Skip to main content

Category Archives: Foreclosure

Government, Bank’s Mistake your Gain (Still)

florida foreclosureAs the summer months wind down and the chillier winds roll in through the fall months and into early winter, many Americans look out their windows at their cold and dismal hometowns. Their neighborhoods, strewn with fallen leaves or dirty snow, strongly fortify dreams of a second—or a first—homes in paradise. But with Florida real estate inventory, and subsequently prices, as conducive as ever to a buyer’s market the dream is as achievable as ever.

 
We all know the story of the early-2000’s housing bubble. Inflated by banks selling to the subprime mortgage market, a brand new segment in 2002, the bubble got bigger and bigger until it finally popped in 2007. But five years was long enough to do plenty of damage to markets across the country, particularly in Sun Belt areas. And right under the bubble was southwest and the west coast of Florida.

 
A tool to increase buyer confidence, writing bad mortgages actually didn’t start with the banks. Rather it started with the administration taking initiative to combat the fallout from the 2001 terrorist attacks. And many consumers took the bait in the name of achieving the American dream. The issue with this is many didn’t have the income to support mortgage payments, nor did they have to prove it. This was thanks to a brand new tool called the ‘No Doc’ loan, short for ‘no documented proof required.’

 
Needless to say, many of these mortgages were foreclosed on, left as bank-owned properties. As a matter of fact, in 2006 right before the bubble burst, 21% of subprime mortgages went into default. This compares to the prime loan statistic of less than 1%. Of these, most were in Florida– where statewide there were nearly 325,000 subprime mortgages issued.

 
Fast forward to 2015, and Florida still has the highest rate of late mortgages. Statewide, over 18% mortgage holders are late or about to face foreclosure. And when banks foreclose, they are not looking forward to sitting on excessive supply; they want to turn and burn to the highest bidder. And with an inventory glut the highest bidder typically isn’t bidding too high lately.

Updated mortgage-aid program aims to pick up slack

PHILADELPHIA – April 5, 2012 – After months in the works, HARP 2.0 is available to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac borrowers who want to refinance but owe more on their mortgages than their houses now are worth.

HARP 2.0 – HARP stands for Home Affordable Refinance Program – is being billed as an improvement over the three-year-old version that just about everyone acknowledges didn’t help anyone.

The reason for that failure: The original program had limits on loan-to-value ratio, the amount of a mortgage as a percentage of the appraised value of a property. If the balance of a mortgage exceeded the appraised value – say, $300,000 versus $150,000 – the borrower wasn’t allowed to refinance.

Recognizing that none of the borrowers the program was intended to help would be able to qualify, the limits were dropped when the new version of HARP was heralded in October.

Does that mean all lenders have agreed to no limits?

“I have lenders that have limited the loan-to-values. Some have even differentiated between attached and detached homes,” said Philadelphia mortgage broker Fred Glick, who has launched a blog, http://harp2.com, to update consumers. “They still are limiting what they will do” with loan-to-value ratios of 150 percent and no more.

“All in all, it is a great way to get people’s rates down in spite of low values,” Glick said. “This will decrease the supply of homes for sale and increase values over the long run.”

As with all these programs, the months since HARP 2.0 was announced have been spent trying to get lenders on board – no easy task since Fannie and Freddie loans are pooled as mortgage-backed securities that are owned by many investors. All the investors need to agree before borrowers can apply to reduce monthly payments to today’s low fixed interest rates, which remained under 4 percent for many months but now are beginning to increase as bond yields rise in an apparently improving economy.

As of March 17, HARP 2.0 has been in place to help keep homeowners above water. About four million Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac borrowers nationwide owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.

The government has a website, http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov, (link) that has details about HARP 2.0 and other information.

