Bankruptcy Questions Answered

Lawsuit Alleges Mortgage Fraud by Deutsche Bank

News reports this week announce that the U.S. Department of Justice has initiated a lawsuit against Deutsche Bank, one of the world’s largest, claiming that the institution lied to federal regulators in order to secure taxpayer-funded insurance for less-than-secure mortgages.

Here’s a look at the details and some of the underlying issues.

The Charges against Deutsche Bank

According to the lawsuit, Deutsche Bank and its subsidiary MortgageIT:

• Initiated risky mortgage loans to homebuyers. Some of these loans may have been subprime, and since their initiation, sources indicate, about a third have defaulted.
• Lied to federal regulators. While the loans themselves may have been a bad move financially, what interests prosecutors is what happens next: that Deutsche Bank allegedly lied to officials with the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) in order to secure insurance for the shoddy loans.
• Got taxpayer-backed insurance for questionable loans. Because of its reportedly false claims that it was evaluating its mortgages for default risk, Deutsche Bank managed to secure FHA funding (which comes from tax dollars) for the questionable loans.
• Required money from the government when the loans defaulted. Now, as many as 12,500 of Deutsche Bank’s loans have apparently defaulted (meaning that the homes have gone into foreclosure), leaving the government responsible for covering the losses. The money goes to those investors who own the mortgage debt. Sources note that, to date, defaulted Deutsche Bank loans have cost the government more than $386 million.

Because of all these allegations, the Justice Department is reportedly suing the bank for $1 billion, an amount that represents the dollar amount lost plus individual penalties for each mortgage that went into default.

What Mortgage Lending Rules Were Broken?

The government’s lawsuit charges that Deutsche Bank and MortgageIT failed to follow the rules required of anyone interested in federal mortgage insurance. These rules require lenders to:

• Annually verify various records of mortgage borrowers, including credit reports, incomes and record of employment. This measure is to make sure borrowers are not at risk of defaulting.
• Examine any loan that goes into default shortly after being originated in an effort to prevent and eliminate careless lending techniques.
• Act in the government’s best interest, because any money needed to guarantee loans that defaulted would come directly from taxpayers’ pockets.

The lawsuit claims that Deutsche Bank did none of these things and so is both on the hook for the money lost by the government and responsible for paying penalties for breaking the rules of engagement for obtaining federal insurance.

Some sources suggest that the Deutsche Bank lawsuit could be the first of many; after all, reckless lending techniques were fairly common during the housing boom that touched off the current recession.

Posted in Bankruptcy and Predatory Lending, Consumer Protection, Economy, Mortgage, Mortgage Foreclosure, predatory lending | Comments Off

Mortgage Scammers on the Loose

Despite the best efforts of groups like the Better Business Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission, scammers manage to find new ways to take money from unsuspecting consumers on a regular basis. Here’s a look at one of the latest warnings that’s been posted by consumer advocates.

A New Mortgage Scam Afoot

The latest in a long line of mortgage and foreclosure “rescue” scams seems to be one that involves attempting to trick homeowners into thinking they qualify for money from a lawsuit against their lenders. According to the BBB, the scam works like this:

• An official-looking letter arrives: Victims have reportedly noted that they received a letter indicating that they were eligible to join a “joinder action suit” against certain mortgage lenders and banks. The letters noted the potential for winning significant financial compensation in the suit.
• Unrealistic promises: Victims who called the number listed on the letter were apparently directed to employees of the scammer, who falsely suggested that, by joining the suit, victims might win thousands of dollars, have their interest rates slashed to two percent or have their mortgage principal reduced by 80 percent.
• Request for upfront payment: In classic scam fashion, victims were then told that they must pay a $5,000 retainer fee to ensure their spot in the lawsuit.

Unsurprisingly, none of the information presented in the letters or during follow-up phone calls was true. But what many victims found disturbing was that the scammer had access to their personal information, including name, address, loan information and even loan amount. In other words, this particular scam may have seemed frighteningly legitimate.

How to Spot a Scam

If you’re among the millions of Americans currently struggling with your mortgage, be sure to follow these safety tips (from the BBB) if and when you decide to seek mortgage assistance.

