Mortgage Disclosure Improvement Act: New Waiting Periods on Mortgage Transactions

Posted on July 16, 2009 by Rhonda Porter

In an early post, Ardell wrote about the significance of a buyer being able to close quickly…new regulations may put a damper on that. With mortgage applications taken after July 30, 2009, waiting periods will go into effect with regards to when and how disclosure forms are provided to the consumer. The Mortgage Disclosure Improvement Act (MDIA), which modifies the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), was originally going to become effective on October 1, 2009, however the effective date was moved up two months which may catch some real estate professionals by surprise.

Here are some of the details:

Good Faith Estimate and Truth in Lending Disclosures….required waiting periods.

Under MDIA, early disclosures are required for “any extension of credit secured by the dwelling of the consumer.” Three business days from application, the consumer must receive an initial Good Faith Estimate and Truth in Lending (unless the borrower is denied at application).

The earliest a transaction can possibly close is seven days after the initial disclosures have been issued by the lender (delivered in person, mailed, emailed, etc.). This is assuming no re-disclosure is required.

Re-disclosure (waiting periods after the early disclosure and corrected disclosures) of the GFE/TIL are triggered if the fees and charges are more than 10%; if the APR is more than 0.125% or a change in loan terms. Three business days must pass in the event of re-disclosure. Re-disclosing is nothing new, it typically happened at closing–this will no longer be acceptable. Mortgage originators “should compare the APR at consummation with the APR in the most recently provided corrected disclosures (not the first set of disclosures provided) to determine whether the creditor must provide another set of corrected disclosures”. Double check those APRs prior to doc!

From MortgageDaily.com:

“The Commentary added by the MDIA Rule expressly provides that both the seven-business-day and three-business-day waiting periods must expire for consummation to occur. The seven-business-day waiting period begins when the early disclosures are delivered to the consumer or placed in the mail, and not when the consumer receives the disclosures. The three-business-day waiting periods begin when the consumer actually receives or is deemed to receive the corrected disclosures. If corrected disclosures are mailed, the consumer is deemed to receive the disclosures three business days after mailing. If a creditor delivers corrected disclosures via email or by a courier other than the postal service, the creditor may rely on either proof of actual receipt or the mailing rule for purposes of determining when the three-business-day waiting period begins to run.”

Consumers have the right to waive or shorten the MDIA if “a consumer determines that an extension of credit is needed to meet a bona fide perosnal financial emergency”.

No monies may be collected from the borrower with exception to a “bona fide and reasonable” credit report fee until they receive the initial disclosures. This may cause a delay of when an appraisal is ordered. Most lenders require an upfront deposit to cover the cost of the appraisal. The collection of fees rule may also cause potential issues if a borrower is doing a certain type of lock (some with float down or extended lock periods require an upfront deposit). NOTE: HVCC requires the borrower receive a copy of the appraisal at least three days prior to closing.

Tim Kane can attest that there is nothing worse than a borrower learning at signing their final loan papers that the fees are significantly higher than what was originally disclosed. I’d like to think that all mortgage originators redisclosed WHEN modifications to the transaction/fees take place…obviously, this has not been the case.

DFI covers MDIA here.

Re-disclosures could become a “holy hand grenade” to quick closings.

Are We Facing A Housing Shortage?

Posted on July 15, 2009 by Chuck

In looking at the latest Northwest MLS statistics for King County, it would be tempting to say that our housing market is recovering. But it is an odd mix of data. Single family home sales volumes are up (even better than last year), inventory is down sharply from last year, prices seem to be starting to rise again, and average days-on-market is dropping. That all sounds pretty good. (larger residential stats charts)

(Note that the Northwest Multiple Listing Service neither prepares nor is responsible for these charts – the interpretation is my own.)

But condominium sales are still slow (though rising some), inventory is staying high, and median prices are not rising. That doesn’t sound quite as good. (larger condo stats chart)

What are we to make of this seemingly conflicting data?

What it looks like to me is that we are in the early stages of a housing shortage. While Seattle and the west side have been built out for decades, Bellevue and the east side communities have been absorbing most of the region’s growth for the past 50 years or so. But we passed the Growth Management Act in 1990, and then we added the Critical Areas Ordinances. As a result, it has become harder and harder to get permits for housing developments of any significant size. In fact it appears that over the last 10 years or so it has become far easier to get a permit for a 100-unit condominium high-rise than for a 100-home residential development. The rate of application for new building permits “fell off a cliff

Lower Interest Rate – Escrow Timeframe

Posted on July 13, 2009 by ARDELL

1) How long is Escrow?

