Mortgage Professional America forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Association accuses Clinton of calling originators bigots

Notify me of new replies via email
Mortgage Professional America | 26 Feb 2016, 06:30 AM Agree 0
Does Hilary Clinton think mortgage the mortgage industry is full of bigots? One association argues she does
  • cheryl m | | 26 Feb 2016, 12:22 PM Agree 0
    So when Ben Bernake tried to receive a mortgage some time ago, what were his issues. This is a very dangerous lie/fraud from Clinton. This "everyone is a victim" she has going on is really not "presidential" However, I'm sure it brought a tear to Elizabeth Warren eyes(who should also leave politics) Hopefully, this young man won't take it personally when Hillary is going to hearing after hearing for lying to the American people. Go see "13 hours"....wonderful, moving movie about what she's really about/accomplished.
  • Not for Hillary | | 26 Feb 2016, 12:55 PM Agree 0
    She was totally off base! Unless he was a plant (likely), how did she know his personal situation and be able to say that the hoops he had to jump through was because he was Hispanic? As a mortgage officer, I couldn't care less about my borrowers race. I want to do the mortgage regardless, so to say that he had more documentation because of his ethnicity and race is ridiculous. Perhaps he was a non-permanent resident, so a copy of his green card or EAD was required. OK, that's legit, but I don't think that's what was conveyed. Her spouting off about the industries bigotry is a little comical... especially since she is backed so heavily by big banks.
  • | | 26 Feb 2016, 01:30 PM Agree 0
    Clinton is right. Banks have had to pay huge sums of money for discrimination in lending. The truth is bitter. She is right on the money.
  • Ashby McDonald | | 26 Feb 2016, 01:49 PM Agree 1
    OK let me shed some light on the FAU "study" that found discrepancies in the mortgage rates paid by African-American and European-American (I apologize for the micro aggression) homebuyers. I ready the study, and noticed that there was no mention of the study controlling for differences in credit scores of the two groups. As any mortgage originator can attest, credit scores are by far the biggest single determining factor in what a borrower's interest rate will be (duh!). So I emailed the conductor of the study, Ping Cheng, about this omission of credit scores. This was his response:

    "Credit score is a function of multiple borrower characteristics such as debt-to-income ratio, net worth, prior credit rejection, prior bankruptcy, etc. We choose to control the fundamental borrower characteristics as opposed to an indexed number (the score) of such factors. Of course the practical reason is that the dataset we used does not contain reliable credit scores."

    This response should be very disturbing to anyone in our industry. First of all, credit score is ABSOLUTELY NOT a function of debt-to-income ratio, net worth, or prior credit rejection - it has nothing at all to do with them! It makes me wonder how much research was done prior to the study! Secondly, ignoring credit scores when looking at differences in interest rates makes the study useless because credit score is so important in determining interest rate. That's like doing a study on why the average air temperature is lower at 5AM that at 5PM and ignoring the effects of sunlight!

    In his response, he is basically saying that credit scores were not available so he just left them out. If that is the case, this study should never have been done. If he knew much about mortgages -- i.e., if he had talked to at least ONE seasoned mortgage originator -- he would have known this ahead of time.

    It is possible, I suppose, that credit scores themselves are racially biased (though I have no idea how they could be). But since they are the main driver of interest rates, they have to be controlled for in any study of interest rate disparity.

    I should have asked him if he at least controlled for differences in LTV.

    I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I think this is a clear case of agenda-driven research.

  • NoSpinJustFacts | | 26 Feb 2016, 01:57 PM Agree 0
    What are you facts to validate your claim that Clinton is right? What did she or you know about this man's "hoops" a.k.a. "discrimination" he had to jump through. It appears that both Clinton and yourself rather create an environment of victimizing before knowing the facts. This tactic is certainly fueling keeping people insecure and uneducated.

    The reality, this man indicated he did receive his mortgage and had to jump through hoops. As a member of the lending community, his feelings of jumping through hoops is common in all the races, sexual orientations, and ages of the people applying for a mortgage mortgage in the Dodd-Frank area. This is an environment that Clinton was a big participant in making a reality in her support of Dodd-Frank; which by her statement was intended to create discrimination (jumping through hoops).
  • Ashby McDonald | | 26 Feb 2016, 02:21 PM Agree 0
    “You know, you are three times more likely to be able to get a mortgage if you are a white applicant than if you’re Black or Hispanic – even if you have the same credentials and you’re presenting it to the people who are looking at it.”

    I would love to see the studies that show this. There is no such thing as a mortgage originator who does not want to make more money, and they don't get paid when they say "no" to a mortgage applicant. So I am not sure how it is possible that white people are three times more likely to be approved than black or hispanic people, all other things being equal. Even for racist people, the most important color is green.
  • OneRace | | 26 Feb 2016, 02:24 PM Agree 0
    She is right about the lending industry. The mortgage originators don't have control over the underwriters decisions. She is not talking about the originators she is speaking to the decision makers on your file. As soon as they see a Ethnic individuals name or the government portion on the file they through all kinds of Conditions on the file that are unnecessary. Unfortunately, America will always be scared of another race taking financial control. Racism is a learned trait and America gives out degrees in it every day in schools, jobs, homes and even on vacations. Your are not an American if you don't hate or have an issue with some race for some reason or another. Even you reading this at this moment you will never be truly a rich person here in America because it's not about your race (White, black, brown or purple). It's about keeping the rich (not you) in control. Not having another race make money here in the USA. Check your history and see for yourself. Every time another race tries to experience the American dream another race destroys their dream. America doesn't like looking at it's reflection because it shows the ugly side of America's true history of Racism, Violence and destruction. So if your not of European Caucasian Descent enjoy your hurdles and deal with it. FYI, a proven study showed that Blacks rarely defaulted on their mortgage mortgages.
  • Monica's Brother | | 26 Feb 2016, 04:19 PM Agree 0
    Seem to remember something about the Clintons and a fraud land deal in ARK back during the S&L Crisis. One of the partners accidently departed this life. Just one of several past partners to find. The over reaction to the mortgage crisis was due totally to the Dem's (Barney The Frank) telling the banks and regulators to put everyone in a house. I have never seen and underwriter discriminate in over 38 years originating. She is part of the problem. Fraudster and then voted to allow banks to make mortgages to anyone, breathing or not.
  • Folsom Broker | | 26 Feb 2016, 05:13 PM Agree 0
    It is how it is. Discrimination is rampant according to much the literature I have read on the subject. I agree Dodd/Frank is a major road block to all Americans getting or trying to get a home mortgage. 2 bad they lumped originators together with banks under Dodd/Frank.

    What we brokers and originators should really be focusing on is Barney Frank's comments leading up to its passage that he was going to destroy the broker industry. That is blatant discrimination. He was already where he wanted to be. Hillary is trying to get elected and was wooing the Hispanic vote. Not a place for a politician to lie, you think?
  • Astounded | | 29 Feb 2016, 10:56 AM Agree 0
    Hillary’s response was ludicrous and totally without basis. I wish they would air this on the newscasts like CNN, FOX news, etc. Lenders are highly regulated and scrutinized for fair and equal lending. Majority of mortgages must comply with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, VA, FHA, etc., underwriting guidelines. An individual’s situation will generally dictate what requirements or “hoops” must be met. These “hoops” are to protect the consumer, whatever race they may be. As a mortgage originator, my number one priority is to make sure the customer will be able to maintain the mortgage so he/she will enjoy the American dream of home ownership for the long term. It’s not about race – it’s about qualifying and doing the right thing for the consumer.
  • 20 Yr MLO | | 29 Feb 2016, 06:38 PM Agree 0
    How stupid are you? Underwriters come in all colors and denying an applicant based on their race or gender is punishable by fines and imprisonment. No u/w would risk their future with such a frivolous act. And many u/w I know are paid on the amount of mortgages they approve(qualified) and fund. Your silly claim that people look at last names and make a decision based solely on race is way off base and untrue.
  • 20 Yr MLO | | 29 Feb 2016, 06:41 PM Agree 0
    My comment above was directed at "Onerace" the number one idiot on this string.
  • | | 29 Feb 2016, 11:14 PM Agree 0
    Good post.
  • Dpinheiro | | 01 Mar 2016, 03:24 PM Agree 0
    Clinton could not have been more wrong. Most lenders today use automated underwriting systems, such as Desktop Underwriter (DU) or Loan Prospector (LP). We key in information as accurately as possible and run the program. We either get "Approve", which means good to go as long as your information is accurate, or "Refer", which could mean an outright turn down or the possibility of a "manual underwrite" if the borrower meets the criteria. The DU and LP programs set conditions for us. We just gather up what is on the findings, nothing else. You are not required to have borrower's race in the system to get those findings, so how would the automated program know the race? Since I am paid strictly on a commission basis, what incentive would I have to make it harder to get a mortgage done? I get paid the same if my borrower is Caucasian, Hispanic or African American.
  • Unbelievable | | 01 Mar 2016, 03:59 PM Agree 0
    OneRace -Your an idiot that obviously knows nothing about lending, and even less about humanity.
  • Seen it filed the reports | | 02 Mar 2016, 12:39 PM Agree 0
    It is because of years of discriminatory action on the part of lenders that the HMDA reports have to be filed at least twice a year. Those of you who think Hillary is wrong either don't know anything about the industry or are drinking the kool aid. One or the other.
  • NW IN | | 07 Mar 2016, 02:37 PM Agree 0
    She is right..??!! This couldn't be further from the truth. Did you notice the title said "Originators" - not "big banks"!
    Speaking of bigotry - she just lumped all originators into a box... one that could not be further from the truth for most of us.

    In my opinion, they are confusing redlining (which is illegal) throughout most of this article - with racial bias. Redlining = refuse a mortgage to someone because they live or are buying in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk. The lenders do make it harder to lend in certain areas. Our hands are tied for the most part regarding smaller mortgages -because the banks do not want to do them. With all the legal mumbo jumbo and the restriction of fees, most small mortgages cannot be done because the 3% rule isn't enough to cover all the expenses to even do the mortgage. The government basically gave the banks permission to redline without calling it that -which is what it is.

    As an originator -and originators are paid by commission, I (along with most) do not care about the borrowers race. We want to do every mortgage that we can because we do not get a paycheck unless we close mortgages. We simply put in all the info - income, credit score, debts, new mortgage info, etc. (and we CAN leave race out since it isn't a needed factor) and then run it through the automated desktop underwriting system. It determines if the mortgage is eligible or not. At this point, I can tell you that the address is not even a factor because for many borrowers, they do not have a home picked yet. So the system will give us an eligible or ineligible to let us know if the mortgage can be done. The issue where racial bias may come in is if there are unusual circumstances where an actual underwriter has to make a determination regarding whether or not certain documents are acceptable or certain income (that is out of the norm) is usable. If the mortgage is just a standard mortgage, it goes thru the process the same as any other and documents are validated. Because an underwriter is human, if they have to "decide" if the mortgage or certain aspects of the mortgage are acceptable then in those circumstances personal biases may be present.

    Again, this goes above the head of the originator. It is out of our hands. If we do not like the decision or agree with it, we can fight for a mortgage that we believe in by requesting an underwriting manager to review the file, providing additional documentation, or requesting an exception for instance.

    Hillary Clinton simply saying that "originators are bigots" shows her lack of understanding the issues, presents an irresponsible, very negative image to the public, and makes me question her motives in doing so -- since it is narcissistic behavior.
    Some info available on the internet describes: What is a narcissistic sociopath?
    •A narcissistic sociopath is someone with a combination of narcissistic personality disorder and definitive behavioral signs of sociopathy.
    •People with narcissism are characterized by their excessive and persistent need for others’ admiration and positive reinforcement. They generally have grandiose opinions of themselves and believe they are superior to other people. Narcissists are also frequently convinced that they are above the normal responsibilities and obligations of everyday life.
    •The narcissistic sociopath has this type of personality along with a noticeable lack of regard for the rights of others and a tendency to regularly violate those rights.

    I am sure a lot of politicians show these characteristics. It is just irresponsible and damaging to our society for her to irrationally state that "originators are bigots". The problem is much further up the chain than she may want to admit.
  • AllKnowing | | 07 Mar 2016, 03:12 PM Agree 0
    To - Seen it filed the Reports - comment of: "It is because of years of discriminatory action on the part of lenders that the HMDA reports have to be filed at least twice a year."

    Someone has clearly misinformed YOU or given you the wrong koolaid. These reports were done so that the government could determine the percentages of mortgages being done by race... but for reasoning other than what you think. It was completely the opposite of discrimination! This info is used to CREATE lending programs for areas and races that are underserved. Have you not heard of and seen lending programs for down payment assistance for specific areas and people? The programs, of course, cannot say they are for a specific race because then that would be discrimination. Before just spewing what you THINK are facts, you should do enough research to ensure you know what you are talking about.
  • John | | 08 Mar 2016, 06:25 AM Agree 0
    Insurance Business
Post a reply