PACE Energy Efficiency Mortgages Still Risky Despite New Department of Energy Guidelines

Stronger, Enforceable Protections Needed to Stop Predatory Loans

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: November 18, 2016

(WASHINGTON) New best practices guidelines released 11/18 by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) mortgages could encourage states and localities to begin to address some of the growing problems and potential for abuse in this market. The new guidelines are a significant improvement from earlier guidelines but far stronger, enforceable protections are needed to ensure true energy savings and to protect homeowners, according to national and state advocates at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), Americans for Financial Reform, Consumer Federation of America, Bet Tzedek Legal Services, Public Counsel, Public Law Center, and Elder Law & Advocacy.

“Home energy efficiency is important, and well-designed programs like the federal Weatherization Assistance Program can be a cost-effective way to promote energy independence and help low-income homeowners save on energy bills. But PACE mortgages lack consumer protections, have few checks to ensure that energy savings are real and cost effective, and are inappropriate for homeowners who may be eligible for free or lower cost programs,” said Charlie Harak, senior energy attorney at the National Consumer Law Center.

“PACE mortgages may be the next wave of Wall Street-funded predatory lending,” said National Consumer Law Center Associate Director Lauren Saunders. “Through loopholes in state and federal law, PACE loans do not comply with ability-to-repay rules or other federal protections for mortgages or contractor fraud.”

“We are seeing aggressive door-to-door salesmen targeting seniors with false claims of savings and government subsidies,” said Leigh Ferrin, directing attorney at Public Law Center of Santa Ana, California.

“Older adults living on fixed incomes are duped and stuck with thousands of dollars a year in new property taxes for unnecessary so-called home improvements they were told would be provided to them for free through a government program, putting them at risk of foreclosure and the loss of homes in which they lived for years,” explained Dipti Singh, Directing Attorney of Impact Litigation at Bet Tzedek of Los Angeles, California. “PACE financing costs more than a home equity loan, and the tax lien can make it difficult to refinance or sell. The program is a risky deal with uncertain benefits for many homeowners,” added Charles Evans, Senior Staff Attorney at Public Counsel.

Currently, PACE loans are most prevalent in California and are being rolled out in Florida and Missouri, followed by other states. Where permitted under state and local law, PACE loans are marketed to homeowners through private contractors but are secured by property tax liens and are collected through the homeowners’ tax assessments. Interests in the homeowners’ payments are then sold to private companies that securitize and sell them on Wall Street. Because the loans become part of the tax assessment, lenders claim that the loans fall outside the rules adopted after the mortgage crisis and early waves of predatory lending.

“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should close the tax lien loophole so that PACE mortgages don’t evade mortgage protections. State and local PACE programs need to prevent contractor scams, predatory lending, and elder abuse,” Saunders urged. “PACE loans are marketed to investors as easily collectable because they can ‘quickly foreclose’ if a homeowner falls behind on payments without the protections of a typical mortgage,” said Brian Simmonds Marshall, policy counsel at Americans for Financial Reform. “At a minimum, PACE loans should have at least as strong of protections as conventional mortgages. States also need to adopt enforceable rules to protect homeowners from abusive sales practices.”

The tax liens also typically become a super-priority lien, ahead of the existing mortgage. For that reason, homeowners often have trouble refinancing or selling their home without paying off the lien in full. Mortgage bankers and realtors have also complained about the PACE program.

The DOE Final Guidelines recommend “best practices” for states and localities regarding program design, eligibility criteria for homeowners, and consumer protections. “States should require an energy audit to ensure that claims of energy savings are real, and lower income homeowners should be independently screened for whether they can obtain lower-cost or free energy efficient improvements from another program or a utility company before taking on a PACE loan,” said Harak. “Additionally, we need more investment in the existing federal Weatherization Assistance Program, which has a proven track record of saving money and energy.”

Related Links
National Consumer Law Center policy brief: PACE Energy Efficiency Loans: Good Intentions, Big Risks for Consumers, (Sept. 2016): http://www.nclc.org/issues/pace-energy-efficiency-loans.html

National Consumer Law Center comments to U.S. Department of Energy: supplemental comments (Oct. 18, 2016), http://bit.ly/2fhywm4 and original comments (Aug. 18, 2016): http://bit.ly/2ceBOJF.

