Mortgage Loan Compliance | FHFA Sues Lender After Forensic Audit

On July 27, 2011, in U.S. District court for the Southern District of New York, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) brought suit against UBS Americas Inc., several of its subsidiaries, and four former executive officers charging violations of securities laws in the sale of private label residential mortgage-backed securities (MBS) to government sponsored enterprises (GSEs) Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. FHFA sued as conservator of the GSEs and seeks a jury trial in an attempt to recover losses and damages on behalf of the GSEs that occurred as a result of their investment in the UBS securities.

A forensic audit of 966 randomly selected loans from two of the pools at issue found that approximately 78 percent were not underwritten in conformance with guidelines. The underwriting guidelines that were violated were those designed to assess the likelihood that loans would be repaid. The forensic review revealed the following types of breaches:

1. Failure to test the reasonableness of the borrowers' stated income relative to their line of work, leading to material misrepresentation of income. The forensic review found multiple instances in which income appeared unreasonable yet there was no indication the originator attempted to confirm that income.

2. Failure to investigate multiple submissions from the same borrower of applications showing increasing stated incomes. In each instance the stated income on the original application did not meet underwriting guidelines, but subsequent applications at higher income levels did. Forensic review confirmed that the later applications misrepresented that income and that underwriters did not investigate the discrepancies.

3. Failure to confirm the intended owner occupancy of the property despite indications that the property was intended as an investment. In some cases the loans were underwritten as owner-occupied properties even though the borrower stated they intended the property to be as second home or investment. Additionally, the Prospectus Supplements materially understated the proportions of the loans that were not owner occupied.

4. Failure to properly calculate the borrower's outstanding debt, resulting in a debt-to-income (DTI) ratio that exceeded underwriting guidelines. When properly calculated, 32 percent of the 996 loans in the random sample for forensic review contained DTI ratios that exceeded applicable guidelines.

5. Failure to investigate credit report information that indicated potential misrepresentation of borrower debt. The forensic review revealed numerous instances where multiple credit inquiries on borrower credit reports should have put underwriters on notice for potential misrepresentations of debt obligations, but underwriters did not investigate.


The lawsuit alleges that the underwriters of the underlying mortgages systematically disregarded their respective underwriting guidelines in order to increase production and profits and that the Defendants failed to conduct adequate due diligence on the mortgage loan files and mortgaged properties prior to or during the securitization process. A number of banks and mortgage companies originated the loans in question including Fremont Mortgage, Wells Fargo Bank, Countrywide Home Loans, IndyMac, and Provident Funding Associates.

_______________________

Mortgage Loan Compliance® | The Forensic Loan Audit Company

Get The Facts, Audit Your Loan, and Protect Your Rights!

Call Today 1-866-966-6615 or Visit www.ml-compliance.com