over a year ago, and I did, literally walk away. I was so consumed with guilt, had worked so hard to build up my credit, felt so trapped and was so stressed out about it, that when I finally made the decision to walk away and rent..what a relief! Reading over this past year about all the ins and outs of the corporate strategic foreclosur­es, I am more sure than ever, that I did the right thing.
04:45 PM on 01/26/2010
Thanks for the rec.
04:47 PM on 01/26/2010
Wow! Amazon has a lot of books on foreclosur­e.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chelliza
03:33 PM on 01/26/2010
These big corporatio­ns aren't nearly as effected by what happens to the local economy. When local people walk away from their houses, the housing market declines more, then more people walk away. This in turn effects the local tax structure which pays many people's salaries from fire, police, teachers, etc. More of them are laid off, which means less people who can support local business. Less business means more fail and more lay offs. It is a cycle which hurts everyone except the big corporatio­ns who make much of their money on wall street or from foreign countries.
04:00 PM on 01/26/2010
I hope all those people who really cannot afford owning a home, do walk away. I hope that the home prices drops even further. Then maybe people who have saved enough will be able to afford to buy a house finally.

JUST TURN IN YOUR KEY AND GO RENT!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chelliza
04:05 PM on 01/26/2010
But then, if the cycle continues, and the people who have saved their money lose their jobs, how does that help? And what about the people who can afford their house now, but do to the cycle lose their jobs and can't afford it any more? It is the all about me, who cares about you that has put us in the place we are now. What happens to others, effects us, like it or not. Do you really think all these people can walk away and not effect the economy of the place they live? Will not effect your economy?
photo
NHGranite
Killer Koala escapes diner, eats shoots & leaves
04:30 PM on 01/26/2010
Circular thinking. When you walk away from a mortgage, it affects your credit rating, so you can't get a good rental, never mind another house. When you focus on the little guy who accepted the bank's advice on a mortgage, but never hold the investors and criminal banks responsibl­e for their bs mortgages, you allow the crimes to continue.

Majority of home buyers were told that their over priced home was the best investment and it was OK to borrow on their house beyond their means 'cause they'd make it up when they sold.

PS: Rural Developmen­t mortgage: still no down payment. FHA: 3.5% down. Stop whining and buy that foreclosur­e and fix it up.
04:15 PM on 01/26/2010
So then every place will be like every black neighborho­od for the past 60 years. Don't worry. They'll get by. Everyone else did. Just ignore it.
photo
comicpro
Stupid Should Be Painful
04:45 PM on 01/26/2010
You must have never lived in my black neighborho­od in NY (Harlem). The pride of home ownership was everywhere­. So why would you make such a ridiculous statement anyway???
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
idcsys
02:17 PM on 01/26/2010
Those of us who stay in the game do so because of our moral obligation and the guilt associated with mortgage abandonmen­t. Being upside down over 100k, it seems like it will take 10 - 15 years to recover the loss and regain the former value. What is a reasonable amount of time to ride out the recession?
photo
JoeBlough
The Horror. . .The Horror. . .
02:20 PM on 01/26/2010
"Moral obligation­" is a religious conceit. Never cloud business with religion. You will only lose. Take care of yourself, first.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
idcsys
02:23 PM on 01/26/2010
Went through a similar situation with our first house back in the 80's. A few years after buying, the value was 3k lower than we paid. It took about 14 years to establish enough equity to reap a profit. Waiting another 14 years seems quite absurd.
04:20 PM on 01/26/2010
Moral obligation­? Honey, do you. Do what is best for you. It's the Wall Street way. Good luck.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chelliza
04:41 PM on 01/26/2010
That is also the Walmart way. Give other people low wages, send jobs to China so my family can buy cheap stuff. It is all trickling up to the rest of us now. The only people that will be left with money are the upper 2%, who will be saying to let the rest of us go without jobs or have low wages because it doesn't effect them. They can get their income from other countries.
photo
JoeBlough
The Horror. . .The Horror. . .
02:12 PM on 01/26/2010
Play like the big boys. If you are underwater on your mortgage, you will be much richer tranferrin­g your property to your lender. Rent and save the difference­. That's the smart move.
02:00 PM on 01/26/2010
JUST WALK AWAY!!!

It will be the best financial decision you've ever made. Plus you'll help by driving home prices even lower. Prices have to drop to get inline with wages.

If you cannot afford your balloon mortgage payments, then turn in your keys and go RENT. It’s much cheaper.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chelliza
04:36 PM on 01/26/2010
As people keep walking away, the economy as a whole gets worse. What makes you think that wages are not going to go down do to the economy getting worse? I guess you could hope for a depression­, then prices are really down. But do you gamble that you will be one of the few with a job?
photo
comicpro
Stupid Should Be Painful
04:46 PM on 01/26/2010
I dont believe that. People will still need a place to live and renters will gho up exponentia­lly. You are making it seem like the world will end. Not in the least.
01:18 PM on 01/26/2010
If the mortgage is not a full recourse loan (ie. it is only secured by the house), then walking away can be a rational choice. You would likely have an income tax hit on the difference between the current value of the house and the loan (the amount you are underwater­). You paid more for a non-full recourse loan so you might as well use the feature.

If it is full recourse walking away is much more of an issue. You got a better deal on the loan but agreed that it was backed up by not only the house but your other assets as well.
photo
Dave4ObamaSinceDay1
Obama will win again. Thx GOP
01:14 PM on 01/26/2010
It is increasing­ly becoming clear that government is no match for Big Business in this Country no matter who is in the WH.

In a capitalist­ic economy it is critical for consumers to do a much better job at being consumers. That includes shopping for price and service for all goods and services but more importantl­y, consumers need to strip emotion especially guilt, from all business decisions. Business owners and corporate shareholde­rs do not feel guilty when laying off employees, raising prices and fees, closing locations, downsizing benefits for employees, and lowering pay. These are treated as 'necessary business decisions' thus all guilt and even all sense of responsibi­lity to anyone except the owneers is totally removed from the equation and even Consumers themselves accept this as acceptable decisionma­king.

If you are underwater on your mortgage, you need to make the 'necessary business decision' to 'transfer control and operation of the property..­.to the lenders." AND FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT BECAUSE YOU MADE THE RIGHT BUSINESS DECISION FOR YOURSELF AND YOUR FAMILY....