An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right

Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust

The Obama administration’s $75 billion program to help homeowners escape foreclosure is a failure and should be scrapped. By unintentional consequences, the government itself under the FDIC sabotages the program.

The irony of this is that a private non-profit company exists that has a proven track record helping homeowners renegotiate mortgages they can afford — for free.

Bear with me as we go through this one step at a time.

About 40% of the mortgages in which banks voluntarily lowered the monthly payments by 20% were delinquent in less than a year, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision reports.

Since March when the Obama program began, 760,000 homeowners were offered loan modifications but only 31,000 were eligible. Of those, only 781 (less than 1%) were determined permanently enrolled. Those were “qualified” homeowners defined as having made at least one in three consecutive payments on time.

Nationally, 14% of homeowners with mortgages are either behind on their payments or in foreclosure.

Certainly, the basic problem is homeowners caught in the jaws of a recession and unemployment. “Even if you’ve gone through a modification, your situation may deteriorate,” said Fred Phillips-Patrick, director for credit policy at the thrift office.

Part of the reason for the poor showing is that mortgage servicers don’t have adequate staff and systems to process the increasing number trial plans. Another reason is that the banks had no business “giving” homes to people with questionable credit or in some cases not even jobs.

Enter the FDIC. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is going broke. It insures consumer savings accounts in banks and takes over banks that fail and sells them to competitors deemed more financially stable. It is supposed to be self-supporting by assessing a fee on banks for its insurance fund. One of its bad management policies was not tapping wealthy banks any levy whatsoever, a policy Congress changed in 2006. When the housing market collapsed because of subprime and predatory lender practices, it had in reserves only $583 million for failed banks. It was forced to secure a $500 billion line of credit from Treasury and stuck taxpayers a bill analysts say will never be repaid. As of June 30, FDIC reported its insurance fund assets exceeded liabilities by $10.4 billion, about 0.22% of insured deposits. So far this year, 94 banks have been shut, the fastest pace in almost two decades. The FDIC said 416 banks were on its “problem” list, a 15-year high, as of June 30. That was up from 305 three months earlier.

What is overlooked although reported on the FDIC website is the sweetheart deals they make to banks they lure to takeover failed ones.

A classic is OneWest Bank which took over IndyMac Bank in March 2009. OneWest purchased all current residential mortgages at 70% par value. FDIC guaranteed anywhere from 80-95% from any losses OneWest might occur based on the original outstanding loan balance.

For example, if a home has a loan amount of $500,000, One West would pay $350,000. If the owner is offered $250,000 cash in a “short sale,” OneWest can report a $250,000 loss based on the original loan and receive a check from Uncle Sam for $200,000. Add that to the $250,000 “short sale” price offer and OneWest earns a grand total of $450,000 and a nifty 100 grand profit.

A short sale is when a home is sold for less than its outstanding mortgage. Since September 2008 short sales have increased 22%.

Bottom line: The FDIC in its shared loan agreements with some 50 banks unwittingly encourages them to foreclose on homeowners because it is more profitable, less risky and rids the banks they consider deadbeats.

That’s not all. Banks which are making a serious effort to loan say regulators — another arm of our government — have reversed course since the market collapse and made borrowing more difficult by insisting on larger reserves and higher collateral and credit ratings from consumers.

In researching this article, I learned from a Realtor about The Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, a non-profit advocacy group for homeowners who fall victim to subprime and predatory lenders. I can’t vouch for them but they seem to be one solution to a problem the Obama administration is trying to fix with its $75 billion homeowners assistance program.

According to its website:

The NACA solution is to restructure the existing mortgage by permanently reducing the interest rate to achieve an affordable mortgage payment. A mortgage restructure is not a refinance that requires eligibility for a new loan (i.e. high credit scores, high property values, etc). Since a restructure reduces either or both the interest rate and/or mortgage principal on the existing first mortgage, there are no mortgage criteria eligibility restrictions. If the homeowner is unemployed NACA provides a forbearance with a minimum payment until that have steady income to have their mortgage restructured.

… NACA has legally binding agreements with all the major lenders/servicers covering over 90% of homeowners to achieve to a restructure or forbearance and is advocating against others. All of NACA’s services are free. NACA also provides for free a forensic audit to determine any violations in obtaining your current mortgage.

