Friday, February 29, 2008

Housing stimulus: It ain't over 'til it's over - Feb. 29, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Senate Republicans this week thwarted efforts by their Democratic counterparts to vote on a housing stimulus bill that President Bush said would "bail out lenders and speculators."

But that doesn't mean Congress is done trying.

Democrats are likely to push ahead on legislation they argue would soften the problems caused by the growing number of foreclosures. The most controversial part of the bill would let bankruptcy judges reduce the amount of principal and interest due on some residential mortgages. Under current law, only mortgages for investment properties, vacation homes and farms may be written down for those in bankruptcy.

The lending industry has been lobbying heavily against the provision, arguing that letting judges rewrite the terms of mortgages would cause lenders to impose a bankruptcy risk premium, raising rates on all mortgage borrowers.

Some studies, however, contend the increase in rates would be minimal.

Proponents of the legislation - in particular, Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., who are from the states hardest hit by foreclosures - have vowed to keep fighting for the bill.

In a press conference on Friday, Brown said such a stimulus bill is needed given the speed at which Americans are losing their homes to foreclosures - 200 families a day in Ohio alone, according to Brown. And, he added, spending a few billion dollars to preserve Americans' homes pales in comparison to the estimated $3 billion a week spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "What [the administration has] done is pitifully small relative to what we need to do," Brown said.

Added Stabenow, "We're going to keep pushing on this issue."

Senate Democrats may get help from the House, particularly on the proposal to change the way residential mortgages are treated in bankruptcy.

In the upcoming election, "Democrats will argue that Republicans sunk a housing stimulus bill that could have kept troubled borrowers in their homes without costing taxpayers a dime," wrote Jaret Seiberg, the financial services analyst for the policy research firm Stanford Group.

The House is working on its own housing stimulus bill. "Adding mortgage bankruptcy to the package may make political sense and we would not be surprised to see House leaders do it," said Seiberg.

White House to bend?

If housing conditions worsen, some say the administration may get on board with some of Democrats' proposals that include more government action.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has said publicly that he wouldn't back any taxpayer-funded bailout plan. But the newspaper American Banker reported Friday that the Treasury and the Federal Reserve have been meeting with congressional aides and financial services groups to consider plans that might involve more government involvement.

"If current trends hold, yes, I think there will be some kind of intervention. ... It's fair to say Treasury officials wouldn't be spending the time to meet with different groups if they didn't feel something broader needed to happen," Jim Carr, the chief operating officer of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, told American Banker.

What that something would be is unclear. Several plans are being proposed or considered. Some would create a government fund intended to ease the credit crunch by reviving the beleaguered mortgage-backed securities market. Some would fund state and local governments so they can buy up vacant foreclosed properties and either renovate or rebuild them for sale or rent. And others would have the government insure subprime mortgages for at-risk borrowers.

Beyond the bankruptcy measure, the Senate housing stimulus bill also includes some ideas that Bush has said he supports.

One such measure would boost the ceiling on how much in federally tax-exempt bonds state and local housing agencies may issue to help subsidize the cost of mortgages for consumers. It would also allow those agencies to use the bond proceeds to subsidize the cost of refinancing subprime loans. Currently, they are only allowed to subsidize the cost of loans for first-time home buyers and people buying properties in distressed areas. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Thursday, February 28, 2008

Smart window shopping - Feb. 29, 2008

(Money Magazine) -- To hear window salesmen tell it, replacing old single-pane windows with modern double-pane ones will cut your heating and cooling bills in half. Don't believe the hype.

True, today's best windows are twice as energy-efficient as those installed just a decade ago, but because windows make up only a fraction of your home's exterior, your actual energy savings will be no more than 25%, and maybe just 5% or 10%. Considering that replacements run $300 to $1,200 a window, we'll all be using hydrogen power before your new windows pay for themselves.

Still, there are other reasons to replace windows: New ones open and close easily. They tilt in so you can clean from indoors without climbing a ladder. They don't rattle when trucks drive past or ever need exterior painting. And they can even increase your property value if you do the job right.

Preserve your home's character

You can't count on recouping the full cost of new windows when you sell - a 2007 National Association of Realtors study found that sellers got back about 80% of the expense.

But choose the wrong ones and you can shatter your house's salability. "Like mantelpieces and built-in cabinets, original wood windows are important architectural features," says Atlanta realtor Bill Golden. "Replace them with a downscale product and you downscale the house."

Avoiding this trap is simple: Buy windows that mimic the ones you're tearing out. Although vinyl windows ($300 to $800 installed) are the least expensive option, they have a plain-Jane look that's fine on a simple tract house but not on a classic prewar. Wood replacements ($400 to $1,000) need periodic painting.

So you're best off with a clad window ($500 to $1,200), which is made from wood with a pre-colored, no-paint-needed aluminum coating outside and a wood finish on the inside, giving you classic beauty that's also low maintenance.

The same goes for window style: If your old ones have "divided lights" - that is, multiple pieces of glass separated by dividers - your house will look best if the new windows display the same pattern.

Trouble is, true divided lights are available only on custom windows ($2,000 and up); the standard solution of snap-in grilles (a $25- to $50-a-window add-on) looks the part only from the inside.

For a well-dressed house, get simulated divided lights (a $200-a-window add-on), which have permanent grilles on the inside, outside and between the panes - and can pass for the real thing.

Think green

While it's not worth buying new windows solely for the energy savings, you should go for efficient ones if you're replacing them anyway.

In most of the country, says Dariush Arasteh, a staff scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, you should spend an extra $10 to $20 each for windows that have argon gas between the panes and a low-e (low-emissivity) coating, an invisible film that blocks heat from going through the glass.

That can knock 8% to 15% off your heating and cooling bills, according to Nils Petermann, a senior associate at the Efficient Windows Collaborative in Washington, D.C. To see what's best for your climate, visit efficientwindows.org.

For installation, consider the trade-offs

A true window replacement involves removing the interior and exterior trim, attaching a new window to the house's framing, insulating and sealing the gaps and then reinstalling the trim.

That's a labor-intensive job that most installers skip by simply removing the sash (the framed glass sections) and popping in a window insert. This will save you $150 to $300 a window in labor. But because it's those uninsulated spaces around the old windows where much of the air escapes, inserts may not eliminate drafts - or yield any energy savings.

Also, the glass will likely be about an inch smaller - in height and width - and inserts can look decidedly like a retrofit, says Harleysville, Pa. contractor Dennis Gehman.

To decide what's right for you, get a wide range of bids. A good contractor will happily explain how he'll do the job, what the result will look like and how much it will cost. For inserts, major window manufacturers and home centers offer installation, or you can do it yourself and save another $100-plus per window. (The trickiest part is the measurements.) For a full-scale replacement, you'll need a general contractor.

Also, get two warranties: one from the manufacturer and another from the contractor. Some warranties are transferable to the next owner, providing you with one more selling point - in addition to your sparkling clean, easy-to-open, energy-efficient windows.

Worried about your investments? Get a makeover from Money Magazine. E-mail us at makeover@moneymail.com.  See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Mortgage rates jump in lackluster market - Freddie Mac - Feb. 28, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Following a January surge in refinancing activities, mortgage rates rose this week in the lackluster housing market, but are likely to decline, Freddie Mac reported Thursday.

"Refinancing activities, which had surged to a 12-month high in January, according to Freddie Mac's monthly refi-share report, are likely to ebb following this recent rise in rates," said Frank Nothaft, Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500) vice president and chief economist in a statement Thursday.

Nothaft noted that long-term fixed mortgage rates trended up for a third week, bringing 30-year and 15-year fixed-rate mortgages back to last November's levels.

The government-sponsored loan buyer said 30-year fixed-rate loans averaged 6.24% for the week ending Thursday, up from 6.04% last week.

Last year at this time, the 30-year rate averaged 6.18%, Freddie Mac said.

Freddie Mac also said 15-year fixed-rate loans averaged 5.72%, up from 5.64% last week. A year ago, the 15-year rate averaged 5.92%.

Rates on five-year adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) averaged 5.43%, up from 5.37% last week. A year ago, the 5-year rate averaged 5.93%.

One-year Treasury-indexed ARMs averaged 5.11%, up from 4.98% last week. At this time a year ago, the 1-year ARM averaged 5.49%. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Thornburg Mortgage to pay $300M in margin calls - Feb. 28, 2008

NEW YORK (AP) -- Thornburg Mortgage Inc., a mortgage lender, said Thursday it has been the subject of margin calls on a portfolio of securities backed by alt-A mortgages.

Alt-A mortgages are loans given to customers with minor credit problems or who cannot document their income or assets to get a traditional, prime mortgage. Margin calls force borrowers to repay loans or put up more collateral to secure them.

