With a Federal Reserve rate cut all but certain in the coming days, financial professionals are advising Americans to brace for a new wave of economic ripple effects. While markets have priced in a quarter-point reduction, the move could still influence everything from mortgage rates to savings yields—and not always in obvious ways.
August saw a dramatic shift in mortgage market behavior as rate-and-term refinances surged and non-QM lending hit its highest level to date. While purchase activity continued to cool, a wave of homeowners rushed to take advantage of slightly improved rates, and lenders expanded their reach with creative non-agency loan offerings.
The administration may declare a national housing emergency as early as this fall, according to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. While no official framework has been released, potential executive actions under consideration include standardizing local building and zoning codes, lowering closing costs, and granting tariff waivers on construction materials.
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.
I know, it sound pretty elementary, we underwrite to see if the borrower qualifies, it’s that simple right? Actually it’s not that simple nor is the task of underwriting a basic exercise in calculating ratio’s, cash to close and making sure the borrower’s credit score is sufficient to meet investor criteria.
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.
Last week I outlined upcoming changes to FHA’s mortgage insurance premium structure based on preliminary communication from HUD but subject to the release of an official Mortgagee Letter. Since then Mortgagee Letter 2012-4 has been issued which communicates the finalized changes to FHA’s mortgage insurance premium structure.
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.
I know this statement will be relatively unpopular but I am going to say it anyway, thank goodness for the return of the FHA mortgage insurance program” In a HUD Public Affairs publication, No. 12-037, issued on February 27, 2012, HUD announced its intentions of again raising the UFMIP and MMI premiums to not only protect their capital reserves but also to encourage the return of private capital into the residential mortgage market.
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.
Anyone who is familiar with my article writing over the past several years probably knows I am a huge advocate for training and education in our industry whether it be for those coming in to the lending environment fresh with no prior experience or for the most seasoned veteran such as myself who have been working in the lending environment for well over 20 years or more.
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.
The past few weeks have been quite interesting around the office for me, not because I have had opportunity to learn new things or underwriting interesting cases, but because I have had to endure a whole new level of customer complaints. It seems like more and more these days, when I pick up the phone it’s my boss saying to bring some loan officer to her office because again, she had just gotten chewed by another customer or real estate agent and in a time of dwindling business not to mention fees, this is never a good thing.
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.
At the end of 2011, HUD finally released a long-awaited current version of the TOTAL Scorecard User Guide. The prior version had not been updated since 2004. FHA requires that all loans be scored through TOTAL except for those transactions involving borrower’s with no traditional credit scores and streamline refinance transactions.
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.
When I hear those words, they immediately evoke images of a world in which mortgage underwriting decisions are determined by AUS systems that have no capacity to either employ common sense underwriting principals or fairly or adequately assess overall risk. They are simply three more numerical values used by a computer model to “recommend” if a loan should be approved and just like its partner, the AUS, I think credit scoring as rule has outlived its usefulness.
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.
In December I promised to be giving updates on the new HARP refinance programs as details emerge, and so being good to my word I am returning to the subject. Unfortunately there are not many details to talk about, and what there is to say is almost guaranteed to give you a headache.
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.
The Federal Trade Commission website is a resource I refer people to fairly often because of the informative and educational materials available for consumer distribution. The FTC offers a lot of great information available in web format, PDF format and some materials are even available to order in bulk quantities for free which makes this a great resource for seminar materials and overall distribution to homebuyers and homeowners.
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.
I know what you’re thinking already, “Really Bonnie, we know all about them”, but I say untrue, this based on a conversation I had yesterday with an underwriter friend at Philadelphia HOC. It is always nice to talk to her, catching up with friends is always a good thing and as you can image, she will sometimes share with me some of the most common disastrous mistakes lenders make where various loan types are 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.