Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Foreclosure-Prevention Plan: Modification and Refinancing




How the Plan Would Work for Borrowers

By JAMES R. HAGERTY

Here are answers to some common questions about the Obama administration's new foreclosure-prevention plan.

What do these programs involve?
One component calls for reducing payments for distressed borrowers through modifications of loan terms, known as loan mods. A second involves refinancing mortgages for some people who are current on their payments but have little or no equity in their homes.

When does this start?
Immediately.

How do I know whether I qualify for a loan modification?
For starters, this program applies only to your primary residence. That could be a home for one to four families, condo, cooperative apartment or manufactured home affixed to a foundation. It doesn't apply to second homes or investment properties, and the home can't be vacant or condemned. It also doesn't apply to mortgages on one-unit homes whose balances exceed $729,750.
And it isn't for people who can easily afford to pay their loans. You qualify only if your mortgage payment is more than 31% of your pretax monthly income. The monthly payment includes principal, interest, taxes, insurance and homeowner association or condominium fees. Income includes wages, salary, overtime, fees, commissions, tips, Social Security, pensions and other items.
You may qualify whether or not you are up to date with your payments, but you will need to show that you don't have sufficient cash or other readily available assets to meet your current payments.

If I think I may qualify, what's the first step?
Call your loan servicer, the company that sends you your monthly mortgage bill. If you want a counselor to help you, you can request free counseling from approved counseling organizations by dialing the Hope Hotline at 888-995-4673. Avoid firms that charge you a fee for helping you get a loan mod.

Aside from lower payments, what are the benefits of participating?
As long as participants stay current on the modified loans, they can get reductions of as much as $1,000 each year in their principal balance for five years.

Can everyone with a hardship be helped?
No. Servicers will apply a "net present value" test to determine whether a loan modification is in the financial interests of the lender or investor who owns the loan. If it isn't, you may not qualify.

Do I have to pay a fee for a loan mod?
No.

How do I know whether I qualify for the refinancing part of this plan?
You must be current on your payments and your loan must be owned or guaranteed by government-backed mortgage companies Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
These refinancings are designed for cases in which the loan balance is between 80% and 105% of the estimated value of your home. (Those below 80% should be able to get refinanced without the help of this program by contacting lenders or mortgage brokers.) Loan servicers will use computer programs or other means to estimate the value of your home.
These refinancings also are available for second homes and investment properties in some cases.

How do I find out if my loan is owned or guaranteed by Fannie or Freddie?
Your loan servicer or counselor should be able to determine that. On your own you can contact Fannie by calling 1-800-7FANNIE or visiting this Web site: www.fanniemae.com/homeaffordable. To reach Freddie, call 1-800-FREDDIE or go to www.freddiemac.com/avoidforeclosure.

Do I have to pay a fee for a refinanced loan?
Lenders or mortgage brokers may charge fees, which are likely to vary.

How long will these programs last?
The modification plan ends Dec. 31, 2012, and loans can be reworked only one time under this program. The refinance program ends in June 2010.

Where can I get more information?
The U.S. Treasury has provided information at http://www.financialstability.gov/.

Friday, March 6, 2009

Renters Lose Edge on Homeowners




Cost Gap Returns to Historical Norms in Some Markets as House Prices Drop

The relative cost of owning versus renting is swinging back in favor of homeownership in some U.S. markets, buoyed by several quarters of sharp declines in home prices.

At the height of the housing boom, as home prices surged, demand for rentals started to rise as the gap between owning and renting widened significantly. Even after the housing market soured, apartment demand grew as former homeowners became renters, allowing landlords to push healthy rent increases.

Now, after two years of rapid home-price depreciation, the relationship between the cost of rental payments versus after-tax mortgage payments is tilting toward ownership in a number of metropolitan areas.

Over the past 18 years, after-tax mortgage payments have averaged 26% more than rent payments, according to Green Street Advisors, a real-estate consultancy based in Newport Beach, Calif. In 2006, at the height of the housing bubble, mortgage payments reached as high as 66% more than rent payments. But by the end of 2008, average monthly rent for the largest 50 metropolitan areas was $1,045, compared with after-tax mortgage payments of $1,300, assuming a rate of 5.5% on a 30-year fixed mortgage. That means mortgage payments averaged just 24% more than rent payments, the narrowest gap since 2001.

