iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Regulator Stands In Way Of Potential Multi-Billion Dollar Mortgage Settlement


First Posted: 02/24/2011 9:48 pm Updated: 05/25/2011 6:35 pm

The Obama administration is seeking to broker a deal that would have the nation's largest mortgage lenders agree to pay as much as $30 billion in fines to settle state and federal claims that they abused borrowers and illegally foreclosed on homes, according to state and federal officials engaged in the talks.

Under the terms of the proposed deal under discussion, the government would apply the fines toward an expanded relief program for troubled homeowners, while focusing on broad loan forgiveness. Some 27 percent of all homeowners with a mortgage now owe the bank more than their properties are worth, according to real estate site Zillow.com, amplifying calls to shrink mortgage balances.

The fact that the administration is now pursuing such a course reflects the widespread consensus that the President's signature anti-foreclosure program has been a disappointment, leaving millions of American households vulnerable to losing their homes in the face of persistently high unemployment.

The Obama Treasury has long resisted pressure from housing advocates to adopt a new program that would include writing down principal balances, arguing that this would unjustly reward people who bought more expensive homes than they could afford, while forcing banks to absorb fresh losses.

But given intensifying worries about a continued drop in housing prices, and amid public perception that major banks have avoided justice for their role in the national real estate calamity, the administration is seeking a new approach to keeping more families in their homes, the sources said.

A final agreement remains far off, the sources emphasized, and would require complex compromises between a diverse set of players with conflicting interests, making prospects for a deal highly uncertain. Indeed, state and federal officials have yet to begin negotiations with major lenders, but are still at the stage of formulating their own proposals.

Officials at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Administration, and those now creating a fledgling consumer financial protection bureau are inclined to seek as much as $30 billion in fines, making those funds available to provide relief to borrowers at risk of losing their homes.

State attorneys general are intent on imposing larger fines on the nation's five largest mortgage companies, the sources said. Last year, attorneys general in all 50 states launched an investigation into claims that mortgage lenders improperly foreclosed on homeowners without proper documentation.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which oversees the nation's largest banks, intends to pursue its own settlement with lenders, a track distinct from the talks conducted by its federal counterparts, the sources said. The OCC, eager to protect major banks from expensive fines, is seeking to limit the terms to $5 billion, while also ensuring that lenders retain wide latitude in how to administer relief for homeowners, the sources said.

That position is certain to infuriate housing advocates and delinquent homeowners, whose struggles to secure lower monthly payments from mortgage companies under the administration's relief program have become legion. The OCC declined to comment.

The settlement under discussion would end the multi-agency probe launched last fall that investigated breakdowns in the handling of mortgages. Officials at the Federal Reserve have said the review found "significant weaknesses" in various aspects of how lenders service mortgages, which involves collecting payments, modifying delinquent loans, and foreclosing on borrowers upon default.

The top official at the OCC told a Senate committee last week that his agency found that a "small number" of foreclosures should not have occurred. One Fed official separately said the findings were part of a "deeper, systemic problem" in how firms process mortgages and deal with homeowners.

Officials at the White House, Treasury, the Federal Reserve and other agencies with interests in the outcome declined to comment.

The Wall Street Journal first reported news of talks toward a possible settlement with a story published Wednesday night on its Web site. The paper cited unidentified sources who said the administration was angling for a package of fines and loan relief reaching $20 billion.

Federal agencies and state prosecutors are still wrangling over how they would collect the fines and what precisely that money would be used for, the people involved in the negotiations said.

Under the terms being discussed, mortgage lenders would be forced to forgive balances not only on primary mortgages, but also on second mortgages such as home equity lines of credit. The sources said that would accomplish two key goals: expanding relief to homeowners while punishing the lenders who allegedly forced people out of their homes in foreclosure proceedings without legally required documentation.

The four largest mortgage companies -- Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup -- collectively handle the bills on more than $5.7 trillion worth of home loans -- more than half of all outstanding mortgages, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade publication and data provider.

