Schneiderman: Civil & Criminal Investigations Will Continue As We Seek Accountability For Those Responsible For Crisis And Leverage Greater Relief For Homeowners
Sorry Suckers! | FHFA Releases Analysis that Excludes Principal Forgiveness As Loss Mitigation Tool
William Black | Why Elite Frauds Cause Recurrent, Intensifying Economic, Political and Moral Crises
Recasting A Mortgage – What Is It and Why Is It Done?
Article by Peter Harper
A mortgage recast is more like mortgage modification but it mainly involves re-amortization of your home loan. The need for mortgage recast in general comes up in case of three situations. One is when you would want to pay down the principal and get the home loan amortized. The second situation is when a homeowner is in financial hardship and thus may want to extend the term of the home loan. Another situation is when negative amortization happens on a home loan, recast is done.
Why is recasting on mortgage done?
Mortgage recasting is done in order to lower the monthly payment on your mortgage. Thus, it is more like mortgage modification as the loan term gets changed and the payment on the mortgage is reduced. Through mortgage recasting the cost and the hassles of refinancing your mortgage gets reduced. There are many such lenders who offer the homeowners the chance which can help them in to lowering their monthly payments through recasting or re-amortization.
Amortization is when the payments against the mortgage are made and when the loan amount reduces as a result of this. Thus, negative amortization is just the opposite of this where the loan amount grows as a result of less than minimum payments made by the borrower.
The amortized loan lowers the fixed amount of money that you are required to pay each month against the home loan so that at the end of the mortgage, the principal amount gets paid off. Thus, you can use a mortgage calculator in order to understand fully the amortization schedule which shows as to how the monthly payments are broken down into the payment towards the interest and the payment against the principal amount borrowed.
Typically the homeowners do not recast the home mortgage under a situation where they make additional payments against the principal. Rather the loan gets foreshortened and this is because additional payments towards the principal reduce the outstanding balance of the loan, along with the expense on the monthly interest. In this case as the monthly payment do not change, so the loan gets paid off faster.
However, sometimes the main idea of the homeowners, in making the additional principal payments is not mainly to reduce the loan but to lower the monthly payments on the mortgage. In such a situation the home loan is required to be recast. The lender in case of recast is required to base the payments against the home loan as per the new term, thereby the lower balance of the loan and also the remaining home loan term.
But again, not all of the mortgage lenders may offer their customers the provision to recast the home mortgage. The main lenders in many cases sell off the loans and these get originated to investors. The investors in general are not much interested in providing this level of provisions and flexibility to the borrowers and so these home loans may not have the recast option. However, it is always better to talk to your lender about the mortgage recast and if you can get such a provision.
Other than this in case of the negative amortization loans or also as known as the pick and pay loan, you may be able to recast the loan. Though these loans offer you various advantage and various low payment options, this is quite a troublesome kind of loan. This is because the loan amount grows and at a point of time it becomes really tough for you to make the payments against the home loan. So, in such cases the loans can be recast and in this case the loan payments grow higher in order to lower the principal amount which you had borrowed.
William Black | Lenders Put the Lies in Liar’s Loans and Bear the Principal Moral Culpability
Fixing the Principal Deficit Problem
I’m not sure I deserve credit for this entry from Richard Widmark, but it has a great deal of merit. It should be expanded and I’ll publish it. His is a bare outline with not much to show the reasoning behind it. Yet I see glimmers of a solution if anyone would listen.
The presenting issue is that none of the homes are worth the paper that was written and signed. We all know that. But we also know that prices vary from place to place. And we know the appraisal fraud was worse in some places than in others. So without establishing another federal agency to go through each closing, how do you fix this? Richard sees a possible way. He gives me credit but I’m not sure why.
Summarizing what I see in Richard’s comment you start with each homeowner using a “stated value” of their home that they come up with. The program could be further refined by use of appraisers, but his point is well taken — if the homeowners can be kept honest we instantly have a correction to reality pricing and that is the only correct starting point for this nonsense.
The offset for the homeowner is that if they state the value too low, then the government or anyone else could come in and buy it. The homeowner is out. The more they want to keep the home, the higher the value they place on the home. In theory this makes sense and while neo-cons would be quick to point out moral hazard, I would be just as quick to point out that any moral hazard would be a drop in the bucket compared to what Wall Street did with these “values.”
A new obligation, note and mortgage is created at the real fair market value of the property. I would argue that the best stimulus for the economy is to use 80% loan to value since the prices are still going down anyway. The creation of a feeling of equity, even if it wasn’t all that solid would do more to prop up the confidence in the economy and confidence in a government that is dealing with reality.
The new loan would be funded. The proceeds would go to anyone who could prove they actually lost money on this deal starting with the purchase of mortgage bonds and ending with the new loan and the new valuation. I would argue that the investors should be required to use their “credit standing” if they can prove it, to hold a portion of the new loan rather than receiving funding from it. The funding would come from conventional lending, especially if you use 80% loan to value and conventional underwriting standards. I would argue that it is in the best interest of the country to make some accommodation (perhaps a lease) to those homeowners who cannot afford to own the property even if the terms are drastically turned in their favor.
Government guarantee programs, as opposed to actual funding will cause actual liquidity in the housing market and allow these deals to go forward and the regular purchase and sale of homes to go forward using a higher degree of certainty about prices. The actual out-of-pocket government cost would be minimal.
But here is the rub. If we don’t adopt the approach used in Germany which was to create and maintain jobs at all costs, then there won’t be anyone to pay rent, mortgage payments or anything else. Housing prices have long been known to vary directly with median income, which in this country has been going down for over thirty years. The drop in median income was “offset” with credit, but we all know how that turned out. So the only way we are going to see our country survive as anything more than a banana republic is by raising median income through jobs programs, new business stimulus, small business loan liquidity and housing liquidity.
The neo-cons can scream all they want about how this is against American principles of self-reliance and small government. This is NOT an ideological question. It is a practical one — do we want recovery or do we want ruin?
FROM RICHARD WIDMARK (ANY RELATION TO THE ACTOR?)
I propose the Neil Garfield bottoms-up and top-down split mortgage options program.
Each underwater home owner is given the right to fix a fair value on his home.
The US Government will guarantee a mortgage on that homeowners own value with the full faith and credit of the US Government: I propose 5-year T-Bond rates for that underlying mortgage.
And then the US Government will give a lesser guarantee on a 2nd mortgage to fill the difference.
The rub: the US Government may condemn the property at will and on 60-days notice at the the price set by the homeowner. And third parties may force than condemnation procedure as well.
And in that fashion – homeowners will be very honest about their homes value.
Homeowners may adjust their value upwards if prices rise – as they will under this propgram.
Filed under: foreclosure
BofA to reduce principal for at-risk mortgages
Bank of America Corp. is giving some of its most troubled mortgage borrowers relief from the threat of foreclosure.
Bank of America – Mortgage – Business – Financial Services – Banking Services
ACORN Asks HAMP Servicers to Forgive Principal
“The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), in response to the Treasury announcement, calls for a full stop to foreclosure on any HAMP-eligible property, whether the borrower is committed or not. Additionally, ACORN wants servicers to explore alternative methods of aiding ailing borrowers, for example by principal forgiveness as opposed to forbearance. “





