Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Serious Delinquency rates declined in May, by Calculatedriskblog.com


Fannie Mae reported that the Single-Family Serious Delinquency rate declined in May to 3.57% from 3.63% April. The serious delinquency rate is down from 4.14% in May last year, and this is the lowest level since April 2009.

The Fannie Mae serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 5.59%.

Freddie Mac reported that the Single-Family serious delinquency rate declined slightly in May to 3.50%, from 3.51% in April. Freddie’s rate is only down from 3.53% in May 2011. Freddie’s serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 4.20%.

To Read the rest of this article go to calculatedriskblog.com

Piedmont Victorian – 5775 NE Garfield Portland, OR 97211


I recently toured a beautifully remodeled Victorian home in the Piedmont neighborhood in Portland, OR. Here’s a short video about the home, which is listed at $399,000:

This house really caught my eye from the moment I stepped on the front porch. Here is a photo gallery of pics I snapped with my phone while I toured the house with Joe:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

The owners have taken great care in restoring and remodeling this house, with a great mix of classic and modern elements. Joe even told me how much time he spent filling the original posts on the porch, and it is a lot!

Financing for 5775 Ne Garfield

There are a range of home loan options available for this property. As I said in the video, it does qualify for FHA financing, which has flexible credit guidelines and financing for up to 96.5% of the home’s value. To learn more about financing this property, or any other in Oregon and Washington, feel free to contact me at 503.799.4112 or email jason@mypmb.us

You can learn more about this great home at the following website:

http://www.5775negarfield.com

Contact the listing broker,

Michael Rysavy
Oregon Realty
503.860.4705

Thanks for taking a minute to check out this property!

Jason Hillard

Mortgage Advisor MLO #119032

Pinnacle Mortgage Bankers

a div of Pinnacle Capital Mortgage Corp

1706 D St Suite A Vancouver, WA 98663

http://www.homeloanninjas.com/

NMLS 81395 WA CL-81395

Equal Housing Lender

What the heck does “loan-to-value” mean?


There are lots of terms we use in the mortgage industry that aren’t part of everyday parlance. Today, I’ll talk a little bit about “loan-to-value”, or LTV for short.

In fact, I have a video that’s less than 90 seconds long if you’re in a hurry:

Loan-to-value

So, just to recap what I said in the video, your loan-to-value is the percentage of your home’s value that you finance with your home loan.

Whether you a purchasing a home, or refinancing your existing mortgage, LTV is an extremely important factor in making an educated decision about your home loan.

I’ll give you an example:

FHA – When purchasing a home using an FHA home loan, you can finance up to 96.5% of the appraised value of the property. If you are refinancing, you have two options: “rate & term” or “cash-out”. Rate & term means you are refinancing to lower your rate or change the length of your loan. A rate & term refinance is capped at a 97.75% LTV for FHA. Cash-out FHA refinances are limited to 85 per cent of the value of your home. If your current mortgage is an FHA loan, you can refinance with an FHA streamline, which does not have an LTV limitation.

So your needs define your loan-to-value, which helps define what home loan program you are going to apply for.

If you would like to learn more about loan-to-value, other mortgage terminology, or home loans in Oregon and Washington, I invite you to visit my site or contact me. I am long on answers and short on sales pitches 🙂

Thanks for taking a minute to read this post!

Picture: Jason HillardJason Hillard – homeloanninjas.com

Mortgage Advisor in Oregon and Washington MLO#119032

Pinnacle Mortgage Bankers

a div of Pinnacle Capital Mortgage Corp

503.799.4112

jason@mypmb.us

1706 D St Vancouver, WA 98663

NMLS 81395 WA CL-81395

Equal Housing Lender

Bank of America Offers $20,000 Short-Sale Incentive to Homeowners, by Kimberly Miller, The Palm Beach Post


Bank of America, the nation’s largest mortgage servicer, is offering Florida homeowners up to $20,000 to short sale their homes rather than letting them linger in foreclosure.

The limited-time offer has received little promotion from the Charlotte, N.C.-based bank, which sent emails to select Florida Realtors earlier this week outlining basic details of the plan.

Only homeowners whose short sales are submitted for approval to Bank of America before Nov. 30 will qualify. The homes must have no offers on them already and the closing must occur before Aug. 31, 2012.

A short sale is when a bank agrees to accept a lower sales price on a home than what the borrower owes on the loan.

Realtors said the Bank of America plan, which has a minimum payout amount of $5,000, is a genuine incentive to struggling homeowners who may otherwise fall into Florida’s foreclosure abyss.

The current timeline to foreclosure in Florida is an average of 676 days — nearly two years — according to real estate analysis company RealtyTrac. The national average foreclosure timeline is 318 days.

“I think this is a positive sign that the bank is being creative to try and help homeowners and get things moving,” said Paul Baltrun, who works with real estate and mortgages at the Law Office of Paul A. Krasker in West Palm Beach. “With real estate attorneys handling these cases, you’re talking two, three, four years before there’s going to be a resolution in a foreclosure.”

Guy Cecala, chief executive officer and publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, called the short sale payout a “bribe.”

“You can call it a relocation fee, but it’s basically a bribe to make sure the borrower leaves the house in good condition and in an orderly fashion,” Cecala said. “It makes good business sense considering you may have to put $20,000 into a foreclosed home to fix it up.”

Homeowners, especially ones who feel cheated by the bank, have been known to steal appliances and other fixtures, or damage the home.

“This might be the banks finally waking up that they can have someone in there with an incentive not to damage the property,” said Realtor Shannon Brink, with Re/Max Prestige Realty in West Palm Beach. “Isn’t it better to have someone taking care of the pool and keeping the air conditioner on?”

