Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2012
Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies As discussed in Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements, the Company is obligated to make payments in the future to the former minority owners of Corvisa of up to $1.2 million if revenue targets are achieved. The Company has recorded a liability of $0.9 million, based on management’s estimate of the earnings targets being achieved. As of September 30, 2012, $0.4 million is recorded in the accrued expenses line item of the condensed consolidated balance sheet, while $0.5 million is recorded in the noncurrent liabilities line item. The full amount of the liability is included in the other liabilities line item of the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2011. The Company also has contingent obligations related to a separation agreement with a former Mango employee of up to $0.3 million. As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, there was a liability for this contingent obligation of $0.2 million in the other current liabilities and $0.1 million in the other liabilities line items in the consolidated balance sheets. The Company has received indemnification and loan repurchase demands with respect to alleged violations of representations and warranties (“defects”) made in loan sale and securitization agreements. These demands have been received substantially beginning in 2006 and have continued into 2012. Prior to the Company ceasing the origination of loans in its mortgage lending business, it sold loans to securitization trusts and other third parties and agreed to repurchase a loan due to missing documentation or breaches of representations or warranties made in sale documents that materially adversely affected the value of the loan. Beginning in 1997 and ending in 2007, affiliates of the Company sold loans to securitization trusts and third parties with the potential of such repurchase obligations. The aggregate original principal balance of these loans was $43.1 billion at the time of sale or securitization. The remaining principal balance of these loans is not available as these loans are serviced by third parties and may have been refinanced, sold or liquidated. During 2011 and 2012, the Company has received claims to repurchase loans with original principal balances of approximately $24.6 million. These claims have not been acknowledged as valid by the Company. In some cases, claims were made against affiliates of the Company that have ceased operations and have no or limited assets. The Company has not repurchased any loans in 2011 or 2012. Historically, repurchases of loans or indemnification of losses where a loan defect has been alleged have been insignificant and any future losses for alleged loan defects have not been deemed to be probable or reasonably estimable; therefore, the Company has recorded no reserves related to these claims. The Company does not use internal groupings for purposes of determining the status of these loans. The Company is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments related to repurchase demands because the Company does not have access to information relating to loans sold and securitized and the number or amount of claims deemed probable of assertion is not known nor is it reasonably estimated. Further, the validity of claims received remains questionable. Also, considering that the Company completed its last sale or securitization of loans during 2007, the Company believes that it will be difficult for a claimant to successfully validate any additional repurchase demands. Management does not expect that the potential impact of claims will be material to the Company's financial statements. Pending Litigation. The Company is a party to various legal proceedings. Except as set forth below, these proceedings are of an ordinary and routine nature. Although it is not possible to predict the outcome of any legal proceeding, in the opinion of management, other than the active proceedings described in detail below, proceedings and actions against the Company should not, individually, or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the Company's financial condition, operations and liquidity. Furthermore, due to the uncertainty of any potential loss as a result of pending litigation and due to the Company's belief that an adverse ruling is not probable, the Company has not accrued a loss contingency related to the following matters in its condensed consolidated financial statements. However, a material outcome in one or more of the active proceedings described below could have a material impact on the results of operations in a particular quarter or fiscal year. On May 21, 2008, a purported class action case was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, by the New Jersey Carpenters' Health Fund, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated. Defendants in the case included NovaStar Mortgage Funding Corporation (“NMFC”) and its individual directors, several securitization trusts sponsored by the Company ("affiliated defendants") and several unaffiliated investment banks and credit rating agencies. The case was removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On June 16, 2009, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, alleging that the defendants violated sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, by making allegedly false statements regarding mortgage loans that served as collateral for securities purchased by plaintiff and the purported class members. On August 31, 2009, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims, which the court granted on March 31, 2011, with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on May 16, 2011, and the Company again filed a motion to dismiss. On March 29, 2012, the court dismissed the plaintiff's second amended complaint with prejudice and without leave to replead. The plaintiff filed an appeal, which remains pending. Given the court's ruling in an early stage of the litigation, the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that the affiliated defendants have meritorious defenses to the case and expects them to defend the case vigorously. On July 9, 2010 and on February 11, 2011, Cambridge Place Investment Management, Inc. filed complaints in the Suffolk, Massachusetts Superior Court against NMFC and numerous other entities seeking damages on account of losses associated with residential mortgage-backed securities purchased by plaintiff's assignors. The complaints allege untrue statements and omissions of material facts relating to loan underwriting and credit enhancement. The complaints also allege a violation of Section 410 of the Massachusetts Uniform Securities Act (Chapter 110A of the Massachusetts General Laws). Defendants removed the cases to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and plaintiff filed motions to remand the cases back to state court. On August 22, 2011, the federal court remanded these cases back to state court, and on October 14, 2011, the plaintiff filed amended complaints. In December 2011, the Company, together with the other defendants in the litigation, filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaints alleging that the plaintiff lacked standing. On March 12, 2012, the court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of standing, and the defendants sought an interlocutory appeal of the denial, which the appellate court declined to hear. On April 26, 2012, the defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaints for a failure to state a claim. By order dated September 28, 2012, the court granted the motion to dismiss as to NMFC. On June 20, 2011, the National Credit Union Administration Board, as liquidating agent of U.S. Central Federal Credit Union, filed an action against NMFC and numerous other defendants in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, claiming that the defendants issued or underwrote residential mortgage-backed securities pursuant to allegedly false or misleading registration statements, prospectuses, and/or prospectus supplements. On October 12, 2011, the complaint was served on NMFC. On December 20, 2011, NMFC filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint and to strike certain paragraphs of the complaint. On July 25, 2012, the court granted the motion in part and denied the motion in part. The plaintiff was granted leave to amend the complaint. On August 24, 2012, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint making essentially the same claims against NMFC. On October 29, 2012, NMFC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. This litigation is in an early stage, and the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that NMFC has meritorious defenses to the case and expects it to defend the case vigorously. On May 30, 2012, Woori Bank filed an action against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. and NovaStar ABS CDO I, Ltd. (collectively, “NCDO”) and certain other unrelated entities in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation and unjust enrichment based on allegations that defendants knew that NCDO securities purchased by plaintiff involved more risk than their ratings suggested. Plaintiff dismissed, without prejudice, NovaStar ABS CDO I, Ltd., and on August 20, 2012, plaintiff filed an amended complaint against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. and other, unrelated entities. The amended complaint alleged the same claims against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. On September 12, 2012, NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. This litigation is in an early stage, and the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that NCDO has meritorious defenses to the case and expects NCDO to defend the case vigorously.

