Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Truth on the Market
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Corporate & Securities Law
: Truth on the MarketZywicki on Judicial Modification of Mortgage Contracts
Earlier this week, I argued that courts should resist the urge to modify what turn out to be improvident commercial contracts. An unintended consequence of rewriting such contracts, I asserted, is that negotiated agreements would become unreliable, which would raise the risks associated with, and thereby discourage, wealth-creating exchanges. And real wealth creation — not just wealth redistribution — is what we desperately need right now.
In an op-ed in today’s Wall Street Journal, Josh’s GMU colleague (and Volokh conspirator) Todd Zywicki offers a similar analysis of proposals to modify mortgage contracts. He cites the following unintended consequences of permitting judges to rewrite such contracts:
* Mortgage costs will rise, as the risk of judicial modification increases the risk of lending, resulting in higher interest rates and/or upfront costs;
* Bankruptcy filings will increase as homeowners see bankruptcy as a means of getting out of a bad mortgage without foreclosure (Todd notes that there were 800,000 bankruptcies last year and that five million homeowners are currently delinquent on their mortgages);
* Because “a bankruptcy filing sweeps in all of the filer’s other debts, including credit cards, car loans, unpaid medical bills, etc.,” the increase in bankruptcies resulting from the ability to rewrite mortgage contracts will also “destabilize the market for all other types of consumer credit”;
* At least under the leading pending proposal, homeowners could act opportunistically at the expense of lenders, filing for bankruptcy to get the mortgage principal written down and then pocketing much of the appreciation if the home eventually appreciates in excess of the written-down principal amount.
In addition, Todd notes a number of systematic adverse effects of permitting judicial modification of mortgages (e.g., effects on mortgage-backed securities, which “provided no allocation of how losses were to be assessed in the event that Congress would do something inconceivable, such as permitting modification of home mortgages in bankruptcy”). Go read the whole thing.
Full post as published by Truth on the Market on February 13, 2009 (boomark / email).
Whats a Home Loan Modification?
How to Qualify for a Home Loan Modification
Legal Forms
Business and Commercial Legal Forms
Home Mortgages
What to look for
National City Mortgage
$4.6 million payout resolves mortgage suit.
SunTrust Mortgage Faces Class Action over Alleged HAMP Breach of Contract
SunTrust Mortgage Faces Class Action over Mortgage Restructuring
Auto Financing
Credit Acceptance Corp. agrees to $52.1 million class action settlement after overcharging consumers for fees and interest on automobile installment contracts.
Seattle Mortgage Co Faces California Class Action
Seattle Mortgage Co Faces California Class Action
SunTrust HELOC Loan Termination
SunTrust HELOC allegedly violated clients contracts by decreasing, freezing, or terminating HELOC loans.
Bank of America Faces Class Action over Mortgage Foreclosure Practices
Bank of America Faces Class Action over Mortgage Foreclosure Practices

Judicial Mortgage Modification, Lobby Day in DC
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of Mortgage Servicing and Implications for Mortgage Modification
Judicial Mortgage Modification Bill Leaves Unanswered Questions for Bankruptcy Practitioners
Some loan modification programs may cost you
Uh-oh: Mortgage Modification Programs are Terribly Ineffective
Foreclosure and Modification Data