Underwater loans might also be eligible to refinance under provisions of the recent National Mortgage Settlement. That applies to loans neither owned by Freddie or Fannie nor insured by the Federal Housing Administration, which has its own streamlined refinancing under a program announced in January. Details of that settlement are being worked out, and eligible borrowers will be notified by the five participating lenders – Wells Fargo, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Ally Financial, and Citibank – at some point.

To be eligible for HARP, homeowners must be current on their mortgage. That means paid in full up to date, with no late payments in the past six months and only one in the past 12. They also need to show that they can afford the new payments gained through refinancing without any trouble.

Borrowers must have closed on their current mortgage on or before May 31, 2009, and cannot have refinanced through HARP before. In addition, mortgages must fall under current “conforming-loan limits,” which vary by region.

One thing both Fannie and Freddie want to see is whether borrowers refinance to loans with terms shorter than 30 years. They call this “movement to a more stable product.”

Borrowers with an interest-only loan will be urged to refinance to a mortgage product that provides amortization of principal and accumulation of equity in the property.

Those who have an adjustable-rate mortgage will be encouraged to refinance to a fixed-rate loan that eliminates the potential for payment shock, or to an adjustable with an initial fixed period of five years or more and equal to or greater than the existing mortgage.

Homeowners with a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage will be advised to refinance to a 15-, 20- or 25-year fixed that offers, in Fannie Mae’s words, accelerated amortization of principal and equity building. But borrowers won’t be allowed to cash out equity under this refinancing “except for closing costs and certain allowances to cover items such as association fees, property tax bills, insurance costs and rounding adjustments.”

Plus, borrowers may not satisfy subordinate financing in the form of a home-equity line of credit or a closed-end second mortgage with the proceeds of the refinance mortgage.

Balloon mortgages and convertible adjustable-rate mortgages are eligible for HARP 2.0 if the conditional right to refinance the balloon or convert the ARM was exercised by the borrower and “redelivered” to Fannie Mae before June 1, 2009.

Resources

• To determine whether Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac owns your mortgage, check at http://fanniemae.com/loanlookup and http://freddiemac.com/mymortgage.

• To access Fannie Mae’s frequently asked questions file, go to http://goo.gl/pN54x.

• Many of the rules and regulations outlined in the latest information from Fannie and Freddie are far beyond the understanding of the typical homeowner, and, as the government warns, scam artists are already hovering above borrowers, waiting to pounce. For information about mortgage-assistance-relief scams, visit http://FTC.gov.

• Some underwater homeowners will qualify for assistance under the Mortgage Settlement. The Center for Responsible Lending has a downloadable consumer’s guide for that program at http://goo.gl/2FZKM.

Copyright © 2012 The Philadelphia Inquirer. Distributed by MCT Information Services.

xvideos

Deadline on foreclosure deal pushed

Millions of borrowers who could have their foreclosure cases checked for errors – and possibly get restitution – are passing up the chance.

Federal banking regulators announced Wednesday that they’ll extend an April 30 deadline for consumers to request such reviews to July 31.

Only 89,000 people have asked for reviews even though more than 4 million got letters from the government late last year telling them that they could, says Bryan Hubbard, a spokesman for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

Consumer groups say promotion was flawed by letters that were too legalistic and text-heavy advertisements that weren’t eye-catching.

“They’ve done a pretty lousy job on public outreach,” says Ira Rheingold, director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.

The reviews are part of last year’s federal settlement with 14 mortgage servicers and affiliates who manage home loans. They’re separate from the $25 billion settlement that states and the federal government reached last week with some of the same servicers.

Borrowers hurt by foreclosure abuses could receive help under both settlements.

Under the first, auditors hired by the servicers but approved by regulators will review cases. The consumer letters included a 13-question form asking people to describe how the foreclosure process financially harmed them.

The letters “looked like what you’d get from a loan scamming company. A lot of them probably got tossed,” says Deborah Goldberg, of the National Fair Housing Alliance.

The OCC, overseeing the settlement with the Federal Reserve, has not estimated how much the settlement will cost servicers. In addition to examining the cases of borrowers who ask for reviews, auditors are sample-checking 100,000 other foreclosure cases, Hubbard says.

