From the AP:

Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way.

"These mortgages have been considered more safe and sound for portfolio lenders than many fixed rate mortgages," David Schneider, home loan president of Washington Mutual, told federal regulators in early 2006. Two years later, WaMu became the largest bank failure in U.S. history.

The AP goes on to list several proposals from 2005 that were ignored. Here they are:

Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.

Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.

Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn't be crippling.

Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.

Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.

Countrywide, then the nation's largest mortgage lender, called the proposals "excessive" and claimed they would "inhibit future innovation in the marketplace." Whooooops.

AP IMPACT: US diluted loan rules before crash [AP]
(Photo: dooleymtv )

The FTC lists the top 3 foreclosure scams to be aware of as the housing crisis deepens.

Top 3 Foreclosure Scams To Avoid

1. The foreclosure prevention specialist: The “specialist” really is a phony counselor who charges outrageous fees in exchange for making a few phone calls or completing some paperwork that a homeowner could easily do for himself. None of the actions results in saving the home. This scam gives homeowners a false sense of hope, delays them from seeking qualified help, and exposes their personal financial information to a fraudster.

2. The lease/buy back: Homeowners are deceived into signing over the deed to their home to a scam artist who tells them they will be able to remain in the house as a renter and eventually buy it back. Usually, the terms of this scheme are so demanding that the buy-back becomes impossible, the homeowner gets evicted, and the “rescuer” walks off with most or all of the equity.

3. The bait-and-switch: Homeowners think they are signing documents to bring the mortgage current. Instead, they are signing over the deed to their home. Homeowners usually don’t know they’ve been scammed until they get an eviction notice.

(Photo: Getty)

The Times says that in September of last year, Citibank held a meeting to discuss the looming mortgage crisis. Citibank's CEO at the time, the since-canned Charles O. Prince III, asked Thomas G. Maheras, who oversaw trading at the bank, "whether everything was O.K." Maheras assured him that it was, and kept assuring him until it was too late.

From the NYT:

For months, Mr. Maheras’s reassurances to others at Citigroup had quieted internal concerns about the bank’s vulnerabilities. But this time, a risk-management team was dispatched to more rigorously examine Citigroup’s huge mortgage-related holdings. They were too late, however: within several weeks, Citigroup would announce billions of dollars in losses.

Normally, a big bank would never allow the word of just one executive to carry so much weight. Instead, it would have its risk managers aggressively look over any shoulder and guard against trading or lending excesses.

But many Citigroup insiders say the bank’s risk managers never investigated deeply enough. Because of longstanding ties that clouded their judgment, the very people charged with overseeing deal makers eager to increase short-term earnings — and executives’ multimillion-dollar bonuses — failed to rein them in, these insiders say.

Now, of course, the losses at Citibank — over $65 billion so far — threaten to dismantle the entire bank.

The article, which is 5 pages long, goes into detail about the relationships between the executives responsible for designing the strategy that ran Citibank into the ground. They lay a large part of the responsibility at the feet of Robert E. Rubin, a top adviser at Citibank and the Secretary of the Treasury during both Clinton administrations.

When he was Treasury secretary during the Clinton administration, Mr. Rubin helped loosen Depression-era banking regulations that made the creation of Citigroup possible by allowing banks to expand far beyond their traditional role as lenders and permitting them to profit from a variety of financial activities. During the same period he helped beat back tighter oversight of exotic financial products, a development he had previously said he was helpless to prevent.

And since joining Citigroup in 1999 as a trusted adviser to the bank’s senior executives, Mr. Rubin, who is an economic adviser on the transition team of President-elect Barack Obama, has sat atop a bank that has been roiled by one financial miscue after another.

Interesting stuff.

Citigroup Saw No Red Flags Even as It Made Bolder Bets [NYT]
(Photo: cmorran123 )

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates national banks, said no to the plan. The sticking point was a clause that would let banks defer paying income tax on the forgiven debt until the rest of the debt was paid off.

From Yahoo:

The agency "does not consider any plan that defers the timely recognition of loss as prudent, and any such proposal cannot be viewed favorably by us," Timothy Long, senior deputy comptroller for bank supervision policy, said in a letter to the two groups dated Monday and made public Wednesday.

"The timely identification, reporting and management of credit losses, along with adequate loan-loss reserves and capital levels, provide the public with ... confidence" in the banking system, Long wrote.

Credit card charge-offs are up 48% from last year.

Regulators nix credit card debt forgiveness plan [Yahoo!] (Thanks, J.D.!)
(Photo: afagen )

From the Wall Street Journal:

While retailers, car companies and others hit by the slowdown in consumer spending haven't gotten the government money, financial firms of all kinds are getting federal bailouts.

