60 Minutes Blows the POA/ALT-A Loan Story

by guest author and good friend Scott J. Wilson

I know that I am just smart enough to get by, and I know am not a genius by any stretch of the imagination.  I have just been in the mortgage industry – working everything from mortgage sales to secondary markets – for more than fifteen years.

I happen to be watching CBS’s 60 Minutes tonight (12-14-08) and they had a piece called Mortgage Meltdown:  Where’s the Bottom? with Scott Pelley, who did the story, and not a very good job of it.  Either he or his writers need to better research their topic before they to such a report. 

Mr. Pelley failed to note that POA’s qualified borrowers with “teaser” interest rates, and not the actual “payment” interest rates.  But that is not what I am griping about.  My complaint lay in Pelley’s false assumption that no one but a few sage individuals could see these consequences of poor lending standards coming.

All of my experience is in the explosive Orlando, Florida area, so I know a thing or two about exotic mortgage products like the soon to be infamous Pay Option ARM (POA), ticking time-bomb of the mortgage world, and the subprime’s little brother ALT A.

 

imfresets1

During the bubble from in 2004-2006, I worked for one of the biggest lenders in the nation (one of the survivors thus far) and I doing a truckload of Condo-conversions.  I sold a hell of a lot POA’s to borrowers during that period, and most will all be recasting over the next two years.

I tried to always do one thing when I did sell a POA, I tried to explain to the borrowers exactly what these loans were intended for – people with season variances in income like construction and tourist trades, or for those whose income is mostly delivered from quarterly bonuses like sales people.

I did my best to point out to the borrower advantages and traps in POA’s.  That being said, I am no “expert” by 60 Minutes standards, let alone “one of (only) six experts in the nation who saw this (tsunami of foreclosures) coming,” as 60 Minutes called Mr. Eagan in tonight’s story.

I knew way back when in the bubble, as did most of the loan officers that I worked with, that these were potentially bad products if they were sold to the wrong borrowers, and that most would probably fail if they allowed more than 80% loan to value (LTV), or made them available to speculators and subprime borrowers.

I also know that most of these loan officers were not geniuses either.  Could we have been the only ones to know?  I doubt it.  So to say that the banks that offered them had no idea that POA’s had a high risk of potentially failing is just completely incorrect.

The bank’s own greed got the best of them; all they saw was the dollar signs in their eyes, as fees and points that filled their coffers.

The borrowers were really no less greedy– like I said, I did my best to explain, even tried to talk some borrowers out of using a POA to buy the property that they were interested in. But most times, it was to no avail.  They either didn’t care about the risks or worse yet, their Realtor “over talked” me and told them that I did not know what I was talking about, and that the POA was their best choice:

Real estate always goes up, remember? It’s different here!  No need to worry about that negative amortization loan if you stick with the only payment you can really afford, the one with the 1% teaser, your house will be worth double what you paid for it in a year or two!

But, unfortunately, the problem as the banks saw it wasn’t that these loans were going to fail in droves, nope.

The problem the banks saw was that the people were using these loans as short-term real estate investment loans with a really low initial payment, giving the investors time to remodel the property in order to “flip” the house and then move on to the next investment without having to sink so much capital into principle and interest with a higher interest commercial loan payment.

The banks were not making enough money, so they started tacking on prepayment penalties, which investors took as a cost of doing business and the banks thought of as a new revenue stream.

So the big banks and mortgage lenders had to have done some sort of analysis of these POA loans (I know Anthony did when he worked for them, whether the executives ever really read them I don’t know).

Did they not anticipate that the loans would be bad?  That if someone who was taking this completely unaffordable loan out for a long period of time they would get burned, especially if the borrower had a two or three year pre-pay penalty on it and the market took a quick downturn, leaving them unable to refinance – just like it did.

