Fannie Mae Threw a Party And Nobody Showed Up

by: Brian.Brady on May 22, 2008 17:43:59     1 comment »

The National Association for Realtors convinced FNMA to lift its "declining market" down payment policy:

 

Fannie Mae is scrapping a "declining markets" policy that required loan underwriters to boost minimum down-payment requirements by 5 percent in areas where home prices are falling or difficult to determine.


Beginning in June, Fannie Mae will instead require 3 percent down payments for conventional, conforming mortgages processed through its Desktop Underwriter automated underwriting system, and 5 percent minimum down payments for loans processed manually. Larger down payments may be required depending on occupancy, property and transaction types.


The new single national down-payment policy will retire a controversial declining-market policy announced in December. The policy, implemented Jan. 15, boosted the minimum down payment required by 5 percent when Desktop Underwriter flagged a property as being located in an area of declining home prices or where it was difficult to assess home values. The policy also applied if an appraiser determined a property was in a declining market.

 

Californians rejoice, right?  Not so fast.  There are a few more moving parts in the mortgage industry and the NAR lobby can't provide enough lubricant to remove the rust.  Mortgages with a down payment of less than 20% can't be funded without:

 

a) a corresponding second mortgage for the amount over an 80% loan; NOBODY is making second mortgages at the 95-97% level.

 

b)  private mortgage insurance; the PMI insurers just aren't playing ball.

 

MGIC, the big private mortgage insurer, has their own "restricted markets list".  If the property falls in a restricted market,  down payment and credit requirements are more onerous than the FNMA policy.

 

FNMA threw a party but nobody showed up.




2008 Housing Market Outlook For U.S. Investors

by: Brian.Brady on November 27, 2007 05:53:58     12 comments »

The U.S. housing market outlook for 2008 is somewhat bleak.  Mortgage defaults continue to rise, flooding certain locales with more inventory, as mortgage lenders seek to rid themselves of poorly performing loans.  The first three months of 2008 may very well be a bloodbath for markets that inflated quickly, regardless of the underlying fundamentals.  Parts of California, Arizona, Florida, and Nevada seem most likely to suffer from this final downward push as the weak borrowers are culled from the herd.

 

Why will the first quarter of 2008 be bleak for housing?  Mortgage companies have been losing money hand over fist, in 2007, due to defaults and short sales.   I think they're delaying the big losses.  REALTORs have been reporting that lenders are becoming increasingly difficult to negotiate short sales in the past few months.  It is conceivable that many lenders expect 2008 to be worse than 2007 and are delaying foreclosure activity and short sales until next year.  They can "hide" the 2007 numbers in the larger numbers of 2008.  It's kind of like limiting your fat intake to 25 grams daily then binging on McDonald's on Fridays.  The huge spike in fat grams, ingested on Friday, won't be absorbed by your body and will "flush through your system" on Saturday.

 

It's a case of pent-up supply.  If lenders have 3-4 months of bad loans on their books ,and flood the market in the beginning of the year, it is most likely that we'll see foreclosure and short sale activity, in the first quarter of 2008, that is twice as large as what we've seen this quarter.  That increased inventory will put downward pressure on prices for the first half of 2008.  The downward spiral, however, should be limited to markets that are driven by lending activity.  Pockets within those markets will be impervious to the fall.  In San Diego County, for example, La Jolla, Del Mar, and Rancho Santa Fe seem to defy gravity as inland communities drop.  Those communities are mostly cash buyers (or low loans to value) while their lesser-priced neighbors rely on mortgage financing.  Paradise Valley, Arcadia, North Central Phoenix and parts of Scottsdale seem to be the resilient pockets in Maricopa County. 

