H E L P I have been trying to write to Sen Durbin. My children are going to loose their home because HSBC will not rewrite their mortgage. They had a sub prime mortgage that was eventually sold to HSBC. It is a round robin. Their crdit is not wonderful. They are paying tremendouls rate every month. They can afford the house if the rate is lowered. I do believe they pay around 9% They were told to make 6 payments more at this tremendous amt $2,800 a month and then they can lower their rate by that time they will owe everyone else and will be way under again. We have been helpping them but cannot continue to do so. Why can't they refinance now. They can comfortably make $2000 pay ents each month and still meet all their other obligations. My daughter went back to work to help with the bills but they are struggling. They have lived in the house 5 years and have run into some bad time. Please put us in contact with someone who can help. He has exhausted all avenues and HSBC would rather get the house back then help them? Just some names would help. Thank you I didn't know how else to rach Sen Durbin
Ilene Evins
of IL
@
Dec 18, 2008 07:43:41 AM
Retroactive Cramdowns
Maybe the system could function as well or better adding in bankruptcy and cramdowns as a possible additional risk to be borne by lenders. But only if it is prospective. IF Durbin and others succeed in retroactively imposing cramdowns on existing loans that were made in reasonable reliance on clear law explicitly not allowing the cramdowns, lnders would have to plan to price in any other unknown and similarly painful and costly legislative reductions in their rights-- the cost of credit will be much higher as a result.
Flory
of AR
@
Dec 03, 2008 00:46:07 AM
Cram Downs and MBA Kittle's Testimony
Kittle's recent testimony is an obvious concoction: He argues that allowing BK judges to cram down mortgages would raise rates for all borrowers since new risk premiums would have to cover cyclical downturn risk: This is a red herring argument. If banks went back to responsible lending and required mortgage insurance for anything less than 20 percent down and did not facilitate liars loans, there would be almost zero increase in risk premium. MBA's Kittle conveniently fails to acknowledge the concept of mortgage insurance which was standard fare before the lax underwriting standards--zero down, liar loans, etc became par for the course. Cram downs have been allowed on second homes and lien stripping is allowed in the 9th district for primary residents and these allowances don't seem to have made too much of a difference as far as folks pursuing "cram downs". Simply put, a bankruptcy judge is in the best position to look at somebody's situation and determine if they are attempting to game the system. If somebody is lying to the judge, this is a felony. Kittle's rate raising argument holds even less water if cram down provisions are implemented to stem default rates of existing mortgages that run risk of foreclosure. If there was a grandfathered period that applied to folks who bought in the last 5 years, one would be hard pressed to make the case that primary residential mortgages going forward should include a risk premium for potential cram down. Kittle is a tool of the MBA and banks that have created the secondary market for troublesome loans/fueling irresponsible lending. It's time to pay the fiddler, Mr. Kittle.
Ilene Evins of IL @ Dec 18, 2008 07:43:41 AM
Flory of AR @ Dec 03, 2008 00:46:07 AM
Justin McCarthy of CA @ Nov 22, 2008 13:25:53 PM
Back to blog