• Go directly to your lender first. Third-party “relief” providers, especially those that approach you unsolicited, are much less trustworthy and much more likely to take your money and offer you nothing in return.
• Be suspicious of mailings from strangers. If you receive a letter about any class action or mass joinder lawsuit, be sure to check online to learn about the latest scams. Then, contact your bank or connect with a lawyer to assess the nature and legitimacy of the letter.
• Shy away from advance fees. Thanks to new consumer protection rules that took effect this year, advance fees are only permitted in rare cases. In many cases, those that ask for money upfront are interested only in your money and may not stick around long enough to provide the help they promised.
• Beware of forensic loan audits. These are hot scamming ground and often have no effect on a person’s mortgage payments.

Posted in Financial Literacy, Foreclosure, Mortgage, Mortgage Foreclosure, mortgage rescue scams, scam | Comments Off

Financial Literacy Survey Shows Our Weaknesses

The National Foundation for Credit Counseling reported results from its annual survey of consumer financial literacy recently, and the findings suggest that, as a nation, we’re still not as well equipped to deal with financial stumbling blocks as we need to be.

Specifically, the survey revealed the following about American consumers:

• 26 percent of survey respondents reported spending more than they did last year, a percentage higher than it has been for two years. While this could be good for the nation’s economic recovery, it’s only one part of the puzzle.
• More than 40 percent of respondents graded themselves as earning a C or lower in their personal finance know-how. This is alarming but not surprising: in more official tests of financial literacy (often given to high school students), it’s often common for the majority of students to fail.
• While more than two-thirds of Americans reported paying for most purchases with cash or debit cards, 40 percent still reportedly carry revolving debt on their credit cards from month to month. This sort of behavior can be dangerous and debilitating, especially if a consumer is hit with unexpected job loss or income reduction. In fact, one of the most commonly cited factors for bankruptcy filings is overextension on credit.
• More than 80 percent of the those polled apparently voiced the opinion that walking away from a mortgage can be justified in certain circumstances, particularly if the borrower was misled at the time of the loan or if the borrower can no longer afford mortgage payments. If many people get a chance to act on these beliefs, the effect on the housing market could be seriously detrimental, especially during a period of recovery.

Why Does Financial Literacy Matter?

The issue of financial literacy education has been a hot one in recent years, ever since the bubble in the housing market burst and the abuses (by lenders and borrowers alike) came to light.

Since the beginning of the Great Recession, we’ve seen legislation like the Credit CARD Act to improve the transparency of credit products for consumers, the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and proposals to change debit card fees and other consumer credit products.

When the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act took effect in 2005, one of its provisions was the introduction of a Debtor Education (also called a Financial Management) course for all bankruptcy filers – the idea was that those who filed for bankruptcy could certainly benefit from a little guidance on financial matters. And the idea seems to be a good one.

But what about those who aren’t ready to file for bankruptcy? Luckily, the U.S. Government has set up a financial literacy destination, MyMoney.gov, for people who have never set foot in the bankruptcy court.

Posted in Bankruptcy, Financial Literacy, Links, Mortgage, consumer rights | Comments Off

Are You Liable for Ongoing Homeowner’s Association Dues if You Surrender Your House in a Bankruptcy?

Earlier this month on my Atlanta-bankruptcy web site blog I discussed an interesting case involving mortgage loan deficiency claims that was issued by the Georgia Court of Appeals and Georgia Supreme Court.  In the River Farm vs. Suntrust case, the Georgia courts ruled that a mortgage lender could sue a defaulted borrower on the promissory note and thereby bypass the deficiency confirmation process associated with a foreclosure.  This ruling is important because property values in Georgia have been trending downward and more and more often I am seeing cases where the balance due on a mortgage exceeds the fair market value of my client's home.

This court case should be of concern to you if you intend to walk away from your home because you are delinquent or if your are so "underwater" with your mortgage that it does not make sense to fight to keep a home that may never be worth what is owed on it.   If you do walk away (without filing bankruptcy), your lender may sue you on the mortgage loan contract instead of foreclosing.  The lender would refrain from foreclosing to avoid a legal requirement associated with foreclosure that would require the lender to appear before a judge to argue that the foreclosure sale price was reasonable.

In my article, I pointed out that this change in the law might encourage more people to file bankruptcies since a bankruptcy can discharge any deficiency claim.

However, there is another potential problem area that could arise if your lender holds off on foreclosing.  This problem area relates to homeowners' association (HOA) dues.

Under Georgia law, homeowners' associations enjoy special protections.  Unpaid dues can automatically can become liens that encumber your property.   As HOA lawyers read the law, if you file a bankruptcy and surrender your home, your delinquent HOA dues as of the date of filing will be discharged.  However, ongoing dues that accrue after the filing remain your obligation until title passes.  In other words, if your HOA dues are $100 per month and you file Chapter 7 bankruptcy on February 28, your dues begin accruing again on March 1.  If your lender does not foreclose until November, you would, in theory, be responsible for 8 months of dues, or $800, after your filing, even though you have stated  your intention to surrender your house in bankruptcy.

Obviously, a provision of the law that involuntarily re-obligates you to hundreds or thousands of dollars of monthly dues on an asset you have surrendered seems contrary to the public policy associated with bankruptcy.  Nevertheless, this is how lawyers for homeowners' associations read the law.

I discussed this issue with an attorney at a law firm that represents HOA's in the Atlanta area and throughout Georgia.   This lawyer offered the above explanation of the law but he said that as a practical matter, his firm has not and does not plan to sue a homeowner for HOA dues that arise after a bankruptcy case has been filed, as long as the homeowner vacates the premises.  However, the homeowner is presumably fair game if he remains in the house (or rents it out) while the bank is dilly-dallying about foreclosing.

He also advised me that his firm does not report post-petition HOA delinquencies to credit bureaus.

The problem here, of course, is that the HOA lawyer's explanation of policy is just that – a voluntary policy.  Is it possible that this HOA law firm or one like it could change its policy?  Is it possible that the HOA itself might sell this receivable to a debt buyer who would not hesitate to sue you?

I would not assume that an HOA or a debt buyer will necessarily write off otherwise collectible debt, but until this issue is litigated in a Georgia court, we will not know the answer to this issue.  I do think that a homeowner who remains in a house after surrendering that house in a bankruptcy will face an increased likelihood of an HOA lawsuit.  I will also continue my practice of rejected the HOA contract as part of my bankruptcy filings.

Posted in Foreclosure issues, Georgia Bankruptcy, Mortgage, Repossession issues, accruing, an, area, associations, case, claims, deficiency, delinquent, dilly dallying, discussed, dues, enjoy, foreclosing he, foreclosing  , hoa, homeowners, homeowners association lawsuits, interesting, involving, law i, loan, month, mortgage deficiency claims, ongoing, problem, protections  , read, relates, special, the, unpaid | Comments Off

What is “Lien Stripping” and Can I Use it to Reduce my Mortgage Payments

With the decline in Atlanta area housing values, a seldom used bankruptcy technique has taken on new life.  The technique is called "lien stripping" and it arises from Bankruptcy Code Section 506(a) and (d).  A lien strip allows a Chapter 13 debtor to use the power of the Bankruptcy Court to transform a secured second mortgage or home equity line of credit into an unsecured debt, thereby eliminating a monthly payment and reducing total debt by tens of thousands of dollars.

Here's how it works: Let's say that you own a home worth $250,000.   Perhaps that home was worth $350,000 three or four years ago but its market value has dropped because of the recession.  The balance on the first mortgage is $270,000 and the balance on the second mortgage is $45,000.

In this case, a Chapter 13 debtor can ask his bankruptcy judge to "strip away" the second mortgage debt since all of the value in your home is encumbered by your first mortgage.  In other words, if you were to sell your house, the first mortgage lender would not be paid in full and the second mortgage lender would get nothing.  The second mortgage lender is, therefore, unsecured.