Getty Images

A new housing development in Las Vegas, a market like several others in the U.S. where the cost equation has shifted in favor of homeownership.

In more than half of the top 50 U.S. housing markets -- including Los Angeles, northern Virginia and Las Vegas -- the ratio is now below its 18-year average. In Los Angeles, for example, mortgage payments averaged 60% more than rent payments between 1990 and 2008. Now, those payments average 30% more than rent.

"We're not saying on an absolute basis that it's cheaper to own a home, but on a relative basis...owning is looking much more attractive than it has in a long time," said Andrew McCulloch, a Green Street analyst. While the shift doesn't mean that renters will rush to buy homes soon, "it's not a 'no-brainer' anymore if they're going to rent versus own," he said.

If mortgage rates fall to 4.5% -- and some economists have called for the government to push rates to that level to ease the housing crisis -- mortgage payments would average 14% more than rent payments, a level last reached in 1998.

While lower rates could further boost home affordability, that may not be enough to overcome a psychological barrier for many would-be buyers who believe homes will become even more affordable. "One of the challenges in the housing market is not only affordability but also willingness to buy," said Nicolas Retsinas, the director of Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. "People are still worried about falling prices."

And lending standards are much tighter than they were during the housing boom, when less-creditworthy tenants left apartments in droves to take advantage of no-money-down financing. At the housing market's peak, nearly one in four renters left to buy homes, said Richard Campo, chief executive of Houston-based Camden Property Trust. That rate fell to near its historical norm of around 12% by the end of 2008. "The nonqualified renters are not moving out this time," said Mr. Campo.

A separate report by Moody's Economy.com also finds that home prices relative to rents are more in line with their historical relationship. Using data that measure average home prices and rent payments for 54 metro areas between 1984 and 2004, Moody's Economy.com estimated that eight markets are "undervalued." In those eight markets, home prices relative to rents are below or within 5% of their historical levels. "The bottom is coming into view," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com, "But we've still got a ways to go."

[price retreat]

The report notes that home prices relative to rents remain well above historical levels in 30 markets, including Philadelphia; Portland, Ore.; and Virginia Beach, Va.

Lower prices and interest rates are spurring some buyers to get off the sidelines. Jason Schanta, 37, an independent contractor, has been ready to buy for three years, but he said he waited because Southern California home prices had become "outrageous."

"I'm not an economic guru but I knew the bubble was going to burst," he said. He is ready to buy a $500,000 home if Bank of America Corp.'s Countrywide Financial unit approves a short sale on the property in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. (In a short sale, the lender agrees to sell a home for less than the value of the mortgage.) Mr. Schanta currently rents a three-bedroom house for $2,250 a month, and says that he will pay just $150 more in mortgage payments and taxes for a house that has an additional bedroom and 350 more square feet. "Renting now costs just as much as buying," he said.

Others are finding that they could pay less on their mortgage than they would on rent. Carla Zeineh, 22, and her husband recently began shopping for a home in Irvine, Calif., and discovered that with a 5% mortgage rate, her monthly payment on a $350,000 two-bedroom home with 20% down could be less than the $1,800 month that they pay in rent on their two-bedroom condo.

