Commitments and Contingencies - Outstanding Litigation (Details)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2012
[PreferredTermSecuritiesXxMatterMember]
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Litigation Description	A complaint by a note-holder in Preferred Term Securities XX (“PreTSL XX”) was filed on July 16, 2010 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against Bimini Capital Management, Inc. (“Bimini”), the Bank of New York Mellon (“BNYM”), PreTSL XX, Ltd. and Hexagon Securities, LLC (“Hexagon”). The complaint, filed by Hildene Capital Management, LLC and Hildene Opportunities Fund, Ltd. (“Hildene”), alleges that Hildene suffered losses as a result of Bimini’s repurchase of all outstanding fixed/floating rate capital securities of Bimini Capital Trust II for less than par value from PreTSL XX in October 2009. Hildene has alleged claims against BNYM for breach of the Indenture, breach of fiduciary duties and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and claims against Bimini for tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and “rescission/illegality”. Plaintiff also alleges derivative claims brought in the name of Nominal Defendant BNYM. (On May 2, 2011, Hexagon and Nominal Defendant PreTSL XX were voluntarily dismissed without prejudice by Hildene). On May 23, 2011, Bimini and BNYM moved to dismiss Hildene’s derivative claims, and Bimini also moved to dismiss Hildene’s claim for “rescission/illegality.” On October 19, 2011, PreTSL XX, Ltd. moved to intervene as an additional plaintiff in the action, and Bimini and BNYM opposed that motion. On August 23, 2012, the court issued a Decision and Order granting PreTSL XX, Ltd.’s motion to intervene. Bimini and BNYM filed appeals in the Appellate Division, First Department in October 2012. The joint appeal has been calendared for the Appellate Division’s March 2013 term. Bimini and BNYM have obtained a stay of all proceedings in the trial court through April 24, 2013. Bimini denies that the repurchase was improper and intends to continue to defend the suit vigorously.
Loss Contingency, Lawsuit Filing Date	July 16, 2010
Loss Contingency, Name of Defendant	Bimini Capital Management, Inc.
Loss Contingency, Name of Plaintiff	Hildene Capital Management, LLC
Loss Contingency, Domicile of Litigation	Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County
Loss Contingency, Allegations	Hildene has alleged claims against BNYM for breach of the Indenture, breach of fiduciary duties and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and claims against Bimini for tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and “rescission/illegality”.
Managment Position	Bimini denies that the repurchase was improper and intends to continue to defend the suit vigorously.
[MassachusettsMutualLifeInsuranceCompanyMatterMember]
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Litigation Description	On March 2, 2011, MortCo and Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation (“Opteum Acceptance”) (referred to together herein as “MortCo”) received a letter dated March 1, 2011 from Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“Mass Mutual”) enclosing a draft complaint against MortCo. In summary, Mass Mutual alleges that it purchased residential mortgage-backed securities offered by MortCo in August 2005 and the first quarter of 2006 and that MortCo made false representations and warranties in connection with the sale of the securities in violation of Mass Gen. Laws Ch. 110A § 410(a)(2) (the “Massachusetts Blue Sky Law”). In its letter, Mass Mutual claims it is entitled to damages in excess of $25 million. However, no monetary demand is contained in the draft complaint and the actual damages Mass Mutual claims to have incurred is uncertain. Mass Mutual has not filed the complaint or initiated litigation. On March 14, 2011 Mass Mutual and MortCo entered into a Tolling Agreement through June 1, 2011 so that Mass Mutual could address its allegations against MortCo without incurring litigation costs. Mass Mutual has not yet contacted MortCo to schedule such discussions. The parties extended the Tolling Agreement through June 1, 2013. MortCo denies it made false representations and warranties in connection with the sale of securities to Mass Mutual. Mass Mutual has taken no action to prosecute its claim against MortCo, and the range of loss or potential loss, if any, cannot reasonably be estimated. Should Mass Mutual initiate litigation, MortCo will defend such litigation vigorously.
Loss Contingency, Lawsuit Filing Date	March 2, 2011
Loss Contingency, Name of Defendant	Opteum Mortgage Acceptance Corporation
Loss Contingency, Name of Plaintiff	Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company
Loss Contingency, Allegations	Mass Mutual alleges that it purchased residential mortgage-backed securities offered by MortCo in August 2005 and the first quarter of 2006 and that MortCo made false representations and warranties in connection with the sale of the securities in violation of Mass Gen. Laws Ch. 110A § 410(a)(2) (the “Massachusetts Blue Sky Law”).
Managment Position	MortCo denies it made false representations and warranties in connection with the sale of securities to Mass Mutual. Mass Mutual has taken no action to prosecute its claim against MortCo, and the range of loss or potential loss, if any, cannot reasonably be estimated. Should Mass Mutual initiate litigation, MortCo will defend such litigation vigorously.
[CoastBankOfFloridaMember]
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Litigation Description	On June 14, 2007, a complaint was filed in the Circuit Court of the Twelfth Judicial District in and for Manatee County, Florida by Coast Bank of Florida (“Coast”) against MortCo seeking monetary damages and specific performance and alleging breach of an alleged oral contract for allegedly failing to convert approximately fifty construction loans to permanent financing. A non-jury trial was scheduled to begin on January 17, 2012. However, on January 16, 2012 the parties reached an agreement. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, MortCo, without admitting any allegations, paid Coast $800,000 and the litigation and all related claims was dismissed with prejudice. Each party was responsible for the payment of its own legal fees and expenses.
Loss Contingency, Lawsuit Filing Date	June 14, 2007
Loss Contingency, Name of Defendant	MortCo
Loss Contingency, Name of Plaintiff	Coast Bank of Florida
Loss Contingency, Domicile of Litigation	Circuit Court of the Twelfth Judicial District in and for Manatee County
Loss Contingency, Allegations	alleging breach of an alleged oral contract for allegedly failing to convert approximately fifty construction loans to permanent financing
Managment Position	A non-jury trial was scheduled to begin on January 17, 2012. However, on January 16, 2012 the parties reached an agreement. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, MortCo, without admitting any allegations, paid Coast $800,000 and the litigation and all related claims was dismissed with prejudice. Each party was responsible for the payment of its own legal fees and expenses