California Attorney General Kamala Harris has been awfully quiet amid pressure from the Obama Administration to agree to a settlement with the big banks over foreclosure fraud. So it’s interesting that she popped up this week to call for the resignation of Ed DeMarco, the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
California Attorney General Kamala Harris has called on the head of the agency that houses Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to “step aside” if he continues to refuse to reduce mortgage loans for underwater homeowners.
“It has become clear to me that the only way to keep distressed California homeowners in their homes is through meaningful principal reduction,” Harris said in a statement Thursday [...]
Harris’ pressure on Edward DeMarco, who oversees Fannie and Freddie as the acting director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, serves to further highlight the inadequacies of a deal that does not include Fannie and Freddie, although they own half of the mortgage debt in the country.
Some of my colleagues have characterized this as Harris doing the dirty work of the Administration. They don’t like DeMarco, in this telling, because he’s tough on the banks; witness the FHFA lawsuit against 17 financial institutions over misrepresentations on mortgage-backed securities purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
I think it’s a bit more complicated. First of all, DeMarco is a bottom-line guy. He views the FHFA mandate very narrowly. He wants to limit taxpayer exposure to Fannie and Freddie, and that’s it. Now that’s a good thing when he sues the banks over representations and warranties, because he’s trying to recoup money on agency MBS. But it’s a bad thing when he refuses to allow the GSEs to give principal reductions to homeowners with Fannie and Freddie-backed loans, which has been the case since March. This is how I put it then:
The FHFA (Federal Housing Finance Administration), which oversees Fannie and Freddie, has rejected a government-administered principal modification program, because their mission is to minimize losses to the taxpayer in the short-term, and mods would reduce the overall portfolio value. But houses in foreclosure do nothing for Fannie and Freddie’s bottom line, either. FHFA is also seeking put-backs on mortgages on the banks, also to reduce taxpayer exposure, but we see with their rejection of principal mods that the sword is double-edged [...]
Basically, by refusing to modify principal, traditionally the most sustainable modification, FHFA is setting off a death spiral, where home values continue to drop because of foreclosures, and borrowers go more underwater, leading to more foreclosures. With Fannie and Freddie holding so many mortgages, they are a serious impediment to a more stable solution to the foreclosure crisis.
Here’s where this gets interesting. If FHFA maintains this position, it has a major effect on any global settlement. The way a settlement would work, according to reports, is that the banks would have to fill a quota of a certain amount of principal reductions or refinances on underwater loans. But if FHFA denies such a measure, then over half the mortgages in the country would not be part of the settlement. The banks would only be able to extend their credits to bank-owned loans, or loans owned by outside investors.
This would be a bad deal for California. There are very few bank-owned loans here, because Countrywide, a major player in the state during the bubble years, securitized almost everything they got their hands on. So Harris, by asking DeMarco to step aside, may be asking him to participate in the settlement.
To be clear, I want DeMarco to allow principal mods on loans the GSEs own or guarantee, because it’s the only way to fix the housing crisis. Former Deutsche Bank trader Gregg Lippmann, who famously bet against subprime mortgages during the height of the bubble, has come around to that reality. Joe Nocera has a good opinion column on this today. It’s the right thing to do. And it’s good that Harris is focused on principal reductions as the key step.
But in the context of the settlement, it’s a different story. This sounds to me like Harris is demanding that DeMarco relent on principal reductions so those loans can be included in the settlement terms. Then the banks can spread the $20 billion earmarked for principal mods across the full suite of loans. I’ve already discussed at length why the terms for the settlement are shockingly weak, and why a settlement on ongoing activity without an investigation to plumb the depths of it is flat-out wrong.
It’s also important to note that DeMarco could simply grant principal mods under the existing Principal Reduction Alternative run by the Treasury Department. It doesn’t have to be part of a settlement at all.
This is just one explanation of Harris’ motives in going after DeMarco. But if it’s right, then DeMarco’s unwillingness to allow principal mods could be what keeps Harris out of the settlement – which in all likelihood keeps the settlement from happening.




19 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
I’ve been reading your site for a while and as a guy who lives in the central valley and is 100s of thousands of dollars underwater from all the fraudclosures around me I appreciate the reporting/blogging you guys do. I have one question that no one has been able to answer, perhaps you can.
