Category Archives: Mortgage/Lending

Credit Scores for the Ages

Posted on by
5

It’s funny how sometimes a post will take on a life of it’s own within the comments…such is the case with my recent interview of Jillayne Schlicke.  My intentions were to call out to Washington State LOs to make sure they’re up to speed with the new year approaching…the comments have turned into a discussion of credit scores.  Most likely because of Jillayne’s prediction:

“I expect that underwriting guidelines will continue to go up as banks and conforming paper sold to Fannie and Freddie will raise minimum credit score requirements to 800 and require 20% down.  Everyone else will be pushed to FHA.”

Ardell offered stats from 2005 on credit scores and age so I thought I’d share credit score information from credit reports I’ve provided since the start of 2008.  Not all of the subjects obtained a mortgage loan.

  • Age 18 – 29: average credit score = 697.   Don’t let age fool ya, this group had a high score of 807 and a low of 513.  (This group = 12% of the demographic).
  • Age 30 – 39: average credit score = 735.  High score of 811 and the low at 614. (36% of demographic).
  • Age 40 – 49: average credit score = 739.  High score of 819 and a low of 592. (31% of demographic).
  • Age 50 – 59: average credit score = 759.  High score of 820 and the low at 680. (15% of the demographic).
  • Age 60 – 69: average credit score = 714.  High score of 813 and a low at 589.  (4% of the demographic).
  • Age 70 plus: average credit score = 805. High and low score: 805. (1% of the demographic).

The average mid scores, year to date credit reports I’ve ran is 732 for the borrower and 720 for the co-borrower.  This means that if they are considering locking, the rate would be based on the lower of the two mid scores.  I’m also pleased to see that the credit score criteria that I use (credit scores from 720-739) seems to be appropriate for when I’m post.

From the same interview with Jillayne post, Ardell asks:

“What good is it to say interest rates are at 5.875%, if only people 70 plus can get that rate? False advertising…no? If the average person buying a home can only get a rate of 6.5%, then we have to stop encouraging people to think their rate is going to be something that is unlikely”

Using the credit score data above, it’s very likely that the younger group would be FHA candidates.  Not just because of having an average credit score of 697, most are still working on building their savings and do not have 20% down payment.  Combine a 697 mid score with a 90% loan to value and (now costly) private mortgage insurance and FHA may be the better option.  The key is to investigate all available options if someone decides they should buy a home at this stage of their life.  

The next two groups, 30-49 year olds, would fit the rates that I quote at RCG since the credit score criteria I use is based on 720-739.  Based on Friday’s rates, their rate would be 5.875% at 1 point (total shown in lines 801, 802 and 808 of the Good Faith Estimate or HUD).   This combined group is 67% of the applications with credit reports that I have worked with year to date.

Credit scores 740 and above qualify for a slightly better rate.  Based on Friday’s scenario, they would have 0.25% improvement to fee–so 5.875% would be at 0.75% points (using the above example).  Or depending on how rates were, they could possibly obtain an 0.125% better rate.

The slight dip in average credit score to 714 for ages 60-69 I think just reflects that “life happens”.  Maybe something medical has taken place or you were on vacation and thought you paid that credit card or you’re helping your kids with college or you have an unknown parking ticket or an overdue library book turned into a collection.   I’ve seen many surprised people over the years where they had no idea their credit score dropped.   This is in no way a reflection on this age group, it’s just how the stats came in for this report based on my data.

FHA credit scores (where the credit report was ran and FHA was the identified loan program, the loan may be closed or just prequalified) averaged 680.  FHA is not as credit score sensitive as Fannie/Freddie.  FHA is looking for clean credit (no lates) in the past 12 months.

This data is hardly scientific and is really just a reflection of the people I work with which is really pretty diverse.  I don’t advertise or do cold calling or try to “specialize” in a niche market…so I’d like to think that this group is a good “norm”.

2009 Conforming and Conforming Jumbo Loan Limits for Seattle Metro

Posted on by
3

Update April 9, 2009:  On February 23, 2009 FHFA announced that according to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, 2009 loan limits will be revised to the 2008 loan limits.  As of this update, we’re anticipating the higher revised limits to take place at any time (1-Unit for this area will return to $567,500).  FHA has all ready implemented the loan limit changes.   This serves as a reminder that any information on the internet regarding mortgages can be out dated in a fairly short amount of time.