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Who Gets To Refinance




by Jack M. Guttentag
Posted on Monday, February 9, 2009, 12:00AM


It is unusual to have a refinance boom in the middle of a foreclosure crisis. In the 1930s, which was the last time we had a foreclosure crisis comparable in magnitude to this one, lenders were so spooked by the foreclosures that there was almost no refinancing. That changed only after the creation of the Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) in 1933, which refinanced many borrowers at the government's risk.
The refinance boom today is also fueled by government. With few exceptions, refinanced loans are either being sold to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, or insured by FHA. The requirements of those agencies largely dictate who can and cannot profit from a refinance.
The refinance decision involves a comparison of what a borrower has with what he can get. For example, if he is currently paying 5 percent and can refinance at 4.5 percent and no fees, he will profit from the refinance. If he is currently paying 7 percent but the best he can get in the current market is 7.5 percent, he won't.
Borrowers with fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) usually know what they have, but borrowers with adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) often don't. I have received letters from borrowers in a state of high anxiety because their ARM faced a rate reset and they felt they had to refinance before that happened. In some such cases, a close look revealed that their rate was probably going to drop sharply, making it unnecessary to refinance quickly -- if ever.
Readers who ask me whether they should refinance usually tell me what they have but seldom tell me what they can get. They expect me to know that, but I don't because it depends on so many factors specific to them that they haven't told me about.
Borrowers in the best position to refinance profitably have loan balances of $417,000 or less secured by a single-family house in which they reside. They will also have a credit score of 800 or more, and have equity in their property of 20 percent or more. The interest rate premiums associated with deviations from this standard are larger today than I have ever seen them. Note: The premiums reported below are those being quoted by large wholesale lenders on 30-year FRMs, and are reflected in the retail rates quoted by mortgage brokers and many if not most lenders. They may not apply to smaller credit unions or community banks.
Loan Size: Borrowers with loan balances above $417,000 up to $625,500, who live in higher-cost areas where Fannie and Freddie are authorized to buy loans up to $625,500, will pay a rate premium of about 1 percent. These are conforming jumbo, meaning that they can be purchased by the agencies but are priced higher than non-jumbos.
Borrowers with balances in excess of $417,000 who do not live in a high-cost area, or who have balances in excess of $625,500, will pay a premium closer to 2 percent. These are "non-conforming jumbos" that cannot be purchased by the agencies.
Type of Property: On loans secured by condominiums, figure on paying a rate premium of .75 percent, and on 2-family to 4-family homes, the premium can be twice that large.
Loan Purpose: If a loan is secured by an investment property, figure on paying a rate premium of about 1.375 percent. Those refinancing who borrow more than their loan balance will pay a premium of about .25 percent. However, they can finance settlement costs without it being considered "cash-out."
Credit Score: Shortfalls from excellent credit, defined as a FICO score of 800, have become very expensive. Even a score of 780 can cost a rate premium of .125 percent. The premium on a score of 700 is about 1.125 percent, and on a score of 600 it can be a prohibitive 2.625 percent.
Equity: If a borrower has equity of less than 20 percent -- meaning that the loan balance exceeds 80 percent of current property value -- he will pay a mortgage insurance premium. This can make refinance a loser for borrowers whose recently purchased homes have declined in value. For example, if Jones borrowed $160,000 to purchase a home for $200,000 in 2005, he still owes $158,000, and the house is now worth only $180,000, a refinance will require mortgage insurance where the original loan did not. If the house is worth only $150,000, the loan can't be refinanced at any price.
Approval: On loans that will be sold to Fannie and Freddie, increased risk premiums have been accompanied by tougher approval standards. In particular, documentation of income, which had grown lax and sloppy during the go-go years, is now rigorously enforced. Approval is also dependent on a satisfactory combination of all the risk factors discussed above. For example, a FICO of 650 might be approvable if all other factors are favorable, but a 650 score on an investment property with only 5 percent equity will be rejected.
Loans that won't be approved by the agencies might past muster with FHA, whose requirements are more liberal. But FHA loans carry higher rates and insurance premiums.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Judges Back Mortgage Legislation





