The decimated housing market may get considerably worse before it gets better, according to housing-industry professionals, who expect foreclosures and home-price declines to continue pressuring the sector through at least the first half of 2010.

The biggest problem will likely be a flood of inventory hitting the market from rising foreclosures, says Bob Curran, a managing director at Fitch Ratings. With a mountain of specialized adjustable-rate mortgages, known as option ARMs and Alt-A mortgages, slated to reset over the next 12 to 18 months and unemployment projected to hit 10.5% this year, the number of homeowners defaulting on their mortgages is expected to surge. At least $64 billion in option ARMs will reset in 2010 and another $68 billion in 2011, according to First American CoreLogic, a real estate and mortgage-data company. 

At the same time, the government’s loan-modification program has been disappointing: the default rate on loans modified after the third quarter of 2008 was 61%, according to a report issued in December by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision. All of this is expected to trigger another wave of potential home foreclosures in 2010 and could cause home prices to fall another 5% to 10% before the market stabilizes, according to analysts and economists.

A record 3 million homes received foreclosure notices in 2009, according to Lawrence Yun, chief economist with the National Association of Realtors (NAR). He expects a similar number this year.

John Burns, president of John Burns Real Estate Consulting, is a bit more bearish, predicting foreclosure notices will rise to 3.1 million this year. Foreclosure notices include default notices, auction-sale letters and bank-repossession notices. But those notices may produce a far more damaging result than last year’s. “I think 50% more people will lose their homes to a bank this year than they did last year,” predicts Burns. 

One reason for the expected jump, he says, is that in 2009 many lenders were under pressure from the Obama Administration to postpone repossessions until loan modifications could be made. However, many banks didn’t have the staff to assess all their defaulted loans at the time, and he believes many of those will ultimately go into foreclosure in 2010.

Adding to the sector’s woes — the Federal Reserve has indicated it plans to end a program that’s helped keep mortgage rates at attractive levels for home buyers. The Fed program, which involved purchasing up to $1.25 trillion in mortgage-backed securities backed by Fannie and Freddie, will expire on March 31. Rates have already started to inch up in anticipation of the change, with the average 30-year fixed-rate mortgage surpassing the 5% mark in December.

Since the housing market’s peak in July 2006, home prices have plunged 30% on average, with prices in some markets, such as Las Vegas, Phoenix and parts of Florida, falling more than 60%. NAR’s Yun estimates home-equity losses from the housing meltdown totaled $7 trillion at the end of 2009.

Many housing-industry experts believe pricing will bottom soon, but the bears warn that it will probably be 2013 before the market noticeably rebounds. “The improvement that we’re going to see off the bottom will be anemic” for quite some time, says Curran.

“Some markets still have further [down] to go, but we’re definitely in the latter innings of the downturn,” says David Goldberg, an analyst at UBS. “Even if there’s another leg down, we definitely think by [late] 2010 we will have seen the bottom of housing.”

The government’s decision to extend the $8,000 first-time home-buyer tax credit to mid-2010 and expand the program to include a $6,500 credit for non-first-time home buyers will likely help lure home shoppers into the market. Also, the slide in prices is making homes more affordable. Notes Burns: “If you go to Phoenix, it’s $800 a month to buy a brand-new house,” making it more affordable than renting.

There have already been mixed signs of stabilization in price and demand. Home prices rose month over month for six consecutive months through October, according to Standard & Poor’s Case-Shiller Home Price Composite 10 Index, although prices are still down year over year. However, the most recent figures from NAR indicate that pending sales of existing homes fell 16% in November. Such mixed signals, analysts say, will be the housing market’s message for some months to come.

Time

The Obama administration’s $75 billion program to protect homeowners from foreclosure has been widely pronounced a disappointment, and some economists and real estate experts now contend it has done more harm than good.

Since President Obama announced the program in February, it has lowered mortgage payments on a trial basis for hundreds of thousands of people but has largely failed to provide permanent relief. Critics increasingly argue that the program, Making Home Affordable, has raised false hopes among people who simply cannot afford their homes.

As a result, desperate homeowners have sent payments to banks in often-futile efforts to keep their homes, which some see as wasting dollars they could have saved in preparation for moving to cheaper rental residences. Some borrowers have seen their credit tarnished while falsely assuming that loan modifications involved no negative reports to credit agencies.

Some experts argue the program has impeded economic recovery by delaying a wrenching yet cleansing process through which borrowers give up unaffordable homes and banks fully reckon with their disastrous bets on real estate, enabling money to flow more freely through the financial system.

