iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Average Homeowner In Obama Foreclosure Program Deeply Underwater, Drawing Calls From GOP To Cut Off Help


First Posted: 07/06/10 08:57 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:00 PM ET

The average beneficiary of the Obama administration's flagship homeowner-assistance program owes their mortgage lender more than $1.50 for every dollar their home is worth, which means they fall into the stratum of homeowners most likely to simply walk away from their mortgages, recent government data show.

This little-noticed statistic was disclosed in a June 24 report by the Government Accountability Office. Citing government data collected through mid-April, the report found that even homeowners who receive lower monthly payments through the administration's Home Affordable Modification Program are still struggling "under water," meaning they owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.

A recent study by Federal Reserve economists shows that underwater homeowners are, not surprisingly, much more likely to default on their mortgages. Moreover, borrowers who are deeply underwater -- like those in HAMP, who average negative 50 percent home equity -- are far more likely to default willingly; that is, to give up on trying to overcome their growing mountains of debt, and just stop paying at all.

This revelation underscores the problems with the path taken by the Treasury Department to help homeowners, who merited federal attention only after the government gifted Wall Street banks with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to survive a financial meltdown largely of their own making. Rather than designing a program exclusively focused on homeowners, the administration chose to set up an initiative that seeks to balance the needs of homeowners with the interests of lenders and investors.

Thus, while the average homeowner in the program is saving more than $500 a month, 28 percent more homeowners have been bounced from the program than have been helped. Homeowners that receive permanent reductions in their monthly mortgage payments end up deeper underwater than they were before they were "helped." Meanwhile, lenders and investors continue to foreclose on properties at a record pace.

On Tuesday two top Republicans released a Thursday letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner calling for the administration to "immediately" end HAMP.

"It defies common sense that taxpayer money is being used to pay banks to modify loans that are likely to default anyway," said Rep. Darrell Issa (Calif.), the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. "In cases where loan changes could keep borrowers out of foreclosure, banks have a clear incentive to make changes without a need for public funds."

They don't necessarily have an incentive to help homeowners, however. Consumer advocates like Diane E. Thompson, a lawyer with the National Consumer Law Center, said part of the reason the average HAMP homeowner is so deeply underwater is that underwater homeowners are more likely to get a loan modification approved than less-desperate borrowers with positive equity in their homes.

That's because of the test that mortgage servicers run to determine whether homeowners qualify for the program. Called the "net present value" test, it essentially tells lenders and investors whether they'll make more money foreclosing on the home or modifying the borrower's mortgage. This profit motive determines whether distressed borrowers will keep their homes or be kicked to the curb.

The test "favors homeowners who are underwater," Thompson said. "The less equity you have in the house, the more likely you'll pass the NPV test."

"One of the real failures of HAMP" is its inability to help the "little old lady who's lived in her house for 30 years," Thompson added.

If some disaster struck and she's looking for a mortgage modification, she's unlikely to qualify for the administration's program because she'll have too much equity in her home. Her lender or the investors who own her mortgage would make more money of a foreclosure than by simply reducing her monthly payments, Thompson said.

"It's insidious," she added. "It really illustrates how the NPV test is not about helping homeowners. It's purely driven by what is going to help the investors the most."

Still, Thompson stopped short of Issa's call to kill the program. While Issa and fellow Republican Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio are "certainly not alone" in demanding that HAMP be ended, Thompson said that "while HAMP has been a disappointment, I'd rather see the program improved than scrapped."

"HAMP is relatively cost-effective," Thompson said. "It's not going to have the large macro impact we had hoped for, but scrapping HAMP doesn't mean we'll have fewer people being foreclosed on." Ending the program, she said, "doesn't do anything to rebuild our communities."

And while Issa and Jordan argued that homeowners and taxpayers would be better off in private modification programs, Thompson disagreed.

"Homeowners would be worse off in 90 percent of the circumstances," she said.

More than 16 months after President Barack Obama told a crowd in Mesa, Ariz., of his plan to help up to 4 million Americans avoid foreclosure through restructured mortgages, many of the homeowners who weren't simply booted from HAMP have indeed benefited from the program. Treasury data through May show that the median HAMP homeowner's monthly payments fell by about 41 percent, meaning that half the homeowners saw a bigger drop than 41 percent while half experienced a smaller decrease.

But only about 340,000 homeowners have received permanent relief from HAMP -- a far cry from 4 million -- while nearly 436,000 homeowners have been expelled from the program.