Power to Modify Mortgages Sits Well With Judges

By AMIR EFRATI and JENNIFER S. FORSYTH

Federal bankruptcy judges say they are eager to have the power to restructure mortgages for struggling debtors because it could save hundreds of thousands of homeowners from foreclosure.
Top Senate Democrats are advancing legislation to let bankruptcy-court judges approve new repayment terms on first mortgages for primary residences for homeowners who have sought protection in a Chapter 13 filing. The proposal allowing so-called mortgage cramdowns, in which the principal amount of the loan is reduced, is one of several efforts Democrats are pushing to give homeowners relief as they wrestle with increasing debt levels and plummeting home values.
Reuters
Proposed changes to bankruptcy laws could save thousands of homeowners from foreclosure.
Judges overseeing bankruptcy cases already can approve modifications for credit-card debt and most other kinds of loans, including second-home mortgages. But they haven't been able to modify primary-home mortgages since 1979, when the U.S. bankruptcy code went into effect, said Samuel L. Bufford, a U.S. bankruptcy judge in Los Angeles. Before then, many states allowed judges to do some form of modification, he said.
Allowing a judge to modify loans gets around the problem that many mortgages have been turned into securities and sold to multiple investors. "The bankruptcy system depends on people making deals, but the deal-making piece of it has disappeared when it comes to mortgages because of the way mortgages were sold and packaged," Judge Bufford said. "There's nobody on the lender side to do the deal unless you [get permission] from investors, and that's impossible."
The measure is "a good idea," said Laurel Isicoff, a federal bankruptcy judge in Miami. Financial institutions have gotten help from the government, but the only way to fix the economy is through "a holistic approach" that also "solves the problem of people losing their homes."
Until last week, when Citigroup Inc., one of the nation's largest mortgage lenders, dropped its opposition, the banking industry had long fought modification of first mortgages in bankruptcy, fearing it would encourage more homeowners to file for Chapter 13 and that it would further destabilize the housing market. Representatives of the Mortgage Bankers Association said last week that they were still opposed to cramdowns. But Citigroup's support increases the chances of passing legislation that would allow judges to lower the interest rate, reduce the principal or alter the length of primary mortgages.

Opponents of the proposed law change, including the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, say it would have "serious and negative consequences," including increasing mortgage rates for consumers overall because investors who typically buy the loans might deem new mortgage contracts too risky.
A Chapter 13 filing is a plan in which debtors can retain assets and pay back their debt over three to five years. About two-thirds of Chapter 13 filers have a mortgage, but half of them aren't able to keep paying the mortgage as part of their reorganization, judges and lawyers say.
A. Jay Cristol, a federal bankruptcy judge in Miami, said that changing the bankruptcy law would be beneficial because "after foreclosure, families get broken up and lenders hold on to nonperforming assets that they sell at a loss."
Samuel Schwartz, a Las Vegas bankruptcy lawyer, has a client who is facing foreclosure on her primary residence even though she has been able to modify the loans on her two investment houses. Under the current bankruptcy rules, she was able to "strip away" the second mortgage on one of the investment homes and she "crammed down," or reduced, the principal balances on the first mortgages for both rentals -- reducing her combined loan balances to a total of $355,000 from $590,000.
She was also able to strip away the second mortgage on her primary residence but couldn't modify the first mortgage. That mortgage, Mr. Schwartz said, is more than $100,000 above the current value of the property. Thus, she still may lose her own home. Under the new law, her first mortgage on her home also could be modified.

