M.Soliman
Expert.witness@live.com
Focusing on Foreclosures and Now that the election's over, is relief in sight? Web Exclusive
Nov 6, 2008 Updated: 5:05 p.m. ET Nov 6, 2008
Newsweek reports with the election concluded, Washington can turn away from the cable pundits and turn its attention back to the financial crisis. And as they do, one task looms large: What's the best way to help struggling homeowners who are facing foreclosure?
According to Maher Soliman a Los Angeles based foreclosure analyst "I agree with the article" It's an effort that began more than a year ago, when the government began offering programs like FHA Secure and the Hope Now alliance.
So what about the flaws with the existing government programs to help refinance or modify loans.
For many homeowners, refinancing is out of the question, since their homes are now worth less than their loan amount, and their credit scores have fallen due to missed mortgage payments. Marks say too many loan modifications don't take a realistic look at whether the homeowner will really be able to make the new payment.
Soliman also concedes how those programs are intended to help homeowners. By that he means to say the programs allow you to refinance into more affordable mortgages or work with lenders to modify their loan terms and reduce their payments.
But as unemployment increases and more people face the prospect of foreclosure, critics say these initial programs aren't doing enough to help. With taxpayers putting up hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out financial institutions, it's time for the government to become more proactive about saving people's homes.
While there is no shortage of proposals for what should be done, by far the leading contender is being pushed by Sheila Bair, the chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). This summer, the FDIC took over a failing bank called IndyMac and went to work swiftly modifying thousands of homeowners loans. Instead of doing a painstaking case-by-case analysis of each loan, which is what made existing modification programs move so glacially, IndyMac began applying standard formulas, based on each homeowner's income to determine whether they could reduce the interest rate or extend the term of the loan to create an affordable monthly payment.
Under the FDIC's plan, this type of program would become a nationwide standard. But for the last week the proposal has been bogged down by bureaucratic snafus. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that officials at the Treasury Department and the White House weren't yet willing to sign-on. Some observers believe the Republican administration wanted to sit on the proposal until after the election, to avoid giving the appearance that it was totally ignoring John McCain's proposal to have the federal government buy up mortgages from troubled homeowners.
Does the FDIC plan make sense? To get an answer, I called Bruce Marks, CEO of the nonprofit Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. Marks, whom the Boston Globe once called "one of the most feared men in the corporate boardrooms of the nation's leading financial institutions," has spent years advocating for homeowners. In the last year, his group has helped thousands of U.S. homeowners work with banks to modify their mortgages. His take on the FDIC plan: "It's a huge step forward ... Sheila Bair gets it."
Soliman who is registered with Juri Pro as a foreclosure specialist offers 25 years of secodary and primary mortgage banking experience. He agrees that the FDIC program starts by taking a hard look at what homeowners can actually pay.
Once it calculates an affordable payment, pros start playing with the mortgage numbers to see what they can adjust to hit that magic number. They start by reducing the interest rate. If that doesn't push the payment low enough, they'll extend the term of the loan. As a last resort, they'll consider lowering the principal amount of the mortgage. The mortgage holder loses money in any of these scenarios, but the appeal of these deals is that they usually lose less than if they foreclose on the house. Marks says these deals are also better in the long run than modifying a mortgage that winds up in default a few months later.
"If you provide a homeowner with an affordable mortgage payment that you lock-in forever, there's a fully amortizing loan," he says, meaning the homeowner will be gaining equity with each payment and will eventually pay the loan down to zero. Even if the homeowner is currently "underwater" (meaning the loan exceeds the value of the home), if they can afford the payment and are building equity, they have every reason to stay in the house.
Marks' views make sense to me. At root, the mortgage crisis was sparked when the industry's underwriting process lost its focus on the question that should be its primary interest: Can this person pay back this money? Now, as the government seeks to help thousands of homeowners out of this crisis, creating a streamlined program that's focused on that question sounds like a smart move.