It isn't clear if the application under the Troubled Asset Relief Program came before or after the credit- and charge-card giant got Federal Reserve approval Monday to become a bank-holding company.

Amex's shares are down 57% this year as even affluent consumers keep their plastic in their wallets. The WSJ says that it is unclear how Amex would use the money — and that it's clear that $3.5 billion won't help with the consumer spending slump.

Notoriously slime-filled credit card issuer Capital One has already received approval for $3.5 billion in bailout cash.

AmEx Said to Request $3.5 Billion in U.S. Aid [WSJ] (Thanks, Jameson!)
American Express Wins Fed Approval to Become Bank (Update1) [Bloomberg]

[House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney] Frank said the Fed shouldn't reveal the assets it holds or how it values them because of ``delicacy with respect to pricing.'' He said such disclosure would ``give people clues to what your pricing is and what they might be able to sell us and what your estimates are.'' He wouldn't say why he thought that information would be problematic.

[Bloomberg] (Thanks, James!)
(Photo: Meg Marco )

Graham says:

Our mortgage is with Countrywide. They keep sending us notices with bold type that say:
"YOUR MORTGAGE IS NEARING ITS NEXT ADJUSTMENT!"

Of course ... we have always had a fixed rate and they know that. There isn't anything that could possibly adjust.

They know we don’t have a variable rate. It has always been a fixed rate and never been refinanced. It strikes me as fear based tactics to get you to shoulder an expensive refi.

The text reads:
"As a valued Countrywide customer, you shouldn't have to worry about rising monthly payments."

Except ... It would never have crossed my mind to worry about my Fixed Rate Mortgage payments rising if I hadn't received this mailer from them.

Oh, but Graham, didn't you realize that "If you have available home equity, you may be able to access it to pay off bills or take care of unexpected expenses." Don't you know that your house isn't really a house? It's an ATM! Isn't that nifty? It must be true, too, because it says "official" up there at the top.

We thought Bank of America was going to try to clean up Countrywide's image, but apparently not.

From Bloomberg:

"Yes, I found a flaw,'' Greenspan said in response to grilling from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. ``That is precisely the reason I was shocked because I'd been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.''
...
The admission that free markets have their faults was a shift for the former Fed chairman who declared in a May 2005 speech that ``private regulation generally has proved far better at constraining excessive risk-taking than has government regulation.''

Today Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, said Greenspan had ``the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis.''

``You were advised to do so by many others,'' he told Greenspan. ``And now our whole economy is paying the price.''

Waxman and other lawmakers repeatedly interrupted Greenspan as he answered their questions, in contrast to deference to his testimony while he was Fed chairman.

Greenspan then claimed that the Fed had no idea how large the subprime mortgage market had become until late 2005, says Bloomberg.

Greenspan Concedes to `Flaw' in His Market Ideology (Update2) [Bloomberg]

Here's what Lewis had to say about executive pay:

"I think they were overpaid,' he said. "It's more egregious in financial services than any other industry that I know of. We need to cut back compensation in this industry."

"So this is a question everybody wants answered: Is this Socialism?" Stahl asked. "Have we now taken a huge step away from the free-wheeling Capitalism that we’ve known for the last 30 or so years?"

"I don’t know what we’ll call it, but it will be different," he said. "And there will be more regulation. The Golden Era of financial services is over, in my opinion."

Under New Ownership: Bank Of America [60 Minutes]

The NYT explains:

Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. outlined the plan on Monday to nine of the nation’s leading bankers at an afternoon meeting, officials said, in which he essentially told the participants that they would have to accept government investment for the good of the American financial system. This capital injection plan will use a huge chunk of the money authorized for Troubled Assets Relief Program.

Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase were told they would each get $25 billion; Bank of America and Wells Fargo, $20 billion each (plus an additional $5 billion for their recent acquisitions); Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, $10 billion each, with Bank of New York Mellon and State Street each receiving $2 to 3 billion. Wells Fargo will get $5 billion for its acquisition of Wachovia, and Bank of America the same for amount for its purchase of Merrill Lynch.

The result of this "capital injection"? The US government will own preferred shares in all, yes all, of the major US banks, and will be paid dividends. The injection will not be voluntary, says the NYT.

Expect a press conference by President Bush tomorrow morning, announcing the plan.

U.S. Investing $250 Billion in Banks
(Photo: donbuciak )

If you have a friend who's working overseas, let her know to watch out for this:

I'd like to tip you about a scam going around Japan right now, and possibly Asia (I live and work in Japan), and maybe other places. It's a fax from being sent to foreigners, and in my case to schools. I've received it once and many of my friends have too.

