Cross Qualifying – Just Say No!

[an]

[quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).[/quote]

That’s because you’re thinking from the perspective of a borrower.

A holder of a note will usually only sell it off if they can earn a profit on it. That means that someone else was willing to make less on that same note. In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.

Ultimately, if the note is changing hands rapidly in a credit environment that is not otherwise changing, the borrower is likely paying too much.

Of course, interest rates and perceived risk can change over time, so what might have been a good deal one month might look like a worse or better deal at a later date. The most recent lender might not have been willing to offer those lower rates/fees when the loan was first originated. But as ucodegen pointed out, everyone is trying to determine what their opportunity cost will be if they hold the note.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).[/quote]

That’s because you’re thinking from the perspective of a borrower.

A holder of a note will usually only sell it off if they can earn a profit on it. That means that someone else was willing to make less on that same note. In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.

Ultimately, if the note is changing hands rapidly in a credit environment that is not otherwise changing, the borrower is likely paying too much.

Of course, interest rates and perceived risk can change over time, so what might have been a good deal one month might look like a worse or better deal at a later date. The most recent lender might not have been willing to offer those lower rates/fees when the loan was first originated. But as ucodegen pointed out, everyone is trying to determine what their opportunity cost will be if they hold the note.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).[/quote]

That’s because you’re thinking from the perspective of a borrower.

A holder of a note will usually only sell it off if they can earn a profit on it. That means that someone else was willing to make less on that same note. In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.

Ultimately, if the note is changing hands rapidly in a credit environment that is not otherwise changing, the borrower is likely paying too much.

Of course, interest rates and perceived risk can change over time, so what might have been a good deal one month might look like a worse or better deal at a later date. The most recent lender might not have been willing to offer those lower rates/fees when the loan was first originated. But as ucodegen pointed out, everyone is trying to determine what their opportunity cost will be if they hold the note.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).[/quote]

That’s because you’re thinking from the perspective of a borrower.

A holder of a note will usually only sell it off if they can earn a profit on it. That means that someone else was willing to make less on that same note. In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.

Ultimately, if the note is changing hands rapidly in a credit environment that is not otherwise changing, the borrower is likely paying too much.

Of course, interest rates and perceived risk can change over time, so what might have been a good deal one month might look like a worse or better deal at a later date. The most recent lender might not have been willing to offer those lower rates/fees when the loan was first originated. But as ucodegen pointed out, everyone is trying to determine what their opportunity cost will be if they hold the note.

[CA renter]

[quote=AN][quote=ucodegen]
My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]
How can you say I’m not paying what would have been the lowest rate possible if that’s exactly what I did at the time that I close the loan? When the loan changed hands, if I refi around similar time, I would be paying more than what I originally got my loan for. So, I still don’t understand your logic. I don’t see how just because the original bank can sell my loan to another bank mean I’m paying more than the lowest interest rate possible for my risk category. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see the connection (at least in the eyes/shoes of a borrower).[/quote]

That’s because you’re thinking from the perspective of a borrower.

A holder of a note will usually only sell it off if they can earn a profit on it. That means that someone else was willing to make less on that same note. In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.

Ultimately, if the note is changing hands rapidly in a credit environment that is not otherwise changing, the borrower is likely paying too much.

Of course, interest rates and perceived risk can change over time, so what might have been a good deal one month might look like a worse or better deal at a later date. The most recent lender might not have been willing to offer those lower rates/fees when the loan was first originated. But as ucodegen pointed out, everyone is trying to determine what their opportunity cost will be if they hold the note.

[jpinpb]

[quote=ucodegen]My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]

And here I thought I was doing good at 4.25 x 30.

[jpinpb]

[quote=ucodegen]My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]

And here I thought I was doing good at 4.25 x 30.

[jpinpb]

[quote=ucodegen]My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]

And here I thought I was doing good at 4.25 x 30.

[jpinpb]

[quote=ucodegen]My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]

And here I thought I was doing good at 4.25 x 30.

[jpinpb]

[quote=ucodegen]My point is not that you will be paying more, but that you are not paying what would have been the lowest interest rate possible for your risk category. The difference is what the originating bank pocketed before hot-potato-ing the loan to someone else.[/quote]

And here I thought I was doing good at 4.25 x 30.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.[/quote]
That’s the problem with your assumption. I can’t borrow directly from the party who’s currently holding my loan (Fannie May). I hope you’re aware of the difference between retail and wholesale. Borrower can’t get access to those money. We can only borrow at retail. I already stated that I looked into refi when my loan changed hands and would have to pay HIGHER rate than the rate I have.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.[/quote]
That’s the problem with your assumption. I can’t borrow directly from the party who’s currently holding my loan (Fannie May). I hope you’re aware of the difference between retail and wholesale. Borrower can’t get access to those money. We can only borrow at retail. I already stated that I looked into refi when my loan changed hands and would have to pay HIGHER rate than the rate I have.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.[/quote]
That’s the problem with your assumption. I can’t borrow directly from the party who’s currently holding my loan (Fannie May). I hope you’re aware of the difference between retail and wholesale. Borrower can’t get access to those money. We can only borrow at retail. I already stated that I looked into refi when my loan changed hands and would have to pay HIGHER rate than the rate I have.

[an]

[quote=CA renter]In other words, if you could have borrowed from the last note holder, you would have been paying less in interest/fees.[/quote]
That’s the problem with your assumption. I can’t borrow directly from the party who’s currently holding my loan (Fannie May). I hope you’re aware of the difference between retail and wholesale. Borrower can’t get access to those money. We can only borrow at retail. I already stated that I looked into refi when my loan changed hands and would have to pay HIGHER rate than the rate I have.

[Author]

Posts