New QM Harms Homeowners…

How QM Harms Homeowners -House Committee Hearing
Jan 14 2014

The House Financial Services Committee heard testimony from five persons, almost all representing mortgage lenders, at a hearing today entitled How Prospective and Current Homeowners Will Be Harmed by the CFPB's Qualified Mortgage Rule.  Given the title of the hearing it is not surprising that four of the five spoke out against the regulations.

Jack Hartings, President and CEO of The Peoples Bank Company and Vice Chairman of the Independent Community Bankers of America told the committee that reform of QM is a key plank of ICBA's Regulatory Relief Agenda. 

Mortgage lending by community banks represents approximately 20 percent of the national mortgage market and is often the only source of mortgage lending in the small communities they serve, he said.  The 20 percent actually understates the significance of their mortgage lending as they make a larger share of their home purchase loans to low-or moderate-income borrowers or borrowers in low- or moderate-income neighborhoods and make a larger share of home purchase loans than loans for other purposes such as refinancing or home improvement.

Hartings said there is question that the QM rule will adversely affect his own bank's mortgage lending even though it qualifies as a small creditor making fewer than 500 mortgage loans annually and having less than $2 billion in assets.  "Even though my asset size is well below the $2 billion, in 2012 I made 493 mortgage loans.  We believe this threshold is far too low and is not consistent with the asset threshold."   He later pointed out that such low thresholds could prevent his bank from expanding its lending as the economy recovers.

Non-QM loans will be subject to significant legal risk under the Ability to Repay (ATR) rule and the liability for violations is draconian, he said.   Non-compliance with ATR could also serve as a defense to foreclosure if the loan is deemed not to be a QM loan and small community banks do not have the legal resources to manage this degree of risk. Thus these banks, he said, will not continue to make some of the loans they have made in the past such as low dollar amount loans, balloon payment mortgages, and higher priced mortgage loans.

The full impact of ATR goes beyond QM compliance as banks must still analyze each loan for ATR compliance, a costly and time consumer procedure.  It is necessary to expect that regulators will want to see documentation of the eight ATR underwriting factors and if they are not sufficient the asset could be downgraded and subject to high capital requirements. 

Without "small creditor" status, he said, his loans will be subject to a 43 percent debt-to-income limitation, a lower price trigger for "high cost" QM status which carries higher liability risk, and restrictions on balloon loans.  ICBA is urging Congress to raise the loan volume threshold. The problem could be easily addressed by disregarding loans sold into the secondary market in applying the threshold," Hartings said.

Daniel Weickenand CEO, Orion Federal Credit Union testifying on behalf of The National Association of Federal Credit Unions said that credit unions have always been some of the most highly regulated of all financial institutions, facing restrictions on who they can serve and their ability to raise capital and the Federal Credit Union Act has strict consumer protection rules.  Despite the fact that they were not the cause of the financial crisis, they are still firmly within the regulatory reach of rules promulgated by CFPB.

The impact of this growing compliance burden is evident as the number of credit unions continues to decline, he said, dropping by more than 900 institutions since 2009.  One cause of this decline is the increasing cost and complexity of complying with the ever-increasing onslaught of regulations.  "We remain concerned about the QM standard and that this rule will potentially reduce access to credit and hamper the ability of credit unions to continue to meet their member's needs," he said.

A number of mortgage products sought by credit union members and offered by credit unions are non-QM loans and may disappear from the market.  He said a forty-year mortgage loan, a product sought by credit union members in high costs areas, exceeds the maximum loan term for QMs, and because of a problematic definition, a number of credit unions make mortgage loans with points and fees greater than 3% because they can leverage relationships with affiliates to get the best deal for their members.

Because a credit union will not receive any presumption of compliance with the ability-to-repay requirements for a non-QM loan, the least risk to credit unions would be to originate only QM loans.  His own credit union, Weickenand said, has decided to go that route and a recent NAFCU survey revealed that a majority of credit unions will cease or greatly reduce their offerings of non-QMs.

Weickenand said that NAFCU strongly supports bipartisan pieces of legislation in the House (H.R. 1077/ H.R. 3211) to alter the definition of "points and fees" prescribed by the QM standard and an exemption from the QM cap on points and fees: (1) affiliated title charges, (2) double counting of loan officer compensation, (3) escrow charges for taxes and insurance, (4) lender-paid compensation to a correspondent bank, credit union or mortgage brokerage firm, and (5) loan level price adjustments which is an upfront fee that the Enterprises charge to offset loan-specific risk factors such as a borrower's credit score and the loan-to-value ratio.

Like Hartings, he supports an increase in the exemption's asset size and 500 mortgage thresholds.  He said many credit unions are approaching one or both thresholds which will render the small lender exemption moot for them. 

