Bad mortgage nightmare could cost banks $60 billion

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011 By

Bank of America

Bank of America is one of two banks gearing up to fight a clause saying it has to buy back mortgages. Image: Flickr / MoneyBlogNewz / CC-BY

The repackaging of mortgages into securities, for many investors, ended up being a bad deal. The bad deal, however, could end up being banks’ responsibility. A clause written into many of the securities could mean banks have to spend $60 billion to re-buy mortgages gone bad.

Security clauses for mortgage securities

When banks packaged, sold and re-packaged mortgage securities for sale, they made billions of dollars. Many of these mortgage securities were more than just bad credit loans, however. The securities also contained a clause that said if the loans go south, the bank would re-purchase the loans. During the height of the mortgage bubble, this seemed like a minor issue. Now that billions of homes are in foreclosure, that clause is forcing buybacks, and banks are putting up a fight.

$60 billion liability

The buyback clause on mortgage-backed securities has been triggered by dropping credit ratings and values. Credit ratings agencies estimate that the nation’s six largest banks face about $60 billion worth of buyback liability. Half of that liability is owed to U.S. Government-backed Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae. In January, Bank of America paid Frannie and Freddie $2.5 billion to buy back a portion of those mortgages. These mortgages are spread all over the country, with a high number in high-foreclosure states such as Nevada.

Years of buybacks in the works

JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America are the two banks with the “highest exposure” to buybacks. There are three groups of businesses seeking to sue banks that are not buying back mortgages — insurers, mortgage finance companies and private investors. Even if the banks do repurchase some of the loans, as dictated in the terms of the packaged securities, they likely will not buy them all back. In the end, that means that banks will have years of possible lawsuits and bad loans on the books, all while the investors are stuck with foreclosed homes that their contracts say they should not have.

Source

NY Times Dealbook

Previous Article

« Costly DMAE cream delivers little more than common moisturizers

DMAE cream is being marketed as a face lift in a jar, but dermatologists say you're better off saving your money with a standard moisturizer. anti aging products
Next Article

Woman bites into razor in Walmart ice cream, but won’t sue »

A woman who bit into a broken razor blade in her container of Great Value brand ice cream doesn't plan to sue Walmart or the manufacturer. Great Value

Leave a Reply

Other recent posts by bryanh

Shark attacks worldwide in 2010 rose to highest level since 1980

Shark attacks increased 25 percent worldwide, but the recession and BP oil spill may account for a reduction of shark attacks in Florida ...
shark attacks worldwide

Chase Bank in trouble for treatment of servicemember loans

Active duty servicemembers with mortgages or student loans through JPMorgan Chase are facing additional fines or changes to repayment.
Paperwork

Study proves red light cameras reduce traffic fatalities

A recently conducted insurance industry study found traffic fatalities dropped 26 percent in cities equipped with red light camera systems.
traffic fatalities