Consumers Pile on $15 Billion More Debt in March 2008!

Americans are piling on the debt at an alarming pace while one of our most valuable assets (our homes) is plummeting in value. A recent article from Bloomberg points out that consumer debt levels increased by a whopping $15.3 billion in March 2008, which was substantially more than economists had projected. According to the article:

"Consumers are turning to credit cards after banks tightened standards for home-equity loans and other borrowing. The March figures brought U.S. consumer borrowing in the first quarter to $34 billion, the most since the first three months of 2001, when the economy entered its last official recession."

This is scary for those of you (like P2P-Loans.com) that are invested in Prosper loans. As banks turn away more people, they are likely to pursue alternative financing on sites like Prosper, LendingClub, etc..

America's debt problem has only gotten worse over the years and the current credit crisis may end up being a healthy event in that it will constrict American's ability to keep borrowing (at least for a short time). But, with the weak economy and fewer sources of capital, Prosper lenders beware...

Here's an interesting site that provides a lot of interesting debt-related information. Enjoy! http://mwhodges.home.att.net/nat-debt/debt-nat-a.htm

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

P2P-Loans.com has recently noticed a number of smart folks writing about the end of the housing crisis. In two separate articles in the WSJ ("Opinion: The Housing Crisis is Over" and "Is Housing Slump at a Bottom?"). These articles make very valid points with regard to housing starts, low interest rates, etc. What these articles fail to debate in any material fashion is that housing prices relative to disposable income are still extremely high!

This chart from Ned Davis Research (the line graph at the bottom of this page is most relevant) demonstrates that we remain at very high price levels relative to historical data. Ultimately, the value of housing is a function of affordability. When it's all said and done, this is the single most important factor that drives demand for new housing and the price of such housing. For example, the data in the chart suggest that in 2001 (yes, interest rates were in the sub 7% range for 30-year fixed mortgages then as well) the Median New Home Price / Disposable Income ratio was near its 30-year average, which is where it had been for the better part of 15 years. In fact, the ratio had been even lower before that, however this is likely due to the artificially high interest rates of the 1970's and early 1980's.

This dynamic has served to dramatically reduce demand for housing in conjunction with tougher lending standards (fewer buyer approved for new mortgages) and skitish buyers (when will prices stop falling). As a result, housing inventories have spiked to record highs. Accross the US, housing inventories are more than double typical levels, and are as high as 4-5 years worth of inventory (versus a long-term average of 5-6 months) in formerly hot markets such as Florida and California.
According to a recent post at Seeking Alpha, housing inventories are beginning to come down, but remain well above historical averages. Seeking Alpha points out that, at the current sales pace, inventories of new homes will be "back to normal" by the end of 2009. Simply put, we will be in a supply/demand imbalance for the next two years (and this is assuming that the market doesn't overshoot to the downside, which it's been known to do in prior busts - think about when many tech stocks were trading at less than cash value in 2003). The data is similar on the inventories of resales as well. In my estimation, this means we still have a ways to go before calling the end of the housing crisis. I hope I am wrong.

On a side note, the government is trying to push through a MASSIVE bailout program. Generally, when the government makes a move like this, they are too late to the party. Thus, this single fact alone could lead one to believe we are at the end of the housing crisis.

Is there a tax-payer funded (err... "government sponsored") bailout coming for honeowners? Momentum appears to be building for a broad-based program to bail out folks that bought homes in the boom times and can no longer afford to make their payments (e.g. are approaching or are already in foreclosure proceedings). This has been a topic of much debate. For those that made smart, sound financial decisions (e.g. didn't borrow more than they could afford to pay back, and read the fine print on their mortgage documents, etc.), this seems like it might be unfair since the taxpayers will potentially be bailing out these folks. But, as the outline below reflects, the current debate in Congress revolves around structuring a compromise that enables any eventual program to pay for itself. P2P-Loans.com is encouraged by some of the provisions being discussed (especially the payment of insurance premiums to the FHA and a sharing in any equity gains to homeowners upon a sale). We would hope that the equity gain sharing is substantial and not a pittance given any gain will be made entirely on the backs of tax payers (errr...the "government-sponsored" program). Generally speaking, the government has a terrible track record on projects like this (they underestimate the total costs, botch the execution and mess up a market-based system that works pretty well in the long run).

