Archive for May, 2009

House Passes Bill Imposing New Rules on Credit-Card Industry

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

From the Wall Street Journal

Obama Expected to Sign Measure Soon

WASHINGTON — The House overwhelmingly approved legislation Wednesday imposing new restrictions on credit-card companies, sending the measure to President Barack Obama to sign in the coming days.

The 364-61 approval, following the Senate’s 90-5 vote Tuesday, will ban several of the industry’s most profitable practices and require clearer disclosure to cardholders about the interest they are paying.

Mr. Obama has pledged to sign the measure, which would take effect in late February 2010. One of the toughest provisions: Cardholders won’t see interest-rate increases on existing card balances unless they are 60 days late on payments. And if the customer pays on time for six months after that, the prior rate must be reinstated.

The new rules also would ban some fees, provide more notice for customers to pay bills and require clearer disclosures. For instance, credit-card statements will have to tell customers how long they would need to wipe out their balance if only paying the minimum each month, and how much interest they would incur along the way.

The legislation will force broad changes in the credit-card business, many of which were under way after the Federal Reserve approved similar — though less stringent — regulations in December. Industry officials say the most stringent elements of the legislation will constrain their ability to adjust prices for the riskiest consumers. Card companies have said they are considering shorter introductory rates, higher interest rates and more annual fees for some consumers as a result of the new restrictions.

By blocking many practices that aggravate consumers, however, lawmakers said the new provisions would help the economy in the long run.

“Consumers will have more money to invest in the economy instead of paying off debt,” said Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D., N.Y.), who co-wrote the legislation.

Over the past year, credit-card issuers have seen their losses mount as customers default on their bills. Many companies have been protecting themselves by raising rates and cutting credit lines in recent months, even for customers who pay their bills on time, at the same time the government stepped forward with expensive bailouts of the financial sector. “It absolutely inflamed the public,” Ms. Maloney said.

The industry found itself isolated on the issue as other business interests — and most Republicans — stepped forward to support the card legislation. But some members warned it could lead to unintended consequences, such as cutting credit to more consumers as card companies aim to protect their bottom lines.

“We don’t need to take away consumers’ credit opportunities at a time when the market is already contracting from the economic recession,” said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas), who said he backed the clearer disclosure about terms.

The credit-card bill included an unrelated measure, attached in the Senate by Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.), to allow loaded firearms on federal parks in areas where state and local laws would already allow it. The House carried out an unusual separate vote on the gun provision, which passed 279-147, allowing members to object to it while still putting their names on credit-card legislation.

Senate approves sales tax hike

Wednesday, May 20th, 2009

From the Boston Globe

6.25% levy would include alcohol; margin veto-proof in both chambers

By Michael Levenson Globe Staff / May 20, 2009

The state Senate voted last night to increase the sales tax, lift the sales tax exemption on alcohol, and allow cities and towns to raise meals and hotel taxes, brushing aside criticism that higher taxes would hurt Massachusetts businesses by driving consumers over the border, particularly to tax-free New Hampshire.

Discuss
COMMENTS (191)

The Senate plan, which cleared the House in April, would push the sales tax from 5 percent to 6.25 percent, while generating an estimated $633 million to offset deep cuts in services for the poor, elderly, and disabled.

Lifting the sales tax exemption on alcohol sold at package stores would raise another $80 million for those services, senators said. Allowing cities and towns to impose a 2 percentage point increase in taxes on hotels and restaurant meals will help offset cuts in state aid to municipalities, senators said.

At 6.25 percent, Massachusetts would have the second highest sales tax rate of the six New England states plus New York. Only eight states nationwide have a higher rate.

Governor Deval Patrick has threatened to veto any broad-based tax increases, unless the Legislature also overhauls the state transportation agencies, pension system, and ethics laws.

His aides were not available for comment last night, but his threat carries little weight because of the vote tallies.

The Senate voted 29-10 in favor of the sales tax increase, joining the House in mustering a veto-proof majority. Senate President Therese Murray described the sales tax increase as the least punitive of tax options needed to restore services for the most vulnerable.

“I think this is probably the more fair way to go if we have to raise revenue and, unfortunately, we have to raise revenue,” she told reporters after the vote. She said that although the budget’s proposed cuts will not be completely reversed, there will at least be “some money put back into those programs.”

