Bankruptcy Law Backfires On Those Which Lobbied For It

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a0EKOfVyqCD4&refer=home

Bankruptcy Law Backfires as Foreclosures Offset Gains (Update1)

By Kathleen M. Howley

Nov. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Washington Mutual Inc. got what it wanted in 2005: A revised bankruptcy code that no longer lets people walk away from credit card bills.

The largest U.S. savings and loan didn't count on a housing recession. The new bankruptcy laws are helping drive foreclosures to a record as homeowners default on mortgages and struggle to pay credit card debts that might have been wiped out under the old code, said Jay Westbrook, a professor of business law at the University of Texas Law School in Austin and a former adviser to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

``Be careful what you wish for,'' Westbrook said. ``They wanted to make sure that people kept paying their credit cards, and what they're getting is more foreclosures.''

Washington Mutual, Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. spent $25 million in 2004 and 2005 lobbying for a legislative agenda that included changes in bankruptcy laws to protect credit card profits, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan Washington group that tracks political donations.

The banks are still paying for that decision. The surge in foreclosures has cut the value of securities backed by mortgages and led to more than $40 billion of writedowns for U.S. financial institutions. It also reached to the top echelons of the financial services industry.

Prince Exits

Citigroup Chief Executive Officer Charles O. ``Chuck'' Prince III stepped down this week after the country's biggest bank by assets said it may have $11 billion of writedowns on top of more than $6 billion in the third quarter. Stan O'Neal was ousted as CEO of Merrill Lynch & Co., the world's largest brokerage, after an $8.4 billion writedown. Both firms are based in New York.

Morgan Stanley, the second-biggest securities firm, said in a statement today that subprime losses will cut fourth-quarter earnings by $2.5 billion. The New York-based bank said it lost $3.7 billion in the two months through Oct. 31 as prices for securities linked with home loans to risky borrowers sank further than traders expected.

Even as losses have mounted, banks have seen their credit card businesses improve. The amount of money owed on U.S. credit cards with payments more than 30 days late fell to $7.04 billion in the second quarter from $8.37 billion two years earlier, according to data compiled by Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

In the same period, the dollar volume of repossessed homes owned by insured banks doubled to $4.2 billion, the federal agency said. New foreclosures rose to a record in the second quarter, led by defaults in subprime adjustable-rate mortgages, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association in Washington.

`Let the House Go'

People are putting their credit card payments ahead of their mortgages, said Richard Fairbank, chief executive officer of Capital One Financial Corp., the largest independent U.S. credit card issuer. Of customers who are at least three months late on their mortgage payments, 70 percent are current on their credit cards, he said.

``What we conclude is that people are saying, `Honey, let the house go,''' but keep the cards, Fairbank said Nov. 5 at a conference in New York sponsored by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

The new bankruptcy code makes it harder for debtors to qualify for Chapter 7, the section that erases non-mortgage debt. It shifted people who get paychecks higher than the median income for their area to Chapter 13, giving them up to five years to pay off non-housing creditors.

No Help Left

The court-ordered payment plans fail to account for subprime loans with adjustable rates that can reset as often as every six months, said Henry Sommer, president of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. Two-thirds of debtors won't be able to complete their payback plans, according to the Center for Responsible Lending.

``We have people walking away from homes because they can't afford them even post bankruptcy,'' said Sommer, a Philadelphia- based bankruptcy attorney. ``Their mortgage rates are resetting at levels that are completely unaffordable, and there's nothing the bankruptcy process can do for them as it now stands.''

Four million subprime borrowers with limited or tainted credit histories will see their mortgage bills increase by an average 40 percent in the next 18 months, according to the National Association of Consumer Advocates in Washington. About 1.45 million of those will end up in foreclosure by the end of 2008, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com, a research firm and unit of Moody's Corp. in New York.

Lenders began the process of seizing properties on 0.65 percent of U.S. mortgages in the second quarter, a record in a quarterly Mortgage Bankers study that goes back 35 years. The percentage of subprime borrowers making late payments increased to 14.82, a five-year high, from 13.77.

Bankruptcies Increase

Personal bankruptcies rose 48 percent to 391,105 in the first half of 2007 from a year earlier and Chapter 13 filings accounted for more than one-third of those, according to the American Bankruptcy Institute. In the first half of 2005, they were just 24 percent of the total.

Bad mortgages slashed Washington Mutual's profit by 72 percent in the third quarter from a year earlier, the Seattle-based thrift said Oct. 17. Income from credit card interest rose 8.8 percent to $689 million in the period, helping to offset a loss the bank warned on Oct. 5 would be 75 percent.