How come the fhfa can sue banks for mortgage fraud related to robo signing, faulty mortgages, lying rating agencies, and bad cdo’s, while at the same time telling homeowners who live in these areas where much of this fraud was perpetrated that were just victims of the “free market” and our price declines have nothing to do with all this fraud, there by refusing to allow us to participate in programs like the fha short refi? If it is fraud, lawsuits, and bailouts for banks, then it must be the same for homeowners in these areas or there will be no recovery.
DeMarco is pretty stubborn. He’s been pressured repeatedly for quite awhile, and if anyone could actually force his hand it would seem to have already happened.
WSJ has had a handful of articles including DeMarco since last summer. Searching “DeMarco” there brings them up. In some he is characterized as an untouchable enjoying the power of “No.” Yet there was a call from Dems for Obama to intervene and replace him. Contradiction, there.
So DeMarco’s actual indelibility seems unclear. One would think if Obama could get rid of Demarco, Obama would have. Isn’t there a Chicago Way that can be invoked?
Certainly a state AG can’t do much more than fume at him.
David — Thanks for the perspective on this situation.
But don’t think that let’s you off the hook for no round-upping yesterday. You owe us one!
VERY complicated stuff Mr. Dayen.
FWIW, I wouldn’t trust DeMarco, Harris or anyone to do right for the masses.
The end game lies ahead, but I’ll bet a bottom dollar it don’t end well for we the people.
Harris is gonna gin this shit up for a shot at the Gov Ticket, n eventually the WH, I’ll be willin to wage.
She’s just another bought and paid for 1% shill, lookin to move up the shillin ladder.
Ain’t that the truth!
Larue, I always enjoy your optimism!
Wait, have you seen this movie before?
“He wants to limit taxpayer exposure to Fannie and Freddie, and that’s it.”
You mean there’s actually somebody around who wants to limit taxpayer exposure to these 2 bloated pigs? They’ve already cost taxpayers $169 billion (so far).
The underlying legal issue is that bone in the throat of the Constitution, the Humphrey’s Executor v. United States decision from 1935. The sooner the Supreme Court tosses it (and Team Scalia has been pushing the Court in that direction for years), the better.
In that case, the Supreme Court, over the strenuous objection of President Franklin Roosevelt, upheld the constitutionality of independent agencies — that is, agencies whose heads are removable by the President only for cause, not at will, and that thus operate free of presidential direction and supervision… Because of Humphrey’s Executor, the President to this day lacks day-to-day control over large swaths of regulatory policy and enforcement in the Executive Branch.
http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=5&xmldoc=In%20FCO%2020110701130.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR&SizeDisp=7
If I refinance now I’m not sure I can afford a 15-year mortgage. Isn’t the payment a lot more? but glad I found the “Official Refinance” and I was able to refi
Excellent summary of the situation, David.
We are all on the same page – but I don’t see Obama sitting with us in the choir.
F&F could just offer a 4% refi to everyone, and in the process accept applications for a principal reduction, to be acted on once the refi is complete (the refi requiring the total home payment to be less than 50% of income – the same as some current rules, and the principal reduction being made to get the home payment down to 39%, again the same as some current rules).
It does not solve the problem for those that can’t handle a refi based on current income – but it cleans the deck for going forward. For those that need special handling, finding new incentives for servicers that does not prioritize foreclosure is job one, as is finding a way to deem an owner of the mortgage – this means accepting MERS as legal and getting a settlement lest we want to be in court for the next decade.
For those with no or little income there will be foreclosure – but jobs will come back faster to help them if the above is done.
Ummm. Accepting MERS as legal is not acceptable. It has been an utter bloody disaster and should be shitcanned out of existence. It deprives state and local governments of funds that are obviously needed because it doesn’t the one thing it was supposed to do – meet the legal requirements of chain of title. As for a settlement – any settlement that does not remove the top officers of every bank involved and enjoin them from EVER running or managing a bank or finance company again and have possible jail time for some of them is unacceptable. One that does not return us to the staid requirements of Title registration and documentation is unacceptable. So I’d say I respectfully disagree.
Beo, thanks for the clarification. I wasn’t aware there were effective barriers around those positions.
