Public Foreclosure Seminars/meetings:
April 6, 2010 Reno-Sparks Convention Center, 1 pm -7:30 pm
April 7, 2010: 1155 E 9th, 4-6:30 pm
April 17, 2010: 1155 E 9th, 9 am-Noon
Reno is in the midst of a foreclosure crisis the likes of which
has never before been seen. According to the Reno
Evening Gazette, more than half the homes with mortgages in this town
are underwater, meaning the unpaid balance of the home's mortgage
exceeds its fair market value. As of Oct. 18, 2009, some experts were
predicting that the market value of Reno homes will drop another 10% or
so during the next year.
Some buyers forget that a home is the
place to live and the stock market is the place to speculate, i.e.
they bought their home as an investment. It is the nature of some
investments to go bad. We have no sympathy with these folks,
though we certainly will represent them if they were defrauded or some
such. Even investors have a right to an honest deal, well
disclosed.
Some
buyers though, perhaps most, just bought a
home to live in, as folks have been doing for hundreds of years.
They weren't investing and, so long as they still make the income
they were making when they took out the loan, they should just pay it
back, as they promised to do. Who cares whether they have or
don't have equity? Who cares that they are upside down?
They have a place to live, a place to put their kids to bed in
every night. These folks are OK. However, even these folks
might benefit by viewing their situation economically rather than
morally. In a capitalist society, morality generally takes a back
seat to making a buck. This is certainly so for the banks and
there is nothing inherent in homeownership which decrees that
homeowners should not be guided by the same principle. After the
bail-outs, what's your bank's credit score and how long will it take
the bank to recover? If two are playing a game, the rules should
be the same for both sides.
But
then there's another group of folks, those who have lost their jobs or
who bought adjustable rate mortgages and who, before October 1, 2009,
pledged their home as security for a loan, purchase money or
otherwise. These problem-folks have
suffered a loss of income, often by
job-loss, after taking out the loan, or, if they still make the same
income, have suffered an increase in mortgage payments under the terms
of
their adjustable interest rate loan, putting the payment out of reach.
(On the other side, is another group of
problem-folks: those who bought securities of institutions which had
purchased mortgage backed loans, or portions thereof, which are underwater, before or after they had been converted to
securities).
The bad guys, if
there are such, are the middle men...the financial institutions and
their friends which facilitated these loans for, of course, a profit.
Not all of them. Some appraisers were honest, some were
not. Some mortgage brokers were honest. Some were not. Some real estate brokers were honest. Some were not.
Many knew or should have known that the buyer couldn't pay and
that therefore the investors were buying little more than air.
And,
to be honest, the bad guys are also the homebuyers and their banks,
with, perhaps banks being a bit more to blame, if blame is important,
as they are supposed to have the expertise needed to evaluate risk.
A
question that has yet to be definitively resolved is "who can
foreclose?" Folks who live in states which require a judge to
foreclose have a leg up on states such as Nevada, where the foreclosure
generally takes place outside of court. MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.)
claims the right to foreclose in its own name. Yet the homeowner
normally does not owe MERS anything. MERS never loans money,
never borrows money, has no financial interest
in any property and holds no notes or mortgages on any property. Does
someone who has no financial interest in the property whatever have the
right to direct the trustee to foreclose on that property? If MERS is
an agent, does it have to disclose its principal? Cases, most of
them well-reasoned, are coming down on all sides of this question - all
over the country. Some think that the changes wrought by MERS are
so significant that some legislative sanction is necessary. They
think that the legislative scheme is designed to ensure that the
homeowner can readily determine who owns his note, while MERS claims
that all the homeowner needs to know is who is servicing his loan.
Others point out that neither the homeowner nor any third party is
harmed by MERS, so long as the homeowner is actually in default. To
date, homeowner suits attempting to permanently arrest a foreclosure
have
not fared too well in Nevada. But stay tuned. As
plaintiff's attorneys
become more
experienced, that may change.
A
related question is "what does the note holder get on foreclosure?" We
have arguably specific statutory guidance in NRS 40.451, restricting
foreclosure "indebtedness" as follows: " . . . Such amount constituting
a lien is limited to the amount of the consideration paid by the
lienholder." This would seem to require at least three things: 1.
Name(s) of noteholder; 2. Amount noteholder paid; and 3. Enough cash
to pay that amount. The first two of these are hard to determine in a
non-judicial foreclosure state like Nevada. We suppose a letter to the
foreclosing entity would be in order, so inquiring and, if the
information is refused, perhaps a lawsuit would be necessary to get it.