This morning, the Federal Housing Finance Agency has announced the 2009 conforming and jumbo conforming loan limits for 2009.  The conforming loan limit will remain at $417,000.  The jumbo conforming was reduced to 115% of median home value from 125%, with the passage of HR 3221.   Based on the new lower estimated home values, the 2009 conforming jumbo limits for King, Snohomish and Pierce Counties are:

  • 1-Unit:  $506,000
  • 2-Unit:  $647,500
  • 3-Unit:  $783,000
  • 4-Unit:  $973,100

Some banks and lenders have all ready began to send notices that they will stop accepting locks for the 2008 conforming jumbo limits ($567,500 for 1-unit) effective later this month.    This is done so that once the loan is sold and closed to Fannie or Freddie, the loan limit is compliant.   (You may not have until the end of the year to take advantage of the $567,500 loan limit).

More to follow…including updated rates this afternoon.

Interview with Jillayne Schlicke – Part 1: LO's Are You Ready for 2009?

Posted on by
32

I recently contacted Jillayne to see if she would be open to an “interview” geared to Loan Originators who plan to sticking around beyond the end of this year…of course, she agreed!  😉   Jillayne offers training and clock hour approved courses to LOs and I thought this would be good timing to touch base with her.  This will be a two part series with the next post addressing the SAFE Act (national licensing). My questions to Jillayne are in italic text.

What should Loan Originators be doing right now to prepare for 2009?

Jillayne:  Well, let’s first define LO’s.  In my mind, we’re talking about LO’s who work for non-depository lenders such as mortgage broker LOs and CLA [correspondent lenders, credit union and consumer loan] LOs.  Loan originators who need to work for an FHA lender have all ready made that move.  Those who have not, will.  LOs who work for a lender or broker that is not FHA approved are all ready finding other sources of money.  Some LOs have already positioned themselves nicely but are experiencing a dramatic drop in income.

Many LOs made six figures income during 2006 and 2007 and subsequently have a six figure lifestyle that they are already trying to pare down to match 2008 income levels.  Income levels will remain volatile in 2009.  Existing client bases will not return the same income level as prior years.  LOs must prepare for the recession and start to research what kinds of industries survive and thrive in a down market and begin to reach out to people in those industries today.

Loan modifications have popped up out of nowhere to become the current “get rich quick” scheme marketed to hungry LOs.  Stories are circulating about LOs wo are closing 60 loan mods a month.  This is a possible untapped revenue source for LOs, however, there are some big liability pitfalls to navigate in the form of state laws, federal laws and contract laws.  Loan mod salesmen have been pitching lots of different programs, charging LOs thousands to buy into a “system”, without knowledge of state and federal laws.   LOs must be cautious and do their homework before jumping in head first.  Massive government intervention in foreclosures may make that “system” investment worthless.  There are ways to do loan modifications without putting your license in danger.

What trends are you seeing in the mortgage industry?

Jillayne:  Mortgage lenders, no matter where they work; banker, broker, consumer lender, credit union, ought to be prepared for more regulations at the state and federal level.  The winds of change are blowing in favor of the consumers.  The industry went through this in the 1970s when we saw a wave of consumer protection legislation such as the Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act (RESPA), Truth-in-Lending, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

We have only seen the beginning of what will likely be more consumer protection.   The consumer must be told in a clear way what fees will be charged and how much the loan originator is making on the deal.  The mortgage broker industry mis-used Yield Spread Premium.  Because of this, the government will now tell mortgage brokers exactly how to explain that fee, and the brokerage industry won’t like it.  Watch for RESPA reform to pass and a new Good Faith Estimate.

I expect that underwriting guidelines will continue to go up as banks and conforming paper sold to Fannie and Freddie will raise minimum credit score requirements to 800 and require 20% down.  Everyone else will be pushed to FHA.

On the broker side, we’ll likely see more of the smaller, non-FHA approved brokers joining larger, branch office brokers with FHA-approval already in place.  Brokers who do not want to join the FHA party could take a look at the hard/private money side of the industry, which will likely grow as more people who always will be subprime return to their broker.  Brokers always have been a source of non-traditional money.  Now more than ever, subprime borrowers need that broker.  FHA is not the world’s subprime lender.  It was never intended for that purpose.

