Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Buying and Selling RE › Stupid refinance rule: Must live within 100 miles from property!
- This topic has 45 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
(former)FormerSanDiegan.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 27, 2009 at 8:10 AM #406165May 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM #406444
PadreBrian
ParticipantI love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003!
May 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM #406688ParticipantI love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003!
May 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM #406896ParticipantI love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003!
May 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM #406201ParticipantI love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003!
May 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM #406750ParticipantI love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003!
May 27, 2009 at 9:19 AM #406206Oxford
Participant[quote=briansd1]So?
I don’t see what’s wrong.
Lender have their good guidelines for their own reasons.
It makes senses to me. If you live too far from you rental you can’t manage it or properly supervise the property manager. Therefore you are a higher risk.
[/quote]
She has had a local property management company for many years but that did not change anything when they were informed of that.
OXMay 27, 2009 at 9:19 AM #406901Participant[quote=briansd1]So?
I don’t see what’s wrong.
Lender have their good guidelines for their own reasons.
It makes senses to me. If you live too far from you rental you can’t manage it or properly supervise the property manager. Therefore you are a higher risk.
[/quote]
She has had a local property management company for many years but that did not change anything when they were informed of that.
OXMay 27, 2009 at 9:19 AM #406754Participant[quote=briansd1]So?
I don’t see what’s wrong.
Lender have their good guidelines for their own reasons.
It makes senses to me. If you live too far from you rental you can’t manage it or properly supervise the property manager. Therefore you are a higher risk.
[/quote]
She has had a local property management company for many years but that did not change anything when they were informed of that.
OXMay 27, 2009 at 9:19 AM #406693Participant[quote=briansd1]So?
I don’t see what’s wrong.
Lender have their good guidelines for their own reasons.
It makes senses to me. If you live too far from you rental you can’t manage it or properly supervise the property manager. Therefore you are a higher risk.
[/quote]
She has had a local property management company for many years but that did not change anything when they were informed of that.
OXMay 27, 2009 at 9:19 AM #406449Participant[quote=briansd1]So?
I don’t see what’s wrong.
Lender have their good guidelines for their own reasons.
It makes senses to me. If you live too far from you rental you can’t manage it or properly supervise the property manager. Therefore you are a higher risk.
[/quote]
She has had a local property management company for many years but that did not change anything when they were informed of that.
OXMay 27, 2009 at 9:59 AM #406770(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant[quote=PadreBrian]I love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003![/quote]
Some of the new guidelines make sense. This one
does not.Seems like other factors are more important:
Income (rent) from the property.
Income (wage,other investment) of the owner.
Value of the propertyHow much more downpayment should be required per mile distance from the property ?
I am guessing that the particular lender is using this as an excuse because they have plenty of other more qualified borrowers that meet their real guidelines for the funds they plan on committing to real estate loans. And that this person meets all the objective criteria, but not by the same margin as the pool of borrowers they are lending to.
May 27, 2009 at 9:59 AM #406707Participant[quote=PadreBrian]I love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003![/quote]
Some of the new guidelines make sense. This one
does not.Seems like other factors are more important:
Income (rent) from the property.
Income (wage,other investment) of the owner.
Value of the propertyHow much more downpayment should be required per mile distance from the property ?
I am guessing that the particular lender is using this as an excuse because they have plenty of other more qualified borrowers that meet their real guidelines for the funds they plan on committing to real estate loans. And that this person meets all the objective criteria, but not by the same margin as the pool of borrowers they are lending to.
May 27, 2009 at 9:59 AM #406221Participant[quote=PadreBrian]I love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003![/quote]
Some of the new guidelines make sense. This one
does not.Seems like other factors are more important:
Income (rent) from the property.
Income (wage,other investment) of the owner.
Value of the propertyHow much more downpayment should be required per mile distance from the property ?
I am guessing that the particular lender is using this as an excuse because they have plenty of other more qualified borrowers that meet their real guidelines for the funds they plan on committing to real estate loans. And that this person meets all the objective criteria, but not by the same margin as the pool of borrowers they are lending to.
May 27, 2009 at 9:59 AM #406464Participant[quote=PadreBrian]I love these new rules. We needed that back in 2003![/quote]
Some of the new guidelines make sense. This one
does not.Seems like other factors are more important:
Income (rent) from the property.
Income (wage,other investment) of the owner.
Value of the propertyHow much more downpayment should be required per mile distance from the property ?
I am guessing that the particular lender is using this as an excuse because they have plenty of other more qualified borrowers that meet their real guidelines for the funds they plan on committing to real estate loans. And that this person meets all the objective criteria, but not by the same margin as the pool of borrowers they are lending to.
-
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Buying and Selling RE’ is closed to new topics and replies.