Saturday, January 3, 2009

Time To Step Up For Credit Score





A Higher Number Is Needed for Some Loans; How to Improve Your Chances


By MARY PILON

It used to be that a 720 credit score or higher would get you the best interest rates. With lenders suddenly focused on credit risk, that isn't necessarily the case anymore.
To lock in the best interest rate on a 30-year fixed-rate home mortgage, it now takes a 760 or above, according to data from Fair Isaac, developers of the FICO score. For a 15-year home-equity loan a 740 FICO score is sufficient to lock in the lowest interest rate now. And borrowers will need a 720 for the best interest rate on a 36-month auto loan.
Your credit, or FICO, score is a three-digit number, ranging from 300 to 850 that lenders use to try and gauge what you are going to be like as a borrower. Fair Isaac generates the score based on your credit report from one of the three credit-reporting agencies: Equifax, Experian or closely held TransUnion Corp. The FICO score is used by more than 90% of lenders.
But despite higher standards from lenders, the average credit score has stayed relatively flat at 690, according to John Ulzheimer, president of consumer education for Credit.com. This leaves a whole swath of good customers scrambling to boost their scores.
"It's a completely different credit world," Mr. Ulzheimer says. But there are still some tactics consumers can employ to boost their credit scores in an otherwise tough environment.
Look at your usage. Lenders recently have done two major things to crimp customer credit ratings: Cut back on credit limits and close dormant accounts. Even if consumers aren't maxing out their cards -- and they shouldn't -- having a high credit limit helps with the amounts-owed portion of the credit score. The higher your limit and the more responsibly you use it, the higher your score.
In the past, customers could call up their lenders and ask for their limits to be reinstated, or even increased. But many financial institutions are being less generous as they fight to offset huge losses. Harvey Rosenfield, founder of Consumer Watchdog, recommends asking to speak with a supervisor if you aren't satisfied with the response. "It's the squeaky-wheel principle," he says.
If that doesn't work, replace that credit line with a new credit card. Your credit score will take a temporary hit after applying for a new line of credit. But in the long run, having a higher credit limit should lift your score.
Pay on time, every time. Thirty-five percent of the FICO credit score is payment history, so paying off at least the minimum balance on time is crucial. The newest version of Fair Isaac's score, FICO 08, is set to unroll in 2009, and is even more sensitive to payment history.
Keep accounts open and active. Rather than closing unused lines of credit, keep them open. Call up the issuer to make sure the account isn't closed due to inactivity. If you are worried about overspending on the card, put it in a safe place in your home, to avoid the temptation of racking up unnecessary charges.
Piggyback, if eligible. One of the original provisions of FICO 08 was eliminating authorized user accounts, such as children or spouses, to cards. Due to uproar from consumers and the credit-reporting firms, that isn't the case any longer, a victory for benevolent borrowers trying to helped loved ones establish a credit history.
Order a copy of your credit report. Twenty-five percent of credit reports have an error that could result in a lower credit score, according to a 2004 study from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
You're legally entitled to one free from each of the credit reporting firms through annualcreditreport.com. Fair Isaac and the three credit reporting agencies charge for consumers to see their FICO credit score, but your credit report, the blueprint for your credit score, is free.
If you are applying for a loan from a specific lender, ask which of the three FICO scores (the Equifax, Experian or TransUnion scores) they will use. They aren't required to tell you, but it could save you the hassle of having to order all three scores.
If you are curious what your credit score is, but don't want to shell out the cash, there are several credit-score simulators available on Credit.com, CreditKarma.com as well as Bankrate.com. Although these are only simulators, they might help give a general sense of where your credit rating stands.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Mortgage Market Eases For Some But Not For Self-Employed or Jumbo Loan Borrowers




Self-Employed Are Frozen Out of Mortgages
Efforts to Jump-Start Lending Bypass Those Without W-2s; The Trouble With Jumbos

By NICK TIMIRAOS and RUTH SIMON

The government's recent moves to backstop the mortgage market have made it easier for many people with decent credit scores to get a loan. But for many self-employed people -- even those with pristine credit -- the mortgage freeze has yet to thaw.
A reversal of the loose lending practices that led to the banking industry's current woes was certainly expected. But some economists and mortgage brokers say lending standards have become overly restrictive, which could be exacerbating the credit crunch and helping push down home prices further.

Locked Out of a Home Loan

Some self-employed professionals are not benefiting from federal moves to loosen the mortgage market.
The volume of jumbo loans -- those that exceed limits for government backing -- fell by more than 70% for the first nine months of the year from a year earlier.

"Underwriting criteria have swung from foolish ease to tighter than any in modern times," says Lou Barnes, a mortgage banker in Boulder, Colo.
The changes are increasingly frustrating a group of borrowers whom banks once coveted: affluent self-employed professionals such as doctors, lawyers, accountants and small-business owners.

Hubert Noguera, a 38-year-old medical-device engineer who also owns a small business, is one of them. He can't get approved for a loan, even though he has a strong 800 credit score and is prepared to make a 40% down payment on a house near San Francisco in the $800,000-to-$900,000 range. Mr. Noguera says he has assets worth three times the $500,000 loan he's requesting and is in the process of selling his share of a recently inherited residence in Saratoga, Calif., worth $1.1 million.

Banks have turned down the loan because the amount he's requesting appears high relative to the portion of his income that he can fully document -- and they won't consider his other income, says his mortgage broker, Connie Madrid.

"My blood type is O positive. What else do they want?" Mr. Noguera recalls asking Ms. Madrid.

The chief problem for self-employed people is that they don't have W-2 forms from an employer to document their full wages. For proof of income, they must rely solely on their income-tax returns. But income for the self-employed is often understated for tax purposes, in part because they tend to take large business-related deductions. Self-employed borrowers who don't take any big deductions won't likely face the same difficulty getting a loan.

"When you're self-employed, the write-offs that you use help at tax time -- but that means when you apply for a loan, your income won't reflect your cash flow," says Richard Redmond, a mortgage broker in Larkspur, Calif. Lenders are also cautious because nonsalaried workers can see greater volatility in their annual income.

In the past, most self-employed people took out "stated-income loans," which don't require borrowers to fully document their income. Such borrowers typically made substantial down payments, had strong credit profiles and paid a slight premium -- around 0.25 percentage point -- on their interest rates. Defaults were low.

That changed as the loans grew in popularity during the housing boom and expanded beyond their traditional market of affluent professionals. Stated-income loans eventually became disparaged as "liar's loans" because borrowers' incomes were frequently exaggerated.
Many banks have eliminated stated-income loans entirely, and Freddie Mac -- which, with Fannie Mae, is one of two government-held buyers of mortgages -- will end its stated-income lending program designed for self-employed borrowers next month.

"If the market stays as it is, we've frozen thousands and thousands of good borrowers out of the mortgage market," says Peter Ogilvie, past president of the California Association of Mortgage Brokers. "People who've demonstrated they can pay their bills cannot get a mortgage -- and that's people who have homes."

Mr. Noguera's loan hasn't been approved because he receives part of his income from a human-resources consulting business that he also inherited last year, but lenders won't count income from the firm because he doesn't have two years of reported earnings.
"Six months ago, I know I could have done this no problem," says Ms. Madrid, his broker. She says that even the loan officer at Wells Fargo & Co., for example, was surprised that the loan couldn't be approved. A Wells Fargo spokesman wouldn't comment on the particular case, but said in a statement: "Like everyone else in financial services, Wells Fargo has adjusted underwriting standards to effectively manage risk in this difficult credit environment."
This part of the market is tightening despite the government's attempts to jump-start mortgage activity. Earlier this year, it approved larger loan limits for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration. Last week, the government announced it would buy $600 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities and debt from Fannie and Freddie, which helped push down mortgage rates on government-backed loans by a third of a percentage point.
Self-employed borrowers aren't the only ones finding themselves shut out despite having good credit and savings. Lenders have also sharply tightened requirements for so-called jumbo loans, which are too big to qualify for government backing. That's because banks are relying heavily on loans guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie and the FHA, which have loan limits that vary by market from $417,000 to $729,000. Government-backed lending now accounts for 87% of loan volume, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade publication.

At J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., for example, more than 95% of mortgage originations are now sold to a government agency. In certain distressed markets, such as South Florida, J.P. Morgan Chase won't go above a 60% loan-to-value on jumbo mortgages. Overall, jumbo-loan originations declined 71% to $87 billion in the first nine months of 2008 from $303 billion during the same period last year, according to Inside Mortgage Finance.

Those who can get a jumbo loan are finding them very expensive. Rates on jumbo loans averaged 7.49% last week, nearly 1.6 percentage points above the rates on loans eligible for government backing, according to HSH Associates, financial publishers in Pompton Plains, N.J. The gap widened from 1.3 percentage points two weeks ago. In July 2007, the gap between the two was as little as 0.25 percentage point.

Mike Castrichini, a chiropractor in Scottsdale, Ariz., has been caught between the tightened jumbo market and the disappearance of stated-income loans, which he says he's used for more than a decade without any problem. He's been unable to find a lender willing to refinance the $900,000 adjustable-rate mortgage on his primary residence, which he says is worth around $1.1 million now, down from $1.8 million a few years ago. "Nobody will touch the loan," says Steve Walsh, his mortgage broker.

The 42-year-old Mr. Castrichini, who has a solid 787 credit score, owns his two offices and a small strip mall in Illinois. Even if he's approved for the loan, he laments the fact that he is facing a much higher interest rate. "I'm going to have to cut back," he says, expressing concern that he'll be unable to keep his children in private school.
Banks, meanwhile, are tightening their requirements beyond those of Fannie and Freddie. J.P. Morgan Chase, for instance, has set tighter standards than the agencies for loans that exceed 80% of the home's value and has stopped making loans for second homes and condos in Florida, according to a recent investor presentation.

"No one wants to be stuck with a loan," says Mr. Walsh, the Arizona broker. He says underwriters he works with have been told they'll be fired if a loan they originate can't be sold to Fannie, Freddie or the FHA.

Lenders have tighter standards than government agencies because they "usually have a more granular understanding of where credit losses are coming from," says Sanjiv Das, chief executive of Citigroup Inc.'s CitiMortgage unit. Lenders say they are also concerned that Fannie and Freddie will force them to repurchase delinquent loans.
Brokers say there's little borrowers can do to improve their chances of getting a loan right now, but that they can prepare themselves once guidelines ease. The most important steps include maintaining a stellar credit rating and being able to show liquid assets. Borrowers who can't get a jumbo loan will have a better chance at getting a so-called conforming loan -- one not exceeding $417,000, with a higher ceiling in some markets.

Mr. Redmond, the California broker, says he sees enough rejected borrowers with strong credit that he is setting up a $15 million private lending fund targeting those good credit risks. He warns that the inability of creditworthy borrowers to refinance mortgages, particularly those that have rising rates, could spur forced sales and further depress home values.
"Fannie and Freddie can sit on the stoop with buckets of cheap money, but if they have raised the bar too high for the borrowers to get at it, it doesn't matter," he says.

Sunday, December 7, 2008

30 Year Fixed Mortgage Rates Headed for 4.5%




By DEBORAH SOLOMON and DAMIAN PALETTA

WASHINGTON -- The Treasury Department is considering a plan to revitalize the U.S. home market that would push down interest rates for loans to purchase a home, according to people familiar with the matter.

The plan, which is in the development stage, would temporarily use the clout of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to encourage banks to lend at rates as low as 4.5%, more than a full point lower than prevailing rates for standard 30-year fixed-rate mortgages.

Government officials are under pressure to address falling home prices and mounting foreclosures, which underpin the financial crisis. The Treasury has struggled for months to come up with a plan that would ease the strains on borrowers without appearing to bail out homeowners and lenders.

The plan remains in discussion and may not be made final before the Bush administration's term ends in January. President-elect Barack Obama has said repeatedly that his administration would do more than the current one to help struggling homeowners but he has not offered specifics.

Treasury views this plan as potentially halting the slide in home prices by enabling borrowers to afford bigger loans, thus increasing demand and pushing up home values. The lower interest rates would be available only to borrowers who are buying a home, not those refinancing a mortgage.

Borrowers would have to qualify for a mortgage guaranteed by Fannie, Freddie or the Federal Housing Administration. Those guarantees apply to loans where borrowers can document their income and afford their monthly payments, steering the government away from backing loans considered risky.
The Treasury and the Federal Reserve are already working to bring mortgage rates down through a program announced last week in which the Fed will buy up to $600 billion of debt issued or backed by Fannie and Freddie, along with Ginnie Mae and the Federal Home Loan Banks. That move helped push down rates on 30-year mortgages, and applications to refinance have jumped, the Mortgage Bankers Association said Wednesday.

