New Jersey bankruptcy Article
Article printed in
the New York Post, April 11, 2004
Blue Skies and Green Yards, All Lost
to Red Ink
By MICHAEL MOSS and ANDREW JACOBS (
Series ) 6326 words
STROUDSBURG, Pa. -- Ethel Davis first glimpsed her luminous future
in 1997 when she saw a television ad that offered a vision of a
green, secure world that had seemed hopelessly out of reach.
''Why Rent?'' asked the ad for a home
builder in the Pocono Mountains of Pennsylvania. ''Our goal is
homeownership for you and your family. Every American wants it;
every American deserves it.''
And so, with the ad's irresistible
kicker, ''The only thing you have to lose is your landlord,''
ringing in her ears, she did what thousands of her neighbors, many
of them middle-income blacks and Hispanics from New York City, did.
She took the interstate west, lured by the promise of fresh air,
good schools and green, gated communities they could never afford
closer to home.
It turned out there was more to lose
than a landlord. Six years later, after her new house proved far
beyond her means and the five-hour daily round trip to her job in
New York City sapped her endurance, her marriage has collapsed, the
bank is seizing her house and she is back in Brooklyn renting space
from a landlord who took pity on her.
''I worked so hard for so long, and I
have nothing to show for it,'' said Ms. Davis, a 45-year-old legal
secretary. ''I'm just devastated.''
Ms. Davis's migration west was part
of a national campaign that has made homeowners of millions of
middle- and lower-income Americans. But her tumble from ownership to
foreclosure was part of another mass movement.
In the last decade, lenders have
brought foreclosure proceedings against 5,700 homes in Monroe
County, Pa., or more than one in five of all mortgaged homes in this
rural county that takes in most of the Poconos.
Thousands more families here are
struggling to hang on. In some of the fastest-growing Pocono
townships, census data show, one in four minority families are using
half or more of their gross earnings to pay for their homes. They
are piling on credit card debt, forfeiting college savings and
plundering retirement funds just to meet their mortgage payments and
unexpectedly high expenses.
The story of the Pocono Mountains,
drawn from corporate and government documents, and interviews with
more than 100 homebuyers and dozens of finance industry employees
and policymakers, is one of miscalculation and greed, of
questionable business practices by builders and banks, of dismal
state regulation and a federal policy whose ambitions outstripped
its ability to be carried out.
President Bush is enthusiastically
promoting his role in raising the homeownership rate, particularly
among minorities. Indeed, encouraging homeownership is one of the
few issues the Clinton and Bush administrations pursued with equal
ardor.
But the national foreclosure rate has
tripled over the last three decades. Experts say mortgage fraud is
on the rise in the United States and is now evident in as much as 25
percent of the loans that falter. And what happened in the Poconos
is a disturbing glimpse of how a worthy goal -- helping more
middle-income Americans own their own homes -- can sometimes produce
disastrous results.
Last month, in a familiar scene here,
a former renter from Queens, Lewis Delgado, gave up a five-year
struggle to pay for his home in Tobyhanna by helping his three sons
get their belongings into storage before the sheriff arrived with
eviction papers.
''We're losing everything that we
worked for,'' he said, as he drove off to look for a new place to
live.
Some tried to avert the calamity
here. Finance industry insiders warned government officials and
institutions like Chase Manhattan and Freddie Mac that homebuyers
were being overcharged and buried in debt, according to records and
interviews. Still, the selling and lending rolled on.
Ethel Davis was good for federal
officials who boast of their success in promoting minority
ownership. She was good for the home builder and the banks, which
used mortgages like hers to reach a new market for consumer loans.
She was good until she collapsed, and
then she became an inconvenient casualty on the bleak side of the
housing boom.
Distant Yet Inviting
There was, to be sure, something
quite improbable from the start about having a home in the Poconos
and a job in New York.
It is, after all, 100 miles from
Manhattan to Tobyhanna, which means that with no traffic the drive
would be two hours; the average rush-hour trip more like three.
But, many working-class families
asked, what was the alternative? Westchester, where the median home
price is now $564,000? Nassau, where it is $479,000? Suffolk at
$357,000? Bergen County at $392,000?
The average Monroe County home, by
contrast, is going for $148,000, and unlike the pricey New York
suburbs, the Poconos seemed to be courting minorities from the city.
There was even the promise, often repeated, though a bit vague, that
a train was on the way to make the commuting that much more
sensible.
