news-record.com

NEWS

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

New wave of homeowners in trouble?

Sunday, September 27, 2009
(Updated 7:24 am)

Steve Gaulden has a good income, good credit and a nice house.

So when the Trinity resident took steps earlier this year to improve his family finances by locking in a stable mortgage payment, he could not have known that one of his banks would block his path.

The recession has ushered in “the new normal,” as financial experts say, causing lenders to act in abnormal ways.

Mortgage experts say some banks are refusing to refinance mortgages for some of their most reliable customers — customers with second mortgages or home equity loans — because they simply want borrowers to pay off loans and clear up shaky bank balance sheets.

Some reliable homeowners will find no relief despite their best efforts.

“Without a doubt, this threatens a new wave of people,” said Boston lawyer Joel G. Kinney , who was an adviser for the book “How to Sell Your Home in a Down Market.”

The nation’s top two mortgage lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, have urged banks to be more flexible and support programs designed to restore the housing industry to full health.

But that’s just not the way banks see it.

“The more they can remove from their books, the more they can clean up their bank balance sheets, which are a nightmare these days,” said Chris Young, a Greensboro certified mortgage planner who owns The Young Team Inc.

Banks, meanwhile, have little to say to clients or the public about the issue. Banks say they consider each case individually based on credit history and other factors, but they often give little detail to customers whose requests they deny.

Young has seen a 40 percent decrease in refinancing approvals for people who should be able to refinance. Nationwide, that could mean tens of thousands of borrowers fighting the same problem.

Financially solid customers such as Gaulden are left scared and worried about what they’ve discovered.

Banks have money to lend, Kinney said, but they’re not responding to pressure from Congress.

At a hearing in Washington three weeks ago, the U.S. House Financial Services Subcommittee pressured a slate of bank executives to speed up their compliance with government-supported programs to help struggling homeowners.

Rep. Howard Coble, a Republican from Greensboro, is aware of this situation . Gaulden sent him a detailed e-mail about his difficulties. Coble’s office has done research on the issue, but the pressure can best come from finance committees that are overseeing the process, Coble’s spokesmen say.

 

Hundreds of thousands of borrowers across the nation financed houses through a combination of loans. Gaulden bought his $150,000 house five years ago with an adjustable-rate mortgage of $120,000 from Realty Mortgage Corp . He simultaneously took out a second mortgage of $30,000 with SunTrust so that he could finance 100 percent of the value of the home.

That would also help him avoid paying for mortgage insurance. His payment was good; he knew he could manage it for five years until he could refinance.

Buyers often use adjustable rate mortgages, or ARMs, to help them afford their first homes or to get by in times of financial stress.

These mortgages were sold aggressively by banks during the housing boom. They start with low fixed payments and interest rates for an early term, usually five to seven years. Most buyers expect to refinance to a loan with a permanent, or fixed, interest rate before the ARM ends and the rate adjusts, usually upward.

ARMs begin adjusting their interest rates and can rise to a much higher rate, usually pegged to the prime rate, London Interbank Offered Rate or treasury bills. If interest rates rise rapidly, such a loan could move from 6 percent interest to 10 percent, for example, after the adjustment period begins — boosting a monthly payment by hundreds of dollars.

Like many other stable home­owners, Gaulden, who is married with two children, doesn’t want to leave that threat open for when rates begin to rise.

Gaulden’s fixed-rate period expired in July.

“If it resets and that (payment) starts going through the roof?” Gaulden said. “Yeah, you’re talking about double or triple my house payment.”

Young, the mortgage planner, found Gaulden a way to refinance into a $120,000 fixed-rate mortgage with full approval from Fannie Mae. According to the new mortgage contract with Fannie Mae, all Gaulden had to do was to get SunTrust to agree under contract to go along with the new financing. Bankers call it “subordinating” a loan — the new mortgage would be paid off first under default. It’s usually a routine process.

That is, until SunTrust refused to make the change.

Instead, Gaulden, 37, would have to pay off the $30,000 loan or abandon his hope of refinancing.

He believes that SunTrust will be far more likely to get its $30,000 over the life of the loan if his financial structure is sound .

“It’s as if they’ve not only handcuffed you, they’ve handcuffed themselves to the track that the train’s coming down,” said Gaulden, a technical global adviser for NetApp.

Said Young: “You’ve got an entire group of people that are simply stuck, and they’re asking why?”

