[quote="1 More Thing"]well since last September - the number of fradulent loans have gone up. I am sure that working for a Net Branch will not be a safe haven either.
The Feds look like they are leaning towards - dealing with BANKS ONLY.
Then they have the most control especially if they have borrowed TARP money.[/quote]
right on as usual.......................
StephenF Nitroglycerin
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 981
Location: New Jersey
well since last September - the number of fradulent loans have gone up. I am sure that working for a Net Branch will not be a safe haven either.
The Feds look like they are leaning towards - dealing with BANKS ONLY.
Then they have the most control especially if they have borrowed TARP money.[/quote]
right on as usual.......................
This is what I was hinting towards...I was not saying that you are a "net branch" as we currently know them,one remains a broker but the Banks are in control, they essentially say who gets FHA and then they top it all off with income regulation. Bottom line is...Banks are in control. Not good.
_________________ “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act”
– George Orwell
Snets Nitroglycerin
Joined: 12 Nov 2008
Posts: 875
Location: Palm Beach County
The real scary thing is there won't even be a vote - it is a "rule" not a law by the Federal Reserve Board - if this is adopted re: YSP etc. after the question period in December - that could be the absolute end of all of us. In the language it states that we cannot be compensated by the terms or structure of the loan - so we would theoretically make exactly the same no matter if it was a $50K loan or a $500K loan - bank loan officers will be similarily constrained but they will get a salary plus a "bonus" instead of a commission which will be precisely the same thing but will have the net affect of limiting all mortgage transactions to the big four banks. Loan officers will be 24 year olds with zero experience working for $10 an hour plus a bonus. All AE's, processors, mortgage brokers, and anyone that depends on a check (landlords, credit reporting agencies etc.) from a mortgage company will be done in an instant. This simply can't be true can it?
The real killer that I saw in there was the anticipation that mortgagees would start having to have some skin in the game. So yes they could take the loan from any broker who qualifies, but would they want to if FHA no longer picks up all the tab if the loan goes bad?
If mortgagees are on the hook for defaulting FHA loans then I would think the only way they would work with a broker is if the broker has reserves to buy back loans.
I work for a correspondent lender and we have to buy back loans or pay fees for EPO's and EPD's.
The Next Big Bailout? FHA Facing "Cataclysmic" Default Rates
Posted Oct 13, 2009 09:00am EDT by Aaron Task
Related: FNM, FRE, XHB, TOL, PHM, LEN, XLF
Given the choice between "complete collapse" and increased government involvement in the housing market, Whitney Tilson, manager of T2 Partners, is glad policymakers opted for the latter in 2008.
But there is going to be a heavy price to pay for the U.S. government becoming the nation's mortgage broker, says Tilson, co-author of More Mortgage Meltdown.
Specifically, Tilson is worried about the potential need for a bailout of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), which has guaranteed about 25% of all new U.S. mortgages written in 2009, up from just 2% in 2005.
Created in 1934 to help low-income and first-time homeowners, the FHA has historically played a minor role in the U.S. housing market. But the agency has become the government's vehicle of choice for mortgage financing in the past year.
Again, Tilson supports the concept of the government stepping into the breach caused by the near total cessation of private mortgage lending, as well as the curtailed financial activity of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which became wards of the state in September 2008. But "there's a price to pay," he says, noting the FHA is facing "cataclysmic default rates" on loans written in 2006, 2007 and early 2008, as detailed by The NY Times.
"Effectively we the taxpayers are now guaranteeing mortgages written by over 10,000 FHA-approved lenders," Tilson says. "The FHA's portfolio is exploding [and] the taxpayer is now on the hook for 100% of the losses."
How big of a hook? The FHA's mortgage portfolio is now approaching $1 trillion. You can't assume all those mortgages will default but you can assume the FHA's exposure will only grow in the months ahead as politicians continue to look for ways to support the housing market (especially in an election year.)
In other words, FHA is looking very much like the "new Fannie Mae."
View next topic View previous topic
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