So the ads beckoning urban residents
to the distant exurbs hit a responsive note for thousands of
teachers and bus drivers, paralegals and postal workers, desperate
to have a home, a green yard, to call their own.
Gilbert Vazquez, a soft-spoken bear
of a man, was at work monitoring traffic reports when the Why Rent
ad flashed across his TV screen back in May 1995. He stifled the
urge to let out a whoop.
The company where he worked, Handicab,
which transported people with physical handicaps, was prospering and
so was he in more ways than a growing paycheck: his wife, Madeline,
was pregnant.
They could not stay in East Harlem.
He felt lucky to still be alive. Over the years he had been grazed
by a bullet, tossed into the air by a speeding gypsy cab and chased
by a gang with its pistols blazing. ''Out of a group of 40
friends,'' Mr. Vazquez said, ''I'm one of four who is either not
dead or in jail.''
But house shopping proved harder than
he had imagined. Prices were climbing faster than their income,
which had just edged past $50,000. Their hunt for a home in Queens,
where the dregs cost more than $200,000, left him thinking ''there
was no way; we can't do it.''
So when he saw the ad for the Poconos
he phoned Madeline, and they marveled at what seemed like a stunning
turn of fate.
''To tell you the truth, I didn't
think we were ready for a house,'' Mr. Vazquez recalled. ''But I
said, 'Let's go check it out and see what kind of program this
is.'''
In the Bronx, Joane Walton had
likewise all but lost hope of getting away when she saw the Why Rent
ads five years later. Their home was a roomy two-bedroom apartment
near Yankee Stadium. But it sat atop a sheet metal workshop. Used
car lots, welding shops and junkyards lined their street.
Her youngest son had asthma, and she
kept all three children -- another boy and a girl -- inside their
apartment for fear of crime. She had a good job as a paralegal, and
her husband, Edgar Rodriguez, was a school custodian. But they did
have a problem: she still had debt from her college days, which
tarnished her credit profile.
To her, the Why Rent commercial
resonated not just with beautiful houses. The builder offered a
counseling service and savings plan that would let them clear off
her debt and build a down payment.
''I wanted to be the first in my
family to actually own a home,'' Ms. Walton said. ''I wanted to
break the cycle, to show my kids that if you work hard, there's
nothing you can't do.''
Ms. Davis had perhaps the most to
lose when she first saw the commercial.
She had gone through bankruptcy just
three years earlier and was still recovering from the financial
ordeal. Her downtown Brooklyn apartment had an enviable rent of
$680, part of the state's Mitchell-Lama housing program, for which
the waiting list is measured in years.
Still, she and her husband, Wayne
Young, an accountant for a grocery chain, wanted more elbow room and
a safer environment for their son, Lasscelles, then 12. They also
saw homeownership as the single greatest route to a sound financial
future.
''We had a good life and a nice
apartment, but what we really wanted was a house to call our own,''
she said.
Forces Align for a Boom
Cheap land and deft marketing have
long been Pocono trademarks. By the time of his death in 1806, Jacob
Stroud, who settled the area half a century earlier, had made an
enviable fortune selling lots around Stroudsburg, the county seat
that bears his name.
The Poconos eventually became best
known for tourism, and Monroe County promoted itself as a quick
weekend retreat and the Honeymoon Capital of the World.
But over the years, the Poconos often
became known for less wholesome promotions. In 1973, a land promoter
was sued for enticing prospective homebuyers with ''free'' vacations
to London for which, it turned out, the takers had to pay most of
their own way. Five years later, a former assistant United States
attorney was jailed for promoting a housing development with false
promises about tennis courts, paved roads and a swimming pool. More
recently, a jury in 1993 convicted another developer of defrauding
more than 60 home-seekers, in part by selling lots he did not own.
Developers had bet big on selling
weekend homes just before the economy slumped in the early 1990's,
and they were left holding swaths of land all paved and piped and
ready to go. Then two things came to their rescue. One was the
rebounding housing market. The other was the White House.
Bill Clinton saw housing as a
potentially winning issue early in his 1992 presidential campaign.
Soon after the New Hampshire primary, he announced that he would
jump-start the national homeownership rate, which had languished
during the previous 12 years of Republican administrations.