The correct answer is it can be as long or short as the buyer and seller want it to be. However a long escrow timeframe can cause an escrow to fail, because it can create a situation where the buyer no longer qualifies for the mortgage. Just because the buyer qualified when the offer was submitted, doesn’t mean the buyer will continue to qualify on the day the lender is supposed to fund the loan so the escrow can close.

A lender assumes a given interest rate when they qualify the buyer. If that interest rate is different for the reasons detailed below, at time of close, the buyer may not qualify at that changed interest rate.

2) Why do most agents write a contract to close in 30 days or less?

Dan Green of The Mortgage Reports wrote a post today explaining why a shorter escrow timeframe equals a lower mortgage interest rate. His post explains that a 60 day lock “costs more” than a 30 day lock, often in terms of higher interest rate vs. higher cash costs to close.

In order for the buyer to get the rate they think they are getting, they have to be able to lock that rate for no longer than 30 days. While the buyer is not required to lock that rate, it should at least be a possibility. If a buyer looks at a rate quote of 5%, they often are not told that assumes a rate lock period of no more than 30 days. So if they sign a contract to close in 60 days, and then try to lock the rate in the first week of their contract, they will find the rate to do that is higher than the rate they were quoted the day they made the offer.

The rate can change in a few hours without the issues noted in this post. But even if the rate does not change at all, the rate will be higher if you try to lock it through a 60 day closing vs. a 30 day closing.

The honest lender who asks “what is your proposed closing date” and gives you a “60 day lock rate quote” will be higher than the lender who assumes a 30 day lock. Be sure the lenders are using the same parameters when quoting you a rate prior to making an offer, so that you are comparing apples to apples. In this scenario the most trustworthy lender could appear to have a higher rate, when they are being most honest about the potential for rate if you lock for 60 vs. 30 days.

3) How does the closing date timeframe, chosen at time of offer AND ACCEPTANCE, impact the buyer and seller in other ways?

Buyer A gets a pre-approval letter the day they are submitting an offer. The lender pre-approves the buyer for a $300,000 mortgage at 5%.

Seller B accepts the buyer’s offer BUT asks for a 90 day closing, as the home they are moving to is new construction, and won’t be completed for 90 days.

Buyer A accepts the seller’s counter-offer as to closing date.

30 days later the buyer sees interest rates rising and wants to lock the rate. The lender quotes the “lock rate” and the buyer is confused. “I see the rate on your website is 5%. Why are you quoting me 5.25%?” Lender explains that a 60 day lock vs. a 30 day lock adds 1/4 of a % point to the mortgage interest rate.

Here’s where it gets REALLY complicated…if the buyer doesn’t qualify to buy the house if the rate is 5.25% vs. 5%, he can’t lock it. If he chooses to wait until the closing is within 30 days before he locks the rate, the rate could be at 5.5% at that time. If the timeframe for the finance contingency protecting the buyer’s Earnest Money expires prior to that time (and almost all do), the buyer is painted into a corner by circumstance.

Moral of the story is often a buyer CAN let the seller have 90 days to close if they are renting month to month. But a buyer must consider the impact of the interest rate floating out for 60 of those 90 days and/or the cost of locking for more than 30 days at time of contract.

Today, it is near impossible for a seller to stay in the property for more than 60 days from time of offer and acceptance. You can close in 30 days and let the seller stay or rent back from the buyer. BUT the buyer’s lender will not allow that seller to rent bank for an extended period. If the buyer is qualifying at an “owner occupied” interest rate, they will impose a maximum number of days that the buyer can rent it to the seller. Beyond that time period the buyer’s lender will consider it an “investment” mortgage, and higher investor interest rate and higher downpayment requirements, vs. an “owner occupied” purchase money loan.

The “ifs, ands or buts” that happen in a split second during negotiations, can change the “assumptions” made at the time the buyer received their preapproval letter. The lender is often not “in the room” while these negotiations take place, or consulted for every tiny change in close date or rent back terms. They most often don’t see those “changes” until the buyer and seller both sign the contract as finally negotiated.

These small changes can put the buyer’s Earnest Money “at risk” of loss. The agent is the “protector of the buyer’s Earnest Money”, as related to changes in contract terms during negotiations. Yet how many realize the changed position the buyer is put in when the seller counters for a longer close date?