Money from the sales tax increase, senators said, would be spent on a multitude of services. Among them: $4 million for summer jobs for at-risk youth, $5 million for workforce training, $6 million for regional tourist councils, $36 million for special education, and $10 million for rental housing assistance to enable 1,700 families to stay in their homes.

Senator Gale D. Candaras, a Wilbraham Democrat, seemed to speak for the Democratic majority when she declared on the floor that there was “absolutely no good card in the hand,” when it came to raising taxes.

Still, she said, “this sales tax will fund a lot of very important programs, at least in part for some of the most vulnerable citizens.”

Opponents warned that a higher sales tax would hurt the state’s ability to recover from the recession.

“Maybe we should call this the New Hampshire economic stimulus bill,” Senator Robert L. Hedlund, a Weymouth Republican, said with sarcasm.

Of the five sates bordering Massachusetts, only Rhode Island, at 7 percent, has a sales tax rate above 6.25 percent. Massachusetts, however, does not impose sales taxes on groceries, clothing under $175, and prescription drugs.

Discuss
COMMENTS (196)

The Retailers Association of Massachusetts cited a study by the Beacon Hill Institute in warning that a 6.25 percent rate would cost the state 12,600 jobs.

“What you get right now are actually a lot of consumers from Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York coming into Massachusetts and purchasing here,” said Jon B. Hurst, president of the Retailers Association. “Not only is that incentive going to be gone, but we’re going to create an incentive for our own consumers to head to New Hampshire and, just with a couple clicks of the mouse, go on the Internet, all tax-free.”

Mayor Thomas M. Menino applauded the Senate for voting to allow cities and towns to raise taxes on hotel rooms and restaurant meals.

He said the measure, which has not cleared the House, could raise $47 million to help Boston reduce its reliance on property taxes and state aid.

“We need different, more innovative tools to manage costs and diversify revenues at the local level,” Menino said in a statement after the Senate vote. “I hope that members of the House will also support this crucial reform.”

Earlier in the day, a proposal to raise the state income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.95 percent was defeated. Supporters argued it was fairer than the sales tax and would raise $1.3 billion annually.

Opponents said the measure would drain household budgets and hurt small businesses.

The Senate also voted 33 to 6 against the governor’s proposal to raise the gas tax by 19 cents and later defeated an 11-cent increase in the same tax.

The alcohol tax was approved with support from lawmakers who said it would raise $15 million to ameliorate what they described as a heroin epidemic in Massachusetts.

“When we have an addict, we’ll have a bed for them,” said Senator Steven A. Tolman, a Boston Democrat. “This money will help us put these beds on line.”

The Senate approved the tax increases on a day of furious lobbying and wrangling behind closed doors.

Hundreds of demonstrators, including many in motorized wheelchairs, with developmental delays, and using guide dogs and canes, jammed Beacon Street early in the day, calling on legislators to raise taxes and “save our services.”

“Families will be devastated if this budget passes!” declared Gary Blumenthal, executive director of the Association of Developmental Disability Providers, eliciting cheers and applause from the crowd.

Michael Levenson can be reached at mlevenson@globe.com.

Senate Approves Bill to Overhaul Credit Card Industry

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

News from FOX NEWS

The overwhelming bipartisan vote of 90-5 was lawmakers’ way of telling Americans that they haven’t been forgotten amid a recession that has left hundreds of thousands jobless or facing foreclosure.

The Senate voted on Tuesday to prohibit credit card companies from arbitrarily raising a person’s interest rate and charging many of the exorbitant fees that have become customary — and crippling — to cash-strapped consumers.

The overwhelming bipartisan vote of 90-5 was lawmakers’ way of telling Americans that they haven’t been forgotten amid a recession that has left hundreds of thousands jobless or facing foreclosure.

With the House on track to endorse the measure by week’s end, President Barack Obama could see a bill on his desk by the end of the week.

“We’ve got too many hard-working families in Massachusetts struggling to keep their heads above water, and the last thing they need is to get whacked with unfair credit card fees,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

If enacted into law as expected, the credit card industry would have nine months to change the way it does business: Lenders would have to post their credit card agreements on the Internet and let customers pay their bills online or by phone for free. They’d also have to give consumers a chance to spare themselves from over-the-limit fees and provide 45 days notice and an explanation before interest rates are increased.

Some of these reforms are already on track to take effect in July 2010, under new rules by the Federal Reserve. But the Senate bill would put the changes into law and go further in restricting the types of bank fees and who can get a card.