The vast majority of those loans are owned by other parties such as investors and the government-backed mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The four large banks simply send out monthly bills, collect payments, and process foreclosures when borrowers fall behind.

But the four largest mortgage companies do own an enormous portfolio of loans that have worked against their incentive to provide homeowners with meaningful relief: They collectively hold more than $400 billion in second mortgages.

Housing experts assert that mortgage companies have been largely unwilling to shrink principal balances on first mortgages, because they understand that that this would trigger huge losses on the second mortgages they own themselves.

The OCC is opposing a settlement that would entail large-scale write-downs of mortgages precisely because of concerns about this very scenario, the sources said.

State and federal regulators seeking more stringent terms say they are concerned that if mortgage companies are given too much leeway in selecting which loans to forgive, they will simply write down the principal balances on those mortgages owned by some other party, while sparing their own portfolios, the sources said.

These officials are now seeking to avoid that outcome with a proposal that would have federal or state agencies collect the fines and place the money in a new fund that would be tapped to finance mortgage relief for homeowners.

But none of these terms have been agreed to among the multiple federal and state agencies at the table.

The OCC has already begun a process toward resolving the allegations lodged against the banks that it regulates, recently sending draft orders detailing improper and illegal practices that the firms would have to end, according to people familiar with the matter. The draft orders, which are not public, have been shared with some federal agencies, the sources said.

One source said the OCC was effectively aiding the banks in delivering the orders by handing them valuable information about its findings, thus allowing mortgage companies more time to marshal a defense.

The OCC has also shown reluctance to share its detailed findings and documents with other federal regulators, said people familiar with its actions. As the primary regulator for the nation's largest lenders, the OCC is privy to more inside information than its counterparts, giving it substantial power in shaping the contours of any negotiation.

Despite the OCC's separate tack, state and federal officials say they remain hopeful that a unified settlement can ultimately be reached. Even if the OCC goes it alone, the other federal agencies could join with the states to reach one massive settlement, the sources said. At worst, they said, each agency would reach its own settlement with the targeted institutions.

The states appear to hold much of the power, officials said. State attorneys general, who are much closer to homeowners given their proximity, constantly hear allegations of bank misconduct. And they have been here before: In 2008, 11 states reached an $8 billion settlement with Countrywide Financial to settle predatory lending allegations.

If state officials decide to buck their federal counterparts and pursue a more punitive set of fines, they could force the banks to endure many more months of investigations. That prospect could entail more lawsuits, myriad negative headlines and a steady drip of potentially damaging revelations.

The states have begun to formulate their own possible settlement strategies, according to the sources. But they are presently only looking at the five largest mortgage companies -- Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and Ally Financial -- while promising to examine other large mortgage firms over time. Whatever deal they reach would hit those firms much harder than any proposed federal settlement, which targets the 14 largest mortgage companies.

But while the states appear to have strong tools they can wield to encourage banks to negotiate, their ultimate ability to prosecute in the event no settlement is reached was diminished by a 2009 Supreme Court case -- Cuomo v. Clearing House -- that restricted their ability to examine national banks for potential violations of state laws. The OCC oversees national banks.

The Supreme Court said states can pursue legal action against national banks for violations of state law, but they are expressly barred from examining those institutions to find such violations in the first place.

In effect, the states find themselves dependent upon the very banks they are targeting to hand over documents (with the exception of Ally, which is a state-regulated bank). Though the OCC has documents detailing bank violations, it has so far opted not to share them with state authorities, the sources said.

The OCC's acting chief, John Walsh, last week told a Senate committee that the agency had found a "small number" of wrongful foreclosures during its review.

But Walsh said the review was limited to 2,800 mortgages that experienced foreclosure last year. By comparison, nearly 2.9 million homes received a foreclosure filing in 2010, according to RealtyTrac, a California-based data provider.

Some officials pointed to the difference and suggested that whatever the OCC found could be multiplied by 1,000 to give an accurate scope of the widespread problems in mortgage servicing that lead to wrongful foreclosures.

