Skip to main content

Help us extend anti-deficiency protections to homeowners who have refinanced "purchase money" loans and are now facing foreclosure

When is Enough, Enough?

The Big Banks are Opposing C.A.R.'s Bill to Protect Borrowers

The Vote is TOMORROW! Please Call NOW!

C.A.R. is sponsoring SB 1178 (Corbett) to extend anti-deficiency protections to homeowners who have refinanced "purchase money" loans and are now facing foreclosure. Most homeowners didn't even know that when they refinanced they lost their legal protections, and now may be personally liable for the difference between the value of the foreclosed property and the amount owed to the lender. SB 1178 will be voted on THIS WEEK by the entire Senate.
One can't help but think, "when is enough, enough?" Banks have already foreclosed upon a family's home and now lenders can continue to hound them for additional payment. How much more money can today's families afford to pay when they've already lost their homes and most likely their jobs? Are they never to have the opportunity to begin again?

Action Item

Call Senator George Runner Today!

Urge him to vote "Yes" on SB 1178.
Call 1-800-672-3135 and enter  PIN number -- use the following PIN number -- 212005033

Background

California has protected borrowers from so called "deficiency" liability on their home mortgages since the 1930s, but the evolution of mortgage finance requires the statute to be updated.
Current law says that if a homeowner defaults on a mortgage used to purchase his or her home, the homeowner's liability on the mortgage is limited to the property itself. The law has worked well since the 1930s to protect borrowers, ensure the quality of loan underwriting and allow borrowers who are brought down by financial crisis to get back on their feet.
Unfortunately, the 1930s law does not extend the protection for purchase money mortgages to loans that re-finance the original purchase debt -- even if the re-finance was only to gain a lower interest rate. Recent years of low interest rates have induced tens of thousands of homeowners to re-finance their mortgages, yet almost no one realized that by re-financing their mortgages to obtain a lower rate, they were forfeiting their protections. These borrowers became personally liable for the balance of the loan.

C.A.R. is Sponsoring SB 1178 Because:

SB 1178 is fair. Home buyers, and lenders, entered into the purchase with the idea that the mortgage would be non-recourse debt, and that the lender would look to the security (the house) itself to make good on the debt if the borrower cannot. It meets the legitimate expectation of the borrowers, who have no idea that they are losing this protection by a re-finance. Homeowners didn't know that their re-finance exposed them to personal liability, and new tax liability, on the note. It would be unfair to allow a lender, or someone that has purchased a note from a lender, to pursue the borrower beyond the value of the agreed upon security.
SB 1178 is consistent with the intent of the orginal law and simply updates it for modern times. Current law was intended to ensure that if someone lost their home to foreclosure, they wouldn't be liable for additional payment. Since the law was passed over 70 years ago, homeowners re-financing from the original loan to lower their interest rate has become commonplace. The 1930s legislature didn't anticipate how mortgages would change over time.
Lenders could pursue families to collect this "deficiency" debt years down the road. Under current law, lenders have up ten years to collect on the additional debt after a judgment has been entered on the foreclosure. Years after a family has lost their home, they could find themselves in even more financial trouble. Lenders could even sell these accounts to aggressive collection agencies or even bundle them into securities. The end result would be banks who didn't lend responsibly in the first place coming after families for even more money that they don't have.
SB 1178 does NOT apply to "cash-out" re-finances, unless the money was used to improve the home and it doesn't apply to HELOCs.

Thank you for your support of this important law.  David Hoshaw david@scvrealty.com
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What to look for in a real estate agent

There's a common saying in the real estate industry regarding the vast number of agents in the business: "If you don't have any friends who are agents, then you probably don't have any friends at all." With so many agent out there, how can you make an intelligent decision? Do you choose a friend, neighbor or coworker? Should you work with an agent at a large firm, a small firm, a franchise or an independent? While there's an exception to every rule, and every marketplace has its own nuances, here are some solid rules to apply when you want the best representation to protect your interests. Demand Experience Always look for an agent with at least two years of experience. Anyone still in the business after two years has probably learned at least the fundamentals of real estate. Look for Commitment Another problem we have in the industry is a large number of part-time and recreational salespeople. No matter how long they have been in real estate, their lack of f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Getting the Best Tax Break When Selling Your Primary Residence

Getting the Best Tax Break When Selling Your Primary Residence When you sell your primary residence, you may be able to save thousands of dollars by taking advantage of one of the best available tax breaks.  Provided that you have lived in the home as your primary residence and owned it for at least two of the past five years, when you sell your home, you can exclude from income up to $250,000 of gain ($500,000 for married couples filing jointly).  This tax benefit can be used once every two years.  Did you know that a married couple can qualify for the entire $500,000 exclusion even if only one spouse has owned the property for two years?  Or that you don’t need to own the home and use it as your primary residence the same two years?  Read on for a few pointers that may help you take advantage of this tax benefit when you sell your primary residence.  Pointer One - $500,000 Exclusion for Married Couples Available Even if Only One Spouse Owns Home for...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Down Payment Anomaly

Despite home buyers being advised to issue down payments of at least 20 percent, many home buyers are finding that smaller down payments result in better interest rates—but also higher payments. Rules put in place in late 2008 by Fannie Mae and similar rules adopted by Freddie Mac are less favorable to borrowers who put down 20 percent to 25 percent--partially because the GSEs consider these borrowers to be more of a credit risk since they are not required to purchase private mortgage insurance. According to Fannie Mae, borrowers benefit from this industry practice because they are able to leave themselves a financial cushion by not issuing larger down payments, and can instead save the extra money for emergencies. It is important to note though that smaller down payments mean higher monthly payments because the loan itself will be larger. To read the full story, please click here Message David Hoshaw Broker, CRS, GRI, e-PRO Weichert, Realtors - Hos...
Post a Comment
Read more