(function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-NHW25TH'); window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} gtag('js', new Date()); gtag('config', 'G-BPZENKSMDF');

Archive | November, 2010

Insurable on parents’ health care policies until age 26? – Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – Check with your insurance agent!

Harvard Law Professor and consumer advocate Elizabeth Warren has estimated that some 40%+ of family bankruptcies have a nexus with medical losses.

If you have young adult children struggling to make their way in the world, there may be a break for you and them.

The new health laws may enable to you add children to your policies up until they reach 26 years of age. Do not assume that such children are now "automatically" added – there is likely some paperwork that you will need to complete in order to ensure that your older children are on the policy. The older children may be eligible to be added immediately, but there may be a premium increase, so research the situation and be prepared.

This would end the policy of many insurers of booting children off of the policy once they reach 23 years of age.

Again, check with your insurance agent – the coverage may not be self-executing nor automatic – you probably have to affirmatively move in writing to extend or re-establish coverage for such adult children who have previously aged-out of coverage, but remain under age 26.

For more information, see the September 23, 2010, NY Times article by Jacob S. Hacker and Carl DeTorres, Jacob S. Hacker is a professor of political science at Yale University. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/09/23/opinion/20100923_opart.html?scp=1&sq=The%20Health%20of%20Reform%20Jacob%20S.%20Hacker&st=cse

See Also Kevin Sack’s NY Times Article of the same September 23, 2010: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/health/policy/23careintro.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=For%20Many%20Families,%20Health%20CAre%20Relief%20Begins%20Today&st=cse

See Also Kevin Sack’s further articles – covers three "real life" stories about (1) the chronically ill, (2) lifetime healthcare caps and (3) insuring adult children to age 26 on parents’ policies: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/health_insurance_and_managed_care/health_care_reform/index.html?scp=2&sq=For%20Many%20Families,%20Health%20CAre%20Relief%20Begins%20Today&st=cse

Underemployment rate 18.1% – much more telling than “official unemployment” Washington statistic of 9.1%

Nearly one in five Washington workers are unemployed. Their plight is like that of Seattle administrative assistant Lorilee Lines, who applied for more than 200 jobs before landing a meagre 30 hour per week job. This statistic was provided by Sanjay Bhatt of the Seattle Times, November 18, 2009, for the 12 months ending September 2010, in a page one article.

The national unemployment stood at 9.6% and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics placed the "underemployed" statistic at 16.8%, but this is regarded as a very restrictive interpretation of underemployed.

Underemployment rates capture part timers, but they still leave out those working in full time jobs for which they are overqualified.

Through approximately October 2010, Washington has seen a net gain of only about 6,000 jobs. Overall, about 10,200 jobs were added in the private sector, but these were offset by a loss of some 4,200 government and public sector jobs.

Contrary to national trends, jobs continue to contract in Washington. Washington had 8,500 fewer jobs in October 2010 than it had in October 2009 – a decline of 0.3%. By contrast, there was a 0.6% increase in jobs nationwide over the same period. As reported in the Seattle Times, November 18, 2010.

JPMorgan owned Mortgage Electronic Registrations System – Do you get a free house because the mortgage securitization industry didn’t want to pay county fees?

The October 19, 2010, NY Times Article of Floyd Norris ("HIgh & Low Finance) seeks to explain the controversy swirling around Mortgage Electronic Registrations System, the private company designed to "hold" your mortgage.

According to the University of Utah’s Christopher L. Peterson and Adam Levitin of Georgetown University, one cannot park a mortgage with MERS, but then transfer the note from investor to investor. United States District Court Judge Garr M. King of Oregon, ruled recently that the use of MERS had invalidated the mortgage, and that Bank of America could not foreclose. Mr. Peterson recites an 1879 Supreme Court decision reciting that "the assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity."

Other explanations I have heard is that the mortgage investors did not want to pay a re-recording fee to the counties where the mortgages were based every time the mortgage loan obligation changed hands, so they sought to "park" the mortgages with MERS. This could prove to be penny wise and dollar foolish if Professors Peterson and Levitin are correct.

Interesting.

Most judges seem to be holding "No free houses in my Court."

We will see how this plays out.

