Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

    I would have posted this in Housing Bubble, but this affects much more than housing...

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...REBF18JR7P.DTL

    Key concepts:

    1) The greater the negative equity, the more likely a 'jingle mail'
    2) As negative equity approaches -$200K, walkaways plateau at over 35%
    3) The more foreclosures in a ZIP code, the higher the default rate increases.

    To me this sounds like a runaway situation is more than possible in many parts of the US including much of California, Florida, Las Vegas.

    Would you, under any circumstances, default on your home mortgage, even if you could afford to make the monthly payments?


    That's a trickier question than you might assume, according to new research from the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business and Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.

    The study found that 26 percent of the record numbers of home mortgage defaults across the country are "strategic" - that is, calculated economic decisions to bail out of loans by owners who actually have the money to make the payments but can't handle the negative equity they're carrying caused by local property value declines.

    Nationwide, according to data from Zillow.com, 22 percent of all homeowners were in negative equity positions during the first quarter of 2009 - "underwater," with mortgage debts that exceed their home values.
    In some parts of California and Nevada, more than half of all households have negative equity. In a few localities, the size of the equity deficit is staggering: In the Salinas metropolitan area, for example, the median equity for people who bought their homes in 2006 near the peak of the boom is now a negative $214,305, according to the study.

    When researchers questioned two nationally representative statistical samples of households about strategic defaults, they found that moral and social beliefs play a constraining role, but negative equity and the frequency of defaults in local ZIP codes have significant contrary impacts.
    Co-authors Paola Sapienza, Luigi Zingales and Luigi Guiso used interviews with 2,000 American households in December and in March to explore the "moral and social" dynamics of strategic defaults. The two 1,000-person samples came from the Chicago Booth/Kellogg School Financial Trust Index, which monitors the level of trust households have in the financial system.

    Their research not only represents the first attitudinal study of the phenomenon of widespread strategic walkaways from home loan commitments, but also has implications for federal policies seeking to limit the numbers of foreclosures - which are on pace for a record 3.1 million filings this year, according to RealtyTrac Inc.
    Among the study's sobering findings:

    -- Moral precepts keep large numbers of financially struggling homeowners out of default, but only to a point. Fully 81 percent of household heads said they believe intentional defaults on mortgages to be "morally wrong." But that high percentage begins to crumble as negative equity grows increasingly larger.

    When negative equity rose to $50,000, 7 percent of those who consider strategic defaults to be immoral said they'd walk away. At $100,000 negative equity, 22 percent would do so. At negative $200,000, 37 percent of those with moral objections would nonetheless default, and at $300,000, 38 percent said they would.

    -- Among those who had no moral reservations, the percentages were much higher. At $50,000 negative equity, 20 percent said they'd walk. At negative $100,000, 41 percent would do so, as would 59 percent at negative $200,000 and 63 percent at $300,000.

    -- The researchers found that age, tenure of homeownership, the frequency of foreclosures in a person's ZIP code and even politics influence an owner's willingness to bail out of a mortgage. Owners under age 35 are less likely to have moral problems with strategic defaults, as are self-described political "independents," compared with Republicans and Democrats.

    -- An important factor in walkaways, according to the researchers, is the level of foreclosures owners observe in their local community and their personal acquaintance with owners who have defaulted. In the latter case, owners who know someone who defaulted strategically are 82 percent more likely to default themselves, compared with owners who do not know anyone in that situation.

    -- The higher the number of foreclosures in a given ZIP code, the higher owners' willingness to walk away, the researchers found, suggesting what they call a "contagion effect that reduces the social stigma associated with default as defaults become more common." High numbers of foreclosures also appear to create a "vicious circle" that increases neighboring owners' negative equity and greatly raises the probability of additional defaults, foreclosures and equity destruction in the area.
    Though the authors offer no specific remedies - they are behavioral researchers, not policy advisers - they argue that the traditional assumption that borrowers default because they can't afford their monthly payments needs to be re-examined in light of accelerating foreclosures in some markets combined with plummeting equity.
    The Obama administration appeared to take a step in that direction on July 1 when it allowed refinancings of Fannie Mae- and Freddie Mac-owned mortgages where owners have up to 25 percent negative equity. Previously the limit was 5 percent.