The Association also believes that all mortgages held in portfolio should be exempt from the QM rule not just small credit unions and would like to be able to continue to offer mortgages of 40 years or less duration as QMs.  NAFCU also supports Congress directing the CFPB to revise aspects of the 'ability-to-repay' rule that dictates a consumer have a total debt-to-income (DTI) ratio of 43 percent or less which will prevent otherwise healthy borrowers from obtaining mortgage loans and will have a particularly serious  impact in rural and underserved  areas where consumers  have  a limited number of options.

Bill Emerson, CEO of Quicken Loans and Vice Chairman of the Mortgage Bankers Association spoke on behalf of the trade group, starting his testimony by saying, "I can tell you categorically that Quicken Loans, like theoverwhelming majority of lenders, will not lend outside the boundaries of QM. In fact, even if we wanted to, we wouldn't be able to make non-QM loans because there is no discernable secondary market for them. The only place these loans can be kept is on a bank's balance sheet."

"Beyond that, the liability for originating non-QM is simply too great. Claimants can sue for actual and statutory damages, as well as a refund of their finance charges and attorney's fees, and there is no statute of limitations in foreclosure claims. By MBA's calculations, protracted litigation for an average loan can exceed the cost of the loan itself.

Given this uncertainty, at least for the foreseeable future he said non-QM lending is likely to be limited to three categories; loans where there are unintended mistakes, higher balance and non-traditional loans to wealthier borrowers, and loans made by a few lenders to riskier borrowers, but at significantly higher rates. He said the rate sheets he had seen suggest borrowers could pay an interest rate of 9-10 percent for non-QM loans.

Emerson said it remains very important to make adjustments to the QM rule. "The CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) deserves enormous credit for working with all stakeholders, lenders and consumer groups alike, and fashioning a rule we think is a substantial improvement over Dodd-Frank. We are also grateful the Bureau is open to making additional revisions in the near future."

There is a major problem with the 3 percent cap on points and fees for QM eligibility.  Because so many origination costs are fixed, a lot of smaller loans, particularly in the $100,000 to $150,000 range, will trip the 3 percent cap and fall outside the QM definition, pricing consumers, especially first-time homebuyers and families living in rural and underserved areas, out of the market.

"Additionally, the final rule picks winners and losers between affiliated and unaffiliated settlement service providers, even though their fees are subject to identical regulation. At Quicken Loans, we have chosen to affiliate with title and other service providers to ensure our customers have the best loan experience and that there are no surprises at the closing table."  His company, he said, has won awards because its affiliated arrangements have led to a smooth closing process.

Emerson said the MBA urges the House to promptly pass H.R. 3211, the Mortgage Choice Act.

Michael D. Calhoun, President of the Center for Responsible Lending was the only one of the five presenting testimony in favor of the CFPB's rules.  Calhoun said those rules strike the right balance of providing borrower protections while also ensuring access to credit. 

The QM rule covers 95 percent of current originations according to Moody Analytics he said that this broad coverage is because CFPB established four different pathways for a mortgage to gain QM status. The first uses a 43 percent back-end debt-to-income ratio. A second is based on eligibility for purchase by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and a third is specifically crafted for small creditors holding loans in portfolio. Lastly, there is a pathway for balloon loans as well. This multi-faceted approach will maintain access to affordable credit for borrowers.

"This broad definition is key for borrowers, including borrowers of color who represent 70% of the net household growth through 2023.  The broad definition means that borrowers will not be boxed out of getting a home loan and will also benefit from the protections that come with a Qualified Mortgage.  In addition, several lenders have said they will originate mortgages that do not meet QM requirements, holding them in their own portfolios.  Calhoun said he expects this will only grow over time. 

As a whole, these rules continue the CFPB's approach of expanding access to credit while ensuring that loans are sustainable for the borrower, the lender and the overall economy, Calhoun said.

Also testifying was Frank Spencer, President and CEP of Habitat for Humanity's Charlotte, North Carolina Chapter.  Spencer was primarily asking for relief from QM and ATR requirements for his organization which currently services approximately 780 mortgages.  Spencer said that despite the fact that the mortgages are non-interest bearing and that most of the chapters that originate them fall far below the thresholds of QM, some of the charity's operations trigger the requirements and present significant liability for its officers and community partners. 

Best Regards, Chris Mesunas

 

Mortgage Fraud Committed by Ex-Loan Officer…

Ex-loan officer pleads guilty in mortgage fraud scheme involving Roseville, Rocklin properties

 

Published: Thursday, Jan. 9, 2014 – 4:33 pm

A former Sacramento-area loan officer has pleaded guilty to his role in a mortgage fraud scheme that included properties in Placer County.

