Home › Forums › Closed Forums › Buying and Selling RE › Why can I not get a loan?
- This topic has 735 replies, 51 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by
davelj.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 20, 2009 at 5:08 PM #332452January 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM #331931
patientrenter
Participantsduuuude seems to have put his (her?) finger on something important here: The OP doesn’t respond to many of the analytical posts, but responds with vigorous outrage at the less kind ones.
I’ll play FBI profiler here: The OP is a woman who is in major nesting mode, who has already decided on the house she wants. It happens to cost $800K, and she wants support for her anger that she is being denied it now simply because she cannot afford it now. (Afford it now means you can pay $800K, or convince someone to give you the difference if you pay less.)
January 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM #332268Participantsduuuude seems to have put his (her?) finger on something important here: The OP doesn’t respond to many of the analytical posts, but responds with vigorous outrage at the less kind ones.
I’ll play FBI profiler here: The OP is a woman who is in major nesting mode, who has already decided on the house she wants. It happens to cost $800K, and she wants support for her anger that she is being denied it now simply because she cannot afford it now. (Afford it now means you can pay $800K, or convince someone to give you the difference if you pay less.)
January 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM #332346Participantsduuuude seems to have put his (her?) finger on something important here: The OP doesn’t respond to many of the analytical posts, but responds with vigorous outrage at the less kind ones.
I’ll play FBI profiler here: The OP is a woman who is in major nesting mode, who has already decided on the house she wants. It happens to cost $800K, and she wants support for her anger that she is being denied it now simply because she cannot afford it now. (Afford it now means you can pay $800K, or convince someone to give you the difference if you pay less.)
January 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM #332373Participantsduuuude seems to have put his (her?) finger on something important here: The OP doesn’t respond to many of the analytical posts, but responds with vigorous outrage at the less kind ones.
I’ll play FBI profiler here: The OP is a woman who is in major nesting mode, who has already decided on the house she wants. It happens to cost $800K, and she wants support for her anger that she is being denied it now simply because she cannot afford it now. (Afford it now means you can pay $800K, or convince someone to give you the difference if you pay less.)
January 20, 2009 at 5:14 PM #332457Participantsduuuude seems to have put his (her?) finger on something important here: The OP doesn’t respond to many of the analytical posts, but responds with vigorous outrage at the less kind ones.
I’ll play FBI profiler here: The OP is a woman who is in major nesting mode, who has already decided on the house she wants. It happens to cost $800K, and she wants support for her anger that she is being denied it now simply because she cannot afford it now. (Afford it now means you can pay $800K, or convince someone to give you the difference if you pay less.)
January 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM #331936XBoxBoy
ParticipantBeen watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.
Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.
Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.
1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.
2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.
3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.
Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)
XBoxBoy
January 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM #332273ParticipantBeen watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.
Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.
Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.
1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.
2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.
3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.
Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)
XBoxBoy
January 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM #332351ParticipantBeen watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.
Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.
Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.
1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.
2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.
3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.
Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)
XBoxBoy
January 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM #332378ParticipantBeen watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.
Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.
Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.
1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.
2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.
3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.
Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)
XBoxBoy
January 20, 2009 at 5:20 PM #332462ParticipantBeen watching this thread, and maybe I’m wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that what ncounty4 really wants to know is why don’t 90% jumbo loans exist any more? (Not why can’t they personally get the loan) If my hunch is correct, here’s my quick stab at that question.
Banks (and mortgage companies) generally don’t hold mortgages these days. Thus they are only willing to make mortgages that they can sell to someone else. Given that neither investors nor the government are interested in buying jumbos, that means they are not available.
Why don’t investors or the government buy jumbos? The government only buys mortgages for political reasons, but helping people who make a good living but aren’t fabulously wealthy campaign contributors isn’t politically very popular right now. And investors don’t want to buy mortgages for the following reasons.
1) Too much risk. No one knows how far down housing prices are going to go.
2) Government interference. There is lots of concern among investors that any loan you write will get changed for political reasons by the government and the person holding the loan will get screwed. As an investor this simple reason would drive me away from owning mortgages.
3) Lots of investors have had their fingers burned by mortgage backed securities in the last couple of years. After being burned like that it takes a while for people to come back into the kitchen.
Bottom line here is that why in the world would anyone want to hold mortgage backed securities at this time and at the current rates? The profit just doesn’t justify the risks. Thus they aren’t available. (Or when available, only scarcely and at higher rates)
XBoxBoy
January 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM #331946Daniel
Participantnc4, ok, I’ll bite: I’m in my early thirties, just like you. I have a spouse and kids, just like you. We make $200K+, just like you. Our FICOs are 800+, just like yours. As far as assets, let’s say we wouldn’t even need a mortgage if we were to “liquidate all our assets for housing”, as you nicely put it.