The Fed study found that about 20 percent of defaults by underwater homeowners, and fully half of those with negative equity greater than 50 percent, were strategic defaults driven by their underwater status. In other words, these homeowners looked at their income and expected losses, then decided that it was better to abandon the mortgage than to keep throwing good money after bad.

The government has taken notice. "We agree negative equity is an issue," a Treasury Department spokesman said. "And that is why we have announced the principal reduction alternative as part of HAMP, and FHA refinance adjustments to help underwater borrowers."

These plans -- cutting the total cost of some HAMP homeowners' mortgages and allowing others to refinance into a taxpayer-backed mortgage that's more closely aligned with the current value of their home -- are just beginning to launch, though, and are expected to take months to get off the ground.

Hui Shan, one of the three Fed economists behind the default study, cautioned that it may be difficult to apply its conclusions to HAMP homeowners because borrowers in the administration's mortgage program benefit from lower monthly payments, reducing the incentive to simply walk away from their home in favor of a rental at a comparable price.

However, as Thompson noted, "by its nature, HAMP is going to increase debt" as mortgage servicers add delinquent payments and associated fees to the back end of the mortgage.

A recent report by federal bank regulators showed that three months after their mortgages were modified, HAMP borrowers had a lower delinquency rate than those who modified their loans in other, non-government programs. But the key -- and the administration has yet to release any statistics on this -- will be whether that trend continues six, nine and 12 months out. Until then, Treasury is forced to defend a program critics are already writing off.

*************************

Shahien Nasiripour is the business reporter for the Huffington Post. You can send him an e-mail; bookmark his page; subscribe to his RSS feed; follow him on Twitter; friend him on Facebook; and/or become a fan and get e-mail alerts when he writes.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
The average beneficiary of the Obama administration's flagship homeowner-assistance program owes their mortgage lender more than $1.50 for every dollar their home is worth, which means they fall into ...
The average beneficiary of the Obama administration's flagship homeowner-assistance program owes their mortgage lender more than $1.50 for every dollar their home is worth, which means they fall into ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,361
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (19 total)
01:50 AM on 08/06/2010
This program is a waste of money. I say rewrite the backruptcy laws to let the judges adjust loans downward to match the real value of the properties. That could fix something.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheCrimeDog
06:45 PM on 07/12/2010
Does anyone know "why" Obama has walked away from the foreclosure crisis altogether ?
05:21 PM on 07/12/2010
For ConservativeUSA and all the knuckleheads who believe in the same tripe. What will you do when those you have evicted from their home decide your home is a perfect place to pitch a tent and make a bonfire?
08:04 AM on 07/09/2010
A quote from the NYT: 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. CoreLogic data suggest that many of the well-to-do are purposely dumping their financially draining properties, just as they would any sour investment.
07:55 PM on 07/08/2010
Another failure by Obama. You can almost set your watch by it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mstock57
Go commando
11:20 PM on 07/08/2010
Yes Bu$h was doing so well for. Sorry you guys aren't offering anything but no.
08:08 AM on 07/09/2010
You are obviously the party of No, blame Obama for everything, and a card carrying tea party organizer.
06:12 PM on 07/08/2010
The whole concept of bailing out homeowners was a failure at the outset. It was just another way to funnel taxpayer money to the banks. People played the musical chairs house game and lost. They wanted appreciation and free money and they got stuck holding the bag. Some refinanced and spent the money. The point is that $175,000 three bedroom ranch style was never worth the $475,000 on the mortgage. These people cannot be made whole, the banks don't deserve to be bailed out and many executives, securities dealers, mortgage brokers, appraisers and ratings agencies personnel need to be in jail.

Obama's approach is yielding the results one would expect, nothing of any substance at a great cost.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WoolStreet
06:12 PM on 07/07/2010
GET BACK AT WALL STREET---Make your mortgage bank PRODUCE THE NOTE! PRODUCE THE NOTE! PRODUCE THE NOTE! PRODUCE THE NOTE!

It works. A FEDERAL judge in California (one of the strictest AGAINST homeowners) RULED for a homeowner and if the bank or servicer doesn't produce the note, they got no claim and the people will own it outright.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=news/7_on_your_side&id=6839404
FEDERAL JUDGE.”

codycap replied on Jun 24, 2010 at 16:04:10

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2010/04/15/cromwell-vs-ndex-west-llc-kimberly-is-a-winner-after-a-long-haul-perseverence-pays-off/

I have a trial date for 6/1 in front of a jury in Contra Costa County Superior Court