The form is attached [pdf], claiming to be from "Internal Revenue Service IRS.gov", and prompts the recipient to complete form W-8BEN, which is a tax withholding form. Sure, sounds legit at first, but scroll to the 2nd page (page 1 of the fax) which has a W-8BEN "Substitute Form" that asks for personal info including your bank account number, SSN, and a copy of your passport among other things.

Then it asks the person to fax the form back to +1-206-888-1766 within one week to get a ficticious w-9095. Please inform your readers that this is a scam! I (nor my boss) don't know how this person got the fax numbers, and one of my friends recieved this even though she's from England so perhaps they are trying random numbers.

If you receive one of these faxes, report it to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration at ustreas.gov/tigta.

“But when presented with the evidence that the financial crisis about to hit the United States would affect every single American up and down the economic food chain, this president decided that it was important that the government take robust action. That’s why we worked with Congress to establish the rescue package.”

Ms. Perino said the “capital injections” into the banks would involve “an equity stake” for the federal government but would not amount to a takeover.

“Secretary Paulson is looking at all the different tools to figure out which ones should be used at what time and how robustly and how much money to put into each,” Ms. Perino said, referring to Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.

The plan allows the government to take an ownership stake in banks — even healthy ones. In exchange, the banks would get an injection of cash that (in theory) would strengthen their balance sheets and convince them to start lending again.

The Times also says that the recent coordinated global rate cut hasn't seemed to help much:

Never before has the Fed issued an announcement on interest rates jointly with another central bank, let alone five other central banks, including the People’s Bank of China.

Yet the world’s markets hardly seemed comforted. Credit markets on Wednesday remained almost as stalled as the day before. Stock prices, which had plunged in Europe and Asia before the announcement, continued to plummet afterward. And stock prices in the United States went on a roller-coaster ride, at the end of which the Dow Jones industrial average was down 189 points, or 2 percent.

Even serious free-market type Republicans are starting to warm to the "cash injection" idea:

“The problem is the uncertainty that people have about doing business with banks, and banks have about doing business with each other,” said William Poole, a staunchly free-market Republican who stepped down as president of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis on Aug. 31. “We need to eliminate that uncertainty as fast as we can, and one way to do that is by injecting capital directly into banks. I think it could be done very quickly.”

Administration Is Considering Cash Injections Into Banks
(Photo: Getty)

The article also points out that more people are investing in gold, which at least makes sense. But may we suggest you consider moving your cash over to a credit union before you glue it behind the wallpaper in your bedroom? Just make sure you ask the credit union manager about their Texas ratio first, so you don't inadvertently put your savings at a greater risk.

"Savers Banking on Shoeboxes" [New York Post]
(Photo: Brian Branch Price | New York Post)

The problem with a permanent stop payment is that it places the responsibility on the bank to watch out for that specific check forever, or until their bank policies determine the check has expired. No, we don't think it should cost a consumer over $5 a month to ask the bank to catch the check, but is anyone really surprised that the fee would be set at a level that generates a profit?

Unfortunately—and this is what concerned Jennifer too—experienced scammers may also be aware of the six month window. Attorney Mary Beth Guard tells Bankrate:

"Say you wrote a check for a vacation scam. The scammers know you'll put a stop-payment on it, but they also know that unless there's a special agreement with your bank the order will be valid for only six months. They may wait until after six months to cash the check. If your checkbook is stolen it may be best to close the account and open a new one."

Which brings us to your other option. Jennifer says that she in fact "advised [my] fiance to close the account." We agree, but not because his current bank is behaving any worse than other banks. Depending on the amount of the check and your bank's check expiration policies, it may actually be a more cost effective solution.

Before you place a stop payment:

1. Determine the details of your bank's check expiration policy (or if it even has one);
2. Find out the stop payment fee;
3. Estimate the relative cost (in overall trouble as well as fees) of relocating your checking account to another bank, or in switching your account to a new number at the same bank.

Once you can figure out how many six month renewals it will take to block the check until it expires, you'll know the true cost of blocking that check, and you can determine whether getting a new account will be the cheaper choice.

You should also know that an oral stop payment order only lasts 14 days—you'll need to go into the bank and place a written order for the 6 month policy to kick in.

"Stopping a check payment is expensive" [Bankrate.com]
(Photo: Getty)

``There is a point at which the FDIC will take Wachovia over if they are concerned about the stability of the bank,'' said Christopher Whalen, managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, an independent research firm in Torrance, California. ``But as long as Citi and Wells will extend support to Wachovia, they have time.''

To end a legal skirmish, Citigroup may agree to take Wachovia's branches in the northeast and mid-Atlantic regions, while Wells Fargo would get the Southeast and California branches, as well as Wachovia's asset-management and brokerage units, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing people familiar with the situation.