If we continue to push subprime towards FHA, then we will soon be looking at an FHA bailout.  Let’s not act surprised when it happens.

We are likely to see government intervention in the foreclosure crisis on a massive scale. FHA Secure and Hope 4 Homeowners will be deemed colossal failures because the underlying lenders simply cannot write down the principal balance on those non-performing loans without sending their own banks teetering into receivership.  I believe we are inching closer each day toward eventual nationalization of banks.

What are your most popular classes that you’re teaching right now?

Jillayne:  The short sale class, which I’ve taught for over ten years now, is very hot.  Other best sellers:  Foreclosure; Losing the American Dream, Current Issues in Lending, FHA Loans, Fiduciary Duties for Mortgage Brokers, and for Real Estate Agents: How to Survive in a Down Market and How to Become an REO Agent.  I’m starting to teach the fundamentals of a loan modification inside the Short Sales/Short Refis class and my class last week loved it so watch for one on loan mods.

On that note, I really recommend that Washington State LO’s make sure they’re signed up for their 2008 clock hour classes, if they have not all ready met their education requirements for licensing this year.  Be sure to check out Jillayne’s new Professional Education page here at RCG and watch for Part 2 of my interview with Jillayne where we discuss national licensing: The SAFE Act.

Buyer Beware: 'Tis the Season

Posted on by
16

Boy, you’re going to think I’m the Scrooge…and this article may not apply to most of you…but I want to reach out to those of us who rely on our credit cards to help finance the holidays.  You see, years past it was not uncommon for home owners to get into the spirit and purchase many gifts for our loved ones–going over the top (meaning beyond our budget).  Yes, it feels great to see the look of joy and surprise on little Johnny and Susie’s face when the open the gifts they’ve been longing for…but this year, you may not have the “fix” of meeting with your Mortgage Professional in January to “reorganize” your debt.   Just in time for the holidays, Fannie Mae is unrolling DU Version 7.1 which really puts a damper on cash out refinances.

This officially takes place over the weekend of December 13, 2008; however lenders will start implementing this soon (so that loans are in compliance for Fannie Mae once they are purchased).   A cash out refinance will be limited to 85% of appraised value of your single family residence.   By the way, if you’re refinancing a second mortgage/home equity loan that was not used for the purchase of your residence, this is classified as a “cash out” refinance–even if you have never received cash out and you only reduced the rate on your second mortgage on a previous refinance.  (A refinance including a “non-purchase” second mortgage is treated as “cash out” with pricing and underwriting–no exceptions).   This will force more home owners to FHA mortgages which allow higher cash out refinances at a cost (upfront and monthly mortgage insurance regardless of loan to value).  

Factor in home values and you can really see the challenge with doing a cash-out refinance.  Lenders count on appraisals to establish a value for your home.  This value is based on what other homes like yours have recently sold and closed for in your neighborhood.  No sales?  A short sale?  Ugh.  It doesn’t matter what’s listed down the street, what your assessed value is or what you feel the home is worth in the lenders and appraiser’s eyes.

Tis the Season for big sales, no interest or payment for X many months and credit card companies including blank checks in our statements with dreams of sugar plum fairies and hopes that we’ll indebt ourselves further.  Please don’t do it. 

  • Make a budget for your holiday shopping.
  • Pay cash.
  • Consider a gift exchange for your family.
  • Find alternatives to spending for celebrating the Season.

You may wind up trapped, like Ardell’s Six Pack Joe, once your interest rates kick in and your bills start piling up with no refinance in sight.   I’m here to say that YOU do have a choice and you need to be informed and responsible for your debts.   Mortgages are getting tougher (especially refinances) and chances are, your home equity is not here to rescue you.

I won’t go into how credit cards and home equity loans are being frozen or the credit lines are being reduced without notice (and how damaging it is to your credit scores when your borrowed amount is above 50% of the credit card limit).  

You have less than two months to plan for Christmas.  Don’t be stuck with extra debt and tanking credit scores…your home equity may not be there to save you (even if you have it, you may not have affordable access to it).