It was a promise that Mr. Clinton
found easy to keep. A surging economy bumped up the ownership rate
with little help from Washington. Then in 1995, he rolled out a
100-point plan for homeownership. The program sought to increase the
supply of new homes by streamlining local building codes. It
encouraged lenders to ease borrowing by reducing the traditional
down payment of 20 percent to a few percentage points or in some
cases nothing at all. With help from Congress, the tax law was
changed to let first-time buyers use their retirement funds without
penalty. Through promotions like National Homeownership Day, people
who had never thought they could own a home were encouraged to think
they could.
As a result of policies pursued both
by Mr. Clinton and Mr. Bush, the ownership rate climbed to beyond 68
percent now from 64.1 percent in 1992. Those four points meant 8
million new homeowners, including 2.5 million lower-income buyers
and 1.2 million each for blacks and Hispanics.
The makeup of the Poconos and the
goals of the federal housing policy were in perfect alignment. Soon
billboards for ''award-winning homes'' sprung up at the border of
New Jersey and Pennsylvania where Interstate 80 climbs up from the
Delaware River.
The larger developers also bought air
time in metropolitan New York. The Keystone Development Company had
a commercial that opened with urban warfare and finished with
grazing deer. But none played more artfully to the aspirations of
apartment-bound city dwellers than the ''Why Rent'' catch phrase.
The Builder
In many ways, the man behind the Why
Rent ads, Gene P. Percudani, was just right for the national
homeowner campaign. Born in Queens, the son of a carpenter, he
exuded self-made success. He studied architecture at City College of
New York, moved to the Poconos in the 1970's and fit right in with
his personable style, confident but not pushy.
''Is he driven? Most successful
businessmen are,'' said Dario Belardi, a partner in one development
just outside the Poconos and a former executive with Caesars
resorts. ''But he's a great family man. A humanitarian. A decent
human being.''
Not all of Mr. Percudani's projects
were royal flushes. His venture with Mr. Belardi, for example, is
struggling to attract buyers.
He also got in a legal brawl with his
main Pocono associate, an entrepreneur named Gerard Armond Powell
whose businesses included selling vanity toll-free numbers and
marketing loans for plastic surgery. After fighting over a $2
million settlement to dissolve their partnership in 1996, they took
their Virginia operations into bankruptcy.
But in Monroe County, Mr. Percudani
gained a reputation as a prolific builder. By the mid-1990's, he was
telling prospective buyers that he had built about 1,000 houses,
many of them starter models.
On weekends, prospective buyers at
his office in Tannersville stepped into a dreamy whirl of model-home
photos and videotaped testimonials from satisfied buyers.
''I came away really impressed,'' Mr.
Vazquez said. ''I thought this will be great for kids, but it's not
so far that we couldn't catch a show in the city.''
Ms. Walton fell in love with a gated
community, Emerald Lakes, and put down a $900 deposit before
returning to the Bronx. ''I imagined us getting married again by the
lake,'' she said. ''I wanted a place we could invite all my friends
and family.''
Ms. Davis picked out a lakeside lot
in another community called Pocono Country Place. Few of the
homebuyers interviewed for this article looked at other places, met
other developers or considered an existing home, prompting some
longtime Pocono residents like Susan McGinty to point a finger:
''They should have known what they were getting into.''
Mr. Belardi said prospective buyers
saw homes for $80,000 in the Poconos and homes 5 or 10 times as
expensive closer to home and made bad decisions.
But homebuyers say there was often
pressure to buy now, buy fast, and the best deals seemed to be
always nearly gone. There were free decks and fireplaces and an
advertised monthly mortgage of $685, but in limited quantities. They
were also tempted by extras that ended up raising home prices beyond
what they first thought they would pay. One buyer, David Johnson,
recalls hearing a cellphone exchange that he now suspects was
staged; his sales agent fought with a colleague over whose customer
would get the lot where they stood.
''It just seemed like such a real
good deal,'' Ms. Davis said. ''I mean these people were willing to
build us a brand-new home for not much more than we were paying in
rent for a tiny apartment. Who would walk away from that?''
It did not take long for many of them
to start having second thoughts. Their lakefront lots would become
mysteriously unavailable, forcing them to settle for lesser spots.
Also, Pennsylvania, unlike most states, had no building code to set
standards for critical matters like foundations, plumbing and
insulation; only this year did state officials finish writing such a
code.
At her housewarming party, Ms.
Davis's father, a builder from Chicago, pronounced the house ''a
rip-off.'' There was no polyethylene sealant wrap under the vinyl
siding, he told her, and almost no insulation in the walls or in the
attic. ''We'd walk around all winter bundled up in sweaters and
coats,'' she said, shivering at the memory.