A spokesman for Bank of America said the program is being tested in Florida, and if successful, could be expanded to other states.

Wells Fargo and J.P. Morgan Chase have similar short-sale programs, sometimes called “cash for keys.”

Wells Fargo spokesman Jason Menke said his company offers up to $20,000 on eligible short sales that are left in “broom swept” condition. Although the program is not advertised, deals are mostly made on homes in states with lengthy foreclosure timelines, he said.

And caveats exist. The Wells Fargo short-sale incentive is only good on first-lien loans that it owns, which is about 20 percent of its total portfolio.

Bank of America’s plan excludes Ginnie Mae, Federal Housing Administration and VA loans.

Similar to the federal Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives program, or HAFA, which offers $3,000 in relocation assistance, the Bank of America program may also waive a homeowner’s deficiency judgment at closing.

A deficiency judgment in a short sale is basically the difference between what the house sells for and what is still owed on the loan.

HAFA, which began in April 2010, has seen limited success with just 15,531 short sales completed nationwide through August.

But Realtors said cash for keys programs can work.

Joe Kendall, a broker associate at Sandals Realty in Fort Myers, said he recently closed on a short sale where the seller got $25,000 from Chase.

“They realize people are struggling and this is another way to get the homes off the books,” he said.

HUD Cuts To Devastate Mortgage Counseling Agencies Across Nation, By Ben Hallman, IWATCHNEWS.ORG


Housing counselors at Western Tennessee Legal Services were plenty busy, even before one of the region’s largest employers, a Goodyear tire factory in tiny Union City, shut its doors in July.

The plant closing, which put nearly 2,000 employees out of work in a rural part of the state, meant more work for counselors like Emma Covington. Covington said she already takes 18 to 20 calls a day and meets in person with people who need counseling on foreclosures and other housing issues.

Now, like many of its clients, the legal nonprofit will have to make do with less.

Earlier this year, Congress defunded the $88 million grant program administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that helped support more than 7,500 housing counselors across the country, including those at Western Tennessee. Funds run out Sept. 30.

The cuts come at a terrible time, say counseling advocates.

In the second quarter of 2011, more than 3.4 million home mortgages nationwide were 90 or more days delinquent or in the foreclosure process. More than one in five mortgage borrowers owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth, according to government data.

The counseling money may not be coming back. The House Appropriations Committee recently approved a budget for 2012 that also doesn’t include any HUD housing counseling dollars. A group of senators is trying to restore funding, but even if successful, it is unlikely that funds will reach counselors before next spring, at the earliest.

The looming gap in funding and continued uncertainty about the program’s future means layoffs and reduced hours for counselors at nonprofits across the country at a time when demand for their services is greater than ever.

“These are rough times for our clients and our staff,” said Steven Xanthopoulos, the executive director at Western Tennessee Legal Services. “We are faced with some hard decisions.”

Western Tennessee may lay off as many as four employees when its $1.2 million HUD grant runs out at the end of this month, Xanthopoulos said. Many more counselors could lose their jobs at the 25 rural legal aid groups throughout Appalachia and the Mississippi River delta that the nonprofit supports with its share of the grant money, he said.

The National Council of La Raza supports 50 housing counseling agencies that helped 65,000 families last year with about $1.2 million from HUD. Thirty of those agencies will close their doors if Congress does not restore the HUD housing counseling funding, said Graciela Aponte, a legislative analyst.

“We are in the middle of foreclosure crisis,” Aponte said. “This is devastating for our families.”

HUD grants also support one of the nation’s biggest housing counseling training programs. NeighborWorks America used a $3 million HUD grant to fund 1,200 housing counseling training scholarships to its mobile nonprofit training university last year. When the HUD money goes away, so will those scholarships, a spokesman said.

The program – whose cost is modest, by Washington standards – is being suspended at least in part because HUD is a full year behind distributing the grant money to housing groups.

“HUD has been slow to distribute the money and Congress zeroed in on that,” said Candace Mason, senior director of housing and national grants at the National Foundation for Credit Counseling.

In recent testimony , a HUD official said that the agency has a plan to reduce the distribution timeframe to 180 days.

Some have questioned the effectiveness of the programs but the Government Accountability Office cited several studies that show counseling helps struggling homeowners avoid foreclosure and prevent them from lapsing back into default – especially if the counseling occurs early in the foreclosure process.

One study cited by the GAO found that clients who received counseling were 1.7 times as likely to be removed from the foreclosure process by their mortgage servicer as borrowers who did not. Clients who got loan modifications paid an average of $267 a month less than they would have otherwise, according to the study.

Counseling advocates say there appears to be general antipathy toward HUD, an oft-criticized federal agency, from some members of Congress related to the agencies past failings.

Congress also hasn’t yet provided $45 million mandated by the Dodd-Frank financial regulation law for HUD to set up a new Office of Housing Counseling, which will set counseling standards and dole out grants to agencies.

Here, too, HUD has been slow to act. According to the GAO, a working group at HUD is “in the process of developing a plan” for how to organize that new office, but is unable to say when it will submit it.

HUD already has an office that seems to have a similar function: the Office of Single-Family Housing. HUD officials say the primary change needed to create the new office is the reassignment of staffers who work on housing counseling activities, but also have other responsibilities.

Staffers at the House committees responsible for the funding did not comment for this story.

Foreclosure prevention made up the single-biggest slice of any housing counselor’s workload in 2009 and 2010, according to HUD, with nearly half of all queries coming from homeowners in trouble. What makes the HUD grants so valuable, housing counselors say, is that the money can be spent to help people resolve a variety of housing woes, in addition to foreclosure.