For example, the Senate bill requires anyone under 21 seeking a credit card to prove first that they can repay the money or that a parent or guardian is willing to pay off their debt if they default.

Tax credit for buying home worth cashing in By Barry Armstrong / Money Matters Tuesday, May 19, 2009 –

Tuesday, May 19th, 2009

Article from the Boston Globe

Is now the right time to buy a home?

The national median home price has fallen 26 percent since its peak in early 2006. Nearly all sales in the fourth quarter of 2008 were distressed sales, including foreclosures and homeowners selling their homes for less than they owe on their mortgage.

Homes have not been this affordable since the 1970s, and you can still get a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage in the 4 percent range. This may be a good time to snag a bargain if you are confident in your job prospects and you don’t plan to sell for at least five years.

From a tax perspective, this is a great time to purchase your first home. Home purchases made before Dec. 1, 2009, may qualify for a first-time home buyer credit of $8,000 or 10 percent of the price tag, whichever is smaller. As long as you own the home for three years, you don’t need to repay the credit.Many buyers aren’t aware that they can re-file their 2008 taxes and claim the credit now, even if they bought their home after Dec. 31, 2008. That means you don’t have to wait until 2010 to receive the credit.

Everyone’s situation is different so talk to your tax adviser to see if you qualify for the credit.

E-mail questions to barry@moneymattersradio.net. Barry Armstrong is the host of “Money Matters with Barry Armstrong” on WCRN-AM (830) and a registered representative with Securities America Inc.

$50M home rescue pact

Tuesday, May 12th, 2009
Article that appears in The Boston Herald
By Thomas Grillo
Tuesday, May 12, 2009 -

More than 700 Bay State homeowners on the brink of foreclosure could be rescued by a $50 million settlement with Goldman Sachs, Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said.

Under the terms of the agreement, Goldman will reduce the principal of 714 first mortgages they hold (or service) by up to 30 percent and reduce second-mortgage amounts by 50 percent or more. This will allow borrowers to replace troubled mortgages with more affordable loans that take into account today’s value of their properties.

“There’s no dispute that Goldman Sachs and other securitizers have been involved intricately in this whole process by which loans were made to homeowners and, as we have argued, in many instances destined to fail,” said Coakley – referring to the practice of offering mortgages to prospective homeowners who lacked a realistic means to pay them back.

Goldman and others further imperiled the financial system by bundling those very risky mortgages and selling them as mortgage-backed bonds, or securities. Coakley said that Goldman, a powerful and politically wired firm, has been cooperative and wasn’t asked to admit any wrongdoing.

Under the deal, borrowers whose first mortgage is significantly delinquent will be required to make a reasonable monthly payment while seeking refinancing or until they sell their home, Coakley said.

The attorney general acknowledged that Goldman was not the only company that profited from selling off subprime loans destined to fail. She declined to mention other firms under investigation.

“I cannot name names and I can’t comment other than to say that this was opened as a broad-based investigation and it’s ongoing,” she said.

Coakley has probed Fremont Investment & Loan, now defunct, and H & R Block Inc., owner of Option One Mortgage Corp., for making the types of mortgages that Goldman then securitized.

In addition to the cost of reducing the principal of the troubled loans, Goldman has also agreed to pay the state $10 million.

Michael DuVally, a spokesman for Goldman in New York, said: “Goldman Sachs is pleased to have resolved this matter.”

Herald wire services contributed to this report.

Still there, foreclosed no longer Nonprofits help occupants buy back homes

Monday, May 11th, 2009
An article that appeared in the Boston Globe.

Thomas Quinn did something that most people who lose their homes to foreclosure can only dream about: He bought back his family’s Hyde Park house.

Quinn, 48, a father of two teenage daughters, was forced to give up the deed to the 1920s bungalow last year after his wife died of cancer and he could no longer afford the payments on their subprime loan. But he refused to leave the property, outraged that his lender wouldn’t rework the mortgage. And then, with the help of a local nonprofit, the fire pump salesman was able to repurchase his home and secure an affordable 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage nine months after the foreclosure.

“I’m a happy homeowner again with a payment I can live with,” he said. “It is saving me over $1,000 a month.”

Quinn is one of a small but growing group of former owners who are not only staying in foreclosed homes but are buying them back, with the help of nonprofit groups and housing advocates. And in some cases, they are getting their homes at significant discount the second time around, because real estate values have plunged.

