Skip to main content

Goldman Sachs Mortgage Relief Settlement


Goldman Sachs is approaching the billion-dollar mark for mandated consumer-relief actions stemming from two mortgage-related settlement agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice and three states. Professor Eric D. Green, who serves as independent Monitor for the company’s consumer-relief agreements, announced this week that Goldman Sachs has thus far provided $993,420,822 in consumer relief, or 55 percent of the $1.8-billion target.
Eric D. Green, a professional mediator and retired Boston University law professor, was named by the settling parties as independent monitor with responsibility for determining whether Goldman Sachs fulfills its consumer-relief obligations.
Since his previous report on February 15, 2018, Goldman Sachs has forgiven $61,610,295 in principal on 666 first-lien mortgages, Professor Green reported. The average principal forgiveness for the loans was $92,508, and the reportable credit toward the total owed was $75,278,610, “after the application of appropriate crediting calculations and multipliers.”
The modified mortgages were located in 41 different states and the District of Columbia. Professor Green also reported that 26 percent of the relief occurred in New York, Illinois, and California, and 45 percent of the credit was in the Hardest Hit Areas, “census tracts identified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as containing large concentrations of distressed properties and foreclosure activities.”
According to the media statement, the 2016 Goldman Sachs settlement stemmed from “legal claims against Goldman Sachs regarding the marketing, structuring, arrangement, underwriting, issuance, and sale of mortgage-based securities.” Goldman Sachs settled with the DOJ, California, Illinois, and New York, as well as the National Credit Union Administration Board and the Federal Home Loan Banks of Chicago and Des Moines.
Goldman Sachs has until the end of January 2021 to meet its requirement of paying “a total of $5.06 billion, including consumer relief valued at $1.8 billion.”

Popular posts from this blog

Grass Seed Video

When Will Bank Foreclosurews ‘Normalize’? Team Thayer #realestate #investor #housing #market #news #oregon

With much of the talk surrounding the housing market centered on “normalization” or returning to its pre-crisis state, one metric which the market is watching is the distressed sales share—the share of REO and short sales that comprise total residential home sales. For February 2016, the distressed sales share declined by 2.9 percentage points over-the-year (and 0.4 percentage points over-the month) down to 11 percent, according to  data released by CoreLogic  on Thursday. At their peak in January 2009, distressed sales accounted for nearly one-third of all residential home sales (32.4 percent) but has been declining steadily since then. By comparison, the pre-crisis share of distressed sales was typically around 2 percent; CoreLogic estimates that if the current rate of year-over-year decline continues, the distressed sales share will reach the “normal” pre-crisis level in slightly more than two years. “Prior to the housing crash, the distressed share of total...

Reverse Mortgage Foreclosure May Be At Increased Risk. Team Thayer #realestate #housing #market #foreclosure #Mortgage #news #oregon

San Francisco-based advocacy group  California Reinvestment Coalition  (CRC) has asked  HUD  to impose a moratorium on home equity conversion mortgage (HECM, or reverse mortgage) foreclosures by  CIT Group  and its subsidiary, Financial Freedom. CRC requested the moratorium based on new data it obtained from HUD in  the form of a fact sheet which shows that CIT Group/Financial Freedom were responsible for 39 percent of the 41,237 reverse mortgage foreclosures in the United States since April 2009 despite having an estimated market share of only 17 percent in the reverse mortgage market. Many of the reverse mortgage foreclosures that have occurred are “widow foreclosures,” or foreclosures that occur after the death of a non-borrowing spouse. These foreclosures are allowed to happen because some reverse mortgage originators name only the borrower on the reverse mortgage, which later allows the servicers to foreclose on the non-borrowing spouse. M...