For example, the Federal Housing Administration requires seniors who want a Home Equity Conversion, or reverse mortgage to first receive counseling. Since 2005, more than 486,000 seniors received one of those loans, about 3.6 percent of all counseling activity, according to HUD

Many of these seniors, especially in rural areas, have nowhere else to turn, said Covington, the Tennessee housing counselor. “People can’t afford to travel to our office much less to Memphis and Nashville,” she said.

Homes on the Hill, a Columbus, Ohio, counseling service, is already operating on a razor-thin margin in terms of both budget and staffing, said executive director Stephen Torsell. Counselors have

had their hours cut and clients have faced long waits for an appointment – several weeks in many cases.

The nonprofit receives HUD money through La Raza. The annual grant is quite small—about $75,000 per year—but like other housing nonprofits, Homes on the Hill uses the HUD money to solicit matching funds from private donors.

There is still a chance that Congress will at least partially fund the housing counseling program for 2012. A Senate subcommittee recently signed off on $60 million in funding for 2012, but whether the funding makes it into law is uncertain

No End in Sight: Mortgage Loans Harder in High-Foreclosure Areas by Brian O’Connell, Mainstreet.com


NEW YORK (MainStreet) — Here’s another bitter pill for homeowners to swallow: If you live in an area with a high foreclosure rate, the chances of someone getting a loan to buy your house significantly decreases.

The news comes from the Federal Reserve’s latestreport, in which it concluded that mortgage lending was dramatically lower in communities and neighborhoods where foreclosures were surging, using data from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) and from the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA).

“Home-purchase lending in highly distressed census tracts identified by the Neighborhood Stabilization Program was 75% lower in 2010 than it had been in these same tracts in 2005,” the report said. “This decline was notably larger than that experienced in other tracts, and appears to primarily reflect a much sharper decrease in lending to higher-income borrowers in the highly distressed neighborhoods.”

The Fed uses the term “highly distressed” in place of the word “foreclosure”, but the message is clear: Banks and mortgage lenders are taking a big step back from lending to buyers who want a home in a high-foreclosure neighborhood.

It’s the same deal for borrowers who want to actually live in a home and buyers who want to purchase the property as aninvestment, as neither party seems to be having much luck in getting a home loan in a highly distressed neighborhood, according to the Fed. The lack of credit extended to investors could really hurt neighborhoods crippled by foreclosures.

“In the current period of high foreclosures and elevated levels of short sales, investor activity helps reduce the overhang of unsold and foreclosed properties,” the Federal Reserve says.

Overall, the Fed reports that 76% fewer mortgage loans were granted to “non-owner occupant” buyers in 2010, compared to 2005.

The Fed’s report reveals some other trends in the mortgage market:

  • Mortgage originations declined from just under 9 million loans to fewer than 8 million loans between 2009 and 2010. Most significant was the decline in the number of refinance loans despite historically low baseline mortgage interest rates throughout the year.  Home-purchase loans also declined, but less so than the decline in refinance lending.
  • While loans originated under the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance program and the Department of Veterans Affairs‘ (VA) loan guarantee program continue to account for a historically large proportion of loans, such lending fell more than did other types of lending.
  • In the absence of home equity problems and underwriting changes, roughly 2.3 million first-lien owner-occupant refinance loans would have been made during 2010 on top of the 4.5 million such loans that were actually originated.
  • A sharp drop in home-purchase lending activity occurred in the middle of 2010, right alongside the June closing deadline (although the deadline was retroactively extended to September). The ending of this program during 2010 may help explain the decline in the incidence of home-purchase lending to lower-income borrowers between the first and second halves of the year.

All in all, the report offers a pretty bleak – but even-handed and thorough – review of today’s home-purchase market.

Read more about the continuing effects of the housing crisis at MainStreet’s Foreclosure topic page.

Promoting Housing Recovery Parts 1 and 2, by Patrick Pulatie


Previously, I have posted articles regarding housing and foreclosure issues. The purpose was to begin a dialogue on the steps to be taken to alleviate the foreclosure crisis, and to promote housing recovery.   Now, we need to explore how to restart lending in the private sector.  This will be a three part article, with parts I and II herein, and III in the next post.

To begin, we must understand how we got to the point of where we are today, and whereby housing became so critical a factor in the economy. (This is only an overview. I leave it to the historians to fill in all the details.)

Part One – Agreeing On The Problems

Historical Backdrop

At the beginning of the 20th century, the U.S. population stood about 76,000,000 people. By the end of 2000, the population was over 310 million. The unprecedented growth in population resulted in the housing industry and related services becoming one of several major engines of wealth creation during the 20th century.

During the Depression, large numbers of farm and home foreclosures were occurring. The government began to get involved in housing to stop foreclosures and stimulate housing growth. This resulted in the creation of an FHA/Fannie Mae– like program, to support housing.

WWII led to major structural changes in the U.S., both economically and culturally. Manufacturing and technological changes spurred economic growth. Women entered the work force in huge numbers. Returning veterans came back from the war desiring to leave the rural areas, begin families, and enter the civilian workforce. The result was the baby boom generation and its coming influence.

From the 1950s through the 1970s, the US dominated the world economically. Real income growth was occurring for all households. Homeownership was obtainable for ever increasing numbers of people. Consumerism was rampant.

To support homeownership, the government created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac so that more people could partake in the American Dream. These entities would eventually become the primary source of mortgages in the U.S. F&F changed the way mortgages were funded, and changed the terms of mortgages, so that 30 year mortgages became the common type of loan, instead of 5 to 15 year mortgages.