Washington Mutual shares tumbled the most in 20 years yesterday after New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said the thrift had pressured real estate appraisers to assign inflated values to properties. Its dividend yield fell to 11 percent and the company traded at 0.74 price-to-book value.

Citigroup's third-quarter earnings fell 57 percent on mortgage losses. Bank of America stopped so-called warehouse lending to mortgage brokers after its profit declined 32 percent in the same period.

`Unintended Consequence'

JPMorgan reported profit growth of 2.3 percent in the quarter, the smallest in more than two years, after reducing the value of leveraged loans and collateralized debt obligations, investment packages of mortgages, by $1.64 billion.

Washington Mutual spokeswoman Libby Hutchinson in Seattle, JPMorgan spokesman Thomas Kelly in New York and Bank of America spokesman Terry Francisco in Charlotte, North Carolina, declined to comment on the bankruptcy law.

``The law had an unintended consequence of taking away a relief valve that mortgage borrowers used to have,'' said Rod Dubitsky, head of asset-backed research for Credit Suisse Holdings USA Inc. in New York. ``It's bad for the mortgage borrowers and bad for subprime investors because it means more losses.''

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 was the biggest overhaul to the code in more than a quarter of a century. The old law, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 that was signed by President Jimmy Carter, had loosened requirements for debt forgiveness.

Lobbying Effort

Financial companies began a coordinated lobbying campaign for bankruptcy reform in 1998 when the American Financial Services Association, a trade group representing credit card companies, joined the American Bankers Association to form the National Consumer Bankruptcy Coalition.

Campaign contributions from the coalition and its members totaled more than $8.2 million during the 2004 election that gave Bush his second term in office. Two-thirds of the donations were given to Republicans who supported the bankruptcy changes, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The group, later renamed the Coalition for Responsible Bankruptcy Laws, has since disbanded. Its members included Washington Mutual, JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, MasterCard Inc., and Morgan Stanley.

Ford Motor Co., General Motors and DaimlerChrysler also were members. They won provisions in the new code that changed the way car loans are treated in bankruptcy.

Reform the Reform

Congress may soon take action to ``reform the bankruptcy reform,'' Zandi said. The House Judiciary Committee is working on legislation to let bankruptcy judges restructure home loans by lowering interest rates and reducing mortgage balances to reflect current market value.

Banks including Washington Mutual, Citigroup and Wells Fargo & Co. sent a letter to the committee opposing the change, saying such restructurings should be done privately.

Countrywide Financial Corp., the largest U.S. lender, said last month that it will modify $16 billion worth of adjustable-rate mortgages. Washington Mutual said in April that it will spend $2 billion giving discounted rates to help customers with subprime loans refinance at better terms.

So far, most lenders have been reluctant to change loan agreements. About 1 percent of mortgages that reset in January, April and July were modified, according to a Sept. 21 Moody's Investors Service report that surveyed 16 subprime lenders that account for 80 percent of the market.

Congress probably will approve at least a limited measure to permit loan modifications, said Westbrook, the University of Texas law professor.

``They are going to have to figure out some way to address the problem,'' Westbrook said. ``I don't think our economy or our consciences can handle the number of foreclosures we'll see if they do nothing.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Kathleen M. Howley in Boston at [email protected]

Last Updated: November 8, 2007 11:07 EST
 
Yeah well that legislation was republican backed. You're a bushie fan aren't ya?

Trickle up economics.... *puke*
 
i don't get this thread. how could big corporations do anything that isn't smart for them in a business sense and morally upright at the same time?

in any case it's fine to put the screws to lousy, irresponsible debters. but, wait, where does that leave the gubmint?

i'm not sure i should post this though, i'm not really sure what we are debating here. i might get off-topic and fail to see the point that would teach me, nay, all of us, an important lesson.
 
A mortgage you can't afford. Rising interest rates on ARM. Second, third, forth mortgage.

It isn't the credit card companies fault you can't mange your bills.

I don't see the unintended consequence.
 
A mortgage you can't afford. Rising interest rates on ARM. Second, third, forth mortgage.

It isn't the credit card companies fault you can't mange your bills.

I don't see the unintended consequence.
I think they might have been unintended. Unintelligent as well.
 
Gee, I thought it was sorta self explanatory but I guess I got caught thinkin' -- or giving more credit that what was due.

The story was pretty clear about what was affected by the change in the bankruptcy laws. It made it harder for people to bankrupt their CREDIT CARD DEBT but left MORTGAGE DEBT alone. So now, those who wanted their UNSECURED credit card loans to be protected are finding out that what they wanted is now affecting the other side of their business -- mortgages.