So
what to do? Perhaps someday the Nevada Legislature will provide in
residential cases that a notice of default and election to sell must
contain the name and address of the current owner of the mortgage.
Meanwhile, if the home you bought
to live in is underwater and you can't make the payments, then you have
several options in Nevada.
One
is to wait for the foreclosure sale and
hope that the holder of the note doesn't come after you for a
deficiency. This is very, very risky. Too risky. You
have to
assume that the mortgage company will exercise its rights as they
exist under Nevada law. But, on the other hand, if your home is
already significantly upside down, you effectively already have a
virtual or inchoate judgment against you for the difference
between the fair market value
of the property at the foreclosure date and the outstanding balance of
the note (but see above discussion of NRS 40.451 defining
"indebtedness"). So you get a windfall if the mortgagee doesn't
exercise
its rights to seek a deficiency. And a real judgment against you
if it does. The foreclosing bank only has 6 months after the
foreclosure sale to sue you for a deficiency, so you generally know
whether you have to pay back the deficiency amount right away. (Note
that if your residential loan is a FHA loan, Federal law prohibits
deficiency. And the VA strongly discourages deficiencies on its
loans. Also, if your residential loan was made after October
1, 2009 and 1) The real property is a single-family residence; 2) The
loan was used to buy the property; 3) The borrower continuously
occupied the property as a principal residence after the loan was made;
4) The original loan was not refinanced; and 5) the loan was made by a
financial institution, this discussion doesn't apply in large part
because such loans are rendered non-recourse by a 2009 Nevada law.)
One
significant advantage to the foreclosure option (it really isn't an
"option" sometimes) is Nevada's new mediation program. Nevada has
enacted legislation that requires a Notice of
Default filed after July 1, 2009 to be accompanied by mandatory
mediation forms. Any homeowner who can should, upon receiving a
Notice
of Default, take advantage of this mediation option. This
requires the
homeowner to promptly complete and return the mediation forms and
promptly pay the mediation fee. The first advantage is that the bank
can't ignore you any more... it has to send someone with some authority
to the mediation hearing. The second advantage is that, depending on
the mediator, you just might be able to find out who owns your note.
For further information about mediation, see this article from
the National Consumer Law Center.
Another
option
is to file bankruptcy. However the bankruptcy court can't (and won't)
modify the loan if it is secured by your principal residence.
Nonetheless, if
there is a junior mortgage that has been rendered completely unsecured
by the reduction in market value, the bankruptcy
court might allow it to be discharged. That could help some, but you
would still have to pay all mortgages that are fully or partially
secured. And, depending on your income and other assets, you might
still be
required to pay back all your unsecured creditors, including the
sold-out junior mortgage. Basically, for most people, bankruptcy is
probably not a
good way to save their home for any extended period of time. As
far as that goes, bankruptcy has not been much of an option for
middle-class Americans since the Bush amendments to the bankruptcy code
took effect in October, 2005, amendments which, not surprisingly, were
supported by Nevada's Governor, who was then in the House of
Representatives. Those amendments basically converted the former
free-wheeling American capitalistic bankruptcy system into a clone of
the heavily moralistic bankruptcy systems so prevalent in Europe. If
anyone wonders who no one is buying new cars anymore, they might take a
moment and look at what Bush did to our bankruptcy laws.
Still another is the
lawsuit option. Depending on the facts of your case, you might have a
lawsuit against one or more of the financial institutions who sold you
the loan. Or agents of the financial institution, or against others, such as appraisers and brokers who were
involved in the process. If you don't want to keep the home, you
might,
depending on your facts, have a suit for rescission. If you want
to stay in your home, you might have a suit for damages.
Or an injunction, temporary or permanent. Or other relief.