Shares of Thornburg (TMA) fell $3.09, or 26.8%, to $8.45 in premarket trading Thursday. Shares have traded between $7.49 and $28.40 during the past year.

Thornburg said in a regulatory filing it is facing margin calls because the value of the alt-A mortgage-backed securities has plummeted between 10% and 15% since the end of January. The margin calls come amid "a sudden adverse change in mortgage market conditions in general" that began on Feb. 14, Thornburg said in the filing.

As of Feb. 15, Thornburg said it has $2.9 billion of exposure to the troubled loans.

Thornburg said in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission its securities face a very low threat of future downgrades, which would reduce their value further, and even less risk of actual losses tied to the securities.


So far, Thornburg has met margin calls totaling more than $300 million, which has reduced its available liquidity to meet future margin calls. If available cash cannot cover future margin calls, the lender said it may have to begin selling assets to raise cash.

In August, Thornburg was forced to sell some of its assets at a steep discount to shore up its capital reserves during a similar period where the value of securities the company held dropped precipitously. The company was able to manage through that period, while dozens of other mortgage lenders shut down.

Since the middle of 2007, investors have been worried about rising delinquencies and defaults among mortgages. That worry has all but dried up the market for securities and other debt backed by mortgages, leading to a decline in value among the debt.

Over the past month, the broader credit markets have continued to tighten, in some cases leaving bondholders unable to sell hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars in debt at any given time. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Moody's mulling over downgrade for Fannie Mae - Feb. 28, 2008

NEW YORK (AP) -- Credit rating agency Moody's Investors Service on Thursday said it put Fannie Mae's "B+" bank financial strength rating on review for possible downgrade.

Fannie (FNM), the largest buyer and backer of U.S. home loans, said Wednesday it lost nearly $3.6 billion in the fourth quarter of 2007, and $2.1 billion for the year, amid mounting home-loan delinquencies and soured bets on interest rates.

"This loss exceeded our expectations and represents a significant deterioration of surplus regulatory capital," Moody's said in a statement. Moody's said it expects Fannie to have sizable losses in the first half of 2008 and possibly a net loss for the year due to the continued deterioration in the residential mortgage sector.

Moody's affirmed Fannie's "Aaa" senior debt, "Prime-1" short-term debt, "Aa2" subordinated debt and "Aa3" preferred stock ratings with "Stable" outlooks.

Mortgage volume has fallen rapidly as banks tighten lending standards in response to rising delinquencies and defaults.

Fannie Mae could get relief from its dwindling capital surplus requirements if its federal regulator decreases the requirement, something it said it would discuss with Fannie Mae.

Moody's financial strength rating measures a financial institution's likelihood of requiring financial assistance from third parties to continue operating normally. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Home over-improvement - Feb. 27, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The granite countertop's glory days might be over.

During the housing boom, updating a kitchen with high end materials like cherry wood cabinets and a Viking stove was a sure bet to boost a home's value. Homeowners often recovered about 80% of the cost when the house was later sold.

But with so much more inventory on the market for buyers to choose from, they just aren't as impressed with the bells and whistles. Now most upscale renovations are returning less than 70% of their cost, according to a recent survey from the National Association of Realtors (NAR).

"Pay-back for high-end projects has declined over the past few years," said Kermit Baker, chief economist for the American Institute of Architects (AIA). "People planning to sell shouldn't over-improve," he said. "They won't get the money out if they sell in the next two or three years."

NAR's survey revealed that returns on investment for a wide range of high-end interior redecorations dropped in 2007. An upscale bathroom renovation cost an average of $50,590, nationally, but only added $34,588 to house value - a 68.4% return. In 2006, a high-end bath renovation returned 77.4% of its cost.

Adding a brand new bath didn't pay off as well either, earning just a 69% return in 2007, compared with 72.8% in 2006. High-end kitchen remodels held up better, adding value equal to 74.1% of the cost, compared with 75.9% in 2006.


Many owners simply went too far amidst the mania, over-improving their homes beyond what the local market would bear, according to Darius Baker, a veteran Sacramento, Calif., contractor.

In the past his clients were more likely to opt for expensive redos even if they were planning to move, since they knew they'd recoup most of their costs.

"I definitely saw a lot of tract houses built in the 1970s, in developments with three basic floors plans, get expensive renovations," he said. "We did a lot of radical projects, moving walls around, installing granite counters instead of Formica and cherry wood cabinets instead of oak."

The numbers made sense. In 2005, a fancy kitchen renovation on the West Coast returned an average of 93% of its cost. Even if the owner got only a year or two use of it, the close-to-break-even return made it worthwhile. By 2007, the return had declined precipitously to 74%.

Today, people who are moving out soon, Darius Baker said, "are not looking to make the place a Taj Mahal." They're just doing enough to make the house presentable.

In the current environment, owners are cutting back on upscale renovations, according to Fred Ugast, chief operating officer of HomeTech, which supplies cost statistics for NAR's annual Cost vs. Value index report.

"We're seeing a lot of pull-back in the high end," he said.

A separate report from the AIA also found demand for luxury features waning in 2007 according to the AIA. The popularity of high-end appliances declined from 65% to 47%. Demand for larger pantry spaces went down from 64% to 51% and wine refrigerators fell from 53% to 49%.

Still, people are willing to spend on their own comfort. Most of the high-end jobs that Darius Baker is getting are for clients staying put for a long time.

"They're saying, ''I'm not concerned about the price because I'm not leaving until they carry me out,'" he said.

And returns for high-end exterior renovations are still holding up, according to the NAR report, with better pay-offs than interior work.

For example, sprucing up a home's look with expensive fiber-cement siding, which looks like wood but is more durable, returns 88% on investment, more than any other renovation NAR evaluated.

"It could indicate that curb appeal is even more important than in the past," said NAR spokesman, Walter Molony. "It might get the home more serious looks from buyers."

Mick De Giulio, of Chicago-based De Giulio Kitchen Design, also senses a downshift in the market. "The high-end is still strong, but there's something in the air," he said. "I just finished jobs for two very high-end clients. We put kitchens in their new homes, but they can't sell their old ones." See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Mortgage application volume declines while rates rise - Feb. 27, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Mortgage application volume tumbled 19.2% during the week ended Feb. 22, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association's weekly application survey.

The MBA's application index fell to 665.1 from 822.8 the previous week. It was the third straight week application volume fell. During that time, volume has dropped 39% as interest rates have risen steadily.

Application volume fell as refinance volume plummeted 30.4% during the week. Purchase volume increased 0.2%.

Refinance volume accounted for 52% of total mortgage applications. Refinance applications accounted for 73% of all application activity about a month ago.

The index peaked at 1,856.7 during the week ended May 30, 2003, at the height of the housing boom.

An index value of 100 is equal to the application volume on March 16, 1990, the first week the MBA tracked application volume. A reading of 665.1 means mortgage application activity is 6.651 times higher than it was when the MBA began tracking the data.

The survey provides a snapshot of mortgage lending activity among mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts. It covers about 50% of all residential retail mortgage originations each week.

Application volume declined as interest rates continued to rise. The average rate for traditional, 30-year fixed-rate mortgages increased to 6.27% from 6.09%. In 2008, the average rate was as low as 5.49% during the week ended Jan. 18.

The average rate for 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, often used for refinancing a home, increased to 5.77% from 5.55%.

The rate on one-year adjustable-rate mortgages increased to 5.84% from 5.72%. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Insure your home against disaster - Feb. 27, 2008

(Money Magazine) -- If last fall's devastating California wildfires weren't enough of a wake-up call, consider this: Nearly 60% of homes nationwide don't carry enough insurance coverage to be fully rebuilt. On average those homes are underinsured by 21%. To give yourself a chance of being made whole, follow these steps before and after disaster strikes.

Beef up your policy

Remember you're insuring for future rebuilding costs. That means avoiding an actual-cash-value policy, which reduces your payout by how much your possessions have depreciated.

A guaranteed replacement-cost policy, which reimburses you for the full cost of rebuilding, is the gold standard but is almost impossible to find. Go for an extended replacement-cost policy, which pays you a set amount (the "dwelling limit"), plus a 20% to 25% margin. Add a building-code endorsement to cover the cost of complying with future rule changes.

Setting your dwelling limit high from the outset and reviewing it every few years is crucial. A good agent should be able to help, or for $8 you can create a custom estimate at accucoverage.com.

As a rough guide, keep in mind that the average cost to rebuild is $250 a square foot.

Document what you own

In order to be reimbursed, you need records: pictures and videos of your stuff, receipts, model numbers and so on.