Bank officials and FDIC spokesman David Barr declined to comment. Cable network CNBC reported that Citigroup was bidding for all of Wachovia. Citigroup spokeswoman Shannon Bell didn't immediately return a call seeking comment.

A ruling over the weekend that said Citibank had the exclusive right to negotiate a takeover with Wachovia until Oct. 10 was overturned yesterday.

Wachovia is in trouble after acquiring a lender that was heavily invested in "pay-option" mortgages, a type of risky loan often given to people with good credit, but who are not required to provide documentation of their finances. "Pay-option" loans can actually grow in size because borrowers are allowed to pay less than the accruing interest.

Citigroup, Wells Fight May End by Splitting Wachovia (Update4)[Bloomberg]
(Photo: So Cal Metro )

UPDATE: Now the block has been blocked! Madness continues apace.

Citibank previously teamed up with the FDIC to pick off Wachovia's banking operation for $2.2 billion. Four days after the deal was announced, Wells Fargo loaded up the stagecoach, buying Wachovia as a whole for $15 billion. The FDIC shrugged its shoulders, glad not to have pay $42 billion to secure against losses, and let Wells Fargo proceed with the takeover.

Citigroup raised the stakes in the merger battle on Saturday afternoon, asking Justice Charles E. Ramos of New York State Supreme Court to issue an emergency order blocking the deal between Wachovia and Wells Fargo.

Representatives from the banks met at Justice Ramos’s home in Cornwall, Conn., late Saturday afternoon for more than three hours of oral arguments, according to people briefed on the situation.

In the unusual weekend session, Citigroup presented Justice Ramos with a 16-page complaint naming both Wells Fargo and Wachovia, and their boards, as defendants. But it has not yet filed the suit formally because the courts were closed.

Late Saturday, after several hours of intense legal jockeying, Justice Ramos issued an injunction effectively blocking the Wells Fargo deal, pending a hearing scheduled for Friday.

Wachovia hasn't seen the judge's order yet, but that didn't stop them from debasing Citibank's lawsuit as nothing more than a "pointless legal maneuver."

Wachovia customers can sit back and feel loved. Your accounts are safe, and for the moment, your banking experience will remain the same as it ever was.

Citigroup Says Judge Suspends Wachovia Deal [The New York Times]
Citi: Wells Fargo blocked from buying Wachovia [AP]
PREVIOUSLY: Giddyup! Wells Fargo Rides In And Steals Wachovia From Citibank!
(Photo: So Cal Metro)

Consumer Reports posted a list of 7 common online security mistakes that you might be making — and assuming you were protected was #1. Now, we know our readers aren't making these mistakes because they are so responsible and awesome, but maybe you have a family member who keeps sending money to Nigeria and wondering why Bank of America keeps emailing when they don't have an account. Maybe you could send this their way?

7. Shopping online like you do in stores. Avoid using a debit card and always look for the "https" in the website's address. You can get a virtual account number from your credit-card company. It’s good for only one purchase from a specific vendor.

6. Clicking on a pop-up that tells you your PC is secure. CR's survey showed "that 13 percent of respondents who saw such a pop-up tried to close it but launched it instead; 3 percent clicked on a pop-up and got a malware infection." Block pop-ups and/or be very careful to click the X, not the ad.

5. Thinking your Mac protects you from everything. Mac users fall prey to phishing scams at about the same rate as Windows users, says CR.

4. Downloading Free Software. "Fish-tank screen savers and smiley faces" are the enemy of everything good in the world. Download software from reputable sites (Download.com), and check out our sister site Lifehacker to see if they have any recommendations.

3. Using one password for everything. Dumb! Here's some advice for creating and managing good passwords.

2. Accessing your account through email links. Don't do this. Don't. Please stop. Stop! CR says: No matter how official an e-mail message looks, trying to access a financial account by clicking on embedded Web links is risky. If the e-mail message is fraudulent, a cybercriminal could use the account number and password you enter to steal your identity or empty your bank account.

1. Assuming your security software is working. CR says: "Renew the subscription when the software prompts you. Make sure your security software is active when you’re online and that it has been updated within the past week or so."

Read the full article here.

7 online blunders
[Consumer Reports]
(Photo: Getty)

The announcement came just four days after Citigroup had agreed to buy Wachovia’s banking operations of Wachovia for $2.2 billion of about $1 a share. But Wachovia, which is based in Charlotte, N.C., has now rejected that deal in favor of one where the entire company would be acquired. How Citigroup will respond to the news remained a question Friday morning.

In a statement, Wells Fargo, which is based in San Francisco, said that the deal required no assistance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

Under the old deal, the FDIC agreed to guarantee losses above $42 billion in exchange for stock and warrants worth about $12 billion, says the NYT.

