Mortgage Cram-Down Bankruptcy Legislation Passes in House

A controversial bill that would allow Federal judges to modify loans, forcing banks to reduce the payments of borrowers in bankruptcy got one step closer to becoming a law. The so called mortgage "cram-down" law passed in the House of Representatives yesterday 234-191 and heads to the Senate.

According to reports from the Congressional Budget Office this law will help 1 million homeowners remain in their homes. The proposed law would give Federal judges the authority to modify mortgage contracts by lengthening terms, cutting mortgage rates, or reducing loan balances. It would also permanently increase the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) coverage of deposits to $250,000.

Although this law would arguably give judge more tools to help consumers recover from crushing debt, it will continue to apply pressure to banks and housing prices.

The bill stalled in the House earlier this week amid significant opposition from the banking industry. Industry groups, like the American Banker, claim that this legislation will just further destabilize housing prices. There was also concern with the earlier version of the bill being too attractive; therefore, ceasing to be a true "last resort."

As a result, the House tightened the legislation with the provisions such as a equity share that would be paid back to the bank if the property was sold later at a profit.

Experts believe that this will significantly increase Chapter 13 bankruptcy filings. Chapter 13 bankruptcy code allows individuals with regular income to pay all or a portion of their debts and avoid losing their homes in foreclosure.

Friday jobless numbers that continue to climb give us reason to believe that this bankruptcy provision is likely to get a lot of exercise, if passed. February jobless claims reported another 651,000 jobs lost. This raises the unemployment rate to 8.1 percent from 7.6 percent in January, the highest level since 1983. Total job loss since the recession began in December 2007 reaches 4.4 million.

Mortgage lending in Continental Europe

Within the European Union, the Covered bonds market volume (covered bonds outstanding) amounted to about EUR 2 billion at year-end 2007 with Germany, Denmark, Spain, and France each having outstandings above 200.000 EUR million. In German language, Pfandbriefe is the term applied. Pfandbrief-like securities have been introduced in more than 25 European countries – and in recent years also in the U.S. and other countries outside Europe – each with their own unique law and regulations. However, the diffusion of the concept differ: In 2000, the US institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac together reached one per cent of the national population. Furthermore, 87 per cent of their purchased mortgages were granted to borrowers in metropolitan areas with higher income levels. In Europe, a wider market has been achieved: In Denmark, mortgage banks reached 35 per cent of the population in 2002, while the German Bausparkassen achieved widespread regional distribution and more than 30 per cent of the German population concluded a Bauspar contract (as of 2001).

Costs

A study issued by the UN Economic Commission for Europe compared German, US, and Danish mortgage systems. The German Bausparkassen have reported nominal interest rates of approximately 6 per cent per annum in the last 40 years (as of 2004). In addition, they charge administration and service fees (about 1.5 per cent of the loan amount). In the United States, the average interest rates for fixed-rate mortgages in the housing market started in high double figures in the 1980s and have (as of 2004) reached about 6 per cent per annum. However, gross borrowing costs are substantially higher than the nominal interest rate and amounted for the last 30 years to 10.46 per cent. In Denmark, similar to the United States capital market, interest rates have fallen to 6 per cent per annum. A risk and administration fee amounts to 0.5 per cent of the outstanding debt. In addition, an acquisition fee is charged which amounts to one per cent of the principal.

Recent trends

July 28, 2008, US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson announced that, along with four large US banks, the Treasury would attempt to kick-start a market for these securities in the U.S., primarily to provide an alternative form of mortgage-backed securities. Similarly, in the UK "the Government is inviting views on options for a UK framework to deliver more affordable long-term fixed-rate mortgages, including the lessons to be learned from international markets and institutions". More specifically, Mr. George Soros issued a Wall Street Journal Opinion: Denmark Offers a Model Mortgage Market. - A survey of European Pfandbrief-like products was issued in 2005 by the Bank for International Settlements^[13]; the International Monetary Fund in 2007 issued a study of the covered bond markets in Germany and Spain, while the European Central Bank in 2003 issued a study of housing markets, addressing also mortgage markets and providing a two page overview of current mortgage systems in the EU countries.

History

While the idea originated in Prussia in 1769, a Danish act on mortgage credit associations of 1850 enabled the issuing of bonds (Danish: Realkreditobligationer) as a means to refinance mortgage loans . With the German mortgage banks law of 1900, the whole German Empire was given a standardized legal foundation for the emission of Pfandbriefe. An account from the perspective of development economics is available.

Mortgages in the UK

The mortgage loans industry and market

There are currently over 200 significant separate financial organizations supplying mortgage loans to house buyers in Britain. The major lenders include building societies, banks, specialized mortgage corporations, insurance companies, and pension funds. Over the years, the share of the new mortgage loans market held by building societies has declined. Between 1977 and 1987, it fell drastically from 96% to 66% while that of banks and other institutions rose from 3% to 36%. The banks and other institutions that made major inroads into the mortgage market during this period were helped by such factors as:

• relative managerial efficiency;

• advanced technology, organizational capabilities, and expertise in marketing;

• extensive branch networks; and

• capacities to tap cheaper international sources of funds for lending.

By the early 1990s, UK building societies had succeeded in greatly slowing in not reversing the decline in their market share. In 1990, the societies held over 60% of all mortgage loans but took over 75% of the new mortgage market – mainly at the expense of specialized mortgage loans corporations. Building societies also increased their share of the personal savings deposits market in the early 1990s at the expense of the banks – attracting 51% of this market in 1990 compared with 42% in 1989.One study found that in the five years 1987-1992, the building societies collectively outperformed the UK clearing banks on practically all the major growth and performance measures. The societies' share of the new mortgage loans market of 75% in 1990-91 was similar to the share level achieved in 1985. Profitability as measured by return on capital was 17.8% for the top 20 societies in 1991, compared with only 8.5% for the big four banks. Finally, bad debt provisions relative to advances were only 0.4% for the top 20 societies compared with 2.8% for the four banks.

