Author
Abstract
Purpose - The problem in alleviating homeowner mortgage distress through refinance is how to achieve meaningful alleviation without prospectively harming the financier. The problem revolves around two parameters from real estate finance – the probability that the distress leads to foreclosure and resulting foreclosure loss severity for the financier if foreclosure does occur. Previous analysis focuses on reducing the probability that homeowner distress leads to foreclosure. By contrast, the purpose of this paper is to focus on reducing foreclosure loss severity. Design/methodology/approach - The study develops a new intuitive formula for foreclosure loss severity to quantify its dependence on transaction costs. The study shows that foreclosure loss severity reduction is feasible by introducing a new refinancing instrument that lowers foreclosure transaction costs and applying property law to derive the structure of the refinancing instrument. Findings - Foreclosure loss severity reduction can subsidize concessions on scheduled payments for homeowners with arbitrarily poor credit without prospective harm to the financier. Research limitations/implications - Quantification of mortgage distress relief is limited to distressed mortgages described by representative parameter values from various government studies. Practical implications - For most distressed homeowners, payment and principal reductions could exceed those available from the recent government programs. Social implications - Implementation should significantly enlarge the pool of homeowners eligible for mortgage distress relief. Originality/value - The mortgage refinance is qualitatively different from that available under existing government refinance programs because it is based on an arms-length exchange of property rights that makes market sense regardless of whether the refinancing results in subsequent homeowner default.
Suggested Citation
Richard A. Graff, 2017.
"Foreclosure loss severity and distressed home mortgage refinance,"
Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(3), pages 244-263, April.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:jpifpp:jpif-06-2016-0040
DOI: 10.1108/JPIF-06-2016-0040
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:jpifpp:jpif-06-2016-0040. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.