As far as the mortgage meltdown goes, Wells Fargo didn't take the risks that many other banks did, and are therefore in a good position to acquire Wachovia. It also did not have a big investment bank, so was spared the recent investment banking bloodbath.

Wells Fargo in a Deal to Buy All of Wachovia [NYT]
(Photo: So Cal Metro )

The Reporter gives the following example of a family that is unable to refinance their high-cost loans (they have two):

The Brighton Park family has a documented income of $1,400 each month and pays $1,800 monthly on their $225,000 house.

Their situation, like so many others in their shoes, is hopeless, said Jeanne Sherman, the coalition’s homeownership coordinator. Each week, Sherman gets 55 calls from people who want to refinance because they are on the verge of foreclosure.

Here are the 10 metropolitan areas with the most high-cost loans:

10. St. Louis, MO

9. Miami, FL

8. Washington D.C.

7. New York, NY

6. Houston, TX

5. Atlanta, GA

4. Riverside/San Bernardino, CA

3. Phoenix, AZ

2. Los Angeles, CA

1. Chicago, IL

Refinance Blues [Chicago Reporter]
(Photo: stirwise )

Here's a quick summary of the article, which can be found here:

1. A much less leveraged economy — Cash will be the thing to have.

2. More modest rewards — Less risk-taking means slower growth, slower appreciation of property value, etc.

3. A feast for bottom fishers — If you've got patience and cash, there will be a feast for you amongst the wreckage.

4. Fewer financial firms — Big banks are swallowing the smaller ones.

5. More government oversight of financial markets. — They're gonna be watching.

6. But a revival of private financial firms — Kiplinger's doesn't think that investment banks are gone for good.

7. Simpler forms of securitizing debt — Nor do they think that the secondary mortgage market is gone for good. They say it will be back, but it won't be as 'exotic'

8. Greater scrutiny of executive compensation — Shareholders are annoyed. Very annoyed.

9. Higher taxes and/or a bigger federal deficit — Someone has to pay to run the bilge pump.

10. Higher long-term interest rates — You saw that one coming, didn't you?

Hey, it turns out that the new post-apocalyptic economy is pretty much just the old traditional economy — but with a debt hangover.

10 Things That Will Change [Kiplinger's]
(Photo: Joy of the Mundane )

We wonder how long this WaMu Live nonsense is going to last. Hello, Chase Bank Auditorium #334,234...

Dow Jones reports that those of you waiting to hear more about those option-ARM, "pick-a-payment" or "pay-option" loans are going to be happy:

Wachovia, like WaMu, has a troubled mortgage portfolio and faces its own uncertain future. Saddled with a mountain of troubled adjustable-rate mortgages inherited through its 2006 takeover of Golden West Financial Corp., Wachovia has seen its financial condition weaken and its stock price plunge. Former Chairman and Chief Executive G. Kennedy Thompson was ousted earlier this year.

Both WaMu and Wachovia have taken big lumps from writing a mountain of so-called option-ARM loans, or adjustable-rate mortgages that allow some homeowners to actually increase their loans' balance by paying less than the full monthly interest they owe.

Option-ARM loans have quickly become notorious for showing high rates of delinquencies and foreclosures. Many option-ARM borrowers have increased their loan balances even as the value of their homes fell, leading many to stop making payments or walk away from properties altogether as their homes were worth less than what they owed on the mortgages.

Wachovia recently held more than $120 billion in such loans, a central driver that has led the firm to raise capital and slash its dividend.

Not too long ago the CEO of JPMorgan Chase had this to say about the coming wave of Option-ARM loans: "The first wave of Americans to default on their home mortgages appears to be cresting, but a second, far larger one is quickly building." He added that the losses on these mortgages, which were given to people with good or excellent credit, will be “terrible.”

Wachovia shares sink, down 45% for week [Chicago Tribune]
(Photo: epicharmus )

Reuters says:

The House passed the bill, 312 to 112, but it was not expected to advance in the Senate as Congress tackles the Bush administration's $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan before adjourning as soon as Friday.

Credit-card issuers like Bank of America and Citigroup could still face restrictions from the Federal Reserve, which is expected to finalize similar rules by the end of this year.

The bill would prevent banks from retroactively increasing interest rates until the card holder is over 30 days late, and would require banks to mail statements 25 days before the due date.

House passes credit-card reform bill [Reuters]
(Photo: balmes )

The New York Times says:

But one after another, senators from both parties said that, while they were prepared to move fast, they were far from ready to give the administration everything it wanted in its proposed $700 billion plan to buy up and hopefully resell troubled mortgages.
...
Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and chairman of the Senate banking panel, called the Treasury proposal “stunning and unprecedented in its scope and lack of detail.”