Storm clouds were beginning to appear on the horizon at the same time. Japan, Korea, Germany, and other countries had now come out of their post war depressions. Manufacturing and industrial bases had been rebuilt. These countries now posed an economic threat to the U.S. by offering improved products, cheaper labor costs, and innovation. By the end of the 1970s, for many reasons, US manufacturing was decreasing, and service related industries were gaining importance.

In the 1980s and 1990s, manufacturing began to decline in the U.S. Service Industries were now becoming a major force in the economy. With the end of the Cold War in 1989, defense spending began to decline dramatically, further depressing the economy.

In the early 1990s, F&F engaged in efforts to increase their share of the mortgage market. They freely admitted wanting to control the housing market, and took steps to do so, undermining lenders and competition, and any attempts to regulate them.

In 1994, homeownership rates were at 64% in the US. President Clinton, along with Congress and in conjunction with Fannie and Freddie, came out with a new program with the intent to promote a 70% homeownership rate. This program was promoted even though economists generally considered 64% to be the maximum amount of homeownership that an economy could readily support. Above 64%, people would be 

“buying” homes, but without having the financial capabilities to repay a loan. The program focused upon low income persons and minorities. The result was greater demand for housing and homeownership, and housing values began to increase.

Lenders and Wall Street were being pushed out of the housing market by F&F, and had to find new markets to serve. F&F did not want to service the new markets being created by the government homeownership programs. The result was that Wall Street would naturally gravitate to that market, which was generally subprime, and also to the jumbo market, which F&F could not serve due to loan amount restrictions. This was the true beginning of securitized loan products.

The events of 9/11 would ultimately stoke the fires of home ownership even further. 9/11 occurred as the US was coming out of a significant recession, and to keep the country from sliding back into recession, the Fed lowered interest rates and kept them artificially low until 2003. Wall Street, recognizing the promise of good financial returns from securitized loans, freed up more and more capital for banks and mortgage bankers to lend. This led to even greater demand for homes and mortgages.

To meet the increased demand, home construction exploded. Ancillary services did well also, from infrastructure, schools, hospitals, roads, building materials, and home decor. The economy was booming, even though this was “mal-investment” of resources. (Currently, as a result of this activity, there are estimated to be from 2m to 3.5m in excess housing units, with approximately 400k being added yearly to housing stock.)

It did not stop there. Buyers, in their increasing zeal, were bidding for homes, increasing the price of homes in many states by 50 to 100,000 dollars more than what was reasonable. The perception was that if they did not buy now, then they could never buy. Additionally, investors began to purchase multiple properties, hoping to create a home rental empire. This led to unsustainable home values.

Concurrently, the Fed was still engaged in a loose money policy. This pumped hundreds of billions of dollars into the housing economy, with predictable results. With increasing home values, homeowners could refinance their homes, often multiple times over, pulling cash out and keeping the economy pumped up artificially. A homeowner could pull out 50,000 to 100,000 dollars or more, often every year or two, and use that money to indulge themselves, pretending they had a higher standard of living than what existed. The government knew that this was not a reasonable practice, but indulged in it anyway, so as to keep up an appearance of a healthy economy. Of course, this only compounded the problem.

The end result of the past 40 years of government intervention (and popular support for that intervention) has been a housing market that is currently overbuilt and still overvalued. In the meantime, real wages have not increased since the mid 1990s and for large numbers of the population, negative income growth has been experienced. Today, all segments of the population, homeowners especially so, are saddled with significant mortgage debt, consumer debt, and revolving credit debt. This has led to an inability on the part of the population to buy homes or other products. Until wage and debt issues are resolved, employment increases, and housing prices have returned to more reasonable values, there can be no housing recovery.

Current Status

As all know, the current status of housing in the US is like a ship dead in the water, with no ability to steer except to roll with the waves. A recap:

Private securitization once accounted for over 25% of all mortgage loans. These efforts are currently nonexistent except for one entity, Redwood Trust, which has issued one securitized offerings in 2010 and one in 2011. Other than this, Wall Street is afraid to invest in Mortgage Products (to say nothing of downstream investors).

Banks are unable to lend their own money, which represented up to 15% of all lending. Most banks are capital impaired and have liquidity issues, as well as unknown liabilities from bad loans dating to the bubble.

Additionally, banks are suffering from a lack of qualified borrowers. Either there is no equity in the home to lend on, or the borrowers don’t have the financial ability to afford the loan. Therefore, the only lending that a bank can engage in is to execute loans and sell them to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or VA and FHA. There are simply no other options available.

F&F are buying loans from the banks, but their lending standards have increased, so the loan purchases are down. F&F still distort the market because of government guarantees on their loans (now explicit instead of implicit), and they are still able to purchase loans above $700k, which was implemented in response to the housing crisis.

F&F are still having financial issues, with the government having bailed them out to the tune of $140b, with much more to come.

VA is buying loans and doing reasonably well, but they serve a tiny portion of the market.

FHA has turned into the new subprime, accepting credit challenged borrowers, and with loan to values of 95% or greater. Default rates on FHA loans are rising significantly, and will pose issues for the government when losses absorb all FHA loss reserves, which may have already happened (depending on how you look at the accounting).

The Mortgage Insurance companies are financially depressed, with PMI being forced to stop writing new policies due to loan loss reserves being depleted. Likely, they will cease business or be absorbed by another company. Other companies are believed to be similarly in trouble, though none have failed yet.

The US population is still overburdened with debt. It is believed that the household consumer debt burden is over 11%, for disposable income. This is far too high for effective purchasing of any products, especially high end. (There has been a lessening of this debt from its high of 14% in 2008, but this has primarily been the result of defaults, so most of those persons are not in a position to buy.)