Alexander A. Romaniolis, 48, of Irvine, entered the plea today in federal court in Sacramento, according to a Department of Justice news release. A federal grand jury returned a three-count indictment in March 2013, charging him with mail fraud.

According to court documents, Romaniolis recruited five straw buyers to purchase eight California residential properties in Rocklin, Roseville and San Clemente. He assisted the straw buyers in providing false information to lenders about their employment, income, assets and their intent to occupy properties as primary residences.

In most cases, the straw buyers claimed to be executives of companies that Romaniolis created and controlled. He was responsible for originating more than $5 million in residential mortgage loans in the scheme, authorities said. All of the properties ended up in foreclosure, resulting in a total loss of more than $2 million.

Romaniolis is to be sentenced March 27.

The case resulted from an investigation by the FBI and the California Attorney General’s Mortgage Fraud Task Force.


 

 

Adjustable Rate Mortgages May be More Appealing to Less Financially Secured Borrowers…

Less Financially Secure Borrowers More Likely to Choose Adjustable Mortgages

Three staff member of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco have published, on the Bank's website, results of a study about what drives the mortgage choices of borrowers.  The three, Fred Furlong, David Lang, and Yelena Takhtamanova looked at the question of whether lower-rated borrowers paid less attention to loan pricing and interest-rate-related factors because house prices were rising rapidly. 

They developed a model to account for the factors that influence mortgage choice.  Earlier research has found that mortgage pricing and other interest-rate-related fundamentals are key but they also looked at housing market conditions and borrower characteristics, such as degree of financial constraint, attitudes towards risk, and mobility. Research has shown that financially constrained borrowers, or those with lower credit ratingstend to favor adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs) as do homebuyers who expect to only stay in a house a short time because ARMs have lower introductory interest rates.

Fixed-rate mortgages (FRM) initially tend to have higher interest rates than ARMs because they are tied to long-term interest rates which include a term premium to compensate investors for tying up their money longer. Both FRM and ARM rates include lender margins, that is, mark-ups reflecting general credit supply conditions, regional economic and housing market conditions, and individual borrower characteristics. Relative shifts in FRM and ARM margins can affect financing choices.

How much risk borrowers are willing to accept also can influence mortgage choice. Borrower risk tolerance can affect sensitivity to loan pricing, income volatility, and affordability in choosing mortgages. Borrowers with low credit ratings may be less sensitive to risk, for instance, because of lower cost of default. Research shows that more risk-averse borrowers tend to favor FRMs or option ARMs because they prefer to avoid the risk of future sharp rate increases possible with volatile adjustable-rate financing.

Thus, a mortgage choice model should include measures of the term premium, expected short-term interest rates over time, FRM and ARM margins, and interest rate volatility. In general, borrower preference for basic ARMs should increase as the term premium, expected short-term interest rates, and FRM margins rise, and ARM margins and interest rate volatility fall.  In other words, the more affordable ARMs become by comparison, the more they're favored.  No surprises here

Research also shows that the faster house prices are rising, the greater the probability that homebuyers will choose ARMs. In addition, rising house prices can affect the importance of interest-rate-related fundamentals when borrowers choose financing.

The researchers say that one view is that the housing boom was a bubble in which financing decisions for some borrowers were divorced from traditional fundamentals while another is that borrowers paid less attention to fundamentals during the housing boom, but that such a shift is consistent with rational decision-making models, given expectations of further house price appreciation. According to this view, with little or no change in house prices, homeowner decisions about moving or terminating a mortgage would generally reflect life-cycle events, such as illness, retirement, and job changes.

Rapid house price gains might change that.  During the boom homeowners expected to gain home equity as prices rose, allowing them to refinance even if they didn't plan to move or expected to flip houses soon after buying them.  Such short-term mortgages might make ARMs more attractive and reduce borrower sensitivity to interest-rate-related fundamentals.  In other words, they didn't care as much about the riskier nature of the loans because they planned on being out of them relatively quickly.

Finally, studies suggest that borrower financial literacy may affect mortgage choice.  Borrowers who choose ARMs appear more likely to underestimate or not understand how changes in interest rates would affect their loans. Hence, systematic differences in levels of financial literacy among borrowers at different risk levels could affect sensitivity to fundamentals. 

The study's model of mortgage choice allows for an examination of how these factors affected the decisions of borrowers at different credit risk levels. The authors studied a sample of about 9 million first-lien mortgages originated between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2007 allowing for three mortgage choices: FRMs, basic ARMs, and option ARMs.  Key model determinants are FRM and ARM margins, the 10-year Treasury term premium, expectations for short-term interest rates over time, and interest rate volatility. Controls included loan-to-value ratios, borrower credit risk, the two-year average change in house prices, and a measure of house price volatility. Finally, credit risk groups were defined by FICO scores: low, 660 or below, high, 760 or above, and medium 661 to 759.