Commitments and Contingencies

As discussed in Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements, the Company is obligated to make payments in the future to the former minority owners of Corvisa of up to $1.2 million if revenue targets are achieved. The Company has recorded a liability of $0.9 million, based on management’s estimate of the earnings targets being achieved. As of September 30, 2012, $0.4 million is recorded in the accrued expenses line item of the condensed consolidated balance sheet, while $0.5 million is recorded in the noncurrent liabilities line item. The full amount of the liability is included in the other liabilities line item of the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2011.

The Company also has contingent obligations related to a separation agreement with a former Mango employee of up to $0.3 million. As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, there was a liability for this contingent obligation of $0.2 million in the other current liabilities and $0.1 million in the other liabilities line items in the consolidated balance sheets.

The Company has received indemnification and loan repurchase demands with respect to alleged violations of representations and warranties (“defects”) made in loan sale and securitization agreements. These demands have been received substantially beginning in 2006 and have continued into 2012. Prior to the Company ceasing the origination of loans in its mortgage lending business, it sold loans to securitization trusts and other third parties and agreed to repurchase a loan due to missing documentation or breaches of representations or warranties made in sale documents that materially adversely affected the value of the loan. Beginning in 1997 and ending in 2007, affiliates of the Company sold loans to securitization trusts and third parties with the potential of such repurchase obligations. The aggregate original principal balance of these loans was $43.1 billion at the time of sale or securitization. The remaining principal balance of these loans is not available as these loans are serviced by third parties and may have been refinanced, sold or liquidated. During 2011 and 2012, the Company has received claims to repurchase loans with original principal balances of approximately $24.6 million. These claims have not been acknowledged as valid by the Company. In some cases, claims were made against affiliates of the Company that have ceased operations and have no or limited assets. The Company has not repurchased any loans in 2011 or 2012.

Historically, repurchases of loans or indemnification of losses where a loan defect has been alleged have been insignificant and any future losses for alleged loan defects have not been deemed to be probable or reasonably estimable; therefore, the Company has recorded no reserves related to these claims. The Company does not use internal groupings for purposes of determining the status of these loans. The Company is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments related to repurchase demands because the Company does not have access to information relating to loans sold and securitized and the number or amount of claims deemed probable of assertion is not known nor is it reasonably estimated. Further, the validity of claims received remains questionable. Also, considering that the Company completed its last sale or securitization of loans during 2007, the Company believes that it will be difficult for a claimant to successfully validate any additional repurchase demands. Management does not expect that the potential impact of claims will be material to the Company's financial statements.

