WASHINGTON – Oct. 27, 2008 – U.S. mortgage lenders are showing more willingness to rewrite loans for troubled homeowners, a trade organization said.
“There’s really no reluctance anymore,” said Chairman-elect of the Mortgage Bankers Association David Kittle. “Lenders lose $40,000 to $50,000 on every loan that goes into foreclosure,” he said.
Kittle said some lenders were sending staff door-to-door to engage homeowners in discussions about rewriting their contracts, USA Today reported Wednesday.
Kathleen Day of the Center for Responsible Lending said the door-to-door maneuver may just be a publicity stunt, the newspaper reported.
Many banks lack the extra staff needed to help homeowners renegotiate or systematically review mortgages to see if they qualify for federal programs.
Hope Now, a national alliance of lenders, financial counselors and investors, said 2.26 million homeowners avoided foreclosure since July 2007 by changing repayment plans.
As many as 400,000 homeowners could benefit from a new Federal Housing Administration program, while another 400,000 could find relief through Bank of America, which purchased Countrywide Financial and then settled a complaint against it with terms that include helping qualified homeowners.
Copyright © 2008 by United Press International. All rights reserved.
Vote now or on Nov. 4
Early voting for the Nov. 4 general election continues through Nov. 2; and now you have more time to vote. Yesterday, Gov. Charlie Crist signed an executive order that immediately extended early voting hours in Florida. Early voting sites now are open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, four hours longer than state law specifies; the governor’s order also requires that sites be open 12 hours this weekend, another four hours longer than the law says. Local election officials will decide how to divide the weekend hours in each county. To find out where the early voting sites are and times of operation, check with your county elections supervisor’s office, either by phone or online. Along with casting ballots for president, voters will decide the fate of six constitutional amendments, and FAR has voted to support three of them:
• No. 3 – Changes and Improvements Not Affecting the Assessed Value of Residential Real Property, click here.
• No. 4 – Property Tax Exemption of Perpetually Conserved Land; Classification and Assessment of Land Used for Conservation, click here.
• No. 6 – Assessment of Working Waterfront Property Based Upon Current Use, click here.
PENSACOLA, Fla. (AP) – Oct. 29, 2008 – Gulf County Commissioner Billy Traylor says he is supporting Amendment 4 on Tuesday’s ballot because he prefers the tiny fishing villages and pine tree farms of his rural county to the widespread development of South Florida.
While he doesn’t envision shopping malls, big hotels and chain restaurants anytime soon in his small Panhandle county, he worries about future development spoiling the region’s natural beauty in decades to come.
“You have to be careful because you don’t want to stop business growth too much, but overall I think it is a good thing,” said the lifelong Gulf County resident.
The amendment, which has broad support from a coalition of environmental, business and government groups, gives landowners a tax incentive to place their land in conservation and declare it either permanently or temporarily off limits to developers. It has no organized opposition.
Amendment 4 would create conservation as a new land-use classification, giving conserved property a lowered tax assessment similar to that of agricultural land. Legislators would decide how long property must remain undeveloped to meet the criteria for the conservation classification. The amendment eliminates property taxes on lands placed in a perpetual conservation easement, which would prohibit future development on the land because the classification remains even if the land is sold. Like all proposed amendments, it requires 60 percent approval for passage.
“This allows someone to take the cows off their land and instead place it conservation use,” said Preston Robertson, the amendment’s creator and vice president of the nonprofit Florida Wildlife Federation.
Robertson said the amendment shouldn’t cause a decline in property tax revenues because much of the land that would be placed in conservation is currently being used as agriculture.
“It’s pretty much a wash as far as revenue,” he said.
Brian Yablonski, vice president of public affairs for The St. Joe Co. and a member of the Florida Taxation and Budget Reform Commission, backed the amendment at the commission.
But officials from St. Joe, Florida’s largest private landowner, did not return numerous calls from The Associated Press seeking information about the company’s stance on the amendment. The one-time timber company owns large swaths of Panhandle lands including most of Gulf County, Traylor’s home. It is slowly developing the land into high-end vacation homes and commercial projects.
Robertson called Yablonski’s support of the amendment a “red herring” because other commissioners also supported the amendment even though St. Joe may receive “some tax benefit.” And Robertson said most of the company’s lands are currently taxed at a reduced rate under the agricultural classification.
Cragin Mosteller of the Florida Association of Counties said her organization is supporting the amendment despite the possibility of some lost property tax revenues because members believe it has a long-term benefit for the state.
“Everyone realizes the positive benefits conservation lands bring to a community. This is another tool in our tool boxes to encourage more conservation,” she said.