Patrick Pulatie is the CEO of LFI Analytics. He can be reached at 925-522-0371, or 925-238-1221 for further information. http://www.LFI-Analytics.com, patrick@lfi-analytics.com.

FHA Loan Limits Can Drop Much Further, Study Finds, by Mortgageorb.com


Logo of the Federal Housing Administration.

Image via Wikipedia

The Obama administration‘s proposal for Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan limits to reset to lower levels in October will have only a small impact on the agency’s current market share, a new study suggests. According to researchers at George Washington University (GW), larger reductions may be necessary to return the FHA to its traditional role as a lender to first-time and low- to moderate-income borrowers.

The report, titled “FHA Assessment Report: The Role and Reform of the Federal Housing Administration in a Recovering U.S. Housing Market,” concludes that the FHA still could serve 95% of its historic targeted market even if the maximum FHA loan limits were reduced by nearly 50%. To serve its target population, the report concludes that the FHA only needs a market share of somewhere between 9% and 15% of total mortgage originations. Currently estimates by the administration show that nearly one-third of new originations have FHA backing.

“FHA’s expansion played a major role in keeping the housing market afloat during the economic collapse of 2008 and 2009,” says Robert Van Order, co-author of the report. “However, we now are left with large loan limits that were set when home prices were at the top of the bubble. They don’t reflect current market conditions and are unlikely to assist the FHA in reaching its historical constituencies – first-time, minority and low-income home buyers.”

As part of its broader proposals to reshape the housing finance industry, the Obama administration wants to reduce the FHA’s high-end loan limit of $729,750 to $629,500. The GW report says an FHA limit of $350,000 in the high-cost markets and a limit of $200,000 in the lowest-cost markets is sufficient to satisfy more than 95% of the FHA’s target population.

The report also finds that the administration’s proposed reductions in loan limits would affect only 3% of loans endorsed last year.

“We find that FHA’s current market share exceeds what is needed to serve these markets,” says Van Order. “In the wake of significant declines in home prices, we believe the FHA could reduce its loan limits by approximately 50 percent and still almost entirely satisfy its target market. That would reduce its currently large market share, which is difficult for FHA to manage.”

Below Market Interest For Some Home Buyers Rate Available , by Brett Reichel, Brettreichel.com


If an interest rate below 4% is appealing to you, you should consider the Oregon State Bond Loan as an option in your next home purchase.

 Yes – it can be used in a “next” situation.  Though the program is a first time home buyer program, there are options for previous home owners to use this program.  The Bond Loan defines a first time home buyer as someone who hasn’t owned a home in the last three years.  So, if you owned a home, but sold it prior to 2007, it’s possible that you could qualify for this loan.

Currently, the State Bond Loan has an interest rate of 3.875%* and an APR of 4.721%*.  These low interest rates might be a once in a lifetime opportunity. 

The program is underwritten to FHA guidelines so it’s a pretty easy program to qualify for.  FHA allows for less than perfect credit, and has flexible debt-to-income guidelines as well. 

 There are income limitations, but they are quite generous.  You should plan on being a long term owner due to the potential “recapture” tax penalty (which isn’t automatic, nor is it as bad as many loan officers make it out to be).

Any “first time” home buyer should be considering this tool to minimize their housing expense!

*Based on a $200,000 sales price and $194,930 loan amount.  Finance Charge $157,406.55, Amount Financed $190,935.08 and Total of Payments $348,341.73.  Credit on approval.  Terms subject to change without notice.  Not a commitment to lend.  Call for details.  Equal Housing Lender.

 

Brett Reichel’s Blog  http://www.brettreichel.com

 

Mortgage Apps Rise as FHA Loan Demand Surges, Thetruthaboutmortgage.com


Mortgage application volume increased 5.3 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis during the week ending April 15 as government mortgage demand surged, the Mortgage Bankers Association reported today.

The refinance index increased a meager 2.7 percent from the previous week, but purchase money mortgages jumped 10.0 percent, mostly due to a 17.6 percent spike in FHA loan lending.

“Purchase application volume jumped last week largely due to another sharp increase in applications for government loans. Borrowers were likely motivated to apply for loans before the scheduled increase in FHA insurance premiums,” said Michael Fratantoni, MBA’s Vice President of Research and Economics, in a release.

Refinance activity increased somewhat, as rates dropped to their lowest level in a month towards the end of the week.”

That pushed the refinance share of mortgage activity to 58.5 percent of total applications from 60.3 percent a week earlier.

So it looks as if purchases will eclipse refinances in the near future, which is good news for the flagging housing market.

Meanwhile, the popular 30-year fixed-rate mortgage dipped to 4.83 percent from 4.98 percent, keeping the hope of refinancing alive for more borrowers.

The 15-year fixed averaged 4.07 percent, down from 4.17 percent a week earlier, meaning mortgage rates are still very, very low historically.

That alone could bring more buyers to the signing table this summer.

Proposed QRM Rule Released, 20% Down Payment Required, by Michael Kraus, Totalmortgage.com


New proposed risk-retention rules, required as part of the Dodd-Frank financial reform were released today by the FDIC, according to a report from Fox News.

The new regulations would require mortgage originators to retain capital reserves equal to 5% of all but the safest mortgages. The mortgages that are exempt from the risk retention guidelines are termed “qualified residential mortgages” or QRMs. In order to qualify as a QRM, there must be a down payment of at least 20%. Additionally, anyone who has ever had a 60 day delinquency in their credit history will not qualify for a QRM. FHA loans will be exempt from the QRM rules, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mortgages may also be exempt so long as these agencies are in government conservatorship.

As we’ve discussed in the past, there could be a number of side effects for borrowers, among them increased mortgage rates for anyone who doesn’t qualify for a QRM. Another one of the side effects could be that the FHA Mortgage Share could increase significantly as these loans are exempt from the QRM rule.

Sheila Bair, Chairman of the FDIC, spoke at an FDIC board meeting today and addressed the proposed rule. She said:

“In thinking about the impact of this proposed rule, we need to keep in mind the following facts:
First, the QRM requirements will not define the entire mortgage market, but only that segment that is exempt from risk retention. Lenders can – and will – find ways to provide credit on more flexible terms, but only if they then comply with the risk retention rules.
Second, what matters to underserved borrowers is not just the volume of credit that is available, but also the quality of that credit. More than half of the subprime loans made in 2006 and 2007 that were securitized ended up in default, which hurt both borrowers and investors and triggered the financial crisis. By aligning the interests of borrowers, securitizers and investors, our new rules will help to avoid these outcomes and keep default rates at much lower levels. They will also help avoid another securitization-fed housing bubble which made home prices unaffordable for many LMI borrowers.
Finally, the private securitization market, which created more than $1 trillion in mortgage credit annually in its peak years of 2005 and 2006, has virtually ceased to exist in the wake of the crisis. Issuance in 2009 and 2010 was just 5 percent of peak levels. This market needs strong rules that assure investors that the process is not rigged against them. The intent of this rulemaking is not to kill private mortgage securitization – the financial crisis has already done that. Our intent is to restore sound practices in lending, securitization and loan servicing, and bring this market back better than before.”
The majority of homeowners with mortgages in this country would be unable to refinance into a QRM due to a lack of home equity. Additionally, the vast number of people who have gone through foreclosure or have even been two months delinquent would be unable to get a QRM. All of these people will likely pay increased mortgage rates if they were to refinance or get a new mortgage. I totally understand the reasoning behind the QRM. It also strikes me as being a classic case of closing the barn door after the horse has escaped. What are your thoughts on the proposed rule? Let me know in the comments section below.

FHA Sets New Premium Structure for 15- and 30-Year Loans to Boost Capital Reserves , by Nationalmortgageprofessional.com


Logo of the Federal Housing Administration.

Image via Wikipedia

As part of ongoing efforts to strengthen the Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA) capital reserves, FHA Commissioner David H. Stevens has announced a new premium structure for FHA-insured mortgage loans increasing its annual mortgage insurance premium (MIP) by a quarter of a percentage point (0.25) on all 30- and 15-year loans. The upfront MIP will remain unchanged at one percent. This premium change was detailed in President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget and will impact new loans insured by FHA on or after April 18, 2011.

“After careful consideration and analysis, we determined it was necessary to increase the annual mortgage insurance premium at this time in order to bolster the FHA’s capital reserves and help private capital return to the housing market,” said Stevens. “This quarter point increase in the annual MIP is a responsible step towards meeting the Congressionally mandated two percent reserve threshold, while allowing FHA to remain the most cost effective mortgage insurance option for borrowers with lower incomes and lower down payments.”

The proposed change was announced last week as part of the Obama Administration’s report to Congress, which outlined the Administration’s plan to reform the nation’s housing finance system. The Administration’s housing finance plan also recommended that Congress allow the present increase in FHA conforming loan limits to expire as scheduled on Oct. 1, 2011.

This premium change enables FHA to increase revenues at a time that is critical to the ongoing stability of its Mutual Mortgage Insurance (MMI) fund, which had capital reserves of approximately $3.6 billion at the end of FY 2010. The change is estimated to contribute nearly $3 billion annually to the Fund, based on current volume projections. It is vital that HUD take action to ensure that FHA will continue to serve its dual mission of providing affordable homeownership options to underserved American families and first-time homebuyers while helping to stabilize the housing market during these tough times.

On average, new FHA borrowers will pay approximately $30 more per month. This marginal increase is affordable for almost all homebuyers who would qualify for a new loan. Existing and HECM loans insured by FHA are not impacted by the pricing change.

FHA will continue to play an important role in the nation’s mortgage market in 2011. President Obama’s FY 2012 budget projects the FHA will insure $218 billion in mortgage borrowing in 2012. These guarantees will support new home purchases and re-financed mortgages that significantly reduce borrower payments.

Would-be buyers face even more hurdles on home front, by Mary Ellen Podmolik, Chicago Tribune


The drumbeat from the housing community was loud and clear in 2010: There was never a better time to buy a home.

For most of the past 12 months, home prices tumbled, mortgage rates ticked downward, and the inventory of available traditional and distressed homes was plentiful.

But would-be buyers, even if they were able to overcome job worries, found that the hurdles to obtain a loan were formidable. They remained on the sidelines, and housing analysts opined that if the broader economy improved and unemployment fell, pent-up demand would be unleashed, credit guidelines would ease and home sales would improve.

As the new year begins, that guarded optimism has turned into uncertainty, thanks to a combination of rising mortgage rates, tighter underwriting guidelines and sweeping government regulation. As a result, it’s unlikely to get any easier and may, in fact, get much more difficult to buy a home in 2011.

“From a credit standpoint, I tend to think we’re toward the bottom of that cycle,” said Bob Walters, chief economist for Quicken Loans Inc. “The bad news is, I don’t think it’s going to get a lot better in 2011. You’ll hear a lot more noise pressuring the industry to ease guidelines, and you’ll hear from the industry that we don’t want a redo of what’s happened.”

Risky practices

Looming large over the mortgage market are provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act that have yet to be finalized. Among them is a requirement that mortgage lenders maintain some “skin” in the game on the mortgages they originate by holding at least 5 percent of the credit risk rather than bundling the loans and selling them off entirely.

The goal is to discourage a repeat of risky past practices, but the legislation makes an exception to the risk-retention standard for what is labeled a “qualified residential mortgage.” It is the still-unspecified definition of what’s become the industry’s latest acronym to digest, QRM, that has lenders in an uproar.

If a very strict definition is applied by regulators, and a final rule isn’t expected until the spring, it could become more difficult, and more costly, for homebuyers to secure mortgage financing.

“People have some very different ideas of how to define this,” said Michael Fratantoni, vice president of research and economics at the Mortgage Bankers Association. “Some would say if it doesn’t have a 30 percent down payment, it’s not a QRM. For a first-time homebuyer, that would really be eye-opening. It definitely has the potential to turn the market upside down.

“This could dramatically tighten underwriting much more than what the lenders have already done. It’s going to make it even tougher to work through the (housing) overhang.”

Wells Fargo has told regulators it supports exempting mortgages with a 30 percent down payment. Community banks worry such a strict definition would curtail home mortgage lending.

“If you have to have 30 percent down, the American dream would become the American fantasy,” said Nick Parisi, a senior vice president at Standard Bank and Trust Co. in Hickory Hills, Ill.

Less competition

Additional regulation on mortgage bankers will mean a thinning of their ranks, weeding out the unscrupulous players. But it also will lessen consumers’ ability to comparison-shop widely for the best home mortgage product.

“That means less competition, and generally, less competition is not good for the consumer,” said Quicken’s Walters. “It might mean that your interest rate over time is a little higher. A less competitive industry has to work less hard.”

Tighter lending requirements already have steered 40 percent of buyers to secure Federal Housing Administration-backed loans, which carry their own set of fees. FHA-backed loans are exempt from the Dodd-Frank provision.

Another new wrinkle to the mortgage market is that beginning in March, Freddie Mac will raise fees for mortgages sold to Freddie that carry higher loan-to-value ratios.

Fannie Mae in late December announced its own series of considerable loan-level price adjustments, effective April 1, for mortgages with greater than a 60 percent loan-to-value that will apply even to consumers with credit scores above 700.

Loan fees aren’t the only item going up: So is the cost of money itself. The average rate on 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages has been below 5 percent since early May, but economists predict those days are nearing an end.

General guidance on mortgage rates for a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage call for them to stay under 6 percent for the year, likely falling somewhere between 4.75 percent and 5.5 percent. Still, that could be a jolt to buyers on the sidelines who watched rates drop to as low as 4.2 percent in the fall.

FHA Loan Requirements: Can FHA’s New Loan Requirements Be The US Housing Market’s Lifesaver?, by Stockmarketsreview.com


With the new, recently announced changes to FHA Loan Requirements, homeowners are expected to overwhelm FHA Lenders, in the new year, hoping to see if they qualify for the new program. As a government home loans program designed specifically to give renewed hope to those residing in “underwater” properties, homeowners are rallying to see if they qualify. Both the Making Home Affordable program and the FHA’s refinancing programs will be nuanced to allow FHA lenders to provide FHA mortgage loans that will potentially forgive at least 10% of the existing mortgage’s principal balance. These newly generated FHA Loan Requirements are creating quite a buzz amongst homeowners worried they could lose their homes down the road. It’s critical to understand that these mortgages are for property owners currently paying down a subprime or conventional mortgage loan. The property must have a current valuation that’s lower than the property owners current loan(s). Approved applicants must owe a minimum of 15% more on the residence than its current market value. You may wish to get out your loan calculator and see where you stand. These new FHA mortgage programs provide aid to those who qualify with a potential 10% reduction on their home loan(s). But, these programs are only available to those who are still current on their home payments. Given the thousands of homeowners who were advised to become delinquent so that they would be considered for a loan modification by their lender, the pool of candidates who might make the cut is the big question. In addition to these stringent qualification requirements, the borrower must currently show a credit score of at least 500 and the property must be the homeowner’s primary residence. Yet, another potential obstacle is that these FHA Mortgages featuring these FHA Loan Requirements are to be offered to those not already holding an FHA loan. Again, only those with non FHA subprime or conventional mortgages will be seriously considered as applicants. The program is being offered for a limited time only and ends December 31st, 2012. How Homeowners with FHA Loans Must Be Proactive If They Believe They Might Default. Preventing Foreclosure or Short Sale Requires Immediate Interaction With FHA Counselors. Know that once you acquire an FHA mortgage, that the rules regarding homeowners who have defaulted are much stricter than a non-FHA home loan. Once you’ve missed a payment on an FHA mortgage, given the FHA’s Loan Requirements, it’s critical to initiate contact with your lender immediately. Once certain deadlines are missed, there is nothing either your lender or the FHA can do to stop you losing your home to foreclosure. The rules regarding loan forbearance are completely different for FHA mortgage holders. As soon you become even one day late on your mortgage, this time line kicks in. The FHA has laid out very specific steps that are important for the homeowner, to initiate, to successfully stop foreclosure. As mentioned, you should immediately contact your lender. It’s also a critical to contact the nearest FHA/HUD counselor. Negotiating your situation within the FHA’s default regulations could help give you a better shot at keeping your home, in spite of the late of missed mortgage payments. Taking action is the most important thing a homeowner who has fallen behind, can do. Thousands of homeowners have thrown up their hands and resorted to wishing. But, problems will simply not resolve themselves on their own. This can result in a disastrous result. The minute you know you’ve got a problem, contact your FHA counselor and your lender. Being aggressive has never meant more. An FHA mortgage holder who has missed the first payment wait. Contacting an FHA housing counselor can definitely help prevent the situation from worsening. FHA/HUD housing counselors can be sourced using the HUD Government Website. Once an FHA home mortgage loan holder has missed four or more payments, the clock may have run out regarding their ability to work out a foreclosure avoidance strategy with their lender, regardless of having an FHA/HUD counselor’s assistance. If nothing has been negotiated by the time the 4th mortgage payment is late or unpaid (Or, if the homeowner has been sent a Demand Letter, that deadline has already passed,) the property is assigned to the lender’s legal department and the foreclosure process is initiated. Many homeowners are fairly confused about the rules regarding repossession laws and repo houses, given the rapid changes in the laws over the last few years. Furthermore, the homeowner is responsible for all the fees related to the delinquency and foreclosure process and may find bankruptcy to be their only remaining source of debt relief. As many property owners have found, the process, regardless of foreclosure moratoriums or investigations by government officials, often ends up with their home sold at auction. Some are fortunate to receive a cash for homes or “Cash For Keys” offer from their lenders. (Another incentivized government program.) Others merely find themselves escorted from their homes by U.S. Marshalls, willing to use deadly force to insure their removal. Norma J. Wheeler is a realty, foreclosure and short sale specialist who writes about programs designed to help struggling homeowners. She is a contributing editor at http://savemyhousenow.net/ as well as an avid blogger. Check out her recent article regarding FHA Loan Requirements for struggling homeowners at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/456534/Fha-Loan-Requirements-New-Loan-Requirements-Fha