“We are in the process of helping a lot of people buy back their homes,” said Zoe K. Cronin, a housing attorney for Greater Boston Legal Services. “There is not likely going to be another buyer. If there is someone willing to buy it back at a real value, that’s probably the best option” for lenders, she said.

Boston Community Capital, a 25-year-old agency with a mission to help create healthy communities, is at the forefront of the effort, with about 30 borrowers – tenants and former homeowners – already in the process of purchasing their homes. In Quinn’s case, the nonprofit bought his house from Wells Fargo Home Mortgage in February and weeks later sold it back to him for $198,750 – about what he owed the bank.

Elyse Cherry, the nonprofit’s chief executive, said it wants to keep residents in their homes and prevent foreclosures because abandoned homes fall into disrepair, scarring neighborhoods. Funded by private and public sources, Boston Community Capital has over the past 25 years invested more than $423 million to help low-income communities across the nation.

Without such help, former homeowners can find it daunting to buy a new home or buy back their old home. With damaged credit, it’s nearly impossible for them to get another loan.

“The folks we are dealing with, they can’t get any debt at all because their credit ratings are ruined,” said Cherry. “Neighborhoods can turn back into blighted areas really quickly if the vacancy rate rises too much.”

The effort comes as the number of foreclosed properties in Massachusetts mounts. Last year, foreclosures jumped to 12,430 – a 62 percent increase from the year before. During the first three months of this year, 2,755 homeowners lost their properties to foreclosure.

To address the problem, government officials, housing advocates, and banks are promoting loan modifications and refinancing for struggling homeowners – who have seen their incomes drop, property values plunge, or mortgage rates jump.

Discuss
COMMENTS (26)

President Obama in February unveiled a $75 billion plan to help 4 million homeowners modify loans and let another 5 million refinance into lower-cost loans.

But much of that help has not yet reached the streets, and many distressed homeowners still struggle to get assistance. Home values have dropped so low in some communities that borrowers simply are unable to refinance. In other cases, borrowers don’t earn enough to meet a bank’s income requirements.

Bruce Marks, chief executive of the homeownership organization Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, based in Jamaica Plain, said banks are flooded by requests for help and struggling with a growing portfolio of bank-owned homes. Marks said his corporation has even managed to persuade some banks to rescind foreclosures in other states.

“Banks are overwhelmed,” he said. “They now recognize it is better to keep the existing homeowners or the existing tenants.”

In Dorchester, a group of tenants living in a foreclosed property spent months trying to persuade Wells Fargo that it made financial sense to sell them the home at a reduced market value rather than force an eviction.

The Meyers family, three sisters and a brother, were taken by surprise when the three-decker they rented from their stepmother was foreclosed upon in 2007. The siblings decided to fight the eviction with the help of City Life/Vida Urbana, a Jamaica Plain-based tenant organization that grabbed media attention last year after members chained themselves to several foreclosed homes.

Allister Meyers, 29, said that Wells Fargo eventually agreed to sell the property back to the family and dropped the price after months of negotiations. Wells Fargo officials declined to discuss the case, citing confidentiality issues.

In November, Meyers bought the house for $225,000, less than half the amount his stepmother had borrowed on the property two years before the foreclosure, according to public records.

“It must have been a miracle; our prayers came true,” he said. “I woke up and said, ‘You know what? This is my house. We are going to start doing work on it.’ “

Sackie Freeman hopes Boston Community Capital will help him repurchase his foreclosed Dorchester home, which has been in his family for four decades. Freeman, a hip-hop DJ, inherited the property from his grandparents in 2004, but refinanced it partly to fund a juice bar and clothing store called All-Nite. When the business started to falter in 2007, Freeman had trouble paying his mortgage.

After foreclosure, Freeman refused to leave the home he shares with his 3-year-old daughter, his ailing mother, and an uncle.

“So we missed two or three payments, they are going to take my whole house?” he said. “Everybody deserves a second chance.”

Like Freeman, Quinn doesn’t understand why more banks don’t help families in his situation.

He and his wife, Raquel, bought their house for $160,000 in 1998. Five years later, Raquel was diagnosed with cancer. Nervous about money, she wanted to refinance. The couple signed a 15-year, adjustable-rate mortgage that folded in their car loan.

After his wife’s death, Quinn took a sales job with a pay cut and less traveling so he could spend more time with his daughters. His mortgage payments increased from $1,600 to more than $2,000. Quinn said Wells Fargo rejected his request to refinance to a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage.

