In 2000, Congress revisited the subprime issue. Once again, the concern was more info on predatory financing methods than systemic danger. But, as with 1998, there have been warnings about bigger dilemmas.

In 2000, Congress revisited the subprime issue. Once again, the concern was more info on predatory financing methods than systemic danger. But, as with 1998, there have been warnings about bigger dilemmas.

Ellen Seidman, manager associated with the workplace of Thrift Supervision, testified that predatory financing had been a concern of severe concern into the OTS to some extent given that it raised safety that is major soundness issues for banking institutions. Seidman, talking ahead of the home Banking and Financial Services Committee in might 2000, stated investors required more training about mortgage-backed securities, because “predatory loans aren’t good company, not merely simply because they are unethical, but since they could harm reputations and harmed stock prices. ”

Cathy Lesser Mansfield, a legislation teacher at Drake University, offered your house committee with certain and alarming information on the attention prices and foreclosure prices of subprime loans nationwide. “Probably the scariest information for me, ” Mansfield testified, “was an individual pool property property property property foreclosure rate. ” Mansfield had looked over the foreclosure rate for one pool of loans that were bundled and in love with Wall Street. Читать далее «In 2000, Congress revisited the subprime issue. Once again, the concern was more info on predatory financing methods than systemic danger. But, as with 1998, there have been warnings about bigger dilemmas.»