Fannie Mae directed its mortgage servicers to delay scheduled foreclosure sales 45 days for borrowers that have been approved for assistance through the Hardest Hit Fund.
In June, the Obama administration approved $1.5 billion in foreclosure-prevention funding through programs set up by 19 state housing finance agencies (including the District of Columbia). In August, he signed off on another $600 million. The initiatives range from providing options for struggling, unemployed borrowers, as well as programs to address first and second liens, facilitate short sales and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure, and assist in past-due payments.
The states hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis are Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington, D.C.
Fannie released guidance Wednesday detailing how its servicers should handle those loans that qualify for the state assistance, and notified them that they should be ready to receive funds from the HFAs within 60 days after a program is launched.
Borrowers can receive unemployment assistance through one of the HFAs to help make their mortgage payments. Servicers are required to accept funds through a reinstatement program, if an HFA has one, which provides aid to borrowers for bringing the mortgage current or reduce the period of delinquency.
Fannie also addressed how the Hardest Hit Fund would affect loans permanently modified under the Home Affordable Modification Program.
"If a mortgage loan has been permanently modified under HAMP, a borrower who subsequently becomes unemployed may use an HHF Unemployment Program to make monthly mortgage payments," Fannie said in its guidance.
If the borrower remains unemployed after leaving the program, servicers must determine if the borrower can qualify for another one of Fannie's foreclosure prevention alternatives such as forbearance.
If the borrower was not in a permanent HAMP modification and found a job, the servicers were directed to consider the borrower for HAMP. But if a borrower redefaults out of a HAMP mod while unemployed, Fannie told its servicers to only evaluate them for Fannie's own program if the borrower finds a job.
Write to Jon Prior.
Follow him on Twitter: @JonAPrior
There are now two new files on my desk.
Wednesday, HousingWire posted four stories covering the Mortgage Bankers Association meeting in Washington, D.C.
The final article focused on the potential for much higher interest rates should the mortgage industry decide to do away with its self-created electronic tracking service, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, or MERS.
Another revolved around a group of protesters organized by the AFL-CIO who interrupted the proceedings.
Both are earning the reporter who covered the conference, Jon Prior, equal parts praise and equal parts scathing criticism.
HousingWire's readers, it appears, are polarized into two, distinct sides of which neither is likely to concede much ground.
As Jon's editor, it is my responsibility to review his work and determine if proponents and detractors alike use arguments that hold water.
The most heated e-mails generally tend to be illogical. In one case, an e-mail associates Jon with terrorism and suggests that his time would be better occupied in prison. The author then points Jon to another website to support his assertion.
To imprison a journalist based on his or her published writing is a clear violation of their First Amendment rights. Not that we charge that this commentary is un-American, but it is a common theme in today's letters.
Another such letter also suggests the reporter be "charged with making terroristic threats against the United States and the states individually and imprisoned, not coddled and pandered to."
In this case, I can offer a clear assurance that Jon Prior is neither coddled, nor pandered to, in his day-to-day work responsibilities.
My personal favorite is an e-mail that offers a question seemingly unrelated to any of Jon's coverage of the MBA conference: "How dare you fight against affordable housing in an effort to keep prices high?"
Yet the simple math reasonably demonstrates that if foreclosures were allowed to reach the market and drive up supply, then demand would lower as well, and, as a consequence, so will prices.
The American Enterprise Institute, which seeks to reform the housing market, submitted Thursday a white paper to Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), vice chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, arguing for an end to the government-sponsored enterprises. Such a white paper would likely be well-received by the readers above.
After spending the eight years prior to this living and working in London, I was struck by the following passage:
The statement from the white paper is true. But it also begs the argument that the system is primarily responsible for the impossible, dire housing situation in America.
The AEI wants an end to the GSEs, but without a viable alternative, via private-label securitization or workable covered bond legislation, mortgages would be pricier for borrowers without Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
That is the system, warts and all. And some readers view our stories as either supporting or opposing their views on housing finance.
Here's a thought: HousingWire editorial is actually a centered organization made up of both young (Jon) and older (me) staff members who have only ever worked in media, not the mortgage industry. Our goal, in our news stories, is to present you with up-to-date, exclusive and insightful analysis of the nation's housing market. We also give you a wide-range of opinions about the news in our "Voices" section.
That said, I am placing the above correspondence in a new file marked "Death to HousingWire!"
Letters that will instead be relegated to the other file, now marked "Long Live HousingWire!" will be from our readers who no doubt enjoy the self-aggrandizing title of this column.
These are the letters that are sometimes critical of what it is we do, but offer guidance, reassurance and an understanding of the way things work in mortgage finance and why.
And in the spirit of benevolence (and centrism), I would offer a sample of their words of encouragement, but I suspect both sets of readers are happiest just reading the vitriol.
Write to Jacob Gaffney.
Follow him on Twitter @JacobGaffney.
Tags: MERS
Posted in Commentary, Jacob Gaffney, Voices | 1 Comment »