Options for Homeowners Facing Foreclosure

Posted on by
89

This is Part Two of a series of articles on the foreclosure process.
This article does not constitute legal advice.
Foreclosure laws vary from state to state.

Homeowners in financial distress should always hire legal counsel. Call your local state bar association for a referral.  Reduced or free legal aid may be available in some states. Ask for a referral from the state bar association or through a LOCAL HUD-Approved Housing Counseling Agency.

For homeowners who are facing financial hardship, denial is a warm, safe comfortable place to stay, where tough decisions can’t hurt and the decision-making process is put off one day at a time.  There is FREE help available from your local state non-profit agencies.

Local, HUD-Approved Housing Counseling Agecies received 1.5 million dollars from Washington State when Gov. Gregoire signed SB 6272. State agencies are already whining that they are “overwhelmed”. Hmmm. How much of that 1.5 million dollars was spent hiring and training competent counselors and how much went into executive salaries, high paid consultants and task force meetings?  There are plenty of out-of-work mortgage production people who are (at this point) probably willing to work at non-profit agencies. Put them to work.  Perhaps I am in denial as to the extent of the problem at our state agencies. If so, agencies: please enlighten me and RCG readers.  If the problems are with the banks and their ability to handle the calls, that doesn’t mean we throw more money at the state agencies.  In part five of this series, I will ponder about massive government intervention. For now, we’re left dealing with the problems at hand.

If you are a homeowner reading this article, that means you’re starting to come out of denial.  Maybe a friend or relative forwarded this to you.  Welcome to raincityguide.com  How are you? Don’t say “fine” through tears or clenched teeth.  Not so good, right?  Okay then. Is your financial distress temporary or long term?  THIS is perhaps the most important question you’ll need to answer. This is going to require that you get real with where you are in life.  Long term, permanent financial distress situations are going open up options that might be different for a homeowner who has a short term financial distress problem.  Let’s try to break things down even more.  Long Term: You’ve been laid off and have been unable to find work at your former pay level for along time and you have third party confirmation that the chances of being able to reach that pay level again are very low. Short Term: You’ve been laid off and have been unable to find work at your former pay level but your prospects are good or you’ve recently been re-hired at a similar pay level.

Reinstatement
If you are payment or two behind, which may happen with temporary financial distress, your lender will be thrilled beyond your wildest expectations to accept the total amount owed in a lump sum.  Reinstatement often happens simultaneously with a forbearance agreement.

Forbearance Agreement
Your lender agrees to reduce or suspend your payments for a short period of time.  These two options are good for people whose financial distress situations are temporary.

Repayment Plan
Your lender helps you get “caught up” by allowing you to take missed payments and tack them on to your existing payment each month until you are caught up.

If your financial distress is long term and will permanently affect your ability to continue making your payments:

Consider Selling
With home values going down, if you do have some equity remaining in your home, you may be better off selling NOW rather than waiting until next year when scads of REOs (already foreclosed-upon homes that the lenders must dispose of) will continue to hit the market, driving inventory up and home values down.  If you owe more on your home than what the home can be sold for in today’s market, you have probably already heard of the term Short Sales.  In this case, the lender is asked to reduce the pricipal balance and allow the loan to be paid off in order to facilitate a sale.  Most lenders are not radically motivated to approve short sales unless foreclosure is imminent.  This author does not recommend that you stop making your mortgage payment in order to force the bank to approve your short sale. All homeowners in financial distress should have an attorney holding their hand the entire time.  If you have assets, you do not qualify for a short sale. Short sales are reserved for homeowners with NO MONEY and you will be asked to provide proof that you have no money.  If you have money, this is a different kind of transaction. It’s called “Making Your Downpayment in Arrears” and you’ll be asked to bring that money at closing.  Don’t ask anyone to help you hide your assets. Doing so may constitute mortgage fraud which is now a class B felony in Washington State. I could go on and on about short sales. If you need more education in this area, we’ve covered the topic in these RCG articles:

Short Sales
—-
Question From Today’s Short Sale Class
—-
Should You Buy a Short Sale Property?
—-
Is a Short Sale a Bargain?
____
Why Do Banks Take So Long to Approve a Short Sale?

Maybe you would prefer not to sell. Consider taking on a tenant or moving out into more affordable living quarters and renting out your home.