We see thousands of articles on “How to choose an agent?” Perhaps asking the agent “what happens if the seller wants to close in 90 days, or wants to rent back for 90 days?”, is a better question than “How many homes have you ‘sold’ this year?” The cost of closing is VERY important to the buyer. Not closing at all, due to changes no one played out to the likely eventual worst case scenario, affects both the buyer AND the seller.

Agents don’t “sell” houses. Agents represent the buyer OR the seller AND the transaction as a whole, as it appears at time of offer…AND as it changes during negotiations and escrow.

Handing a contract to escrow and waiting for a commission check is no longer an option. Changes in lending BACK TO the old tried and true rules of the game, requires agents to be on their toes all the way to the day escrow closes…or doesn’t close.

Why are so many escrows not closing these days? Everyone asks that question. Truth is the skills needed by an agent have changed dramatically back to old school…and agents still think “it’s the lender’s job” vs. theirs.

Gone Facebooking… Be back soon

Posted on July 9, 2009 by Dustin Luther

Earlier today, I launched the latest integration between Facebook and RCG… If you check out the right sidepanel, you’ll see that you can now become a fan of RCG directly from this site thanks a new tool released by Facebook called the Fan Box.

Since I launched the RCG fan page a few weeks ago, I’ve been experimenting will all kinds of content. Some RCG articles, some news articles, some community blog posts, some event related posts… and it’s been really interesting to see which ones resonate with people enough to get them to engage. Just some of the articles I’ve highlighted on our fan page include:

What I really like about the RCG FB Page is that it lets me publish quick links that I think will be interesting to the RCG community without the need to take up a post.

If you’re interested in taking part in this extension of RCG, all you need to do is “become a fan” using the box to the right!

And if you have a story you want to see us cover, I just created a page that will let you use a nifty Facebook Updater widget to share links and/or stories with us. This is definitely not the permanent solution, but as a test of the technology, it should do the trick!

Happy Facebooking!

[CC photo courtesy of Lopolis]

Tales From the Dark Side #1

Posted on July 9, 2009 by Ray Pepper

[Editor’s Note: As a long time member of the Rain City Guide community, Ray Pepper has offered to share stories with us about his on-the-ground experience working as a real estate broker with $500 Realty. We’re calling these “Tales from the Dark Side” and today, I’m please to hit publish on the first edition of this series. Please give a warm welcome to Ray Pepper as the latest contributor to Rain City Guide!]

In an attempt to educate the public and fellow agents of the NWMLS I offer an incident dated Sept 2008.

Client Sam and Tim have been Pre-Approved clients looking for a home in Des Moines with a current Buyers Agency agreement on file. They attend Open Houses and call me for showings every month or so. They have been educated on how to advise all fellow agents they are working with an Agent.

Sam found a home driving around and called me from her cell at the vacant residence. It was a Sunday at 4pm and I got the message about 8pm. The voice mail indicated she called the Agent on the sign, to inquire on the price, and as it turned out the agent lived across the street.

As the story unfolds the Agent spent 2.5 hours with our client talking about the home, the history of it, and the wonderful community she has lived in for decades.

I receive a phone call to write an offer on the property Sunday night. I asked my client how they got inside. She stated the listing agent let me in. I asked, ” Did you remind her you were working with an agent?” She said absolutely!

An offer was written around midnight and was promptly sent Monday morning.

The next phone call I received was one that has been repeated before but this time much harsher then I have ever heard. It reminded me of my old female Drill Sergeant at Fort Leonard Wood. ” Listen here Pepper!” “I’m a million dollar producer!” “I’ve seen the likes of you come and go!” “My time is very valuable!” “Don’t speak until I have finished what I’m saying!” “Your clients lied to me!” ” We have a wonderful community here and I don’t think dishonesty is a good fit for our community!” “I’m not here to do your work for you!”

I’m new here to RCG and I believe none of you know me personally. Those who do will attest that there is nobody more sincere, honest, and willing to take any and all slanderous language. I have listened to it for years at the Seattle/Tacoma Home Show and Puyallup Fair. I took it all in as usual. I attempt to never laugh but always educate based on the rules set forth by the NWMLS and the State.