Lien stripping only works when:

• you are a debtor in a Chapter 13 case
• the fair market value of your house is less than the balance due on your first mortgage

The Clerk's Office of the Northern District of Georgia has provided us with sample lien stripping motions, which you can review by clicking on the link.

I suspect that mortgage companies will mount challenges to lien stripping.  There has already been a Minnesota case where a local judge there refused to allow lien stripping.   One day this issue may be considered by the United States Supreme Court.  For now, however, most bankruptcy judges will allow lien stripping and if your second mortgage or HELOC is fully unsecured, you may want to consider it as well.

My friend and colleague, Charleston bankruptcy lawyer Russ DeMott has published a clear explanation of how he approaches the mortgage lien stripping process (in his district, they refer to lien stripping as "mortgage stripping" but the concept is identical.  You can read Russ' post by clicking on the link.  Russ correctly points out that out of banks and mortgage companies have not cooperated in out of court mortgage modifications and that lien stripping remains perhaps the most reliable tool to modify a mortgage.

I have successfully "stripped" several junior mortgages.  Not surprisingly, the main issue that arises has to do with the fair market value of the home.  You may need to pay for an appraisal to convince the judge that the second mortgage is, in fact, fully unsecured.

Posted in Chapter 13, Chapter 13 issues, Lien stripping, Mortgage, and, approaches, bankruptcy mortgage modification, called, in, lien, modifying mortgages bankruptcy, motions, process, refused, remains, sample, stripping, stripping   , the, unsecured lien | Comments Off

Inside the Mind of a Bankruptcy Lawyer – Should I File and if so, Why Should I Choose Your Firm?

There are dozens of lawyers out there who offer to prepare and file bankruptcy cases.  Some work in high volume "bankruptcy mill" firms that compete on price while others compete on experience, knowledge and service.  Usually the cost differential is a few hundred dollars, but when you are considering bankruptcy, every dollar counts – so why would you want a lawyer like me as opposed to a firm that would offer to represent you for a lower price?

I could offer a glib answer like "if you needed brain surgery, would you look for the cheapest surgeon on the one with the most experience and industry recognition" but that does not really answer the question.  Perhaps it would be helpful if you could look over my shoulder as I analyze a real life situation that came before me recently.

Earlier this month an email arrived from a couple who wanted information about bankruptcy.  The wife wrote that she was a stay at home mom raising 2 children and that her husband lost his job about a year ago, and recently started back to work at a lower paying job.  Their current household income is just under $50,000.  They own a house that is now worth less than what they paid for it – the house is worth about $200,000 – the first mortgage is $210,000 and the second mortgage is $35,000.  They own one older car outright and are financing a mini-van.  They have also incurred around $25,000 of credit card debt – most of which was used trying to keep the mortgage current.

Earlier this year they fell behind on both the first and second mortgage.  The first mortgage lender started foreclosure proceedings, but suspended foreclosure and offered to consider my potential clients for a mortgage modification.  They have been making modified payments for several months but when they called the lender to ask if they had been approved for a permanent modification, the account rep told them that their modification paperwork had not been approved but that their application had been sent to another department for a reconsideration.  News of this decision had not been provided to my prospective clients – the only reason they found out was from their call.  No one from the mysterious reconsideration division was available and their multiple calls have not been returned for over 2 weeks.

They decided to contact me because they are getting the sense that the mortgage company is unlikely to approve their modification and they want to be prepared for a possible foreclosure.  What are their options? Here is what I advised them through my conversation with the wife:

First, I asked what was their desire regarding the house – was keeping the house a priority?  The wife responded that they would like to keep their house but they were not sure they could afford it given the husband's reduced salary.

I explained that Chapter 13 is the type of bankruptcy that can stop a foreclosure but that Chapter 13 would not allow us to change the amount of the monthly payments, nor would it change the total balance due on the mortgage.  Chapter 13 would allow them to "cure" their arrearage by paying that arrearage (the past due payments) over a five year period of time, along with other debts that would also be included in the Chapter 13 payment plan. However, if they were not able to afford the regular monthly payments Chapter 13 probably did not make much sense.