Asserting that the plan would allow Mr. Paulson to act with “absolute impunity,” Senator Dodd said, “After reading this proposal, I can only conclude that it is not only our economy that is at risk, Mr. Secretary, but our Constitution, as well.”

Another expression of disgust came from Senator Jim Bunning, Republican of Kentucky, who said the plan would “take Wall Street’s pain and spread it to the taxpayers.”

“It’s financial socialism, and it’s un-American,” Mr. Bunning said.

Paulson responded that he was "angry" at Wall Street and that he needed the bailout not for the fat cats who bet badly and lost, but for you, the taxpayer.

“This is all about the taxpayers. That is all we are about,” said Paulson, who was formerly the CEO of Goldman Sachs for 7 years before becoming Secretary of the Treasury in 2006.

Finance Officials Face Wary Lawmakers [NYT]
(Photo:Andrew Councill for The New York Times)

IN THE rolling credit crisis, more than £46 billion of the bank's shareholder value has evaporated into thin air. The collapse has hit pension funds, wiped out the nest-eggs of many investors – and added to the misery of staff, many of whom had built up substantial holdings of HBOS shares.

The bank is going to be rescued by a merger with another UK bank, Lloyds TSB. [Scotsman & MarketWatch]

Hmm.

We wonder why.

The FDIC is responding to the renewed interest in their services with some PSAs featuring everyone's favorite personal finance guru and striped shirt aficionado, Suze Orman.

They've also launched a friendly-looking website that will help you, the supposedly insured, make sure your money is protected. You can check it out here.

Oh, and he's another topic that Google's New York users have found oddly compelling in the past month.

These types of accounts are generally FDIC insured:

Checking, savings, trust, certificates of deposit (CDs), IRA retirement accounts, and money market deposit accounts.

A money market deposit account earns interest at a rate set by the bank and usually limits the customer to a certain number of transactions within a stated time period. Do not confuse a money market mutual fund with an FDIC-insured money market deposit account, which earns interest in an amount determined by, and paid by, the financial institution where your funds are deposited.

These investments are not FDIC insured:

Mutual funds, annuities, life insurance policies, stocks and bonds.

What type of insurance covers my investments?

Your investments (mutual funds, stocks, etc.) are not insured against market risk — their value may go up or down depending on the market. You are, however, likely insured against the failure of your broker, or a bank's brokerage subsidiary, by the Securities Investors Protection Corporation. This institution will replace securities that you own that go missing in accounts held by its members up to $500,000, including up to $100,000 in cash, if a member brokerage or bank brokerage subsidiary fails.

If you'd like more information, check out the FDIC's website.

Insured or Not Insured? [FDIC]

The "What's Left" approach might be too vague for those of you who want details, details, details when it comes to your money. Instead of presenting you a dashboard of data, Rudder uses what our editor Ben called a "no-thought-required cash flow management" approach. Not that there's anything wrong with that, especially if you feel like you need to take control of your finances but don't know where to start.

Click here to see a sample Rudder email.

As Cnet puts it:

Rudder's name for this magic number is "what's left" and it figures out what you've got for discretionary spending based on when you're getting your next paycheck and what's in your various savings and checking accounts, compared to credit card payments and other bills that need paying off. The entire process is shown to users, something Roy hopes will educate as much as it does take the work out of doing the math yourself.

As far as security, Rudder asks for read-only access to your accounts through CashEdge; Rudder itself doesn't store any user names, passwords, or account numbers. It's free as in ad-supported—you can see an example of the sort of ads they serve in the sample email above.

Rudder.com
"Rudder steers personal finance to your in-box" [Cnet]

I received a letter from Countrywide today that says:

"We are writing to inform you that we recently became aware that a Countrywide employee (now former) may have sold unauthorized personal information about you to a third party...

Based on a joint investigation conducted by Countrywide and law enforcement authorities, it was determined that the customer information involved in this incident included your name, address, Social Security number, mortgage loan number, and various other loan and application information."

It goes on to say they will give you 2 years of Triple Advantage credit report monitoring for free and they include a website address and activation code to start the credit monitoring service.

Just great. Luckily the only thing Russian hackers could buy with my credit is a bottle of cheap vodka.

We don't understand why temporary free credit monitoring is always the go-to remedy every time a company "loses" your personal data. The security breach could have huge and long-term financial consequences for you, and the company that enabled that breach should take responsibility for it.

Every company that deals in sensitive data should have identity theft counselors on staff—people who will walk you through a formalized plan for changing account numbers where possible, getting new account numbers if necessary, and setting up a systemized way to monitor financial activity on a weekly or monthly basis. (And they should pay for any fees you're charged in the process.)