Pending Litigation.

The Company is a party to various legal proceedings. Except as set forth below, these proceedings are of an ordinary and routine nature.

Although it is not possible to predict the outcome of any legal proceeding, in the opinion of management, other than the active proceedings described in detail below, proceedings and actions against the Company should not, individually, or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the Company's financial condition, operations and liquidity. Furthermore, due to the uncertainty of any potential loss as a result of pending litigation and due to the Company's belief that an adverse ruling is not probable, the Company has not accrued a loss contingency related to the following matters in its condensed consolidated financial statements. However, a material outcome in one or more of the active proceedings described below could have a material impact on the results of operations in a particular quarter or fiscal year.

On May 21, 2008, a purported class action case was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, by the New Jersey Carpenters' Health Fund, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated. Defendants in the case included NovaStar Mortgage Funding Corporation (“NMFC”) and its individual directors, several securitization trusts sponsored by the Company ("affiliated defendants") and several unaffiliated investment banks and credit rating agencies. The case was removed to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On June 16, 2009, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages, alleging that the defendants violated sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, by making allegedly false statements regarding mortgage loans that served as collateral for securities purchased by plaintiff and the purported class members. On August 31, 2009, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims, which the court granted on March 31, 2011, with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint on May 16, 2011, and the Company again filed a motion to dismiss. On March 29, 2012, the court dismissed the plaintiff's second amended complaint with prejudice and without leave to replead. The plaintiff filed an appeal, which remains pending. Given the court's ruling in an early stage of the litigation, the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that the affiliated defendants have meritorious defenses to the case and expects them to defend the case vigorously.

On July 9, 2010 and on February 11, 2011, Cambridge Place Investment Management, Inc. filed complaints in the Suffolk, Massachusetts Superior Court against NMFC and numerous other entities seeking damages on account of losses associated with residential mortgage-backed securities purchased by plaintiff's assignors. The complaints allege untrue statements and omissions of material facts relating to loan underwriting and credit enhancement. The complaints also allege a violation of Section 410 of the Massachusetts Uniform Securities Act (Chapter 110A of the Massachusetts General Laws). Defendants removed the cases to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and plaintiff filed motions to remand the cases back to state court. On August 22, 2011, the federal court remanded these cases back to state court, and on October 14, 2011, the plaintiff filed amended complaints. In December 2011, the Company, together with the other defendants in the litigation, filed a joint motion to dismiss the complaints alleging that the plaintiff lacked standing. On March 12, 2012, the court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of standing, and the defendants sought an interlocutory appeal of the denial, which the appellate court declined to hear. On April 26, 2012, the defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaints for a failure to state a claim. By order dated September 28, 2012, the court granted the motion to dismiss as to NMFC.

On June 20, 2011, the National Credit Union Administration Board, as liquidating agent of U.S. Central Federal Credit Union, filed an action against NMFC and numerous other defendants in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas, claiming that the defendants issued or underwrote residential mortgage-backed securities pursuant to allegedly false or misleading registration statements, prospectuses, and/or prospectus supplements. On October 12, 2011, the complaint was served on NMFC. On December 20, 2011, NMFC filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint and to strike certain paragraphs of the complaint. On July 25, 2012, the court granted the motion in part and denied the motion in part. The plaintiff was granted leave to amend the complaint. On August 24, 2012, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint making essentially the same claims against NMFC. On October 29, 2012, NMFC filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. This litigation is in an early stage, and the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that NMFC has meritorious defenses to the case and expects it to defend the case vigorously.

On May 30, 2012, Woori Bank filed an action against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. and NovaStar ABS CDO I, Ltd. (collectively, “NCDO”) and certain other unrelated entities in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation and unjust enrichment based on allegations that defendants knew that NCDO securities purchased by plaintiff involved more risk than their ratings suggested. Plaintiff dismissed, without prejudice, NovaStar ABS CDO I, Ltd., and on August 20, 2012, plaintiff filed an amended complaint against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. and other, unrelated entities. The amended complaint alleged the same claims against NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. On September 12, 2012, NovaStar ABS CDO I, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. This litigation is in an early stage, and the Company cannot provide an estimate of the range of any loss. The Company believes that NCDO has meritorious defenses to the case and expects NCDO to defend the case vigorously.