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

moran_cathy
February 18, 2024
The initial meeting with a prospective bankruptcy client is the most important work I do as a bankruptcy lawyer. It’s also the hardest.
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
In determining the appropriate “present value” factor to be added to the payment of a secured claim in a Chapter 12, the Court should look at the “riskless” treasury rate rather than the “prime rate” before enhancing it with a risk factor.  (Ebinger) Farm Credit Services of America v. Topp, 2022 WL 2981590 (S.D. Iowa, July 19, 2022) Case Summary...
Members
December 22, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part VII Introduction This series focuses on four bankruptcy-related bills that were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019. One bill, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), will be effective February 19, 2020. It appears in its entirety in Appendix B to...
Members
May 19, 2019
By Gretchen D. Holland, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee for the Greenville/Spartanburg Division of South Carolina Although this is a chapter 11 case, it has chapter 13 implications because the confirmation requirement that a plan be “proposed in good faith and not by any means forbidden by law” is identical in both chapters (§ 1129(a)(3) and § 1325(a)(3)). Garvin v. Cook...
Members
Hale-Andrew-Antico
September 25, 2022
Sahni v. Tajima (In re Tajima) 2022 WL 3354006 (9th Cir. BAP Aug 15, 2022)(unpublished) S.Klein J ISSUE Did the Bankruptcy Court err when confirming Chapter 13 plan? RULING Yes. FACTS This case involves the tension of litigation in bankruptcy causing delay, and the need to get a Chapter 13 plan confirmed quickly. Here, there was a dispute between debtors...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 26, 2021
Where a Chapter 7 debtor fails to disclose the location of his Mercedes which he intended to surrender, fails to produce documents relating to the ownership of his property, and invokes his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination, the Court appropriately denied the debtor a discharge. (Preston) In re Appleby, 2021 WL 5121854 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio, Nov. 3, 2021) Case Summary...
Members
January 12, 2020
By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) Click here for Part 1 of 3 C. Determining whether to file. Collection considerations outside of bankruptcy. Is the debtor judgment-proof? Are assets and income exempt? How active are creditors? Is the current situation likely to change? Has there been a previous filing, and if so, are there stay or exhausted...
Members
travera
When Does The Bankruptcy Code Require The Payment Of Interest On Unsecured Claims In Chapter 13? I. Introduction This article primarily discusses the interpretation and application of § 1325(b)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code in relation to the payment of interest to general unsecured creditors in chapter 13 bankruptcy cases. Section 1325(b)(1)(A) generally states that a court may not approve a chapter...
Members
September 20, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Chapter 13 debtor lacked “person aggrieved” standing to appeal objection to trustee’s final report. The bankruptcy court had overruled the debtor’s objection to the trustee’s final report, and debtor’s appeal was dismissed, with the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel finding that debtor lacked “person aggrieved” standing to appeal. Debtor’s objection had not included amount of...
Members
February 10, 2019
By Leo G. Spanos, Senior Staff Attorney to Martha G. Bronitsky, Chapter 13 Trustee, Northern District of California (Oakland Division) Courts around the country are split on whether property acquired post-chapter 13 confirmation remains property of the estate or vests in the debtor for all purposes absent contrary language in the plan or confirmation order under 11 U.S.C. § 1327(b).1...
Members

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: