Monday, July 2, 2012

How I Personally Caused the Financial Crisis (part 1)

First, I'll give you my background.

In 2004 I moved from Bellingham to Seattle after completing my BA in Theatre Arts. Like every theater arts major, I eventually found myself working as a financial analyst for the nation's largest thrift bank -- Washington Mutual.

Like everything else in my life, I kinda' just "fell into it." My wife and I, both theater majors, decided to apply to a temp agency -- Adecco. She found a job working for a company that insured ski resorts. I found a job working with "rate locks." Oh...the twisted lives of creative folks.

When I first heard about "rate locks," I thought I was going to be installing actual, physical "locks"...on, like, ATM machines or safety deposit boxes or something. I had no idea. All I knew was that I was to report to the beautiful Washington Mutual Tower (now known as 1201 Third Avenue) to receive my training.

Needless to say, I learned about rate locks. But in actuality, the group that I found myself working for existed solely to publish something called the "Pricing Variance Report." It worked like this: every day a program would scan all of the locked loans and kick out "variances." Our group would research the variances, and either ignore them or assess a penalty that the loan officer, loan processor, or borrower would then have to pay.

Why did they need "people" to do this, when a single computer program could probably catch all of the same errors?

Turns out, it would have to be a pretty complicated program...and the cost of that program would be much more expensive than farming out the task to a bunch of temps. Inefficient efficiency...I guess.

This is because Washington Mutual (WaMu) had acquired several different companies in the late 90s and early 2000s...and each company used their own computer program. These programs were called "origination systems," and they tracked the loan from beginning to end. WaMu did not have its own origination system, so it just used all of the others ad hoc.

When I started working at WaMu, there were about 5 different origination systems. The one I worked in the most was called MLCS...which stood for Mortgage L-something C-something System. I think. It was created in 1984 (seriously) and it had not changed much since then -- it was text-based, and looked like something you'd find on an Apple IIe. It was the most popular origination system we had, mostly because it was so secure.

Anyhow, with all of these various systems, keeping track of lock prices was a hot mess. I'll explain later why "tracking prices" was so important, but let's just say that sometimes the bank and the loan officers did not always share the same motivation.

And the loan officers knew it. Most of the systems were not secure, and there was a shit-ton of human error and (sometimes) straight-up "intentional misrepresentation" that could take place. On top of that, occasionally there were "specials" that the systems just couldn't handle. It was a bureaucratic nightmare that could have been easily repaired by a uniform policy or system. But alas...that would have been difficult to implement across such a large, disparate company. Instead, WaMu tried to function with a cobbled-together mess instead, and I got a paycheck every two weeks.

Lucky me.
Eventually our group bloated to about 15 people as the company expanded. That's 15 people whose job it was to just "look at the variations explain them." Unsurprisingly, I was laid off in late 2006 when my position was "outsourced" to Colombia...........um, South Carolina.

Eventually I found my way to (or rather "fell into a job with") a company named Liberty Financial Group (LFG). LFG was a correspondent lender in a very nice building in Bellevue, and I worked as a "rate lock specialist" at the pricing desk. A correspondent lender is a company that has more infrastructure than a broker, not as much as a retail bank. There are other differences too...but they are boring, and if you want to read about it you can go here: http://mtgprofessor.com/a%20-%20type%20of%20loan%20provider/what_is_a_correspondent_lender.htm

My job was to publish a daily rate sheet and lock loans at various banks (such as Countrywide, US Bank, Chase, GMAC, and Greenpoint Mortgage). It was here that I discovered just how screwed up the entire industry had become -- gone were the days of the vanilla 30 year fixed loan. Now, most lenders were investing in bat-shit crazy programs...like the Option ARMs, interest-only, LIBOR, no-doc, SISA, NINA, CMT, et cetera. I had no idea what any of that shit meant...and I'm assuming neither did the borrowers.

On top of it all, I wasn't very good at that job, unfortunately. I made some pretty big pricing mistakes which still bother me to this day. But I was learning, and getting better with time.

Then, on one inauspicious morning in August (I don't remember the exact date), our boss poked his head into the converted conference room I shared with two other guys. Our boss was a quiet, laid-back, skinny older gentleman with 25 years of experience in the mortgage industry. This morning he looked absolutely terrified. He told us that the market was making massive, unprecedented moves...and that we had to "lock" every loan we had as soon as possible.

We did...but it didn't matter. The market shuddered, companies folded, homeowners started foreclosing, and worst of all I lost my job two months later. Several months after that, Liberty Financial Group also closed down, along with countless other mortgage businesses, both large and small (including my old employer, WaMu).