The model allows the impact of interest-rate-related fundamentals to change as house prices rise. The estimates show that rising house prices have a sizable influence on the effect these fundamentals have on mortgage choice. The size of this effect differs according to borrower credit ratings.

 

Fig. 1

 

Figure 1 shows the impact of margins and term premiums on the probability of borrowers choosing an ARM.  The green bars indicate those factor's marginal effects if house prices are static.  A higher margin makes ARMs less attractive so the marginal effects are negative.  The low FICO group shows a greater effect indicating they are more sensitive to ARM mortgage pricing than the higher FICO cohort.  "Specifically, if house prices were flat, a 0.8 percentage point increase in the ARM margin would reduce the probability of low FICO borrowers choosing an ARM 13 percentage points and high FICO borrowers 8 percentage points. It is useful to compare this with the ARM share of mortgage originations, shown in Figure 2, which peaked at 50%."

The two year average house price appreciation was 16 percent.  The red bars show the offsetting effects of this with a reduction of one-third in the ARM margin to 8 percentage points for low FICO borrowers and 5 points for high FICO borrowers.  Similarly, house price appreciation reduces the impact of increases in the FRM margin and term premium on mortgage choice. Thus, even accounting for the influence of house price gains, lower FICO borrowers generally were at least as sensitive, if not more sensitive, to fundamentals as the high FICO borrowers.

 

Fig. 2

 

But, if low and high FICO borrowers gave similar consideration to interest- rate-related fundamentals, why were low FICO borrowers more likely to select ARMs during the housing boom?  Credit risk measures, including FICO scores and lender designation of borrowers as subprime, explain most of the difference in ARM shares. The authors considered whether borrowers would have made the same mortgage choice if, all else equal, they had different credit ratings. In Figure 3, for each month in the sample, they replaced the actual FICO score and subprime designation of each borrower in the low FICO group with the average score and subprime share of the high FICO group. The results of this hypothetical exercise, shown by the green line, suggest that the low FICO group's ARM share would have been closer to that of the high FICO group had their credit risk been similar.

 

Fig. 3

 

One could interpret the results as credit risk measures being associated with borrower level of financial sophistication or the findings could reflect economic decisions related to risk aversion, credit constraints, or differences in how quickly borrowers expect to refinance.  The authors conclude rising prices during the housing boom muted the influence of interest rate fundamentals on borrower mortgage choice, especially among borrowers with lower credit ratings.  But when house prices rose rapidly, those borrowers responded at least as strongly as higher-rated borrowers to changes in fundamentals. "This suggests," they say, "that the greater propensity of low FICO borrowers to choose ARMs is more consistent with mortgage choice reflecting economic considerations rather than lack of financial sophistication among low FICO borrowers."

 

APR’s not useful to shoppers…..

The Mortgage Professor: New disclosures fail to make APR useful to shoppers

 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has developed two new disclosure forms designed to make the mortgage process more manageable for borrowers. The first two articles in this series showed that the new disclosures will not protect borrowers from unjustified price changes while the loan is in process, nor will it help borrowers shop for the best price. This article considers whether the disclosures will help borrowers select the type of mortgage that best meets their needs.

The new loan estimate form retains the annual percentage rate disclosure from the current Truth in Lending form, which makes sense. The APR is a good measure of the cost of the loan to the borrower over the period the borrower has it. The problem with the APR has always been that it is calculated over the full term of the mortgage, though very few borrowers have their mortgage for the full term. Here is an example of how the full-term APR can mislead borrowers with shorter time horizons.

On Dec. 27, a borrower with strong credit credentials shopping my site for a $200,000 loan was quoted 4.375 percent on a zero-fee, 30-year, fixed-rate loan, and also 3.375 percent with upfront fees of $19,000. Which is better? The APR on the first loan is 4.375 percent and on the second is 4.19 percent, suggesting that the low-rate/high-fee loan is better.

But if the APRs are calculated over five years rather than 30, the APRs are 4.375 percent and 5.67 percent. Compressing the fees into a shorter period raises the APR on the high fee loan. The borrower in this case has to expect to be in the house for more than 14 years to make the low-rate/high-fee loan the better choice.

There are two possible remedies for this problem. The best is to ask borrowers to provide a best guess as to how long they will have the mortgage, and calculate the APR over that period. An alternative is to calculate the APR over several periods. While borrowers would have to do their own interpolations, this would be far better than encouraging them to believe that the APR calculated over the full term applied to them.