SunTrust spokesman Hugh Suhr said that the bank considers borrowers’ requests “on a case-by-case basis.”

 

Trey Hanna, 35, a single father of two in High Point, is struggling with issues similar to Gaulden’s.

Hanna, who works at Mickey Truck Bodies Inc. in High Point, financed his home with a five-year ARM, which is set to adjust in December.

He may actually see a reduction because interest rates are so low now. But in five years, if rates increase to normal or average levels, Hanna could be paying hundreds more a month.

Also like Gaulden, Hanna finds his plan blocked by SunTrust.

SunTrust is willing to give him a loan worth 90 percent of his $170,000 house — if he moves all his banking needs there.

Problem is, he needs more than that to cover his debt.

“I never thought in a million years this whole thing would happen like this,” he said.

SunTrust, which accepted $3.5 billion in government bailout money in November and has not made any repayments, is not helping its image, Hanna said.

“It’s SunTrust taking taxpayer and consumer money from the government and holding our mortgages hostage and not refinancing them or releasing them to other companies that want to refinance them, like Fannie Mae,” Hanna said. “It’s almost like government and SunTrust are not working together to solve this.”

Said Kinney, the Boston lawyer: “There’s a lot of people who aren’t in foreclosure right now and they won’t be in foreclosure if they can get out of these ARMs. And the banks are holding their feet to the fire. It’s the banks’ role to help. ”

 

Banks approach such situations in different ways.

BB&T says it generally subordinates second loans if the borrower’s main payment is reduced, improving the bank’s overall situation.

Wells Fargo, which bought Wachovia last year, said borrowers who modify loans under new government programs generally get second-loan subordination.

Charlotte-based Bank of America did not respond to questions or a request for an interview.

SunTrust, based in Atlanta, is affecting borrowers across the country.

“I’m seeing people here who are refinancing ARMs and finding their banks, especially SunTrust, are refusing to subordinate (home equity lines of credit),” Kinney said.

“This year is the first year I’ve had to tell clients, 'I don’t have a good answer for you.’ ”

His advice to beleaguered borrowers: “Be as creative as possible in finding a solution and finding another agency that can step in and help you or come up with creative financing.”

Young is pursuing just such an approach for his clients. He has spoken with SunTrust officials, Georgia banking officials and elected officials. He has found one glimmer of hope with a senior executive at SunTrust who believes that the bank’s divisions are confused about the bank’s policies.

She told him the bank should have been more flexible with his customers.

But he hasn’t seen any proof yet.

“I should know soon when I send a couple of applications through,” he said.

Hanna, meanwhile, received a letter from the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance recently promising that it will take care of his SunTrust loan problem. “We will see,” he said last week.

Kinney believes it may take legal intervention before more borrowers can regain power.

“The banks aren’t participating,” he said. “And there’s plenty of money out there, and there’s plenty of people that can fit in with the guidelines, and (the banks are) not doing it. A legal challenge needs to be brought.”

 

Contact Richard M. Barron at 373-7371 or richard.barron@news-record.com

 

Accompanying Photos

Jerry Wolford (News & Record)

Photo Caption: August Hanna (from left), her father Trey Hanna and brother Jaxon Hanna at their home. 

IF YOU WANT TO REFINANCE AND HAVE TWO MORTGAGES

  • Get an idea of your home’s value. When you have a first and second mortgage, the value of your home drives the refinancing process. A real estate agent can do a competitive market analysis.
  • Contact a professional mortgage planner for advice.
  • Go to “Fannie Freddie Lookup” on the Internet to see if your loan is owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. If one of these owns your first loan, that works in your favor. www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/cq
  • Never make late payments on any debt because it hurts your credit score and makes a challenging process even tougher.

 

Source: Chris Young, certified mortgage planner and owner of The Young Team Inc.

 

WHAT THE BANKS SAY

.

What the banks say

The News & Record requested interviews with the following banks, who released statements or did not respond:

  •  BB&T: A.-C. McGraw, media relations manager, said: “We are definitely willing to work with our clients when it makes sense for all parties.“In the typical situation where the client’s payment on the first mortgage is reduced and the deal does not involve a cash-out, we almost always approve the subordination since the client’s financial situation is improved and the bank’s position is no worse off. “If, for some reason, the client’s payment increases on the first mortgage and/or they are requesting cash out, we may be less willing to approve the subordination if the bank’s position is worsened.”
     