Though the building societies did subsequently recover a significant amount of the mortgage lending business lost to the banks, they still only had about two-thirds of the total market at the end of the 1980s. However, banks and building societies were by now becoming increasingly similar in terms of their structures and functions. When the Abbey National building society converted into a bank in 1989, this could be regarded either as a major diversification of a building society into retail banking – or as significantly increasing the presence of banks in the residential mortgage loans market. Research organization Industrial Systems Research has observed that trends towards the increased integration of the financial services sector have made comparison and analysis of the market shares of different types of institution increasingly problematical. It identifies as major factors making for consistently higher levels of growth and performance on the part of some mortgage lenders in the UK over the years:

• the introduction of new technologies, mergers, structural reorganization and the realization of economies of scale, and generally increased efficiency in production and marketing operations – insofar as these things enable lenders to reduce their costs and offer more price-competitive and innovative loans and savings products;

• buoyant retail savings receipts, and reduced reliance on relatively expensive wholesale markets for funds (especially when interest rates generally are being maintained at high levels internationally);

• lower levels of arrears, possessions, bad debts, and provisioning than competitors;

• increased flexibility and earnings from secondary sources and activities as a result of political-legal deregulation; and

• being specialized or concentrating on traditional core, relatively profitable mortgage lending and savings deposit operations.

Mortgage types

The UK mortgage market is one of the most innovative and competitive in the world. Unlike some other countries, there is little intervention in the market by the state or state funded entities and virtually all borrowing is funded by either mutual organisations (building societies and credit unions) or proprietary lenders (typically banks). Since 1982, when the market was substantially deregulated, there has been substantial innovation and diversification of strategies employed by lenders to attract borrowers. This has led to a wide range of mortgage types.

As lenders derive their funds either from the money markets or from deposits, most mortgages revert to a variable rate, either the lender's standard variable rate or a tracker rate, which will tend to be linked to the underlying Bank of England (BoE) repo rate (or sometimes LIBOR). Initially they will tend to offer an incentive deal to attract new borrowers. This may be:

• A fixed rate; where the interest rate remains constant for a set period; typically for 2, 3, 4, 5 or 10 years. Longer term fixed rates (over 5 years) whilst available, tend to be more expensive and/or have more onerous early repayment charges and are therefore less popular than shorter term fixed rates.
• A capped rate; where similar to a fixed rate, the interest rate cannot rise above the cap but can vary beneath the cap. Sometimes there is a collar associated with this type of rate which imposes a minimum rate. Capped rate are often offered over periods similar to fixed rates, e.g. 2, 3, 4 or 5 years.
• A discount rate; where there is set margin reduction in the standard variable rate (e.g. a 2% discount) for a set period; typically 1 to 5 years. Sometimes the discount is expressed as a margin over the base rate (e.g. BoE base rate plus 0.5% for 2 years) and sometimes the rate is stepped (e.g. 3% in year 1, 2% in year 2, 1% in year three).
• A cashback mortgage; where a lump sum is provided (typically) as a percentage of the advance e.g. 5% of the loan.

To make matters more confusing these rates are often combined: For example, 4.5% 2 year fixed then a 3 year tracker at BoE rate plus 0.89%.

With each incentive the lender may be offering a rate at less than the market cost of the borrowing. Therefore, they typically impose a penalty if the borrower repays the loan within the incentive period or a longer period (referred to as an extended tie-in). These penalties used to be called a redemption penalty or tie-in, however since the onset of Financial Services Authority regulation they are referred to as an early repayment charge.

"Self Cert" mortgage

Mortgage lenders usually use salaries declared on wage slips to work out a borrower's annual income and will usually lend up to a fixed multiple of the borrower's annual income. Self Certification Mortgages, informally known as "self cert" mortgages, are available to employed and self employed people who have a deposit to buy a house but lack the sufficient documentation to prove their income.

This type of mortgage can be beneficial to people whose income comes from multiple sources, whose salary consists largely or exclusively of commissions or bonuses, or whose accounts may not show a true reflection of their earnings. Self cert mortgages have two disadvantages: the interest rates charged are usually higher than for normal mortgages and the loan to value ratio is usually lower.

100% mortgages

Normally when a bank lends a customer money they want to protect their money as much as possible; they do this by asking the borrower to fund a certain percentage of the property purchase in the form of a deposit.

100% mortgages are mortgages that require no deposit (100% loan to value). These are sometimes offered to first time buyers, but almost always carry a higher interest rate on the loan.

Together/Plus mortgages

A development of the theme of 100% mortgages is represented by Together/Plus type mortgages, which have been launched by a number of lenders in recent years.

Together/Plus Mortgages represent loans of 100% or more of the property value - typically up to a maximum of 125%. Such loans are normally (but not universally) structured as a package of a 95% mortgage and an unsecured loan of up to 30% of the property value. This structure is mandated by lenders' capital requirements which require additional capital for loans of 100% or more of the property value.

UK mortgage process

UK lenders usually charge a valuation fee, which pays for a chartered surveyor to visit the property and ensure it is worth enough to cover the mortgage amount. This is not a full survey so it may not identify all the defects that a house buyer needs to know about. Also, it does not usually form a contract between the surveyor and the buyer, so the buyer has no right to sue if the survey fails to detect a major problem. For an extra fee, the surveyor can usually carry out a building survey or a (cheaper) "homebuyers survey" at the same time.