The CFPB has done neither. Only one APR is shown on the loan estimate, and it is the same full-term APR that is on the Truth in Lending disclosure.

The APR on adjustable rate mortgages, or ARMs, has another problem. An APR calculation requires an interest rate for every month the loan is in force. On ARMs, the rate is known only for the initial rate period. The rate that kicks in after that is based on the value of the interest rate index at that time, which is not known at the outset.

The assumption used in the APR calculation for ARMs is that the interest rate index remains unchanged through the life of the loan – a "no-change scenario." A 5/1 ARM that was available Dec. 27 at 3.25 percent with zero fees had an APR of 2.98 percent, the result of assuming that the index rate of 0.584 percent at that time remained unchanged for 30 years.

Of course, no assumption about interest rates in the next 30 years is going to be right. To be useful to borrowers, the APR on ARMs should be disclosed using alternative scenarios that are likely to bracket the possible outcomes. A no-change scenario could be usefully combined with a worst-case scenario, where it is assumed that the rate on the ARM increases by the maximum amounts allowed by contractual rate adjustment caps and maximum rates.

Consider a borrower trying to decide between the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage at 4.375 percent and zero fees, and a 5/1 ARM available at the same time at 3.25 percent and zero fees. The APR on the fixed-rate mortgage is 4.375 percent regardless of future rates. The adjustable-rate mortgage has an APR of 2.98 percent on a no-change scenario, and 6.13 percent on a worst case scenario, which is not very helpful. But that is because the ARM APRs are calculated over 30 years. Here are some other worst-case APRs on the ARM:

-Five years: 3.25 percent

-Eight years: 4.39 percent

-12 years: 5.38 percent

-30 years: 6.13 percent

Note that at eight years, the worst-case APR is very close to the APR on the fixed-rate mortgage. This means that a borrower who expects to be out of the house within eight years will do better with the ARM. That is useful information.

The upshot is that the APR would be useful to borrowers in making mortgage selections if it were calculated for multiple periods, and if on ARMs it was calculated on both no-change and worst-case scenarios.

Instead, CFPB has decided to leave the APR as it is, and to add three additional measures: total interest paid over the loan term, total payments of all types over five years, and total principal payments over five years. These measures seem to have been selected because borrowers understand them, but that does not make them helpful in choosing between different mortgage types. For that purpose, they are largely useless.

 

 

Non QM Lending…

Wells and Others Gear up For Non-QM LendingJan 8 2014, 11:02AM

With new rules defining Qualified Mortgages (QM) slated to kick in on Friday at least two lenders have indicated they will make room for loans that don't quite fit the government mandated mold.  The two, Wells Fargo and Bank of the West, plan to write at least some of the loans, retaining them for their own portfolios. 

Bank of the West, headquartered in Omaha says it will continue to offer interest only loans to its customers even though the loans fall outside the guidelines established by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  Paul Wible, Senior Executive Vice President and Head of the bank's National Finance Group said in a statement this week, "We extensively reviewed the CFPB's rules and found them broadly consistent with how Bank of the West has always done business. At the same time, we know that interest-only loans can fulfill the mortgage needs of many of our customers. Therefore, even though they do not fit the CFPB's definition of a QM, we will continue to offer them as before."

Wible said that the bank's analysis confirmed its belief that a well-underwritten, interest only loan could be good for its customers and safe for the bank to hold on its balance sheet.  These loans, he said, meet the needs of certain customers such as the self-employed and that the bank will continue to require that such borrowers meet its prudent underwriting criteria.

Bank of the West, a subsidiary of BNP Paribas, has assets of $65 billion and operates 600 retail and commercial banking locations in 19 states.

On a much larger scale, Wells Fargo, the country's largest home lender is reported to be readying a group to handle nothing but portfolio loans.  Bloomberg says the bank has created "a swat team" of about 400 underwriters who will originate mortgages for the bank to hold.  As many as 40 percent of the loans are expected to be outside of new government guidelines. 

Bloomberg said they were told by Brad Blackwell, head of portfolio lending at the bank that the group will review loans that do not qualify for the safe harbor protections of new CFPB rules as a way to increase lending without losing control of quality.   

'"We have separated the underwriting group into a separate team that only underwrites loans" for the bank's own balance sheet,' Blackwell told Bloomberg.  '"We found it impossible to achieve our objectives" with the two groups together, he said.'

The bank's portfolio held $72.4 billion in non-conforming mortgages at the end of the third quarter, 14.5 billion of which Wells Fargo added in the second and third quarters of 2013.