The only possible justification for a Chapter 13 would arise from the possibility that they could use Chapter 13 to "strip" the second mortgage and make that unsecured.  Under Chapter 13 law, a second mortgage that is wholly unsecured, meaning that the balance due the first mortgage exceeds the fair market value of the home.  If the second mortgage is wholly unsecured, we can file a motion to strip the lien, thereby making the second mortgage debt an unsecured claim in the Chapter 13.  If our Chapter 13 plan called for paying unsecured debt at 5 cents on the dollar, then Chapter 13 might be something to consider.

In this case, the wife advised me that the monthly payment due the first lender was more than what they could afford, plus she did not seem enthusiastic about signing on for a five year payment plan, so we decided to remove Chapter 13 from consideration.

We then proceeded to discuss Chapter 7.

I pointed out that Chapter 7 would allow the couple to discharge their credit card debt as well as any potential liability arising from the surrender of their home.  I felt that the real danger came from the second mortgage lender as it has been my experience that first lenders rarely pursue deficiency claims because  of the Georgia law that requires them to go to court to certify the deficiency before a judge within 30 days of the foreclosure.  Second mortgage holders, by contrast, need only file suit on the promissory note associated with their loans.  I see far more deficiency balance claims from second mortgage lenders than from first mortgage lenders.

I also noted that since the foreclosure process could take several months, one strategy here would be to remain in the house and pay nothing – nothing to either mortgage lender and nothing to the credit card lenders.  This strategy would allow my prospective clients to reduce their budget outflow dramatically for several months while they built up a small cash reserve, and then file bankruptcy in four to six months when creditors were starting to take action.  I noted that this strategy was based on economics, and that they would have to be comfortable with the moral implications of this course of action.  I also noted that this "wait until the last minute" strategy would cause significant damage to their credit in addition to the bankruptcy.  By contrast, filing a Chapter 7 when there were few or no 120 day late references would make recovery from bankruptcy a little easier.  Credit reports document payment histories and while a bankruptcy discharge will put the balances at zero, it does not delete the negative payment histories.

On the other hand, I advised the wife that if she and her husband waited to file and the husband secured a better, higher paying job, their household income might leave them with disposable income in their budget, or it might cause their household income to exceed the median income for a family of four, thereby making Chapter 7 much more difficult or impossible.  It has been my experience that when household income exceeds the median (in Georgia the current median income for a family of 4 is $68,258) by $10,000 or more, it can be very difficult to qualify for Chapter 7 under the means test.  Thus, if the husband was actively looking for employment and his target income was $80,000 or more, waiting to file Chapter 7 might not be the best idea.

The wife then asked me about the credit report issue – how long would it take for she and her husband to rebuild their credit.  I responded by saying that it my experience, a Chapter 7 debtor can expect his credit score to remain depressed for eight months to a year following the Chapter 7 discharge.  However, Chapter 7 has the positive effect of eliminating all debt and thereby causing an improvement to the debt to income ratio.  Further, individuals can only file Chapter 7 once every eight years – so from a lender's perspective a recently discharged debtor has no debt and cannot file bankruptcy for at least 8 years.

I assured the wife that I made it my practice to follow up with my clients who had received a discharge to review their credit reports three to five months after discharge.  I have found that at least half of the time, there are errors on the credit reports that artificially depress post bankruptcy credit scores and sometimes, the errors are actionable, meaning that we can collect damages from creditors for Fair Debt Collection Practices Act violations.  In a few cases I have been able to collect enough in damages to cover the attorney's fees and filing fees associated with the original bankruptcy filing!

I ended by conversation with the wife by thanking her for contacting me.  I then followed up our conversation with a brief email summarizing what we had spoken about and providing her with the "get started" link to one of my web sites.

I hope you can see that even a "simple" fact pattern can give rise to a variety of options and pratical considerations.  Consumer bankruptcy is not a "one size fits all" practice and I am able to raise all of the points that I did because I have seen a lot of different issues over the past 23 years.  If you have any questions about what have written here or if you want to discuss your personal situation, I encourage you to contact attorney Susan Blum or me by phone at 770-393-4985 or send us an email.