Wells Fargo officials would not comment on Quinn’s case, but said they do everything possible to help homeowners.

Nonetheless, the lender went ahead with the foreclosure last spring, and eviction proceedings soon began. Quinn contacted City Life to help him fight the eviction. That’s when Boston Community Capital stepped in to help.

Cherry said Wells Fargo agreed to stop the eviction process and sell the property to the nonprofit to keep Quinn in his home.

“We are really delighted to have banking partners that are willing to step up to the plate that way,” she said. “They need to clear out their inventory.”

Quinn’s is one of three mortgages – one for a tenant and two for former homeowners – the nonprofit has already financed. The company also is buying and financing the purchase of abandoned bank-owned properties.

To make sure homeowners who purchase properties at deep discounts don’t unfairly gain from a future sale, the company will require them to share any equity appreciation with Boston Community Capital.

Despite the nonprofit’s efforts, Cherry said, some people can’t afford to buy back properties, even at a discount.

“We can’t fix every problem, but we certainly can work very closely with residents with any loan we come to own,” she said. “Unfortunately, the laws of economics still apply.”

Senate Rejects Mortgage ‘Cramdowns’ by Judges

Friday, May 8th, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama lost his first big legislative fight Thursday when the Senate failed to pass a measure that would allow bankruptcy-court judges to reduce the value of some mortgages.

The defeat of the bill, which was a central part of Mr. Obama’s plan to help homeowners, came as the House voted 357-70 in favor of a measure that would cap the fees credit-card companies can charge. The credit-card measure now goes to the Senate, where it is likely to pass.

Small banks and credit unions had opposed letting judges reduce a mortgage to reflect a home’s market value — known as a “cramdown” — despite weeks of wooing by Democrats. Some opponents said they wanted to signal to Mr. Obama their dwindling tolerance for what they described as continued government intervention in private business, particularly businesses that didn’t precipitate the nation’s mortgage crisis. The measure failed a vote that would have moved it forward by 45-51.

Mr. Obama had described cramdown as a “stick” in the carrot-and-stick approach he sought to take with banks, as part of the administration’s effort to aid eight million homeowners whose properties are headed toward foreclosure. The measure would be in effect only until 2012, and could be used only after a homeowner had tried to rework the mortgage directly with the bank.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.) had pushed for the cramdown measure. Along with many Republicans, a dozen moderate Democrats also voted against the bill. The House in March had passed the cramdown legislation by a vote of 234-191, along party lines.

Big banks, including Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co. were early supporters of a Senate compromise even as big-bank lobbying groups opposed it. Community bankers and two major credit-union groups also declined to support the measure, saying it would give too much power to judges.

“It’s hard enough to deal with bankruptcy judges, much less giving a bankruptcy judge the power to change the terms of a contract,” said Cam Fine, chief executive of the Independent Community Bankers Association, a group wooed by the administration. He said his group represents 8,000 community banks.

The House credit-card bill that passed Thursday would ban retroactive rate increases by credit-card issuers and rein in some interest-charging practices. For example, companies would have to give consumers 45 days’ notice before raising interest rates.

—Sudeep Reddy contributed to this article.

Write to Elizabeth Williamson at elizabeth.williamson@wsj.com

Cramdown Slamdown Three cheers for obstructionism.

Friday, May 8th, 2009

Wall Street Journal Editorial

The power of a united minority was on beneficial display yesterday, as Senate Republicans defeated the budget bankruptcy “cramdown” bill. Credit goes to Arizona’s Jon Kyl and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who kept their party together to beat destructive legislation that had easily passed the House and was one of President Obama’s housing priorities.

The cramdown would have allowed bankruptcy judges to rewrite contracts to reduce the amount that people owe on their mortgages. But a bipartisan majority understood that relief for today’s troubled borrowers would be paid with higher rates on the next generation of homeowners, as lenders priced the added risk into mortgage contracts.

A dozen Democrats joined Republicans in the 51-45 vote, and even Pennsylvania turncoat Arlen Specter gave his former GOP comrades an assist. Speaking for millions of renters and nondelinquent borrowers, Mr. McConnell said that the vote “ensures that homeowners who pay their bills and follow the rules won’t see an interest-rate hike at the whim of a bankruptcy judge.”