 

Best Day of the Year for Mortgage Rates…

Best Day of the Year for Mortgage Rates

Mortgage rates fell at their fastest pace in 2014 and to their best levels.  Such a feat was only manageable due to what has been an exceptionally flat market up to this point.  Even today's move was fairly small by historically standards, equating to only 0.03 percent in terms of rate.  That means that the improvements over yesterday would be seen in the form of lower closing costs with interest still averaging 4.625%for ideal, conforming 30yr Fixed loans (best-execution).

To put the recent flatness in more perspective, there have only been 3 days in the past 30 where rates moved any more than they did today.  It continues to be the case that the events in the latter half of the week (beginning tomorrow morning) have more potential to break the monotony, or rather, to continue breaking the monotony that was preemptively broken today. 

Whereas the movement seen so far in 2014 has largely been a product of market participation ramping back up, the upcoming movement may be more motivated by the tenor of the economic data.  As such, strong data can push rates back toward recent highs while weak data could help this correction/bounce continue.


Loan Originator Perspectives

"Rates continued to improve today adding to the gains from yesterday. As of the time I write this, most lenders have yet to pass along any of the improvements. As stated yesterday, as the week continues, the data becomes much more market moving which makes floating very risky. At this point, there isn't much to be gained unless the data is down right horrible which is unlikely. I would advise and am advising clients to lock in later today especially if they are within 30 days of closing." –Victor Burek, Open Mortgage

"As we conjectured yesterday, we got some additional pricing gains today. The bulk of this week's MBS "meal" starts tomorrow with a salad of ADP December Employment and December Fed minutes. The entrée arrives Friday AM when Decembers' NFP jobs report is released. Nice to see improvement, but it's nothing definitive at the moment. If you floated the last 2 days, you've gained some house money. Whether you want to roll the dice again depends on personal risk tolerance!" –Ted Rood, Senior Originator, Wintrust Mortgage

"Based on the latest rate movements, we may see some more improvements. Maybe the race to 3% on the 10 year was premature, but then again good numbers this week for jobs and we blow by 3%. Cautiously float but realize big risks. " –Michael Owens, VP of Mortgage Lending at Guaranteed Rate, Inc. NMLS # 107434

 


Today's Best-Execution Rates

  • 30YR FIXED – 4.625%
  • FHA/VA – 4.25%
  • 15 YEAR FIXED –  3.5%
  • 5 YEAR ARMS –  3.0-3.50% depending on the lender


Ongoing Lock/Float Considerations

  • The prospect of the Fed reducing its asset purchases weighed heavy on interest rates for the 2nd half of 2013, causing volatility and generally pervasive upward movement.
  • Tapering ultimately happened on December 18th, 2013.  Markets had done so much to come to terms with it ahead of time that it essentially just confirmed the the 6 month move higher in rates, but didn't make for another immediate spike higher.
  • That said, we should assume that we're still in a rising rate environment on average.
  • NOTE: Lenders had begun adjusting rate sheets to account for the most recent announced hike inGuarantee Fees.  This would have unequivocally raised rates by at least an eighth of a percent for almost every borrower, and in most cases .25-.375%.  Those changes are now on hold indefinitely.  We won't know if they're coming back or not until we hear more official word from new FHFA Director Mel Watt.
  • (As always, please keep in mind that our Best-Execution rate always pertains to a completely ideal scenario.  There are many reasons a quoted rate may differ from our average rates, and in those cases, assuming you're following along on a day to day basis, simply use the Best-Ex levels we quote as a baseline to track potential movement in your quoted rate).

Best Regards, Chris mesunas

Shopping for a Mortgage…

6 ways to shop for the best mortgage rate

Once you've organized your information and identified the right loan, follow this advice.

By Michele Lerner of HSH.com

If you're in the market for a mortgage, chances are you've been instructed to shop around for the best rates. But just because you've been told to shop around doesn't mean you know how. (Bing: How low are interest rates this week?)

First, you'll need to contact one lender to get your credit score. Craig March, a personal mortgage consultant with Inlanta Mortgage in Janesville, Wis., says you should share your credit score with other lenders rather than letting each one pull your credit because having too many inquiries could lower your score.

"There are so many different credit-score models that the score you see as a consumer may not be the same as the one a mortgage lender sees, so it's important to get your score from a lender," says Mark Richards, a senior mortgage-loan officer for TD Bank in Washington, D.C.

