Loan Think

What We're Hearing

THE MAIN EVENT: I'm going to start out this week's column asking you, the industry, some terribly dumb questions about something that's been bugging me a great deal lately. Bear me with me because it's going to get a bit complicated (I think). It has to do with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and all the loan buybacks they are jamming down the throat of the industry. It also has to do with all those AAA-related bonds they bought from those charlatans on Wall Street. (Author Michael Lewis painted this picture 25 years ago but don't get me started on the Street again.) And it has to do with the mortgage insurance industry which insures most high LTV products sold to the two GSEs. If you saw the National Mortgage News website on Friday afternoon you know that Fannie and Freddie forced the nation's mega banks and others to repurchase roughly $30 billion in product during the second half. And that's just 2H09. The way I see it, we have all of 2010 and next year. It's going to be a loan buyback 's-storm' from here on out. I assume that when FanFred asks Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, or Citigroup to repurchase something, they say, "Yes, right away sir." Then there's the MI industry. From what I've heard, the MIs have paid out somewhere in the range of $30 billion to $50 billion in claims. Didn't most of that go to the GSEs? And what about bond insurance? All that subprime and alt-A crap the two bought -- isn't that guaranteed by someone? And then there are the legal rights of the GSEs. If they were sold crap by the Street (subprime ABS being at the top of the list) can't the GSEs sue the Street? Shakespeare had it wrong. It's not "First, we kill all the lawyers." It should be: "First, we hire all the lawyers." Anyway, what I'm getting at is this: FanFred have lost $130 billion or so the past two years. With all these buybacks, with all these MI policies, with all the bond insurance they have, shouldn't their losses really be minimal? I know this sounds crazy. But someone has to pay, right? And it would appear the government owned GSEs are trying to make everyone pay. So why shouldn't their losses eventually be compensated? What am I missing? I told you I had some dumb questions to ask. Feel free to comment at the end of this column or drop me a line at: Paul.Muolo@SourceMedia.com...

Processing Content

And in a related note, I've been meaning to write another story about the nation's due diligence firms. I still plan on doing another story (one of these days) about the W-2/1099 mess, but from what I'm hearing the due diligence firms are working for both the GSEs and the lenders. As a GSE vendor their goal is to find underwriting problems that trigger buyback clauses. But the lenders (who are being hit with buybacks) also are hiring due diligence (DD) firms as a defense. When a DD is working for a lender the goal is to say, "No, that loan was properly underwritten. You have no case, Fannie Mae." It's called "playing both sides against the middle." Stay tuned...

CORRECTION: I don't like being wrong. It's the worst thing that can happen to a writer/editor/columnist. In most cases, being wrong is the result of listening to the wrong sources or misunderstanding something and not doing enough homework. In this case, I did the homework but my sources misunderstood something. Needless to say, I was wrong in reporting on the NMN website recently that Sovereign Bank was getting out of the warehouse lending business. For the record: they are not. But the story is complicated. The Spanish owned bank refused to discuss its warehouse strategy with me -- even after four telephone calls where I stated exactly what I was working on. I gave them ample opportunity but they declined. What I know is this: Sovereign would like to grow its warehouse business, at least a little bit. Company warehouse chief Cliff Schultz was at the MBA show in Atlantic City this past week, trying to drum up business. But there is a back story to all this. Sovereign's warehouse business has been in decline since 2007 when it had roughly $1 billion in outstandings. Today it has about $300 million. Those figures come to me from a former officer of the bank. Sovereign, of course, would not verify them. Also, Sovereign has been trimming its roster of nonbank lenders for low usage. (This happens all the time, I am told.) I wrote about one of these nonbank lenders and after I did, the shop, Advantage Financial of South New Jersey, got its warehouse line extended by Sovereign. So, some good came of it. But I get the sense that the story of Sovereign and its warehouse business is not settled. And one last note: the bank did not lose money on a warehouse line made to Taylor Bean & Whitaker. It lost money on a loan backed by TBW servicing rights...

DATA STUFF: The brand new 4Q issue of the Quarterly Data Report is out. In it you can find information on a few fast growing wholesalers based in California including: Provident Funding, Sierra Pacific Mortgage, and Stearns Lending. To order the QDR drop a line to: Deartra.Todd@SourceMedia.com...

WASHINGTON NEWS: As you all know there's a big old bank re-regulation bill out there from Sen. Chris Dodd which is going to get marked up next week. Dodd's "partner" on the Banking Committee, Richard Shelby of the GOP, isn't too fond of it. NMN's own Brian Collins was at the American Bankers Association conference in Washington last week and heard Shelby's little "pep talk" to banking lobbyists. It went down like this: A banker in the audience stood up and said he appreciated Shelby's record on the banking committee. This banker noted that his state (Missouri) is trying to elect another Republican -- Roy Blunt -- to the Senate. Blunt is currently in his seventh term as a congressman. Shelby told the bankers, "We all support him financially and praying for him too." The Alabaman told the audience that everyone at the meeting should ship the candidate $10,000. The audience laughed.

The Federal Housing Administration wants to raise the minimum net worth requirement for its lenders to $2.5 million within three years, an idea that doesn't warm the hearts of small correspondent lenders. However, we're told that at least one large wholesale/correspondent lender thinks the minimum should be hiked to $3 million (for the first year) and $4.5 million by 2012. If this happens a correspondent that is light on capital would be forced to find another source of funding, merge, or close their doors...

Media notes: I am on Twitter. But not Facebook.

SURVEY NOTICE #1: Our annual "Top Producer Survey" (aka LO survey) is at: http://brokeruniverse.com/losurvey/. Please spend a few moments answering our questions. It will generate free publicity for your shop. We are giving away complimentary subscriptions to Origination News to those who provide their 2009 origination volume. Questions? Send an email to: Deartra.Todd@SourceMedia.com...

SURVEY NOTICE #2: It's survey time once again for sellers and servicers. Look for our annual survey in your computer mailbox.

DATA NOTICE: National Mortgage News has all different data sets available for purchase including rankings and contact lists on the nation's top lenders and servicers. Send your requests for information to: Deartra.Todd@SourceMedia.com. Dee can also tell you about our web-friendly Mortgage-Stats.com product.

THE LAST WORD: Alex Chilton passed away this week. From the Box Tops to Big Star, he was the man.


For reprint and licensing requests for this article, click here.
MORE FROM NATIONAL MORTGAGE NEWS
Load More