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

Shahien Nasiripour is a 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; become a fan; and/or get e-mail alerts when he reports the latest news. He can be reached at 646-274-2455.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 287
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
01:45 PM on 03/30/2011
MSoliman, on March 30, 2011 at 10:28 am said:

It was an “illegal, fraudulent or willfully oppressive sale of property under a power of sale contained in a mortgage or deed of trust. In California start with the basic – ” munger v. moore (1970) 11 cal. app.3d. 1. You’re therefore a Plaintiff filing action for belief for claims and on supposition of fact that merit alleging a wrongful foreclosure action brought “Before” and “not After” the non-judicial foreclosure sale or Sheriff’s sale. In other words show us where they breached the terms of the private parties contract upon accepting the note and mortgage YOU gave them. I was one of them for 22 years and what I can tell you is im not afraid of your securities attack . I would fear you coming after me for using a debt collector to make good on repossessing title to real property which is what they are doing under the true holder in due course . The FDIC. Your complaint should not lack merit with all this substance in this menagerie of malfeasances. But it’s not in the Wall Street side of things. It’s in your states civil code of procedures. They breach the agreement your provided and they did by engaging a misjoinder of parties and by unlawful estopples. See a lawyer . It’s the case you bring after that’s killing your chances.
expert.witness@live.com
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
06:12 AM on 03/01/2011
Wall Street sits in the WH, which in return protects the OCC. Its a cartell, a cr1m1n@l cartell that is.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Siebenstein
> there is no endless growth
06:11 AM on 03/01/2011
My h@te grows with every additional article such as this one.
I hope one day somebody will bl0w Wall Street to pieces.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
01:46 PM on 02/28/2011
Here is the problem. My son owns a home. One West is forclosing. One West obtained the supposed
'Right to Forclose' via a Deed of Trust, signed by one of their own employees, puporting to also be a Vice President of MERs, on 12/16/2010 (There is plenty of evidence online of Suchan Murray's various shenanagins in her many incarnations at both IndyMack and One west.)

At any rate, the Trustee handling the Foreclosure is Regional Trustee Services Corp, dated 12/17/2010
but according to OneWest, the Trustee is Pacific Northwest Co. No Substitution of Trustee in between.
There is also the problem that none of the three has the original note, and more than likely that no one has it at this point.

One fact is very clear. None of them, One West, MERs nor Regional Trustee Services have never put one single cent in this house. My son spent 21 years in the Military and was discharged when he was found to have diabetis. He put a new roof on this house. Is paying $15,000 for a sewer hookup that we thought we already had for the first 15 years we lived here. I have had breast cancer, a stroke, and a heart attack, all in the last 3 years.

Now we must leave by April 22nd because there is no way to come up with the $10,000 for a lawyer to prove they have no right to take our home.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:52 PM on 02/28/2011
Your story is heart wrenching. I wish I had some way to help...
I hope for the best for you and your family.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
03:43 PM on 02/28/2011
Thank you. There are now millions of us with much the same story. I just wish all States would swith to Judicial Foreclosures. Non Judicial puts way too much burden on the homeowner.
01:47 PM on 03/30/2011
Heres your problem - My son owns a home. One West is forclosing­. One West obtained the supposed
One West is not foreclosing Got it?
And Regional by its own admissin is not a trustee.

Your lost before you ever began the fight - no offense but .

God Bless
expert.witness@live.com
11:07 PM on 02/27/2011
What, a small number of wrongful foreclosures compared to all of the stars in the known universe?

No, the chain of title was broken at securitization so each and every foreclosure was a null, wrong, illegal.

