Law Commons^™

Comment On The Fhfa's Small Multifamily Subgoal, David J. Reiss, Jeffrey Lederman

David J Reiss

As the FHFA sets the housing goals for 2015-2017, it should focus on maximizing the creation and preservation of affordable housing. Less efficient proposed subgoals should be rejected unless the FHFA has explicitly identified a compelling rationale to adopt them. The FHFA has not identified one in the case of the proposed small multifamily subgoal. Thus, it should be withdrawn.

The Future Of The Private Label Securities Market, David J. Reiss

David J Reiss

The PLS market, like all markets, cycles from greed to fear, from boom to bust. The mortgage market is still in the fear part of the cycle and recent government interventions in it have, undoubtedly, added to that fear. In recent days, there has been a lot of industry pushback against the government’s approach, including threats to pull out of various sectors. But the government should not chart its course based on today’s news reports. Rather, it should identify fundamentals and stick to them. In particular, its regulatory approach should reflect an attempt to align incentives of market actors with …

Armed, Unarmed Or Harmed By Knowledge? A Comment On The Fha's Housing Counseling Pilot Program, David J. Reiss

David J Reiss

The FHA has requested input on its Homeowners Armed with Knowledge (HAWK) for New Homebuyers pilot program. This comment letter argues that housing counseling is not a proven solution to the problem it is meant to solve, excessive defaults by FHA borrowers. HAWK is a traditional housing counseling program but the scholarly literature casts into doubt the efficacy of such programs. It would be better to take time to research which counseling strategies, if any, are proven to be effective. This is true for the FHA but also for other government agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, that …

Goliath Versus Goliath In High-Stakes Mbs Litigation, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

The loan-origination and mortgage-securitization practices between 2000 and 2007 created the housing and mortgage-backed securities bubble that precipitated the 2008 economic crisis and ensuing recession. The mess that the loan-origination and mortgage-securitization practices caused is now playing out in courts around the world. MBS investors are suing banks, MBS sponsors and underwriters for misrepresenting the quality of loans purportedly held in MBS pools and failing to properly transfer loan documents and mortgages to the pools, as required by the MBS pooling and servicing agreements. State and federal prosecutors have also filed claims against banks, underwriters and sponsors for the roles …

Show Me The Note Q&A, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

This is a Q&A relating to an article, Show Me The Note, available at http://works.bepress.com/david_reiss/63/.

"Show Me The Note" refers to a defense that seeks to forestall or prevent foreclosure by requiring the foreclosing party to produce the mortgage and the associated promissory note as proof of its right to initiate foreclosure.

Show Me The Note!, William K. Akina, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

News outlets and foreclosure defense blogs have focused attention on the defense commonly referred to as "show me the note." This defense seeks to forestall or prevent foreclosure by requiring the foreclosing party to produce the mortgage and the associated promissory note as proof of its right to initiate foreclosure.

The defense arose in two recent state supreme-court cases and is also being raised in lower courts throughout the country. It is not only important to individuals facing foreclosure but also for the mortgage industry and investors in mortgage-backed securities. In the aggregate, the body of law that develops as …

Dirty Remics, Revisited, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

We review the differences between two visions for the residential mortgage markets, one driven by the goal of efficiency and the other driven by the goals of efficiency and consumer protection. Both visions advocate for structural reform, but one advocates for industry-led change and the other advocates for input from a wider array of stakeholders. Broader input is not only important to ensure that a broad range of interests are represented but also to ensure the long-term legitimacy of the new system. This is a response to Joshua Stein, Dirt Lawyers Versus Wall Street: A Different View, PROBATE AND PROPERTY …

Dirt Lawyers And Dirty Remics: A Debate, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden, Joshua Stein

David J Reiss

In mid-2013, Professors Bradley T. Borden and David J. Reiss published an article in the American Bar Association’s PROBATE & PROPERTY journal (May/June 2013, at 13), about the disconnect between the securitization process and the mechanics of mortgage assignments. The Borden/Reiss article discussed potential legal and tax issues caused by sloppiness in mortgage assignments.

Joshua Stein responded to the Borden/Reiss article, arguing that the technicalities of mortgage assignments serve no real purpose and should be eliminated. That article appeared in the November/December 2013 issue of the same publication, at 6.

Stein’s response was accompanied by a commentary from Professors Borden …

Regulation Not Prohibition: The Comparative Case Against The Insurable Interest Doctrine, Sharo Michael Atmeh

Sharo M Atmeh

American law requires an insurable interest—a pecuniary or affective stake in the subject of an insurance policy—as a predi-cate to properly obtaining insurance. In theory, the rule prevents both wagering on individual lives and moral hazard. In practice, the doctrine is avoided by complex insurance transaction structuring to effectuate both origination and transfers of insurance by individuals without an insurable interest. This paper argues that it is time to ab-andon the insurable interest doctrine. As both the English and Aus-tralian experiences indicate, elimination of the insurable interest doctrine will have little detrimental pecuniary effect on the insurance industry, while freeing …

Comment On Enterprise Duty To Serve Underserved Markets, David J. Reiss

David J Reiss

FHFA invited further comment on the merit of considering properties without affordable use restrictions as part of the Enterprises’ duty to serve, noting that affordable housing preservation “encompasses efforts to keep unsubsidized properties in good condition while maintaining affordability for low- and moderate-income households.” (Page 32102)

FHFA should be certain that any aid given to buildings without affordable use restrictions will actually be passed on in large part to their tenants, whether through lower rents or improved conditions. I question whether that is in fact the case.

There are two main rationales for subsidizing multifamily buildings without affordable use restrictions. …