Number one blog for finding anything that has to do with the law. Read up on the law and know your rights. Labor Laws, Wage Laws, Contract Laws, and anything else that has to deal with justice and rights.
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
City Extends Deadline on RFP for New Conflict Counsel Model
Thursday, January 10, 2013
DealBook: In Deal, Bank of America Extends Retreat From Mortgages
Correction Appended
Kevork Djansezian/Associated PressBank of America bought Countrywide in 2008.9:00 p.m. | Updated
Bank of America is continuing a large-scale retreat from its costly expansion into the home mortgage market, a shift that concentrates more power in the hands of its biggest rivals and leaves fewer options for some home buyers.
The bank, which already has sharply scaled back in making mortgages, on Monday sold off about 20 percent of its loan servicing business as part of its agreement to pay the housing finance giant Fannie Mae more than $11 billion to settle a bitter dispute over bad mortgages.
The payment resolves claims that Bank of America made bad mortgages before the financial crisis that home buyers had a hard time repaying, and then sold those troubled mortgages to the government. When borrowers defaulted — sometimes within months of taking out a mortgage — the taxpayer-supported Fannie Mae suffered immense losses.
Less competition in the mortgage market could hurt consumers, potentially raising the costs of borrowing. The problems at Bank of America have cut down its mortgage ambitions; it accounts for 4 percent of the nation’s mortgage market, a slide from just over 20 percent in 2009, ceding market dominance to Wells Fargo and JPMorgan Chase.
“This is part of a broader consolidation of banks and that is something that we should all be very, very concerned about,” said Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates. “Anything that leads to less competition can only be bad for consumers.”
Chris Keane/ReutersBrian T. Moynihan, Bank of America’s chief. The bank’s $4 billion acquisition of Countrywide has cost it tens of billions.Also Monday, Bank of America and nine other lenders agreed to an $8.5 billion settlement with banking regulators to resolve claims of foreclosure abuses that included flawed paperwork and bungled loan modifications. While the two agreements were separate, they represented one of the biggest single days for government settlements with United States banks, totaling $20.15 billion, and illustrated the extent of the banks’ role in the excesses of the credit boom, from the making of loans to the seizure of homes.
While costly, analysts said, the settlements may reduce legal uncertainties for lenders and spur more banks to compete for home loan business.
In its agreement with Fannie Mae, which the government controls, Bank of America will pay the agency about $3.6 billion to compensate for faulty mortgages and $6.75 billion to buy back mortgages that could have resulted in future losses for the government. The bank also agreed to sell to other firms the right to collect payments on $306 billion worth of home loans.
“Bank of America is sending a clear message that the bank only wants to be the mortgage lender to a select, small group of people,” said Glenn Schorr, an analyst with Nomura.
Bank of America has been battered by a steady stream of losses after its 2008 purchase of Countrywide Financial, the subprime lender that has come to symbolize the reckless lending practices of the real estate bubble. Before Monday, the $4 billion Countrywide acquisition had cost Bank of America more than $40 billion in losses on real estate, legal costs and settlements. Most of the loans covered in the Fannie Mae settlement were issued by Countrywide from 2000 to 2008.
“These agreements are a significant step in resolving our remaining legacy mortgage issues, further streamlining and simplifying the company and reducing expenses over time,” the bank’s chief executive, Brian T. Moynihan, said in a statement.
Bank of America said it expected the settlement to depress its fourth-quarter earnings by $2.5 billion. Its shares, which doubled in 2012, on Monday essentially closed flat at just over $12.
While the settlement will resolve all of the lender’s disputes with Fannie Mae, which weighed on the bank, Bank of America still faces billions of dollars in claims from investors and federal prosecutors.
While the mortgage market is consolidating in the hands of a small number of banks, the housing market is showing signs of recovery. The Federal Reserve has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to stimulate the economy, driving down interest rates on 30-year mortgages to 3.34 percent. In the last year, this has helped lift house prices from their lows and prompted a boom in refinancings. At the same time, though, even borrowers with strong credit complain about onerous checks and backlogs in the application process. This suggests banks are still struggling to efficiently follow the higher standards introduced since the financial crisis.
Nearly all mortgages that banks make right now are transferred to the government, which guarantees that they will be repaid.
Most analysts agree that mortgage rates would be lower if banks were competing more vigorously for business. Because the settlements could ease legal uncertainties surrounding mortgage lending, a wider array of banks might be encouraged to lend more, eating into the market share of giants like Wells Fargo.
“Every one of these puts a little more distance between the banks and their subprime problems,” said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry publication.
