Current Housing Indicators |
| CURRENT | PREVIOUS | ||
| Existing Home Sales | 4.49m | ▼ | 4.74m |
| New Home Sales | 309,000 | ▼ | 344,000 |
| Housing Starts | 583,000 | ▲ | 477,000 |
| Building Permits | 547,000 | ▲ | 531,000 |
| HMI | 9 | UNCH | 9 |
| Existing Home Prices | $170,300 | ▼ (annually) | $199,800 |
| New Home Prices | $201,100 | ▼ (annually) | $232,400 |
- 100% Mortgage Financing From USDA
- Despite Government Aid, Foreclosure Crisis is Not Improving
- Housing Data Delivers Mixed Messages
- Appraisals Now Center Stage in Housing Recovery
- Underwater Mortgages Could Sink Even Deeper
- First Time Buyers Rescue Housing: Realtors
- Housing Recovery 'Still In Uncharted Territory': HUD Secretary
- Shadow Inventory Dwarfs Loan Mods
- The Battered Businesses Behind Housing
- Watch Foreclosures, Seriously
- How Stock Investors Can Play Holiday Travel
- Time Lapse World Series Is A Great Play
- Hirschhorn: Greed...or Fear
- My Top 10 Tech Toys for the Holidays
- iPhone a Better Gaming Platform Than Android?
- May Day For Dendreon
- 100% Mortgage Financing From USDA
- Holiday Tipping: Who And How Much
- Deep Discounts Should Make It a Very Tech-y Holiday
- The Richest Members of the US Congress
- New Consensus Sees Stimulus Package as Worthy Step
- Wall Street Jobs Slow to Return Despite Record Profits
- Thanksgiving Week Stuffed With Economic News
- Black Friday Deals May Not Signal Retail Comeback
- Investors to Goldman: Be Less Greedy
- UPS Sets New Rates For 2010
- Victoria's Secret Hopes to Rekindle Desire for Lingerie
- 'New Moon' Takes Record $72.7M Box Office Bite
RSS FEED
Realty Check
![]() |
iStockphoto |
We all know that the biggest roadblock to mortgage modification is and has been the loan servicer and that servicer’s responsibility to its investors. So many loans during the housing boom were pooled and sold off to investors that it became close to impossible for the servicers of those pools to get permission across the board to change the terms of individual loans.
Government rescue programs for troubled borrowers, like Hope For Homeowners, require lenders/servicers to write down principal in order to participate, and the result has been alarmingly few applications. The program was recently deemed a failure by its own leadership.
Taylor and the NCRC are proposing a new government program, using TARP money, whereby the government would “use its power of eminent domain to take troubled properties/loans from mortgage servicers and lenders, so large numbers of loans could be modified, writing down principal and interest rates. The loans would then be re-sold to the private market.”
The government would buy these loans at a “steep discount.” Eminent domain allows the government to take an asset where a public purpose is served, and it requires that they pay the investor the “fair market value” for it. NCRC claims the fair market value would be about 30-50 percent of the current loan value.
NCRC argues, “Discounting the purchase of these loans would strike a balance between assisting homeowners and ensuring that lenders, servicers and securitizers are not rewarded for financing and servicing predatory and price-inflated loans.” That discounted price would then “be sufficient to write down the loan balance of millions of loans such that they can be permanently refinanced or modified to ensure long-term sustainability.”
It’s not too crazy, no? I mean, if you’re of the opinion that these borrowers should in fact be saved and given back home equity that perhaps they gambled on in the first place. The cost, NCRC estimates, $50-$100 billion.
NCRC also has a Harvard Law Professor on its side, arguing the case for eminent domain. The sticky part is proving that a mortgage is in fact a piece of real estate, but I’ll leave that to the scholars out there. Essentially it’s a way to force lenders/servicers into submission.
It’s another program that falls squarely on the side of the borrower, assuming that all the losses should go to the lender/investor, not to mention the U.S. taxpayer. Borrowers get a new loan and home equity to boot. Like I say, if that’s your preference, it’s not a bad idea. You know me, I’d like to see a little "equity" in all this debate over home equity.
Questions? Comments?









