« Police Confirm Gas Line at Democratic Congressman’s Relative’s House Deliberately Cut
French Rally to Side of Texas Man Facing Execution: France Info, France »
Earth To Planet Obama — Rescuing Drowning Homeowners A Hoax
Mar 26th, 2010 | 15 responses
The Obama administration can’t get it through its fat heads that helping homeowners from losing their homes does not work. But it keeps trying and praying something might. As they say in New Jersey, forgetaboutit.
Every time the government offers help to the homeowner or his lender, the people who President Obama is wont to say — those playing by the rules — get screwed.
What we have here folks is a situation where the government should bug out and let market forces runs its natural course. The housing market might not right itself to pre-housing-market-collapse prices until 2015. Yes, that means millions will lose their homes. But, despite the dreadful loss of accumulated wealth in one’s home, the option of renting is by no means a death sentence as was the case of health reform legislation where doing nothing was not a viable option.
Today the White House announced more plans to ostensibly help struggling homeowners from drowning in underwater loans in which they owe more than their house is worth. Go figure that the lenders — the banks — are the real beneficiaries and not the borrowers.
And get this: They have the audacity to claim it won’t cost taxpayers which is a crock of dog feces. Among the gimmicks is the Federal Housing Administration guaranteeing certain loans, an agency, by the way, quickly going bankrupt with an avalanche of new foreclosures in the pipeline.
And, another: Banks which took over failed banks are guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. up to 85% of the original loan value from the original bank. That means it is more profitable for the new bank to foreclose on the devalued property than modifying terms of the loans to lower monthly payments, reduce interest rates or as now being proposed reduce principle.
Home ownership is the American dream strongly encouraged by the government by providing tax write-offs on mortgage interest rates and works swimmingly as long as market prices appreciate over the years. The housing market collapse in 2007-2008 popped that dream. For how long is anyone’s guess.
That’s my rant and I’m sticking with it.
Meanwhile, here is some crumbs the government is throwing at the problem because of political pressure from Congress and drowning homeowners.
– $14 billion to FHA from the $75 billion borrowed funds in Obama’s foreclosure-prevention program passed last year to high risk underwater borrowers who have not defaulted on their monthly payments.
– Reduce monthly payments for unemployed homeowners for up to six months.
– Would enable the borrowers’ existing mortgage companies to receive incentives to lower their principal on underwater customers.
“There’s no intention here of tackling what may be 10 to 12 million foreclosures over the course of the next three years,” said Diana Farrell, a White House economic adviser.
The new steps by the administration amount to an acknowledgment that the year-old Home Affordable Modification Program. hasn’t done enough. By the end of December, it had permanently lowered monthly payments for only about 170,000 borrowers out of the expected 3 million to 4 million it was aimed at covering through 2012.
This was reflected during Congressional hearings yesterday as reported by The Los Angeles Times.
At a House hearing Thursday, frustrated Democrats and Republicans labeled the program a bust so far, echoing a stinging report this week by a government watchdog.
“This program is a failure and a waste of taxpayer dollars,” said Rep. Patrick T. McHenry (R-North Carolina.).
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-New York), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, warned the administration it needed to act quickly to fix the program. “I really do believe we can do a whole lot better than what we’re doing to keep people in their homes,” he said.
Assistant Treasury Secretary Herbert M. Allison admitted that modifying mortgages has been more difficult than officials had anticipated. “Certainly we’ve seen a lot of frustration with this program since its inception,” he told lawmakers. “We did not fully envision the challenges we would encounter.”
At least someone in the administration got it right.
Many analysts believe the problem of negative equity — about a quarter of U.S. homeowners with mortgages owe more than their homes are worth — will make it difficult for modifications to succeed because even a slight economic setback could cause those borrowers to abandon their loans and homes.
“This is a ‘kick the can down the road’ action at best,” Chief Executive Officer Dennis Santiago of Risk International of Torrance, Calif., told the Times.. “Yes, it will keep people in their homes longer. However, there remain no provisions for relief of the debt.”
For homeowners caught in this Catch 22 vice, the Washington Post offers some questions and answers that I found of value. Here are a few:
I have a second mortgage. Will that complicate my chances of refinancing into an FHA loan under this program?
The FHA will allow the refinancing of the first mortgage only. If there is a second mortgage, the two loans combined cannot exceed the current value of the home by more than 15 percent once the first loan is refinanced.
Will refinancing into an FHA loan this way hurt my credit score?
Probably. It is likely to hurt your credit score because the total balance of the loan was not paid off.
I am underwater on a mortgage but have become delinquent on the payments. Will there be any help for me?
Maybe. The government effort also includes paying lenders if they lower underwater borrowers’ loan balances under the Making Home Affordable loan-modification program. Lenders will have some flexibility on whether to grant principal forgiveness, so it is not likely to be done across the board. Also, borrowers must owe at least 15 percent more than their home is worth to qualify.
I have already been given a modification under the government program. Is it too late for me to get a principal reduction?
No. If you are still current on payments when this new program kicks in, lenders will be required to retroactively consider reducing the mortgage balance by the same amount that would have been forgiven under the new approach.
Will this plan require new taxpayer funding?
No. The initiatives will be funded out of the $50 billion in bailout money that was set aside to deal with foreclosure prevention, administration officials said.
