Home > Uncategorized > These Government Programs May Have Prolonged the Recession

Comments 0 Comments

It took nearly a decade, but the foreclosure crisis created by the housing bubble seems to have finally receded. ATTOM Data Solutions, which gathers information on housing trends, reported that default notices, auctions and bank repossessions fell 24% in September, compared to a year ago. Essentially, that means foreclosures are down to their lowest levels since 2005, before the bubble burst.

“Foreclosure activity has been on a steady slide downward over the past six years, finally dropping back below pre-crisis levels in September,” Daren Blomquist, senior vice president at ATTOM Data Solutions, said, proclaiming the results provide the “nail in the coffin” of the foreclosure crisis.

The timing is probably good for Democrats, as the Obama administration’s program to help Americans facing foreclosure — the Home Affordability Modification Program (HAMP) — was criticized for not helping enough at-risk homeowners. In its first five years, HAMP was supposed to help 3 to 4 million homeowners — but only about 1 million modifications were completed by then. Meanwhile, an estimated 7 million people lost their homes during the recession.

Data crunched by ATTOM at Credit.com’s request raises another potential question regarding HAMP and other efforts to help struggling homeowners: did these programs prolong the recession?

Bloomquist examined five states where banks had an easier time completing foreclosures — we’ll call these the “pull-off-the-band-aid” states — and five other states called “foreclosure prevention states,” where legislation and court proceedings were designed to slow down the foreclosure process.

The results are telling. In the five “pull-off-the-band-aid” states, housing prices are up dramatically from 2008 — an average of 33%. Those states are Arizona (up 10%), California (34%), Colorado (50%), Georgia (26%) and Michigan (44%).

On the other hand, the housing recovery is much slower in the “foreclosure prevention” states. As a group, housing values in those five places are only now besting 2008 levels. They are Florida (up 8%), Illinois (up 1%), Nevada (up 6%), New Jersey (down 11%) and Ohio (up 16%).

Four of those five states are “judicial foreclosure” states, meaning a judge must review each case, which typically slows down the process. Nevada, the exception, passed laws requiring mediation in the foreclosure process, as did several other legislatures in this group. The sluggish recovery in those five states is also apparent from the share of seriously underwater homes. In them, 19% of homeowners owe at least 125% more on their mortgage than their home’s value.

Among that group, Ohio’s property values have risen the most, but 21% of mortgage holders there are still seriously underwater. Standing in contrast, in the “pull-off-the-band-aid” states, the seriously underwater share is 11%.

Bloomquist said the data suggests government foreclosure intervention efforts in the housing crisis failed on both sides.

“Not only did they not do as much good as promised, they actually did some harm in prolonging the pain,” he said. “This harmful effect was multiplied in states with aggressive foreclosure prevention efforts added on to the federal programs. On the other hand, several hard-hit states that did not add many or any additional foreclosure prevention programs on top of the federal government programs have recovered most quickly in terms of foreclosure numbers getting back to pre-recession norms and home prices recovering.”

The data can’t say definitively that slowing down foreclosures during the recession hindered the housing market recovery in those states. But Bloomquist thinks the data is strong enough that it merits consideration by policymakers.

“Yes, there are other factors at work helping to lift the real estate markets in places like Colorado and Georgia, and even Arizona and California,” Bloomquist said. “However, Michigan does not have the favorable demographic trends in place, and Florida on the other side do have more favorable demographic trends. I think juxtaposing specifically Michigan and Ohio and also Arizona and Nevada provides a pretty clear difference between two sets of similar markets.”

It’s important to note that a foreclosure can significantly damage your credit, but that you can repair it over time. You can keep an eye on the progress you’re making in fixing your credit after a foreclosure by viewing two of your free credit scores, updated every 14 days, on Credit.com.

Image: kzenon

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team