The amendment also has the backing of the Audubon of Florida, the Florida Chamber of Commerce, The Nature Conservancy and Florida Tax Watch, which supports the measure but warns it could be abused by landowners seeking tax breaks if legislators are not careful in drafting its supporting legislation.
Eric Draper, policy director for Audubon of Florida, said the environmental groups will push for strict guidelines including a 10-year minimum for land place under conservation and the imposition of back taxes on those who develop the land before the period ends.
“If the people vote for this, we have faith in the Legislature to act appropriately,” said Janet Bowman, legislative policy director for the Nature Conservancy.
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press, Melissa Nelson. All rights reserved.
State Farm makes case in Florida rate hike hearing
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Oct. 29, 2008 – State Farm, the state’s largest private insurer, Monday defended a sought-after 47.1 percent hike to homeowners insurance policies at a hearing expected to last up to a week.
In August, state insurance regulators rejected the rate hike, which would have driven up homeowners’ policies in parts of Palm Beach County by nearly 70 percent.
In turning down the request, Florida’s Office of Insurance Regulation, which oversees rate hikes, cited technical deficiencies, a lack of evidence that the boost was justified and questions about losses; specifically, losses the insurer claimed it incurred because the legislature forced a rate reduction for homeowners who harden their homes against storms.
State Farm took its case to an administrative law judge, asking him to recommend granting the hike.
Lawyers for the State Farm assured Judge Daniel Manry on Monday that their proposal is sound and necessary to keep the insurer solvent enough to pay claims in the event of a catastrophic storm.
The state subsidiary of the company, which received an average 52 percent rate hike in 2006, really needs a 67.6 percent rate increase now, argued State Farm Vice President Kathy Popejoy, an actuary.
In her 25-minute opening statement, State Farm attorney Cynthia Tunnicliff said, “You will hear no testimony that the actuarial judgments that went into projecting the expenses was not reasonable. You will hear no testimony that the actuarial judgments that went into the rate of return was not reasonable. You will hear no testimony that the proposed rates are excessive or unfairly determined.”
The Office of Insurance Regulation’s opening statement from attorney Marc Herskovitz was brief: “We disagree with most if not all of what was said and the balance we’ll reserve for the testimony.”
The company has had some success in winning rate hikes in Florida from regulators. In 2006, State Farm won approval to raise its rates an average of 52.7 percent statewide and more than 100 percent in parts of Palm Beach County.
The hearing on the current rate hike request is scheduled to last a week. Manry then has 30 days to issue a recommended order, after which state regulators will have 45 days to make a final order.
Copyright © 2008, The Palm Beach Post, Fla., Dara Kam. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
WASHINGTON (AP) – Oct. 29, 2008 – The worst financial crisis in 70 years has forced the Federal Reserve to employ all the weapons in its arsenal — including cutting interest rates to near historic lows — to try to keep the United States from plunging into a deep recession.
Fed policymakers are expected to slash a key interest rate by a half-point, pushing the federal funds rate down to 1 percent, as they wrap up a two-day meeting Wednesday.
That would put the Fed’s target for the interest banks charge each other on overnight loans down at a level last seen during the 12-month period between June 2003 and June 2004. Before that period, the funds rate had not been that low in 45 years.
Economists believe the Fed is prepared to cut rates so low because of the rising fears that the financial turmoil of the past two months is raising the specter of a deep and prolonged recession.
“The Fed is going to send a very strong signal that they will do whatever it takes to restore stability to the economy,” predicted Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com.
The prospect of another sizable rate cut, coming just three weeks after a half-point move that was coordinated with a number of countries, sent the stock market soaring on Tuesday, pushing the Dow Jones industrial average up by 889.35 points, its second-biggest point gain in history.
Even if the Fed does fulfill the desires of investors with its action Wednesday, it is not likely to end the turbulence on Wall Street. Analysts are cautioning to be prepared for more stomach-churning days ahead as investors struggle to deal with a severe credit crisis and what could be the worst recession in at least two decades.
A half-point rate cut on Wednesday would push borrowing costs lower for millions of consumer and business loans with banks moving quickly to match the Fed’s action by lowering their benchmark prime lending rate from 4.5 percent, where it has been for the past three weeks, down to 4 percent.
The Fed is hoping that the sharply lower rates will help boost economic growth going forward. The government will release its first look at economic activity in the July-September quarter on Thursday and that is expected to show that the gross domestic product shrank at a rate of 0.5 percent in the third quarter.
Many analysts believe the GDP — the measure of the value of all the goods and services produced in the country — is falling further in the current quarter and will also fall in the first three months of next year.