Brian Martucci, a mortgage lender with GetLoans.com in Washington, D.C., says that every borrower must be prepared to provide the following information before lenders can provide an accurate rate quote:

  • How large is your down payment? Interest rates vary according to your loan-to-value ratio.
  • Are you buying a single-family home or a condominium? Martucci says a borrower purchasing a condominium with a loan to value above 75% will pay a one-quarter percent higher interest rate.
  • Are you refinancing or purchasing? Interest rates may be higher on a refinance, especially if you are taking out cash, which could raise your rate by one-eighth of a percent.
  • And if you intend to waive escrow and pay your taxes and insurance yourself, your mortgage rate could be one-eighth of a percent higher because that's considered a riskier loan, Martucci says.
  • 6 steps to shopping for the best mortgage rates
  • No. 1: Establish a baseline. Get a referral from someone you trust and contact that lender to obtain your credit score and discuss your loan options. Your first lender can help you compare Federal Housing Administration and conventional financing, as well as various loan terms so you can make an informed decision on which loan program and term you want before you contact other lenders.

    No. 2: Contact a mix of financial institutions. Interest rates fluctuate constantly for a variety of reasons, including the occasional promotion of a particular loan product by a financial institution. For example, some lenders who are eager to generate more purchase loans might offer the best mortgage rates for homebuyers rather than refinancing homeowners, Martucci says. Sometimes a credit union or bank will introduce a new loan product and offer better mortgage rates to entice borrowers, March says.

    Read:  Are your home-loan chances better at a smaller bank?

    "It's best to diversify and try a mix of places such as a direct lender, a regional bank, a credit union, a community bank and a national bank," March says.

    No. 3: Know when you want to close. The length of your lock-in period will impact your mortgage rate, so discuss your target close date with each lender and ask what they charge for different loan-lock periods.

  • "Make sure you tell the lender when you expect the closing to be, because you want to lock in the interest rate for the right length of time," Richards says. "Many lenders charge one-eighth percent more if you must lock-in the loan for 60 days. If you need a 90-day loan lock, your interest rate could be as much as one-third percent higher."

    No. 4: Ask about fees. The various fees associated with a loan are one reason you shouldn't comparison shop based only on the advertised rate. Sometimes an advertised rate can be lower than all the rest because it doesn't include the fees associated with it.

    "Some lenders blend all their fees into a loan-preparation fee, while others separate them out, so be sure to ask for the total amount it will cost to close the loan," Martucci says.

    Generally, a mortgage with higher fees should have a lower interest rate, March says.

    If you're refinancing, use HSH.com's Tri-RefiRefinance Calculator to compare your options for paying closing costs. Should you wrap the closings cost into the loan amount, pay them in cash or choose a "no-cost" mortgage?

    Read:  A no-fee mortgage? Really?

    No. 5: Should you pay points? One of the largest fees by far can be the points attached to a particular loan. Each point is equal to 1% of your loan amount.

    "You need to make sure you discuss with each lender how the loan will be structured in terms of whether you are paying points or not," March says.

    If you intend to stay in your home for the long term, such as 10 years or more, you may want to pay points to keep your interest rate as low as possible for the life of your loan. If you plan to sell in a few years, paying a lot of cash upfront to pay points may not be worth it, Richards says. A lender can show you the difference in interest and monthly payments in order to decide whether or not it's worth it to pay points.

  • No. 6: Call lenders on the same day. Mortgage rates fluctuate constantly, so you should call lenders as close to the same time as possible on the same day to compare the best mortgage rates, Martucci says.

    "If possible, call within the same time frame, because a bond rally could mean that mortgage rates have dropped dramatically from the morning to the afternoon," he says.

    After you organized your financial information and decide which loan is best for you, follow these six steps to make sure you find the best mortgage rate available.

HARP myths debunked by Freddie Mac Exec…..

HARP Myths Debunked by Freddie Mac Exec

A Freddie Mac senior vice president is using the company's blog to debunk a few myths she says may be keepinghomeowners from refinancing through HARP, the Home Affordable Refinance Program.  Tracy Mooney's information about on nine HARP misconceptions might not only be helpful for homeowners themselves but a good resource for lenders to share with customers and the public.

1.      Myth One is that refinancing with HARP (or any other program for that matter) would reset the clock and the borrower would again be looking at 30 years of mortgage payments.  This, as Tracy points out, is not true as almost any refinancing allows the borrower to pick a term from 10 to 30 years for the new loan.  The counterpoint is that most borrowers opt for a 30yr term and this does indeed entail a new 30 years of payments.  Even then, if the interest rate is lower and the borrower simply continued paying the original mortgage payment, less interest would be paid over time and the loan would be paid off faster than the original would have been.  Bottom line: all things being equal, dropping the rate is advantageous in most cases.

2.      Some borrowers have so many offers to refinance coming their way they fear some may be scams.  Mooney says that many legitimate offers have specific information identifying the borrower's existing loan such as the account number.  Also the borrower can report any suspicious offers at 888-995-HOPE. When in doubt borrowers should check with their current lender.

3.      Another myth is that HARP can't help homeowners who are underwater on their mortgage.  That, in fact, is what HARP was designed to do and has no restrictions on loan-to-value ratios for fixed-rate mortgages.

