additional 0.75% for condos?

[veees]

A 0.75% fee slapped on your closing costs for a Fannie-backed loan if you have less than 25% equity in a condo or other “attached” property.

http://moneyfeatures.blogs.money.cnn.com/2009/03/16/new-fees-await-those-seeking-loans-for-condos/

Is there anyway to avoid this other than putting down 25%?

we are looking to buy a condo soon, but with this additional 0.75%+HOA+MR…it is becoming more and more difficult to pull the trigger

[patientrenter]

veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?

[patientrenter]

veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?

[patientrenter]

veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?

[patientrenter]

veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?

[patientrenter]

veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]

Very well put.

At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.

I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

My 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]

Very well put.

At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.

I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

My 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]

Very well put.

At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.

I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

My 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]

Very well put.

At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.

I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

My 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=patientrenter]veees, I am curious: why would 3/4 of 1% make a difference in a major purchase decision? Have you ever decided not to buy any new TV because the prices were 3/4 of 1% higher than you expected/wanted?

If 3/4 of 1% is actually enough to push this from affordable to unaffordable, then have you considered that paying the remaining 99.25% – that’s 133 times as much – is probably even more unaffordable for you?[/quote]

Very well put.

At a conceptual level, the GSE’s (like Fannie) have the right to design their own underwriting standards.

I don’t think that protecting themselves more is a bad idea. This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

My 2 bits.

[barnaby33]

This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
Josh

[barnaby33]

This makes it less likely that they will need additional bailouts.

Oh its too late for that. Where is that lovely updated credit suisse chart when you need it. Probably one google search away, except I’m drunk and lazy.
Josh

[Author]

Posts