The settlement covers people who were harmed in foreclosures in 2009 and 2010, if their servicer is part of the settlement. More information is at independentforeclosurereview.com.

With the $25 billion settlement, $1.5 billion will go to up to 750,000 consumers – payouts could be about $2,000 depending on borrower response. Payouts won’t require loan reviews.

A settlement administrator will send claim forms. The process is expected to take months. See nationalmortgagesettlement.com for details.

© Copyright 2012 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

New rules aim to simplify refinancing for troubled homeowners

If you are a troubled homeowner hoping to refinance, pay attention next Tuesday as details come out on a new federal program that could make it easier starting in late December or early in 2012.

In the meantime, be sure you keep up with your mortgage payments so that you can qualify for the new deal.

Even if you missed payments in the past, it can help to be current going forward, said Kathy Conley, housing specialist for GreenPath Debt Solutions in Farmington Hills.

The revised Home Affordability Refinance Program (HARP) could apply to a broader base of people.

If, for instance, you owe $100,000 on a house that would appraise at just $50,000 – too deep underwater for a conventional refinancing – you might be able to refinance under the new HARP. That was not true under the old HARP, launched in 2009, which had a 125 percent maximum on loan-to-value ratio.

The new plan is expected be a big help for many homeowners in states that have been hard hit by drastic drops in home values, such as Michigan, Florida, California, Arizona and Nevada, according to Greg McBride, senior analyst for Bankrate.com.

Seeing mortgage rates hover near record lows – around 4.23 percent for a 30-year fixed and 3.48 percent for a 15-year – has many folks wondering whether it’s time to refinance.

In this tough housing market, what do you need to know? How can you save money by refinancing and make those low rates work for you?

Even with interest rates low and a revised federal program coming, refinancing is not for everybody who wants – or needs – a better deal on their home and some extra cash.

Some homeowners could face surprising hurdles, even if they’re not underwater and are current on payments.

“Everybody who is really hurting – and everybody who needs the help – can’t take advantage of the rates,” said Kip Kirkpatrick, CEO of Shore Mortgage Services in Birmingham, Mich.

What’s your credit score? How solid is your income? Got a lot of debt?

To refinance, the borrower needs a predictable level of recurring income – so such things as pension income would count, as would Social Security, your regular paychecks, alimony if expected to last three years or more, and interest on investments.

“You will need to provide a full accounting of your income,” said Bob Walters, chief economist for Quicken Loans in Detroit.

Lenders are going to look at how much money you owe on the mortgage and other loans relative to what you’re making.

“A reduction in income can lead to a higher ratio of debt payments to monthly income,” said Greg McBride, senior analyst for Bankrate.com. “A high debt-to-income ratio makes lenders nervous. The borrower is just one unplanned expense away from problems.”

As a general rule, it becomes more difficult – but not impossible – to qualify for a mortgage or refinance when a person’s total debt – to income ratio exceeds 40 percent to 45 percent, Walters said.

Your credit score counts. Lenders generally want a FICO of 680 or higher to qualify for the best rates in a conventional mortgage. A FICO of 620 tends to be the cutoff that often defines who can, and who can’t, get a mortgage.

Walters noted that there are exceptions to the 620 cutoff, especially when utilizing Federal Housing Administration programs with some lenders.

Credit scores also could have more wiggle room under the new federal Home Affordable Refinance Program. Gerri Detweiler, personal finance expert for Credit.com, said consumers who are in the process of a refinancing don’t want to go out and borrow money to get new furniture, buy a car or even get holiday gifts. Lenders are likely to look at your credit even the day before or the day of closing on that new mortgage, Detweiler said.

“If you’ve done something stupid with your credit, you could lose the loan,” she said.

So what if the house you bought for $280,000 and mortgaged for $260,000 is now worth $150,000?

Right now, you can’t do a thing with it.

For a conventional refinancing, the lender wants at most an 80 percent loan-to-value ratio. So if your home is worth $100,000 and you owe $70,000, you could qualify.

The new HARP 2.0 plan is going to address the underwater mortgage issue further.

“Anybody who thinks they’re underwater, I would say just hold off until the new program comes out,” said Brian Seibert, president of Watson Group Financial, a mortgage banker in Waterford, Mich.

The old HARP program had a maximum 125 percent loan-to-value ratio. But that cap is removed under the new plan.

“It’s easier to refinance through HARP than a conventional refinance,” Conley said.

But remember to stay current with mortgage payments.

Under HARP 2.0, the borrower would have to be current with the mortgage payment for the past six months and have no more than one late payment in the past 12. But Conley and others recommend that even if you were late in the past, you can try to be current now if you want to try to qualify for HARP 2.0.

“Definitely don’t skip the mortgage payment so you can go Christmas shopping,” Detweiler said.

Though the old HARP promised far more than it delivered – fewer than 900,000 refinancings and just 72,000 of them underwater – experts say consumers should avoid being discouraged. The revised program, which will run through 2013, could be an improvement.

The program would lower payments but would not reduce principal, so borrowers would still hold mortgages for more than their homes are worth. But they could avoid foreclosure.

Consumers who want to refinance should prepare paperwork, keep up payments, consider the new option and avoid the desire to give up.

“You feel the frustration that people have,” McBride said, “but sitting back and doing nothing is not going to solve the problem.”

Some homeowners, who can afford the mortgage, still default

She has a sales job with a six-figure salary. He owns a successful tech company. And they are in foreclosure.

But unlike countless other Americans faced with losing their homes, this couple could make the $5,200 monthly mortgage on the waterfront property in Pompano Beach that they bought for $585,000 in 2004. Foreclosure was their decision – not the bank’s.

They crunched the numbers: $525,000 outstanding on their first mortgage and a $245,000 second mortgage on a home now worth about $319,000. His business was way down, her company was laying off workers and other investments had tanked. It made no sense to hang on to their underwater home. So they stopped paying their mortgage and waited for the foreclosure notice. It came in October.

It is called strategic default – borrowers who have enough money to make their mortgage payments but do not. They owe so much on a home that is now worth so little, that they decide to walk away.

It is not an easy decision. But it is not the inevitable blow to their credit score that troubles some strategic defaulters. It is the ethical dilemma of refusing to repay a loan when they are able to and worrying about what the neighbors will think.

“It felt like such an awful thing to do,” the woman said, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “I got a car loan at 14 and paid $35 a week until I paid it off when I was 16. “

How prevalent are strategic defaults?

Although the exact number is unknown, half the homeowners in a study conducted by the Federal Reserve Board walked away when they owed twice what their home was worth. A Palm Beach Post analysis of foreclosed homes purchased since 2006 found 72 percent – about 4,124 homes – are worth less than half of the original loan.

In the business world, strategic default is a common tactic – considered a savvy move for financially troubled companies. However, “consumers have been browbeaten and trained to believe that it’s not honorable to not pay your debts,” said Margery Golant, a Boca Raton attorney who represents the Pompano Beach couple in default. “Why should it be any different for consumers?”

Last year, Morgan Stanley walked away from a $1.5 billion mortgage on five buildings in San Francisco despite record-breaking profits in 2009. Real estate giant Tishman Speyer Properties strategically defaulted on $4.4 billion in loans on two housing developments in New York after the properties lost $2.2 billion in value. The company had billions of dollars in assets, including Rockefeller Center and the Chrysler Building, which it could have leveraged to meet its loan obligations.

Even the Mortgage Bankers Association, whose president chastised homeowners who strategically default for the “message” it would send to their “family, kids and friends,” dumped its Washington headquarters in a short sale. After working out a deal with its lender, the MBA sold the building for $41.3 million last year. In 2007, the group purchased it for $79 million.

