|
||||
|
||||
What Do Subprime Securitization Contracts Actually Say About Loan Modification? Preliminary Results and Implications
John P. Hunt University of California - Davis School of Law (King Hall); Berkeley Center for Law, Business and the Economy March 25, 2009 Abstract: A review of pooling and servicing agreements from large subprime securitization programs in 2006 reveals that about 10% of the contract ban loan modifications altogether. The other 90% do not seem to forbid win-win loan modifications (defined as modifications that benefit the borrower and increase the present value of cash flows to the trust), although their terms are open-ended enough that reluctance to make such modifications is understandable. If the subprime universe as a whole looks similar to the contracts we have reviewed to date, mass clarification of contracts rather than mass abrogation either through special legislation or through the creation of a special bankruptcy process may be appropriate.
Keywords: subprime, pooling and servicing agreements, loan modification, mortgage modification, Countrywide JEL Classifications: G20, G21, G28 Working Paper SeriesDate posted: March 27, 2009 ; Last revised: March 27, 2009Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||
© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use Privacy Policy
This page was served by apollo2 in 0.141 seconds.