Another
option
is to seek to modify the loans on your home....to deal with the bank or
whoever claims to represent the holder of your note. For a whole lot
of folks, this is a reasonable way to approach the problem. This process is started in
lots of ways, but probably the best is to log on to
makinghomeaffordable.gov and familiarize yourself with the various
available options. There is no way we can completely cover this field,
but we will now briefly discuss a couple of the options available to
some:
Home Affordable Modification program (HMP). www.MakingHomeAffordable.gov
If the first mortgage (deed of trust) on your owner-occupied home is a
Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac Conventional mortgage originated before
1/1/09, you may qualify for the HMP. Call 800-7Fannie or 800-Freddie to
find out. The basic idea of this program is to get your mortgage
payment down to 31% of your gross income. The unpaid balance of the
first mortgage can't exceed the maximum amount (its pretty high - most
loans qualify) and the cost of the HMP can't exceed the cost of
foreclosing on the home. Nonetheless, the benefit can be significant
for those who qualify. For example, interest can be reduced to as
little as 2% for five years and under some circumstances, payment of a
portion of the unpaid balance of the mortgage can be deferred for many
years, without interest. If, as noted above, you look on your home as a place to live and
not as an investment, HMP often presents a very attractive way to keep
it. We here don't go into detail as the details may change. HMP only
helps with the first mortgage, but we note that there might be some
help available for your second mortgage, under certain circumstances
through related programs.
Home Affordable Refinance. www.MakingHomeAffordable.gov
If your owner-occupied home has a loan is owned or securitized by
Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, you may be able to refinance your loan into
a more affordable mortgage and thereby reduce your monthly mortgage
payments.
If your home is insured by FHA, you might be
able to take advantage of FHA-HAMP, similar in ways to Freddie
Mac/Fannie Mae's HMP. www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/nsc/lmmltrs.cfm.
If
you are considering a loan modification, we strongly recommend that you
check with one or more of the following free counselors for mortgage
assistance:
Consumer Credit Affiliates, 3100 Mill St, Suite 111, Reno,
NV 89502 (775-337-6363) www.cccsnevada.org;
Nevada Legal Services, 650 Tahoe St., Reno, NV 89509 (775-284-3491) www.nlslaw.net;
Washoe County Senior Law Project, 1155 E. 9th St., Reno, NV 89512 (775-328-2592) www.washoecounty.us/seniorsrv/Legal/legal.htm.
No doubt there are other non-profits which will help you free of
charge. These agencies can be very helpful in completing the necessary
forms and in dealing with your loan servicer. If, after exhausting
these remedies, you still need help, you can call us. But that rarely
makes sense. We are lawyers, not loan-modifiers. And we will charge
you our $300 hourly fee for what is all too often an unsuccessful
outcome. In short, if you want a loan modification, do it yourself or
with the help of a non-profit counselor.
Deed
for Lease Program. Some might want to take advantage of Fannie
Mae's new program, under which qualifying homeowners who are facing
foreclosure will be able to voluntarily convey the property back to the
lender, then remain in their homes under a lease for up to a year, with
possible term renewal or month-to-month extensions. If the
property is subsequently sold, it will include an assignment of the
lease to the buyer. Although the stated goals are worthwhile
(helps eliminate uncertainty, keeps families in their homes, helps to
stabilize neighborhoods and communities), there are pitfalls for the
unwary, such a bankruptcy and equitable mortgage issues. Anytime
a borrower keeps a possessory interest in the property foreclosed on,
there is a chance that a court will find that the lease is really an
equitable mortgage. At least Fannie Mae's purchaser better get
good title insurance.
Short
Sales. We note that some brokers are
pushing "short sales," where the upside-down homeowner sells to a third
party for less than the outstanding balance of the note. In early
April, 2010, the Obama administration's Making Homes Affordable program
took up the short-sale cause as a way of helping solve the foreclosure
crisis. It is yet to be seen if this will work as it requires the
voluntary cooperation of the mortgagee (bank). Additional issues
are whether the bank reserves
the right to
seek a deficiency judgment as a condition to giving its consent to the
short sale. The new federal short-sale program may ameliorate the often
adverse tax consequences, perhaps
depending in part on whether a bankruptcy petition is filed before or
after the "short sale" closes. Check with your tax advisor. But, if
your credit score is
important to you, the bank agrees to mark the loan "paid" rather
than
"settled," and the holder of any junior lien goes along with the program, this might be a way to go.
In
sum, as you can see, this is a complicated mess. Nonetheless,
perhaps we have shown you that if your home is "underwater," you are
not without recourse. Remember, you can always "walk" and if you
don't risk a deficiency and the amount you are underwater is
significant, this may be your best alternative. Even if you do
risk a deficiency, "walking" is sometimes the best of your options.
A gamble, perhaps, but the big boys take these sort of gambles
all the time. If you decide to walk, best to get some good advice
first. That, again, is what the big boys do.