Many other homebuyers interviewed for
this article blamed a number of builders for problems like
foundations that sagged, siding that peeled, basements that flooded,
and yards in which all of the soil had been scraped away. In 1992
the Pennsylvania attorney general, Ernest D. Preate Jr., sued Mr.
Percudani for deceptive practices on behalf of 11 aggrieved buyers
who cited similar construction woes. Mr. Percudani settled the suit
by making repairs and returning deposits.
Mr. Preate is now in private practice
and represents Mr. Percudani, who declined to be interviewed. ''Gene
built a good house with good value and tried very hard to help
people fulfill an American dream out in the country,'' Mr. Preate
now says. ''If there is a complaint he fixes it.''
However disappointing some houses
were, many buyers soon faced far greater trouble rooted in the
relationship that Mr. Percudani formed with one of the world's most
prestigious banks.
The Borrowing
Mr. Percudani did more than build
houses to further the cause of homeownership. He lined up the loans
that buyers needed to pay for their homes, and worked with more than
20 lenders including First Union and SunTrust Banks. But most often,
he turned to the mortgage unit of Chase Manhattan, now known as J.P.
Morgan Chase, an executive with his company said in a deposition.
The bank had low interest rates and
fast service and its status as a corporate powerhouse had a calming
effect on nervous buyers like Mr. Vazquez. ''Whatever little fears I
had went out the window,'' Mr. Vazquez recalled. ''I basically said,
'If Chase was involved, I don't have to worry about this.' ''
Chase was certainly eager for the
business. The bank had embarked on a national expansion into home
lending and was sensitive to the minority-lending goals of
regulators who held sway over its growth. In 1996, it won high
praise for joining an urban program that counsels first-time buyers
on the pitfalls in homeownership.
But officials with urban housing
groups say that in the Poconos little was done to help novice buyers
avoid mistakes.
Local lenders who dodged the
foreclosure mess say they did so by knowing the market and players
on intimate terms. They also handle the loan work themselves from
the moment buyers walk into their banks.
As a result, two of Monroe County's
eight local lenders say they have no foreclosures at all. Five have
averaged three filings a year, county records show. And the largest,
ESSA Bank and Trust, which has made 3,500 loans there since 1997,
says it has foreclosed on 60 homes, well below the national
foreclosure rate.
By contrast, 50 of the 377 Pocono
homebuyers who used Chase have lost their homes to foreclosure, and
to prevent even more failures, the bank has taken the extraordinary
step of forgiving $6 million in debt owed by 210 of its homebuyers.
Some of Chase's loan practices
differed markedly from those of local lenders.
Chase ran its Pocono venture from a
regional office in Independence, Ohio, whose manager, William K.
Spaner, has said in legal proceedings that he never visited the
region or met Mr. Percudani. Chase then farmed out much of the work
that borrowers had expected the bank to perform.
For starters, Chase paid Mr.
Percudani's mortgage concern to be its broker in the Poconos, which
put him in charge of hiring the appraiser who is supposed to
independently assess a home's true value.
Larger banks commonly assign this
task to their mortgage brokers in a process that in recent years has
come under criticism by some experts and institutions in the
industry. More than 7,000 appraisers nationwide have signed a
petition saying they felt pressured to produce inflated evaluations
in part because of who was hiring them.
But lending experts say that such
pressure is even greater in situations where builders, like Mr.
Percudani, create their own loan brokerage units, which they are
increasingly doing, with appraisers feeling they must come up with
the price that the builder wants.
''That's a major, big-time, red flag
conflict of interest and a very high risk loan,'' said Connie Wilson
of AppIntell, a consulting firm that helps lenders avoid problem
loans.
Banking guidelines do not require
lenders to take special precautions in such situations. But, Robert
Cook, a special counsel with the Federal Reserve Board, says such
arrangements make it imperative that lenders ''ensure the appraisals
are accurate.''
As it turned out, the appraiser Mr.
Percudani used most often, Dominick Stranieri, surrendered his
license in 2002 to settle an unrelated case in which the state
alleged that he overvalued homes by using an improper method. Mr.
Stranieri has said in legal proceedings that he acted independently
in valuing Mr. Percudani's homes and was not asked to meet a
predetermined price.
Chase says that for much of its
Pocono venture it had Mr. Stranieri on an internal watch list, and
that it returned him to good standing in 1999 because there were no
further concerns about his work. But on three occasions starting in
April 1998, Chase consultants who reviewed homes appraised by Mr.
