{"id":4404,"date":"2010-10-14T15:54:55","date_gmt":"2010-10-14T19:54:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=4404"},"modified":"2010-10-14T15:54:55","modified_gmt":"2010-10-14T19:54:55","slug":"the-securitization-process","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2010\/10\/14\/the-securitization-process\/","title":{"rendered":"the <em>securitization<\/em> process&#8230;"},"content":{"rendered":"<br \/>\n<blockquote>\n<div align=\"center\"><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2010\/10\/13\/AR2010101307597.html\" target=\"_blank\">&nbsp;Lack of proper mortgage paper trail could leave big banks reeling again<\/a><br \/>    Washington Post<\/strong><br \/>    By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jia Lynn Yang<br \/>    October 13, 2010<\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup> The federal government&#8217;s pressure on lenders Wednesday to fix the  paperwork problems plaguing foreclosures left unaddressed a far greater  potential threat facing the financial system and the U.S. economy. Beyond sloppy documents, the foreclosure debacle has exposed one of Wall  Street&#8217;s little-known practices: For more than a decade, big lenders  sold millions of mortgages around the globe at lightning speed without  properly transferring the physical documents that prove who legally  owned the loans.<\/sup><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup>Now, some of the pension systems, hedge funds and other investors that  took big losses on the loans are seeking to use this flaw to force banks  to compensate them or even invalidate the mortgage trades themselves. Their collective actions, if successful, could blow a hole through the  balance sheets of big banks and raise fundamental questions about the  financial system, financial analysts and a lawmaker said. If judges rule in favor of such lawsuits, &quot;it could be 2008 all over  again,&quot; said Josh Rosner, managing director at Graham Fisher &amp; Co.,  referring to the Wall Street meltdown that occurred after Lehman Brothers collapsed.<\/sup><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup>Financial and legal analysts are divided over how the ownership  questions will be resolved and the scope of the potential damage.  Lenders and investigators are in the midst of a painstaking process of  unraveling the complex chain of loans that were sold from one party to  another, a process that some analysts say could take years.<\/sup><\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"> <strong><font color=\"#990000\">Of the nearly $11 trillion in mortgages in the United States, about  two-thirds was turned into securities that were traded around the globe&#8230;<\/font><\/strong><\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\"><sup>However, local laws in most states dictate that each time a mortgage  changes hands, the transaction needs to be recorded in courts or county  offices. But the speed with which the loans were being generated during  the housing boom and then pooled together and passed around Wall Street  meant that big financial firms took shortcuts, consumer lawyers said. Often the proper paperwork got lost or was passed along without being  filled out, lawyers say. Some documents have been found retroactively  signed or even forged.<\/sup><\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\"><sup>&quot;It now appears that in many cases: 1. the paperwork was not properly  transferred and 2. it is unclear in many cases where the actual  paperwork actually rests today,&quot; Citigroup Global Markets analyst Josh Levin wrote in a note to investors this week. Some analysts doubt whether the consequences will be dire. &quot;Does it call into question all securities?&#8230; If they rule that the securitization process muddied the ownership of  the loans, &quot;then basically the whole thing winds down,&quot; said Debash  Chatterjee, senior vice president at Moody&#8217;s&#8230;<\/sup><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n<div align=\"justify\">Mrs. Wagner meant well. As an 8th Grade teacher, she did her best to teach us about Loans: <strong>Princip<u>le<\/u><\/strong>, <strong>Interest<\/strong>, Compounding. But I was 14 years old, and the only <strong>Princip<u>al<\/u><\/strong> I understood was the one that kept calling me down to the Office. And my only <strong>Interest<\/strong> had to do with my hormone problem. So by the time I bought my first house, I was clueless. &quot;<strong>How much do I have to pay each month?<\/strong>&quot; was as deep as it got. Later, I got educated when I realized that getting a really long loan with low payments meant I was paying a much greater Overall Cost. And I learned that Interest Rates really did matter. <em>When the student is ready&#8230;<\/em>  <\/div>\n<div align=\"center\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"520\" vspace=\"5\" height=\"250\" border=\"0\" src=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/images\/mortgage1.gif\" \/><\/div>\n<div align=\"justify\">The reason it&#8217;s on my mind is that there&#8217;s something from all my Greenspan researches that&#8217;s sticky. <img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"200\" vspace=\"5\" hspace=\"4\" height=\"183\" border=\"0\" align=\"right\" src=\"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/images\/mortgage2.gif\" \/>Loans yield profit money when Interest Rates are high &#8211; a lot more money [right graph]. Why did they tolerate the Fed keeping Interest Rates so low for such a long time? I guess it&#8217;s sort of related to the obvious question, &quot;Why did they make so many risky loans? Now we all sort of know the answer to those questions. They sold the loans [and the risk] the day after the papers were signed. And what the Mortgage Lender got for the loan depended on the loan&#8217;s parameters <u>and<\/u> the assessment of risk. So things had changed, and I think that has something to do with Greenspan keeping the Interest Rates so low. Essentially, the Banks had found another way to make their profit. They just didn&#8217;t need high Interest yields anymore.<\/div>\n<p align=\"justify\">All this traffic in loans [called <strong><em>securitization<\/em><\/strong> above] changed the incentives. The way for a lender to make money in the new system is to make lots of loans, and minimize the risks when selling them. In fact, there were lots of levels on the way to the final CDO, and at every level, there was a temptation to increase profits by minimizing the risk. And that&#8217;s what they all did. In everyday parlance, what was incentivized is called <em><strong>fraud<\/strong><\/em>. How a system that incentivizes <em><strong>fraud<\/strong><\/em> can be called <strong><em>securitization<\/em><\/strong> is beyond my comprehension. Now we hear that along with the fraud, there was widespread <em><strong>sloppiness<\/strong><\/em> with paperwork such that they can&#8217;t even come up with who owns the loan anymore, and that the paperwork that was done was inadequate &#8211; bordering on absent. How a system that incentivizes <em><strong>sloppiness<\/strong><\/em> can be called<strong> <\/strong><strong><em>securitization<\/em><\/strong> is beyond my comprehension.<\/p>\n<div align=\"justify\">So when I read, &quot;<strong><font color=\"#200020\">If they rule that the securitization process muddied the ownership of   the loans, &#8216;then basically the whole thing winds down,&#8217; said Debash   Chatterjee, senior vice president at Moody&#8217;s<\/font><\/strong>,&quot; I say, &quot;<strong><font color=\"#990000\">Wind it down!<\/font><\/strong>&quot;<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&nbsp;Lack of proper mortgage paper trail could leave big banks reeling again Washington Post By Ariana Eunjung Cha and Jia Lynn Yang October 13, 2010 The federal government&#8217;s pressure on lenders Wednesday to fix the paperwork problems plaguing foreclosures left unaddressed a far greater potential threat facing the financial system and the U.S. economy. Beyond [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4404","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4404","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4404"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4404\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4404"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4404"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4404"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}