Refinancing is a tough road for homeowners in financial distress. On the one hand, they have been hit by some kind of financial hardship and this typically affects their credit score, which means lender’s rates and fees will be higher.  In addition, tightening underwriting guidelines is something banks do in order to help stop the rising tide of foreclosures. People who hold mortgage loans today might not be able to re-qualify for that same loan if they had to requalify under today’s guidelines.  Income and assets must be fully documented. Find a licensed, local mortgage lender with FHA-approval to see if you might qualify for an FHA loan.  For people who made the conscious decision to state their income higher than reality are out of luck, unless they can prove that they were coached to do so by their lender.  Consult a local attorney for further guidance.  Since refinancing might only be yesterday’s dream for some, Loan Modifications are all the rage in my spam bin. We’ll cover Loan Mods in Part Three.

While doing research for this blog post, I stumbled upon even more money that went from our state government’s rainy day fund, into a state fund to help low to moderate income Washington State homeowners in foreclosure refinance into new loans through the Wash State Housing Finance Commission.  Read more here. I sent an inquiry asking the WSHFC how many WA State Homeowners have been helped this far by this new law and they said, emphasis mine:

Dear Ms. Schlicke:

Thank you for your interest in the Smart Homeownership Choices Program. To date, we have not made a loan to a prospective applicant.  The good news is that when we have talked to the delinquent homebuyers, it seems they have not been able to make contact with their lenders to discuss foreclosure options.  So, we have been able to facilitate getting them to the right person for loan modifications, etc.  There have also been homeowners who have not been pleased with the fact that the assistance is in the form of a loan and not a grant.  They believe the government should be giving them the money to save their home. While we cannot respond positively to these folks, we do send them to one of our homeownership counseling partners to help them with other options that   might be available.

If you know someone who might benefit from the program, please feel free to give them my contact information.

Sincerely,
Dee Taylor
Director, Homeownership Division
Washington State Housing Finance Commission
1000 Second Avenue, Suite 2700
Seattle, WA 98104-1046
(206) 287-4414

Part one: Foreclosure; Losing the American Dream
Part two: Options for Homeowners Facing Foreclosure
Part three: Loan Modifications
Part four: Government Intervention in Foreclosure
Part five: Foreclosure; Letting Go and Rebuilding

FHA Update: The "It Girl" of Mortgage

Posted on by
86

This morning I’ve been trying to update articles I’ve written on FHA in an attempt to have the information be accurate during this day and age of the ever-changing-loan-guidelines.  Please don’t rely 100% on information you find about mortgages on the web.  Programs and products are simply changing too often to keep up and information is becoming quickly outdated.  

This month, FHA loans have seen a few changes, many with the passage of HR 3221.   Let’s see if I can get us all caught up in one post. 🙂

Effective for FHA case numbers issued October 1, 2008 and later:

  • FHA mortgage insurance increase.  First FHA mortgage insurance was going to have risked based pricing, then HR 3221 came along and put a moratorium in effect until September 30, 2009.   Until then, for a FHA purchase 30 year fixed mortgage, upfront mortgage insurance has increased to 1.75% and monthly mortgage insurance is 0.55% for loan amounts over 95% LTV and 0.50% for borrowers putting more than 5% down on their home. 
  • Down payment assistance programs.  Seller funded down payment assistance programs are currently not allowed.  However there is a bill in Congress (HR 6694) that if passed, would allow DPAs once again but only to borrowers within certain credit scores.   Home Buyers can still obtain a gift or loan from family members as long as it meets underwriting guidelines.
  • Rental income credit when buying a new home and renting the existing residence.  This actually became effective in mid September.   When converting a primary residence to a rental home, the rental income can only be used for qualifying if:(1) the borrower is relocating or (2) the new rental meets at least 25% equity (to be determined by an appraisal < 6 months old or the existing mortgage balance is 75% of the original sales price).   Both mortgage payments are factored for qualifying purposes.  HUD (and Fannie/Freddie) have cracked down on this due to home buyers purchasing a new (less expensive) home and “walking away” from their McMansion mortgage payment.

