Basketball
fans
know that all-stars Patrick Ewing, Charles Barkley, Dominique
Wilkins, Elgin Baylor, Reggie Miller, Pete Maravich, Karl
Malone, and John Stockton share something – none of them ever
won an NBA championship. Like basketball, football is a team
sport. OJ Simpson knows a thing or two about team sports - and
now he knows about the foreclosure process, in which it is
rumored that Chase reps could not locate him in spite of his
well-publicized prison stay: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slugap-ojsimpson-foreclosure.
On
the more constructive side of things, Franklin American Mortgage
Company is currently searching for a VP of Wholesale
Operations for a Regional Operations Center located in
Concord, California. As most know, FAMC is one of the top 5
independent wholesale lenders in the country. The VP is
responsible for overseeing day-to-day wholesale business
operations for A-paper originations, including Jumbo, FHA and
VA, process flow management, individual and regional production
goals, corporate and state/federal regulatory compliance,
employee and state HR requirements, loan quality, customer
service and policy/procedure implementation and
accountability. Prior wholesale operations management experience
is highly preferred. Please submit resumes to Bobby Frank at b.frank@franklinamerican.com.
Head-shaking
continues
regarding economic stimulus and recovery, the agency plans, and
g-fee increases. A while back Steve T. with Primary Residential in
Utah wrote and noted, "Let’s
say we both put $20 into a box. I sell you the box for $30. We
both make $10. Repeat for infinite cash flow: economic
problems solved. Last year ‘in a bid to stem taxpayer
losses for bad loans guaranteed by federal housing agencies
Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac, Senator Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) proposed
that borrowers be required to make a 5% down payment in order to
qualify. His proposal was rejected 57-42 on a party-line vote
because, as Senator Chris Dodd (D-Conn) explained, passage of
such a requirement would restrict home ownership to only those
who can afford it.’ What are we missing here?”
And
Lindsay Hill with Compass
Analytics noted, "The congressionally-mandated g-fee
increases, established in part to pay for extensions of the
payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits, has created somewhat
of a disconnect between MBS prices and lender rate sheet prices.
It creates an interesting
dynamic when the government is purchasing mortgage-backed
securities to keep rates low and help fuel a recovery in
housing, and yet the same government is increasing rates on
the g-fee side, increases that will trickle directly down to
the borrowers that are hoped will lead a housing recovery.”
The
g-fee “shall be determined by the FHFA Director to reflect the
risk of loss, as well the cost of capital allocated to similar
assets held by other fully private regulated financial
institutions, but such amount shall not be less than an average
increase of 10 basis points for each origination year above the
average fees imposed in 2011 for such guarantees. The GSEs will
be prohibited from offsetting the cost of the fee to
originators, borrowers and investors by decreasing other
charges, fee, or premiums, in any other manner. The director of
the FHFA will determine appropriate g-fee to reflect the risk of
loss, as well the cost of capital allocated to similar assets
held by other fully private regulated financial institutions.
FHFA can allow the increase in the g-fee charged by the GSEs to
be phased-in gradually over a 2-year period from the enactment
of the bill. The increase should be such that it provides
uniform pricing among lenders, and takes into consideration the
risk levels and conditions in the financial market.”
Some
Wall Street MBS analysts believe that it is likely that the
g-fee needs to increase by another 15-45bp over the next two
years (on top of the 10bp increase) if the FHFA changes g-fee
level such that it reflects the risk of loss as well as the cost
of capital allocated to similar assets by other fully private
regulated financial institutions as required by H.R. 3630. The analysts note that
conventional securities could be worth .375-.625 more because
of g-fee increase’s impact on current production, and older
securities could be worth 1.5-2.0 points more since it will be
more expensive to refinance, so fewer will do it, meaning that
the securities are on the books longer.
Yesterday
the
commentary mentioned some trouble that a lender was having
ascertaining the FHA loans that had gone delinquent and that
were impacting its compare ratio. I received a few notes on it.
Ray W. wrote, "Rob, Potomac Partners in DC is a consulting group
lead by Brian Chappelle (bjc@p2partners.com) and
can likely give guidance to your reader."
Darryl
R. from Illinois wrote, "Maybe if FHA would allow individuals
who are currently at .50 on their monthly MI to refinance at .50
and also those at .80 to refinance at .80 and those at 1.15 to
refi at 1.15 they wouldn’t see as many delinquencies. Does it
take a brain surgeon to figure out that this makes sense? They
put the 5% rule in place (which I do think is a good thing) but
that should be enough. If people who put down 20% are
underwater today, what do they think about people who put down
either 3 or 3.5%? But remember the Dodd-Frank fiasco was put in
place to help the people. HUD is doing practically nothing to
help people refinance and stay in their homes. The biggest thing
that I don’t understand is when the government prolongs the
entire program but doesn’t move the date for individuals to be
eligible - haven’t house values continued to decline since
2009?"