Just saying "sorry, here's some free online monitoring" is inadequate—it's like a doctor leaving a clamp inside you after surgery, then giving you coupons for free checkups for a couple of years.

(Thanks to Frisco!)
(Photo: Getty)

From ABCNews:

Eble owes $334,000 on his first house, which is now worth only $219,000 and is still dropping in value. He has an adjustable rate mortgage that has doubled to more than $4,000 a month, more than Eble can afford to pay.

So before the bank forecloses on his first house he is taking advantage of falling real estate prices to buy a new home for $285,000, with a fixed rate mortgage he can afford. Once inside the new home, he can either sell the first property for a huge loss to the bank or walk away completely and let it slip into foreclosure.

This exit strategy only helps homeowners who can afford the down payment on the second home as well as carry both mortgages until they are in their new home.

Like Jim Eble, homeowner Kim Hinske just bought a new home — for $280,000 — as a way to get out of an expensive mortgage.

"Yes, it's a scary thing, but I know that my family's taken care of 'cause we have another house, a bigger house and a mortgage that's less," Hinske said.

ABCNews says that the practice is prompting lenders to improse more strict guidelines for approving a second mortgage. A spokesperson from RealtyTrac, the firm that compiles foreclosure statistics, says that the trend is caused by desperation on the part of both borrowers and lenders.

"Desperate people do desperate things and again, we're at a point now where the relationships between the borrowers and lenders really seem to have devolved into a survival of the fittest mode," said Rich Sharga, a spokesman for RealtyTrac, an online marketplace for homes in foreclosure.

In Foreclosure? Buy a Second Home [ABCNews]
(Photo: stirwise )

Nate says:

Approx. 4 Months ago I found my dream home, however, my dream home is more than likely far less extravagant than what most people might consider their dream home, as I'm a recent college graduate and as of 2 months ago, a newlywed. That being said I don't have much money, but I managed to find a decent older 2 story home that I loved. More importantly my at the time wife-to-be loved it as well. Needless to say we purchased the home as soon as we could.

We were approved in no time to purchase our $60,000 home. We of course chose Chase as our mortgage lender because my wife had previously done all her banking through them and they seemed to have their act together, boy was I ever wrong. We did everything cautiously. We hired a top notch inspector to come out and check everything out, despite the home being 90+ years old everything was in tip top shape, save for a few windows here and there. No problem.

This is where things get interesting. Because of a previous home we had looked at that had fallen in a flood plane we were certain to write in on our offer that if the home was found to be in a flood plane we withdrew our offer. However, we were happy to find that the house was in the clear. We closed on the home May 29th.

One fine day whilst sitting at my dinner table eating lunch with a friend of mine and my soon-to-be wife (at the time), my soon-to-be wife began screaming in the other room (where our mail came in). I ran in to see what the problem was, and there in her hands she held a note from Chase stating that they were "Sad to inform (us) that your home NOW lies in a flood plane and requires flood insurance." (my own emphasis added) We were shocked and devastated. However, life goes on right?

I went to my insurance agent a few days later to get things taken care of (mere weeks before my wedding). When I went in to talk to him we discovered that chase was demanding we carry $185,000 worth of flood insurance. I was blown away... There was no way i could afford that sort of coverage which came out to be around 200 a month. I immediately began investigating. Within a few days of investigating I discovered that there had been no changes to the FEMA flood maps in my area since 2002, which means there was no way my house had JUST been put in a flood plane, it had been in one all along but Chase failed to tell me so before I closed on the home. I decided to look into how they could make such a mistake, turns out they were using a flood map from 1990 to determine if I was in a flood plane or not... a map that was over 18 years old. How could they do such a thing? I was Irate.

After some talking with some "higher ups" at Chase I agreed I would pay flood insurance on the home at $60,000 worth of coverage which ran me around 45 a month. I only agreed to this because they told me nothing else could be done.

Fast forward 2 months-

I'm now happily married, and I thought things were going great until...

I received yet another letter from Chase stating that we failed to purchase an appropriate ammount of flood insurance and that we needed $185,000 worth of coverage....

I'm at my wits end, I cant afford that much insurance and I never would have purchased the home had i known it was in a flood plane... Its neither my wife or I's fault that our home is in a flood plane, so how can Chase be doing this to us? Adding that much extra a month to our bills will seriously put us in a financial strain. We both are recent college graduates and both have student loans to repay, hence why we went after such a cheap home. Please help us get this out there and in the public eye.

We took a look at what the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the agency that regulates national banks, like Chase) had to say about flood insurance, and we have good news and bad news.