Ethicist OK with decision

“No, it’s not wrong,” said Randy Cohen, author of the weekly Ethicist column in The New York Times. Although homeowners are emotionally attached to their property, a house is still an investment.

“I don’t understand why you would be asked to make a decision on this investment any differently than you would on any other,” Cohen said. “Why should homeowners be held to a higher ethical standard?”

In many strategic default cases, the moral imperative is self-imposed. Among the arguments: Walking away from a mortgage will depreciate your neighbors’ property values. If all underwater homeowners walked away, the housing market would crash.

“Most people considering strategic default come to me and want my permission,” said Ronald Kaniuk, a Boca Raton foreclosure defense lawyer. “People who cannot pay their mortgage are apologetic. For people who can afford their mortgage or can just barely afford their mortgage and see it as a losing investment, they want absolution.”

They should not get it, according to Luigi Zingales, an economist and professor at the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, who became embroiled last year in a debate over the morality of strategic default.

“When you borrow money you make a commitment to pay it back,” Zingales said. “If you walk away because it’s in your interest to do so, you are violating the letter and the spirit of the law.”

Zingales wanted to know why it had become so easy for upside down homeowners to walk away. The answer was simple.

“The stigma is very much a function of how many people do it,” Zingales said. “Once you think it’s socially acceptable, it becomes easier to do.”

Expect more defaults

But there are consequences, including the long-term health of the housing market, Zingales said. Zingales predicts we will reach a tipping point where getting rid of a bad investment outweighs the damage to neighbors’ property values and the borrower’s reputation. In other words, expect more defaults.

“We’re not there yet,” Zingales said. “Clearly this creates a tension in society.”

On one side are homeowners who did not lose their jobs or live beyond their means and are now struggling to make their mortgage payment. Next door are neighbors who have stopped paying their mortgages and are living largely free until they are booted from their homes. “It’s a legitimate resentment,” Zingales said.

“We never bought cars or jewelry,” the Pompano Beach woman said. The second mortgage they took out on their home went toward purchasing and renovating a condominium as an investment rental property. When her husband’s business lost its best client and her company began layoffs, they decided to get out from under all their debt.

There will be consequences. They will lose the $65,000 in loan payments. The lender could get a “deficiency judgment” to go after the couple for repayment of the defaulted loan.

Their credit score will take a hit, but at least with a strategic default they won’t be homeless.

After liquidating some assets and scraping together what they could, the couple bought a new house – down the street and nearly identical to the old house – for $353,000. They walked away from $770,000 in debt.

“It felt like such an awful thing to do,” she said. “When this is all over I’ll feel like I made a good choice.”

Lenders may be not-so-fast to foreclose

After a pivotal court ruling last Friday in Massachusetts, lenders are likely to be more willing to help homeowners who are struggling to make their mortgage payments.

Last Friday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled that two foreclosures in the case were invalid because the banks didn’t follow proper steps to show they had the authority to foreclose on the homes.

The case likely has set a precedent for the rest of the nation’s lenders to follow: Before you foreclose on a homeowner, make sure you have authority to do it.

“What banks are going to have to do is make sure they’ve dotted their I’s and crossed their T’s before going through with a foreclosure,” says Stuart Rossman, director of litigation at the National Consumer Law Center.

This could mean an even slower pace for foreclosures as banks take extra caution on their paperwork, says Roy D. Oppenheim, senior partner at Oppenheim Law in Weston, Fla.

Experts say the court ruling was a positive for homeowners who are in the middle of the foreclosure process, those trying to work out modifications, refinance, or do a short sale. They say that reaching a deal with lenders may become easier.

“I am expecting the banks to do fewer foreclosures and to engage in serious conversation in pre-foreclosure with borrowers,” Oppenheim says. “We’re already seeing [some] modifications that included for the first time principal reduction.”

