If it ain’t broke, why fix it?

That’s what some people in the housing business are thinking about a “fix” to the consumer-friendly Consumer Reinvestment Act. It’s a change that was rushed out during the pandemic without buy-in from federal banking agencies, by a regulator who couldn’t wait to get out of town.

Enacted in 1977, the CRA has done yeoman’s work over the past several decades in forcing lenders to serve all consumers in their banking footprints, not just the high-income, superior-credit borrowers. The net effect of the law has been to fight redlining -- the practice of banks drawing a red line around neighborhoods in which they refuse to lend. Thus, the CRA makes mortgages, car loans and other products more available to a wider array of borrowers.

That’s why many in the business are puzzled as to the reasoning for the changes. Certainly, some of the circumstances don’t pass a sniff test, such as Comptroller of the Currency Joseph Otting’s resignation the day after the final rule was posted, after an abbreviated time to consider public comments.

If this was a boxing match, it likely would be ruled a split decision, since the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Federal Reserve Board, the other two major federal banking regulators, have not signed off on the final rule.

Rep. Maxine Waters sums up the naysayers’ opinions pretty succinctly: The new regulation “will be harmful for so many communities across the country at a time when they are under severe distress due to the pandemic,” said the California Democrat, who chairs the House Financial Services Committee. “This ill-advised rule badly weakens the implementation of the law and ultimately turns the Community Reinvestment Act into the Community Disinvestment Act. Gutting CRA has been Otting’s priority from Day 1.”

A former banking executive from Iowa, Otting was a Trump appointee. At OneWest Bank, he worked closely with the bank’s founder, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency supervises nearly 1,400 national banks, federal savings associations and federal branches and agencies of foreign banks operating in the United States.

The House has passed a resolution that would prevent the OCC from making any changes in the law, but it’s doubtful the Senate will pass it. And even if it did, the president has said he will veto it.

“The CRA is an essential law that was put in place to prevent redlining and to require banks to invest and lend responsibly in the communities where they are chartered,” said Waters, who introduced the resolution with another House Democrat, Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York. “It is completely unacceptable for the OCC to use the cover of a pandemic to rush out a rule that will be harmful to communities that are already suffering during this crisis.”

Community groups like the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, the California Reinvestment Coalition and legal oversight group Democracy Forward agree that the administration has been keen on gutting the CRA.

In fact, the three groups have given notice they intend to sue the OCC over it.

“The OCC went against the majority of public comments and introduced new, gaping loopholes into the rules that will allow banks to reduce their focus on lower-income borrowers and communities: the very communities the law was intended to protect,” said NCRC’s Jesse Van Tol.

The agency took just 40 days to post the final rule after receiving more than 7,000 public comment letters on the revision.

During a recent seminar, the nonpartisan Urban Institute summarized what’s wrong with the changes:

-- The metric used for assessing CRA compliance neglects community needs.

-- There is no anaylsis of the proposed rule’s impact.

-- It would result in a loss of public data.

Federal Reserve Board Governor Lael Brainard told another UI meeting that CRA reform should not be rushed, and should rather be the result of a united front among financial regulators.

“Given that reforms to the CRA regulations are likely to set expectations for a few decades, it is more important to get the reforms done right than to do them quickly,” Brainard said. “That requires giving external stakeholders sufficient time and analysis to provide meaningful feedback on a range of options for modernizing the regulations.”

Researchers believe it’s way too soon to downshift the fight against redlining, especially at a time when COVID-19 seems only to have widened racial disparities in housing.

According to UI’s Solomon Greene and Alanna McCargo, African Americans and Latinos have been hardest hit by stay-at-home orders and other public health measures put in place to slow the spread of COVID-19.

Because of a legacy of occupational segregation, the two researchers said, minorities are heavily overrepresented in low-wage jobs and in jobs that can’t transition to remote work. In April, Latino unemployment reached a record high of 18.9% and Black unemployment reached 16.7%.

Disinvesting in neighborhoods can add to the problem by causing real economic disparity, according to Redfin’s Dana Anderson: “Redlining remains a major factor in today’s wealth gap between Black and white families across the country.” Over the last 40 years, according to Redfin’s figures, the typical homeowner in a neighborhood that was redlined for mortgage lending by the federal government has gained 52% less in personal wealth generated by property value increases than one in a greenlined neighborhood.

But redlining hurts the entire community, not just owners of color, says Noel Andres Poyo, director of the National Association of Latino Community Asset Builders, testified during a congressional field hearing.

“When people do not have fair access to mainstream financial products and services, they tend to be less economically productive and experience less economic mobility,” he said. “Redlining and other forms of financial discrimination are market distortions, an insidious form of financial inefficiency, that threaten this nation’s economic future.”