"Agent after agent tells me that if there is any dispute, the documentation makes the decision," says Robert Rusbuldt, chief executive of the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America.

At the California Department of Insurance's website (insurance.ca.gov), you can download a 36-page guide that walks you through every room in the house (under Consumers, click on Information Guides and then on Residential Series). Keep these records outside your home.

Manage your claim with care

After a disaster, call your agent immediately - but don't agree to a settlement too quickly. You'll get an initial check (or prepaid credit card) to cover hotel rooms, clothing and dining out; a typical up-front payment is $5,000. Then prepare to negotiate hard, especially if the damage is severe.

"The insurance industry has gotten a lot tougher," says Amy Bach, executive director of UnitedPolicyholders.org. "It's more adversarial."

Your agent will have an adjuster come up with a damage estimate (the "scope of loss"), but if you anticipate a dispute, do your own research too, says industry consultant Andrew J. Barile.

Ideally, have the contractor you plan to work with create an estimate that details construction expenses room by room, including the cost of all materials and labor.

If you feel the insurer's offer is a lowball one, don't sign anything, and appeal to a supervisor. It may also help to complain to your state insurance regulator. If you hit a wall, Bach suggests hiring a public adjuster who will chase the claim on your behalf for a 7% to 10% cut. You can search for one at the National Association of Public Insurance Adjusters' site, Napia.com.

Alternatively, you can work with an independent cost estimator, who will prepare a competing scope-of-loss report. That will cost you several thousand dollars, but it's worth the price if you can sweeten your settlement by far more - and rebuild your home sweet home.

Worried about your investments? Get a makeover from Money Magazine. E-mail us at makeover@moneymail.com.  See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

House discusses $15B plan to bail out borrowers - Feb. 26, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Investors could sell up to $15 billion of troubled mortgages to the government under a plan key House members are discussing to bolster the U.S. housing market.

The tentative plan would allow the government to purchase up to 1 million mortgages over five years in an effort to help struggling borrowers avoid foreclosure, and financial markets avoid more credit-related losses. The loans would be bought by the Federal housing Administration, a Depression-era agency that insures loans made to borrowers with poor credit.

The effort shows that the housing crisis has evolved to the point where government officials are considering bailing out large groups of borrowers and Wall Street investors - something that seemed anathema to Democrats and Republicans all last year. Still, many lawmakers and the Bush administration have been leery of proposals that would transfer risks to U.S. taxpayers.

The plan was outlined Tuesday in a House Financial Services Committee document listing priorities for the year. It is similar to one unveiled last month by Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, who proposed creating a new federal corporation to purchase distressed loans and help struggling homeowners refinance.

Proponents of the new House plan say it should be palatable to critics of any perceived bailout because both investors and borrowers would take a loss. Banks and investors who hold those mortgages - often in complex mortgage securities - would be required to write-down their value, while homeowners would have their loans refinanced into more affordable ones.


"If the economy continues to be a problem, you'll probably have more people jumping onto this," said Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., a member of the financial services panel. Garrett is skeptical of the idea, saying it would reward investors and borrowers who made bad decisions and merely provide incentive for others to do so in the future.

The plan comes as the banking industry has advanced several proposals on Capitol Hill that would allow the government to take on the risk of some bad loans, potentially limiting the scope of losses for Wall Street.

In recent weeks, banks including Credit Suisse Group (CS) circulated their own proposals on Capitol Hill. A Credit Suisse spokeswoman confirmed that a document outlining a plan to expand the Federal Housing Administration's ability to refinance bad loans came from the company but declined to comment further.

The plan would likely benefit the banking industry, though industry officials insist they're not seeking a bailout. Francis Creighton, vice president for government affairs at the Mortgage Bankers Association, said the idea is "exactly the kind of approach that we think [Congress] should be following," as long as the plan is voluntary for lenders.

"We would have to take a big discount if we decided to do this," he said.

Steve Adamske, a spokesman for Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said banks have "made their pitches, but that's not what's motivating us...We think there's an opportunity here to help homeowners stay in their homes."


There is precedent for such in effort: In the 1930s, the government created the Home Owners' Loan Corp. to help borrowers avoid foreclosure. The corporation made more than 1 million loans to refinance troubled mortgages, and in 1937 owned 14% of all outstanding U.S. mortgages, according to testimony last month by Alex Pollock a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

In addition, the document said lawmakers are working on a separate $20 billion in grants and loans to state and local governments to help to buy up foreclosed and abandoned homes. This would be designed to help stabilize neighborhoods wracked by foreclosures. Lawmakers are also proposing to spend $200 million more per year in grants for housing counseling.

Other proposals also are being floated. The federal Office of Thrift Supervision, a division of the Treasury Department, is working on a plan to help borrowers who owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.

It would allow an estimated 8 million homeowners with "upside-down" mortgages to refinance into government-backed loans covering the home's current value. Lenders would receive a certificate equivalent to the remainder of the balance owed that could be redeemed if the home were eventually sold at a higher price. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Democratic housing bill will be vetoed by the White House - Feb. 26, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The White House promised on Tuesday to veto a bill seeking to follow up the recent economic stimulus package with several proposals to shore up the struggling housing market and reduce foreclosures.

Senate Democrats had hoped to begin debate on the housing bill on Tuesday but action has been put off until later in the week, if not later, as Republicans kept the subject on Iraq.

The Democratic housing bill would change bankruptcy laws to allow judges to cut interest rates and reduce what's owed on troubled borrowers' mortgages, provide $4 billion to communities to purchase and rehabilitate foreclosed homes, and improve disclosure of subprime mortgage loans in hopes that borrowers won't be surprised by big payment increases.

But the White House said the $4 billion for purchases of foreclosed homes is too expensive and "would constitute a bailout for lenders and speculators, while doing little to help struggling homeowners."

The provision rewriting the bankruptcy code, the White House said, would allow borrowers to effectively rewrite their mortgage contracts, leading lenders to tighten their standards and raise interest rates.

The White House said both provisions would in fact slow the recovery of the housing sector.

The Democratic measure also contains provisions stripped from the Senate's version of the stimulus bill to boost mortgage revenue bonds and add flexibility to help homeowners refinance subprime loans and to allow homebuilders and other money-losing businesses to reclaim taxes previously paid.

The bankruptcy measure, a similar version of which has cleared a House committee, is fiercely opposed by lenders and many Republicans.

The Mortgage Bankers Association, which is lobbying against the measure, says it would hurt borrowers by requiring "higher interest rates and larger down payments to offset the risk" of bankruptcy court intervention on behalf of some homeowners.

In response to the criticism, Democrats announced they would tighten the bankruptcy provision so that it would only apply to subprime borrowers who can prove that they can't afford the current mortgage and permit bankruptcy judges to reduce interest rates to the prime interest rate plus a premium for lender risk. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Monday, February 25, 2008

Home-price fall accelerating - Feb. 26, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The decline in residential real estate accelerated though the end of 2007, and home prices in 20 key markets plunged 8.9% for the year, according to a survey released Tuesday.

The S&P Case/Shiller Home Price index showed its largest annual drop in its 20-year history. By comparison, during the 1990-91 recession, home prices fell 2.8%.

Prices dropped faster throughout 2007 with the index recording a 9.1% year-over-year drop in December.

"We reached a somber year-end for the housing market in 2007," said Robert Shiller, Chief Economist at MacroMarkets LLC and co-founder of the index, in a statement. "Home prices across the nation and in most metro areas are significantly lower than where they were a year ago."

All metro areas are now reporting at least four consecutive monthly declines.

Case/Shiller's 10-city index fell even more sharply and finished down 9.8%.

The Case/Shiller indexes compare same-home sale prices. The industry considers them to be among the most accurate snapshots of housing prices.

Of the 20 metro areas examined, all but three posted declines for the year. Miami homes lost 17.5% in value - more than any other metro area - and Las Vegas and Phoenix both had 15.3% declines.

The three that posted modest gains: Charlotte, N.C., 2.3%; Portland, Ore., 1.2%; and Seattle, at 0.5%.

Los Angeles, the nation's second biggest housing market, was the worst performer in December, when prices fell 3.6% compared with November; the decline for the year was 13.7%.

Other double-digit losers for the year were San Francisco, down 10.8%; Tampa, 13.3%; Detroit, 13.6%; and San Diego, 15.0%. Losses in the nation's biggest market, New York, were more modest, down just 5.6% for the year. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

January foreclosures up 57% - Feb. 26, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- If there's one thing to count on these days, it's that every month the foreclosure crisis will get worse.

January was no exception. Filings of all types, including default notices, auction notices and bank repossessions, soared by 57% compared with last year, according to RealtyTrac, an online marketer of foreclosure properties.