  • #2
    Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

    Ultimately, it's a cost benefit question, not a moral one.

    I just got a notice from the assessor's office that my property tax would be reduced (Out of the blue, I didn't request a modification). Now I bought my house over 5 years ago. What about the poor sobs that bought two years ago at 30% higher?

    Now I don't have a mortgage to default on but do I blame others that may? No. People have to do what's in the interest of their families.

    I am considering fleeing CA. The CA govt. is quite insane and I rather doubt it will get any better. I might well sell at fire sale prices. It would probably screw the prop. values in the area and further impair the balance sheets of the local banks. But what the hell. It won't be my problem.

    How many others are thinking like me?

    Not good me thinks.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

      Originally posted by c1ue View Post
      I would have posted this in Housing Bubble, but this affects much more than housing...

      http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...REBF18JR7P.DTL

      Key concepts:

      1) The greater the negative equity, the more likely a 'jingle mail'
      2) As negative equity approaches -$200K, walkaways plateau at over 35%
      3) The more foreclosures in a ZIP code, the higher the default rate increases.

      To me this sounds like a runaway situation is more than possible in many parts of the US including much of California, Florida, Las Vegas.
      So, a policy aimed at reducing the principal owed, if it kept the owner above water, would help reduce mortgage defaults, no?
      Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. -Groucho

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

        [quote=Master Shake;109366]So, a policy aimed at reducing the principal owed, if it kept the owner above water, would help reduce mortgage defaults, no?[/quote


        Congress passed the Hope for Homeowners program last year, 300B in home loans to underwater homeowners through the FHA. Highlights of the program were to refinance the current loan at 90 percent of the current appraised value, giving the HO incentive to stay and keep up the payments as he now had 10 percent equity and a much lower payment, and the banks incentive were now they didn’t have to foreclose (average real cost to a bank to foreclose is 29,000) and then sell the home at below current value price.

        Banks would not participate in the program.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

          Originally posted by newnewthing View Post
          Ultimately, it's a cost benefit question, not a moral one.

          I just got a notice from the assessor's office that my property tax would be reduced (Out of the blue, I didn't request a modification). Now I bought my house over 5 years ago. What about the poor sobs that bought two years ago at 30% higher?

          Now I don't have a mortgage to default on but do I blame others that may? No. People have to do what's in the interest of their families.

          I am considering fleeing CA. The CA govt. is quite insane and I rather doubt it will get any better. I might well sell at fire sale prices. It would probably screw the prop. values in the area and further impair the balance sheets of the local banks. But what the hell. It won't be my problem.

          How many others are thinking like me?

          Not good me thinks.
          IMO, a mortgage is a contract that gives the homeowner a choice -- either make your payments or forfeit your equity. That's the deal. Morality doesn't enter into it.

          The mortgage contract says that if you don't make your payments, even if you've paid 99% of the value of the home, the bank gets your home and you're out on the street. In foreclosure, the banks get to kept to all the money the homeowners paid out over the years, and then can turn around and resell the house for full value.
          It's payback time, baby!

          Morality? Ha!
          If you were unable to make your payments, do you think the bank would hesitate to kick you out on the street it if was in their best financial interest to foreclose? Of course not.

          This is a question of business.
          The banks made a financial mistake in giving a non-recourse mortgage at a time when housing was in a bubble. Stupid them. (They should have been reading iTulip.)

          Of course, our corrupt government is coming to save the stupid/corrupt bankers' asses -- wouldn't want their rich friends to lose any money, right? However, if YOU lost money on a business deal, would the government bail you out? Only if it was to protect their banker friends' interests.

          I congratulate homeowners who wake up to the realities of this world and screw the banks like the banks would screw them . . . .
          raja
          Boycott Big Banks • Vote Out Incumbents

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

            Originally posted by raja View Post
            IMO, a mortgage is a contract that gives the homeowner a choice -- either make your payments or forfeit your equity. That's the deal. Morality doesn't enter into it.