Prior to the vote, the Associated Press described the looming defeat as “the first major legislative setback for the popular president.” Illinois Senator Dick Durbin and New York’s Chuck Schumer also did their worst to pass the bill, including some arm-twisting of politically vulnerable bankers. Their defeat is a victory for healthy credit markets and, let us hope, a sign that Americans do not want to throw out all the rules of our market economy.

The victory is also an example of Republicans helping the economy and thus saving Democrats from their own worst instincts. Liberals were so intent on helping troubled homeowners that they were willing to punish the profits of the very banks they say they want to lend more to new mortgage borrowers. May we have more such virtuous “obstructionism.”

‘Cramdown’ Lacks Votes

Friday, May 8th, 2009

This article appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

By ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s proposal to give homeowners new relief in bankruptcy court appears headed to defeat in the Senate Thursday, barring a last-minute compromise.

As of late Wednesday, a measure allowing judges to reduce the mortgages of homeowners in bankruptcy court, known as “cramdown,” didn’t have the 60 votes needed to pass a procedural vote in the Senate, where Republicans still have the numbers needed to block legislation. The measure lacks the support of some Democrats as well, amid opposition by community banks and credit unions.

The president and many Democrats see cramdown as important relief for millions of people whose homes are worth less than they owe on their mortgages, in some cases because they signed up for dubious loans with escalating payments.

The measure, once part of a more sweeping housing bill to be considered Thursday, will now likely be voted upon separately. Sen. Dick Durbin (D., Ill.), the Senate’s second-ranking Democrat, has been working to find a compromise on the measure, a key part of Democrats’ agenda to help homeowners.

But as of Wednesday night, Sen. Durbin and fellow negotiators had been unable to sway enough moderate Democrats and Republican opponents.

A Short Sale May Not Mean You’re Home Free

Tuesday, May 5th, 2009

Here is an article from the Wall Street Journal on Short Sales.  The original article can be found at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124104990739271023.html.

Financially troubled borrowers may think that foreclosure or a short sale of their home means their mortgage woes are over.

Not necessarily.

Some homeowners are finding that when they sell their homes for less than the outstanding mortgages — a so-called short sale — their mortgage companies are going after them for some or all of the difference. Mortgage companies are also sometimes taking legal action to recover unpaid amounts after a foreclosure is completed.

In a growing number of cases, holders of mortgages or home-equity loans are requiring borrowers in short sales to sign a promissory note, which is a written promise to pay back a loan or debt. Real-estate agents and attorneys say they have seen an increase in requests for promissory notes as mortgage companies look to short sales as an alternative to foreclosure.

In many states, lenders have always had the right to pursue former homeowners for unpaid mortgage debt. Yet until recently, most borrowers who ran into trouble were able to refinance or sell their homes and pay off their loans. Now, falling home prices are widening the gap between home values and mortgage balances, and the number of homeowners who can’t make their mortgage payments is rising as the economy has weakened. More than 3.8 million homes will be lost in 2009 and 2010 because borrowers can’t make their mortgage payments, according to forecasts from Moody’s Economy.com.

Some borrowers are surprised to find themselves on the hook. Jodie Byrd sold her home in the Los Angeles area in a short sale last summer after her husband lost his job and the couple realized they wouldn’t be able to make their mortgage payments. The sale price covered the $685,000 mortgage, but their lender, Washington Mutual Co., then began pursuing them for the $21,600 balance on their second mortgage.

Ms. Byrd says a clause in their contract gave Washington Mutual the right to pursue the debt, but adds that her real-estate agent said that wasn’t likely to happen. The couple eventually settled the claim for $4,000.

A spokesman for J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., which acquired Washington Mutual last year, says it’s the company’s policy not to comment on individual cases. Speaking generally, he says, “a short sale may resolve the first mortgage, but the second mortgage … would be a separate negotiation with the lender or servicer.”

Some experts say that mortgage companies may pursue leftover debt, or “deficiencies,” in greater numbers as the housing market settles. Lenders are “doing everything possible to work with their borrowers and trying to bring stability back to the lending and real-estate market,” says Marc Ben-Ezra, an attorney in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., who represents mortgage companies in foreclosures. “However, the ability to get a deficiency judgment is a valuable right that I think lenders will pursue aggressively in the future as the market stabilizes.”

One-Year Moratorium

HSBC Finance, part of the North America unit of HSBC Holdings PLC, has implemented a one-year moratorium on the collection of deficiency balances for short sales and foreclosures that occur after April 1, “given the current economic environment,” a company spokeswoman says.