Effective January 1, 2009:

  • Minimum down payment increases to 3.5%.  Home Buyers have until the end of the year to purchase under the 3% down payment requirement.   Sellers can pay actual closing costs once the buyer meets the minimum down payment requirement (which can be gifted or loaned by a family member).
  • FHA Jumbo loan limits to change.   HUD is in the process of reevaluating median home prices and will announce new loan limits before the end of the year.  With the passage of HR 3221, the maximum loan amount for FHA Jumbo was reduced to 115% of the median home price (currently, the $567,500 limit is based on 125% of the median home price).   Should HUD determine that our home values are unchanged, then the new limit would be reduced to around $522,100.   However, many areas have not had their values reevaluated by HUD in many years…so for now, we really don’t know what the new “FHA jumbo” loan limit will be.

A few more reminders about FHA insured mortgages…

  • Not all lenders are approved to originate FHA loans.  Check HUDs site to verifyif the mortgage company you work for is approved.   One clue I’ve noticed by LO’s who are trying to “fake it” is that they’re charging more than a 1% origination fee.   This is not allowed.
  • FHA does not have income limitations or geographic requirements.
  • FHA is not limited to first time home buyers.
  • FHA is not just for lower credit scores.

Sellers, you are reducing your exposure to more buyers if you are not considering those approved with FHA financing…especially with the higher loan limits.   A $700,000 sales price with 20% down is pretty close to the current limit.  Anything shy of 20% down would probably lean towards FHA jumbo.

Want more reasons to consider FHA financing?  Here’s how conventional compares:

  • Tighter guidelines.  And if you think DU 7.0’s been tough…wait until you get a load of version 7.1 which goes into effect in mid-December.
  • Risk based pricing on credit scores below 740. (FHA has risk based pricing starting at 620 and below).
  • More expensive private mortgage insurance for loans over 80% loan to value.

It’s easy to see why FHA has become very popular…you could say FHA is the “It Girl” of Mortgage.

Are Washington Consumers Safer Working with DFI Regulated Lenders?

Posted on by
13

I’ve always thought so and you may say I’m biased since I work for a company that is regulated by Washington State Department of Financial Institutions.  At the very least, home owners who have been wronged by a loan originator under DFI’s watch can rest assured that the company has much higher odds of having actions taken.  When a borrower contacts me because they want a second opinion or they have a complaint about their lender, the first step is trying to figure out what type of lender they are (mortgage broker, mortgage banker, correspondent lender…) and determine who regulates them.   It’s a mess and there are no innocents.  Bankers are not more ethical than brokers or vice versa.

Here’s an example, from the front page of this morning’s Seattle PI:

In a typical case in late 2002, state bank examiners believed that National City Mortgage was violating the state’s Consumer Loan Act by charging extra fees on mortgages…when asked to explain the costly “discount loan fees, underwriting fees, processing fees and marketing fees,” National City Mortgage sought intervention from federal regulators, records show.

The investigation was stopped by federal decree….the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency wrote National City a letter…saying the state had no right to examine or even visit its offices.  Because National City’s parent bank…was chartered with the OCC, the federal agency preempted the state’s authority….

The federal agency didn’t go after the mortgage fee complaint because it had no authority to enforce state consumer protection laws…

Also from this article:

Banks are governed by a patchwork of federal and state laws, which are notably weak at the federal level in areas of predatory lending and consumer protection, according to  to law professors, attorneys and other experts.  Some states…have passed tougher predatory lending laws with provisions holding Wall Street liable for financing bad loans.  But the two federal agencies in recent years have increasingly shielded their chartered banks…from state laws.

What really frustrates me is to hear the media and our elected officials wrongly use the term “mortgage brokers” when discussing the current mortgage crisis we are in.   It’s clear that there was not enough regulation and enforcement for all mortgage originators (regardless of type of institution they are employed by).

The federal OCC took about a dozen formal enforcement actions against banks for “unfair and deceptive practices” in the current decade, agency spokesman Robert Garsson said.  The other federal agency, OTS, took about half as many, in “the five to six range,  OCC Cheif Operating Officer Scott Polakoff said.   States…took 3,694 enforcement actions against mortgage lenders and brokers in 2006 alone…

The feds were set up as rivals.  Bank oversight is “the only place I know where regulated entities get to pick their regulators,”said Kathleen Keest, with the Center for Responsible Lending.

