Why are Banks Setting the Opening Auction Bid Below The Principal Balance?

I attended a foreclosure auction in Bellevue, WA last week to discover if the rumor was true that banks are opening their bids below the amount owed.  I received confirmation from three professional investors that yes, the banks have been doing that, it’s no secret, and there seems to be no discernable pattern.  It’s not one particular bank or lender, it’s not particular types of property or in any specific area. It appears to be random.

In addition to the 92 active trustee sales scheduled for that day in Bellevue (auctions were also going on in other King County locations,) there were 81 postponements.  Only a few of the trustee sales attracted bidders, and the rest were deeded back to the bank.  Out of the 92 active sales, 25 had opening bids below the amount owed to the bank.

Why would a bank or lender set their opening bid below the amount owed?

Banks and lenders have duties to their shareholders and investors to maximize profits and miminize losses (well, at least they use to.) If opening bids are set LOWER than what’s owed, perhaps the banks have already tallied their losses, realized that if they had to take back the house, get it cleaned out and cleaned up for resale, pay a real estate agent their commission to sell it, pay for title, escrow, excise tax, utilities, and any other carrying costs,  they might as well sell it at a discount at auction.  But maybe there are other reasons.  I wondered if the banks were trying to keep more REO inventory off the market in an attempt to prop up home values for their existing REO inventory.  Maybe appraisers can ignore trustee sale prices in their reports.  Not knowing the answer, I emailed three appraisers for help and here’s what I learned:  Appraisers need to mention trustee sales in the neighborhood if these trustee sales make up a significant percentage of available comps because they are legitimate sales even though title is transferred using a trustee deed instead of a warranty deed.  If an appraiser choses to ignore these, he/she will run the risk of having the appraisal run through an “enhanced review” process in order to catch trustee sale market activity.  If a trustee sale is a significant comparable sale, it can be used. The requirement to use closely comparable trustee sales as comps can also vary based on the requirement of the lender and investor.  It may not be absolutely required but it may be in the appraisers best interest to mention trustee sales. Thanks to Jonathan Miller, Shane Leady and Richard Hagar for teaching me something new today.

That still doesn’t explain the phenomenon of banks undercutting their own principal balances at the auction.  My theory is that banks are relying on third party information such as a mini appraisal or Broker Price Opinion (BPO) prior to auction.  If the BPO suggests that the outstanding principal balance is so high and out of range as to likely attract no bidders at auction, then the banks have nothing to lose by setting the opening bid closer to or significantly lower than the principal balance owed.  If no one bids at auction, they’re still only out the money they would have been out anyways and on the upside, if the low opening bid attracts investors, then perhaps the bidding will rise closer to the payoff.  If not, they have an immediate loss that could be significantly LESS than losses that would add up over time, having to carry the REO on its books for months of marketing time in addition to the other costs mentioned above.

If banks are undercutting their own payoffs, then why isn’t this phenomenon more widely publicized?  Okay, so we know that bidding on a home at a trustee sale is too frightening for most first time homebuyers but still, if more people know about this, then maybe there would be more folks showing up at the trustee sales and bidding those homes UP, thereby reducing the banks losses.  There certainly is NO shortage of tall, well-groomed, good looking, muscular investor gurus in shorts showing off tanned legs, even though it was only 63 degrees outside hanging out at foreclosure auctions with all kinds of downpayment solutions to offer newby real estate investors:  “We have zero down financing available for the right investor!” and “We have private hard money financing available for your purchase and you can refinance out of that loan in 30 days….My mortgage broker is right here, let me introduce you to her.”

Maybe the banks aren’t publicizing their low bids because they don’t want to bring buyer attention away from purchasing their REOs or short sales, knowing that investors are the ones who typically show up at the auction anyways.  The banks also have a vested interest in keeping traditional buyers focused on MLS listings. 

If I owned stock in a bank or lender that was undercutting their own payoff at auction, I’d want to be darn sure that this practice was saving the bank money and not hiding something else such as higher losses to be pushed on into the next earnings report…or the next stress test.


Foreclosure Auction Video Part 1
April 24, 2009
Bellevue, WA
Here is the rest of the auction.
Special thanks to Phil Leng for introducing me to all the investor bidders.