Benefit To Stocks

In this climate, stocks of banks and home builders drew more investor attention Wednesday, helping the Dow Jones Industrial Average rise 172.60 points, or 2.05%, to 8591.69, despite continued bleak economic news in the Fed's "beige book" survey of regional conditions.
The plan the Treasury is considering would encourage banks to issue new mortgages at lower rates by offering to purchase securities underpinning the loans at a price equivalent to the 4.5% rate.
The Treasury would fund the purchases by issuing Treasury debt at 3%, suggesting the government could make a profit on the difference.
The average rate on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages conforming to Fannie's and Freddie's standards was about 5.75% Wednesday, according to HSH Associates, a financial publisher. That's up from about 5.5% Monday but down from more than 6% before last week's announcement.
The plan is very similar to an idea floated in October by R. Glenn Hubbard and Christopher Mayer, academics at Columbia University's Business School. "I think a program to substantially bring down rates for homebuyers would be an incredibly valuable program, and I think it captures a real part of solving what has been an incredibly challenging dislocation in the credit markets," Mr. Mayer said in an interview. He estimated the idea under consideration could quickly help 1.5 million to 2.5 million people buy homes, giving a major boost to the housing market and broader economy.
The plan also could be good news for banks hit hard by the housing slowdown. In addition to having the government play the role of guaranteed buyer, financial institutions could pocket fees for making loans to buyers able to afford homes at the lower rates. That, in turn, could boost the economy and improve the weak outlook for other consumer loans, such as credit cards, that also are weighing heavily on the banking industry's profitability.
Normally, the rates lenders charge consumers, including home buyers, are determined by the secondary market, in which investors buy mortgages or mortgage-backed securities. But Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson views lowering mortgage rates as key to fixing the housing crisis; hence the mortgage-security-buying program announced last week.

"The most important thing we can do to mitigate foreclosures and progress through the housing correction," Mr. Paulson said in a speech Monday, "is to reduce the cost of mortgage finance, so more families can afford to buy a home and so homeowners can refinance into more affordable mortgages."

Fannie, Freddie, their regulator and the Department of Housing and Urban Development -- which oversees the FHA -- all declined to comment. "The Secretary has said repeatedly that we are looking at a number of options to help homeowners," said Treasury Spokeswoman Jennifer Zuccarelli.

The Refinancing Picture

On the refinancing front, the Mortgage Bankers Association said its index of refinance applications had tripled from the previous week, the largest increase since it began tracking such data in 1990. Applications to buy homes, which tend to be less sensitive to interest-rate movements, also increased, by a smaller amount.

Application volume remains lower than it was as recently as March. Last week's numbers are adjusted for a shortened holiday week, which can make comparisons more difficult.

The Treasury plan is similar to ideas previously floated by the National Association of Realtors and the lobby group for home builders, but has skeptics. "I don't think it's the answer to the foreclosure problem because that problem is a combination of negative equity with unemployment," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com.
Mr. Paulson has been wrestling for months with ways to stem foreclosures. The Bush administration has supported mostly voluntary efforts to get the mortgage industry to help borrowers in danger of losing their homes and has resisted calls to use taxpayer money to bail out homeowners. Those voluntary efforts have had only a limited impact as home prices continue to fall and foreclosures to rise.

The administration has been split about its approach, with Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair floating a proposal to use $24 billion from the government's $700 billion financial rescue fund to provide a federal guarantee on roughly two million modified mortgages.

Her plan was a hit with Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill but fell flat with the White House, where some speculated the FDIC plan could cost $70 billion to $80 billion. Mr. Paulson has expressed reservations about the plan on the ground that it would spend taxpayer money, instead of investing it, and that it could encourage banks to foreclose and borrowers to halt payments. Treasury staff have been working on a plan to improve Ms. Bair's model, but Mr. Paulson has so far resisted implementing it over concerns that it costs too much and might not be all that effective.

Resolving the crisis is likely to fall to Mr. Obama. He reiterated his position on Wednesday, saying, "We've got to start helping homeowners in a serious way, prevent foreclosures." Some Treasury officials are frustrated that the Obama team has not provided more specifics about what it would like the Treasury to do to help homeowners.

—Robin Sidel, Ruth Simon and James R. Hagerty contributed to this article.