Change in Freddie, Fannie policy eases buy-backs of foreclosed homes |

Change in Freddie, Fannie policy eases buy-backs of foreclosed homes

WASHINGTON — Thousands of people who lost their homes to foreclosure are eligible to buy back those properties at current market value if their loans were backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.

Fannie and Freddie required borrowers who wanted to repurchase their homes to buy them for whatever amount they owed on the mortgage — even if that amount exceeded the fair market value of the home.

That policy was scrapped by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which oversees Fannie and Freddie.

“This is a targeted but important policy change that should help reduce property vacancies and stabilize home values and neighborhoods,” Melvin Watt, FHFA director, said in a statement.

The change affects 121,000 foreclosed homes owned by Fannie and Freddie as of Nov. 25. But it’s unclear how many people will be in a position to take advantage of it. Some former homeowners may have moved on, and a repurchase may not be practical for them. Many may not qualify for financing.

Some of the financing challenges have to do with Fannie and Freddie’s own rules, which require borrowers to wait at least three years after a foreclosure before they can qualify for a mortgage. That rule will not change, which means most of the people interested in a buy-back would have to look for alternative financing, such as loans provided by nonprofits such as Boston Community Capital.

BCA, established in 2010, buys homes in Massachusetts, Maryland, Rhode Island and Illinois that are in foreclosure or close to it. It then resells or rents the homes to the former owners at a price that reflects the property’s current market value.

“I applaud the FHFA for taking this step and allowing homeowners to have the potential to remain in their homes,” said Elyse Cherry, BCA’s chief executive. “This has been a long time coming, and it makes a lot of sense.”

For years, Fannie and Freddie barred buy-back arrangements because they basically amount to a “principal reduction,” a form of mortgage relief that reduces the size of a troubled borrower’s mortgage. This type of relief has been a hot button issue since the housing market unraveled and home prices plunged. Millions of homeowners had the equity in their homes wiped out, and they could not sell or refinance their way out of trouble. Principal reductions are one of the most effective ways to ward off foreclosure in such cases.

The Obama administration had pressed for Fannie and Freddie to allow such debt reductions through the government’s main foreclosure prevention program, known as the Home Affordable Modification Program. In 2012, the Treasury Department even offered to pay Fannie and Freddie to participate.

But the FHFA, under Watt’s predecessor, feared that such relief would entice homeowners to intentionally default on mortgages in a bid to get cheaper loans. The agency warned that such relief could be costly for taxpayers, who had spent billions of dollars to bail out Fannie and Freddie in 2008.

Last week, when pushed at a Senate hearing to take a position on principal reduction, Watt said such mortgage relief was not “off the table.” He said the issue was “perhaps the most difficult he has faced” as FHFA director.

But even before the announcement Tuesday, there were signals that the agency was easing up on its position on buy-backs in particular.

After years of wrangling, Fannie recently allowed Jaime and Juana Coronel to buy back their Los Angeles-area home at its fair market value after it slipped into foreclosure in 2010. The couple had been living there for 20 years when Jaime Coronel’s landscaping work dried up during the recession and they fell behind on their mortgage payments. Fannie let them rent the property for a few years but tried to evict them when it wanted to sell the house.

The couple refused to budge and asked to buy back the home, a plight detailed in The Washington Post in July. Fannie eventually agreed, and the Coronels purchased the home for $280,000.

The deal closed two weeks ago, according to the Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment, which has been assisting the couple.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.