            The mortgage contract says that if you don't make your payments, even if you've paid 99% of the value of the home, the bank gets your home and you're out on the street. In foreclosure, the banks get to kept to all the money the homeowners paid out over the years, and then can turn around and resell the house for full value.
            It's payback time, baby!

            Morality? Ha!
            If you were unable to make your payments, do you think the bank would hesitate to kick you out on the street it if was in their best financial interest to foreclose? Of course not.

            This is a question of business.
            The banks made a financial mistake in giving a non-recourse mortgage at a time when housing was in a bubble. Stupid them. (They should have been reading iTulip.)

            Of course, our corrupt government is coming to save the stupid/corrupt bankers' asses -- wouldn't want their rich friends to lose any money, right? However, if YOU lost money on a business deal, would the government bail you out? Only if it was to protect their banker friends' interests.

            I congratulate homeowners who wake up to the realities of this world and screw the banks like the banks would screw them . . . .
            I tend to agree with you, Raja. Here's a question I haven't been able to get a consistent answer on though. Say I'm underwater and try to short sell my house. My bank has already agreed that if I can do that, they will forgive the balance of my loan. So, does it really matter whether or not I'm 10% or 50% underwater? If there is no credit impact, why not short-sell? And if I'm able to, does that influence my ability to buy a new home? I've been told both not at all and that I may have to wait 2 years to buy with a short-sale on my record. Any anecdotal experience from Itulipers would be appreciated.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

              Originally posted by raja View Post
              The mortgage contract says that if you don't make your payments, even if you've paid 99% of the value of the home, the bank gets your home and you're out on the street. In foreclosure, the banks get to kept to all the money the homeowners paid out over the years, and then can turn around and resell the house for full value.
              It's payback time, baby!
              ....
              I congratulate homeowners who wake up to the realities of this world and screw the banks like the banks would screw them . . . .
              In most states foreclosure forces an auction and any left over money after paying the mortgage and expenses goes to the homeowner so your scenario can't happen in those states. In some states there is exposure beyond this and the bank can then still go after other assets to get what is owed unless the homeowner bks.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                Originally posted by ax View Post
                I tend to agree with you, Raja. Here's a question I haven't been able to get a consistent answer on though. Say I'm underwater and try to short sell my house. My bank has already agreed that if I can do that, they will forgive the balance of my loan. So, does it really matter whether or not I'm 10% or 50% underwater? If there is no credit impact, why not short-sell? And if I'm able to, does that influence my ability to buy a new home? I've been told both not at all and that I may have to wait 2 years to buy with a short-sale on my record. Any anecdotal experience from Itulipers would be appreciated.
                Ax - first of all there is credit impact, the short sale will be on your record and the impact is the same or nearly the same as a foreclosure. Perhaps the rules will change after another 3-5 million foreclosures are completed over the next year or so.

                The two year time frame is based on the assumption that the short sell is the only negative item on your credit report; two years of subsequent clean living should let you qualify for an FHA loan.

                If you do a short sale you must ensure that your lender is in fact forgiving the shortfall. Some lenders are attempting to pursue the shortage by inserting language relative to the deficiency, or requiring the borrower to execute a promissory note, see this and this.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                  Originally posted by swgprop View Post
                  Ax - first of all there is credit impact, the short sale will be on your record and the impact is the same or nearly the same as a foreclosure. Perhaps the rules will change after another 3-5 million foreclosures are completed over the next year or so.

                  The two year time frame is based on the assumption that the short sell is the only negative item on your credit report; two years of subsequent clean living should let you qualify for an FHA loan.

                  If you do a short sale you must ensure that your lender is in fact forgiving the shortfall. Some lenders are attempting to pursue the shortage by inserting language relative to the deficiency, or requiring the borrower to execute a promissory note, see this and this.
                  Thanks, SWG, for the rapid response. I was under the impression that short-sale debt did not have to be repaid under new law extended until 2010, and that if the bank will write the note as paid in full that there will be no credit consequences. Perhaps that is grossly wrong. Thank you.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                    Then I suspect the smart thing is to keep paying even the mortage is under water, and pray for inflation.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                      Originally posted by c1ue View Post
                      Would you, under any circumstances, default on your home mortgage, even if you could afford to make the monthly payments?
                      I already have.