Last year, in a case involving Wachovia, the Supreme Court ruled that “the OCC has the absolute right to insist on exclusive oversight without states intervening.

According to the Seattle PI article, Barney Frank has indicated he might try to overturn the current system…until then, it’s my opinion that consumers are more protected by selecting lenders who are regulated by DFI rather than relying on the Fed or the banks to look out for them.   Our State’s system is not perfect but atleast a consumer can visit DFI’s site and verify on a local level if a loan originator or their company is licensed or has had actions taken against them.

With the recent passage of HR 3221, the SAFE ACT was passed to help protect our nation from unsavory mortgage originators.   Once again there are different rules for originators who work for banks and those who work for state regulated institutions.   On a comment at RCG, “DFI Examiner” confirmed that “LO’s with FDIC insured banks and credit unions need to register, but they don’t need to be licensed.”   Ahh…but that’s a whole post on it’s own!

MILA's Bankruptcy

Posted on by
10

The bankruptcy trustee in charge of MILA’s Chapter 11 case says there is evidence that MILA’s founder and CEO allegedly collected $32 million from MILA during the years before its demise, “improperly draining the Mountlake Terrace company’s assets as its fortune declined.”

From the Seattle Times:

“I think the executives at MILA knew by 2004 that this bubble was bursting and did their best to take out as much money as they could before it became obvious to everyone else,” says Brian Esler, who represents the bankruptcy trustee in the suit.

The suit claims Sapp, who owned about 90 percent of MILA, paid himself more than $10 million in dividends in 2004 and 2005 when the company was already “functionally insolvent,” meaning it had insufficient capital to continue normal operations and should have been preserving cash.

It also alleges he took $11.5 million in salary for each of those years, though “by March 2005, MILA was already delaying payments, even to important customers, to conserve cash.”

The trustee’s suit also claims that Sapp damaged MILA — and its creditors — in other ways:

He “surreptitiously seized” the mortgage software MILA developed and had another of his companies bill MILA for using it; charged MILA exorbitant amounts for his private yacht and business jets; and, in a “theft of corporate opportunity,” created separate companies to own a four-story office building and a parking lot that were leased to MILA, rather than having MILA buy the properties.

Sapp’s attorney, Jack Cullen, declined to discuss the allegations in detail but said: “We consider the claims nonsense. We don’t think they are founded in law or fact.”

Sapp did not return a call to his Hunts Point home.

Esler is asking the court to freeze $12 million in cash belonging to Sapp, to keep it available to creditors.

Bankruptcy Trustee Esler’s plan is to convince the court that MILA was technically insolvent for over two years before the company abrubtly closed it’s doors in April of 2007.  Esler cites improper accounting and a  twelve-fold increase in the number of loans MILA was required to repurchase from 2002 to 2004.

To protect creditors, the suit says, as early as 2005 “Sapp should have attempted to sell, liquidate or reorganize MILA at a time when it still had significant value, instead of continuing to manipulate and loot it for personal gain for another two years.”
The suit also takes a microscope to transactions among the various entities owned by Sapp. One example: The company that owned his 130-foot yacht billed MILA $395,374 over two years — although “MILA used that yacht only twice for asserted business reasons,” the suit says.

MILA’s creditor claims have ballooned up to 2 billion dollars.  By asking the court to freeze Layne’s personal assets, is the Bankruptcy Trustee is gathering evidence to try and make a case that the corporate veil was pierced? This means Layne might have co-mingled corporate assets with personal assets.  An example of that would be if personal expenses were paid for with corporate funds. This will be an interesting local case to follow.

Bankruptcy Trustee:
Miller Nash
Brian Esler
206-622-8484
Lisa Peterson or Bruce Rubin
360-699-4771

MILA Legal Counsel:
Jack Cullen
Foster Pepper
(206) 447-4689

How Long is a Preapproval Letter Good For?

Posted on by
11

I recently had a newly preapproved client ask me that question.  It’s quite a timely one!  Before this market, I would say that a preapproval letter used to be good for about 90 days assuming that none of the information on provided on the loan application has changed.  Now-a-days, you have to factor in guideline changes and interest rates.   You’re really not approved by the sales price or loan amount, it’s based on the total mortgage payment and funds for closing (down payment, closing costs, prepaids/reserves, etc.) along with any other conditions (such as having a certain amount in your savings account after closing).