Come on though, everyone can’t be so smart that we all saw this coming, but the leadership at Corporate of these mega-institutions did not – especially when they were offering No Income/No Asset options as well – now commonly know as “Liar-Loans” for their lack of any documentation in exchange for a higher interest rate.

Again, profit driven.

At one point, I told people that it was not a matter of if you can qualify or not for an Option ARM or not, if you had below-average or sub-prime credit, you would qualify , with no problems.  All I had to do, was run their credit and if they had a 620 credit score (below average credit at the time), then I told them that they were approved with out even having an underwriter look at it.

Underwriters could approve even lower scores with the advent of “risk-based” and “exception” pricing add-ons, basically charging more for the additional risk posed by a riskier borrower, hence the birth of the ALT A loan, among other expanded approval products meant to sell more loans to more people.

So to have Mr. Pelley and 60 Minutes do this completely un-researched and absolutely baseless story that has little or no semblance to the truth is a more than a shame – lots of people knew this crisis was headed our way.  

Hell, I wouldn’t be surprised if close to a million people knew that these loans were problems and a lot of them were going to fail.  Do you think that any of them just might have worked in upper management of a these now failing banks?

Or are we really all just geniuses after all?   

Well in that case then, I’d say my superior intellect makes me really doubt it.

**************************************

Please check out our new website: 

Information Security Resources:

Or goal is to help financial industry stakeholders, government regulators, and the public better understand and address the mounting information security threats inherent in the current financial crisis. 

 Our concern is centered around the failure of organizations to adequately protect regulated systems and data.  Our current focus is on the exposure of private info and sensitive systems during the financial meltdown, including identity theft, privacy breach, info stolen, credit card fraud, and other enormous liabilities. 
 
In addition to the obvious threat to market stability, the financial debacle has the added element of national and global security concerns. We believe we are among the very first working to highlight this national security problem.
 
We believe this is the next national security, shareholder derivative, D&O liability, regulatory, consumer product safety, and class-action issue.  We teach you how to find this problem, and fix it.

17 Responses to 60 Minutes Blows the POA/ALT-A Loan Story

  1. […] 60 Minutes Blows the POA/ALT-A Loan Story by guest author and good friend Scott J. Wilson I know that I am smart enough to get by, and I know am not an genius by any stretch.  I have just been in the mortgage industry – working everything from mortgage sales to secondary markets – for more than fifteen years.  All of my experience is in the explosive Orlando, Florida area, so I know a thing or two about exotic mortgage products like the soon to be infamous Pay Option ARM (POA), ticking time-bomb of the mortgage world, and the subprime’s little brother ALT A. I happen to be watching CBS’s 60 Minutes tonight (12-14-08) and they had a piece called Mortgage Meltdown:  Where’s the Bottom? with Scott Pelley, who did the story, and not a very good job of it.  Either he or his writers need to better research their topic before they to such a report.  Mr. Pelley failed to note that POA’s qualified borrowers with “teaser” interest rates, and not the actual “payment” interest rates.  But that is not what I am griping about.  My compaint lay in Pelley’s false asuumption that no one but a few sage individuals could see these consequences of poor lending standards coming. During the bubble from in 2004-2006, […] […]

  2. Josh Dowlut says:

    From my front line experience as an LO, I can tell you the majority of LO’s did not understand how these worked. Those who did saw them as trouble waiting to happen. Did you know that the banks were allowed to book the deferred interest as realized profits in the year the interest was deferred? To a non-Harvard MBA type one might call these phantom profits.

    If numerous LO’s saw these for what they are, I’ve gotta believe the Harvard MBA types heading these huge companies did too. Top level management at these companies were either extremely stupid, or extremely corrupt, or some combination of both, and a reasonable man must conclude it is much more of the latter.

  3. Matt says:

    I agree with your criticism of Pelley’s rhetoric; it is impractical to believe that only 6 people saw this coming. While I think that this story was produced in typical ’60 Minutes’ fashion of trying to create jaw-dropping, scandal-breaking journalism, there is an element of truth here. There were very, very few folks actually going public about their concerns over the mortgage market before things started to come unglued in 2005/2006. I am sure that the actual number of folks is higher than 6. However, while many more industry insiders saw the cracks in the armor taking shape, most of them continued to simply put their heads down and push harder.