###

Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here.

Contacts:
National Consumer Law Center: Jan Kruse ([email protected] or 617.542.8010) or Lauren Saunders ([email protected] or 202.595.7845)
Americans for Financial Reform: Jim Lardner ([email protected] or 202.466.1854)
Consumer Federation of America: Barry Zigas ([email protected] or 202.387.6121)
Bet Tzedek Legal Services: Allison Lee ([email protected] or 323.939.0506)
Public Counsel: Charles Evans ([email protected] or 213.385.2977 ext. 188)
Public Law Center: Leigh Ferrin ([email protected] or 714.541.1010 ext. 290)
Elder Law & Advocacy: Carolyn Reilly ([email protected] or 858.565.1392)

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

gendron-1
April 2, 2023
Section in 109(g)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code bars a debtor from filing a new case for 180 days if the Debtor voluntarily dismisses a case “following” a motion for relief. Not surprisingly, courts are split on how they interpret the word “following” as used in § 109(g)(2). After all, the word “following” is not limited to one definition, or even...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
March 5, 2023
Mortgage loan servicer violated mortgage agreement with debtor, the automatic stay, the confirmation order and Rule 3002.1 by applying debtor’s post-petition monthly mortgage payments pursuant to the contractual terms of the loan, thereby applying post-petition payments to the debtor’s pre-petition mortgage arrearage. (Cary) In re Pope, 647 B.R. 597 (Bankr. D. N.H. August 15, 2022) Case Summary In November of...
Members
__ head shot
May 21, 2023
Chapter 13 plans and confirmation orders will occasionally include post-confirmation disclosure and turnover requirements for tax returns and refunds and for other types of post-petition recoveries and income. Debtors are expected, on their own and without the need for rigorous trustee oversight, to fulfill the turnover requirements as a condition of plan completion and discharge. What happens when the case...
Members
February 9, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction The Supreme Court unanimously held on January 14 that an order denying stay relief was final in Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC.1 Thus, the creditor should have appealed the denial instead of waiting until later in the case to seek again to pursue its pre-bankruptcy litigation against...
Members
ACH-headshot
February 19, 2023
Creditors may now be subject to more preference actions, especially for those cases filed in Indiana. The Seventh Circuit recently overturned long-standing precedent that the preference period on garnishment of attachment would no longer run from the date of service or knowledge of the attachment but when the funds were paid over. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Mark...
Members
ahern_larry_regular
May 14, 2023
Introduction This series reviews developments in bankruptcy procedure during the past year.One new rule and amendments to 16 rules took effect December 1, 2022.  Many reflected changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), and had been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect.
Members
January 5, 2020
By Honorable Cynthia Norton & Honorable Kevin R. Anderson Create a Master Slide Template: Create a custom slide template that you can use each time you produce a new PowerPoint presentation (in PowerPoint, click View and then Slide Master). This avoids "reinventing the wheel" each time. In creating your Master Slide, use complimentary and contrasting colors to maximize readability. I...
Members
July 25, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) Are private educational student loans automatically excepted from discharge by § 523(a)(8). (Jacobs) Homaidan v. Sallie Mae, Inc., Navient Solutions, LLC, 2021 WL 2964217 (2nd Cir. July 15, 2021) Case Summary Hilal Homaidan received a number of educational loans to attend College. Shortly after graduation, he filed a Chapter...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
November 6, 2022
Although the retention of collateral validly repossessed prior to the filing of the petition does not violate the stay, the sale of that property does violate the stay and the sale is void. (Bonapfel) In re Rakestraw, 2022 WL 4085881 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. Sept. 6, 2022) Case Summary Ms. Rakestraw filed Chapter 13 on August 12, 2022, listing her ownership...
Members
pricesmith
February 4, 2024
February is Black History Month and it’s a time to recognize the past but also honor those who are achieving great things today.

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: