Michael Williams, president and CEO of Fannie Mae
NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) - Summaries of 24 mortgage loans paint a heart-breaking picture of routine dishonesty that brought down America's house of cards.
Conservators of Federal National Mortgage Association filed the summaries in federal court in December, to support a claim that "Fannie Mae" relied on bad information from lenders when guaranteeing packages of loans.
"A forensic review of loan files has revealed pervasive failure to adhere to underwriting guidelines," conservators wrote.
Conservators wrote that in a random review of 996 loans that UBS Securities packaged, 78 percent were not underwritten in accordance with applicable guidelines.
They also wrote that a review of 363 defaults revealed that 99 percent were not underwritten according to guidelines.
Fannie Mae sued UBS and other big lenders last year, seeking to recover billions it lost in the mortgage meltdown that started in 2008.
Lenders deny responsibility, claiming they didn't know that loan originators loaded mortgage applications with lies.
What no one could see a few years ago appears monstrous in hindsight.
The following 24 summaries provide a snapshot of a mortgage meltdown in the making:
- A machine shop technician earning $2,340 a month borrowed $367,199, on an application showing monthly income of $9,250. The loan defaulted in seven months, resulting in a loss of $200,714;
- A paralegal earning $1,500 a month borrowed $121,000, on an application showing monthly income of $11,795. The loan defaulted in five months, resulting in a loss greater than the loan;
- A paralegal earning $2,020 a month borrowed $318,750, on an application showing monthly income of $11,000. Default resulted in a loss of $224,510;
- A maintenance supervisor borrowed $320,000, on an application showing monthly income of $14,732. Default resulted in a loss of $246,313;
- A borrower with monthly income of $2,114 obtained a $480,000 loan on an application showing monthly income of $15,000. The loan defaulted in 17 months, and the lender hasn't sold the property;
- A borrower who reported monthly income of $7,000 obtained a $355,000 loan after an underwriter raised the monthly figure to $10,000. The loan defaulted in 30 months, and the lender hasn't sold the property;
- A borrower who applied to buy a second home obtained a $66,000 loan, after an underwriter marked the home as owner occupied. The borrower didn't make a single payment, resulting in a loss greater than the loan;
- A borrower who applied to buy an investment property obtained a $208,000 loan, after an underwriter marked it as owner occupied. The loan defaulted after a single payment, resulting in a loss of $57,177;
- A borrower who applied to buy a rental property obtained a $320,000 loan, after an underwriter marked it as owner occupied. The loan defaulted in eight months, resulting in a loss of $313,135;
- A borrower who applied to buy an investment property obtained a $63,900 loan, after an underwriter marked it as owner occupied. The loan defaulted in nine months, resulting in a loss greater than the loan;
- A borrower's bankruptcy action revealed that he or she misrepresented occupancy in obtaining a $378,000 refinancing loan. Default resulted in a loss of $311,986;
- A borrower who refinanced a home for $334,800 displayed a driver's license showing a different address and provided an appraisal that included rental forms. Default resulted in a loss of $109,921;
- A borrower who obtained a $603,250 loan showed additional liabilities of $160,407, but an underwriter cut the monthly obligation from $1,915 to $163. The loan defaulted in a year, resulting in a loss of $288,638;
- A borrower who obtained a $49,000 loan showed additional liabilities of $33,833, but an underwriter cut the monthly obligation from $1,623 to $1,045. The loan defaulted in 20 months, resulting in a loss greater than the loan;
- A borrower who obtained a $385,000 loan showed additional liabilities of $15,254, but an underwriter listed no additional debt. The loan defaulted in 27 months, resulting in a loss of $253,314;
- A borrower who obtained a $94,000 loan already owned 22 properties with monthly payments of $16,383, but an underwriter reported monthly debt of $2,539. Default resulted in a loss of $85,154;
- A borrower who obtained a $276,000 loan took out three other mortgages for more than $1 million at the same time, but an underwriter reported no consumer debt. Default resulted in a loss of $155,049;
- A borrower who obtained a $156,000 loan had borrowed $761,000 on two other mortgages, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. The loan defaulted in a month, resulting in a loss of $82,780;
- A borrower who obtained a $103,380 loan had borrowed $1,571,700 on three other mortgages, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. The loan defaulted in two months, resulting in a loss of $114,238;
- A borrower who obtained a $47,500 loan had borrowed $173,050 on two other mortgages, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. The loan defaulted after three payments, resulting in a loss of $17,937;
- A borrower who obtained a $166,768 loan had borrowed $5,281,336 on 20 other mortgages, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. The loan defaulted in seven months, resulting in a loss of $37,941;
- A borrower who obtained a $465,600 loan had borrowed $1,029,404 on four other loans, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. The loan defaulted in a month, resulting in a loss of $441,562;
- A borrower who obtained a $448,000 loan had borrowed $116,079 on another mortgage, but an underwriter didn't report the other loan. The loan defaulted in three months, resulting in a loss of $189,667; and
- A borrower who obtained a $51,000 loan had acquired 32 other mortgages worth $1,699,130 in the previous three months, but an underwriter didn't report the other loans. Default resulted in a loss of $63,887.