Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Roger Schlesinger :: Townhall.com Columnist
Sub-prime is not the problem -- who is?
by Roger Schlesinger
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I watch, read and listen to the pundits who have unofficially announced that the sub-prime mortgage market is dead or at least D.O.A. and I wonder if they have anything better to do during the day then make ridiculous statements. Is there trouble in the sub-prime industry?

Absolutely! Should you paint all of the tens of hundreds of sub prime lenders with the same brush? No! Are any of the lenders vibrant? Yes! Have there been changes made in the industry in the last two weeks? Of course. Now for my take on the entire affair. It might not be as everyone sees it, but it will be a lot closer to reality than what you have been hearing or reading.

The sub-prime lenders are those who lend to people with credit scores in the very low 600 range down to 500. They are also the lenders who lend to people with a good credit score and unusual circumstances as non conforming properties, borrowers without reserves, borrowers who have a spouse with good earnings and bad credit and one with good credit and marginal earnings, etc. Sub-prime lenders have been the "common sense" lenders for the past decade who have rules but can bend them for the right circumstances. That isn't what got them into trouble. What the problem was and will always be the same problem that is in many businesses--GREED!!

Taking chances to make more money, where I wouldn't do it or you might not do it either.

Our major sub-prime lender came out with 100% financing years ago which seemed to make sense. What didn't make sense was 100% to $1 million with a 580 credit score.

My first comment to my rep from that lender was "not with my money!" In my opinion, it was just too big of a risk! That is over. A week ago they dropped the 80/20 (1st and 2nd)followed by the one loan of 100% two days later . Now they won't do any loan with a loan to value or combined loan to value over 90%. They also will not go below a credit score of 540. The reason is no one else will do those loans and they were getting nothing but those types of loans being submitted to them. They didn't want the exposure so they shut it down. Will those loans ever come back ? Bet on it!

The one loan that sunk most of those going out of business now was "the liar's loan". It was a stated wage earner with a low credit score. Stated loans were developed for people who are self employed who cannot always demonstrate their earnings, primarily because they write everything they can off against their earnings. They, for the most part, are credit worthy and they needed a way to qualify so the industry developed stated loans. But why in the world did we need a stated wage earner loan? They do not have any problem identifying their earnings. They have W-2's, year to date pay stubs and we could always get a Verification Of Employment from their employer which tells everything about their earning's history with the company. Why did the sub-prime lenders develop this loan? It was an untapped market with a lot of profit because of the higher rates they could charge.

An important note about sub-prime loans that you need to know when you are reading and listening to the folks who are telling you the industry is collapsing : Sub-prime borrowers are generally late on their payments. One C.E.O. of a major sub-prime lender told me years ago that they rely on the lateness when making their earnings projections. At that time they were making $250,000 a month in late fees but he assured me that these borrowers had approximately the same percentage of borrowers who ended up in foreclosure as prime "A" borrowers.

The appetite to own property from those who are less credit worthy hasn't abated. The appetite to make these loans hasn't either. The industry will continue but changes will be made and in years to come I believe we will be close to where we were with programs, loans to value and credit scores.

I could go on with facts, figures and stories about sub-prime which is an area my Company has worked in for the last decade producing about 3/4 of a billion dollars of these loans. We have accomplished some extraordinary results including the one I am about to relay to you. For the past six months a gentleman has been trying to refinance his house which he is buying from his wife, with her blessing, because they are divorcing. For six months we have tried to get her to sign the deed and for one reason or another she wouldn't do it. When we started his new loan was in the six percent range and his credit score was about 620. Two weeks ago the deal was finally consummated but because she didn't pay the credit cards assigned to her, his credit dropped to 500 (one more point and the deal was dead).

His rate jumped to the high 8% range and the loan closed this week. If she had waited one more week the loan couldn't have been made because his credit score is now too low.

I hope this gives you another view of the sub-prime market which certainly had it's problems, but nothing compared to what might be the iceberg that sinks home lending or at least curtails an industry that is most vital to the economies health. It is the Option Arm which allows you to pay less than interest due each month and let the difference accrue to your balance. Instead of your balance going down it goes up and when it reaches a predetermined percentage (110% or 120% of the original loan amount) you then must pay both principal and interest. Your payment could double or triple, your equity is gone and your option then is foreclosure or deeding the property back to the lender.

I have talked negatively about this loan for years and now one of the nations largest lenders has a reported 5% delinquency rate on their portfolio. If real estate prices fall, which we really haven't experienced to a major extent, the aforementioned delinquencies could double and the economy could be in serious trouble.

I hear nothing about curtailing this type of loan from any of the lenders who specialize in these. While Rome burns, the prime lending institute is still selling matches! Why?

I will give you a hint. The word begins with a G.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Roger Schlesinger's Mortgage Minute is heard on hundreds of radio stations and daily on the Hugh Hewitt radio show and Michael Medved shows. Roger interacts with his hosts and explores the complicated financial markets in order to enlighten his listeners and direct them along their own unique road to financial freedom.

Be the first to read Roger Schlesinger's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

samd,
Perhaps it's a matter of semantics. I would agree that some of the big players in the subprime market are collapsing. But it's not because the subprime market is going away -- it's because they made a lot of unprofitable loans.

There will always be a demand for credit at all levels. The question is what premiums should a lender charge for what risk factors.

Roger's example is a good one. Someone whose credit score drops to 500 during a divorce because their former spouse does not pay off her assigned debt is a much better risk than their score indicates. But some of the lending practices seemed to assume that housing prices could only go up.

The Self-Employed
If I may pick a nit, Mr. Schlesinger's comments about "Stated Income Loans" are confusing. I am self-employed, and I do not have access to W2's, Year-to-Date pay stubs or verifications of employment. That's because I'm not someone else's employee.

I'm not interested in Stated Income loans, however, because I have many other ways of verifying income.

It will require a little work on the part of a loan officer to understand where I get my income and why I think I am a good credit risk, because it's not as simple as a stack of W2 forms.

Frankly, I don't think Stated Income loans are necessary for the legitimately self-employed. I think they were a risky dodge to allow lenders to make loans they shouldn't have made, gambling that the borrowers would indeed pay, or failing that, that the lenders would recoup enough in fees to cover the costs.

I think the underlying problem, which Mr. Schlesinger doesn't mention, has to do with the fact that all these lousy loans were bundled and re-sold to speculators, thereby relieving the loan originators of the risk. There's the core of the problem, In My Humble Opinion.

inflated appraisals
Another issue unmentioned is related to how valuations are done at the sub-prime level. Despite all the changes made after the last S & L crisis, in many cases brokers are ordering appraisals directly, deciding which appraisers get continued business.

Unfortunately the reality is these decisions are many times based on which appraisers are willing to "make the deal work." This has to stop.

Fanny Mae and The FHA
The Federal Goverment underwirtes billions of dollars of home loans every year to people with poor or no credit. The process is very political. From Section 8s, to Scatter-site Housing (moving minorities to upscale sub divisions), to under writing mortgages for illegal immigrants, the Fed could care less about risks. There's even a plan for single mothers with rotten credit to get a mortgage. Many of these loans have actually done wonders in helping the less fortunate. But, they are still high risk loans. The taxpayers eats billions in foreclosures every year.

I hear the Senate Dems are demanding hearings about the Sub Prime market now. Anything to grand stand. The federal goverment has hundreds of billions of dollars in unprotected liabilities as a result of thier underwriting high risk mortgages.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.