This is the tenative ruling that was CONFIRMED. They granted a summary adjuication on two of the causes but the court finds I have valid evidence to go to trial on three of the causes…now that they no longer have the asssignment (which has no valid POA either!) they will have to provide evidence of ownership another way
12:31 AM on 07/08/2010
This was an interesting read, thank you.
04:15 PM on 07/07/2010
This article does not tell the entire story: Banks tack on numerous fees sometimes more than the debt, each month a person is in a trial modification, the debt continues to grow because any amount paid under the original mortgage amount is considered overdue and is subject to late fees and foreclosure fees. This is not widely reported in the press, and the banks do not mention that when a trial modification is granted. When the permanent modification is refused (based upon the numbers almost inevitable), the homeowner is required to pay in one lump sum (without seeing a statement (which is against the law), the back due amount, including the huge late fees, sometimes close the original debt, the entire original mortgage amount minus the trial payment as well as attorney fees.We need to band together and force our government to deal with these issues. File complaints with the FTC and the OFC, they both have websites. Let the regulators know what is going on with the banks. If enough people file complaints perhaps someone in Washington will wake up to the crimes being enacted each and everyday. We have been subject to numerous violations under the Fair Debt Act, if you have been as well--- file a complaint. The banks are getting away with robbery because we do not have a united voice.
photo
Bluemax1
As thoughts manifest your Universe is created.
03:45 PM on 07/13/2010
Thanks for the information. My daughter is working with Chase and is also in FL. I did not realize that if you were refused permanent modification that you would be placed in foreclosure. The administration is well aware of the violations and the question is what are they going to do for the people.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mortgagechief
04:11 PM on 07/07/2010
Here is a simple two-step solution to the underwater problem:
1. Require all the lenders to report the current market of their mortgage assets (current appraisal).
2. Apply the new value to existing loans.
Immediately solving the underwater, and the toxic assets problems. This will stabilize the market, preserve neighborhoods, and even create jobs.
04:54 PM on 07/07/2010
Unfortunately it will be a disaster for the banks. They will have to eat huge losses on something they have valued at $500,000 that is now worth $350,000. Multiply that times thousands of loans.

The banks currently don't even put up for sale all foreclosed homes, they will leave it vacant, rather than take the write down on their books.
05:31 PM on 07/07/2010
The lenders will never report current market value, as a matter of fact they currently control or own the appraisal management companies that performed the original bloated appraisals. They will simply use the same value whoreappraisers that they have on their staff and within their appraisal management companies approved lists. Most of the honest appraisers have been forced out of the business due to this. I have always recomended that people contact their own appraiser to get an unbiased opinion of value when buying or refinancing. Most people do no understand that the appraiser sent by the bank works for the bank and if he does not get the value they require for the loan he is sure to be cut off from any further business. This is especially true in todays market with most people hoping that their primary asset has not declined in value, although many are becoming aware of the truth. This solution does not take into consideration the consequences for most lenders and their swap contracts as many of these contracts are based on performance or default with no ability to recognize anything in between. It is these positions that have created the Real Estate nightmare we are currently in, as lenders or servicers cannot negotiate these contracts, It is all or nothing (current principal amount or foreclosure). It is a shame as many people are being foreclosed on only to see their homes sold at auction at a price (principal amount) they could have afforded.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mortgagechief
06:23 PM on 07/07/2010
Requiring 2 appraisals from "out of captive network" could address/cancel the ownership problem. The only thing lacking here is the desire to go "mark to market"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
04:08 PM on 07/07/2010
We have nothing, really nothing but incompetent losers in government since 1993.

Sore losers who will finally klll this country.

Vote Nader 2012. He is for people, against destruction of environment, animals, people, and country, like all the oil svvlnes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mstock57
Go commando
04:25 PM on 07/07/2010
Yeah Nader worked so well in 2000. "There's no difference between Bush and Al Gore", Ralph Nader.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
05:53 PM on 07/07/2010
That is only because not enough people voted for him, but kept with the cr@p they know, the one that never works but is familiar.
Vinkaye
science matters
01:22 PM on 07/08/2010
Look, I thought Nader saying this in 2000 was a dangerous thing... I bought the Dem party line, that it was all Ralph's fault. In fact, it took me until today, after having continued to support the Democratic Party for the last 10 years... to realize, Ralph was right! There is currently no difference between the Dems and the GOP... they both work for the corporations!
04:56 PM on 07/07/2010
You need to stretch that timeline back to 1980. And I think Nader was spot on assessing Bush and Gore. As we see with Obama, continuing Wars, favoring Wall Street, continued torture, continuing the Patriot Act, Favoring Big Pharma and Insurance in HCR...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
05:52 PM on 07/07/2010
exactely right
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
05:54 PM on 07/07/2010
totally brain effed on Reagan.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WashingtonDCsucks
DC... Give them rope & they will try to hang you.
03:43 PM on 07/07/2010
Underwater.... the only thing that should be underwater is the politicians head...