                      Im in the process of preparing a legal defense in preparation for a civil and criminal lawsuit that I plan on filing against everyone involved in my entire mortgage process. I can already prove fraud/collusion/conflicts of interest in every part of the application, all the while deceiving me during the whole process. Currently, I am the only one who has paid anything for my home (some 50k already), so I certainly have a vested interest in the property before anyone else.

                      If you don't fight for what's right, then you don't deserve to be a citizen of the United States IMO.
                      Every interest bearing loan is mathematically impossible to pay back.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                        Originally posted by nero3 View Post
                        Then I suspect the smart thing is to keep paying even the mortage is under water, and pray for inflation.
                        Well, as the article says, perhaps the best thing to do is to stop paying

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                          [quote=newnewthing;109354]Ultimately, it's a cost benefit question, not a moral one.

                          I just got a notice from the assessor's office that my property tax would be reduced (Out of the blue, I didn't request a modification). Now I bought my house over 5 years ago. What about the poor sobs that bought two years ago at 30% higher?

                          Now I don't have a mortgage to default on but do I blame others that may? No. People have to do what's in the interest of their families.

                          But what the hell. It won't be my problem.

                          quote]

                          I concur that it is technically a legal/contract issue, and not a moral one at this point. However, when law becomes increasingly divorced from morality, e.g., positive law, the law also starts to divorce itself from justice, and without justice, no society will last long.

                          And what about the rich -not-so-slobs who sold their houses to the "poor-slobs" at the top of the bubble and pocketed hundreds of thousands in profit? If you want to bail out the 'poor slobs', then claw back all the gains from those who profitted from the pyramid scheme - that's not going to happen, so instead, we will effectively "monetize" all this bad debt - socialize the losses while privatizing the gains, and the gains have gone not only to the banks, but the whole real estate industry (RE agents, mortgage brokers, appraisers) including the flippers.


                          Ah, and this is why we are going down as a county (it will become all of our problem by the way). The gov has shown us that the rule of law is not to maintained, and their is little consequence for irresponsible risk taking (b/c of being bailed out) and a lot of risk for being responsible (limited gains from limited risk taking and having to bail out the losing risk takers). Why would we expect an rational actor to think otherwise.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                            Originally posted by raja View Post
                            IMO, a mortgage is a contract that gives the homeowner a choice -- either make your payments or forfeit your equity. That's the deal. Morality doesn't enter into it.

                            The mortgage contract says that if you don't make your payments, even if you've paid 99% of the value of the home, the bank gets your home and you're out on the street. In foreclosure, the banks get to kept to all the money the homeowners paid out over the years, and then can turn around and resell the house for full value.
                            It's payback time, baby!

                            Morality? Ha!
                            If you were unable to make your payments, do you think the bank would hesitate to kick you out on the street it if was in their best financial interest to foreclose? Of course not.

                            This is a question of business.
                            The banks made a financial mistake in giving a non-recourse mortgage at a time when housing was in a bubble. Stupid them. (They should have been reading iTulip.)

                            Of course, our corrupt government is coming to save the stupid/corrupt bankers' asses -- wouldn't want their rich friends to lose any money, right? However, if YOU lost money on a business deal, would the government bail you out? Only if it was to protect their banker friends' interests.

                            I congratulate homeowners who wake up to the realities of this world and screw the banks like the banks would screw them . . . .
                            I agree.

                            Perhaps home mortgages should be non-recourse by law. Then these banksters would be reluctant to make horse-hocky loans.

                            Of course this is a pipe dream unless we can take our government away from the banking industry which presently owns it.
                            And of course their defense (and the plea for "fairness" from the Left assists the NeoCon Banksters) is that "everybody should be able to own their own home", which is nonsense.

                            Some people are so irresponsible that they shouldn't even have a drivers license.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 26% of home mortgage defaults are 'strategic'

                              Originally posted by ricket View Post
                              Im in the process of preparing a legal defense in preparation for a civil and criminal lawsuit that I plan on filing against everyone involved in my entire mortgage process.
                              How exactly are you pursuing a criminal lawsuit?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X