Source: “Foreclosure Ruling May Be Good News for Homeowners,” MarketWatch

Foreclosure mess creates more havoc for Pinellas-Pasco courts

CLEARWATER The temporary freeze on foreclosures by big lenders such as Bank of America is rippling through the Pinellas-Pasco court system.

In the past few weeks about 50 percent of foreclosure hearings have been canceled. It’s a significant setback because the courts are already dealing with a backlog of 33,000 foreclosure cases, said J. Thomas McGrady, chief judge of the 6th Judicial Circuit. “Our goal was to reduce that number by 62 percent within a year,” McGrady said. “Particularly with the cancellation of hearings and the numbers, we’re not going to reach that goal.”Bank of America, GMAC, JPMorgan Chase and other big banks put a moratorium on foreclosures after questions were raised about fraudulent paperwork. Several have resumed foreclosure proceedings this week, but must re-schedule canceled hearings. Also, once the cases are back on the docket, McGrady said judges will have to scrutinize documents. “In all these cases with affidavits, the lenders themselves have questioned … are they going to submit new affidavits? Are they just going to rely on the old affidavits? As a court we’re going to have a look at each one on a case-by-case basis,” he said

read more at TBO.com

As more homeowners walk away, experts fear for nation’s morals

Americans have taken a sharp slap in the face from the housing crisis, financial crisis and jobs crisis. Now, some wonder if the residue of those harsh realities is an ethical crisis.

For the first time in the nation’s history, bankers say, people are walking away from mortgages they can otherwise afford to pay. The phenomenon known as strategic default was once unthinkable. It represents a calculated decision to hand over the keys to a home without making good on a loan, reasoning that it makes no sense to keep paying the monthly mortgage when the home is worth thousands of dollars less than the obligation.

Jeff Horton, a 33-year-old Orlando, Fla., technology manager, is among those who recently decided to take the step. He told his lender that he’s done making payments on the condo he bought in 2005 and the home he bought in 2007, because he wants to move from Florida and can’t sell or rent the properties at a price nearly high enough to cover his payments.

“Life is too short,” said Horton, who has mortgages totaling about $400,000 with Bank of America – about twice as much as he thinks he would get if he could sell the property. He says he has little choice because the bank has refused to refinance the mortgages or adjust original terms.

Strategic default is a symptom of a housing market that suddenly turned from “American Dream” to financial trap. With the Norman Rockwell-like images of homeownership decimated by a 30 percent plunge in prices, some fear America is also losing its grip on another idyllic notion: that people will live by the slogan, “My word is my bond.”

Morgan Stanley recently estimated that about 18 percent of defaults will be strategic. In a recent Pew Research Center survey, 36 percent of Americans said that walking away without paying a mortgage is acceptable, at least under certain circumstances. Fifty-nine percent said the practice is unacceptable.

The saying “My word is my bond” was first posted in the London Stock Exchange in the late 1920s to convey living up to promises. Now, after the worst financial disaster since that period, people such as Horton say they have no such image of Wall Street or large banks as trustworthy institutions, and that has allayed guilt about walking away from mortgages.

“I felt guilty at first,” said Horton. “It all stopped when I saw them take $90 million in executive bonuses. They take bailout money and do nothing for the little guy. They wouldn’t do anything for me.”

Most people walking away from homes see little choice, says John Maddux, chief executive of UWalkAway, a Web site that provides advice on the strategic-default process. “They bought the house thinking of it as an investment in their future,” he said. “For some, it was to be their retirement; for others, it was seen as forced savings, and now it’s bleeding them dry.”

Overburdened with mortgages, people conclude they won’t be able to send their children to college, save anything for retirement or move to a place where they can find a job. But as they go through the soul-searching and guilt connected with walking away, Maddux noted they often point to a sense of betrayal.

He said he frequently hears: “I don’t feel bad for the banks. They let this happen. Banks made the mistake of giving a loan to anyone if they had a pulse. Their loose lending standard led to a bubble, and the regulators should have controlled this.”