I immediately contacted my clients and told them about the incident and how I had to remove myself from this transaction. My clients stated to me SHE is the liar and the agent “offered” to just walk across the street and show her listing to them. As it turns out while I was on the phone with my clients the listing agent called back for Round 2 of screaming and I continued to listen. I must confess that at times I find this very therapeutic and relaxing. I was threatened to be turned into the NWMLS, the State, and her Broker. I strongly encouraged her to do so.

We all know how this story ends. The Buyer wanted the home. The Seller wanted it sold. The buyers walked because they did not want to have this agent as their neighbor.

It is my opinion the only one who ever loses from this type of behavior is the one who will never know it happened. At last look the house still remains on the market today, this time with a new agent.

Our clients closed on their new home in April 2009.

[photo source: Sir Mervs]

Price per square foot revisited

Posted on July 6, 2009 by ARDELL

Are formal dining rooms becoming obsolete? Are huge master suites too “selfish” for today’s changing society? Is “keeping up with the Joneses” turning into “Cutting down with the Joneses”?

In a market projected to be flat at best for the foreseeable future, these questions are fast becoming very important for each home buyer to ask and answer, each in their own way.

In the age of “me”, me being the parents vs. the children, the places where children “go” in their home got smaller and smaller. Families used to spend more time together in the “living” room until the children were banished to the “family room” and the living room became a “formal” living room that most no one ever used. People gathered in the kitchen with friends and family, until the “formal” dining room became a place and space ONLY used once in a while when “guests” came. As if the kitchen was OK for the kids, but the visitors were somehow more important, so much so that we paid big money for a special room just for “guests” vs the family on an everyday basis.

Beyond price per square foot, it is time for home buyers to determine price per square foot of WHAT? Forget about how it currently “works”. It’s time to change how it works.

First Floor = 1,630 sf of which only 534 square feet represent rooms the children enter on a regular basis. The rest is “formal” living room, “formal” dining room, “Dad’s” study, “grand” staircase and foyer. Even if you throw in the 1/2 bath, the space the children live in is smaller than the square footage of the attached 3 car garage at 660 sf.

When did the children become entitled to less space than the cars?

Second Floor = 1,260 sf of which each child’s bedroom is only 130 sf. If you have two children and throw in the bathroom they share at 5 x 8, that gives them 380 sf on the second floor. Let’s be generous and give them an open loft “bonus” room to do their homework in at 15 x 15 and you still have a full HALF of the second floor devoted to master suites and grand staircases.

2,890 sf of home plus 660 sf of garage = 3,550 sf of which only 1,165 sf is space the children enter on a regular basis. The “children’s” place is not even double the amount devoted to housing the cars. Given the “children’s” space includes the kitchen and the family room, that’s just sad.

Let’s put a price tag of $550,000 on this home = $154 per square foot including the garage. 1,165 sf times $154 = $180,500 of that $550,000 devoted to the “family” and places where the children go on a daily basis. That’s about $370,000 for formal areas, master bedrooms and baths, showy staircases and places to put the cars.

Do you really want to spend $380,000 for places your children don’t enjoy?

Put this house on a small lot, as a zero lot line home, and we have to ask ourselves: I know we’ve come a long way, we’re changing day to day. But tell me, where do the children play?

My “Talking” Good Faith Estimate

Posted on July 3, 2009 by Rhonda Porter

Ardell asked me to share with you how I present Good Faith Estimates to my clients when I’m not meeting with them face to face…and believe or not, most of my clients I never have the pleasure of meeting. We do most of our conversation via email or over the phone. When possible, I like to include a presentation where I review the good faith estimate for the client section by section.

Here’s an example from a transaction a few months ago where my clients were buying utilizing an FHA mortgage with minimum down payment.

The program I use is called Jing and you have up to 5 minutes to record your presentation (I was pushing my time with this presentation…you might be able to tell that I’m trying to wrap it up at the end). The uses for this program are endless.

This does take some extra time to prepare an estimate…but I think it’s worth it!