Since mortgages are not included in the bankruptcy reform people are simply giving up the house and continuing to pay their credit card debt. Credit cards are UNSECURED DEBT while mortgages are SECURED DEBT. The bankruptcy reform was to prevent people from defaulting on the UNSECURED DEBTS. So now, knowing they cannot include their UNSECURED DEBT in the bankruptcy, they are simply letting the SECURED DEBT go back to the lender.

That is all that the bankruptcy reform was about -- UNSECURED DEBT, the people who buy, buy, buy, and then bankrupt leaving the lender with nothing from which to rrecover some or all of its losses.

Hre are some gems from the story which explain this to those who either failed to read or failed to comprehend what was being reported.

The new bankruptcy laws are helping drive foreclosures to a record as homeowners default on mortgages and struggle to pay credit card debts that might have been wiped out under the old code

...

lobbying for a legislative agenda that included changes in bankruptcy laws to protect credit card profits

...

The amount of money owed on U.S. credit cards with payments more than 30 days late fell to $7.04 billion in the second quarter from $8.37 billion two years earlier, according to data compiled by Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

In the same period, the dollar volume of repossessed homes owned by insured banks doubled to $4.2 billion ...

...

The new bankruptcy code makes it harder for debtors to qualify for Chapter 7, the section that erases non-mortgage debt. It shifted people who get paychecks higher than the median income for their area to Chapter 13, giving them up to five years to pay off non-housing creditors. (Under Chapter 13 bankruptcy, the debtor submits a budget to the court and pays to the court a fixed amount every month. The court then doles out the funds to the various lenders. After a set period of time, the debt is discharged even if it has not been fully paid; or at least that's how it used to work. For a synopsis on how Chapter 13 bankruptcies work see HERE.)

...

The court-ordered payment plans fail to account for subprime loans with adjustable rates that can reset as often as every six months ... Two-thirds of debtors won't be able to complete their payback plans ...

...

``We have people walking away from homes because they can't afford them even post bankruptcy. Their mortgage rates are resetting at levels that are completely unaffordable, and there's nothing the bankruptcy process can do for them as it now stands.''

...

``The law had an unintended consequence of taking away a relief valve that mortgage borrowers used to have,'' ...

...

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 was the biggest overhaul to the code in more than a quarter of a century. The old law, the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 that was signed by President Jimmy Carter, had loosened requirements for debt forgiveness. (And everyone started abusing that forgivness.)

...

Congress may soon take action to ``reform the bankruptcy reform,'' Zandi said. The House Judiciary Committee is working on legislation to let bankruptcy judges restructure home loans by lowering interest rates and reducing mortgage balances to reflect current market value. (As usual, instead of simply repealing that which has caused the problem they will try to unscrew the previous screwup with still more legislation, which will have still more unintended consequences, etc., etc., ad naseum.)
 
Interestingly, this thread has gone Off Topic if you can imagine such a thing. :lol:
 
:shrug: :confused:

How has it gone off topic besides being posted in a forum by that name??

*sigh* It started out being a thread about unsecured debt and bankruptcy laws but has become a thread about financial responsibility and having some?????

You know what? Never mind.
 
Debt, schmedt... the government will save us. Its just not important until its on the cover of People Magazine... tee-hee.
 
Gee, I thought it was sorta self explanatory but I guess I got caught thinkin' -- or giving more credit that what was due.

The story was pretty clear about what was affected by the change in the bankruptcy laws. It made it harder for people to bankrupt their CREDIT CARD DEBT but left MORTGAGE DEBT alone. So now, those who wanted their UNSECURED credit card loans to be protected are finding out that what they wanted is now affecting the other side of their business -- mortgages.

Since mortgages are not included in the bankruptcy reform people are simply giving up the house and continuing to pay their credit card debt. Credit cards are UNSECURED DEBT while mortgages are SECURED DEBT. The bankruptcy reform was to prevent people from defaulting on the UNSECURED DEBTS. So now, knowing they cannot include their UNSECURED DEBT in the bankruptcy, they are simply letting the SECURED DEBT go back to the lender.

That is all that the bankruptcy reform was about -- UNSECURED DEBT, the people who buy, buy, buy, and then bankrupt leaving the lender with nothing from which to rrecover some or all of its losses.

Hre are some gems from the story which explain this to those who either failed to read or failed to comprehend what was being reported.

you know it's strange, even when you UBERBOLD the key factors i still can't get my brain around this. you most certainly did give more credit than what was due (hah hah and made a clever pun, too)! you really need to spoonfeed this shit to us.
 
*sigh* It started out being a thread about unsecured debt and bankruptcy laws but has become a thread about financial responsibility and having some?????

You know what? Never mind.

Most bankruptcies are born of financial responsibility.
 
Back
Top