Banking expert E. Philip Davis sympathizes with that point of view, but he also points out the implication of homeowners walking away from a commitment.

“It makes them as bad as the bankers,” said Davis, a Baptist minister in the United Kingdom who teaches courses on fostering stability in the financial system.

The erosion of the ethic of keeping promises “will be a cancer for society,” said Davis, who was with the Bank of England and is now a fellow at the U.K.’s National Institute of Economic and Social Research.

On the surface, one consequence is evident: If bankers don’t trust that people will pay off their loans, banks will demand higher interest and other assurances before lending in the future.

In fact, there’s research behind the concern, says Tom Donaldson, a University of Pennsylvania Wharton business ethics professor. And it shows that both bankers and borrowers are at risk if trust erodes.

“We’ve known for decades that trust is critical to successful business,” said Donaldson. “Studies have shown that if one party cheats on one end, the other party feels more entitled to cheat. It’s not the most noble way, but it is human nature, and it becomes a race to the bottom.”

Research into strategic default by University of Chicago Booth School of Business professor Luigi Zingales shows what he calls “the contagion effect.” “The stigma goes down once you see someone else do it,” he said.

Lenders go after money lost in foreclosures

By Dina ElBoghdady
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, June 16, 2010

After the bank foreclosed on Fernando Palacios’s Gainesville home in March, he thought he was done with what he described as the most stressful financial situation of his life.

The bank sold the home for far less than Palacios owed on it, as often happens with foreclosures. What Palacios did not see coming was the letter from his lender demanding that he pay the shortfall: $148,064.02. “I really thought I was through with this house,” said Palacios, who fell behind on payments when the economy soured and his cleaning business stumbled.

Over the past year, lenders have become much more aggressive in trying to recoup money lost in foreclosures and other distressed sales, creating more grief for people who thought their real estate headaches were far behind.

In many localities — including Virginia, Maryland and the District — lenders have the right to pursue borrowers whose homes have sold at a loss to collect the difference between what the property sold for and what the borrower owed on it, also called a deficiency.

Before the housing bust, when the volume of foreclosures was relatively low, lenders seldom bothered to chase after deficiencies because borrowers had few remaining assets to claim and doing so involved hassles and costs. But with foreclosures soaring, lenders are more determined to get their money back, especially if they suspect borrowers are skipping out on loan they could afford, an increasingly common practice in areas where home values have tanked.

Palacios said he was committed to staying in his house, which he bought in 2005. He sunk $20,000 into improving it and hoped to raise his children there. But his lender refused to modify his loan, he said. To avoid personal liability for the deficiency, Palacios is filing for bankruptcy protection, as many people do who are in similar situations, said Nancy Ryan, his bankruptcy attorney.

“I am definitely seeing more people come through my door who walked away from houses a year or two ago and thought they were as free as the dead,” Ryan said. “They’re stunned when they realize they’re not.”
Several lenders contacted for this story declined to say how often they pursue deficiencies. But many said they try to collect the debt if they conclude the borrower can repay all or part of it.

“Lenders are not going after people who face a hardship,” said John Mechem, a spokesman for the Mortgage Bankers Association. “If they can’t pay their mortgage because they have a loss of income, there is no point in going after them.”

Those who had a second mortgage, such as a home-equity line of credit, in addition to their primary mortgage may find themselves particularly vulnerable, especially if they tapped into the equity line for cash.

Second lenders are last in line to get paid when a distressed property is sold. There’s usually little or no money left over for them, making it more likely that they will pursue large deficiencies, several attorneys said.

Gretchen Somers said she and her husband understood the risks last year when they completed a “short sale,” a transaction that allowed them to sell their Manassas home for about $150,000 less than they owed on it. But they felt they had no other options.