A total of 233,001 homes were affected, 8% more than in December. Of that total, 45,327 homes were lost to bank repossessions during the month. The only good news was the comparatively modest month-to-month increase in total filings.

"It could be that some of the efforts on the part of lenders and the government - both at the state and federal level - are beginning to take effect," said James Saccacio, RealtyTrac's CEO.

"The big question is whether those efforts are truly helping homeowners avoid foreclosure in the long term, or if they are just forestalling the inevitable for many beleaguered borrowers," he said.

Many mortgage-assistance efforts simply give borrowers a chance to pay off missed payments, rather than lowering monthly payments, which effectively just delays foreclosures. But now lenders claim they are restructuring more mortgages by lowering or freezing interest rates and reducing balances. These solutions are much more likely to help people save their homes.

Nevada, California and Florida had the highest foreclosure rates in the nation. During the housing boom, all three states recorded big price run-ups, and saw a large proportion of homes sold to investors. In Nevada, one of every 167 homes was in some foreclosure stage last month.

California had the largest total number of foreclosures among the states. There were more than 57,000 foreclosure filings there in January, one for every 227 homes. Florida trailed well back in total foreclosures with 30,000, but its rate of one for every 273 households was only slightly behind its West Coast rival.

Several states recorded massive jumps in foreclosure activity in the last twelve months. In Rhode Island filings rose 279%; in Maryland they spiked 430%; and in Virginia they leapt 634%.


All three of those states had fairly modest rates to begin with. In Virginia, for example, even with that whopping increase, the rate, overall, was one in every 617 homes, about a quarter the rate in Nevada.

Eighteen states substantially improved since last January. In Pennsylvania, foreclosure filings fell 55% to just 1,683, one for every 3,226 households. West Virginia recorded a drop of 54% to a miniscule 53, one for every 16,667 households. And Vermont's total dropped in half, from two to one.

Foreclosure and lending laws vary greatly from state to state, and that can have a huge impact on foreclosure rates. But most places have been recording ever-higher foreclosure numbers as home prices stagnated, and the effects of many of the non-traditional mortgages issued during the boom years took hold.

Subprime, hybrid adjustable rate mortgages, with interest rates that reset to much higher, often unaffordable levels after a two or three year period of low rates, caused many borrowers to default.

Even more exotic products, such as interest-only loans, where balances don't shrink, or, worse yet, option ARMs, where balances grow, also contributed to foreclosure problems.

Those products have just about disappeared from the marketplace today and that should, eventually, lead to healthier foreclosure statistics in the future. But, before that happens, real estate markets will have to improve and, according to many experts, that's not likely to happen much before the end of 2009.

Merrill Lynch, for example, is forecasting home prices will fall by 15% in 2008 and another 10% in 2009. That will likely continue to fuel high foreclosure rates.  See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Foreclosure prevention bill up for vote in Senate - Feb. 25, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Foreclosure gets Congress' attention Tuesday when the Senate decides whether to end debate on a bill aimed at helping homeowners avoid losing their homes.

The Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008's most important - and most controversial - provision would allow judges to reduce mortgage balances for at-risk borrowers to current market prices.

House prices have fallen sharply during the past year, taking many mortgage borrowers "underwater," meaning they owe more than their homes are worth.

Under the bill, a mortgage balance of, for example $200,000, could be reduced to what the home would sell for, say $160,000, on the open market. That would save the borrower hundreds of dollars a month in mortgage payments.

Senate Democrats will seek to force an immediate vote on the bill, according to Jaret Seiberg, senior vice president at the Stanford Group, a Washington policy research firm.

"They need 60 votes to prevail and, right now, they're short of that goal," Seiberg wrote in an e-mail. "That means they will need to compromise to pick up GOP support."

In the Senate, the opposition coalesces around three groups, according to John Williams, resident scholar at the American Bankruptcy Institute: Those opposed to giving bankruptcy judges any more discretion; those who favor individual rights and responsibilities; and those aligned with lenders.

"I don't see the roadblock in the Senate breaking up," he said.

Bankruptcy courts once had more control over the process, but the lending industry worked to make it more difficult for borrowers to discharge debts. Lenders don't want new laws that will make it easier for judges to act unilaterally.

Many opposition lawmakers cite responsibility issues; for them, anyone who signs a loan contract should abide by its terms.

But most opposition stems from the possibility that mortgage bankruptcy reform will make mortgage borrowing more expensive for everyone.

The Mortgage Bankers Association claims that if judges are allowed to reduce loan balances, cutting into lenders' profits, it would introduce extra risk for lenders, which they would pass on to borrowers.

The MBA said such a situation could increase interest rates by the equivalent of 1-1/2 percentage points, which would add a couple of hundred dollars a month to a $200,000, 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage.

Community and consumer advocates counter those numbers by pointing out that no substantial premium attaches to second-home mortgages, which judges are allowed to adjust.

Despite the opposition, the bill has some momentum because it could help several hundred thousand borrowers stay in their homes at no cost to the government, according to one of its sponsors, Sen. Richard Durbin, D- Ill., .

"That's very appealing politically as the election season heats up," said Seiberg. "It is the only comprehensive solution to keep people in their homes that does not require taxpayers to foot at least a large chunk of the bill."

Will it pass?

He pegged the odds of passage at 60%, but said Republicans may try to remove the bankruptcy reform provision.

In turn, "Democrats may still decide that it is politically more attractive to watch Republicans kill the bill than to pass a watered-down version," said Seiberg. Plus "There's a real question about whether the president (Bush) will accept a housing stimulus bill that includes mortgage bankruptcy reform."

One reason the mortgage industry opposes the bill is that, even without actually going into bankruptcy, borrowers could use it to threaten lenders reluctant to restructure mortgages.

"And, savvy borrowers may decide it is worth carrying the stigma of bankruptcy in order to cut their monthly mortgage payments," said Seiberg. "We would expect an advertising wave from consumer bankruptcy lawyers to educate and entice borrowers to look at whether they could use bankruptcy to reduce their monthly mortgage costs."

If Senate Democrats fail to achieve cloture Tuesday, it means the bill is still open to debate, and may be filibustered by Republicans. Nobody relishes that, and it may push Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to table the whole thing.

In fact, he may even cancel the cloture vote because of that, according to Williams.

The other provisions in the bill have drawn far less fire. These include:

  • Allocating $200 million in addition spending for foreclosure prevention counseling;
  • Allowing Housing Finance Agencies, state chartered organizations created to help home buyers find financing, to issue refinancing bonds for home owners with subprime loans;
  • Authorizing communities with high foreclosure rates to use community development funds to buy vacant, foreclosed properties, rehabilitate them and resell or rent them;
  • Simplifying disclosure forms so that mortgage borrowers can more easily understand their payment obligations; and
  • Allowing companies that have suffered losses to use those losses to offset profits from as many as five prior years instead of the current two.

A bill with a similar mortgage-bankruptcy-reform provision is working its way through the House of Representatives. It's still pending a vote in the full House but has picked up an additional 66 co-sponsors, according to the office of Rep. Bradley Miller, D-N.C., the bill's sponsor. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Thursday, February 21, 2008

Foreclosure prevention plan under attack - Feb. 21, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Two bills before Congress would give bankruptcy court judges the authority to reduce mortgage debt, which could save thousands of borrowers from foreclosure.

Lenders are furious at the prospect of having judges seize control of their mortgage portfolios. Community and consumer advocates argue that such a move makes sense amid the current mortgage crisis.

Both the Emergency Home Ownership and Mortgage Equity Protection Act of 2007 and the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 aim to provide relief for some home owners in bankruptcy. Only borrowers who live in their homes and hold subprime or non-traditional mortgages, like interest-only loans, would be eligible.

"This will help 600,000 households avoid foreclosure this year and next," said Ellen Hornick an attorney for the Center for Responsible Lending.

The policy, which in industry parlance is called a cram-down, would reduce mortgage balances and monthly payments based on how much a home's value had decreased.


It is one of many efforts by government and consumer groups to encourage lenders and mortgage servicers to restructure loans to more affordable terms for home owners in danger of default.

"While there are some loans being [voluntarily] modified," Hornick said, "foreclosures are still outstripping modifications by seven to one; subprime ARM foreclosures by 13 to one."

But opponents say the cram-downs would increase mortgage borrowing costs for everyone.

"It would affect a lot of prospective home owners," said Wayne Brough, chief economist for FreedomWorks, a conservative policy advocate, "anyone who applies for a mortgage."

Cram-down opponents argue that borrowers who take risky loans should take the fall when they fail. Without penalties, borrowers would keep making bad bets.

And forgiving debt transfers risk from borrowers to the debt holders - investors in mortgage backed securities. That means interest rates will have to be higher to attract investors.

Steve O'Connor, the senior vice president for government affairs at the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), claims this could add upwards of one-and-a-half percentage points to everyone's interest rates. That would translate into an increase of about $200 a month on a $200,000, 30-year, fixed-rate loan.

"Looking forward, investors will say, 'How do I know this won't happen again, on a larger scale?'" O'Connor said. "Investors have choices in the marketplace and if they see an additional risk, they'll migrate to other securities."


The CRL's Ellen Harnick argues that the cram-down provisions narrowly target relatively few borrowers.

There were only 800,000 bankruptcy filings in the United States in 2007, according to the National Bankruptcy Research Center.

And while there is little hard data as to how many of these involve homeowners, some evidence suggests that about half the cases do. In one metro area, Riverside, Calif., 62% of 2007 bankruptcies involved home owners with outstanding balances. And not all of these would qualify for cram downs.

"These bills have means tests," Harnick said. "If you can afford to pay your mortgage, you don't qualify. If you can't afford to pay even after the mortgage balance is reduced, you're not eligible."

And Adam Litvin, a law professor at Georgetown University contends that cram-downs would add little to the costs of new mortgages.

He examined historical mortgage rates during periods when judges were allowed to reduce mortgage balances, and concluded that the impact on interest rates would probably come to less than 15 basis points - 0.15 of a percentage point.

"The MBA numbers are just baloney," said Litvin.

However, even though the direct impact on borrowers would be limited, permitting cram-downs could indirectly give borrowers more leverage in dealing with lenders, according to Bruce Marks, founder and CEO of the Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA).

Mortgage borrowers could force lenders to negotiate loan restructurings by threatening to file for bankruptcy and have the judges do it for them.

Some people with credit-card debt already win concessions from credit card lenders by threatening bankruptcy, where the debt may be discharged.

"I consider this one of the most important pieces of legislation before Congress right now," said Marks.

Will it become law?

"We believe it will be very difficult to stop this legislation and we put the initial odds of enactment at 60%," said Jaret Seiberg of the Stanford Group, a policy research company, in a press release assessing the new bills.

A vote on the Senate bill could come as early as next week. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Wednesday, February 20, 2008

Fixed mortgage rates rise, adjustable rates fall

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Adjustable-rate mortgages could become more popular as the difference between long-term fixed rates and adjustable rates increases, Freddie Mac reported Thursday.

"After trending up in the past two weeks, long-term fixed mortgage rates are back up to nearly where they were at the beginning of the year. In contrast, average rates on adjustable-rate mortgages are about 0.5 percentage points below levels of the first week of this year," said Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500) vice president and chief economist Frank Nothaft in statement Thursday.

"As the spread between long-term fixed-rates and adjustable-rates widens, it's possible we could see a slight increase in the popularity of adjustable-rate mortgages," Nothaft noted.

The government-sponsored loan buyer said 30-year fixed-rate loans averaged 6.04% for the week ending Thursday, up from 5.72% last week.

Last year at this time, the 30-year rate averaged 6.22%, Freddie Mac said.

Freddie Mac also said 15-year fixed-rate loans averaged 5.64%, up from 5.25% last week. A year ago, the 15-year rate averaged 5.97%.

Rates on five-year adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) averaged 5.37%, up from 5.19% last week. A year ago, the 5-year rate averaged 5.96%.

One-year Treasury-indexed ARMs averaged 4.98%, down from 5% last week. At this time a year ago, the 1-year ARM averaged 5.49%. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Mortgage crisis: Don't forgive debt; postpone repayment - Feb. 20, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A plan that would help troubled mortgage borrowers today - and might make lenders whole later on - was unveiled today in Washington.

The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) is urging the federal savings and loans lenders under its authority to refinance loans by reducing mortgage balances to the current market values of the homes. Thanks to falling home prices, many homeowners are now stuck with mortgages that are actually worth more than the houses themselves.

But instead of having lenders forgive the difference between the old mortgage and a house's current resale value, called a short sale, the OTS advises that lenders issue a warrant or "negative amortization certificate" for the difference. If a home regains its market value and is then sold, lenders have first claims to the profits.

"If a house has a $100,000 mortgage originally," said Bill Ruberry, a press spokesman for the agency, "and the fair market value is $80,000, there's $20,000 in negative equity. The lender could refinance for $80,000 and a warrant [for the $20,000 in lost value]."

If the house later sold for $100,000, the lender would collect the $80,000 mortgage balance plus the $20,000. If the sale realized more than $100,000, the certificate holder might even get interest on top of the $20,000. Any profit beyond that would go to the borrower. The warrants could be publicly traded.


The hope is that this plan will help prevent foreclosures while minimizing the hit that lenders will take, all without putting any burden on the taxpayers.

All borrowers are likely to be eligible, according to Jaret Seiberg of the Stanford Group, a policy research company, but the proposal appears to be aimed at those with subprime ARMs, negative amortization mortgages and interest-only mortgage borrowers. They're the ones most likely to have negative equity.

The savings and loan industry, which held 31% of mortgage loans last year, saw record losses of $5.24 billion for the fourth quarter of 2007, according to the OTS.


Few details about the plan have been settled, but it would not involve any legislation, nor would it be mandated in any way. Adoption would be on a voluntary basis by the hundreds of thrift institutions in the United States, like Washington Mutual (WASH) and IndyMac Bancorp (IMB).

Indeed, banks may not want to take this approach in markets where prices have fallen so steeply that it is unlikely they'll recover any money.

The plan's biggest attraction for lenders, according to Seiberg, is that rather than spending $50,000 to foreclose on a home or to write-off the negative amortization in a short-sale, they get a certificate that permits them to share in the up-side, if and when housing markets recover.

"The plan still needs to be discussed, but it has some attractions," said Ruberry. "We're putting it out there and urging our institutions to give it a look." See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Mortgage applications tumble 22%, MBA survey says - Feb. 20, 2008

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Mortgage application volume tumbled 22.6% during the week ending Feb. 15 as most interest rates moved higher, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association's weekly application survey.

The MBA's mortgage application index fell to 822.8 for the week, from 1,063.5 during the previous week.

Refinance volume dropped 27.9% during the week, while purchase volume fell 11.55%. Refinance applications accounted for 61.7% of total applications.

The index peaked at 1,856.7 during the week ending May 30, 2003, at the height of the housing boom.

An index value of 100 is equal to the application volume on March 16, 1990, the first week the MBA tracked application volume. A reading of 822.8 means mortgage application activity is 8.228 times higher than it was when the MBA began tracking the data.

The survey provides a snapshot of mortgage lending activity among mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts. It covers about 50% of all residential retail mortgage originations each week.

Application volume slipped as most interest rates rose sharply. The average interest rate for traditional, 30-year fixed-rate mortgages increased to 6.09% from 5.72%. The average interest rate for 15-year fixed-rate mortgages, a popular option for refinancing a home, increased to 5.55% from 5.18%.

The average rate for one-year adjustable-rate mortgages remained steady at 5.72%. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Subprime loans failing pre-resets - Feb. 20, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- For months, we've fretted about the Armageddon that will hit when subprime adjustable rate mortgages start resetting to much higher interest rates.

What's happening is even worse: Many of these loans are defaulting well before their rates increase.

Defaults for subprime loans issued in 2007 - none of which have reset yet - hit 11.2 percent in November. That represents perhaps 300,000 households, and is twice the default rate that 2006 loans had 10 months after being issued, according to Friedman, Billings Ramsey analyst Michael Youngblood.

Defaults are spiking well before resets come into play thanks to the lax lending environment of the past few years. Many borrowers were approved for mortgages that they had little chance of affording, even at the low-interest teaser rates .

"I was rather shocked by the characteristics of the 2007 loans," said Youngblood.

Hybrid ARMs start with very affordable fixed-rate terms of two or three years. After that, rates can jump three percentage points or more, and then re-adjust even higher every six months to a year. On a $200,000 mortgage, a reset could add nearly $400 to the monthly mortgage payment.

Originally, concerns about these loans focused on the fact that that most homeowners wouldn't survive such pricey resets. In late 2006, the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL), predicted that 2.2 million subprime ARM borrowers would lose their homes in the following two years due to reset shock.

B

For instance, in both 2006 and 2007, well over 40 percent of subprime borrowers were awarded mortgages with either little or no documentation of their ability to pay. With these so-called "liar loans," borrowers did not have to show proof of either earnings or assets.

And even when borrowers did go on the record about their earning power, it didn't bode well. Both 2006 and 2007 ushered in a large proportion of loans with high debt-to-income ratios (DTI), which indicates the percentage of gross income required to pay debt. In 2007 subprime originations, the DTI hit 42.1 percent, up from 41.1 percent in 2006. Borrowers were simply taking on more debt that they could afford.

What's more, many borrowers started out with low- or no-down payment loans, which left them with almost no equity in their home.

During the boom, rapid price appreciation meant borrowers built up home equity quickly. That minimized defaults, since owners could draw from that equity to pay their bills - including their mortgages - through home equity loans, lines of credit or cash-out refinancings.

But prices fell starting in 2006,leaving borrowers with less home equity to draw upon when they run into financial problems.

Median home prices fell 5.8 percent nationally, and by double digits in many areas. That, along with the deterioration in underwriting, changed the default math.

Owners with mortgages worth more than their homes simply began walking away from their homes when costs become unmanageable.

Lenders were slow to react

By late 2006, lenders knew that the housing market was heading south. Foreclosure filings took off during the third quarter that year, up 43 percent from 12 months earlier, according to RealtyTrac, the online marketer of foreclosure properties.

And the National Association of Realtors started to report median home-price drops in some markets.

But instead of tightening standards and cutting back on risky loans, lenders kept lending. Why?

"Because investors continued to buy the loans," said Doug Duncan, chief economist of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Despite their quality, subprime mortgages were as profitable as any other for lenders like Countrywide (CFC, Fortune 500) and Wells Fargo (WFC, Fortune 500), who were able to quickly securitize the loans and sell them in the secondary market. The loans sold easily because they carried the promise of high yields. Thus, lenders transferred the risk to the investors.

"As long as you could sell the loan, you made the deal," Duncan said.

Lenders needed the fees that these loans generated because their finances were weakening. Their cost of borrowing money was rising, while competitive pressures were keeping mortgage interest rates low.

"Lending had been highly profitable through the second quarter of 2005," said Youngblood, "but by 2006 many lenders were running into red ink."

So, they revved up lending to increase short-term profits. And, to outside analysts, there appeared to be nothing wrong with loan quality.

"There were very few overt changes in industry underwriting guidelines," said Youngblood. What did change, he said, was that lenders were making more exceptions to their standard practices.

If borrowers had reasonable credit scores but short work histories, they might be approved for loans that would have been turned down in the past. An inability to prove income from, say, a part-time business, might be tolerated.

"These exceptions generally amounted to no more than 5 percent [of subprime loans] before 2006," said Youngblood, "but they represented the majority of these loans issued in 2006 and 2007."

The reason for that shift: Lenders depended on independent mortgage brokers for much of their business, and the brokers were pushing them to approve subprime loans because they delivered big profits for the brokers.

"Lenders felt they had to take the loans to preserve their access [to the rest of the loan pool]," he said. They were willing to accept some risky subprime loans so that the mortgage brokers would also send them safer prime and Alt-A loans.

Of course that's a bet that went bad. And it's likely to get worse as resets for ARMs issued in 2006 and 2007 kick in this year.  See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Builders' confidence inches higher - Feb. 19, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- A key index of home builders' confidence edged slightly higher in February, helped by a modest pickup in foot traffic by prospective buyers, according to the National Association of Home Builders/Well Fargo.

But despite the increased traffic, home builders' outlook for the near future has turned negative.

The National Association of Home Builders/Well Fargo Housing Market Index, released Tuesday, increased one point to 20 this month, after hitting a historic low of 18 in December. The index is comprised of three subindexes that measure homebuilders' view of current market conditions, their outlook for the next six months, and the level of buyer traffic.

The index that measures current buyer traffic showed the most significant improvement in February, rising to 19 from 14 in January. The survey of present housing market conditions increased one point to 20.

But the index that measures builders' view of the marketplace 6 months from now slipped to 27 from 28 in January.

"Some potential buyers who have been sitting on the sidelines are starting to at least research a new home purchase given improving affordability factors and the large selection of units on the market," said NAHB Chief Economist David Seiders.

"That said, builders know there's a difference between people looking and people buying, and their current outlook remains quite subdued," Seiders added.

The housing market, which has been deteriorating since last summer's subprime mortgage debacle, has become a major drag on the U.S. economy. In response, the U.S. government has enacted a stimulus plan to help boost economic activity and prevent a recession.

"Housing has always been a major engine of economic growth, and despite the ongoing market correction, it will once again be that engine in the future. But in order for that to happen, Congress must follow up on its recently enacted economic stimulus program by passing legislation that will jump-start the housing market and keep the economy moving forward," said Sandy Dunn, president of the National Association of Home Builders. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Monday, February 18, 2008

An eco-friendly family bath - Spacious family bath (1) - CNNMoney.com

Borrow a little square footage and put it to work for an efficient bathroom loaded with luxury. From This Old House.

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Countrywide expands scope of mortgage help

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Countrywide Financial says it will expand programs to help borrowers manage their mortgage payments regardless of the type of subprime loan they have or whether they have already fallen behind on payments.

Full details of the initiative, the result of a pact with a national community advocacy group, were to be disclosed Monday. Initial plans to disclose the deal were postponed last month after Countrywide agreed to be acquired by Bank of America (BAC, Fortune 500) for $4.1 billion in stock.

Countrywide (CFC, Fortune 500), the nation's largest mortgage lender and home loan servicer, has sought to address the growing number of defaults on its books by modifying loan terms, working out long-term repayment plans and other actions. The company said last month it helped more than 81,000 borrowers keep their mortgage payments manageable in 2007.

The company also was among the lenders who agreed to a Bush administration-proposed agreement to freeze rates on some subprime mortgages for five years.

Those efforts focused on borrowers with adjustable rate mortgages that were still being paid but set to adjust to higher monthly payments.

The latest initiative, brokered with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, calls for Countrywide to try to manage payment plans for borrowers that are already behind in payments, regardless of which type of subprime loan they have.

"Through this partnership, Countrywide and ACORN have agreed to a set of home retention standards to help borrowers who are in various situations of financial difficulty to establish suitable repayment plans or other solutions," Steve Bailey, Countrywide's senior managing director of loan administration, said in a prepared statement.

Some 6.96% of the 9 million loans in Countrywide's servicing portfolio were delinquent as of Dec. 31, up from 5.02% in December 2006.

About 1.04% of the mortgage loans, or 93,961, were pending foreclosure, up from 0.65%.

Under the latest plan, borrowers with subprime hybrid adjustable-rate mortgages, which typically were issued with a low "teaser" interest rate and then adjust higher after two or three years, could be offered the option of refinancing into a lower prime rate loan, or have their initial interest rate frozen for five years.

Homeowners with fixed-rate subprime loans who have fallen behind on payments could be offered short-term repayment plans, loan modifications or other adjustments, including having their interest rate frozen or adding their overdue balances to their principal loan amount.

Despite the efforts to modify loans for some borrowers, some consumer groups argue the mortgage industry hasn't done enough, noting many borrowers continue to fall behind on payments.

Maude Hurd, national president of ACORN, however, praised Countrywide's latest initiative.

"We hope others in the mortgage servicing industry will adopt similar practices," Hurd said in a statement. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Jumbo mortgages: The best deals - Feb. 18, 2008

(Fortune Magazine) -- For many house hunters, these are good times. Home prices have fallen 10% or more in once-hot markets, and interest rates on mortgages of $417,000 or less have sunk to their lowest levels in four years. Today a family with solid credit and enough cash for a 20% down payment can lock in a rate of only 5.9% on a 30-year mortgage, according to Bankrate. Thank you, Ben Bernanke!

The story is much different for well-to-do homebuyers - and not in a good way. These are dark times for jumbo mortgages - home loans of more than $417,000 - which federally chartered mortgage guarantors Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE, Fortune 500) are not permitted to purchase. Spooked investors have stopped buying bonds created from bundles of jumbos or, for that matter, from pools of any other type of mortgage not guaranteed by Fannie or Freddie.

Consequently, banks have cut way back on lending, tightened standards, and hiked rates on jumbos, all of which they now must hold on their own balance sheets. Even for wealthy borrowers with sterling credit and enough cash for a 20% down payment, the cost of fixed-rate jumbo mortgages is now upwards of 7% for a 30-year loan.

The positive news - at least for those seeking a smaller jumbo mortgage - is that Congress feels your pain. As part of the economic stimulus bill signed by President Bush last week, the limit for Fannie and Freddie mortgages will be temporarily raised from $417,000 to $729,750.

In the meantime, there are some things you can do to reduce your mortgage costs without any help from Congress.

Consider a 7/1 jumbo ARM

You can cut your monthly payment by choosing a hybrid loan. Today you can get a "7/1" mortgage, which offers a fixed rate of 5.9% for seven years, then adjusts annually. Why are these loans cheaper than 30-year fixed mortgages? Michelle Ashworth, a top mortgage executive with Wachovia, says that banks prefer to hold ARMs because the interest rate risk is easier to hedge. Some lenders are so eager to sell ARMs that they're now charging regular rates on smaller jumbos. At ING Direct, for example, the lowest rates apply to all 5/1 or 7/1 ARMs less than $500,000.

Take out a second mortgage

Say you need to borrow $800,000 to finance the purchase of your new home but intend to repay $400,000 when the sale of your old home goes through. You'd be best off taking out two home loans - a $417,000 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at the lower conforming rate and a home equity line of credit for the balance. Consult a mortgage broker to help you mix and match. Better yet, see whether you can establish a relationship with your bank's private-banking department - that usually requires $1 million in assets, but the amount may be lowered for someone with big earnings potential (a newly minted partner at a law firm, for instance). "Private bankers usually have amazing deals, especially in this market," says mortgage broker Christopher Minardi of New York-based Manhattan Mortgage.

Hit up Mom and Dad for a small loan

Let's say you're buying a home for $550,000. You've made a 20% down payment, which leaves you with $440,000 to finance. Basically, $23,000 is all that stands in the way of getting a 30-year conforming mortgage at 5.9% instead of a jumbo at 7%. The rate gap is so large it may be worth swallowing your pride and hitting up your relatives for a modest loan - especially if you can pay it back quickly. Pitch it as a win-win: With one-year CD rates down to an average of 3.5%, you could pay them 5% and still beat their bank.  See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News

Thursday, February 14, 2008

Reckoning for a real estate mogul

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Harry Macklowe isn't afraid of bad weather. Three years ago a storm came up while the New York developer was sailing with friends near the Corsican coast on Unfurled, his 112-foot yacht. His wife, Linda, and their guests, attorney Samuel Lindenbaum and his spouse, took refuge in their cabins. They were all seasick. Macklowe, however, donned foul-weather gear and happily went up on deck to help sail the yacht with his captain and crew. "It was amazing," Lindenbaum recalls. "Harry was competing with nature - and he won!"

Now the 70-year-old developer is in the middle of a maelstrom of a different kind. This time it's in the credit markets. Thanks to his personally guaranteeing a $1.2 billion loan last winter, he may lose billions of dollars in real estate, his homes in Manhattan and the Hamptons, his contemporary art collection, and even his beloved yacht. This would be a bitter end to the career of one of New York City real estate's most polarizing figures.

In the clubby world of developers, people either admire Macklowe or detest him. The strong feelings were shaped by two events - one famous and the other infamous - that bookend his nearly 49 years in business. First, he is the guy who in 1985 shamed his industry when he ordered the late-night demolition, without a permit, of four buildings, including a welfare hotel, in Times Square. Second, and more recently, Macklowe pulled off a feat that was nothing short of alchemy. In 2003 he surprised his peers by purchasing the General Motors Building for the then-record price of $1.4 billion. The landmark is now worth twice as much - thanks largely to his idea of putting a sunken Apple store on the building's plaza with a glass entrance at street level. "Harry drew me the design of that store on a piece of paper before he'd even bought the building," says CB Richard Ellis's Mary Ann Tighe, whom the developer hired as the building's leasing agent. Macklowe not only personally sold the idea to Apple CEO Steve Jobs but also negotiated a lease giving Macklowe Properties a cut of the store's revenues. If only the college dropout from New Rochelle, N.Y., had stopped there. Instead he followed up the GM deal with an even bigger one that has turned into the most celebrated commercial real estate catastrophe in the subprime mortgage crisis.

In February 2007 the developer bought seven Manhattan skyscrapers for $6.8 billion from the Blackstone Group. It was the peak of the market. There was plenty of easy money available. Macklowe put up only $50 million of his own cash, financing the rest of the acquisition with $7 billion in loans, due in February, from Deutsche Bank and Fortress Investments, a publicly traded hedge fund. That's a huge amount of short-term, high-risk debt. Once the subprime crisis unfolded, Macklowe couldn't refinance. Now he is handing the keys to those buildings back to Deutsche Bank and other lenders to which the bank has sold some of the debt. He is also trying to sell his precious General Motors Building to repay a $1.2 billion bridge loan that is controlled by Fortress.

Meanwhile, the entire real estate business is watching to see how this plays out for two reasons. Macklowe's difficulties don't bode well for his industry. Not long ago, investors would have fallen all over one another to get a stake in his high-rent properties. Now the demand for trophies may be waning - even in Manhattan, the nation's most valuable market. That's grim news not just for Macklowe, but also for investors around the country who poured billions into office buildings before the credit crunch.

Here's another reason Macklowe's financial pain has drawn such attention. He is a Houdini-like character who has extricated himself from tight spots before - like back in the early '90s when the real estate market collapsed and his creditors called in $1 billion worth of loans. He survived in part due to his cunning but also because he was dealing with commercial banks willing to accommodate him. Those old-school lenders wanted a long-term relationship with a guy who, in his own words, has a "voracious appetite for capital."

As real estate prices have skyrocketed in recent years, however, developers have gone to hedge funds like Fortress for the riskiest pieces of debt. These new, more opportunistic lenders charge interest rates that can rise above 20%. If a developer defaults, some hedge funds are more than happy to grab their collateral and flip it for a potentially higher profit. This is referred to as the "loan to own" business.

In the case of the seven skyscrapers purchased from Blackstone, Macklowe personally guaranteed the $1.2 billion bridge loan. That hunk of debt is part of a portfolio overseen by the hedge fund's president, Peter Briger Jr. The Princeton-educated banker couldn't be more different from his borrower. Briger made his name trading distressed Japanese assets in the '90s. Like many of his colleagues, he scrupulously avoids the media. (Fortress declined to comment for this story.) This much, however, is certain: Briger is showing Macklowe no mercy. Fortress is salivating at the possibility of foreclosing and taking possession of the General Motors Building, which he pledged as part of a personal guarantee against the bridge loan. In addition, Fortune has learned that the hedge fund is assessing the value of the developer's personal assets in case the trophy, encumbered by $1.9 billion in loans, isn't enough to satisfy Macklowe's obligations.

If Briger decides to do this, Macklowe will undoubtedly fight back. He may never have dealt with a lender like Briger, but Fortress's president, tough as he may be, has never tangled with a borrower quite like Harry Macklowe either.

***

"When you walk into the GM Building, you get a good feeling," Harry Macklowe says as he sits confidently in the Macklowe Properties office on its 21st floor. It's early January, only a week or so before he decided to put it up for sale. You'd never know he is staring over the edge of a precipice. Maybe it's the setting that gives him his cool. The views are breathtaking. The Plaza hotel looms outside the window on the other side of Fifth Avenue. Beyond the famous hotel, you can see deep into Central Park. This is part of the reason tenants like private equity's Thomas H. Lee and former Citigroup CEO Sandy Weill pay an average of $150 a square foot to be here.

Macklowe speaks in a whisper; somehow that makes his banter even funnier. He calmly insists that he'll have no problem finding new sources of money to help refinance the skyscrapers from the Blackstone deal: "We still have a very good future. They are very good, glamorous investments." Macklowe also says there are no tensions with Deutsche Bank or Fortress. "We're not fighting with anybody. Nobody's fighting with us."

Only his son Billy seems slightly unnerved by the predicament he and his father are in. Unlike his father, who is slightly disheveled, Billy is perfectly coiffed; his pinstripe suit is impeccably tailored. According to court records, Harry used to ride Billy so hard, thinking his son didn't work strenuously enough, that they ended up in counseling together. (Howard Rubenstein, spokesman for the Macklowes, says Billy's desire for "more responsibility" was the reason for any tension.) Now Billy is Harry's right-hand man. Still, the scion sounds out of his depth as he dismisses the suggestion that the Macklowes are in deep trouble. "We always maintained it was interim acquisition financing," he says, his jaw clenched tightly. "We had a plan to provide for a long-term capital solution. The events in August have slowed the process down. But it's still a process, and it's one that we are moving forward on." His dad probably gets further in a pinch with his charm and his bent sense of humor. Harry's friends, by the way, say he does great impressions.

It's hard to overstate how important the GM Building is to Macklowe's psyche. He could have retired years ago if all he cared about was personal wealth. He and Linda have long been members of the social set that rotates between Manhattan and the Hamptons. She's on the board of the Guggenheim Museum, and they are avid art collectors. Harry named his yacht Unfurled after a series of paintings by Morris Louis, one of which he owns.

On the water as on land, Macklowe's unquenchable ambition gets him in trouble. In 1976, U.S. Sailing, the sport's national governing body, banned him from yacht racing for an unspecified period of time. Why? A U.S. Sailing spokeswoman says the developer aimed his boat threateningly at another vessel after the boat's owner called Macklowe on a rules violation and caused him to be disqualified from a race in Newport, R.I.