Stranieri concluded that he overpriced them by as much as 50
percent, according to interviews and records.
One appraiser's report in 1999 even
warned that federal officials were seizing industry records to
investigate widespread overpricing. Chase says the loan officer who
got this report handled refinancing and did not alert Mr. Spaner's
office, where new loans were being made.
Just how much profit Mr. Percudani
built into his prices is not clear. While builders typically make
$7,500 to $15,000 on homes that sell for $150,000, he cited figures
in the lawsuit with his partner indicating that they made roughly
$62,000 on each of the 150 homes they sold in 1994 and 1995.
Some parcels of land by themselves
had drastic appreciations. For example, Mr. Percudani charged Mr.
Vazquez $27,000 for a third of an acre that he bought not quite six
months earlier for $5,300, according to county title records.
Mr. Percudani's lawyers said his
profits were more typically in line with the industry and that the
land prices included marketing costs. Numerous buyers, they added,
have been able to borrow more money on their homes, which shows,
they say, that those homes were fairly priced.
But many homeowners like Ms. Davis
tried to refinance their homes only to learn with a shock that they
were worth far less than they thought. Ms. Davis's problems began
when she needed a new appraisal to get a lower interest rate.
The first two appraisers she called
said that her $143,653 house was actually worth $90,000 or less. A
third flatly refused to come out when he learned where she lived.
Chuckling, he told her, ''Lady,
you're not going to be able to refinance.''
Still More Adversity
One man who worked with Mr. Percudani
says he saw even worse trouble ahead for many of the Pocono buyers.
Elwood Kurtz, the owner of Homestead
Land Services, had been retained by Mr. Percudani to validate
property records. But as he sat with buyers in closing their deals,
Mr. Kurtz says he worried that they could not afford the homes -- no
matter how fairly priced they were.
''I really felt that a majority of
them were getting in over their heads,'' he said. ''They had to fit
into their budgets the cost of commuting, food, taxes, and it seemed
like $10 one way or another would make it or break it for them.''
Mr. Kurtz said he reported this and other concerns to state
officials in 1996 and never heard back.
In one sense, Mr. Percudani may have
been doing just what the government wanted him to do: help people
buy their first homes. He had a credit service through which he
would pay their delinquent bills. He had a savings plan to help them
accumulate the necessary down payment. He was infinitely patient,
coding their accounts with a medals system based on how fast they
could save -- ranging from platinum for those who were ready at once
to bronze for those needing as long as two years.
Mr. Percudani also typically paid
several thousand dollars of the buyers' closing costs and even
covered their rent while their homes were built. ''Gene was ahead of
the curve in the United States, and it's only in the last couple or
three years that other institutions have encouraged this,'' his
lawyer, Mr. Preate, said.
Chase says Mr. Percudani did not tell
it about the rent payments, which in effect subsidized the buyers'
down payment. This would have increased its risk since lenders view
the down payment as a key measure of the borrower's ability to
repay. ''If Chase had known about the builder's separate side
agreements, Chase never would have approved these loans, as they
were a violation of our underwriting standards,'' said Charlotte
Gilbert-Biro, a Chase spokeswoman.
Mr. Percudani's lawyers scoff at
Chase's assertion, saying the rental payment was featured in his
advertisements and that all lenders take pains to verify that down
payments really come from the borrowers and not from a relative or
the seller.
But whatever the truth, the people
who did this verification work under contract for Chase say they
were hampered in several ways. They say Chase did not tell them that
Mr. Percudani, the loan broker, had also built the homes, so they
were not especially cautious in their reviews.
Two such reviewers, known as
underwriters, also say they were blocked at times from obtaining the
bank statements they needed to trace the down payments. Lynda Davis,
who underwrote the bulk of the Pocono loans, says that she told a
Pennsylvania grand jury in 2003 that Mr. Percudani's loan brokerage
unit would refuse on occasion to forward the statements, and that
when this happened Mr. Spaner, the Chase manager, instructed her to
rely instead on a ledger provided by the brokerage unit, which did
not reveal the rent subsidy. ''I went along with it because I felt
it was on Chase's head. He told me it was O.K. with Chase,'' Ms.
Davis said she told the grand jury.