  •  Wells Fargo statement: “Wells Fargo supports subordination requests from borrowers who have a loan behind a first mortgage that is refinanced through the (federal) Home Affordable Refinance Program. We are processing complete HARP requests typically within 72 hours.“Those that do not qualify under HARP are considered on a case-by-case basis, and we evaluate a variety of factors in our decision, such as credit experience, the combined loan-to-property value and the ability to repay the outstanding loans.”
     
  •  SunTrust spokesman Hugh Suhr: “While we can’t comment on specific individual relationships, in general we do consider resubordinations of second liens on a case-by-case basis, taking into account numerous factors.”
     
  • Bank of America did not respond to the News & Record’s request for comment.

 

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please notify us.

kurgun

September 27, 2009 - 3:56 am EDT

Once people start realizing that banks are crooks they will realize they can't trust them any more than a gang of thieves. Banks create hidden agendas and act like they're more important than anything and they won't explain anything why people can't get loans ETC. I think what everyone should do that has a large mortgage is just refuse to pay the thing, then if everyone does the exact same thing all the crooks will disappear because then noone will own houses or have any desire to do so. Once people learn to play hardball with all these banks and make a stand will the banks start responding. As far as I'm concerned banks money is dirty, just as dirty as money seized in a drug bust. Dirty money may spend like all other money but it leaves a bad taste in your mouth afterwards. More people should simply try joining credit unions and getting loans that way, in a credit union the money all goes back where it started from and not some greedy bank execs pocket for profit.

Clearwater Al

September 27, 2009 - 8:23 am EDT

Once again, Congressman Howard Coble passes the buck. What does Howard Coble do?
His office seems to be a government referral service. If it isn't something he can use to bash
some Democrat with... he isn't interested. Mr. Gaulden, pick up the phone and call Coble's
office. If Coble can't pick up the phone and call your bank and ask them to explain to him
why you are being forced down this financial hole... ask what can he do for any of his voters?

blackstream

September 27, 2009 - 9:12 am EDT

The American people have the ability to bring these banks to their knees. When our government loaned the banks money against 80% of Americans opposed to it, this was the time for the American people to give the government an ultimatum. Either do as the People want, or find another job! They bailed these idiots out with our money against our wishes, and now we are the ones paying the price. If the banks had gotten those loans based on THEIR credit worthiness, just like the avergae American, they wouldn't have gotten a dime. I use to bank with Suntrust. I had my business account with them, and we had a number of private accounts. That has since changed since they had no problem of accessing unecessary fees and refused to help our business financially. They were always glad to have our business, or should I say, glad to have our money going into their bank on a regular basis. In my opinion, banks are like insurance companies. They are nothing more than legalized extorsionist and scammers. Americans give them billions of dollars while only receiving millions in return. It's time that our government started listening to the People, and not to the special interest groups and high powered business . Those folks might get them into office, but the American people can get them out!

jbcarper

September 27, 2009 - 9:40 am EDT

Oh, those mean, nasty banks. They won't refinance/loan us money to cover our foolishness. The cases sited are not very good for making the case that banks are arbitrarily refusing to restructure loans so that people can remain in houses they couldn't afford in the first place.
Case #1: individual buys a home financing 80% with a mortgage and 20% from a second mortgage. I bet this individual didn't bother to tell bank #1 that he was borrowing the down payment. It's been a while since I did a mortgage, but I distinctly remember having to specify the source of the down payment. Had this information been provided, I doubt the original loan would have been approved.
Case #2: bank offers to refinance 90% of the loan but that's not enough to cover the borrower's debt? Is the problem the mortgage or the overall financial instability of the borrower that is the source of the problem. Evidently there is a lot more to this case than meets the eye.
In short, these samples are used to provide a backdrop for the supposition that the financial institutions are mean and nasty. Perhaps they are. But from what I've read in this article, and others, the customers are, in many cases, just as responsible. Buying a home that you can't afford by either providing misleading data or by using debt structures that are obviously shaky wasn't, isn't and never will be a wise choice.
Unfortunately we are now in this boat together. I don't like the fact that I've kept my part of the boat clean and dry while others have chipped away at the hull in their part of the boat. But here we are.
The solution: Refinance the existing mortgages BUT with a provision that any future capital gain go to the financial institution or government which bailed the borrower out.

ustaxpayer

September 27, 2009 - 11:14 am EDT

Now...here is someone with some common sense. I like your Idea about paying back your bailout with capital gains...

Panacea

September 27, 2009 - 11:28 am EDT

Of course the bank knew this guy took out a second mortgage. The loan application would pop up on his credit report, which would have been checked just before closing. SunTrust knew, and didn't have a problem with it.

A lot of shaky deals went through because everyone wanted them to: the homeowners, the banks, the mortgage brokers. Everyone was getting their peice of the pie, with no thought to the ultimate consequences.

However, I do have sympathy for the homeowner. This is a guy who is working hard, has good credit, and making his mortgage payments. If the Fed raises interest rates, a lot of stable borrowers will be driven beyond the brink.

That is a problem easily remedied: by refinancing to a fixed rate. The banks will still make a profit, and if they refinance, the shaky loans will be gone and their books improve anyway. This is greed, pure and simple. They WANT homeowners to get stuck with these rates. After all, SunTrust has nothing to lose: they got THEIR bailout.

jbcarper

September 27, 2009 - 11:51 am EDT

Not necessarily true that the first mortage company would have known. I am acquainted with circumstances, some years back, where a group of individuals purchased some undeveloped property from a private owner using a one-year note as promise to pay for the property. They requested that the owner delay filing the property lean for a period of time. They then used the property as collateral for financing used in their development. Quite a legal hassel when it came to light.
The SunTrust mortgage filing may not have shown up until after the credit report was pulled for the first mortgage. That can be weeks in advance of closing. The SunTrust could have been completed the prior day or days before the first mortgage closing.

ncgrizz

September 27, 2009 - 9:34 pm EDT

Absolutely amazing how a story intended simply to make people aware of some less than ethical behavior which pertains directly to EVERYONES tax dollars can bring out such a flood of "know it alls". With the combined knowledge of the folks on this thread, certainly the global economic crisis could have been avoided...if we had only known to ask here first.
If the above comes across as snippy, it likely is. Personally knowing Mr. Gaulden VERY well, the following comments need to be made (primarily directed at the input from jbcarper), however certainly not limited to this individual. The news story laid this out pretty simply, however as it would appear not everyone comprehends what they read, here are some major points to keep in mind:
1. He is not looking for a bailout, handout, or one penny from anyone else (that includes everyone on this thread).
2. He is not in "over his head", nor was he when he made the decision to purchase said property. This was not a case (as has been alluded) where he obtained some house that was well out of his price range, or ability to repay. As mentioned in the comment following this post, he was directed in this manner by a financial planner, and the logic of the initial decision still made sense, however anyone who states that the last 4 years have been "business as usual" for the economy, housing market, etc, has been living under a rock. The metrics changed drastically and unexpectedly. Even so, he is still making payments as always, and there is no reason to think this will chang. The POINT is simply that because of the inherent danger of ARMs, he is trying as best he can to get a locked in rate, which is being made impossible by Suntrust for no good reason (especially since by their taking TARP money..aka ALL of our money, they agreed to permit subordination). They certainly lived up to the taking of the money, however are not living up to their agreement. If jbcarper would like to explain why this is moral or acceptable, we are all ears).
3. He IS expecting the "poor banks" to abide by their part of the deal. Unlike the banks, Mr. Gaulden is trying to ward off any reoccurrence of the problems seen in recent years by locking in a fixed rate. Period. By taking our tax dollars AND preventing good people with good credit and a stellar payment record to "right the ship", they are in essence saying "thanks for the money America...we'll be back in a couple years, cause we are gonna need some more".
As a closing comment, it would be good for folks who are quick to judge others to take a step back and realize that not everyone who got bitten by this problem was working part time at Chuck. E Cheese and siging up for a half million dollar home. That was not what was chronicled in the story, and does not apply to either of these gents. You can't paint everyone with the same brush just because you "think" you know their situation, or what got them there. Sadly, several of the comments I have seen above did just that, and that might be the biggest tragedy of this whole crisis.

lking173290

September 27, 2009 - 1:38 pm EDT

I agree, the bottom line is we have to make good decision and not decisions based on our wants or emotions. Take the time to crunch the numbers and look toward the outcome and all the possibilities. I feel for the individuals listed in this article but they represent a the typical case of what caused this whole Housing Market Catastrophe. They display all the classic symptoms and the diagnosis is the same, they made bad decisions and expected things to work themselves out. The article says Mr. Gaulden had good income and good credit. Why did he pursue a no money down loan if he had a good income. This in turn caused him to sign off on a ARM instead of a fixed rate mortgage. Just a few bad decisions can put you in a terrible position.