The good news is that you're only required by law to have as much flood insurance as you have outstanding principal on your mortgage:

At a minimum, the insurance coverage must equal the outstanding principal balance of the loan. Coverage must be obtained and maintained throughout the term of the loan.

The bad news is that if your house really is in the flood plain, there's not a lot you can do about it. The OCC recommends that you contact FEMA's Flood Map Assistance Center if you dispute the maps your bank is using.

National banks determine if flood insurance is applicable based on a review of the appropriate flood maps. If you believe that the flood map used by your bank incorrectly identified your property as being in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA), Federal law allows the lender and borrower to jointly apply to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to request a review of the decision.

Visit FEMA's Flood Map Assistance Center or call them at 1-877-336-2627.

As far as dealing with Chase's general incompetance, we're afraid this might be a job for a consumer lawyer.

Answers About Flood Insurance [OCC]
(Photo: mistaken poet )

Thanks to a collapsing housing market and a weak economy, a growing number of banks are struggling to stay afloat, with not enough cash on hand to cover losses from bad loans.

At the beginning of the year, 90 banks were on the FDIC watch list. There are now 117, FDIC chairwoman Sheila C. Bair announced at a news conference this afternoon. That is the highest number in five years, but some analysts expect the list to grow even more in coming months.

"I think there's going to be a steady drip, drip, drip of bad news," said Sean Ryan, a banking analyst with Sterne Agee. "We've only seen the very tip of the iceberg in terms of bank failures."

...
"I fully expect the FDIC insurance fund to be depleted," Ryan added. "The FDIC is going to be one of what is going to be an increasing string of government bailouts."

So should you worry?

Nah, says one expert:

Ultimately though, Ryan said depositors with less than $100,000 in the bank have nothing to worry about.

"The reality is anybody who is within that threshold shouldn't lose any sleep at night," he said. "For all the kind of unjustifiable bailouts being done on Wall Street there's no chance that the government is going to let John Q. Public's money disappear."

Still, the numbers are sobering. The FDIC currently has about $50.2 billion in its fund — 20% of which will be depleted by the recent IndyMac failure. How many more IndyMacs do we have to look forward too? Who knows.

FDIC Warns of More Bank Troubles [ABCNews]

From the P-I:

They allege in the complaint that the lender misrepresented the terms of ARMs (adjustable-rate mortgages), marketed risky complex loans by emphasizing low teaser rates while misrepresenting later steep monthly payments and routinely encouraged borrowers to refinance only months after an affiliated broker sold them a loan.

The plaintiffs in this case include June Taylor, a Renton resident, who refinanced a home loan with Countrywide in 2006. She didn't receive a good faith estimate or a truth-in-lending statement before she closed on the loan — both required by law, according to the complaint. In addition, her truth-in-lending statement listed her monthly payments, but failed to note that it represented only the minimum payment that Countrywide was willing to accept rather than the actual amount she owed. Thus, she ended up with a loan that actually grew over time, the suit alleges.

Oh June, who doesn't want a mortgage that grows over time? You're just not looking at the bright side of things. Like... um... never mind. Nobody wants a growing mortgage. Good luck with your lawsuit.

Homeowners sue Countrywide [P-I]
(Photo: So Cal Metro )

The bank initially downplayed the issue, calling it an “infrastructure problem” or a “systems issue involving disks in our mainframe computer” that affected “certain applications.” In reality, it was much worse.

“It’s very serious to have your core system go down,” said Bart Narter, senior vice president of the banking group at technology research firm Celent. “It is a major technical failure.”

A bank’s core system is the back-office computer that keeps track of checking and other account balances and transactions. Many other bank systems, such as online banking and ATMs, rely on the information in that system. Other computer systems are unrelated.

“The core system is the system of record, the absolute arbiter of how much money you have and how much money you deposited today,” Narter said.

Most U. S. banks do not operate in “real time,” but rather keep computerized notes or “memos” of all transactions that occur during a given day, Narter said. At night, during a specified window when the bank shuts down, officials run the core program to update the accounts using “batches” of those transaction records. They then bring the system back up in the morning.

If the hard drive fails, the bank has to reboot and restore the system, and then rerun the overnight batches to catch up. That takes time at a big bank.

“This is a bank’s worst nightmare, to have the core banking system goes down,” he said. “That means any channel you go to, they’re running blind.”

The bank is keeping select upstate branches open late so Catholic Health System employees can come in and trade their pay stubs for cash. As for affected HSBCDirect customers, the bank promises to "return full–system functionality to you as soon as possible."

HSBC’s issues mostly repaired, but cause still sought [The Buffalo News]
HSBC struggles with customer transactions after crash of computer system [The Buffalo News]
(Photo: Getty)