Reached at his office, Mr. Spaner
said he wanted to discuss the Pocono loans but needed permission
from Chase. Chase officials declined to make Mr. Spaner available
but said he denied the underwriters' assertions. ''Chase has not
seen a shred of credible information to support any of these
allegations,'' Ms. Gilbert-Biro said.
In interviews and written statements,
Chase officials defended their lending methods. They said they used
the best available systems to detect problem loans and were
continuously making improvements. For instance, Chase now requires
two appraisals on Pocono properties.
Chase said that it had successful
relationships with other builders who acted as their own mortgage
brokers and that it had confidence in its wholesale lending
operations. ''One of the things we pride ourselves on is our
nationwide capabilities and our local execution,'' the bank said.
Chase further said that its share of
foreclosure proceedings in Monroe County was at most 7 percent, and
that numerous other lenders were caught up in the debacle.
As it turned out, Chase almost dodged
the pain.
The bank regularly sold its Pocono
loans to Freddie Mac, the government-backed securities giant that is
under its own federal pressure to increase minority lending. But the
agency, whose own appraisal reviews were finding numerous instances
of overpricing, eventually got cold feet. In the fall of 2000,
Freddie Mac told Chase it was investigating. Chase then halted its
dealings with Mr. Percudani. And, in a rare move, Freddie Mac asked
the bank in 2002 to take back the Pocono loans.
Inquiries Into a 'Nightmare'
By the late 1990's, things were so
bad that the county sheriff was pleading for more staffing to handle
the foreclosures, which swelled to 941 last year from 385 in 1995.
The county controller, Kelly Lewis,
dubbed the issue a ''nightmare'' for home buyers in his winning
campaign for the state legislature. In April 2001, a local
newspaper, The Pocono Record, published a series of articles
detailing the buyers' woes. ''For the next week, all I did was
answer phone calls and e-mails from people who said they had been
victimized,'' the reporter, Matt Birkbeck, said.
But drawing attention to the problems
and doing something about them were two different things. The
following month, a dozen law enforcement officials met privately in
the Monroe County Courthouse to find a solution, but little came out
of the meeting.
The United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development determined that few of the loans
involved its programs.
The United States attorney for middle
Pennsylvania decided against pursuing criminal action against Mr.
Percudani, citing, in part, Chase's reluctance to pursue the matter.
''According to Chase's counsel, this whole episode has been a public
relations nightmare, and they do not want to publicize this matter
any further,'' an assistant United States attorney, Bruce Brandler,
wrote in an Aug. 18, 2003, letter to state officials obtained by The
New York Times. Chase says it told Mr. Brandler that it would
cooperate.
The Monroe County district attorney's
office began an investigation that distilled more than 200
interviews into a scathing report on possible price gouging,
coercion and tax evasion by developers, brokers and real estate
lawyers. A mortgage broker was charged with fraud in connection with
arranging a loan. But the district attorney, Mark Pazuhanich, opted
against pursuing more cases by citing his limited resources and a
warning by the local court that its judges had too many conflicting
interests to preside over the matter.
Mr. Pazuhanich had his own conflicts,
he said in a 2002 letter asking the state attorney general to take
over the case. Mr. Percudani and another developer under scrutiny
had been major contributors to his most recent election campaign,
the committee for which included the father-in-law of Mr. Stranieri,
the appraiser who worked with Mr. Percudani. According to Mr.
Percudani's lawyers, Mr. Pazuhanich and two assistants also had
rented Mr. Percudani's vacation home on St. Martin in the Caribbean
several years before he began the investigation. After bowing out of
the inquiry, Mr. Pazuhanich ran for a judgeship and placed his
campaign signs on Mr. Percudani's land.
Finally, in 2002, home buyers felt
some progress was being made when the state attorney general filed
the first of two civil suits against 26 local builders, appraisers
and mortgage concerns, including Mr. Percudani and Mr. Stranieri,
alleging deceptive practices that misled buyers and lenders. Mr.
Percudani and Mr. Stranieri have denied the allegations, their
lawyers said. Mr. Percudani continues to build and sell homes in the
Poconos.
Several buyers including the
Vazquezes have sued Chase, saying the bank conspired with Mr.
Percudani to defraud them. Chase denies the allegations and says it
will vigorously defend itself. Jim Sysko, a deputy state attorney
general, says he accepted Chase's contention it was deceived on the
rent payments, but was weighing the bank's overall role when Chase
offered to help the buyers by reducing their mortgages.
