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

Shocking about-face for Feds on mortgage rules

Notify me of new replies via email
Mortgage Professional America | 29 Aug 2013, 06:37 AM Agree 0
Regulators have sharply backtracked on requirements for qualified residential mortgages, to the delight of industry lobbies
  • Bayview Mortgage Inc | | 29 Aug 2013, 09:30 AM Agree 0
    Maybe that is what is needed. if it were to take a borrower 30 years to save the down payment. Maybe they will stay in the home instead of passing them around like yesterdays trash.
  • Fred Winograd | | 29 Aug 2013, 10:08 AM Agree 0
    " And then there was Light."
  • J Harmon | | 29 Aug 2013, 10:25 AM Agree 0
    So much MORE needs to be done to reverse these mortgage changes. Are realtors aware of all the buyers who will blocked out of the market come January? If your buyer has a former BK or FC or Shortsale on their credit or just doesn't have perfect credit but has saved a good amount for a down payment a private investor has always be the way to finance them until they are Fannie/Freddie ready. These were short term private investors and would enable the buyer to purchase the house. However, Private Money Investors will be prohibited to give them a short term mortgage. Balloons are prohibited come January 10, 2014. Private Money Investors are usually just average folks who would rather invest in a mortgage than a CD that pays them nothing every month on their investment. Well these short term investors will be prohibited from making these short term mortgages. So everyone loses. The buyer can't buy, the realtor can't make the sale, mortgage originator can't do the mortgage, the short term investor will lose his ability to earn an income and in the end the FEDS. Why? Because they are limiting the amounts of money people can make. Therefore guess what? The IRS isn't going to be making as much money because people can't earn an income to pay income tax. There are many new rule changes coming to hurt the mortgage industry which in turns hurts NAR and homebuyers. Please see what else can be done to stop these Regulations in January. I am a Realtor and have been a Mortgage Originator for 26 years. I've seen it all and this January will usher in another 2008 and slump in housing. I am really worried about us all. Check out the CFPB website. The new 3% rule will wreak havoc on the housing industry.
  • Kent Sorgenfrey | | 29 Aug 2013, 02:40 PM Agree 0
    Bayview's comment is very, I guess they suggest that only CURRENT homeowners should own homes...and STAY in them? In other words, stop the real estate market in its more buying and selling, except to those with lots of liquid cash? That would redefine the shrinking market. Sounds like the thinking coming out of Washington. Interesting that the real estate market in DC, Virginia and MD are as strong as ever, as is the entire economy there...our tax dollars go to Washington and many stay there. We need to stop supporting their lavish lifestyles...the federal government is the #1 employer in America and in most states, the state government is the largest employer in that state. How did that happen? Disengaged voters.
  • J Harmon | | 29 Aug 2013, 05:18 PM Agree 0
    Um.. regarding Bayview Mortgage comment. So you graduate from high school, get an AA and get a job. So your 22 when you go to work. So you want them to save 30 years and buy their first house at 52 years of age? And regarding your throw the home away like yesterdays trash comment, you apparently aren't dealing with real, hardworking, heartbroken Americans. I've not met anybody wanting to give up their home. I'd rather be me.
  • Don Broadway | | 29 Aug 2013, 07:15 PM Agree 0
    All good comments, but other items need to be addressed. I've been in the business for 30 years. Today signed up a client to purchase a new house when selling their current house. Didn't know until today the Realtor Broker they took on is not doing a standard 6% comission but a "flat rate percentage" for those homes in the City of Reading PA. The flat rate amounts to a 12% commision. If a mortgage broker charged that amount we'd be put in jail. It's "red-lining" and in violation of ECOA. How does this keep happening?
  • Bayview Mortgage, Inc. | | 29 Aug 2013, 07:34 PM Agree 0
    Don, People don't care what realtors do. They can do and charge what ever they want and they are always right. Didn't you know this? How many appraisals have you seen come out under the made up purchase price set by a realtor? Not many. How many appraisals have come in under the actual value of a refinance transaction. Most of them. So who is in the actual pocket of whom?
  • J Harmon | | 29 Aug 2013, 07:58 PM Agree 0
    OMG!!! What are you all talking about? You take a listing at 6%. You work for a real estate broker and another agent sells the property you listed. The 6% is split between the brokers. That is 3%. You get 1.5% then you pay your advertising expenses, open house expenses, gas, tires, etc. as you drive these buyers to 14 houses. Then you contact a mortgage originator who knows what they are doing and gives a crap. Only to wait 3 months to get your deal closed. So at a 100,000 sales you get $1500. Why are you guys so angry at realtors? You need to really look at the government regulations. I still wear an Originator Hat number 1. Realtor hat number 2. I'm trying to help you all see how bad this is going to get. I'm not pitting any profession against the other. Can't you all see we are all in this together? Including title agents, etc. Good grief, get educated. I'm glad I commented on this website because now I see why we are in the predicament we are.
  • Kent Sorgenfrey | | 30 Aug 2013, 07:23 AM Agree 0
    ...and when was the last time you actually SAW a 6% commission? 5 has become the norm and in many cases, that gets cut even more. It is not uncommon at all for listing agents to offer only 2% to the selling broker because listings have been so scarce.
  • Patti | | 11 Sep 2013, 10:36 AM Agree 0
    I am sorry, but I just have to pipe up here. Maybe off topic, maybe not. Does anyone think like me that the most logical type of qualifying a borrower would be to use real numbers instead of gross, before taxes. I swear to you that we are kidding ourselves from JUMP on putting people in to houses. Whoever came up with that formula needs to be put in jail. If they want to stick their nose in something maybe the Government ought to think on that for a real change in housing!!!!
Post a reply