Assuming that the loan program you’re preapproved with does not have guideline changes and still exists, before you write an offer on a home, I recommend that you contact your mortgage originator to make sure you’re still approved based on that home’s property taxes and current interest rates.  In fact, it wouldn’t hurt to get an updated Good Faith Estimate with current rates and actual property taxes.  If you’re asking the seller to pay closing costs, let your mortgage originator know so they can verify the amount will be allowed per guidelines.  If you’re offering less than you’re preapproved for, your real estate agent may want to have a preapproval letter that is written specifically for the offer (especially if you’re asking the seller to pay closing costs).

Program changes? Boy, we’ve had a few.  There are also changes with private mortgage insurance and various lender guidelines too.  I recommend that people who are in the market right now as “preapproved” buyers, check in with their mortgage originator on a weekly basis (if you’re actively looking) and before you present that offer to make sure it meets current guidelines and that you are still qualified based on the present rate.

Don’t be surprised if your mortgage originator requires you to provide your most recent paystubs and copies of your asset accounts (where your down payment is coming from) before providing an updated preapproval letter.

Last note: Be careful when searching blogs for information on mortgage programs and guidelines.  If the posts are even a few months old, the information may very well be outdated (if it was correct in the first place).

Note: I have modified this post.  I had incorrect data (kind of ironic).

The Bad Reputation of RMBS

Posted on by
180

I was in Mill Creek earlier this evening having sushi with my daughters and everytime we drive down into Mill Creek I say the same thing: “I remember when this whole place was nothing but trees!” They’ve already heard the stories about how I use to leave the house at dawn with the neighborhood boys and play in the woods all day until dinner time.  But they haven’t heard the stories about the banks.  As I was driving back up the hill, I was stopped at a horribly long stop light which gave me time to ponder the bank to my left, a Wells Fargo, and educate my children: “That bank use to be a First Interstate Bank.  Before that it was an Olympic Bank.” Before that it was something else.

With so much shock and awe over the past few days about the possible imending doom headed our way unless we quickly pass Paulson’s bailout plan, and all the taxpayer backlash on the blogs as well as being reported in the MSM, the new question becomes, well what are some other worthwhile ideas for how to get us out of this mess?  Today, Dr. Krugman suggests that we consider anything coming out of Henry Paulsen’s mouth to be a lie.  This might be a good way to solve the financial crisis extremely fast.

“So, this morning Hank Paulson told a whopper:

“We gave you a simple, three-page legislative outline and I thought it would have been presumptuous for us on that outline to come up with an oversight mechanism. That’s the role of Congress, that’s something we’re going to work on together. So if any of you felt that I didn’t believe that we needed oversight: I believe we need oversight. We need oversight.”

What the the proposal actually did, of course, was explicitly rule out any oversight, plus grant immunity from future review. Read more here.

 
Want to see Henry Paulson in action? Watch this quick video. When he’s testifying, at the part where he says “I want oversight” watch his head go back and forth in a “no” motion.  I tend to believe people’s nonverbal signals over the words they say. 

The Paulson/Bernanke bailout plan details are starting to rise to the surface:

One thing is clear – something we all guessed correctly – is that the intention of the plan is to pay premium prices for troubled assets to recapitalize the banks. It’s still not clear how the price mechanism will work, and unfortunately Paulson and Bernanke are unable to describe how this will work..

This means the TARP plan would buy assets from banks at a higher price than what the banks could get if they tried to sell them at fair market value. Bernanke and Paulson believe the assets are being unfairly underpriced in the free market because of their bad reputation so instead, they’re proposing that the taxpayers subsidize the re-capitalization of the banks.

One analyst says it would take at least 5 trillion for the proposed plant to work.

Why not let the banks come clean and sell their assets at today’s prices, and we can spend taxpayer money building back up the FDIC insurance fund. Weaker banks will fail and stronger banks will buy the assets of the weaker banks from bankor from the FDIC after failure.  Big banks like WaMu could be split up into smaller entities which will be easier for many different banks to absorb. 

Eleua, a frequent commenter on this blog, has been working with a group of other like-minded individuals and he has penned an outline for a solution here:

There is a solution that costs the government nothing, eliminates “moral hazard,