Foreclosures in the District of Columbia

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Abstract

This testimony discusses recent data, compiled by NeighborhoodInfo DC, on foreclosures in Washington, D.C. Foreclosures have almost doubled since 2005, and data for the first quarter of 2008 show that the problem continues to worsen. With additional adjustable-rate, subprime loans scheduled to reset over the next two years, the situation is especially serious for homeowners in wards and neighborhoods where foreclosures are concentrated.

The text below is an excerpt from the complete document.
Read the full written testimony in PDF format.

Testimony

Good morning. My name is Peter Tatian and I am a senior researcher in the Urban Institute’s Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center. I am also director of NeighborhoodInfo DC, an information resource for the District of Columbia. I appreciate the opportunity to provide this testimony highlighting data compiled by NeighborhoodInfo DC on housing foreclosures in Washington, D.C.

The delinquency rate for all mortgages, and especially subprime or high-cost mortgages, has increased over the past year, and these higher delinquencies have resulted in more foreclosures. Increased delinquency and foreclosure rates are largely the result of resets to adjustable-rate loans that were made with a low “teaser” rate that was initially affordable to the borrower. Nationally, subprime adjustable-rate mortgages accounted for 7 percent of mortgages outstanding, but 43 percent of all foreclosures initiated in the third quarter of 2007 (Stokes and Mechem 2007).
Consistent with national trends, a local increase in subprime lending has been followed by a surge in home foreclosures. In the District of Columbia, subprime lending increased from 3.2 percent of conventional home purchase and refinance mortgage loans in 2002 to 12.5 percent in 2005 (Tatian 2007a). Levels of subprime lending have been highest in Wards 4, 5, 7, and 8, where almost four of every ten home purchase loans were high-cost loans in 2005 (Tatian 2007b).

According to data from the D.C. Recorder of Deeds analyzed by NeighborhoodInfo DC, the number of notices of foreclosure filed against residential property owners has almost doubled between 2005 and 2007 (table 1). The most notices filed in 2007 were in Ward 5 (523 notices), Ward 7 (462), and Ward 4 (393). As map 1 makes clear, neighborhoods with higher levels of subprime lending are now seeing more foreclosures.

The latest data, for the first quarter of 2008, indicate that foreclosures are continuing to increase. As shown in figure 1, 832 residential property parcels had a notice of foreclosure filed in the first three months of 2008, the highest level in the past 18 years and 60 percent higher than a year ago. The most residential properties with foreclosure notices were in Wards 5 and 7 (170 properties each), Ward 4 (136), and Ward 6 (130).

Although the city’s relatively stable housing market has protected it from the large-scale foreclosures occurring in some U.S. cities, the data suggest that, even in D.C., the foreclosure situation will likely get worse before it gets better. Data from the Federal Reserve indicate that at least 2,000 subprime adjustable-rate loans in D.C. will reset in the next two years. The situation is especially serious for homeowners living in wards and neighborhoods experiencing larger concentrations of foreclosures. Many of these neighborhoods, such as those east of the Anacostia River, had been exhibiting strong home price growth through this past year, indicating a renewed interest in these communities. Large concentrations of foreclosures, however, could be a serious setback toward efforts to increase homeownership and attract investment to these neighborhoods.

The D.C. Council is justified in being concerned about this situation and in considering measures that may help people avoid foreclosure and remain in their homes. I hope the data I presented will be useful in helping formulate those responses and target them to neighborhoods where the problem is most severe. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today.

Peter A. Tatian is a senior research associate in the Urban Institute’s Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center. The author would like to thank Leah Hendey for her help in preparing this testimony

(End of excerpt. The entire testimony is available in PDF format.)

The views expressed are those of the author and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Usage, posting and reprint of materials on the UI web site:

Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site in PDF format. This information may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required.

Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact paffairs@urban.org.

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.