Macklowe has been even more competitive in the real estate business - and more successful too. As a young commercial broker in the early '60s, he watched with awe as the General Motors Building rose on the southeast corner of Central Park. "Harry's goal was always to own the GM Building," says Steve Ifshin. Ifshin, the founder of DLC Management, is a shopping center builder who got his start with the developer. Macklowe doesn't deny that was his ambition.

By the '80s the onetime broker was well on his way to becoming a leading New York developer. He leveraged himself to the hilt and built residential towers on the Upper East Side, sleek office buildings in Midtown, and a luxury hotel in Times Square called the Hotel Macklowe.

But his aggressiveness got the better of him. He became known as the city's foremost black-hatted developer after ordering the "midnight demolition" of four buildings in Times Square, an act that the New York Times called "white-collar vandalism." One of his former employees pleaded guilty to reckless endangerment, but Macklowe came out of this debacle only slightly scathed. Although he was fined $2 million by the city, he was cleared by the Manhattan district attorney, says his spokesman. Meanwhile, his namesake hotel rose on the demolition site. The victory was fleeting. The real estate market fell apart at the end of the decade. Macklowe's bankers called in his loans. New York's old-line real estate families, who felt their profession had been tarnished by his Times Square shenanigan, hoped they'd seen the last of him.

Unlike today, however, Macklowe was then borrowing from the likes of Chemical Bank and Manufacturers Hanover. Those banks didn't want more distressed assets on their books. They were lenders, not real estate guys. In the end Macklowe's bankers reluctantly took back five of his buildings - including the Hotel Macklowe. The negotiations dragged on for several years-giving him time to restructure his remaining holdings and raise money for a comeback.

***

Maclowe was back in business by the end of the early-'90s recession, and the way he handled his bankers during the latter part of that decade is a cautionary tale for the crew at Fortress who think they have the old guy cornered. Back in 1998, Macklowe set out to build a skyscraper at 42nd Street and Madison Avenue, which he planned to finance in part with a public offering that would have valued his real estate company at $520 million.

Then disaster struck again. The developer was forced to scotch his IPO after the Russian debt crisis set off a global economic panic that sent real estate company stocks into a tailspin. Macklowe had counted on funds from the IPO to repay $331 million he'd borrowed from Credit Suisse First Boston to fund several projects, including that proposed building on Madison Avenue, which would have been his largest project in years.

A two-year-long struggle ensued. Credit Suisse (CS) foreclosed and tried to take back Macklowe's development site. So the mogul moved the deed into a shell company he controlled, where his creditor couldn't reach it. Even after he was forced to relinquish the property, Credit Suisse accused him of purposely delaying its efforts to sell the site and get its money back. (Macklowe's lawyers scoffed that these were "false assertions and misstatements.") Two former Credit Suisse bankers confirmed that he also got the bank to give up valuable equity stakes it held in two of his buildings pledged as collateral to the bank.

Once again, Macklowe had extracted himself from a tight spot. Yet after decades in the business he was still a second-tier player in New York's real estate oligarchy. In truth, the developer was better known for his late-night Times Square demolition than for his skills. That changed when he bought the General Motors Building from the bankrupt insurer Conseco in 2003. He was willing to pay the hefty $1.4 billion price because he'd already come up with the idea for the Apple store - a move that Mitchell Moss, a professor of urban policy and planning at New York University, today calls "one of the best examples of real estate ingenuity in the city."

***

With the GM building, Macklowe had finally won big and gotten respect. No one would have looked askance if he had slowed down a little. Surely there were more paintings to buy and places to sail. Still, he had to do another risky deal.

Late in 2006, Equity Office Property chairman Sam Zell decided the commercial real estate market had peaked, so he sold his company to Blackstone for $36 billion. Jonathan Gray, Blackstone's co-head of real estate, was hardly foolish either. Before the deal closed he let it be known that the private equity group would sell many of the EOP assets, including seven buildings in Macklowe's turf, New York's high-rent Plaza district between 42nd and 59th Streets and Third and Eighth Avenues. None of these towers was a trophy like the General Motors Building. But they offered Macklowe something almost as tantalizing. "We thought capturing a dominant position in the Plaza district was a real plus," he says. The developer swooped in and paid Blackstone $6.8 billion for the properties, thinking he could easily refinance the short-fused debt he was using to finance the acquisition.

In hindsight, Zell's timing was flawless. He sold several months before the subprime crisis unfolded. Blackstone was similarly lucky. Macklowe was less fortunate. In August, Wall Street abruptly turned off the credit spigot. "There was a game of musical chairs," says Ben Lambert, chairman of Eastdil Secured, which sold Macklowe the buildings for Blackstone (BX). "The music stopped, and there was no chair for Harry."


“It was musical chairs. The music stopped, and there was no chair for Harry.”

Ben Lambert, Eastdil Secured


Like Merrill Lynch, Citi, and other high-profile corporate victims of the subprime debacle, Macklowe traveled to the Middle East and sought investors in Kuwait, Qatar, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi. Real estate executives familiar with his efforts say Macklowe, who put little of his own cash in the deal, asked for $2 billion from prospective investors in exchange for a 50% partnership stake. He came back empty-handed. (Billy Macklowe quibbles with some of those numbers, but he declines to offer specifics of his own.)

What Macklowe needed more than anything was patience from his creditors. He didn't get it. If any of his current lenders might have given him an extension, it would have been Deutsche Bank. After all, it financed his purchase of the GM Building and shared in his success on that deal. But last month Deutsche Bank began talking to the Macklowes about taking back the EOP buildings. Unfortunately for Billy and Harry, the German bank isn't in a position to call the shots. It has sold pieces of its debt to as many as 20 other lenders. Some of those debt holders, like GE Capital, are at the front of the line to be repaid. Therefore they are eager to foreclose. Others, however, are less enthusiastic. They are at the back of the line and would just get leftovers in a foreclosure-or worse. This dissension among debt holders is good for the Macklowes. In this struggle, delay is their friend. (Deutsche Bank declined to comment.)

Fortress is clearer in its intentions. Briger has sold pieces of the bridge loan to Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and hedge fund D.E. Shaw, both of which, like Fortress, are eager to profit from a Macklowe default. Fortress has also assessed Macklowe's personal holdings, because even if he sells the GM Building, he may still owe Fortress money, and then his toys become fair game. People close to the Macklowes say they are confident that sales of their buildings can cover the debt.

Macklowe has hired CB Richard Ellis to sell the GM Building for him. Bids are due on Feb. 15. Already Larry Silverstein, developer of the former World Trade Center site, is circling the building, which real estate executives say could be worth $3 billion. However, the landmark is encumbered by $1.9 billion in debt. So even if Silverstein pays full price-which he would probably be loath to do -Macklowe will have only $1.1 billion after the sale. That's not quite enough to pay off the $1.2 billion bridge loan (which is now roughly $1.4 billion, with interest). That may be why Macklowe has put a second building he owns on 57th Street on the market as well.

As the magazine went to press, Fortress had extended the bridge loan deadline also to Feb. 15 so that Macklowe can sell the GM Building and possibly pay off the loan. But clearly Briger has made his point-that he's not frightened of the famously difficult developer who previously has been able to emerge solvent from deals gone wrong. "I know Pete well enough to know he and Fortress would not be intimidated one iota," says Briger's friend J. Christopher Flowers, managing director of J.C. Flowers & Co., a private equity group. The question now is whether Macklowe will go along with these sales or disrupt them. Real estate executives say Silverstein is willing to pay top dollar for the GM Building. But Macklowe has more on his mind than money. He wants to stay on as the landmark's manager. That would enable him to save face and collect a big fee. But anyone who agrees to let him hang around isn't going to pay him full price-in which case he'll have less money for Fortress.

Finally, litigation can't be ruled out. In January, Macklowe told this reporter he would fight back legally if his lenders treated him unfairly. He also insisted that Fortress can't seize the GM Building if he defaults because he only pledged a minority stake as collateral. The hedge fund, it should be noted, takes a different position. Litigation might also buy him some time to find more friendly investors and possibly take some buildings off the auction block.

So it's too soon to count Macklowe out. He's come back from the grave too many times. But this time it looks as if Deutsche Bank (DB) and Fortress (FIG) hold the upper hand. That means Macklowe may be remembered as the developer who won one of the greatest prizes in Manhattan, only to gamble it away by doing one deal too many. He'll have time to ponder his mistakes as he sails around the world. Unless, of course, Fortress takes his boat too. See Also

Source: Home Mortgage Rates and Real Estate News