Somers said her family hung onto the house as long as possible. They tried but failed to sell it when her husband was transferred to Arizona for his job in early 2006, just as home prices were softening. They moved back into the house then tried to sell it again in 2008, after their adjustable-rate mortgage reset and their monthly mortgage payment nearly doubled. But home prices had plunged further by then, making it even tougher to sell.

Last year, their first lender and their home-equity line lender granted permission for the short sale. But the second lender reserved the right to come after the couple. Six months later, a collection agency called demanding $85,000 for related losses.

In hindsight, Somers said she and her husband should have just walked away from the house. “We took care of the house because we wanted it to sell,” Somers said. “If they were going to come after us anyway, we shouldn’t have done them the favor of making sure it looked good and cutting the grass even after we moved out, We should have mailed them the key and said: ‘Here you go.’ ”

Carlos Cortez and his wife managed to escape that fate after their second lender came after them for $70,000 when their short sale was completed on his Manassas Park townhouse in 2008.

Cortez knew that was a possibility, but he went through with the sale because his real estate agent said the lender was engaging in scare tactics.

James Scruggs, an attorney at Legal Services of Northern Virginia, said the lender appears to have backed off after Cortez argued that that the loan officer falsely qualified him and his wife for a home-equity line by fabricating key details about their finances.

A handful of states do not allow lenders to pursue deficiencies, nor does a federal program that took effect April 10. Lenders participating in that initiative are paid for approving short sales and as a condition, they cannot go after outstanding debt.

In many states, lenders can go after deficiencies, though laws vary widely, said John Rao, an attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. Some states limit how long the banks have to file a claim or collect the debt. Others may calculate deficiencies based on the fair-market value of the house, Rao said. For instance, if a home sells for $200,000 yet its fair market value is $250,000, “the borrower who owes $240,000 on the mortgage would not have a deficiency,” he said.

Borrowers should get a waiver in writing from their lenders to protect themselves, said Diane Cipollone, an attorney at the nonprofit Civil Justice. “Nobody should assume the deficiency is forgiven,” she said.

Crowds likely at ‘Save the Dream’

A record number of desperate borrowers have registered for a traveling mortgage relief marathon that “sounds too good to be true.”

The Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America’s Save the Dream Tour opens 9 a.m. Thursday at the Miami Beach Convention Center, offering thousands of struggling homeowners a chance to modify their loans – at no cost.

The event, which offers free counseling and face-to-face contact with lender representative, runs 24 hours a day. Doors close at 8 p.m. on April 19.

Bruce Marks, CEO of the Boston-based nonprofit, said Wednesday morning that a company record 15,000 had already registered for Thursday’s event.

“We’ve had a huge response,” he said, even though the tour made a stop in West Palm Beach just last February.

Darren Duarte, spokesman for NACA, said the overwhelming number of people who showed up for help in Palm Beach County led the tour, which makes stops around the county, back to South Florida.

“During the last day the crowd was extremely large and we got to see a lot of people but there were a lot of people we didn’t get a chance to see,” Duarte said about the February event. “So we saw there is still a need here and a demand here.”

More than 24,000 applied for mortgage relief at the Palm Beach County event, leading to nearly 11,000 modifications, Duarte said.

Greg Calley said he was among those who benefited. The American Airlines mechanic said he was poised to short-sell his Jupiter townhome after a year of trying unsuccessfully to work with Chase to modify his loan, which he struggled to pay.

Then he heard about Save the Dream.

“I thought it was too good to be true,” he said, echoing a common skepticism about whether the nonprofit really can help mortgage holders receive a free, same-day loan modification.

But Calley said that by the time he left the Palm Beach event, his monthly payment was $1,000 cheaper and his interest rate reduced by 4.5 percentage points.

The tour’s arrival in South Florida comes on the heels of a month that set a new South Florida record for property repossessions in March, with 3,707 in Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties, according to a report by real estate consulting firm CondoVultures Realty.

Those who attend the workshop are encouraged to register and are urged to bring pay stubs, tax forms and other financial documents.

More info: http://www.naca.com