Wells Fargo made 30 percent of all new mortgages in the first nine months of 2012, far ahead of the second-place JPMorgan, which accounted for 10 percent of the market, according to figures from Inside Mortgage Finance. In 2007, Wells Fargo originated 11 percent of new mortgages.
“The markets are actually more competitive than ever,” said Vickee Adams, a spokeswoman for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage. She says smaller banks are making gains in some of the nation’s biggest urban markets.
Some mortgage analysts said the settlements did not provide the level of legal clarity that the banks crave. “We haven’t done enough listening to the banks,” said Christopher J. Mayer, a professor at Columbia Business School. For instance, he says, the banks need clearer rules on when they have to take back loans they have sold to government housing entities.
But a big problem may be that many banks are too poorly run to compete, a situation that may not quickly change even with greater legal clarity. Bank of America’s servicing operations have struggled for several years.
“It may be that Bank of America decided that it wasn’t good enough at servicing,” said Thomas Lawler, a former chief economist of Fannie Mae and founder of Lawler Economic and Housing Consulting, a housing analysis firm.
The bank is looking to refocus beyond the mortgage business. To that end, Bank of America agreed to offload the servicing rights on two million loans with an outstanding principal of $306 billion. Those rights were scooped up by specialty mortgage servicing firms, including Nationstar Mortgage Holdings and the Newcastle Investment Corporation, which collect payments from borrowers.
Jerry Dubrowski, a spokesman for Bank of America, said, “The strategy is simple: to focus on our core retail customers, to be able to provide an entire array of products and services to them, in which mortgage is an integral product, but not the only product.”
Correction: January 8, 2013
An earlier version of this article omitted one element of the settlement between Bank of America and Fannie Mae, and summaries of the article in some sections of nytimes.com consequently understated the total amount of the two mortgage-related settlements announced Monday. It is more than $20 billion, not $18.5 billion.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Media Decoder Blog: Arbitron Deal Extends Nielsen's Reach Into Consumer Habits
With its $1.26 billion acquisition of Arbitron, announced on Tuesday, Nielsen is buying much more than the most widely followed radio ratings service. It is also extending its already substantial reach into the overlapping forms of media through which people consume their entertainment and news, and spend their money — information that is essential to advertisers.
Nielsen is best known for its television ratings, but its various branches also track an array of consumer product sales, like books and music, as well as consumers’ habits online and through their mobile devices. Just on Monday, for example, Nielsen announced a new system with Twitter to rank TV shows by their levels of social-media chatter.
Arbitron, meanwhile, has remained primarily focused on radio consumption, which has held surprisingly strong in the Internet age as people stay plugged in to their favorite radio stations, particularly while driving.
According to Arbitron’s most recent statistics, more than 241 million people in the United States, or about 92 percent of the population ages 12 and over, listen to the radio each week. And unlike television, the vast majority of the ads on broadcast radio are for local businesses.
Through the deal with Arbitron, Nielsen should be able to track even more of consumers’ media consumption and buying habits. In a presentation to investors and Wall Street analysts, Nielsen said that by adding Arbitron’s radio data to its portfolio, it would be able to increase the total amount of time in a given day it could track the listening and viewing habits of the average American to seven hours from the current five.
“That is a very big deal when your job is to measure how consumers ultimately form and change behaviors,” David L. Calhoun, Nielsen’s chief executive, said in a conference call. “And it’s that linkage of buy and watch that ultimately allows us to provide those insights.”
In early trading, Arbitron’s shares shot up by nearly 24 percent, reflecting the premium Nielsen will pay for the shares; Nielsen’s stock was up about 1.3 percent. Nielsen is active in more than 100 countries and last year had $5.5 billion in revenue. Arbitron is a much smaller company, but has substantial profit margins; last year it generated $53 million in net income on $422 million in revenue.
As some analysts see it, the challenges for the combined companies will include measuring the growth of online audio and linking Arbitron’s value for local advertising with Nielsen’s more extensive and national data.
For now, Internet radio services like Pandora are not measured by Arbitron in “apples to apples” terms alongside broadcast radio stations, which Pandora has complained puts them at a disadvantage with advertisers and media-buying agencies. But those measurements may become essential as online listening grows and is embraced by even the biggest radio broadcasters, like Clear Channel Communications.
Laura Martin, an entertainment and media analyst with Needham & Company, said that Nielsen’s expertise and its aggressive push into online markets could be an advantage in exploiting Arbitron’s local radio data.
“It’s interesting that they will have the management I.Q. of Nielsen in charge of local advertising possibilities,” Ms. Martin said. “The Internet is moving at the speed of light, and the next big promise of advertising cash is sitting in local. In Nielsen’s hands those relationships may turn into something that Arbitron didn’t think of.”
Ben Sisario writes about the music industry. Follow @sisario on Twitter.