These thieves have got to go..... Try them for treason and execute them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pooka47401
Reality is the leading cause of stress!
03:00 PM on 07/07/2010
I bought my home 10 years ago. I went for a payment that I could afford. I have gone through losing my job of 20 years and nearly losing my home before I got my unemployment.(Mitch Daniels is Gov of Indiana and due to his "improving" the unemployment office, it took me 5 months to get my unemployment appeal hearing). I was on unemployment for over a year. I am now working again. I am sure that my house is worth less than I am paying for it, but how am I losing out?? I would pay more on rent. I don't intend to sell my house so I am happy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:00 PM on 07/07/2010
The whole HAMP program seems so ineffective that maybe it should never have been used. Touted to help 4 million homeowners, it barely helped 9%. The rest were told to enter into a loan modification period; first, on a trial basis that lasts 3 months, and then on a permanent basis that lasts 5 years. Those who entered the trial modification and were denied, didn't achieve anything except to give the bank 3 more payments. Those few that got permanent modifications, will have to worry about refinancing 5 years down the road. If they can't refinance, they end up in foreclosure. So, who exactly benefits from this HAMP program? Mainly, the lenders.

Strategic default is really the best option. The nice thing about strategic default is that it doesn't use any taxpayer money. The contract governing the loan already specifies what happens in the case of a strategic default. Bank gets the house, homeowner looses the house, and bank has the option to sue former homeowner for any deficiencies.

For years, financial gurus, and the government, hammered away the message "invest in a house. It will be your retirement nest egg"; The same was said about 401K plans. Both "nest eggs" just lost 50% in value. Who knows, by the time these nest eggs are left with 5% of their initial worth, maybe politicians will pass laws that actually have an effect.
photo
Mr Hankey
Kucinich / Sanders (Democratic Socialist)
10:33 AM on 07/08/2010
Strategic default is a weapon against the lender and investor which may be considered by:

1 - those who put little or no money down on their loans
2 - house flippers
3 - non-primary resident home purchasers
4 - home purchasers who have not invested much (no improvements) in the house or property
5 - financially savvy folks who have faith that they will have assets in the future to buy another house

For those of us who are living in the home, and put down a considerable amount of money, strategic default is not very attractive.
02:33 PM on 07/07/2010
Don't let the talk of helping homeowners fool you. Any help coming from the government is for the purpose of helping the banks. They are still loaded down with the 'toxic assets' from the housing crisis and the Geithner/Bernanke crew's sole concern is to keep housing prices high, in order to help the big banks.

The governement housing tax credit that expired in April was just another way to entice people to buy a house, when they didn't really have enough saved up.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
04:12 PM on 07/07/2010
Its a horrible thought, but I agree.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:23 PM on 07/07/2010
Principle reduction is the only way to salvage these neighborhoods. Otherwise, owners WILL walk away from deeply underwater properties resulting in further decreased property values for their neighbors and bad credit. Lose-lose.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
WashingtonDCsucks
DC... Give them rope & they will try to hang you.
03:47 PM on 07/07/2010
Both the Home purchaser and the bank agreed on the value of the home.. (Otherwise they won't give you the loan). Since both agreed on the value.... when the value goes down... both should take equal losses.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:11 PM on 07/07/2010
Sounds fair to me. That's not what most banks are ready to agree to though. So homeowners are walking away and taking deficiency judgments with them that the banks will likely never collect because the homeowners don't have many assets to begin with. The banks then end up selling the foreclosed properties for even less money than they could have gotten the homeowner to agree to pay. And the neighbors suffer.
photo
Mr Hankey
Kucinich / Sanders (Democratic Socialist)
10:05 AM on 07/08/2010
Thank you - I agree, but home values are a moving target at the moment.

The problem of negative equity only effects the home purchaser. It currently does not effect the loan servicer or the investor holding the note as long as the home purchaser is paying their mortgage.

For example - because I have negative equity (even with 20% down), I can not refinance or sell in any normal manner.

The banks and investors don't care about the loan-to-value difference unless the purchaser walks or does a short-sale.

I am uneducated in the investment world - I would like to know the following from anyone who may know this -

If AIG was insuring these mortgage backed securities / toxic derivatives, and we bailed out AIG, did they pay the insurance on them? Who benefited from those payouts (I guess it would go to financial firms like Goldman)? or because Mortgage Backed Securities may still be losing value if these types of investment products still exist, are these losses yet to be seen?