The massive legal action initiated by the Federal Housing Finance Agency last year on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac against many of the nation’s biggest lenders is getting ready to face its first legal challenge, and the federal judge’s ruling will determine the scope and direction of the cases, experts say. The FHFA lawsuits seek tens of billions of dollars in damages for losses incurred by Fannie and Freddie on purchases of approximately $200 billion in residential mortgage-backed securities.

Observers in MBS and legal circles are closely watching how a federal judge will rule on a pending motion by UBS Americas to dismiss the mortgage securities lawsuit brought last summer by the Federal Housing Finance Agency on statute of limitations grounds and the ruling’s potential impact on other pending FHFA MBS litigation. The FHFA sued UBS in July and then filed a blizzard of 17 lawsuits against some of the industry’s biggest institutions, including Bank of America, Credit Suisse, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and others, seeking tens of billions of dollars in damages incurred by Fannie Mae and Freddie...

MBS investors were not at the negotiating table for the multistate servicing settlement, yet they will feel the reverberations of the principal reductions and loan modifications the banks have promised state attorneys general and federal agencies. The $25 billion agreement reached last week among 49 states, the federal government and five major servicers – Bank of America, Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Ally Financial – allocates $10 billion toward principal reductions for underwater borrowers at risk of default. The banks will cough up another $7 billion for other forms of borrower...

Reaction among non-agency participants regarding the settlement by five large bank servicers announced last week has been mixed. Investors are divided on what impact principal forgiveness loan modifications will have on non-agency mortgage-backed securities – largely because the settlement terms have not been settled yet. “Once the bank modifies their own portfolio loans, where it makes sense to reduce principal, there is a huge incentive to do the rest of the modifications using investor money,” warned Amherst Securities Group. “This stems from the fact that the servicers are able to use investor funds to satisfy their own claims. And the conflicts of interest are exacerbated because of the second liens ...

With prices relatively low, vintage non-agency mortgage-backed securities have been a hot item in recent weeks. Some analysts suggest that the buying boom has already peaked and the collateral is overpriced again, though a significant amount of non-agency MBS is still available for sale. “The non-agency market has rebounded in 2012 after a poor second half of 2011,” according to analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. The Federal Reserve’s two sales in as many months of Maiden Lane assets are as good an indicator as any that investor demand for non-agency MBS is strong ...

Non-agency market participants and stock investors appear to be optimistic about the prospects for real estate investment trusts. REITs are positioned to absorb a portion of the agency share of mortgage origination activity, and investor interest in REIT stocks has increased recently. “REITs should definitely take a big part of the agency footprint,” said Michael Commaroto, president and CEO of Apollo Residential Mortgage, a hybrid REIT. Such REITs invest in both agency MBS and non-agency MBS, with agency MBS generally accounting for most of the investing portfolio ...

American Home Mortgage Servicing and Carrington Capital Management agreed last week to settle a lawsuit regarding alleged improper servicing by American Home on $128.1 million in non-agency mortgage-backed securities owned by Carrington. The lawsuit was filed in 2009 by Carrington, which claimed American Home had conducted “fire sales” of delinquent properties in the securities in an effort to repay debt. At the time, American Home denied the charges. The terms of the settlement were not released. [Includes two briefs]

Excluding streamlined FHA refinancing from the “Compare Ratio” loan review process to facilitate refinancing of underwater non-agency mortgages, as proposed by the Obama administration, would make sense. At the margin, however, the proposal would increase Ginnie Mae prepayment speeds on higher-coupon borrowers, analysts cautioned. The proposal is part of a broader administration plan for housing recovery, which calls on Congress to provide non-agency borrowers with access to low-cost refinancing through FHA, and fully streamlined refinancing for borrowers with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loans. Underwater borrowers who opt for streamlined refinancing in either agency or non-agency programs would have ... [one data chart]

Ginnie Mae is requesting additional funding in FY 2013 to hire more professionals to help manage the more than $1.2 trillion in outstanding guaranteed mortgage securities it holds and the increasing inherent risks associated with the MBS. Under its budget proposal, the agency is seeking an appropriation of $21 million for staff salaries and expenses in 2013, up from $19.5 million in 2012 and $11.07 million in 2011. The requested staffing increase would ensure improvement in managing areas where Ginnie Mae has the greatest risk exposure, including counterparty risk and defaulted portfolio management, according to the agency. Over the past few years, Ginnie Mae’s market share rose ...

Congress should consider changing the mandate of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to address a “conflict of interest” that inhibits the Finance Agency’s supervision of the GSEs, a housing economist told senators this week.Testifying before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, Columbia School of Business Professor Christopher Mayer said a significant problem with the ongoing operation of the GSEs has been the failure to adequately address operational conflicts.“The evidence suggests that the conflict of interest between the businesses of providing mortgage guarantees and managing a large retained portfolio of mortgages and [mortgage-backed securities] has led to obstacles to normal credit conditions,” said Mayer.