 

It's the old adage that the rich get, well..."not poorer" ...while the poor get ...well...clobbered.  That is not surprising.  The irrational exuberance, displayed by the middle class, during the cheap money orgy, was... well...irrational.  Freshman algebra shows us that when we solve for x, it can't equal y.    The median income, for an area like San Diego County, is $60,000 and the median home price is $493,000.  The affordability equation, even when adjusted for the "sunshine tax" is skewed.  If mortgage financing costs about $8 per thousand, and we allow for a full 50% of the monthly income for housing debt service, which is quite generous, we still come up with a maximum loan amount of about $325,000 for the median income family in San Diego County.  That suggests that a $175,000, down payment from that family; ...that just ain't gonna happen.

 

Incomes, in these markets,  need to rise or....housing prices, in these markets, simply must decline.  If new homeowners don't have the ability to service the debt for a home purchase, they can't buy the property at the inflated price.  Look for median prices to gravitate towards that median income.  In the San Diego County example, that median price should drop to $400,000.  If the "rich get richer", meaning those well-to-do pockets won't drop in value, then the lower end of the market wil get hammered.  Therein lies the long-term investment opportunity for the astute property investor.

 

Housing has utilitarian value, which ultimately trumps economic value.  In short, there is value to owning a home even if it is a bit more expensive than renting.  There is a peace of mind that comes with property ownership.  The ability to paint your walls lime green because it's "you own the sumbitch" does allow for a premium to the traditional investment formula.  So, in Phoenix, while the economic value of a home that leases for $700/month may be $130,000, the utilitarian value may go as high as $170,000.  If a tenant pays $700 to lease that home, a good borrower could own that home, with no downpayment, for $1133/month or about $850 in after-tax dollars.  The question then becomes, "Is $150/month worth it for the right to paint the walls lime green?"  I think that the answer is yes.

Read more »




Trust Deed Investing: Risk Does Exist

by: Brian.Brady on October 18, 2007 05:29:09     Leave a comment »

I maintain a practice of matching high-risk borrowers with aggressive, fixed-income investors through trust deed investments.  It is, in my opinion, a conservative way to get a double-digit return with the relative safety of California real estate. 

 

READ: Investing in California Trust Deeds

 

There are, however, risks associated with an investment is a private loan transaction:

 

Credit:  The borrowrers are often very high risk of default.  Approximately 10% of those borrowers are defaulting today.

Market Risk of Collateral:  If a loan is made for 70% of the value of a property, and the market value drops 20%, the risk of return of capital heightens.  It costs approximately 10% to sell a property in distress.   eg:  a $350,000 loan, made against a $500,000 property some 18 months ago, could be in risky today.  That property, worth $400,000 today,  could cost $30,000-$40,000 to sell.  A trust deed investor is now "holding his breath" if the borrower defaults.

Opportunity Cost:  If the loan defaults, it is because the borrower is not making his payments.  Now, instead of receiving a double-digit return, the investor is accruing a double digit return to eventually be recovered in foreclosure.  Still, the investor is receiving his money from the borrower and has to proceed through the foreclosure process.

 

Why point this out?  This is a serious business.  The internet is a funny place.  I noticed a new player in the private mortgage arena, receiving endorsements from bloggers across the globe.  What I saw scared me.  What you are about to read are not testimonials but are, in fact , "sponsored reviews" :

Read more »




California Mortgage Pool Investing

by: Brian.Brady on October 09, 2007 21:14:38     Leave a comment »

I am a private mortgage lender which means I make real estate loans (non-bank loans) to individuals who can't qualify for bank financing.  In California, this is sometimes referred to as Trust Deed Investing because the security instrument (how you secure the collateral) we use is called a Deed of Trust.  The loans can be risky of default and subsequent foreclosure.  This is why we don't make loans for more than 70% of the value of the property.  The returns, however, are very attractive.  It is not uncommon to earn 11-15% interest on trust deeds.  I think they are relatively safe because they are secured by Southern California real estate.

 

A mortgage pool is a generic term used for the financial seet whose underlying assets are mortgages.  Most of the institutional mortgages originated today end up on Wall Street in a mortgage pool.  Many are underwritten according to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac guidelines and are referred to as "conforming pools" because the underlying loans in the pool  conform to those guidelines set by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Read more »