“The choice we appear to be making is trying to modify our way out of this, which has the effect of lengthening the crisis,” said Kevin Katari, managing member of Watershed Asset Management, a San Francisco-based hedge fund. “We have simply slowed the foreclosure pipeline, with people staying in houses they are ultimately not going to be able to afford anyway.”

Mr. Katari contends that banks have been using temporary loan modifications under the Obama plan as justification to avoid an honest accounting of the mortgage losses still on their books. Only after banks are forced to acknowledge losses and the real estate market absorbs a now pent-up surge of foreclosed properties will housing prices drop to levels at which enough Americans can afford to buy, he argues.

“Then the carpenters can go back to work,” Mr. Katari said. “The roofers can go back to work, and we start building housing again. If this drips out over the next few years, that whole sector of the economy isn’t going to recover.”

The Treasury Department publicly maintains that its program is on track. “The program is meeting its intended goal of providing immediate relief to homeowners across the country,” a department spokeswoman, Meg Reilly, wrote in an e-mail message.

But behind the scenes, Treasury officials appear to have concluded that growing numbers of delinquent borrowers simply lack enough income to afford their homes and must be eased out.

In late November, with scant public disclosure, the Treasury Department started the Foreclosure Alternatives Program, through which it will encourage arrangements that result in distressed borrowers surrendering their homes. The program will pay incentives to mortgage companies that allow homeowners to sell properties for less than they owe on their mortgages — short sales, in real estate parlance. The government will also pay incentives to mortgage companies that allow delinquent borrowers to hand over their deeds in lieu of foreclosing.

Ms. Reilly, the Treasury spokeswoman, said the foreclosure alternatives program did not represent a new policy. “We have said from the start that modifications will not be the solution for all homeowners and will not solve the housing crisis alone,” Ms. Reilly said by e-mail. “This has always been a multi-pronged effort.”

Whatever the merits of its plans, the administration has clearly failed to reverse the foreclosure crisis.

In 2008, more than 1.7 million homes were “lost” through foreclosures, short sales or deeds in lieu of foreclosure, according to Moody’s Economy.com. Last year, more than two million homes were lost, and Economy.com expects that this year’s number will swell to 2.4 million.

“I don’t think there’s any way for Treasury to tweak their plan, or to cajole, pressure or entice servicers to do more to address the crisis,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “For some folks, it is doing more harm than good, because ultimately, at the end of the day, they are going back into the foreclosure morass.”

Mr. Zandi argues that the administration needs a new initiative that attacks a primary source of foreclosures: the roughly 15 million American homeowners who are underwater, meaning they owe the bank more than their home is worth.

Increasingly, such borrowers are inclined to walk away and accept foreclosure, rather than continuing to make payments on properties in which they own no equity. A paper by researchers at the Amherst Securities Group suggests that being underwater “is a far more important predictor of defaults than unemployment.”

From its inception, the Obama plan has drawn criticism for failing to compel banks to write down the size of outstanding mortgage balances, which would restore equity for underwater borrowers, giving them greater incentive to make payments. A vast majority of modifications merely decrease monthly payments by lowering the interest rate.

Mr. Zandi proposes that the Treasury Department push banks to write down some loan balances by reimbursing the companies for their losses. He pointedly rejects the notion that government ought to get out of the way and let foreclosures work their way through the market, saying that course risks a surge of foreclosures and declining house prices that could pull the economy back into recession.

“We want to overwhelm this problem,” he said. “If we do go back into recession, it will be very difficult to get out.”

Under the current program, the government provides cash incentives to mortgage companies that lower monthly payments for borrowers facing hardships. The Treasury Department set a goal of three to four million permanent loan modifications by 2012.

“That’s overly optimistic at this stage,” said Richard H. Neiman, the superintendent of banks for New York State and an appointee to the Congressional Oversight Panel, a body created to keep tabs on taxpayer bailout funds. “There’s a great deal of frustration and disappointment.”

As of mid-December, some 759,000 homeowners had received loan modifications on a trial basis typically lasting three to five months. But only about 31,000 had received permanent modifications — a step that requires borrowers to make timely trial payments and submit paperwork verifying their financial situation.

The government has pressured mortgage companies to move faster. Still, it argues that trial modifications are themselves a considerable help.

“Almost three-quarters of a million Americans now are benefiting from modification programs that reduce their monthly payments dramatically, on average $550 a month,” Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said last month at a hearing before the Congressional Oversight Panel. “That is a meaningful amount of support.”

But mortgage experts and lawyers who represent borrowers facing foreclosure argue that recipients of trial loan modifications often wind up worse off.