That pattern would meet the classic definition of a recession as at least two consecutive quarters of declining GDP. Many economists think that when the National Bureau of Economic Research, the official arbiter of when recessions begin and end in this country, makes its decision, it will date this downturn to the beginning of 2008, when the labor market started shedding jobs.
The country has lost jobs every month this year and the unemployment rate now stands at 6.1 percent. Economists forecast that it could hit 8 percent by the spring of next year due to the severity of the shutdown of bank lending, a credit crisis triggered by billions of dollars of losses in mortgage lending as defaults soared to record levels.
That has jolted banks, resulted in government takeovers of the nation’s two biggest mortgage companies and the biggest shakeup on Wall Street since the Great Depression. Banks have become fearful about making new loans, a development that has had ripple effects on American businesses trying to get loans for normal operations, and on American consumers, who are having trouble getting car loans and home loans.
“The credit squeeze has moved from Wall Street to Main Street and it is seriously affecting the real economy and now it has gone global,” said Sung Won Sohn, an economist at the Smith School of Business at California State University, Channel Islands.
Many analysts believe a rate cut in the United States will be followed by cuts in other major economies as central banks around the world try to inject confidence into a badly shaken financial system.
Analysts are split, however, on whether a Fed rate move this week will be followed by another rate cut at the central bank’s last meeting of the year on Dec. 16.
Some analysts think the Fed could drive the funds rate as low as 0.5 percent and might even go to zero, which the Bank of Japan did in an effort to combat a decade-long bout of malaise in the 1990s caused by a real estate bust in that country.
Other analysts believe the Fed will be content to lower the funds rate to 1 percent and leave it there, partly because pushing it any lower would remove any cushion to cut the rate further should the economy fail to respond and the downturn worsen.
These analysts believe the Fed will depend on its other efforts to battle the credit crisis, which involve supplying massive resources to the banking system.
David Jones, chief economist at DMJ Advisors, said that Fed officials will probably decide that all the global efforts to fight the credit squeeze, including a $700 billion rescue fund in this country, should be given time to work.
But Jones, who thinks the economy will remain in a recession until the middle of next year, said he believes that the Fed will signal that it is prepared to leave the funds rate at 1 percent for some time to come.
When the Fed under former Chairman Alan Greenspan “cut the funds rate to 1 percent and left it there for a year, they kept saying rates would remain low for a considerable period of time,” Jones said. “I think this time rates will stay at 1 percent for a longer period.”
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press, Martin Crutsinger (AP Economics Writer). All rights reserved.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) – Oct. 30, 2008 – Three recent home buyers who moved to Florida from other states will appeal a judge’s ruling that dismissed their challenge to property tax breaks offered by two state constitutional amendments, one of their lawyers said Tuesday.
Circuit Judge Charles Francis of Tallahassee rejected the suit Monday. It challenged the 1992 Save Our Homes Amendment, which caps yearly assessment increases at 3 percent for primary homes, and an amendment voters adopted in January.
The recent change lets homeowners take Save Our Homes benefits with them if they move, known as “portability.” The amendment also gives all primary homeowners a tax cut expected to average $240 and includes some breaks for businesses.
“This is the first round of a 10-rounder,” said Douglas Lyons, an attorney for the challengers. “We’re exploring some ways to go directly to the Florida Supreme Court.”
If that doesn’t work, the case next will go to the 1st District Court of Appeal.
It’s one of three similar lawsuits challenging one or both of the amendments.
Another Tallahassee judge last year dismissed the first lawsuit by three out-of-state residents who own second homes in Florida. It challenged the Save Our Homes Amendment, and an appeal is pending in the 1st District.
The third lawsuit also was filed by nonresidents who own Florida property, and it challenges both amendments. That case is pending in circuit court here.
Three Alabama residents argued in the first case that Save Our Homes unfairly has shifted the property tax burden from primary homes, known as homesteads, to all other types of real estate including their vacation homes in Destin.
Circuit Judge John C. Cooper rejected their argument that the amendment violates equal protection and right to travel provisions in the U.S. Constitution. It serves a legitimate public interest in promoting primary permanent homes, Cooper wrote. He also noted the Alabama residents could get the tax break by making their primary homes in Florida.
That’s what the recent home buyers did in the case decided Monday. They still argued their travel rights have been violated because longtime Florida residents get a bigger tax break than they do.
Francis, though, wrote that all residents who buy a home for the first time are treated the same way whether they were born and raised in Florida or just moved here.
He also echoed Cooper’s ruling by writing there’s a rational basis for treating new and older residents differently in the interest of “neighborhood preservation, continuity and stability.”
Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press, Bill Kaczor (Associated Press Writer).
Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!