-- Freelance writer Mark Fogarty contributed to this column.

At last count, some 4.7 million homeowners were in some kind of forbearance plan. That represents almost 9% of all mortgages. Taken together, just over $1 trillion in principal has gone unpaid during the COVID-19 crisis, according to analytics firm Black Knight.

When these folks’ forbearance plans end, some will go back to making regular house payments and make up the balance at the end of their loans. Others will have to add something to their normal payments until they catch up. But some folks won’t be able to make payments of any kind.

No one knows exactly how many borrowers will find themselves in deep trouble when their government-mandated forbearance plans end Aug. 31. But it’s likely to be so many that their lenders will find it difficult be to keep up with requests for further relief. Ditto for landlords, who also seem likely to be overwhelmed with requests for respite.

The good news is that the vast majority of people in forbearance have strong equity positions in their homes. According to Black Knight, “only” 9% have a combined loan-to-value ratio of 90% of higher. Put another way, some 446,000 owners have less than a 10% equity position in their homes and could be in danger of foreclosure.

Most of the remaining owners have enough equity in their properties to weather the storm. But the bad news is that many lenders have tightened the rules on loans based on the stake people have in their homes. Even with high credit scores and good employment histories, people may find it difficult to access the money they have stored in their home if they no longer have a regular income.

The next best choice for financially strapped borrowers, then, is to approach their lenders about what so-called “workout plans” may be available. Despite what some believe, lenders aren’t in the business of owning houses. So they should be willing to extend an olive branch to borrowers who meet the rules.

The kind of workout plans available are very similar to the forbearance plans offered to borrowers during the first months of the pandemic. Here’s a quick rundown:

-- Refinancing. A new loan with new terms, interest rates and monthly payments that are more affordable.

-- Repayment. Allows you pay the past due amount, along with your current payments, over a specified period to bring your mortgage current. The repayment period could be months or years, depending on your situation.

-- Forbearance. Your lender will suspend or reduce your monthly payments for a specific time, after which you must start paying. You also will be required to make up the payments you missed as you go along.

-- Modification. The lender will agree to change the terms of your mortgage -- the amount you owe, the length of the loan, the interest rate -- to make your payment more affordable.

While each of these options has drawbacks, they are all designed to help you stay in your home while recovering from your financial setback at the hands of COVID-19. Your only other choices are to sell and move, or to slide into foreclosure.

If you choose to sell, inventory is so tight right now that you should be able to sell quickly and at a good price. If you opt for foreclosure, the process isn’t likely to start until you’re four months in arrears, so at least you’ll have extra time to figure out where you are going.

Applying for extended relief won’t be nearly as easy as it was to obtain forbearance. Under the government’s forbearance rules, all you had to do was apply. This time around, though, the paperwork needed could be overwhelming.

Late last month, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau gave lenders permission to offer certain loss mitigation options even if the borrower turns in an incomplete application for assistance. But even with that, it’s always a good idea to align yourself with a housing counselor who knows the ins and outs of the process. You can find government-certified counselors on the Department of Housing and Urban Development website (hud.gov).

But start the process early. Servicers of federally backed mortgages are required to contact borrowers at least 30 days before their original forbearance period ends to determine an appropriate next step. But lenders and loan servicers of all kinds are likely to be inundated with requests, so don’t wait. Be proactive.

“Communication is key to a successful outcome,” Bob Driscoll of Rockland Trust, a community bank in Massachusetts, advised. “Asking for help isn’t always easy, especially if you’ve already been in a forbearance plan. But in my experience, if you are honest and can state what you want, you should be successful. We know you need help.”

Take notes about every conversation you have, and make and save copies of every form and document you are asked to submit. And if you don’t hear back within a reasonable amount of time, get back on the horn. You must be your own best advocate.

Remember, though, more relief is not automatic. The decision “will depend on the homeowner’s financial situation when the forbearance plan has concluded, and whether they can afford to make extra payments over time, they can make only their existing monthly payment or they’d had a permanent impact to their ability to pay their existing monthly payment,” Malloy Evans, vice president and chief credit officer at Fannie Mae, told me in an email.

Now, a quick word about help for renters. According to LawAtlas.org, a million tenants are evicted from their homes annually, and that number is likely to be compounded when temporary eviction moratoria end.

Twelve states are set to lift their protections by Aug. 31. And in some cities within those states, landlords need only 24 hours after receiving an eviction judgment to retake possession. “Eviction is a looming crisis as we begin to lift out of the pandemic,” says Megan Hatch, a research fellow at the Center for Public Health Law Research and an associate professor at Cleveland State University.

