This New York Times business blog mostly devotes itself today to assessing, with a skeptical eye, various post-bailout deals being finagled by our auto companies and such. But I was struck by this promise at the end of the column and by the follow up comment from a reader:
Countrywide
On Wednesday, I’ll write about Greenwich Financial Services’ lawsuit against Countrywide Financial seeking to forestall the modification of mortgage loans under 374 Countrywide mortgage trusts.
If Greenwich succeeds it will put a real monkey wrench in loan modification programs. –Steven M. Davidoff
December 2nd,
2008
3:18 pmThere is absolutely no excuse for the Times not putting the story of the lawsuit by Greenwich Financial Services against Countrywide on the front page.
This cracks open the entire securitization game. It is incendiary, to say the least that, because of the practice of bundling mortgages then slicing anddicing tranches of risk off those bundles, wealthy hedge fund investors are preventing mortgage relief.
If the majority of the general public understood this, heads would roll. Why is the Times burying this?
I’m pretty sure that the head of Greenwich Financial Services is the same guy who was (unjustifiably) ripped by some posturing Congressman a few weeks back for insisting that our Constitution prohibits the government from interfering with contracts between private parties (it does). But I’ll go look into it now.
UPDATE: The story’s here. It’s pretty much what I said – Countrywide, bowing to states Attorney Generals and Congress, has agreed to modify some 400,000 mortgages that are in default or threaten to go into default. GFS owns some of those mortgages or the income streams from them and says Countrywide can’t do what it wants to do. I’m with GFS but, as one lawyer quoted in the article says, “it should be interesting”. Indeed.
Professor,