Other mortgage servicers say their actions are often dictated by their contracts with investors or mortgage insurers. Bank of America Corp., for example, will “attempt to seek a promissory note whenever it is feasible” in a short sale “in the interest of protecting investors and shareholders from the losses,” a spokeswoman says. In the case of a foreclosure, the investor or insurer “is generally the one who pursues the deficiency, but we do ourselves on some-bank-owned assets,” she says.

Not every troubled borrower is hit with such a claim. Often, mortgage companies don’t go after borrowers for unpaid amounts either because state laws prohibit or limit such actions or the cost outweighs the potential return. Borrowers subject to a deficiency may also elect to file for bankruptcy in an effort to have the debt discharged.

How a borrower is treated can depend on mortgage company policy, the size of the unpaid debt, whether the borrower has a job or other assets, or whether the home was bought as an investment. “If there isn’t a financial hardship … that’s where the investor or mortgage insurer will go after the homeowner for more,” says David Knight, a senior vice president at Wells Fargo & Co.’s home-mortgage unit.

A PMI Group Inc. spokesman says the mortgage insurer “primarily target[s] borrowers who are not experiencing hardship — but those who simply elected to walk away from the property due to its decline in value.”

Promissory Notes

Still, the number of short-sale agreements that are made with strings attached is increasing. In the past month and a half, “every short sale I have has had a promissory note or gives the lender the right to collect a deficiency,” says Pamela Simmons, an attorney in Soquel, Calif., who represents financially troubled homeowners. Often, the terms are buried in the sale contract, she says.

Regina Rivard, a real-estate consultant in Apollo Beach, Fla., has completed 22 short sales in the past six months. In half of them, the holder of the first or second mortgage required that the borrower sign a promissory note or retained the right to pursue the deficiency. The amounts borrowers were obliged to pay ranged from a few thousand dollars to as much as $100,000, she says.

Some borrowers are balking. Mack Ransom, a mortgage broker in Ashland, Ore., recently brought Countrywide Financial Corp. a short-sale offer for $279,000 — well below the roughly $415,000 he owes on his two mortgages. Countrywide countered that it would accept a $310,000 bid, provided Mr. Ransom signed a $48,000 promissory note, he says. Mr. Ransom rejected that offer and is pursuing a different short sale.

“I would take the foreclosure and the credit hit over that,” he says. A spokeswoman for Bank of America, which acquired Countrywide last year, declined to comment on a specific case, but said: “The company will ask the borrower to sign a promissory note during the short-sale process if dictated by investor guidelines.”

Going to Court

Other borrowers who have already gone through foreclosure are being taken to court by mortgage companies for unpaid debt, though such actions are still relatively uncommon. In Lee County, Fla., deficiency actions have increased in the past six months, with most filed by holders of second mortgages, says Charlie Green, clerk of Lee County Circuit Court. “The sale of the property was not enough to cover the total amount that was owed on the note or notes,” says Mr. Green, who recently began tracking such filings in response to the increase.

Dunstant King, a cab driver in Boston, refinanced his mortgage in 2007, thinking it would save him money. Instead, his payments increased as the economy slowed. In January, Mr. King, who had a $290,400 mortgage and a $72,600 home-equity loan, lost his home to foreclosure. In February, a lawsuit seeking $92,000 was filed in Suffolk County, Mass., Superior Court on behalf of the loan pool that holds the second mortgage, according to court records.

“I don’t have the money to pay them,” says Mr. King. “Business is really bad.” His attorney, David Dineen of Greater Boston Legal Services, says, “We believe Mr. King has legal defenses” to avoid that debt.

A spokesman for Deutsche Bank AG, the trustee for the loan pool, says that the decision to file the lawsuit was made by the mortgage-servicing company, Franklin Credit Management Corp. Franklin executives did not respond to requests for comment.

Blake Brewer, an attorney in Independence, Ohio, is currently representing a borrower who completed a short sale with the approval of his lender, National City Corp. The following year, Mr. Brewer’s client was sued for the $65,000 loan balance, plus accrued interest, on his home-equity line of credit. The borrower “fully believed National City understood they weren’t going to get paid,” says Mr. Brewer.

A spokesman for PNC Corp., which acquired National City late last year, said the company’s policy is not to comment on pending litigation.