The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) has formally raised concerns to the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) about how Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) debt should be treated in mortgage underwriting. In a letter submitted on August 25, the MBA highlighted risks that could undermine borrower affordability assessments and FHA’s financial safeguards.
Markets were taken by surprise after a highly controversial decision from the White House rattled investor sentiment and reignited concerns about the political independence of the Federal Reserve. The sudden announcement of a Federal Reserve governor’s removal—based on disputed allegations of past mortgage-related impropriety—has triggered legal challenges and intensified debate about executive authority over monetary policy institutions.
U.S. mortgage rates edged higher on August 25, pulling back slightly from their recent 10-month lows. The average rate for a 30-year fixed loan rose by just 0.02 percentage points, keeping rates firmly in historically favorable territory. This small uptick followed a period of sharp rate declines driven by a strong rally in the bond market.
The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) is urging a major overhaul of how lenders access credit data for loans delivered to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, calling their tri-merge mandate—requiring credit reports from all three major credit bureaus—"an outdated relic" that drives up costs and limits choice.
Mortgage rates held steady on August 12, 2025, providing a brief moment of calm for borrowers and lenders after a string of economic data releases. According to the Mortgage News Daily index, the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate remains at 6.58%, unchanged from the previous day and comfortably within its recent range.
I Just recently read an article regarding new legislation that was introduced in Congress on Monday which would increase the minimum required down payment on an FHA insured mortgage from 3.5% to 5% and I thought this would be a good time not only to discuss the issue but also indicate why I am firmly against the increase.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Seems like just yesterday all anyone was concerned about was what the AUS had to say. General rule of thumb was if the case was approved by AUS then closes the loan. New underwriters learned not so much how to underwrite but how to validate findings and if your documentation checklist didn’t ask for it then you didn’t need it.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Beginning of the new year in store for use where the FHA mortgage insurance program is concerned. Yes, I am referring to the changes to appraisal requirements per mortgagee letter 2009-30 and changes to how we will process and ultimately underwrite FHA streamline refinance transactions which have been set forth in mortgagee letter 2009-32 and are effective November 18, 2009.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Very recently I had a conversation with a HUD underwriter who expressed serious concern over what appears to be most Direct Endorsement Underwriters inability to accurately validate their AUS findings.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
As we are all aware, there will be some upcoming changes to RESPA in addition to the most recent disclosure changes were Regulation Z is concerned. Give the current confusion on what to expect and were we need to be by January 2010, I thought I would provide some information which might help ease the way.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Over the past couple of months, I have a few conversations with underwriters who have conveyed to me that they have been getting their buts kicked during post endorsement technical reviews.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Since the 203k program has become wildly popular again, I thought I would provide some best practices that in my opinion help get the cases closed as quickly as possible.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Regardless of the transactions type, I am underwriting, one of the thing that I always want to see is a borrowers’ bank statements. It does not matter the transaction type, cash out or rate/term or if or not the borrower will need cash to close, I still want to see the borrowers’ bank statements
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
It seems that, I have never ending conversations with individuals who still want to believe that automated underwriting in and of itself is the only acceptable means of determining loan approval.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Very recently I have been made aware of what is being termed as indemnity flags appearing on FHA case number assignments and decided now was a really great time to discuss the implications of what these actually mean particularly where the FHA streamline refinance program is concerned.
Opinion-Editorial (Op-Ed) Disclaimer For NAMP® Library Articles: The views and opinions expressed in the NAMP® Library articles are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect any official NAMP® policy or position. Examples of analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world application as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information. Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of NAMP®. Nothing contained in this article should be considered legal advice.
Written By: Bonnie Wildt
I have said it before and I will say it again and that is, do not believe everything you hear or read for that matter. In this particular instance I am referring to AUS Findings. I have had countless conversations with processors and loan officer who want to know why I am asking for documentation that the AUS findings have clearly stated wasn’t needed or worse, they can’t believe I am turning a loan down that has an Approve/Eligible. So here it is again and pay particular attention to the details because just because you have an Approve/Eligible or Accept doesn’t necessarily mean you have a done deal.