And
while we’re on suggestions, here’s an idea for a new
conventional program. Fannie and Freddie offer a 15-year
fixed refinance based on today’s value with the loan amount
equal to appraised value. The balance of the deficiency is due
at the end of the 15 year term. Equity is built faster. In five
years the borrower is ‘back to even’ if values stabilize. They
could sell in five years and the deficiency would be paid in
full. You could throw a term life policy on the borrower for the
deficiency amount with the lender as the beneficiary just in
case the borrower dies. The proposed payment to borrowers
sitting at 5% with a reduced loan balance would be close to what
they are paying now if the rate on the 15 year fixed is around
3%. The lenders get paid in full and our industry moves back to
stabilization with borrowers building equity. A 125% 30 year
loan for an underwater borrower does not solve anything for the
housing industry: what is better for the housing industry –
pools of 30-year fixed $500k loans on $400k properties at 4% or
pools of $400k loans at 3% on $400k properties for 15 years with
$100k balloons? You can’t do a massive loan reduction because of
fairness to those that have paid as agreed, but you can create a
loan program that reduces the loan balance quicker.” For
comments write to Mark Weber at mweber89@cox.net.
The
housing market continues to muddle along. U.S. home prices fell
0.4% in November from October, the fourth-straight monthly
decline according to FNC's residential price index. The index is
4.6% lower than a year earlier, though FNC said year-over-year
declines have stabilized in recent months. By the way, the co-founders of FNC (a
real estate technology firm focused on appraisals and
servicing) host a “radio” show on Monday’s – check it out
at http://www.fncmorningview.com.
PNC
Financial
knows something about housing. It is the nation’s sixth largest
bank, and announced that net income fell to $451 million in the
4th quarter, down from $798 million a year ago. It
set aside $240 million (contributing to a 40% drop in quarterly
profits) because it and other big banks may be near a settlement
of government allegations of mortgage and foreclosure abuse -
"robo-signing." (U.S. Bancorp, #5, did something similar,
reporting a $130 million “expense accrual related to mortgage
servicing matters.”)
The
latest SEC lawsuit involves Florida’s BankAtlantic Bancorp
and its CEO Alan Levan. They allegedly misled investors on
defaulting loans in its real estate development portfolio, and
hid the "deteriorating state" of portions of its land
acquisition and development business in 2007. The company and
Levan then tried to minimize losses on the books, the SEC said,
by committing accounting fraud and improperly recorded loans it
tried to sell from the portfolio.
Complaints
about
interest rates continue to be non-existent, and yesterday was no
exception. Yesterday, however, mortgage banker selling picked
up, nearly doubling from recent levels. At the same time,
unfortunately, investors in MBS’s grew cautious given the refi
numbers from the MBA’s weekly survey: who wants to pay a premium
above par for a loan if it is going to refinance relatively
soon? The 10-yr T-note closed at a yield of 1.90% (easy to
remember) and MBS prices were worse by about .125. For good
news, the National Association of Home Builders Housing Market
Index which increased four points in January to 25 - its highest
level since June 2007 and its fourth monthly improvement in a
row.
Today,
given
that things are pretty quiet in Europe, the focus is more on U.S
news. We had weekly Jobless Claims which dropped 50k (after the
big rise last week) to 352k – the lowest in almost four years.
The 4-week moving average is -3,500. This certainly indicates
some strength in the jobs market, even if one questions the
precise numbers. The Consumer Price Index was unchanged and +.1%
on the core rate – inflation is not an issue. Housing Starts
came in slightly lower than expected, -4.1%, and Permits were
-.1%. We’ll also have the Philly Fed Survey for January, and at
8AM the Treasury announces details of next week's auctions of
2-, 5- and 7-year notes - estimated unchanged at $99 billion. So
far, given the strong
jobs number this morning, rates are slightly higher: the 10-yr
is up to 1.94% and MBS prices are worse about .250.
A man and woman were having a quiet, romantic dinner in a fine
restaurant. They were gazing lovingly at each other and holding
hands.
Their waitress, taking another order at a table a few steps
away, suddenly noticed the man slowly sliding down his chair and
under the table, but the woman acted unconcerned.
The waitress watched as the man slid all the way down his chair
and out of sight under the table.
Still, the woman appeared calm and unruffled, apparently unaware
her dining companion had disappeared.
The waitress went over to the table and said to the woman,
"Pardon me, ma'am, but I think your husband just slid under the
table."
The woman calmly looked up at her and said, "No, he didn't. He
just walked in the door."
If you're interested, visit my twice-a-month blog at the
STRATMOR Group web site located at