Here is a summary (from an article at Money.com) of what's being debated (P2P-Loans.com will report back on this issue once a program is passed):

While critics worry that an FHA rescue plan could amount to a bailout, supporters say it's not since everyone involved - lenders, borrowers and mortgage investors - would make a sacrifice.

Lenders get 100% backing from the FHA if a loan goes south. In exchange, the lender takes a "haircut" - reducing the principal owed and converting adjustable-rate loans to fixed-rate mortgages.

Borrowers get to keep their homes, but they would pay a premium to the FHA for the mortgage insurance and they would have to give a small portion of their equity to the FHA when the house is sold. They would also have to show they can afford the newly refinanced loan.

Mortgage investors - while they would sacrifice some future income from loans that have been reduced - would have more confidence investing in the new loans since the refinanced loans will be affordable and the borrower therefore will be more likely to pay them back.

As you may not know, Fair Isaac (what's so fair about them, I don't know) recently updated its FICO score formula and it is being rolled out by the three primary credit agencies. While there are many views on whether these changes are good or bad, the one certainty about all of this is that your credit score is probably going to change. Here's our quick and dirty on how this might affect you:

If your credit is currently being bolstered because you are an authorized user on your parents credit card account, you are probably going to get HAMMERED! One of the largest (and most negative) changes to the formula is the removal of the benefit you get from being on someone elses account as an authorized user. Some credit analysts belive as many of 25% of all Americans with credit could be negatively affected by this one change (that's about 40 million people whose credit score could fall). The good news is that it may take a number of months before all the credit card companies, banks, etc. begin to use this new score (so, get some new credit while you can - P2P-Loans.com has some great credit card offers if you are interested). Getting credit now (while you can still piggyback with daddy's good credit) will allow you to start building your own on-time credit file.

However, there are some positive changes to the scoring methodology as well. For example, the system treats a single large slip up (even as much as 90 days) as an “isolated delinquency” to individuals with a 10-year credit history. Routine late payments of less than 90 days will still damage your report but at least now a legitimate mistake won’t haunt you so severely.

Also under the new system, multiple credit inquiries in a short period of time won’t be so damaging to your credit score, as now they will be weighted less heavily in calculating the overall number.

Finally, the new system rewards borrowers who demonstrate the ability to stay on top of both revolving debt (credit cards, home equity lines of credit) and installment loans (Prosper Loans, student, auto or boat loans, mortgages). Even if you show a wide range of loans but a solid history of paying them on time, expect your score to jump up as well. Go figure, if you pay on time, you have a good score!

Just as a helpful refresher, here is what we do know about the FICO system (even though the exact numbers are closely guarded by Fair Isaac) and what the rough weighting is for certain types of credit data used:

- 35% — punctuality of payment in the past (only includes payments later than 30 days past due)
- 30% — the amount of debt, expressed as the ratio of current revolving debt (credit card balances, etc.) to total available revolving credit (credit limits)
- 15% — length of credit history
- 10% — types of credit used (installment, revolving, consumer finance)
- 10% — recent search for credit and/or amount of credit obtained recently

I was in the process of writing a blog posting on this very topic when I stumbled accross this well-written article from Bankrate. So, I thought I would share it with you. Enjoy!

Who wins, who loses in Fed's rate-cutting spree?
By Chris Kissell • Bankrate.com

When the Federal Reserve meets and changes rates, we all have questions: What does it mean to me? Will my mortgage rate go up or down? Is this a good time to refinance? Bankrate is here to help. We've looked at five categories -- mortgages, home equity loans, auto loans, credit cards and certificates of deposit -- to determine if the Fed's moves made you a winner or a loser. Here's a look at mortgages:

Winner: People locked into a good loan rate
When the Federal Reserve cut the federal funds rate dramatically in January, many soothsayers speculated that mortgage rates would plunge in response. Instead, mortgage rates actually rose significantly, reminding everyone that changes in the federal funds rate do not directly control the direction of mortgage rates.

Now that the Fed has cut rates by 75 basis points (that's 0.75% for you newbies), it's anyone's guess where mortgage rates will go. But Richard DeKaser, chief economist for National City Corp., is betting the cost of carrying a mortgage won't be going down substantially any time soon.

"We've seen the lowest for mortgage rates," he says. "We're going to be in the range of 6 percent for the balance of the year."

Time may prove DeKaser right. If so, consider yourself a winner if you locked into a mortgage before January's rate cut, when mortgage rates were near historic lows.