djones

September 27, 2009 - 4:20 pm EDT

Having been mortgage loan underwriter I can tell you that both the 1st mortgage and the 2nd mortgage lenders knew about each other. For a typical Fannie / Freddie / FHA loan, the lender has to verify the source of funds and include the documentation in the loan file. I do agree that purchasing a home with an 80/20 loan was not the wisest move, but more than likely it was the loan originator who sold this idea to the borrower.

ustaxpayer

September 27, 2009 - 11:15 am EDT

WOW...According to Biden..These stimulus packages that were rolled out earlier this year are working better that he ever imagined they would. These clowns in the White House are not in touch with reality. I suggest you vote straight Republican next ticket and get America back on track. Obama should be pushing to open our factories up and start producing some American Made goods...this will jump start the ecomomy...when was the last time you saw something that was stamped "MADE IN THE U.S.A"? I think the last thing I saw was a toilet plunger in Wal-Mart....Wake up people!!

Panacea

September 27, 2009 - 11:32 am EDT

Obama should "push to open our factories?" That will happen only if he nationalizes manufacturing. You're a Republican and you're advocating that?

The tax codes make it cheaper for companies to manufacture abroad; that's why we don't have any manufacturing anymore.

I agree we would be better off to have our manufacturing in this country. It bothers me that a lot of it is moving to China, a communist country that loves to get its hands on our technology. But that's not Obama's fault, and there's nothing the government can do at this point unless the tax codes are changed to make it cheaper to build here; that's not going to happen.

jbcarper

September 27, 2009 - 12:05 pm EDT

I agree with Panacea on this point, though I might offer a suggestion. It isn't just taxes that move things off-shore. If we truly believe, as a country, in producing things safely and in an environmentally sound method, we should insist that all products imported into the U.S. be manufactured under the same standards. Labor rates and living conditions are the responsibility of the manufacturing country. We should insist, however, that all OSHA and EPA regulations required of a US company producing in the US be applied to the imported products. CEO's and other company executives should be required to annually certify that these standards are met for all product which they import under penalty of law including personal financial and incarceration liability.
Watch how fast things would come back to the U.S.

Panacea

September 27, 2009 - 5:27 pm EDT

Heh. I like this idea. Wall Street would fight it tooth and nail though.

jeffic_fail

September 27, 2009 - 12:14 pm EDT

ustaxpayer....you are a bigger Jeffic Fail than, well...me.

SusanBAnthony

September 27, 2009 - 12:45 pm EDT

Financing 100% of the price has never been a good idea. Financing with an ARM has never been a good idea. Those things are gambles. When you gamble, sometimes you lose. That's the way the game is played. The rules don't change just because you are losing. Save up a 25% down payment, buy a house you can afford (or less), refuse to pay more than a house is worth, and take a fixed rate mortgage. You can refinance if the rates go down.

jbcarper

September 27, 2009 - 4:52 pm EDT

Perhaps we should eliminate the ability to refinance without a penalty. That's a one sided privilege. The mortgage holder doesn't get to demand a refinance if the rates go up, so why should the borrower get to refinance without penalty when they go down. If people knew they had to pay the contract according to it's terms, maybe they would be more careful.

ravencottage

September 27, 2009 - 8:24 pm EDT

Was BOA was too busy pulling up flags along funeral routes and giving money to ACORN to respond?

Clearwater Al

September 28, 2009 - 11:48 am EDT

Unbelieveable! Just about any issue or story has some wound up Red Neck Republican
finding a way to blame the problem on Obama, Biden or Pelosi. Still amazing is that the
25 million foreclosures that happened before Obama took office... are somehow his
fault too. Foreclosures, bailouts and stimulus programs all where born before Obama
took office. The economy falling into a hole nearly as deep as the Great Depression and
all the jobs that have gone over seas somehow all happened within the past 9 months.
Hmmmm... yet to some the past 8 years have nothing to do with it. Amazing!

dgood

September 28, 2009 - 4:39 pm EDT

todays mortgage lenders carry the same stigma used car salesmen have had. you have to look carefully under the hood to find what they are hiding.
Integrity, honesty, the foundation of this country. A mans word, has been lost in the admans 'spin'

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

Triad Weather

  • Current Condition: CLOUDY
  • Current Temperature: 56°
  • UV Idx: 0
  • Forecast High/Low: H: 0° L: 45°

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search