Just because we can do an FHA loan at 580 FICO, does that mean we should? By: Jason Hillard


this post was originally published on home loan ninjas on July 2nd 2010

Perhaps the biggest advantage to being an affiliate branch of a mortgage bank is our inherently “hybrid” nature. We are the bank; we have more responsibility and control than ever before. However, there are some hard and fast guidelines that all loans we originate and underwrite “in-house” must adhere to. These are policies that ensure our good standing with the investors we sell the loans to. Without access to these investors, we wouldn’t be in business because we do not service loans.

One of these steadfast rules is a minimum FICO score of 640, regardless of the loan program. This is where the “hybrid” nature of our operation kicks in and really sets us apart from a traditional bank. If we have clients that don’t meet certain underwriting criteria as prescribed by our investors, we can broker the loan to another bank. Hybrid: part bank, part broker. It really is a beautiful thing because it allows us to assist more customers than before. And we can be faster on our feet because we aren’t always relying on third parties, and provides more options to the consumer.

A quick perusal of the matrix of banks we are brokered with yielded a surprising tidbit of information: we can still do an FHA loan down to a 580 credit score.

This, of course, brings up an important question…

Just because we can, does that mean we should?

My partner and I, as I have previously mentioned, rarely fill out a client’s home loan application the first time we talk to them. Many people out there don’t qualify for their “ideal” mortgage right away. Others don’t know how much income they truly make. The point is, we get to know the down and dirty details before we begin the process in earnest. Outside of a few exceptions, this is the only responsible way to do business.

Now many times one of those details is a “less than perfect” credit score. Frequently, this can be remedied in 6 to 12 months with a little hard work, diligence, and a willingness to pay the items that are negatively impacting the client’s credit score.

We help people climb back up. Its what we are supposed to do. We are advisors, not just salesmen.

Can you make a case in the post-bubble (fingers-crossed) era for doing loans for people with a 580 credit score?

Right now, we have quite a few clients that are in this range. Actually, we always do because we talk to a lot of people and we don’t believe in simply turning people down with no plan to become “approvable”.

So how do we determine whether or not to proceed?

The answer, to me, lies in whether or not the consumer is climbing the stairs up, or riding the slide down.

slide

Let’s say we had a client come in to review their credit history with us 6 months ago, and at that time, their score was 493. We highlighted a plan of action, and they set their minds to achieving those goals. Let’s now assume that client followed all the steps and now they have a 597 credit score. They mention that they saw a house for sale over the weekend that they absolutely fell in love with. They want to know if they can get approved to purchase the home. I am morally OK with my Originator beginning the process with them. They have worked hard to improve their situation, and want to take an advantage of the opportunity to buy a house they really want, rather than settling for something now and trying to upgrade later.

Now let’s look at another situation that isn’t uncommon. A borrower comes to my mortgage company to get pre-approved to buy a “to be determined” property. They have a 641 credit score at the time of application. They start house-hunting, but can’t find anything they want for 60 days. Then they find something, put an offer in, and the offer is rejected. They put an offer in on another house; this one’s a short sale. They go back and forth with the seller over the next few weeks about closing cost concessions and inspection addendums. Suddenly the credit report is over 90 days old, which means we have to pull a new one. Low and behold, the borrower has maxed out a credit card, or taken a new loan out and missed a payment. Their credit score has dropped to a 599. Should we go ahead with the home loan?

The answer is not so clear cut, but I am damn certain about this: we are not acting in the consumer’s best interest if we don’t at least review the situation with them and determine the delinquency’s validity. It’s not professional to negotiate a mortgage for someone who is on the slippery slope of credit decline.

We aren’t trying to be “negative”, just honest and professional. The collective irresponsibility of borrowers, brokers, lenders, and banks got us into the current mess, and professional responsibility is the only way to prevent a repeat.

question mark image credit  Image: jscreationzs / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

slide image credit Image: Tina Phillips / FreeDigitalPhotos.net