Winner: Homeowners whose loans are about to reset
The Fed's rate cut won't directly affect people with fixed-rate mortgages. But it will lower the payments of most homeowners with adjustable-rate mortgages.
This will be a boon for countless Americans with subprime mortgages who fear their next reset could leave them facing foreclosure.

"The Fed's actions in their own right are going to reduce the burden of mortgage resets," DeKaser says. "So that will help directly."

Loser: Fixed-rate mortgage shoppers
Way back in January, times were good for people shopping for a mortgage. Mortgage rates were near historic lows, making it cheaper to borrow.
Of course, not everything was rosy. The U.S. credit crunch and falling home values made it difficult for some borrowers to take advantage of sinking rates. Nonetheless, many homeowners and homebuyers had a window of opportunity to lock into historically low borrowing costs for many years to come.

For now, it appears that window has slammed shut, leaving those who failed to act earlier feeling like losers.

Take action
The Federal Reserve slashed the federal funds rate dramatically in late January. How did mortgage rates respond? They rose, fast and furiously. The moral of the story is simple: Don't make mortgage decisions based on Fed actions, such as this week's rate cut. Instead, take the appropriate action given your individual circumstances.

"Trying to time the market is historically a fruitless exercise," says Bob Walters, chief economist at Quicken Loans. "If it saves you money to convert your ARM or to lower your fixed rate, then by all means do so."

By now, you've certainly read about the credit crunch that has engulfed the world. Banks are running low on cash to lend and in some cases (such as Citigroup) our largest banks are dancing dangerously close to the fire having to rely on sovereign investment funds (can you say Saudi Arabia) to bail them out. But, with consumer and small business loans scarce, credit card companies reducing or canceling credit lines and banks refusing to write new home equity loans, what's a small business to do?

A recent Wall Street Journal article (see below) talks about how small business owners are turning to P2P Lending sites (such as Prosper, LendingClub, Virgin Money and Zopa to name a few) for capital. But, for lenders on Prosper, are we the suckers or the savvy investors by making these loans? The banks are likely turning away some pretty good credits and borrowers on P2P sites tend to pay a higher interest rate relative to a more traditional small business bank loan that might be backed by assets in the business or a personal guarantee by the business owner. At the same time, delinquency rates are very high at Prosper (upwards of 20%+ of funded loans in some months - visit LendingStats or Eric's Credit Community for details).

I published a blog posting on January 22, 2008, which summarizes my personal experience as a Prosper lender. My firm hope is that Prosper and the other P2P Lending sites will continue to be a good place to invest; however, the jury is still out on this one. P2P-Loans' future is counting on it!

-----------------------------------

Where Either a Borrower Or a Lender Can Be Small-Business Owners Turn To Online Networks for Funds As Banks Tighten Credit
By JANE J. KIM

When Jeff Walsh wanted to refinance the small-business loan on his coin laundry, he didn't want to take a chance that his bank would reject his application. "I just bought a house in 2007 and was a little nervous about what the bank would say about my debt-to-income ratio."

Instead, the 31-year-old from Schaumburg, Ill., recently borrowed $22,500 on Prosper.com, an online lending network that matches individual borrowers and lenders. The interest rate on Mr. Walsh's loan: 10.25% -- several percentage points below what he says he would have had to pay at a bank.

HIGH FINANCE FOR THE MASSES

Read a Q&A with the founder of Prosper.com. As the credit crisis spurs traditional lenders to tighten credit standards and raise fees, more small-business owners and entrepreneurs are turning to so-called person-to-person lending networks -- with names like Prosper, LendingClub.com and Zopa.com -- to help keep their businesses going. The unsecured loans are tiny, usually no more than $25,000. But borrowers say they are able to get loans more quickly and with less paperwork than at a bank. And people with good credit are able to lock in lower rates -- often 8% to 12% -- than they would otherwise have to pay on credit cards or unsecured bank loans.

INDEPENDENT STREET BLOG

Have you used peer-to-peer lending? Read the latest post, and share your thoughts. Person-to-person lending is a small but fast-growing corner of the Web economy. New sites are jumping in, including Virgin Money USA, majority-owned by Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group PLC. Roughly $100 million in new P-to-P loans was issued in the U.S. last year, a number that is expected to jump tenfold by 2010, according to Online Banking Report. Recently, some larger financial institutions have begun to take notice of P-to-P lending...