15 Responses to “Earth To Planet Obama — Rescuing Drowning Homeowners A Hoax”
[...] or in extremis, sell. …US Plans Big Expansion in Effort to Aid HomeownersNew York TimesEarth To Planet Obama — Rescuing Drowning Homeowners A HoaxThe Moderate VoiceHelp for HAMP: Feds Finally Try to Patch Up Troubled Foreclosure [...]
Over 50% of those who got relief under the initial mortgage bailout are again more than 90 days overdue on their mortgages:
http://files.ots.treas.gov/482126.pdf
Reminds me of the Thomas Sowell piece on affordable Housing.
http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01/21/a…
Excellent post. I'll add what I've already said on one of the other comment threads on this topic: The truly forgotten people in all this are the people who are currently renting and who could afford to buy a house after prices complete their decline if that decline were allowed to happen. Right now those people are being taxed to pay for a program that makes it harder for them to buy a house!
What we have here folks is a situation where the government should bug out and let market forces runs its natural course. The housing market might not right itself to pre-housing-market-collapse prices until 2015. Yes, that means millions will lose their homes. But, despite the dreadful loss of accumulated wealth in one’s home, the option of renting is by no means a death sentence as was the case of health reform legislation where doing nothing was not a viable option.”
***********
Yer funny Jerry…
*checks calculator*
Yep, millions of homeowners are too big to fail. The amount of property value we're talking about, combined with the decline in value of neighboring homes in “shell-neighborhoods” amounts to more than the banks would've harmed this country if we let them fail. What's good for the goose is good for the gander..
Instead of bailing out the homeowners, we should encourage banks to cut their losses and still maintain income on what would otherwise be total loss and liability: empty and vandalized homes. The banks should switch the mortgage to “rent-to-own” at a reduced cost to the homeowners already on title. Maybe allow the remainder to be accrued in a second lean on the house to be paid off should the home sell. House keeps more value than if vacated and upon the time the economy rebounds and without the across the board plummet in home values, the banks recoup their losses and the people get to stay in their homes.
I'm pretty certain millions of homes going vacant and derelict is a situation that is too big to fail..
Actually one of those people gave up on ever being able to buy their own home around 5 years ago as the market gained steam because I found myself unable, as I had for the ten years prior to that, to make a stupid and insane investment. To quote myself “I can have the classic American dream of the home of my own that I paid for with the sweat of my brow…when I save up a bundle and move to Mexico.”
Rather than take money from people who bought houses they could afford to let people who helped create the bubble, maybe the government should simply help them move to house they _can_ afford?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TMV, Tomas Williams. Tomas Williams said: Earth To Planet Obama — Rescuing Drowning Homeowners A Hoax http://bit.ly/9ABkXD [...]
The idea here is that many of those facing foreclosure CAN afford the house they're in, at its true market value. Since that's all the bank can get anyway*, after going through foreclosure, eviction, vacancy, selling, realtor commissions, closing costs, etc. everyone's better off with those who are truly in need (I don't really think Jazz qualifies) staying in their homes and start making lower payments.
Others have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. They would get a 3-6 month break from their mortgage under this program. Again, the alternative, foreclosure….costs is devastating to the homeowner and costly to the bank. And the likely result is a needy American on the street, the bank losing money, and the house taken by a speculator, the real beneficiaries of housing bubbles.
* in fact, the banks will get far less because the market is slow and speculators are buying only at “steal” prices.
GD – but again, over 50% of those who got relief under the initial mortgage bailout are again more than 90 days overdue on their mortgages:
http://files.ots.treas.gov/482126.pdf
There is no reason to believe anything will be different this time.
Greendream;
>The idea here is that many of those facing foreclosure CAN afford the house they're in, at its true
>market value. Since that's all the bank can get anyway*, after going through foreclosure, eviction,
>vacancy, selling, realtor commissions, closing costs, etc. everyone's better off with those who are
>truly in need (I don't really think Jazz qualifies) staying in their homes and start making lower
>payments.”
That sounds good, except it can't be quite true. If the banks would get more by letting stay in their mortagages and keep paying, they wouldn't need a government program to do so. Unless you are saying, “if we let them off the hook for having contributed to the bubble by buying a house they can't afford the forgiveness of principal still means, to those of us who didn't buy during the bubble, “you should have gone for it and had the government bail you out if things didn't work, next time there is a bubble, you should jump right in…”
>Others have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.
And that would justify a program for those who bought houses and then lost their jobs during the recession. People keep bringing up people who have lost their jobs, but none of these programs, in fact, are targeted at them. It really ends up being a straw man…
No more bailouts….. Period!
It's unconstitutional to take from the national treasury and give it to any individual or entity. You may only give to all equitibly. This is Poli-Sci 101.
Please note many home insurance does not include enough flood coverage, contact me for a
free home and flood insurance coverage quote http://bit.ly/ajc5p7
[...] meanBaltimore Sun (blog)Help for HAMP: Feds Finally Try to Patch Up Troubled Foreclosure ProgramBNETThe Moderate Voice -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -BailoutSleuth.com (blog)all 301 news [...]
Gross misconduct by the politicians, buying the cheap votes of the cheapest people–classic Dem stuff.