Bulgroz

Forest ;

"Cela dit, cela n’a toujours aucun rapport avec aucune contrainte faite aux banques de prêter aux insolvables."

C’est évident que nous n’allons pas retrouver un message de la FED recommandant de prêter aux insolvables.

D’ailleurs quand elle introduit le "adjustable rate mortgage", elle a bien mis en garde le grand public sur le risque de se retrouver insolvable et d’avoir un solde résiduel de prêt supérieur à la valeur de la maison.

Exemple de document de la FED pour informer le public sur les risques de l’endettement immobilier :

http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/arms/arms_englisadjustable rate mortgage.h.htm

Mais, comme je l’ai montré, la FED a encouragé la titrisation qui permettait au prêteur de se refinancer même si celui qui avait accordé des prêts ne pouvait pas recouvrer auprès de propriétaires insolvables. La FED trouve même 5 bonnes raisons pour titriser dont la possibilité de vendre ces actifs pourris au monde entier !!

Mais il y a une marge entre une bonne info de la FED que personne ne lit et les pubs des millions de prêteurs (taper "get cheap home loan" et vous verrez ce qui tombe sur l’écran !!).

Un click et vous pouvez avoir un prêt. Même avoir 125% du prix de la maison !!

Le problème était d’avoir laissé ce marché des prêts faciles par des boutiques peu recommandables se développer sans que la FED ne mette le holà.

Tant que la titrisation a fonctionné et que les gogos étrangers achetaient du subprime, pourquoi se géner ?

Forest ;

Je pense que tu fais un vrai déni français de réalité et je comprends tes craintes.

Cependant, les Américains n’ont pas ces réticences via le CRA qui a incité avec l’aval de la FED l’octroi de prêts aux ménages insolvables et la possibilité de titriser les prêts au monde entiere.

Je te conseille de naviguer quelques instants sur le site :www.hud.gov où on explique comment avoir un prêt même si on n’est pas éligible (discrimination !!) et qui met en oeuvre le CRA.

Tu y verras des choses impensables pour nous Français.

Entre autres, tu verras les résultats du census de 2000, par exemple pour l’Alabama :

http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/systems/census/al/

et sur la distribution ethnique, ville par ville, quartier par quartier, rue par rue pour indiquer là où il fallait prêter :
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/systems/census/cdbgdisabled2/

Alabama :
Population : 4447100
Housing Units : 1963711
DISABLED : 900196
WHITE : 612820
BLACK : 263368
AIANA (American Indian and Alaska Native Alone) : 5555
ASIAN Native : 4025
NHOPI (Native Hawaiian and Other PAcific Islander Alone) : 167
OTHER RACE : 14261
HISPANIC : 11286
NHISPANIC : 888910

Tu as aussi :

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibits lenders from discriminating against credit applicants in any aspect of a credit transaction on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, whether all or part of the applicant’s income comes from a public assistance program, or whether the applicant has in good faith exercised a right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/credit/cre15.shtm

The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in residential real estate transactions on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.

http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/yourrights.cfm

Tu as aussi :  »the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) » la Halde de l’Immobilier où tu peux porter plainte on line si tu estimes que tu as été discriminé du point de vue des crédits immobiliers :

http://www.hud.gov/complaints/housediscrim.cfm

Enter complaint information.

HUD Form 903 Online Complaint

1)What happened to you ? How were you discriminated against ? For example : were you
refused an opportunity to rent or buy housing ? Denied a loan ? Told that housing was not
available when in fact it was ? Treated differently from others seeking housing ? State briefly
what happened. 

2) Why do you believe you are being discriminated against ?
It is a violation of the law to deny you your housing rights for any of the following factors :

- race - color - religion - sex - national origin - familial status (families with children under
18) - disability.
For example : were you denied housing because of your race ? Were you denied a mortgage
loan because of your religion ? Or turned down for an apartment because you have 
children ? Were you harassed because you assisted someone in obtaining their fair housing
rights ? Briefly explain why you think your housing rights were denied because of any the
factors listed above. 

3) Who do you believe discriminated against you ? Was it a landlord, owner, bank, real
estate agent, broker, company, or organization ?