President Obama’s Foreclosure Rescue Plan: Loan Modification Analysis

Underwater homeowners looking for a bailout from President Obama’s Foreclosure Rescue speech might be wise to think very carefully about all the possible consequences of grabbing the new loan modification offer. The White House press release on the full plan is located here. President Obama’s plan offers homeowners in trouble a helping hand, at the expense of all the other taxpayers who didn’t speculate, but let’s put aside our outrage for now. Instead, let’s look at whether or not the loan modification program is a good decision.

Clearly everyone is in a unique situation but there are some commonalities within the group we’ll call People Seeking Loan Modifications. I am openly stereotyping for the purpose of making this blog article general instead of case study specific. People Seeking Loan Modifications (PSLM) are typically folks who had a certain level of income when they purchased the home, and today that income has been dramatically reduced. Some may be facing a rate increase or a payment recast if negative amortization has pushed the principal balance to, say 115% or 125% LTV. Most purchased at 100% LTV, some decided on interest only loans, or interest only for a set period of time, in order to achieve a lower payment, speculating that future appreciation would bail them out at the next refi. They have two big problems: Negative equity AND an unaffordable payment.  PSLM typically have other consumer debt as well as mortgage debt. When income drops off a cliff, PSLM use credit cards to pay for routine expenses. By only offering a modest rate reduction, I predict that the re-default rate on these new loan modifications will be easily over 50% and I’m being optimistic. A rate reduction only solves half the problem. Their monthly housing expense has been reduced but their other expenses have not gone away. (If When the banks are nationalized it will be a lot easier to offer rate reductions on credit cards and perhaps that will be in the next bailout proposal.) There IS a solution for the typical loan mod seeking homeowner; President Obama wants principal balance cram downs in bankruptcy. Now the homeowner has to make a sacrifice: Trash my credit record for 10 years with a BK in exchange for getting a financial matrix reboot.

The key to whether or not a loan modification under the new program will work rests with the homeowner: What is the homeowner’s income today v. when he/she obtained the mortgage loan? Many of these folks have been laid off, some were living on extended overtime as a regular part of their monthly income, others were commissioned salesmen with flatline commissions during 2008, some had to take mandatory salary reductions, and still others have had NO disruptions in income but were qualified at the teaser rate of an Option ARM. What if the homeowner has no job at all? Does the homeowner get a zero percent interest rate loan? I’m thinking no, so how do we underwrite this loan and make a determination if this loan mod will fail? PSLM are high risk borrowers and re-defaults will likely occur. But the theory goes that if we can slow the foreclosures to the pace of a river instead of a flood, then doing so *might* help stabilize neighborhood home values and prevent even more foreclosures.

The Tim at SB reminds us to consider that when speculation occurs, foreclosures are a natural part of the solution and may not always be a negative, especially when a homeowner is far better off renting a similar home for far less than the (even modified!) mortgage payment. Home values fall and people who can afford to purchase do so. This begs the question: Do modified mortgage payments really help homeowners? The answer is, it depends on the homeowner.

In order to project future performance, it is important to visit past efforts in helping homeowners face foreclosure.  Past performance: FHA Secure: Projected to help 80,000 Actually helped 266. Hope for Homeowners: Projected to help 400,000 actually helped 312. Projections for President Obama’s loan modification program are that it may help 3 to 4 million homeowners. I project it will help far less. Perhaps we’ll break a thousand this time. This new plan appears to be a bailout for the banks, disguised as a bailout for homeowners. Same siren as FHA secure and H4H, she’s just wearing a different dress.

Will this piece of the Foreclosure Rescue package from the President help stabilize falling values? No. Instead, it will just flatten out the cliff diving and extend the pain that much longer.  From CR:

“For homeowners there are two key paragraphs: first the lender is responsible for bringing the mortgage payment (sounds like P&I) down to 38% of the borrowers monthly gross income. Then the lender and the government will share the burden of bringing the payment down to 31% of the monthly income. Also the homeowner will receive a $1,000 principal reduction each year for five years if they make their payments on time. This is not so good. The Obama administration doesn’t understand that there were two types of speculators during the housing bubble: flippers (they are excluded), and buyers who used excessive leverage hoping for further price appreciation. Back in April 2005 I wrote: “Housing: Speculation is the Key [S]omething akin to speculation is more widespread – homeowners using substantial leverage with escalating financing such as ARMs or interest only loans.” This plan rewards those homebuyers who speculated with excessive leverage. I think this is a mistake.