It suggests the keening over DeMarco is feckless and for show — or just to make DeMarco uncomfortable if he is susceptible that way. Otherwise if he has a thick skin, one would have to catch him, say, kiting a check in order for Obama to send him on his way.
No fresh start for MERS. the banks or anyone else. So tired of the suggested solution that if only we leapt over the criminality that came before, all would be well. Nothing will be well in the future if no one has to answer for their actions. I am with thurbers abover.
Agreed. OWS should pronounce that their (our) one goal is to return to a Rule of Law. All of the economic disaster, mortgage fraud and title disaster and even the wars of choice happened because the laws were broken. Thousands of them, just broken and ignored, but the administrations chose to ignore that and let the criminals (in business, and government) go on their merry ways. I have totally lost faith in the government. Not that I had much faith to begin with, but at one time about a decade ago we seemed to have some laws enforced.
Now only the laws that affect the poor and lower class are enforced, drug laws, etc. And the 1% and their bought and paid for whore politicians run amuck. That includes Obama and his gang. Bust whistle blowers, medical pot places and on line gambling but let the major criminals go free. Totally unacceptable to me, and I will not be voting Democratic again. Better to let that party die off and have consequences that let the revolution happen. It’s time.
Wouldn’t it be better to get the order of battle settled before the war?
No one knows if the GSE’s or any other party owns the paper, or the rights to the paper, or that claims a lien exists against the property, or that a perfected lien exists to any party.
The only thing we know for certain is that the homeowner is the only party that ever paid any money that has a record of making such a payment. Ask for the chain of title documents from the lender and look at the myriad of excuses why they can’t or won’t produce it.
Has everyone given up on the actual law? Do you not care that you don’t owe anything if there is no perfected lien? Do you not care that they sold your loan 2 or 3 times to various parties at the same time to reside in several pools at once? Do you not care that every loan in this country was paid off, insured, collected, resold, repackaged and that the dilution has been so extreme that they can’t support their claims in court when asked to provide these documents?
I challenge you Dave, cover the real issues, not the restorative solutions for a corrupt system to get one more day cheating and stealing from us all. It really is so simple that it comes down to this one thing.
Do they have the documents? Does the chain of title run to them without interruption? Do they own the note or do they represent someone that claims to? Just show the attorneys that deal with this every day the evidence of one legitimate foreclosure. I trust you know that no evididence has yet been presented?
Until I see real investigative reporting and understanding, I would have to say, from a legal perspective, that this site has been purchased by those very parties that did the stealing. They have this author convinced they own something and you take it on faith.
A bank can steal anything they want by having an attorney perjure themselves. That is how the system works, period.
Legal is what the law says is legal – it does not equate to fair to all, or to revenue raiser for state and local government. Making MERS legal means it is legal.
As to the rest – putting the thieves at the top of the INVESTMENT BANKS AND HEDGE FUNDS (not necessarily those in management in the banks that made the loans or as in BofA, “saved” a loan originator that was headed by a crook) in jail is a great idea. But in the US we do not touch more than lightly the very rich with legal problems – the head of Countrywide got a $20 million fine but had an agreement with his board that they would pay most of it – as he walked away with about $700 million.
I’m just trying for a workable solution under the rules the rich and corporate have imposed on us as “legal”. I don’t do charges against Windmills, or wishful thinking that continues the misery for another decade.
Chain of title is not a way to gift a house to homeowner – my experience with pro-bono cases is that unjust enrichment is not permitted, but up to a two year delay can be obtained by asking for a reconstruction of the paper trail.
Rule of law is great – if the rule is not written by the rich and corporate – and meanwhile as we wait for the revolution that gets us a fair legal system – I’d like to mitigate the suffering.
The article says DeMarco is ‘acting’ head of FHFA. Was he an Obama or Bush appointee or something else?
How can you “protect taxpayers” when an underwater mortgage isn’t performing properly? Isn’t it more sensible to fix these mortgages, so they more properly reflect today’s housing prices (after an amazing historical event — the housing bubble & collapse)?
Does he have the support/protection from Congressional Republicans, so they can resist the fixing of the problem undermining the economy? If so, then this is a political issue and should be highlighted for the public’s consideration.