Stop the insanity of fraud without end!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
03:46 PM on 02/28/2011
I agree, 100%. It isn't fair to make us find a lawyer and take to court the banks that don't have claim to our home in the first place.
08:56 AM on 03/03/2011
the bank didn't own the home they took from ME and my family either and the lawyer wants a "big" fee to take them on, but we need the money we have got to move. WOW -BECKJUSTICE you would make a good lawyer! I pray all goes well for you and your family
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtallwalk
10:16 PM on 02/27/2011
funnie that the GOV dose not want to let banks wright down mortgages that would let folks pay what there home is worth today. chould it be that it will cause a vary big dip in tax revenue
bet you a communist china owned US doller thats it.
got to keep them payments up to date.
photo
Intolerantcentrist
No thanks…I brought my own air.
05:54 PM on 02/27/2011
To vote in the future will necessarily mean making a conscious choice between the pathetically unwilling or the pathologically partisan. Unmistakable if we choose to glimpse beyond the superficial, our current form of a political mercantile system grants to us the self-fulfilling failure to effectively design and regulate the financial segment within our culture.

Yes, history provides us with some hard lessons learned. Along the way we enshrined our understandings in laws that sought to avoid the very catastrophe that we are experiencing today. Yet our political leaders and operatives choose both to ignore these lessons when possible and seek to liberate us from these laws when they cannot be disregarded. Clearly the realizations provided by our history are valued less as a promise of economic stability than more of a burden or barrier to personal gain within the financial segment of our culture. This belief is true regardless of our political divide.
03:51 PM on 02/27/2011
a drop in the bucket to what damage these greedy bast ards did to people. Fix the mess...correct the unjust acts against homeowners...throw the bankers in jail. Prove people bought a home they couldn't afford...come on. All the people that got their houses taken away through this huge fraud...should get back free and clear. If that means the banks go broke...so be it. Realitor's need to take a lesson to...their greed can't be ignored.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BeckyJustice
Stop the frickin Fracking. NOW!
03:49 PM on 02/28/2011
Especially since the banks never invested one single cent into these homes to begin with. Not one red cent.
photo
castlerider
"A man's home is his castle"
03:50 PM on 02/27/2011
Great, so our economy gets completely screwed over by there not being enough regulation, causing all this mess, and now people are getting screwed over because there's TOO MUCH regulation; of course, placed in by the banks to protect them, while our leaders do NOTHING to protect the hard working Americans who've had to lose so much over all this...
12:07 PM on 02/27/2011
this 30 billion is like a fire break used to prevent the further spread of raging flames. This is a mere attempt to halt their damages before any real damage can occur.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fightthapower
Brevity is the soul of wit....
11:17 AM on 02/27/2011
I am wondering why the writer is trying to call Pres. Obama's 'signature anti-foreclosure program a disappointment'. The primary reason his anti-forclosure program hasn't really gotten off the ground is because the banks gummed up the gears. I reject their opinion that pursuing this course is an indication of this president's failure. I have been fighting my servicer about my home since 2006. This has been a festering wound that occurred before President Obama was elected. At least he is making meaningful efforts to DO something about it. I know some of you are going to post snarky comments --feel free to express yourselves. Your comments don't change the fact that I've been trying to resolve my mortgage problems since 2006. And by the way, I have been employed throughout, and earn >$50K in my salary. I consider myself to be a responsible adult who has made good faith efforts to pay my mortgage. The reality for me has been the servicer threw me under the bus.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BonnieDoon
Fool me once...
03:20 PM on 02/27/2011
HAMP ( Home Affordable Modification Program ) did not work.

It was not mandatory - it was advised ( ie., voluntary ) . The banks did not “volunteer” to modify mortgages; instead they ran a dual-track approach for homeowners. While homeowners were supposedly being qualified for a modification, the banks - at the same time - were foreclosing on the property. Bottom-line, the banks and servicers make a lot more money foreclosing than doing modifications.

"The regulators said one reason for the increase in foreclosures is that banks have "exhausted" options for keeping many delinquent borrowers in their homes through programs such as loan modifications."

Looks like regulators and banksters are in cahoots. "Exhausted", my foot.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
fightthapower
Brevity is the soul of wit....
03:44 PM on 02/27/2011
As I mentioned, this is the reality for me. You say HAMP did not work, if you like that view, it I love it. My opinion is still the same. You mentioned that regulators and banksters are in cahoots. I said that the primary reason his anti-forcl­osure program hasn't really gotten off the ground is because the banks gummed up the gears. Tomato, tamato, you feel is doesn't work, I say the banks gummed up the gears of the program. As I said, I reject the writer's opinion that pursuing this course is an indication of this president'­s failure. We may disagree but that does not change what my opinion is or the facts of my situation.
08:50 AM on 03/03/2011
Consider the Servicers are heavies or the decision makers for the banks especially when the fees and numerous tactics for collecting money for multiple task performed by [?].