—Daniel Mcginn Is a National Correspondent at Newsweek and the Author of"House Lust: Americas Obsession With OurHom
--posted By Mortgage-Mess to Foreclosure Info Search at 2/25/2009 07:49:00 AM
Nov 6, 2008 Updated: 5:05 p.m. ET Nov 6, 2008
Newsweek reports with the election concluded, Washington can turn away from the cable pundits and turn its attention back to the financial crisis. And as they do, one task looms large: What's the best way to help struggling homeowners who are facing foreclosure?
According to Maher Soliman a Los Angeles based foreclosure analyst "I agree with the article" It's an effort that began more than a year ago, when the government began offering programs like FHA Secure and the Hope Now alliance.
So what about the flaws with the existing government programs to help refinance or modify loans.
For many homeowners, refinancing is out of the question, since their homes are now worth less than their loan amount, and their credit scores have fallen due to missed mortgage payments. Marks say too many loan modifications don't take a realistic look at whether the homeowner will really be able to make the new payment.
Soliman also concedes how those programs are intended to help homeowners. By that he means to say the programs allow you to refinance into more affordable mortgages or work with lenders to modify their loan terms and reduce their payments.
But as unemployment increases and more people face the prospect of foreclosure, critics say these initial programs aren't doing enough to help. With taxpayers putting up hundreds of billions of dollars to bail out financial institutions, it's time for the government to become more proactive about saving people's homes.
While there is no shortage of proposals for what should be done, by far the leading contender is being pushed by Sheila Bair, the chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). This summer, the FDIC took over a failing bank called IndyMac and went to work swiftly modifying thousands of homeowners loans. Instead of doing a painstaking case-by-case analysis of each loan, which is what made existing modification programs move so glacially, IndyMac began applying standard formulas, based on each homeowner's income to determine whether they could reduce the interest rate or extend the term of the loan to create an affordable monthly payment.
Under the FDIC's plan, this type of program would become a nationwide standard. But for the last week the proposal has been bogged down by bureaucratic snafus. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal reported that officials at the Treasury Department and the White House weren't yet willing to sign-on. Some observers believe the Republican administration wanted to sit on the proposal until after the election, to avoid giving the appearance that it was totally ignoring John McCain's proposal to have the federal government buy up mortgages from troubled homeowners.
Does the FDIC plan make sense? To get an answer, I called Bruce Marks, CEO of the nonprofit Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America. Marks, whom the Boston Globe once called "one of the most feared men in the corporate boardrooms of the nation's leading financial institutions," has spent years advocating for homeowners. In the last year, his group has helped thousands of U.S. homeowners work with banks to modify their mortgages. His take on the FDIC plan: "It's a huge step forward ... Sheila Bair gets it."
Soliman who is registered with Juri Pro as a foreclosure specialist offers 25 years of secodary and primary mortgage banking experience. He agrees that the FDIC program starts by taking a hard look at what homeowners can actually pay.
Once it calculates an affordable payment, pros start playing with the mortgage numbers to see what they can adjust to hit that magic number. They start by reducing the interest rate. If that doesn't push the payment low enough, they'll extend the term of the loan. As a last resort, they'll consider lowering the principal amount of the mortgage. The mortgage holder loses money in any of these scenarios, but the appeal of these deals is that they usually lose less than if they foreclose on the house. Marks says these deals are also better in the long run than modifying a mortgage that winds up in default a few months later.
"If you provide a homeowner with an affordable mortgage payment that you lock-in forever, there's a fully amortizing loan," he says, meaning the homeowner will be gaining equity with each payment and will eventually pay the loan down to zero. Even if the homeowner is currently "underwater" (meaning the loan exceeds the value of the home), if they can afford the payment and are building equity, they have every reason to stay in the house.
Marks' views make sense to me. At root, the mortgage crisis was sparked when the industry's underwriting process lost its focus on the question that should be its primary interest: Can this person pay back this money? Now, as the government seeks to help thousands of homeowners out of this crisis, creating a streamlined program that's focused on that question sounds like a smart move.
