![]() |
Real Estate News and Advice |
September 5, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
Effort To End Predatory Lending Progresses
by Lew Sichelman
The two sides in the long-running debate over abusive lending practices all but agreed on a definition of predatory lending at the Consumer Federation of America's annual Financial Services Conference which has just finished in Washington, DC.. They still can't seem to come to terms on what to do about the problem, but they may be getting a little closer together on that front, too. The mortgage business believes stronger enforcement of existing laws is enough to weed out the bad actors. But consumer advocate Eric Stein of the Center for Community Self Help in Durham, N.C., maintains that at the very least, the rules must be amended to include specific practices. Such skullduggery as equity skimming and flipping are "actually legal" under current federal law, said Stein, a leader in the consumer movement's successful effort to persuade the North Carolina legislature to enact what is possibly the nation's toughest predatory lending statute. "Perhaps some new definitions" are in order, responded Steve Alonso of Cresleigh Bancorp, a mortgage banker who stressed he was speaking for himself and not as an industry spokesman. "But I don't think the laws need to be changed." As far as Alonso is concerned -- and here he echoes the thoughts of most of his colleagues -- legitimate lenders don't need to be forced into complying with more cumbersome federal rules and regulations. The mortgage banker said he's "not going to deny" that abusive practices occur. But, he told the conference, lenders who commit such sins "will never be able to sell" their loans or will be forced to buy them back from investors. Either way, he explained, violators will have to put up their own capital to fund their bad loans. And that alone is enough to keep the vast majority of lenders honest. Besides, Alonso added, state banking regulators "have really tightened up" their oversight, "especially in the last year." Stein, on the other hand, said greater protections are in order, if only because "those who are screwed over the most" by predatory lenders are less educated than other borrowers. The fees some unscrupulous lenders are charging "are very complicated to understand," he added, citing an AARP study that found that 52% of all senior borrowers find loan fees so difficult to comprehend that they don't even bother to try to analyze them. In many cases, the consumer advocate said, predators target African American neighborhoods where there's "a lot of equity but not a lot of options. People shouldn't be penalized just because they only bank in the neighborhoods is a subprime lender." Even though Stein used the term "subprime" in discussing "predatory" lending, both he and Alonso agreed the two words are not necessarily synonymous. "Predatory and subprime are not the same thing," the lender said. "Doing the wrong thing to a customer is predatory; making a subprime loan isn't. Non-prime lending is a service, a product that fills the very specific needs of people for whom no other credit is available." Prior to the advent of the subprime industry, these people borrowed at exorbitant rates from neighborhood finance companies, he noted. Now, they're able to get the money they need at rates that are properly priced for risk. Stein acknowledged that the two terms are not interchangeable. At the same time though, he pointed out that "most predatory lending takes place in the subprime universe." The consumer advocate defines predatory lending "by what it does to families." Equity stripping, loan flipping and excessive fees are all designed to steal the borrower's wealth, he explained. And the problem "comes homes to roost" in foreclosure. He said he has no problems per se with credit insurance as long as the premiums are paid on a monthly basis rather than added to the loan balance and financed over the life of the loan. And he has no objections to risk-based pricing, even if the rate is 10% over prime, as long as it's warranted and a lot of fees unrelated to risk aren't tucked on the front and back ends of the loan. But he and other consumer advocates do oppose onerous prepayment penalties that all but prevent borrowers from paying off their loans in mid-term. These often "hidden, deferred fees" are found in about half of all subprime loans, he pointed out, yet they are noticeably absent in all but about 2% of all prime mortgages. He also said that in some cases, consumers are forced to pay a penalty of 5% of their loan balances if they want to payoff their balances within the first 60 months. On a $150,000 loan, he added, that amounts to a $7,500 prepayment penalty, an exorbitant charge that amounts to nothing more than stealing a borrower's hard earned equity. Published: December 14, 2000 Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws. Related Articles:
|
Real Estate News Network
Today's Real Estate Outlook
Mortgage Rates
30 Year Fixed: 6.40% 15 Year Fixed: 5.93% 1 Year Adj: 5.33% (U.S. Weekly Averages) Today's Headlines
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
|
for Agents
Readers' Choice
|
||||||||||||||||||