Notice of Trustee Sales v. Trustee Deeds

Posted on July 1, 2009 by Jillayne Schlicke

Each month, Alan from Seattle Bubble religiously posts the Notice of Trustee Sale (NTS) numbers for King County. I’m very appreciative of his work because it saves me time each month so thanks again, Alan. Cruising SB last night, I found Alan’s numbers alarming for June: 1615 NTS were filed. Here are more numbers from Alan:

King County Notice of Trustee Sales

6/2009 – 1615
6/2008 – 576
6/2007 – 304
6/2006 – 299

180% YOY (280% of last year)

The last few months:
6/2009 – 1615
5/2009 – 992
4/2009 – 938
3/2009: 1089
2/2009: 838
1/2009: 909
12/2008: 660
11/2008: 540
10/2008: 643
9/2008: 607
8/2008: 575
7/2008: 728

If we’re seeing 180% increase year over year with notice of trustee sale filings, then where are the REOs? Well as it turns out, if you compare the trustee deed filings for the same month, you’ll see that a low percentage of Notice of Trustee Sales actually go all the way through the auction process. Here’s comparison data courtesy of Jess and Julie Lyda, which gives us a visual comparing NTS v. Trustee Deeds, which means title changed hands from the owner in default to a new owner. That new owner could be the bank/lender or someone who was the high bidder at the trustee sale. Here’s a link to a larger image of the graph.

So what assumptions can we make given facts that we already know? We already know that banks and lenders are postponing the majority of trustee sales in King County. We don’t have any data as to how long postponements are lasting. If a homeowner is trying for a short sale or loan modification, we do know that the average wait time for banks to process these requests could easily be months based on nationwide reports from Realtors, home buyers and homeowners. We also know that there are many banks who have turned into zombies, waiting for their number to be called and the regulators to show up on a Friday afternoon. Postponing the losses from a foreclosure means the bankers can collect a paycheck for a few more months.

We also know that 50% of all loan modifications re-default by the 6 month mark. This pushes the foreclosure out longer and increases the overall losses to the bank/lender. Another assumption we can make comparing data from Alan and Julie is that hundreds of REOs will be coming back on the market each month, which will put further pressure on home values. Prime delinquencies are starting to surge and so are delinquencies in the upper home price ranges.

With what we know, home values will continue to feel pressure from many angles including higher inventory levels, continued tightening of underwriting guidelines, the lower prices of REO resales and short sales.

Why Home Inspection Negotiations Fail

Posted on June 29, 2009 by ARDELL

Properties “falling out of escrow” due to the home inspection negotiation failing, is on the rise. In many cases this is because the buyer is asking for something the seller can’t really say yes to, because what they are asking for just doesn’t make any sense. Consequently the answer often becomes no and the escrow “falls out”. See this example of a recent Extreme Home Inspection to see how difficult it is to say “no” when no is the most appropriate response for all parties, and still keep everything moving forward to a right conclusion.

A home inspection is not the same as the original contract negotiation. The original negotiation is more about price and terms than the house itself. Consequently both parties can decide what to do, and what to do next during the negotiation, in email or by fax. To successfully complete a home inspection negotiation, the negotiations need to start AT the property, and may take a few inspections by experts to complete the inspection negotiations properly.

The example in the link gives a better picture of why this is so, than I can describe here. But let’s look at the three main causes for inspection negotiations going sideways, and how the buyer is often moving in the wrong direction.

1) The new norm of not letting the seller’s agent be present at the inspection is not a good one. I agree that the seller should not be present, as the emotional level can get out of control and unmanageable. But the agent for the seller needs to take the ball and run with it once the buyer starts making a request. The BEST way for the agent for the seller to negotiate to a good conclusion is if they are AT the inspection and heard and saw what the inspector was talking about. Not permitting the agent for the seller to be present can lead to the seller fixing the wrong thing, or fixing it incorrectly. If the paper report were an adequate representation of all facts at hand, the buyer would not need to attend. We all know that is not the case, and to understand the inspection in its entirety, so as to negotiate the appropriate fix, requires that all relevant parties be present.

It is a great disservice to the transaction as a whole for buyers to insist that the agent for the seller not be present. Yes, I’ll agree that a lazy, crappy agent in the room doesn’t help anyone. But the right agent in the room can make everything work out even better than the buyer hoped for. The agent for the seller has the best chance of getting the seller to react appropriately to the “issue at hand”. Give that agent what they need to help you best. Let them be present during the inspection, in fact insist on it. The paper report does not replace being in the space with the inspector as he finds and discusses the issue at much greater length and detail then ends up in the written report.

If you have an agent who sits on the front step reading a book or doing “work they brought to do during the inspection”, and doesn’t stay “engaged in the process”, well…I think you know what I want to say there and can’t say out loud.