—Daniel Mcginn Is a National Correspondent at Newsweek and the Author of"House Lust: Americas Obsession With OurHom
--posted By Mortgage-Mess to Foreclosure Info Search at 2/25/2009 07:49:00 AM
November 29, 2009
ReplyDeleteMr. Ed Daire
Roman Steele& Associates
7401 So Crenshaw Boulevard #219
Los Angeles, CA 90043
Dear Ed
It was good to finally meet you with regards to the properties owned by your client. I believe there is a strong chance the lender and interested parties can be prevented from forcing a borrower out of the home. In the examples read herein you may find an unlawful detainer is not justified if another court can determine your rights are being violated. The claim is subject to a court having the proper jurisdiction rule in accordance with remedies and damages subject to the deed having been determined to be void or voidable.
For example, assignment Fraud involves modifications to the original loan where the name of the bank who actually owns the note is changed on execution of the Loan Modification Agreement. The problem with these “modifications” (actually new loans with new “lenders”) is that the old loans remain unaffected. The existing cloud on title to the property, the mortgage deed (or deed of trust), the note, the obligation, the purported assignments etc. is being compounded by attempts to allow impostors to foreclose on the mortgage, collect on the note, modify the loan, or approve a short sale.
The time bomb is title where securitized loans were recorded, foreclosed, modified or sold.
The parties (other than the borrower and possibly the Trustee on the Deed of Trust) had actual knowledge that the “lender” was not the Lender, the terms of the obligation were already changed at the time of closing, the appraisal was false, the underwriting was negligent or fraudulent, the Good Faith Estimate was by definition rendered neither in good faith nor even close to an accurate estimate, and the list goes on and on.
In determining whether a particular loan is part of a “double-funding” or “double-selling” scheme, examiners and forensic accountants should look for as evidence that a mortgage originator is engaging in this scheme and participating in a pattern of deception, forgery and fraud.
M.Soliman
Expert.witness@live.com
BAC Profile
ReplyDeleteA bank holding and a financial holding company, which through its subsidiaries, provides banking and nonbanking financial services and products throughout the United States and in selected international markets.
Bank of America Corp.
100 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, null 28255
Phone: (704) 386-5681
Fax: (704) 386-6699
Web Site: www.bankofamerica.com
BAC Wires Headlines
11.30.09 UPDATE 4-U.S. Treasury gets tougher on home loan relief
11.30.09 Gov't increases pressure on mortgage industry
11.30.09 Top-rated Fortress CMBS seen swaps+190 to swaps+210
11.30.09 UPDATE 3-U.S. Treasury gets tougher on home loan relief
11.30.09 UPDATE 2-U.S. Treasury gets tougher on home loan relief
More BAC From Wires Headlines >
Forbes.com on BAC RSS
* Does Anyone Want To Be BofA's CEO?
o With the promise of lower pay and tight political oversight, it's no wonder the bank hasn't found a successor for Ken Lewis yet.
* BoA's Claire Huang
o Bank of America is rebranding Merrill Lynch with help from its iconic bull.
* Roth Confusion Widespread
o With $1.4 trillion in play, investment firms mount big marketing campaigns.
* Rich Arabs And Israelis Team Up To Sue German Bank
o Banks of wealthiest Israelis, Qaddafi and Gulf Arab governments say WestLB defrauded them of $230 million.
* Geithner Cagey On Folding TARP
o Treasury secretary declines to give end date for bailout program, as Republican senators push for it to sunset at year end.
Investopedia on BAC
John Paulson's 6 Biggest Bets
Financial Stocks Have Been Laying Low
The Stock Market Secret
Four Stocks From The Heartland
BAC Press Releases
11.09.09 Bank of America Extends Nearly $184 Billion in Credit in Third Quarter
11.04.09 Bank of America Charitable Gift Fund Enhancements Create Greater Access to Efficient and...
More BAC Press Releases >
BAC Ratios & Returns
Price-to-sales 0.97
Return on Equity 2.4
Operating Margin 24.0
Profit Margin 3.3%
More BAC Ratios & Returns >
BAC Financials
Sales $142.057 bil
Profits $4.681 bil
Assets $2251.043 bil
Employees 243000.