Posted in Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Credit, Current, Foreclosure, General consumer bankruptcy info, Georgia Bankruptcy, Lenders, Mortgage, a, and, because , choosing a bankruptcy lawyer, claims, deficiency, document, easier  , exceeds, georgia, histories, house, household, in, income, keeping, lender, median, payment, priority  , proceedings, pursue, rarely, reports, responded, started, the, wife | Comments Off

Can You be Sued for Non-payment of your Mortgage if You Do Not Reaffirm?

I recently received an email from a blog reader asking about his obligations to his mortgage company when he does not reaffirm:

I have read your blog and you are very through so I write you with hopes that you might answer this question for me. I file Chapter 7  in 08, and did not reaffirm my loan. I am still living in the house and did make some payments. However, i have not for the last 8 months. It is my understanding that I must sign a document to reaffirm and that continuing payment in itself is not a reaffirmation…or?  Well it gets a little more complicated.  My house is valued at $410,000 and the bank has offered me a deal that is going to be hard to refuse. They have agreed to let me do a short re-fi in the amount of 180k.  If I agree to that is that in itself a reaffirmation?

Here is my response: in most cases, when you take out a mortgage loan, you are signing two different types of agreements.  The first type is a promissory note whereby you personally agree to make the payments.  The second type of obligation creates a property lien, meaning that you, as the owner of the property, pledges that property as collateral for the loan.

When you file a Chapter 7 and receive your discharge, your personal obligations are extinguished.  However, a Chapter 7 discharge does not eliminate the mortgage company's lien against your property.  If you "reaffirm" your mortgage, you are actually reaffirming the promissory note and your personal obligations to pay.

For years, many bankruptcy attorneys advised their clients to avoid signing reaffirmation agreements for mortgages, car loans or any other secured debt.  The reasoning – even without a personal "guarantee" lenders are protected by the property lien.  If the lender is willing to accept payments (the so-called "stay and pay" option), the now discharged debtor keeps his property, keeps making payment, but does not have personal liability on the note.

If the debtor misses payments, the lender would still have the right to foreclose or repossess based on the property lien.  The debtor would not have personal liability for any foreclosure or repossession deficiency because his personal liability was extinguished in the bankruptcy.

There is a downside to this "stay and pay" strategy.  First, the debtor does not get any credit report benefit for making payments.  Because the debtor's personal obligations have been extinguished, the lender no longer reports either a positive or a negative payment history.   A positive payment history from a mortgage company can be a good way to restore credit after bankruptcy, and if you do not reaffirm, you will not get this benefit.

Second, there is the "uncertainty factor" if you do not reaffirm.  Most mortgage or vehicle finance installment notes contain a default provision that includes bankruptcy as a default trigger.  In theory, at least, once your bankruptcy is closed (and the automatic stay of bankruptcy terminated), your lender could declare your loan in default and take action under State law to recover the collateral.  In my experience, lenders would much rather have monthly payments than your collateral but this risk does exist.

Finally, many of my readers have asked me if there is such a thing as "constructive reaffirmation" meaning that by making payments, are you in effect re-obligating yourself?  Are you creating a contractual obligation by your actions?

I think that the answer to this depends on State law but I would suspect that a mortgage or vehicle lender would have a hard time making this argument.  In many States (such as in Georgia) a financial obligation related to real estate must be written and they must have specific terms.  As a matter of general contract law, a contract usually will not be enforceable if its terms are not specified.   I would argue therefore that a debtor's actions of simply making payments and the lenders actions of accepting such payments should not be enough to create personal liability on the part of the debtor.  I would be interested to know if any of the attorneys who read this blog have a different opinion or if anyone is aware of any case law that says otherwise.

At a minimum, if a lender tries to make the argument that you have somehow re-obligated yourself personally by your act of making payments, I would insist that the lender provide you with case law or other support for its position, and you should consult with a lawyer before agreeing to any payment or taking any action (like signing a new, valid contract) that could create personal liability.

My reader states that his lender has proposed a refinance for $180,000.   He did not say, but I presume that his prior (discharged) mortgage was much higher than this and that his current payments under the "stay and pay" are based on this higher balance.  If he enters into a mortgage contract for $180,000, that contract will function like any other mortgage – and include both personal liability under a promissory note as well as a property lien.   It is not a reaffirmation because the bankruptcy is over – instead, the proposed $180,000 loan deal is equivalent to a new mortgage.  This proposed deal could result in lower payments plus positive credit history, but it will also create personal liability that currently does not exist.  I would certainly advise my reader to discuss his options with an attorney so that he will fully understand the implications of his decision.

Posted in Chapter 7 issues, Lenders, Mortgage, Mortgage modifications, Obligation, Post bankruptcy credit rebuilding, Reaffirmation and negotiation, a, actions, agreements, and, avoid, clients, contract, create, creates, enters, history, history   , liability, liability my, lien, making, mortgage loan reaffirmation, negative, note, payment, payments, personal, positive, promissory, property, reader, reaffirmation, reaffirmation after bankruptcy, reaffirming, refinance and bankruptcy, signing, simply, states, the, type | Comments Off

Foreclosures Likely to Top One Million This Year

A recent report from National Public Radio notes that mortgage foreclosures are likely to reach the one million mark in 2010. To put this figure in context, consider these statistics, pulled from the real estate tracking site RealtyTrac.com:

• In a typical year, the United States sees about 100,000 homes enter foreclosure—a mere tenth of the number expected this year.
• In 2009, considered a big year for foreclosures, 900,000 homes were foreclosed on by banks.
• In the first five months of 2010 alone, 528,000 homes have entered foreclosure—already more than five times the yearly average.
• A whopping 1.7 million U.S. homeowners got some kind of foreclosure-related notice between January and June of this year (some of those houses have already gone into foreclosure). This translates to one in 78 homes in the country.

Understanding the Foreclosure Process

So what causes a bank to foreclose on a home? It can take as long as 15 months for a bank to repossess a home once a borrower is 30 days overdue on payments, according to sources. Here’s an idea of what might happen:

• Missed payments

: If a mortgage payment is thirty days or more late, the homeowner is said to be delinquent on payments. At this point, the lending bank may send a notice of foreclosure. This is kind of the first warning of foreclosure a homeowner can get. At this point, it’s a good idea to contact your lender if you’re having financial difficulties. You may also want to consider consulting with a bankruptcy lawyer about whether Chapter 13 bankruptcy is a viable option to stop your home’s foreclosure.

• Bank notifications: If a borrower continues to miss payments or stops making payments altogether, the bank will likely send notice that foreclosure proceedings have begun. While procedures and laws differ from state to state, homeowners can generally expect various types of notification in the mail and/or via telephone.
• Eviction: Once the bank has processed various paperwork, it can evict the residents of the house and reclaim the property as its own. Because of the unprecedented number of foreclosure cases currently active in the U.S., banks may (but won’t necessarily) take longer than usual to actually evict tenants.
• Foreclosure auction or sale: The bank now owns the home and may choose to sell it at a foreclosure auction or via short sale. Often, as sources note, any proceeds the bank makes from such a sale might be used to cover legal costs for the foreclosure process or the unpaid portion of the mortgage.

Clearly, the news of massive foreclosure action isn’t good for individuals and families who are losing their homes, but it’s also a bad sign for the larger economy. As more and more properties glut the real estate market, prices fall and the chances of a swift recovery in that area diminish.

Posted in Foreclosure, Mortgage, Mortgage Foreclosure, statistics | Comments Off

A New Unexpected Cause of Foreclosure Examined

A recent report from National Public Radio describes a shocking and troubling occurrence happening in certain neighborhoods in the United States. Apparently, some homeowners are finding their houses foreclosed on—but not because they fell behind on mortgage payments.

It seems that failure to pay homeowners association (HOA) dues constitutes legal ground for the HOA to foreclose on and resell a property.