Another problem with Part 2 is that this lowers the interest rate for borrowers far underwater, but other than the $1,000 per year principal reduction and normal amortization, there is no reduction in the principal. This probably leaves the homeowner far underwater (owing more than their home is worth). When these homeowners eventually try to sell, they will probably still face foreclosure – prolonging the housing slump. These are really not homeowners, they are debtowners / renters.

Buyer Beware!!! – $8,000 Tax Credit?

UPDATE: signed and passed 2/17 at $8,000. See more details here.

Original post below does not indicate the change to “must not have owned a home during the last 3 years” which was added to the final bill before it was passed.

*********

If you are currently in the process of buying a house, be aware that there is a $15,000  ($8,000) Tax Credit in the new stimulus bill which may, or may not, pass tonight. Then it has to be signed, hopefully by President’s Day they are saying.  Then we have to watch the effective date closely “for homes closed on or after ?” Likely that will be on or after the day the bill is signed, which presumably will be some time during the month of February.

Just a day or so ago an RCG reader asked if she could take the old credit on this return, and she bought ONE DAY too early to get the credit!  Aaaargh…you don’t want that to be you, especially since this credit in this stimulus package is not a loan and is doubled (as of last night) to $15,000 as it stands right now!

That’s a lot of moolah to forfeit by closing one day too early!

Share this post!

stumbleupon

There are a lot of discussions all over the internet, the news and Twitter about the pros and cons of this, but very few warning buyers who are currently in escrow or looking at houses today!  Watch this closely, and sellers should be prepared to move the close date a day or two, if needed.  NO ONE wants to be responsible for a buyer losing out on a $15,000 (an $8,000) credit!

This is like every SELLER getting a $15,000 (an $8,000) price reduction, complements of Uncle Sam and President Obama!  Big NEWS for both buyers AND sellers of homes. Watch the news VERY closely in the coming days.

Should builders and banks receive an excise tax exemption as WA State faces a budget deficit?

House Bill 1495 has been introduced into the legislature and is now in committee.  In these times filled with hope, I am hoping this bill dies or at least comes out looking substantially different.  Let’s take a look.

AN ACT Relating to real estate excise tax exemptions to stabilize neighborhoods…

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
The legislature finds that there is a substantial inventory of unsold or foreclosed vacant homes on the market that is driving property values down and destabilizing neighborhoods. These homes also present an opportunity to provide affordable homes to low-income families, addressing some of the unmet need for affordable housing in the state of Washington. The legislature also finds that providing targeted incentives to housing developers will stimulate the sale of these vacant homes to low-income buyers now and stabilize neighborhoods affected by this growing inventory. The legislature intends to provide such incentives through excise tax relief on sales of homes to low-income first-time homebuyers.

I’ve been asking Realtors in all my classes to begin watching the percentage of financially distressed sellers with homes for sale in their market area.  Agents can do an MLS keyword search using terms such as “short sale,

Nationalization and "Bad Bank" Analysis

Dr.Paul Krugman “Wall Street Voodoo”

“recent news reports suggest that many influential people, including Federal Reserve officials, bank regulators, and, possibly, members of the incoming Obama administration, have become devotees of a new kind of voodoo: the belief that by performing elaborate financial rituals we can keep dead banks walking.”

“What I suspect is that policy makers — possibly without realizing it — are gearing up to attempt a bait-and-switch: a policy that looks like the cleanup of the savings and loans, but in practice amounts to making huge gifts to bank shareholders at taxpayer expense, disguised as “fair value

Government Intervention in Foreclosure

This is Part Four of a series of articles on foreclosures.
This article does not constitute legal advice.
Foreclosure laws vary from state to state.
Homeowners in financial distress should always hire legal counsel. Call your local state bar association for a referral.  Reduced or free legal aid may be available in some states. Ask for a referral from your state Bar Association or through a LOCAL HUD-Approved Housing Counseling Agency.