In Lakeland, Fla., Jaimie S. Smith, 29, called her mortgage company, then Washington Mutual, in October 2008, when she realized she would get a smaller bonus from her employer, a furniture company, threatening her ability to continue the $1,250 monthly mortgage payments on her three-bedroom house.

In April, Chase, which had taken over Washington Mutual, lowered her payment to $1,033.62 in a trial that was supposed to last three months.

Ms. Smith made all three payments on time and submitted required documents, Chase confirms. She called the bank almost weekly to inquire about a permanent loan modification. Each time, she says, Chase told her to continue making trial payments and await word on a permanent modification.

Then, in October, a startling legal notice arrived in the mail: Chase had foreclosed on her house and sold it at auction for $100. (The purchaser? Chase.)

“I cried,” she said. “I was hysterical. I bawled my eyes out.”

Later that week came another letter from Chase: “Congratulations on qualifying for a Making Home Affordable loan modification!”

When Ms. Smith frantically called the bank to try to overturn the sale, she was told that the house was no longer hers. Chase would not tell her how long she could remain there, she says. She feared the sheriff would show up at her door with eviction papers, or that she would return home to find her belongings piled on the curb. So Ms. Smith anxiously set about looking for a new place to live.

She had been planning to continue an online graduate school program in supply chain management, and she had about $4,000 in borrowed funds to pay tuition. She scrapped her studies and used the money to pay the security deposit and first month’s rent on an apartment.

Later, she hired a lawyer, who is seeking compensation from Chase. A judge later vacated the sale. Chase is still offering to make her loan modification permanent, but Ms. Smith has already moved out and is conflicted about what to do.

“I could have just walked away,” said Ms. Smith. “If they had said, ‘We can’t work with you,’ I’d have said: ‘What are my options? Short sale?’ None of this would have happened. God knows, I never would have wanted to go through this. I’d still be in grad school. I would not have paid all that money to them. I could have saved that money.”

A Chase spokeswoman, Christine Holevas, confirmed that the bank mistakenly foreclosed on Ms. Smith’s house and sold it at the same time it was extending the loan modification offer.

“There was a systems glitch,” Ms. Holevas said. “We are sorry that an error happened. We’re trying very hard to do what we can to keep folks in their homes. We are dealing with many, many individuals.”

Many borrowers complain they were told by mortgage companies their credit would not be damaged by accepting a loan modification, only to discover otherwise.

In a telephone conference with reporters, Jack Schakett, Bank of America’s credit loss mitigation executive, confirmed that even borrowers who were current before agreeing to loan modifications and who then made timely payments were reported to credit rating agencies as making only partial payments.

The biggest source of concern remains the growing numbers of underwater borrowers — now about one-third of all American homeowners with mortgages, according to Economy.com. The Obama administration clearly grasped the threat as it created its program, yet opted not to focus on writing down loan balances.

“This is a conscious choice we made, not to start with principal reduction,” Mr. Geithner told the Congressional Oversight Panel. “We thought it would be dramatically more expensive for the American taxpayer, harder to justify, create much greater risk of unfairness.”

Mr. Geithner’s explanation did not satisfy the panel’s chairwoman, Elizabeth Warren.

“Are we creating a program in which we’re talking about potentially spending $75 billion to try to modify people into mortgages that will reduce the number of foreclosures in the short term, but just kick the can down the road?” she asked, raising the prospect “that we’ll be looking at an economy with elevated mortgage foreclosures not just for a year or two, but for many years. How do you deal with that problem, Mr. Secretary?”

A good question, Mr. Geithner conceded.

“What to do about it,” he said. “That’s a hard thing.”

The New York Times

After four months of gains, home prices flattened in October. Worse yet, industry insiders think that they’ll soon start to fall.

Prices have risen more than 3% since May, according to S&P/Case-Shiller.

But most forecasts predict price declines in 2010, with possible losses ranging from anywhere from 3% on up. Fiserv Lending Solutions, a financial analytics firm, forecasts that prices will fall in all but 39 of the 381 markets it covers, with an average drop of 11.3%.

“We’ve seen recent price stabilization because of low mortgage interest rates and the impact of the first-time homebuyers tax credit,” said Pat Newport of IHS Global Research. “But there are really good reasons to think prices will now start going down.”

There are three main reasons for the reversal: a coming flood of foreclosures, rising interest rates and the eventual end of the tax credits.

For Gus Faucher, the director of macroeconomics for Moody’s Economy.com, the huge number of foreclosures that remain in the pipeline is the big problem.