A tenant’s best defense is to know the landlord-tenant laws where they reside. There isn’t a central clearinghouse that I know of for these laws everywhere, but LawAtlas has a data set of state-, county- and city-level laws and court rules in effect as of Aug. 31, 2019, in 10 of the largest cities in each of the four census regions.

“The data set is the only comprehensive resource on eviction law at the city level that provides not only the proper citations but also the full text of the law in each city,” according to CPHLR’s Joshua Waimberg.

Also take a look at KnowYourOptions.com, a site set up by Fannie Mae as a resource for renters and owners.

An opportunity for first-time buyers to find houses priced below market value is presenting itself in a number of places across the country.

Over the 11-week period after March 11, when the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 virus a pandemic, thousands of sellers listed their homes at a discount, according to Weiss Analytics. Not always by a huge discount -- perhaps just a few thousand dollars -- but significant enough that bargain hunters should perk up their antennae.

Even when sellers don’t drop their asking prices, nearly 7 in 10 would be willing to accept a lower offer just to get to the closing table, according to a LendingTree survey of nearly 1,000 people who currently have their homes on the market.

Just over half the sellers polled by LendingTree said they’re “seriously worried” about selling their homes because of the pandemic and resulting economic recession. An additional 36% are “somewhat concerned,” and nearly a third are “extremely anxious” about selling anytime this year.

New listings at or below the $200,000 range are the most likely to be discounted, Allan Weiss, a co-founder of the popular Case-Shiller price index, told me in a phone interview. And the lower the price range, the deeper the discount -- up to 70% in some places.

More often, though, houses are being priced just $2,000-$3,000 below market, Weiss said. Not in every market, but in what he called “micro-clusters” of neighborhoods and communities where house values are no higher than $200,000. Even in spots where median prices are rising, discounted properties can be found.

Sellers offer their homes at below-market prices for any number of reasons. They may want to sell quickly. They may owe little or nothing on a property that has increased in value over the time they’ve owned it, so undercutting the market isn’t so painful. But they also may be unemployed and no longer able to handle their house payments.

Whatever the reason, many in the lower-price tiers seem to be lowering their expectations. “Every single metric -- sales volume, median price -- gets worse as you filter down from $200,000,” Weiss told me.

At least one-quarter of new listings in the nation’s Top 25 metro areas are discounted, according to Weiss’ analysis. Three small Texas metro areas -- El Paso, San Antonio and Killeen -- currently offer the largest percentage of properties priced below market. But bargains can also be found in major markets like Wichita, Kansas; New Haven, Connecticut; Akron, Ohio; Portland, Oregon; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Signs of the Apocalypse: Just before the pandemic struck, the co-founder and former CEO of Zillow listed his Los Angles manse for $24 million -- nearly $8 million more than the site’s oft-maligned automated valuation Zestimate model says it’s worth. Some realty agents have complained that the popular tool is wildly inaccurate.

Meanwhile, some people can never change their stripes. To wit, one of the first people charged with trying to scam the Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program is a convicted mortgage fraudster.

Kurt Sanborn, a former spokesman for the Lowell, Massachusetts, police superintendent, was convicted and sentenced to 27 months in prison in 2014 after pleading guilty to federal mortgage fraud charges. Now he’s been charged with conspiring to seek SBA-backed forgivable loans intended as COVID-19 relief.

Speaking of fraud, attempts to electronically intercept real estate transactions remain big business for swindlers.

According to the FBI, these thefts are part of a fraud category that tops the list of high-loss crimes, resulting in almost $1.8 billion in losses to businesses and consumers. By comparison, investment and real estate rental fraud ranked fourth and fifth on the FBI’s list of top crime losses, costing a “paltry” $222 million and $221 million, respectively.

Wire fraud occurs when thieves intercept emails, so real estate agents should never send instructions electronically. If you receive something via email from your real estate or settlement agent, check out its authenticity before doing anything else.

Telephone utility fraud is also on the uptick. In this type of ruse, a scammer calls saying you were overcharged by your (unnamed) energy supplier and are due a refund. In another version, the reprobate offers a big discount. But to verify your identity, they say, we need your account number.

If you are on the receiving end of one of these calls, hang up. The key is that they don’t know the name of your utility or supplier. Moreover, a utility will not call you about a refund or discount, and a licensed and reputable energy supplier is required by law to give you the company’s name and license number.

If you are not specifically represented by an agent when you purchase a house, you are not entitled to the share of the sales commission that your agent would have earned, had you had one. Under the law in most states, you must be a licensed professional to get a cut of the deal.