Still, we rent. We rent a house that no long ago was “worth” in the seven figures. Why? Because, although I agree with most of your statements, I take exception to one: “in our tax bracket, renting does not make sense”. Yes, today it does (as it did last year, and the year before, and the year before). It makes perfect sense in La Jolla, and Del Mar, and Carmel Valley, and in all areas that haven’t (yet) come down as much. Just like it made perfect sense to stay away from stocks a decade ago.
Honest advice: find a house you like, a house you’d be happy living in as your own, and rent for a couple of years. If you must own (for emotional or practical reasons, as I really think that financially it doesn’t make any sense), then stay with a conforming jumbo and buy smaller or farther away.
I know, it sucks turning thirty during the biggest housing bubble in history. You think that you only have two options, both unappealing: grossly overpay for a house you like, or settle for one that you don’t like. I’m here to tell you that there is a third option: wait.
January 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM #332282Participantnc4, ok, I’ll bite: I’m in my early thirties, just like you. I have a spouse and kids, just like you. We make $200K+, just like you. Our FICOs are 800+, just like yours. As far as assets, let’s say we wouldn’t even need a mortgage if we were to “liquidate all our assets for housing”, as you nicely put it.
Still, we rent. We rent a house that no long ago was “worth” in the seven figures. Why? Because, although I agree with most of your statements, I take exception to one: “in our tax bracket, renting does not make sense”. Yes, today it does (as it did last year, and the year before, and the year before). It makes perfect sense in La Jolla, and Del Mar, and Carmel Valley, and in all areas that haven’t (yet) come down as much. Just like it made perfect sense to stay away from stocks a decade ago.
Honest advice: find a house you like, a house you’d be happy living in as your own, and rent for a couple of years. If you must own (for emotional or practical reasons, as I really think that financially it doesn’t make any sense), then stay with a conforming jumbo and buy smaller or farther away.
I know, it sucks turning thirty during the biggest housing bubble in history. You think that you only have two options, both unappealing: grossly overpay for a house you like, or settle for one that you don’t like. I’m here to tell you that there is a third option: wait.
January 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM #332361Participantnc4, ok, I’ll bite: I’m in my early thirties, just like you. I have a spouse and kids, just like you. We make $200K+, just like you. Our FICOs are 800+, just like yours. As far as assets, let’s say we wouldn’t even need a mortgage if we were to “liquidate all our assets for housing”, as you nicely put it.
Still, we rent. We rent a house that no long ago was “worth” in the seven figures. Why? Because, although I agree with most of your statements, I take exception to one: “in our tax bracket, renting does not make sense”. Yes, today it does (as it did last year, and the year before, and the year before). It makes perfect sense in La Jolla, and Del Mar, and Carmel Valley, and in all areas that haven’t (yet) come down as much. Just like it made perfect sense to stay away from stocks a decade ago.
Honest advice: find a house you like, a house you’d be happy living in as your own, and rent for a couple of years. If you must own (for emotional or practical reasons, as I really think that financially it doesn’t make any sense), then stay with a conforming jumbo and buy smaller or farther away.
I know, it sucks turning thirty during the biggest housing bubble in history. You think that you only have two options, both unappealing: grossly overpay for a house you like, or settle for one that you don’t like. I’m here to tell you that there is a third option: wait.
January 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM #332388Participantnc4, ok, I’ll bite: I’m in my early thirties, just like you. I have a spouse and kids, just like you. We make $200K+, just like you. Our FICOs are 800+, just like yours. As far as assets, let’s say we wouldn’t even need a mortgage if we were to “liquidate all our assets for housing”, as you nicely put it.
Still, we rent. We rent a house that no long ago was “worth” in the seven figures. Why? Because, although I agree with most of your statements, I take exception to one: “in our tax bracket, renting does not make sense”. Yes, today it does (as it did last year, and the year before, and the year before). It makes perfect sense in La Jolla, and Del Mar, and Carmel Valley, and in all areas that haven’t (yet) come down as much. Just like it made perfect sense to stay away from stocks a decade ago.
Honest advice: find a house you like, a house you’d be happy living in as your own, and rent for a couple of years. If you must own (for emotional or practical reasons, as I really think that financially it doesn’t make any sense), then stay with a conforming jumbo and buy smaller or farther away.
I know, it sucks turning thirty during the biggest housing bubble in history. You think that you only have two options, both unappealing: grossly overpay for a house you like, or settle for one that you don’t like. I’m here to tell you that there is a third option: wait.
-
AuthorPosts
- The forum ‘Buying and Selling RE’ is closed to new topics and replies.