Moody’s upped its estimate of defaults recently because of shortcomings of the government-led mortgage modification programs. Trial workouts are not being made permanent and completed modifications are re-defaulting at high rates.

“There are going to be fewer [successful] modifications than we thought,” said Faucher.

Even so, he added, much of the price decline has already occurred and Moody’s forecast is for only another 8% drop. The worst-hit markets will be the ones suffering the most foreclosures, places like Arizona, California, Florida and Nevada.

Resetting option ARMs (adjustable rate mortgages) will also aggravate the foreclosure problem. These mortgages allow borrowers to pick their own payments, which can be so low they don’t even cover the interest. Balances swell.

For many of the more than 350,000 option-ARM borrowers, it’s time to pay the piper. Their loans will change into fully amortizing mortgages that will carry much higher monthly payments. A very large percentage of these homeowners will default, according to Shari Olefson, author of “Foreclosure Nation: Mortgaging the American Dream.”

“We’ve still only seen the tip of the foreclosure iceberg,” she said.

She also predicts more strategic defaults, people deliberately walking away from even fixed-rate mortgages as the value of their homes dips well below the amount they owe.

Olefson’s forecast is for price declines of 5% to 15%, depending on the area, with a national median price drop of about 10% for 2010.

Also affecting prices will be higher interest rates. Some analysts, according to Newport, think rates for a 30-year mortgage will pass 6% next year as the government curtails housing market support.

The Federal Reserve has helped keep rates low through purchases of mortgage-backed securities. But that program is winding down and will end in March.

“The government is throwing everything at the market but the kitchen sink,” said Peter Schiff, president of Euro pacific Capital. “It can’t prop up housing markets forever.”

Schiff is among the bigger bears. Though he gave no specific prediction, he thinks prices — already down 29% from the peak — are only halfway to the bottom.

As a tool for supporting housing markets and prices, the tax credit for homebuyers is a two-edged sword. It reduces taxes dollar-for-dollar by up to $8,000 for new homebuyers and $6,500 for buyers who already own a home and should support home prices. But it ends at the end of April.

Many buyers will push their deals forward to get in before the deadline and then demand for homes could sink afterward.

One of the few bulls out there is NAR, whose chief economist, Lawrence Yun, is counting on the tax credit to provide temporary support for housing markets until the economy recovers enough to start fueling sales. He predicts price improvement in 2010 of more than 3%.

“The headwind we face is rising mortgage interest rates,” Yun said, “but the compensating factors will be the homebuyers tax credit in the first half of the year and increased job creation in the second half.”

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com)

Chicago Tribune

Kenneth R. Harney

The biggest financial fear about so-called “1031 TIC” real estate investment deals appears to be turning into reality: One of the largest “tenants in common” or “TIC” firms — with 8,300 individual investors and office and retail properties valued at $2.4 billion — has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

The firm, DBSI of Boise, Idaho, was part of an investment wave that followed a 2002 ruling by the IRS. That ruling said owners of commercial and residential income properties could fulfill the tax-deferral requirements of Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code by investing in tenants-in-common ventures.

Under Section 1031, investors who seek to avoid or defer capital gains taxes on their properties can exchange their interests for “like kind” real estate, provided they follow IRS guidelines.

In 2002, the IRS ruled that tenants-in-common arrangements — under which as many as 35 investors own fractional interests in individual properties — can qualify as vehicles for 1031 exchanges. For example, an owner of a small retail shopping strip might exchange into a TIC that owns a much bigger and more valuable downtown office building.

The tenants-in-common owners could thereby avoid immediate taxation of capital gains and end up with bigger and theoretically higher-quality real estate – tax free – in the process.

The TIC structure comes with built-in problems, however. Their fractional interests generally are not liquid investments — it’s tough to sell them if you need to pull out money..

Some critics also say TIC ventures pay too much for their commercial properties, and that investors have been charged excessive fees to participate.

DBSI managed the activities of dozens of office, retail and other commercial properties in 30 states, but says it got caught up in the real estate downturn and credit crunch.

Now its eight thousand-plus individual investors are stuck in illiquid TICs … and waiting to hear what happens to them next.

The DBSI bankruptcy comes on the heels of recent advisories from the Federal Trade Commission and the Treasury Department warning investors about potential dangers in 1031 exchanges.

Bottom line: Section 1031 exchanges — structured and facilitated by independent, qualified intermediaries — can be a great way for small scale and large investors to save on taxes.

TICs may also fit into the equation, but only if investors fully understand all the risks, including, now in the wake of the DBSI implosion, the possibility that their TIC may go belly up, leaving investors waiting in line at the bankruptcy court hoping for pieces of the remains.