Another Look at Simple Interest Mortgages
Over the years, I have received a steady flow of inquiries and
complaints about simple interest mortgages (SIMs), and have written
several articles explaining how they work and how borrowers should deal
with them. In doing this, I always viewed SIMs as the product of
outdated practices, which in time would disappear. Only recently have I
become aware that they are not disappearing, that they are much more
common than I had thought, and that the Federal agencies that could make
them go away, or at least mandate adequate disclosures, have been
looking the other way.
How a SIM Differs
From a Standard Mortgage
On a standard mortgage, interest is calculated monthly, the
monthly payment is due on the first day of the month, and the payment is
recorded as paid on that date even when it is delayed. The note
stipulates a 10 or 15-day “forbearance” period during which payments
received are recorded as paid on the first.
For example, if the loan is closed April 1 for $100,000 at 4%
for 30 years, the payment is $477.42, and it is due May 1. The interest
portion is .04/12 x 100,000 = $333.33. The $144.09 difference between the
payment amount and the interest charge is deducted from the balance to
yield a new balance of $99,855.91. If the payment is not made until
later in May, so long as it is received within the forbearance period,
the result is the same.
On a SIM, interest is calculated daily and there is no
forbearance period. The daily rate is .04/365 = .0001096, so the daily
interest charge would be .0001096 x 100,000 = 10.96. On May 1 the interest
due would be 10.96 x 30 = $328.80, which is a little less than on the
standard mortgage because there are only 30 days in April. With the
interest charge a little less, the remaining balance would be a little
lower at 100,000 – [477.42 – 328.80] = 99,851.38.
But this assumes that payment is made on May 1. If payment is
made later or earlier, the results are different, as shown in the table:
Mortgage of $100,000
at 4% For 30 Years, Payment of $477.42 Due May 1
|
Actual Payment Date |
Standard Mortgage |
Simple Interest Mortgage |
||
|
Interest Charge |
New Balance |
Interest Charge |
New Balance |
|
|
April 25 |
$333.33 |
$99,855.91 |
$274.00 |
$99,796.58 |
|
May 1 |
$333.33 |
$99,855.91 |
$328.80 |
$99,851.38 |
|
May 10 |
$333.33 |
$99,855.91 |
$438.40 |
$99,960.98 |
|
May 15 |
$333.33 |
$99,855.91 |
$493.20 |
$100,015.78 |
SIMs Can Ensnare
Unwary Borrowers
To pay off the SIM loan balance on schedule, the borrower must
make the payment on or before the due date every month. Further, the
payment date is not the day a check is placed in the mail, or even
delivered in person to the office of the servicing agent. It is the date
when the agent records the payment as received, which doesn’t happen
until a check clears. In my example, if the borrower doesn’t pay
until the 15th, his loan balance will rise rather than
decline.
I have heard from borrowers who made payments on SIMs for years
without ever making a dent in the amount they owed. In most such cases,
the borrower was unaware of how their mortgage worked.
Beating the SIM
With Early Payments
The one potential advantage that a SIM offers the borrower is a
credit for early payment. Note in the table that when payment is made on
April 25, the monthly interest due on the standard mortgage remains the
same while the SIM borrower pays only 25 days of interest. But this is a
one-time saving, don’t assume that if you pay regularly on the 25th
of the month, your interest charge will continue to cover only 25 days.
From the 25th of one month to the 25th of the
month following is 30 or 31 days. The only borrowers who would obtain a
continuing benefit are those who can make their monthly payments
consistently over a shorter interval, such as every 25 days or every
four weeks. I doubt that there are many of those.
Public Policy
Regarding SIMs
There are two justifiable policies. One is to make SIMs
illegal, because the number of consumers who can use one advantageously
is miniscule compared to the number who are disadvantaged. A second
rational approach would be to require that lenders disclose that the
mortgage note can (or cannot) be interpreted as allowing simple
interest. Neither approach has been adopted. Borrowers must accept the
risk without realizing it, and if it doesn’t hit them at the start, it
can hit them later if the loan or the servicing of the loan is sold.
Ironically, one of the major arguments for the creation of the
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) was to replace the
irreconcilable disclosures previously required by HUD and the Federal
Reserve with one set of integrated disclosures, which it did. This was a
major advance, but it left SIMs entirely out of the picture, for reasons
CFPB has never explained.
The Potential For
Fraud
Mortgage notes that allow borrowers to be charged simple
interest offer firms that service loans for others a tempting
opportunity: charge the borrower simple interest but credit the lender
for a standard mortgage. If the borrower pays a few days late, the
servicer could pocket the excess interest, crediting the lender only
with the expected monthly interest. Further, the slower pay-down of the
SIM loan balance would mean that the borrower would be paying the
servicer after the lender had been repaid.
I don’t have any evidence that this has ever happened, but
given the temptations and the large numbers of players in this market, I
would be surprised if it hasn’t. In any case, it is one more reason why
SIMs should either be made illegal or subject to explicit disclosure
rules.
Next week: SIMs at Fannie and Freddie