A Devastating Oversight

The case detailed in the NPR story involves a deployed Captain serving in Iraq and his wife: they had, according to reports, paid for their home in full but missed two HOA payments—and their house was foreclosed on, sold for the amount of the overdue dues plus legal costs, and sold again for a profit.

Here’s what you need to know in order to protect yourself and your family from facing such an unfortunate fate:

• In the U.S., 33 states have laws that permit HOAs to place liens on homes for which dues are not paid and collect on those liens (i.e. foreclose on the home) without putting the case before a judge.
• In some states, processing a foreclosure takes less than a month—meaning that families have little time to take action to protect their property.
• Because of the tough economy, it seems more families than ever are missing payments and don’t believe it when they’re told they could lose their home for failure to pay a couple hundred dollars’ worth of fees or dues.

The truth of the matter, though, is that you can lose your home in many states simply for missing payments to your HOA. If you’re pressed for cash and worried about making such payments, contact your HOA and explain the situation.

The most important thing to do is to attack the problem head on rather than waiting until it’s too late—if you can’t afford the dues now, you definitely can’t afford to make alternate housing arrangements, but that could be the position you’re in if you miss too many checks.

And, while it may be the least appealing thing you can think of if you’re falling behind on various financial obligations, be sure to open mail as soon as you receive it, as it could contain important and time-sensitive information about some of all of your debts. Remember: avoiding debt doesn’t make it go away, and in this economy it’s important to take any and all warning signs of personal economic turmoil seriously.

Posted in Foreclosure, Mortgage, Mortgage Foreclosure, trends | Comments Off

Oil Spill Making Flood Insurance Difficult to Come By

The price of premiums for flood insurance for homeowners is on the rise and extra coverage is going to be harder to get, with the coming hurricane season and Gulf oil spill are making insurers more wary, according to the Wall Street Journal.

In general, the price of homeowner’s insurance is on a significant rise. Thomas J. Crowley, an independent insurance agent in New York was quoted saying, "the average price of a homeowner policy on Long Island is above $2,000 a year now, five years ago it was probably half that… my own policy has doubled in five years to over $3,000."

One of the main concerns for this year’s hurricane season is the oil spill in the Gulf. Most standard homeowners’ policies would not cover contamination done by the oil in the case of a flood, which could cause even more destruction than the standard high winds and rain.

According the Robert Hartwig, president of the Insurance Information Institute, "In general, whatever is mixed in with the water is part of the flood, hence excluded from a [traditional] homeowner policy."

Congress has failed to renew the National Flood Insurance Program, which is responsible for providing the vast majority of flood policies in the U.S., after it expired on June 1st.

An estimated 1,200 real-estate closings a day have been delayed this month because of the inaccessibility to flood insurance coverage, according to the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies. Federal law requires homes with federally backed mortgages in designated “flood-hazard” areas to have flood insurance, and without the NFIP, many homes can’t get flood insurance.

If you’re in the market for hurricane-related coverage, you should always be sure you have enough insurance to rebuild fully if the worst happens. Your cost to rebuild may be different than the market value of your house, and you shouldn’t wait until you need the money to find out that your policy hasn’t kept up with the cost of construction.

Another good tip is to fully understand your deductibles. Hurricane and wind deductibles can vary greatly, from 1% to 5%, depending on the state. On a $300,000 house, the difference between having to put up $3,000 and $15,000 can be a game changer.

One cost that can catch a storm victim by surprise is emergency living expenses. If your house is unlivable for several months, you need to make sure you can cover your expenses.

It may seem difficult in this economy to spend the money on a good homeowners insurance policy, but as Chari and Bob Hust found out, it can be more than worth it.

After Hurricane Ike caused significant damage to their two houses in Texas in 2008, the couple received combined over $600,000 to repair the houses. They essentially ended up rebuilding their houses, but they had no problem settling their claim with the insurance company. “You may pay more… but if you have a catastrophe, it is worth having the right insurance,” said Chari.

If a hurricane-related flood causes more damage than homeowners can afford, it could result in home foreclosure, and even bankruptcy.

Posted in Financial Literacy, Hurricane, Mortgage, flood insurance, gulf spill, oil spill | Comments Off