Turns out, I had entered the mortgage industry at the very start of the sub-prime housing bubble, and I sat and watched as it popped...which caused the financial crisis that ruined the world's economy.

Basically what I'm trying to say is: I'm sorry. For whatever small amount I may have contributed to this mess, I apologize. I had no idea what I was doing...and my biggest problem was that I assumed the people in charge knew what they were doing. I was wrong.

Click here to read part two.

3 comments:

  1. Send me your address and I'll mail you a really great book called Reckless Endangerment that chronicles the whole collapse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, I'd been meaning to educate myself on the macro aspects of the crisis. But it just seems to me, with stuff like this, the conclusions often mirror the author's (and reader's) built-in bias...and the chronology stops at the point that matches their initial hypothesis.

    For instance, some want to stop with the homeowners, who took out home loans and didn't read the fine print...then foreclosed when those "fine print" items came back to bite them in the ass.

    Others will stop when they get to the "greedy Wall Street bankers," who targeted the poor and stupid with predatory marketing campaigns telling them that even the poor and stupid could qualify for a home loan.

    Others will go to the early 2000s and criticize George Bush for failing to pass strong enough financial regulatory legislation after the collapse of Enron, other than the misguided Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Or maybe for passing the "Bush Tax Cuts."

    Still others (including Barack Obama) will land on the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act in 1999, which gave large banks far too much power across too much of the financial sector.

    Others will go further back to target Bill Clinton, Chris Dodd, and Barney Frank (as the authors of Reckless Endangerment seem to do), who turned the "dream of owning a home" into legislation by expanding the Community Reinvestment Act, first passed by Jimmy Carter in 1977.

    Paul Krugman wants to go all the way back to Reagan for passing the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act in 1982, which deregulated Savings and Loan banks, and allowed them to offer adjustable rate mortgages.

    Or hell, maybe we blame Richard Nixon for the "Nixon Shock" series of economic reforms, which eliminated the Bretton Woods system that allowed for the direct convertibility of the US dollar to gold.

    The origins are interesting, sure, but I feel like every author has an angle, whether they know it or not. This tends to make me shy away from books like that...or most political/economic books. I think the last books I read were the Al Franken books, not necessarily because I agree with him politically (though I do), but because they were pretty funny to boot.

    Though I do appreciate the offer, especially since the book is $10 to download to the Kindle. I can send you my address, but only if you promise to visit next time you're in LA, and I can take you out for a beer or some other manly activity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ty,
    Wow, so much grist. Let me begin by grinding a small particle near the end of part 1 (have not read 2 or 3 yet, but will). Where you say, "I assumed the people in charge knew what they were doing." This little statement has been the bane of my existence. OK, not the whole bane, but a significant bane as this has been the proverbial stone that I have tripped over way more than twice. It's as if I can't help believing that people who are in a position of power above me are there because they are smarter than me and or more deserving of that position. With few (one hand count) exceptions I have always discovered this to be not the case. By and large I could do a better job running the zoo than most of the keepers I have encountered in my life. And I am 68 now, and have been near, worked under, and experienced every sort of malfeasance, ineptitude, incompetence, and outright stupidity at every level of management or polity. Yet I go back and do it again, believe that is.

    Your reply to the proffer of Reckless Endangerment is comment worthy also. I have not read the book, (incidentally, if anyone wants to send ME a copy in any form, it smells like a good read) but as you know, since you and I have discussed this topic before when I asked you to explain this crazy mortgage thing. As far as who to blame, it is so tempting I can't really blame authors for taking that low hanging cheap shot. (Now there's a mixed metaphor for you!) I had an old friend who used to describe the scientific method as guesswork and hearsay, and he had a doctorate in philosophy. He jested, sort of, but it is so much easier to begin with a conclusion and work backwards discarding any contrary evidence as you go. It is not wrong to begin with a conclusion, it is however wrong to discard that which does not agree. Speaking of blame, brother Walter, whose observations are often not bad, but whose madman iconoclastic delivery of them is off putting. Wally says that Nixon ruined the Republican party because they could not control him. Control him, they could not influence him. And, since that time the Republican Party has sought candidates that would be more amenable to their influence. Enter, stage right, Ronny Reagan, followed by a cast of clowns culminating in Dubya. He may be right, and a political party has much more staying power when it comes to influencing the ship of states course over the long haul. There was a time I even jumped ship on occasions when I believed the Democratic Parties candidate was, well, a dumb ass. That has not happened in a long time. Mit Romney is walking the razors edge with his party, trying to look like a tea bagger when his past policies are much more moderate and centrist. I wish him well, but mostly because he will not be able to consolidate GOP support in the next election. So, enough for now, I will go forth and read your next two exegesis and report back

    ReplyDelete