2) Successful negotiations require you to put yourself in the other side’s shoes. Often agents who have represented hundreds of buyers and sellers can do this better than any buyer or seller. When a buyer’s agent writes up an inspection response, they then have to read it back to themselves pretending they are the agent for the seller. How would the agent on the other side of the table take this request and run with it? Often the answer is, they can’t. The agent wrote what the buyer asked for, without analyzing whether or not the other side has enough information to respond well.

Example: “Fix everything.” Even if the seller says yes, there are some things you don’t want the seller to fix. Some things need a credit, some things need to be fixed, and most things need a whole lot more detail as to HOW to fix them than “fix everything on this list” explains. RARELY does ANYONE say yes to an unknown cost. Fix everything is just lazy. The buyer’s fix might cost $6,000. The seller’s fix might cost $300. The seller may be saying “yes” to $300 while the buyer is thinking they said yes to $6,000. Then you get to the end after closing and the fix is horribly inadequate. You must be VERY specific if you want a “fix”, and that fix has to have a “work order” attached. The work order dectates WHO will fix it and the cost of that fix, so the seller is saying yes to what the buyer really wants and needs.

3) The request has to make sense. When the inspector says (and they all do) I can’t tell what’s behind the wall, it is NOT usually appropriate for the buyer to ask for the wall to be opened. Sometimes yes (as in the linked example in the first paragraph) sometimes no.

Example: 200 amp panel is of the type that was recalled. The inspector says it needs a new panel (cost approx. $1,000). The inspector suggests the panel be moved from outside the house to inside the house (generally not an appropriate request – it’s like asking for the washer and dryer to be moved from the second floor to the first floor. A home inspection should not include a request to change the home from what it is, when that something is not “a defect” and is a suggestion vs. a needed repair.)

The inspector says “I see no problem besides the panel itself”, but as a CYA he adds, “I can’t trace the lines throughout the home as I can’t see behind walls”. Buyer asks the seller to replace the panel AND move it from outside to inside AND asks them to trace the lines throughout the home…no possible answer to all that besides “no”. The inspector can’t see through walls and neither can the seller or the seller’s electrician. You’re basically asking for someone to rip out every wall and see the wiring behind the wall and check it. Unless the inspector sees a problem in the wiring, and even when they do, there is a limit to what you can expect a seller to do. Handing them a to do with no work order…no cost…no detail as to what they are to do next, is begging for a no response.

RECAP:

1) Make sure both the agent for the buyer and the agent for the seller are in attendance and “engaged” during the inspection.

2) If there is a “potential” but unidentified problem as to specifics CALL FOR A 2ND INSPECTION of that item by a qualified specialist, before making a request.

3) Don’t simply ask for the biggest number you can get. Make sure your request matches the issue at hand.

Example: 35 year roof is 6 year’s old. Inspector sees 3 cracked shingles and flashing issues around the chimney. If you really want to buy the house, don’t ask for “a new roof”. Sure, getting ten grand is nice. But asking for a new roof when it doesn’t need a new roof will likely lead to the seller not trusting anything you want as “real”, and leads to the seller simply saying “NO!” and not wanting to negotiate any further and that equals #FAIL!

FHA Condo Approval Process – MAJOR Guideline Changes

Posted on June 27, 2009 by Jim Reppond

condo construction building There are major changes on the way for developers of condo projects and existing condo owners who want to get approved for FHA financing. These changes are set to take place October 1st, 2009. But the ramifications are going to start being felt right away. The details are outlined in the Mortgagee Letter 2009-19 that was issued on June 12th by HUD. In this latest Mortgagee Letter FHA is announcing dramatic changes to their Condo Approval Process and the ELIMINATION of the Spot Approval Process. While these changes reduce the documentation and requirements for Full Condo Approval, it will place a lot more work and responsibility on Lenders.

The Lender will have 2 options:

HUD Review and Approval Process (HRAP).
Direct Endorsement Lender Review and Approval Process (DELRAP), outlined in this Mortgagee Letter. This option is only available to lenders who have unconditional Direct Endorsement authority and staff with knowledge and expertise in reviewing and approving condominium projects.

The processing options stated above will be applicable to condominium developments that are:

Proposed/Under Construction;
Existing Construction; or
Conversions.

Certain types of projects will be ineligible. They are:

Condominium Hotel or “Condotels

Rain City Guide

Your Guide to the Seattle Real Estate Market

Category Archives: Seattle Real Estate Stats