Bottom-line foreclosures continue to take place with these fees used to calculate the delinquencies validating the foreclosure[which I received paperwork about signing up for a class-action concerning restoring those fees]
Legally, most of these foreclosures are moot cases, drawn up with hypotheses that appear to be legitimate, including the ever popular "secured instrument" the DEED OF TRUST - who really owned the property? anyway? It's surely not the Bank that got it back from ME - and legally[?] took my home forcing me into unlawful detainer court when I didn't have any place to take my sick husband and three children after being qualified for a modification, the bank- at the same time was foreclosing on the property.

We are "identical twins" don't mean to joke about this mess! But at least I have figured out - I'm not crazy this really happened to so many other people!

OVERSIGHT - REGULATORS- and DOWN-RIGHT CRIMINAL - on a lighter note - "Who Stole the Cookie out of the Cookie Jar?" I you find out let ME know
photo
castlerider
"A man's home is his castle"
03:46 PM on 02/27/2011
Obama should have shown some spine and made it mandatory.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:23 AM on 02/27/2011
Who is Zillow's audience? Who do they spin their numbers for?

They seem to overestimate home prices in my neighborhood by 30% - given what I see on their estimates and what I know of sale prices through government property tax/transfer records.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PilgrimMom
05:55 PM on 02/26/2011
Take 10 minutes and contact all of these officials to let them know it’s time for the banksters and not Main Street to pay for their illegal shortcuts and actions:

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency:
John Walsh, Acting Comptroller of the Currency
250 E Street SW
Washington, DC 20219
202-874-5000
http://www.occ.treas.gov/about/contact-us/index-contact-us.html

Primary contact:
Robert Garrson, Deputy Comptroller of Public Affairs
(202)874-4294


The White House:
Phone Numbers
Comments: (202) 456-1111
Switchboard: (202) 456-1414
FAX: (202)456-2461
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
(Please include your e-mail address)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact


How to reach your Congressman/woman and Senators:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt



Tim Geithner
Secretary of the Treasury
Department of the Treasury
1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20220
General Information:
(202) 622-2000
Fax: (202) 622-6415
http://www.treasury.gov/connect/Pages/contact-us.aspx
05:28 PM on 02/26/2011
If there is fraud by the banks in any foreclosure, the court should give the home back to the owner and it be free and clear with a Quiet Title, the bank should also pay any attorneys fees. If the Banks attorneys stated the docs are legit and they are not, they should be dis-barred and go to jail.

This needs to be part of the settlement, PERIOD, NO NEGOTIATION.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:25 AM on 02/27/2011
... except in Florida's fast-track courts.
... except where foreclosure can occur without involvement of the courts.
02:50 PM on 03/19/2011
how exactly does Florida's Fast track work? I was just told we are in the fast track foreclosure. We had modified two years ago on our second mortgage. Evidently it was for only 2 years. Well the bank sent us a coupon book starting in Dec 2010 for the same amt due. We had been paying that amount, and now are told it was supposed to be for the previous amt (prior to modification). Never were we told it was partial payments, never recieved any letters. A call this past week says because we hadn't been paying full amt we are in the Fast Track Foreclosure route!!!!

Any help would be appriciated on what to do or expect.
11:25 AM on 02/27/2011
And some punitive damages. Imagine if you lost your home and the bank had no right to kick you out. Your children would be scarred. Your life would be in shambles. What about the stress. Punitive damages would also be required.

You know with the judicial system we have today (an unwillingness to assess punitive damages), the Ford Pinto would still be in production.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
builderman55
Featherless Biped
01:44 PM on 02/26/2011
I wonder how much will actually trickle down to homeowners after the government takes it's cut..