More mortgage bad news.

[steyou]

Here's why they are doing this- its called "wealth redistribution" and that is what this administration is all about. Obama told Joe the plumber this is what he intends on doing and he is.

Glad I have cash Buyers.

 

[Mango]

The hard part with first time homeowners is to come up with 10% or more for first time without help of mommy or daddy. Especially when you have two children to raise and there is no affordable childcare options in the area that don't have a waiting list a mile long. So you are stuck as a single income family basically by default.

I am not saying that no down payment options is a great idea just saying that I don't think high down payment options are an option for most first time homebuyers. That is unless you could buy a house for no money down, put in granite countertops and jack the price up $100,000 less than 6 months later. Problem is those days are gone.

What ever happened to advanced planning? When I was coming up, we waited to get married until we had decent careers, then we saved for a house, then children were planned, or at least one spouse was able to pay the mortgage by that time usually because one knew they were going to stay home; diapers, doctor visits, school supplies, all factored in.

I know the best laid planned don't always work out; contraception fails, illness, job layoff, but some practicality needs to be exercised.
We're already paying through the nose for welfare programs for those who lives their lives without a care. I am tired of paying for it through government sponsored loan programs.

Just for the record, I take no issue with 3% down loan if one of the Borrowers' debt to income ratio is half what is required for the program.
FYI--- I am a licensed Mortgage Broker.

 

[Mango]

i would say, given market valuations now, 3 percent is ok provided scrupulous underwriting and conservative appraisals. take away fha, and you'll see a leg down in residential real estate

I disagree, my friend. Like I said above, I have no issue with 3% with a borrower who has a low DTI, job stability, some post closing liquidity in the form of a 401K or pension plan; but, the trend is savings now, and some of these 3% DP borrowers have not demonstrated a history of it. We're just circling around again with these Agencies and FHA has become laxer than FNMA or Freddie than my beginning days of this business (with the exception of appraisals)

 

[beachmouse]

Shrug. We put less than 10% down when we bought at a time when we still had scary amounts of student loan debt. First note was 30 year fixed; refinanced to a 15 year fixed after two years. Never had a problem paying the mortgage or other bills. Course we only borrowed about 2/3rds of what the loan officer said we qualified for because we didn't want to feel like we were slaves to the mortgage.

 

[Bob]

I disagree, my friend. Like I said above, I have no issue with 3% with a borrower who has a low DTI, job stability, some post closing liquidity in the form of a 401K or pension plan; but, the trend is savings now, and some of these 3% DP borrowers have not demonstrated a history of it. We're just circling around again.

i don't think you can complete the circle without pocket appraisals, nina et al. what's the requirement for reserves on fha purchase?

 

[Mango]

i don't think you can complete the circle without pocket appraisals, nina et al. what's the requirement for reserves on fha purchase?

I am not advocating tightening the belt straps till the market turns blue. I am in agreement. The secondary market has gone to extremes. However, for a NINA and low DP programs, go back to the practical basics like I described above, higher DP's, et. al.

 

[TooFarTampa]

Shrug. We put less than 10% down when we bought at a time when we still had scary amounts of student loan debt. First note was 30 year fixed; refinanced to a 15 year fixed after two years. Never had a problem paying the mortgage or other bills. Course we only borrowed about 2/3rds of what the loan officer said we qualified for because we didn't want to feel like we were slaves to the mortgage.

Yeah ... we did a no-money-down VA loan when I was just 24 and Mr. TFT was getting his MBA. Of course we did not buy a palace but it worked out well for us. We did pay closing costs, of course, and I think our interest rate was a bit higher.

In retrospect we were being a bit bold and aggressive, but our timing was good and bottom line was, we could afford it.

 

[Bob]

Yeah ... we did a no-money-down VA loan when I was just 24 and Mr. TFT was getting his MBA. Of course we did not buy a palace but it worked out well for us. We did play closing costs, of course, and I think our interest rate was a bit higher.

In retrospect we were being a bit bold and aggressive, but our timing was good and bottom line was, we could afford it.

we did a zero down va in '87 at 9.5percent, but the house was 58k.

 

[drivingtheview]

FHA and Ginnie Mae: The Next Fannie and Freddie - WSJ.com





Why would our policy makers do this? Maybe there is another side to this story.

From where I sit it looks like a terrible idea to promote taxpayer guaranteed subprime lending.

This Public/Private debate (of Federal Government interference with private industry for the good of us all) sounds and reads like a fiscal disaster. Why on earth would we en-trust our elected officials to navigate this road all over again??? Just stating the obvious when the Feds try to alter massive sectors of the economy (which is currently in the worst shape of our lifetime)

Higher Education
In 1987, President Ronald Reagan established the President's Commission on Privatization to identify federal government functions that could be shifted to the private sector. One agency that the Commission considered was the Federal National Mortgage Association, or Fannie Mae. Fannie Mae was a Depression-era creation that was charged with establishing a secondary market for home loans. By purchasing qualifying residential mortgages from individual home loan issuers, Fannie Mae provided these institutions with funds for the continued issuance of mortgages, thereby promoting the government's goal of increased homeownership. Although lawmakers had already partially privatized Fannie Mae in 1954 and again in 1968, the agency in 1987 still retained close links to the federal government, including an emergency line of credit from the U.S. Treasury. After its deliberations, the President's Commission recommended Fannie Mae be restructured into a fully private firm. Now it was up to Congress and the President to decide whether to accept and implement the Commission's findings................:scratch:

What Are the Origins of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? This was from 2003 before these agencies had "big" problems
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the only two Fortune 500 companies that are not required to inform the public about any financial difficulties that they may be having. In the event that there was some sort of financial collapse within either of these companies, U.S. taxpayers could be held responsible for hundreds of billions of dollars in outstanding debts. A recent investigation by the Justice Department and the SEC into the accounting practices at Freddie Mac revealed accounting errors in the amount of 4.5 to 4.7 billion dollars and resulted in the termination of three of the company's top executives....................:scratch:

 

[AliKat]

Don't think home ownership is a right, just the American Dream. I agree that in doing so there must be some fiscal responsibilty. I just think the main issue in the whole "crash" was not 0 down loans, but more so ARM loans. I think if you are planning on living in a home long term and not house flip then a 0 down loan could be for you.