    The underlying belief here, I think, is that as a country we could overcome some instability if we don’t stop to realize we’re about to go over the edge of a cliff. Most of the media pundits act as though the housing bust cam out of nowhere in late 2006/early 2007, which is entirely untrue. While there were plenty of rumblings early on, the seminal moment as I see it was in the summer of 2005 when Radian published a list of the 19 most overheated markets in the US. This report was covered by virtually every major paper and news outlet, yet the party continued for a little over another year. If the markets and government had implemented a remediation strategy back then we would be in a much better spot today. First off, had there been a change in strategic direction then the 2006 and 2007 vintages would be underwritten to more discriminating standards. Second, we would have been able to head off the cascading failures in older vintages before problems became so pervasive.

    However, hinsight is always 20-20. There were not many people willing to go against the market from 2005-2007 – I think that Pelley’s goal was to emphasize what a striking minority actually stood up and took the contrarian position that ultimately proved to be right. There’s no sense arguing about fault at this point; it is simply time to enact remediation strategies that will actually work.

  4. million says:

    Real simple: they’re not an “expert” if they didn’t see this coming. Or 60 Minutes defines “expert” to mean something completely different than how we define it.

  5. Ken says:

    Do you think you’re at fault for allowing these loans for consumers? Part of me thinks homeowners should sue every real estate agent for their greed and making so much money off homeowners. what do you think?

  6. linda says:

    I’m just a dummy with a bachelor’s degree from a state college and when I heard about neg-am loans in 2005, I remember telling my co-workers and we all sensed the doom ahead. I had also heard about the deferred payments being booked as profits — and the fact that for many banks, their profit for the year was about equal to those deferred payments. So bank profits were basically a sham. We all could see it was a house of cards and, to mix metaphors, when the music stopped there would be no chairs left.

    It also burns me up that all the housing bulls who were in denial and who laughed at me for “living in fear” at the time now pretend that nobody knew — or could have known! They obviously weren’t even listening.

  7. EllB says:

    There were a few of us underwriters who saw this coming, myself included. I’m reminded by former co-workers that I predicted this over 10 years ago & everyone thought I was out of my mind, after all, everyone was making money, right? All of this started a long time ago in part due to government policy, “creativity” on the part of investment banks, lenders, LO’s pushing products they didn’t truly understand on borrowers who didn’t understand the consequences, the advent of credit scores & AUS, etc. & it all has snowballed; but overwhelmingly, it was greed, a lack of oversight & lack of common sense.

  8. Steve says:

    As for suing, I am. I’m suing multiple parties for a wide variety of violations of TILA and HOEPA. There was so much fraud and material misrepresentaion in not only my loan,but millions of other loans during the same period, that the loans are null and void. I’ll start another round of suits against more parties for a number of other causes of action. I expect I’ll be in court for the next 5 years, and hopefully will have most of the parties I name spanked pretty good by the courts.

    According to most PSA’s the originator must buy back a non-performing loan, or substitute it with a performing loan. they must also buy back any loans made under fraudulent conditions. Having not disclosed the fraud up front, and represented the loans as “healthy” and legal, there has been lots of fraud perpetrated on the investors too.

    Its gonna get more interesting here soon.

    BOA worked a deal with 15 State AG’s to modify $8.4 billion for loans in default or foreclosure. Now the investors in the MBS pools are suing BOA for modifying loans and passing the losses onto investors.

    Freddie and Fannie are also forcing loan originators to buy back fraudulent loans to the tune of a couple of billion.

    Yep, its gonna get more interesting.

  9. […] for example this global economic crisis. Well, it’s a crisis now. Before the bottom fell out of this elaborate Ponzi scheme, all of the men and women (so many of […]

  10. Mark in SF says:

    Another complaint to add: Watching that show I got the impression that all the POA’s were in Miami. They didn’t even bother to educate their viewers on where in the country they are concentrated. I’ve read 30% of loan in the CITY of San Francisco originated in 2005-2006 were negative amortization. That’s a time bomb waiting to blow. Or is it? 60 Minutes had nothing to say.

    Really lousy job on the part of CBS.

  11. Anon says:

    I’d like to pint out that the 60 minutes piece was not clear on what an option arm is. That it is an adjustable rate loan where there are multiple payment options each month. They only mention that the interest rate adjusts. The vast difference in payments between the minimum payment and a fully amortized payment is the bigger problem.

    They also claimed that Alt-A is a loan. They are not loans, they are loans given to people with credit scores below prime. So there can be a fairly standard 7/1 adjustable rate 30 year loan without a ridiculously low teaser rate included in Alt-A (although not common).

    60 minutes should have done a better job defining their terms. Also true of the graph above. Someone with a credit score in the Alt-A range who has a 7/1 arm with an initial APR of 4% is not as likely to default as someone who has a 5 year interest only loan with an initial APR of 2% or even 4%. Both of these folks are lumped together as “Alt-A” but their loan type is very different and the payment difference at reset will be very different.

    Option-ARMs – almost all of those are going to get huge payment shifts after reset. Unless they were making the fully amortized payment almost all of the time. And that doesn’t happen. If they could afford a 30 year fixed, they would have taken it.

  12. rocketone says:

    You are so right. Something radical really must be done about the fraudulent behaviour of the banks.

    Educating everyone about the whole system with lots of publicity would be a good start !

    Have a look at my blog about the banks here at rocketspage.wordpress. com or google modern times in mudshires

  13. Ugly Sister says:

    Great article! Plenty of people saw this coming, it is sad to see that 60 minutes is part of the reification of this false narrative of unintended consequences. Impunity is a dangerous trend, and if the 4th estate refuses to scrutinize the power of the criminals and the crimes of the powerful, then the citizenry must. Good job.

  14. John S Lewis says:

    Scott Wilson’s aricle about 60 Minute’s piece on toxic mortgages was quite informative. But he seems to present the erroneous notion that the Banks funding the ill-fated mortgages intended to keep them in their bank’s loan portfolios. Not true. These bad mortgage loans were destined for securitization. They were hot potatoes. Soon to be off the bank’s books. While the banks securitizing the toxic mortgages did lose some money when the market for private MBS died, the much bigger losers were the invetors stuck with the illiquid and possibly worthless mortgage backed secrities.

  15. […] I had seen clips of the protesting factory workers, and enjoyed their solidarity.  I looked forward to seeing more of the protesting laborers, and the threat they posed to the status quo. B of A’s refusal to renegotiate Republic Windows and Doors debt in a way that allowed the factory to honor its obligations to hard-working employees right before Christmas seemed to exemplify the consequences of this global economic crisis and  the immorality and culpability of the financial sector. […]

  16. John says:

    After much research I’ve found the following websites cover everything about the “Making-Home-Affordable” plan and mortgage information in general. If your loan is held by Freddie or Fannie, you might qualify for a refi or loan mod.

    First, find out if your loan is held by Fannie or Freddie. Contact them here to find out. They give you the phone number to call Fannie and Freddie directly to see if your loan is held by one:
    http://www.financialstability.gov.

    For an idea whether you even qualify, even if your loan is held by Fannie or Freddie, you can calculate your eligibility here:
    http://www.making-home-affordable.com

    I’d also call HUD. I don’t have their number but you go to:
    http://www.hud.gov

    And last but not least is MortgageBreakDown, in my opinion one of the best new mortgage sites for independant information available. Easy to read, navigate and contains solid information:
    http://www.mortgagebreakdown

Leave a comment