- This topic has 145 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 9 months ago by
DWCAP.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 17, 2009 at 12:21 PM #368498March 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM #367893
Diego Mamani
Participant[quote=IONEGARM]… FHA is understaffed and now represents a huge chunk of the market.
[/quote]My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
We need prices to come down to reality before a real recovery can start. Artificially keeping prices inflated will only create a temporary relief but we’ll have to pay for it later.
March 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM #368184Participant[quote=IONEGARM]… FHA is understaffed and now represents a huge chunk of the market.
[/quote]My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
We need prices to come down to reality before a real recovery can start. Artificially keeping prices inflated will only create a temporary relief but we’ll have to pay for it later.
March 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM #368352Participant[quote=IONEGARM]… FHA is understaffed and now represents a huge chunk of the market.
[/quote]My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
We need prices to come down to reality before a real recovery can start. Artificially keeping prices inflated will only create a temporary relief but we’ll have to pay for it later.
March 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM #368389Participant[quote=IONEGARM]… FHA is understaffed and now represents a huge chunk of the market.
[/quote]My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
We need prices to come down to reality before a real recovery can start. Artificially keeping prices inflated will only create a temporary relief but we’ll have to pay for it later.
March 17, 2009 at 12:29 PM #368503Participant[quote=IONEGARM]… FHA is understaffed and now represents a huge chunk of the market.
[/quote]My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
We need prices to come down to reality before a real recovery can start. Artificially keeping prices inflated will only create a temporary relief but we’ll have to pay for it later.
March 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM #367903IONEGARM
Participant[quote=Diego Mamani]
My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
[/quote]
FHA underwriting was this loose way before the current administration got in office. It has been tightening up underwriting and lenders have been adding on overlays.
FHA is popular for one reason and one reason only. 3.5% down. If FHA wasn’t there it would be whoever was the next lowest down payment requirement would be the most popular.
March 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM #368194Participant[quote=Diego Mamani]
My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
[/quote]
FHA underwriting was this loose way before the current administration got in office. It has been tightening up underwriting and lenders have been adding on overlays.
FHA is popular for one reason and one reason only. 3.5% down. If FHA wasn’t there it would be whoever was the next lowest down payment requirement would be the most popular.
March 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM #368362Participant[quote=Diego Mamani]
My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
[/quote]
FHA underwriting was this loose way before the current administration got in office. It has been tightening up underwriting and lenders have been adding on overlays.
FHA is popular for one reason and one reason only. 3.5% down. If FHA wasn’t there it would be whoever was the next lowest down payment requirement would be the most popular.
March 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM #368399Participant[quote=Diego Mamani]
My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
[/quote]
FHA underwriting was this loose way before the current administration got in office. It has been tightening up underwriting and lenders have been adding on overlays.
FHA is popular for one reason and one reason only. 3.5% down. If FHA wasn’t there it would be whoever was the next lowest down payment requirement would be the most popular.
March 17, 2009 at 12:31 PM #368513Participant[quote=Diego Mamani]
My point exactly. That a big chunk of the “market” has nothing to do with market and everything to do with populist politics! Can’t anybody in govt (Larry Summers, Tim G., Paul Volcker, etc.) tell Obama that delaying the inevitable will only prolong the pain?
[/quote]
FHA underwriting was this loose way before the current administration got in office. It has been tightening up underwriting and lenders have been adding on overlays.
FHA is popular for one reason and one reason only. 3.5% down. If FHA wasn’t there it would be whoever was the next lowest down payment requirement would be the most popular.
March 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM #367908SD Realtor
ParticipantIONEGARM the lenders are actually the ones overlaying the guidelines on top of the FHA. In fact FHA is understaffed like you said but the government does want more people to buy. Yet the government, (try as they might) cannot strongarm the lenders into making the loans. (at least not yet)
You are correct in the sense that the LENDERS are the ones pushing back and they are the ones ultimately originating and servicing the loans. Now on FHA loans the government actually insurers 25-35% of the loan and the lender does take the ultimate loss on the difference for a default. You are correct about the 620 min FICO overlay.
Also with regards to the spouses score. So the spouses credit score is checked BUT does not have bearing on the loan. HOWEVER if the spouse is carrying debt that debt will indeed be used for the qualifying ratios for the loan.
Also the 3.5% down payment CANNOT come from the seller. The seller can credit the buyer for closing costs. Alternately the 3.5% down can be gifted to the buyer but it does have to be from a relative.
This is my understanding and I am not a mortgage broker so feel free to correct me.
March 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM #368199ParticipantIONEGARM the lenders are actually the ones overlaying the guidelines on top of the FHA. In fact FHA is understaffed like you said but the government does want more people to buy. Yet the government, (try as they might) cannot strongarm the lenders into making the loans. (at least not yet)
You are correct in the sense that the LENDERS are the ones pushing back and they are the ones ultimately originating and servicing the loans. Now on FHA loans the government actually insurers 25-35% of the loan and the lender does take the ultimate loss on the difference for a default. You are correct about the 620 min FICO overlay.
Also with regards to the spouses score. So the spouses credit score is checked BUT does not have bearing on the loan. HOWEVER if the spouse is carrying debt that debt will indeed be used for the qualifying ratios for the loan.
Also the 3.5% down payment CANNOT come from the seller. The seller can credit the buyer for closing costs. Alternately the 3.5% down can be gifted to the buyer but it does have to be from a relative.
This is my understanding and I am not a mortgage broker so feel free to correct me.
March 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM #368367ParticipantIONEGARM the lenders are actually the ones overlaying the guidelines on top of the FHA. In fact FHA is understaffed like you said but the government does want more people to buy. Yet the government, (try as they might) cannot strongarm the lenders into making the loans. (at least not yet)
You are correct in the sense that the LENDERS are the ones pushing back and they are the ones ultimately originating and servicing the loans. Now on FHA loans the government actually insurers 25-35% of the loan and the lender does take the ultimate loss on the difference for a default. You are correct about the 620 min FICO overlay.
Also with regards to the spouses score. So the spouses credit score is checked BUT does not have bearing on the loan. HOWEVER if the spouse is carrying debt that debt will indeed be used for the qualifying ratios for the loan.
Also the 3.5% down payment CANNOT come from the seller. The seller can credit the buyer for closing costs. Alternately the 3.5% down can be gifted to the buyer but it does have to be from a relative.
This is my understanding and I am not a mortgage broker so feel free to correct me.
March 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM #368405ParticipantIONEGARM the lenders are actually the ones overlaying the guidelines on top of the FHA. In fact FHA is understaffed like you said but the government does want more people to buy. Yet the government, (try as they might) cannot strongarm the lenders into making the loans. (at least not yet)
You are correct in the sense that the LENDERS are the ones pushing back and they are the ones ultimately originating and servicing the loans. Now on FHA loans the government actually insurers 25-35% of the loan and the lender does take the ultimate loss on the difference for a default. You are correct about the 620 min FICO overlay.
Also with regards to the spouses score. So the spouses credit score is checked BUT does not have bearing on the loan. HOWEVER if the spouse is carrying debt that debt will indeed be used for the qualifying ratios for the loan.
Also the 3.5% down payment CANNOT come from the seller. The seller can credit the buyer for closing costs. Alternately the 3.5% down can be gifted to the buyer but it does have to be from a relative.
This is my understanding and I am not a mortgage broker so feel free to correct me.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.