The group, formed in 1988, claims it has negotiated more than $10 billion in loan commitments and guarantees.

Based on the government’s record of helping just 781 out of 31,000 problem mortgages, I would think NACA’s proven success is worth a shot at tackling the problem and one helluva lot cheaper.

It is one of those scenarios where the private sector, not the government, can do a better job.



10 Responses to “Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust”

  1. [...] Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust – The Moderate VoiceBanks which are making a serious effort to loan say regulators — another arm of our government — have reversed course since the market collapse and made borrowing more difficult by insisting on larger reserves and higher collateral and credit [...]

  2. Father_Time says:

    Typical capitalist response to a Social Problem: “Help the capitalist pigs that caused the Social problem, screw the individual victim of the Social problem”.

    Why couldn't the government simply force the lender to accept pay off of that mortgage with that amount and SAVE the government a hundred grand? It leaves the borrower with a place to live and a base for finding employment, AND, an asset!

    In my opinion it is unconstitutional for government to provide profit to business especially at the expense of the citizen.

    This friggen country is unbelievable! Why would people fight to the death for this corrupt form of government?

  3. [...] Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust – The Moderate VoiceFDIC guaranteed anywhere from 80-95% from any losses OneWest might occur based on the original outstanding loan balance. For example, if a home has a loan amount of $500,000 All of NACA’s services are free. NACA also provides for free a [...]

  4. ProfElwood says:

    In my opinion it is unconstitutional for government to provide profit to business especially at the expense of the citizen.

    To a large extent, true. But the “general welfare” interpretation, that was needed for the new deal, also opened the pipe for corporate interests. You can't dismiss the constitution and bring it back from the dead at the same time.

  5. patrick4rent says:

    For the same reason the medical industry can – they have the power to convince others that they should be allowed to do so, to convince others that they and they alone have the ability. They presume to be so elite and so knowledgeable that no one else could possibly do the job.

    And we let them, being cowed by their power and money. Any time we allow a profession to police itself, you can expect it to be corrupt. If it wasn't to begin with, it will become so. It will police itself only for the purpose of controlling its members so that they stay in line and follow the policy that's focused primarily on one thing – making more and more money and taking less and less responsibility for the harm they do.

    Self-policing is never innocent and always self-serving. Anyone who argues against it is looked down upon and sidelined as being unknowledgeable, unable to judge the high and mighty and all-knowing members of that profession.

    Self-policing is just another way of taking power from the masses and aggregating it to a smaller and smaller number of ever more powerful people, who use it to further enslave the masses.
    “Merry Christmas
    http://www.topnflnews.com/

  6. [...] Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust – The Moderate VoiceThe Obama administration’s $75 billion program to help homeowners escape foreclosure is a failure and should be scrapped. By unintentional consequences, the government itself under the FDIC sabotages the program. The irony of this is that a private [...]

  7. [...] Obama Homeowner Aid Plan A Bust – The Moderate VoiceSince March when the Obama program began, 760,000 homeowners were offered loan modifications but only 31,000 were eligible Even if you’ve gone through a modification, your situation may deteriorate,” said Fred Phillips-Patrick, director for [...]

  8. Don't Pay hundreds or Thousands of dollars to a loan modification company.
    You can Do-it-yourself with the right tools.
    http://www.modifyingmadeeasy.com

  9. Father_Time says:

    You do not understand the Constitution.

    The constitution provides for the general welfare of the PEOPLE, not business. Business does not have the right to vote, people vote. Business does not have inalienable rights. People have inalienable rights. A business is not a person. A business is property owned by a person. The government has no responsibility to provide for business no more than it has any responsibility to provide for an a conditioner or a hockey stick or any property for that matter. Profit is the responsibility of the owner of the property, not any government within the United States.

  10. ProfElwood says:

    Of course natural people are the only ones with any real rights, but the “general” in “general welfare” means “as a whole”, not to individuals. So even if you believe that the general welfare clause was supposed to a listed power (I don't), it still shouldn't cover giving handouts to anyone, natural person or not. Defense protects everyone at once; the justice system helps the entire society; roads, well, they help in an area, but still aren't a direct benefit; even fire and police services help an area without specifying who will get them. The bank handouts were handed out to individual banks, to a large extent based on political clout. That political influence is the reason that specific welfare is a dangerous, corrupting force in a government.

© 2003-2011 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Mode Equity