Frustrated by the events, buyers have
picketed the Monroe courthouse, the statehouse in Harrisburg and
even the F.B.I. headquarters in Washington.
''It's like the Wild West out here,''
said Al Wilson, the founder of the Pennsylvania Homeowners Defense
Association, an advocacy group. He added, ''No one is being held
accountable.''
A Chance of More Poconos
In some ways, the Poconos is a place
apart, where a combination of lax regulation, a history of
corruption and a huge market in New York were the perfect
ingredients for a financial storm.
But few doubt that what happened here
has the potential to happen elsewhere.
For all the attention paid to the
national homeownership rate, little is known about the hundreds of
thousands of buyers who fail each year. Lenders decline to say how
many are minorities or first-time buyers, but early last year the
foreclosure rate passed 1.1 percent, or roughly 560,000 homes,
compared with a rate of 0.86 percent in 1995 when the homeownership
campaign began.
George McCarthy, a housing economist
at the Ford Foundation, says the easier credit unleashed by the
homeownership drive has exposed vulnerable buyers to fraud and
excessive debt. Already, the F.B.I.'s caseload of 500 mortgage fraud
investigations is up fivefold since 1997.
''The risk of more Poconos is huge,''
Dr. McCarthy said. ''In every affordable market in the country we
are seeing these fast run-ups in prices, double-digit appreciation,
and the problem is that people who are not well versed and able to
tell what the true value is can get hoodwinked.''
Should housing prices drop, he says,
the fallout may track the stock market scandals in which sundry
accounting irregularities, ignored during the booming 1990's, were
exposed. Prospective buyers should be warned that a house is an
investment that can lose value, he and other housing experts say.
Many people, no doubt, were helped by
the homeownership drive, and in the Poconos there are many buyers
who say they are pleased with their homes and the move. There is
also hope that a rising market will compensate for any overpricing.
Still, Marc Weiss, who helped shape
the Clinton administration's homebuyer campaign, says the program
did not have enough safeguards to protect first-time homebuyers.
''We were so focused on expanding homeownership that we probably
didn't put enough attention with our private sector partners on what
is needed to help people from getting in trouble,'' he said. Now,
those in trouble are trying to get out.
The Vazquezes moved into their Pocono
home. Had a son. Made it through job losses and unemployment. But
only by getting deeper in debt did they ward off two foreclosure
actions.
Then in October 2003, after
suspending their payments to resolve the lawsuit against Chase, the
bank brought its third foreclosure against them. ''There can't be
words to describe the tears I cried, losing my home and having to be
an embarrassment for my family,'' Mrs. Vazquez said.
Ms. Walton never even made it to the
Poconos. She was paying into the credit counseling and savings plan
when Mr. Percudani suspended it. The family adores the game
Monopoly, and now has a running joke that it is the only way they
will ever buy a home. Better to laugh than cry, Ms. Walton said.
''We're pretty much living hand to
mouth now,'' she said. ''It was a big letdown for the boys. It's
like being told you can have a puppy, petting it, and then never
being given it.''
As for Ms. Davis, it is difficult to
pinpoint, she says, just what sent her over the edge. There was the
$3,000 in annual school and property taxes, a $3,600 yearly heating
bill, and $500 in homeowners' association dues, which she says she
had not expected.
Soon after Christmas of 2000, her
husband announced that he would stay in New York. The talked-about
train to New York City had never materialized. The traffic tie-ups
were endless. ''All you talk about is bills, bills, bills,'' she
recalled him saying.
Their divorce left Lasscelles alone
in the house all week and Ms. Davis wracked with guilt as she stayed
in New York weeknights to save the bus fare. She did not dare tell
anyone and slept with her cellphone on her pillow. On weekends, she
would return home and pack. For months, they lived frozen lives with
boxes filling every room. As much as homelessness, Ms. Davis was
terrified by the shame of forcible eviction, but she eventually
abandoned the Poconos altogether for a rental back in Brooklyn.
On March 24, Chase won a foreclosure
judgment against her, the penultimate step before it can sell her
house.
She recently went to her local bank
for a credit card. She had no luck. But she got friendly with the
woman who took her application. They talked about real estate and
the woman excitedly told her about having just signed for a new home
in the Poconos.
''And the best thing about it,'' the
woman told her, ''is that there's a train coming.''
-----
CLICK
HERE FOR OUR FREE BANKRUPTCY ASSESSMENT
CALL NOW TO SPEAK TO AN
ATTORNEY - 856.429.2449
|