In this article we will address current government intervention as well as discuss possible future intervention programs. For other preventative measures, check out the other parts of this series:

Part one: Foreclosure; Losing the American Dream
Part two: Options for Homeowners Facing Foreclosure
Part three: Loan Modifications
Part four: Government Intervention in Foreclosure
Part five: Foreclosure; Letting Go and Rebuilding

Current government intervention in the foreclosure process has taken many forms. Some states such as California, Florida, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Philadelphia, and Illinois have discussed, proposed, or passed legislation in favor of a foreclosure moratorium.  In order to avoid state mandates, some companies placed a temporary halt on foreclosures over the holidays. These companies include Indymac, Countrywide, WAMU, and loans held in the Fannie/Freddie portfolios.  Recall that during the real estate bubble run-up, government backed loans fell out of favor. Many subprime loans are held by lender/servicers in pools of mortgage backed securities. The foreclosure moratorium didn’t reach those homeowners.

State moratoriums give homeowners more time to possibly refinance into a Hope for Homeowners loan or complete a short sale and the moratorium also gives banks more time to get caught up on all the backlog of foreclosure paperwork

Financial Economics Analyst Edward Vincent Murphy, in his Sept 12, 2008 report “Economic Analysis of a Mortgage Foreclosure Moratorium,

Questions for a Panel of Bankers

I’ll be moderating a panel of bankers on Dec 1, 2008 in Denver at the National Auctioneers Association’s convention.  I present at 11:00 AM (Title: There Always Was a Subprime Market. View my slides here) and the panel starts after lunch.  I’m preparing some questions for the panelists. Here’s what I have so far. Your suggestions are welcome.

1. When will you begin to lend again to borrowers who are other than prime?

2. What will happen if/when the FDIC runs out of money?

3. How are local, state-chartered banks preparing for the coming loan losses in the commercial and development sector?

4. How are loan modifications performing at your institution?

5. What do FHA delinquencies look like at your institution?

Fannie and Freddie to Announce Mass Loan Modification Program

From the Wall Street Journal:

Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and U.S. officials are expected to announce plans Tuesday to speed up the modification of hundreds of thousands of loans held by the housing finance giants, marking the latest effort to try and prevent more foreclosures, people familiar with the matter said.

The announcement could mark the government’s most assertive use of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to help homeowners since the companies were taken over in September.

The streamlined effort will target certain loans that are 90 days or more past due, these people said. The program will aim to bring the ratio of mortgage payments for these homeowners to 38% of their income by modifying interest rates and in some cases forgiving portions of principal debt, these people said.

Borrowers would have to provide a statement or affidavit showing that they have encountered some sort of hardship that has impacted their ability to pay their mortgage. It would only apply to loans made on or before Jan. 1, 2008, and borrowers will be disqualified if they file for bankruptcy. The homes must be owner-occupied and escrows for real estate taxes and insurance must already be set up.

U.S. government officials plan to encourage big banks that hold loans in their portfolios to take similar streamlined modification measures.

The announcement is expected to come at a press conference at 2 p.m. at the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which temporarily has Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in conservatorship because of their shaky financial condition.

Spokespeople for the companies, the Treasury Department and the Federal Housing Finance Agency weren’t immediately available for comment.

Servicers are expected to be paid $800 for a successful modification and loan investors are expected to reimburse servicers for certain fees associated with the modification. There will be a 90-day trial period, and if borrowers successfully make payments for those 90 days the modification will be formally approved. 

This is the beginning of massive government intervention to try and slow foreclosures. On a positive side, Fannie and Freddie could provide a template for servicers to follow which may help homeowners receive a “yes” or “no” answer faster.  On the down side, this may also slow the recover of the housing market, prolonging the decline of home prices. Currently 40% of loan modifications re-default. This may also further erode investor confidence in residential mortgage backed securities, the impact being even tighter underwriting guidelines than what we’re now experiencing.

I’d like to see provisions in there regarding proof that the homeowner did not commit fraud when receiving the original loan, and proof that the homeowner has the ability to re-pay the modified loan.  But these things take time to ascertain.

Update from Calculated Risk:

Here is the press release from the FHFA. Note that this does not include principal reduction as a solution to create an affordable payment, and is limited to: “extending the term, reducing the interest rate, and forbearing interest”.

This is intended to help “thousands” (a drop in the bucket unless it is several hundred thousand), and seems to encourage homeowners to stop making payments until they are 90 days late.