(article continued at WSJ.com)

I don't normally re-post blogs, but I found this posting from the WSJ and found it particularly interesting. In fact, I have some experience with this area as I know someone in my local market that has executed the home squatter strategy to near perfection over the last few years.

This person owns a second home (it's actually a condo on the beach) and has had foreclosure proceedings started on him on 3 different occasions. Each time, he's taken the bank for a "rent-free" ride for 9-12 months. During each of these processes, he negotiated a "new deal / payment plan" with the bank, which ended in dismissal of the foreclosure proceedings. The net result of his actions has been effectively free rent for nearly 3 years (e.g. no cash payments) on his second home since the back payments, interest and penalties/fees were simply added to his mortgage balance (which he may or may not make payments on going forward). I suspect he'll try this again in a few months, and maybe the bank will wise up (doubtful). Or, maybe he will just continue to live in the condo as long as he can continue to play this game (in reality, he cannot afford this second home without playing this game with his bank).

With so many folks upside down on their homes (their home is worth less than their mortgage balance), one might expect to hear about more of these cases going forward. Let's hope that the banks will show a little compassion since many folks in foreclosure today are not gaming the system (per the story above), but genuinely need their help to keep their families in their homes.

Here's the blog posting and a link to the blog (there are some interesting comments on the actual posting, so I encourage you to visit).

Why Walk Away? Mortgage ‘Squatters’ Stay in Their Homes
by Lauren Baier Kim

We’ve written about homeowners who are walking away from their homes instead of paying back their mortgages as home values fall. But why give up your house when you can continue living in it without paying a cent? That’s essentially what some people are doing, according to a recent post on the Big Picture blog.

The blog shares the observation of one South Florida developer, MW, who says that in “the very best neighborhoods of Florida,” owners of houses valued in excess of $2 million have ceased making mortgage payments and are essentially squatting in their luxury homes. And thanks to a backlog of foreclosure cases in the local courts, they may be able to live in their home for months, maybe even years, before the banks can take action (many have also quit paying property taxes and insurance, the post notes).

The post reminds us of a December Journal article written by Amir Efrati about a family in Cleveland who fought off foreclosure in the courts and continued to live in their home for 11 years without forking over a single mortgage payment. Ultimately, the bank foreclosed on the house, the family was evicted and the house was sold to another family, Mr. Efrati says.

There’s a similar tale on Bloomberg.com of a Boca Raton, Fla., resident who hasn’t paid his $1.5 million mortgage since 2002, but still has ownership of his home because the bank can’t prove that it owns the mortgage note. The article says that homeowners across the U.S. have seen foreclosure cases against them dismissed because of lenders’ inability to prove ownership of mortgages that have been pooled into securities and have changed hands multiple times, sometimes with poor documentation.

Of course, many people stay in their homes for a year or two while awaiting eviction. But with so many folks holding negative equity in their homes, should we expect to see more of this? — Lauren Baier Kim

As you likely know by now, Bank of America announced plans to acquire Countrywide last week in what many have called a "rescue" deal. But, if you are a Countrywide customer, what does this mean to you? I believe it is good news for you and here's why. The price that Bank of America paid for Countrywide indicates that they are assuming a large chunk of Countrywide loans will go bad. Thus, if you are currently behind on your Countrywide mortgage, HELOC, etc. payments, this may be an historic opportunity for you to cut a deal with the new owner/servicer of your loan. The math is quite simple - BoA purchased your loan for a HUGE discount meaning they may have paid $150,000 or less for your $200,000 mortgage/HELOC. Thus, if they cut a new deal with you that gets them $150,000 or more of value (through a new payment plan, a more traditional mortgage product through a refinance, etc.), they win and you win! Countrywide could not have done this as easily because it would have required further write-downs of their assets (mortgages they hold on their balance sheet), which would have precipitated further negative press, loss of investor confidence, and potentially bankruptcy for the company. CNN Money recently published an article on this very topic, which I would encourage you to read.

If you are having trouble with your Countrywide mortgage or if your mortgage is an ARM, Option ARM, or similar, I would strongly encourage you to inquire about your options with the new Countrywide. You may not have another opportunity like this down the road!

If you would like to contact Countrywide (or any other mortgage company), you can refer to the contact information in this blog posting. You may also contact Countrywide's Loss Mitigation Department on the web at:

https://customers.countrywide.com/secure/FHAStart_login254.asp