4.      The fourth myth is that refinancing is hopeless for the unemployed.  HARP does offer options that might work such as underwriting based on assets rather than income.  Borrowers should reach out to their lender to discuss available solutions.

5.      It is possible to refinance through HARP even if the borrower's current lender doesn't participate in the program.  Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have lists of lenders who can discuss options and eligibility with anyone.

6.      Some people believe they are ineligible if they currently have an adjustable rate mortgage (ARM).  HARP was in fact created to help such homeowners obtain mortgages that are more stable and sustainable.  With rates still so low it is the perfect time to lock into a fixed-rate mortgage

7.      Myth Seven is that condos are not eligible for HARP refinancing.  Not only are condos eligible but so are investment properties and second homes.

8.      It isn't always necessary to have sufficient cash up front to pay closing costs.  Lenders can evaluate whether a borrower qualifies to have closing costs and other necessary expenses rolled into the new loan.  

9.      Finally many homeowners think HARP is only for those who are behind in their payments and in danger of foreclosure.  In fact HARP is intended specifically for homeowners who are current on their mortgages but are underwater and unable to refinance through a traditional refinance programs

Moony said potentially millions of homeowners could save money each month by refinancing through HARP.  The program has more than 2.9 million success stories so hopefully if you now know these myths are just that, she says, reach out to your lender and get started with HARP because, "Saving money is a good thing!"

Best Regards, Capital Valley Team
 

 

Mortgage Rates downward..,.

Mortgage rates wander downward for the first time in three weeks

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Fixed mortgage rates wandered downward for the first time in three weeks, according to the latest data released Thursday by Freddie Mac.

The 30-year fixed-rate average dropped to 4.42 percent with an average 0.7 point after climbing 24 basis points in the past two weeks. It was down from 4.46 percent a week ago but up from 3.32 percent a year ago. Since spiking to 4.58 percent in late August, the 30-year fixed rate has bounced around between 4.57 percent and 4.1 percent.

The 15-year fixed-rate average edged down to 3.43 percent with an average 0.7 point. It was 3.47 percent a week ago and 2.66 percent a year ago. The 15-year fixed rate has remained below 3.5 percent since late September.

Hybrid adjustable rate mortgages also fell. The five-year ARM average was 2.94 percent with an average 0.4 point. It was 2.99 percent a week ago and 2.7 percent a year ago.

The one-year ARM average was 2.51 percent with an average 0.4 point. It was 2.59 percent a week ago.

“Mortgage rates were little changed amid a light week of economic data releases,” Frank E. Nothaft, Freddie Mac vice president and chief economist, said in a statement.

“Of the few releases, total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 203,000 in November, and the unemployment rate declined to 7 percent. Also, single family mortgage debt outstanding increased for the first time since 2008. This is a positive sign, as it reflects that the pick-up in new purchase-money originations has offset loan paydowns and led to a net increase in principal outstanding.”

Meanwhile, mortgage applications showed a slight uptick last week, according to the latest data from the Mortgage Bankers Association.

The Market Composite Index, a measure of total loan application volume, edged up 1 percent. The Refinance index rose 2 percent, while the Purchase Index increased 1 percent.

The refinance share of mortgage activity accounted for 65 percent of all applications.

Best Regards, Chris Mesunas

 

Mortgage Credit Availability Tightens Up..January is Coming…

Mortgage Credit Availability Tightens as Higher LTV Options Expire

Dec 10, 2013

Mortgage credit was slightly less available in November than it was in October the Mortgage Bankers Association said today.  MBA's new Mortgage Credit Availability Index (MCAI) slipped from 111.5 to 110.2, a -1.2 percent change.  Any decrease in the index indicates that credit standards are tightening.

MBA said the index drop was occasioned by discontinuance of a significant number of loan programs that had allowed for loan-to-value ratios exceeding 95 percent and low-to-mid range credit score minimums.  There was also a continued investor pull-back from programs offering longer than 30-year terms and interest only loans. Some of these changes were the result of preparations for new regulations coming into effect in January.  The above changes were offset a bit by an increase in cash-out refinancing programs offered to well-qualified borrowers by some investors.

MBA unveiled the MCAI earlier this year in conjunction with AllRegs and using their Market Clarity product.  The index is benchmarked to 100 in March 2012.  It takes into account several factors related to borrower eligibility and the underwriting criteria from over 85 lenders and investors.   By way of context, MBA says that had the market been tracked by the index in 2007 it would have been at a level of roughly 800 because of the easy availability of credit at that time.

The MCAI rose for four straight months after MBA first went public with in late spring.  It has now retreated for a fourth consecutive month.

Regards, Chris Mesunas