Tu peux aussi porter plainte contre ton propriétaire pour discrimination : Bad Landlords in Federal Housing Complaints

http://www.hud.gov/complaints/badlandlord.cfm

Quand la FED approuvait et encourageait la titrisation des Subprimes et la pulvérisation des pertes en confétis pour les vendre au monde entier.

MARCH 1994 et mise à jour 1996

Page 21 : http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/SupManual/cbem/200710/4000.pdf

The federal government encourages the securitization of residential mortgages. In 1970, the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae) created the first publicly traded mortgage-backed security. Shortly thereafter, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), both government-sponsored agencies, also developed mortgage-backed securities. The guarantees on the securities that these government or government-sponsored entities provide ensure investors of the payment of principal and interest. These guarantees have greatly facilitated the securitization of mortgage assets. Banks also securitize other types of assets, such as credit card receivables, automobile loans, boat loans, commercial real estate loans, student loans, nonperforming loans, and lease receivables.

There are essentially five benefits that can be derived from securitized transactions. First, the sale of assets may reduce regulatory costs. The removal of an asset from an institution’s books reduces capital requirements and reserve requirements on the deposits funding the asset. Second, securitization provides originators with an additional source of funding or liquidity. The process of securitization basically converts an illiquid asset into a security with greater marketability. Securitized issues often require a credit enhancement, which results in a higher credit rating than what would normally be obtainable by the institution itself. Consequently, these issues may provide the institution with a cheaper form of funding. Third, securitization may be used to reduce interest-rate risk by improving the institution’s asset-liability mix. This is especially true if the institution has a large investment in fixed-rate, low-yield assets. Fourth, by removing assets, the institution enhances its return on equity and assets. Finally, the ability to sell these securities WORLDWIDE diversifies the institution’s funding base, which reduces the bank’s dependence on local economies.

D’autres textes là :

http://search.newyorkfed.org/search/search.jsp?template=BOARD&type=adv&who=patx&directory=pwall&text=securitization+of+residential+mortgages⊂mit=Search

Oui, vous avez bien lu selon la FED, l’intérêt de la titrisation des subprimes était de les vendre ai mond entier et de ne pas dépendre des économies locales.

C’etait effectivement bien vu.

Forest, dites moi si ça fait mal !!! (triple emoticon rigolard),

Quand la FED approuvait et applaudissait la titrisation des Subprimes.

MARCH 1994 et mise à jour 1996

Page 21 : http://www.federalreserve.gov/BoardDocs/SupManual/cbem/200710/4000.pdf

The federal government encourages the securitization of residential mortgages. In 1970, the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae) created the first publicly traded mortgage-backed security. Shortly thereafter, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), both government-sponsored agencies, also developed mortgage-backed securities. The guarantees on the securities that these government or government-sponsored entities provide ensure investors of the payment of principal and interest. These guarantees have greatly facilitated the securitization of mortgage assets. Banks also securitize other types of assets, such as credit card receivables, automobile loans, boat loans, commercial real estate loans, student loans, nonperforming loans, and lease receivables.

There are essentially five benefits that can be derived from securitized transactions. First, the sale of assets may reduce regulatory costs. The removal of an asset from an institution’s books reduces capital requirements and reserve requirements on the deposits funding the asset. Second, securitization provides originators with an additional source of funding or liquidity. The process of securitization basically converts an illiquid asset into a security with greater marketability. Securitized issues often require a credit enhancement, which results in a higher credit rating than what would normally be obtainable by the institution itself. Consequently, these issues may provide the institution with a cheaper form of funding. Third, securitization may be used to reduce interest-rate risk by improving the institution’s asset-liability mix. This is especially true if the institution has a large investment in fixed-rate, low-yield assets. Fourth, by removing assets, the institution enhances its return on equity and assets. Finally, the ability to sell these securities WORLDWIDE diversifies the institution’s funding base, which reduces the bank’s dependence on local economies.

Oui, il faut bien lire le dernier bénéfice de la titrisation des prêts aux logements individuels selon la FED, c’est de pouvoir vendre au niveau mondial et ne pas dépendre de l’économie locale !!!!!!!!

Forest,

Oui, exactement, ce sont les autorités fédérales qui ont conseillér de titriser du surprime pour assurer le financement des prêts aux insolvables.