If you are interested, here is the link to the October 19, 2010 NY Times article of Mr. Norris:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/19/business/19norris.html?scp=1&sq=some%20sand%20in%20the%20gears%20of%20securitizing&st=cse

Homeless shelters see 20% increases in need – 550,000 receive aid from Federal Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program

[categories: Washington bankruptcy attorney]

The NY Times’ Michael Luo reported upon the extreme toll the recession has taken upon young families. See NY Times "National" Section, Pages 19 & 28, September 12, 2010.

The Federal Government knows of the problem as well. The Feds have allocated $1.5 billion to be made available to homeless prevention causes over the ensuing three years as part of the stimulus package, known as the Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program.

This article is striking and heartbreaking. It follows the story of Mr. and Ms. Griffith (aged 40 and 26) and their two children aged 3 and 16 months. Mr. Griffith was a hard working gentleman working two jobs. His primary $25/hour job as a waiter at a Florida Applebee’s restaurant ended when the restaurant closed. The family could not find work and returned to Providence, Rhode Island after a three day bus ride from Florida.

I was shocked at the story; living in a homeless shelter with an infant and a toddler is no freeloader’s picnic; I don’t know that I personally could survive the Griffith’s daily life. There are many, many rules at the shelter, and after three infractions of the rules the entire family is evicted – no exceptions.

The rules are easy to violate, and include rules against being found in your living quarters between 10:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. There is a rule against congregating around outside seating benches. If you are caught watching news programming on the TV in the common area, it is also an infraction.

The Crossroads shelter in Providence, Rhode Island (the shelter where the Griffiths reside) has seen a 20% increase in demand and occupancy for June, July and August 2010, over the same time period in 2009. Similarly, an Ohio Y.W.C.A. shelter in Columbus, Ohio, has seen similar increases in occupancy.

Homeless families jumped from 131,000 to 170,000 between 2007 and 2009.

6% Drop In Mortgage Delinquencies – only 13.52% of Households now Behind (but 1 out of 7 Remain Delinquent!)

[categories: Washington bankruptcy attorney]

The NY Time’s David Streitfeld reported on Friday, November 19, 2010, that mortgage delinquencies dipped from 14.42% of households to 13.52% of households. This works out to about a 6.0% reduction in mortgage delinquencies from Q2 2010 to Q3 2010, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/19/business/19delinquent.html?

Likewise, seriously delinquent mortgages (in excess of 90-days) fell from 9.11% of mortgages to 8.7% of mortgages, a drop of some 4.5% overall.

Federal Reserve Bank governor Elizabeth A. Duke testified before Congress this week – the Federal Reserve expects 2.25 million foreclosure filings for each of 2010 and 2011. 2 million foreclosures are expected for 2012.

David Streitfeld reported: "…foreclosures are no longer being caused by bad [subprime] loans, which was the case for much of the recession. Now most foreclosures occur with prime loans, which are harder for banks to modify than subprime [loans]. Prime fixed-rate loans, the safest kind of loans, represented 36 percent of all new foreclosures in the third quarter, up from 30 percent in the third quarter of 2009. Meanwhile, the percentage of new foreclosures generated by the worst kind of loans, adjustedable subprime, fell sharply.

CHECK THIS OUT – MODIFICATIONS LARGELY A SHAM! – D. Streitfeld reported: "…only 24,000 hoseholds had gotten permanent new loans during October. It was the lowest number since the government’s Making Home Affordable Program was getting started last year. [ ] ..483,000 homeowners ahve gotten permanent new loans through the program; 719,000 enrolled in a trial but were either foreclosed or got a modification without government oversight.

I personall feel that banks seem to seek avoidance of the guidelines of the HAMP program, which recite a modification must meet certain criteria – so the banks seem to make up their own modification programs so as to avoid the strictures of the HAMP program. Accordingly, "Bank of America said that it modified 25,000 loans in October, up from 16,500 in September. Relatiely few were done through the government program." recites the NY Times’ David Streitfeld, in his 11/19 article.

D. Streitfeld quotes Michael Fratantoni of the Mortgage Bankers’ Association: The post-modification re-default rate of modified loans can be as high as 50% after the first year, another reason foreclosures are unlikely to decline significantly.