The comment period for HUD’s rule banning the use of seller assisted down payment programs is still underway but in the meantime, as I noted in my previous post today, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Fran, D-Mass., recently told The Washington Post (registration required) that the House has agreed to accept Senate provisions that ban seller funded downpayment assistance on FHA loans and impose a 12-month moratorium on the charging of risk-based premiums by the FHA. The White House has also dropped opposition to the bill, so it is now on the fast track to passage.
As I spend time reading all the websites that seem to rejoice over reciting every detail of the downfall of the mortgage industry, I see many comments bringing attention to HUD’s efforts to get rid of seller paid down payment assistance. I usually find that these comments are being made by those with no access to any real information other than the misleading and often inaccurate numbers issued by the political appointees at HUD.
I’m often amazed when supposed experts issue opinions on subjects that I actually know something about. It is frightening how often the so-called experts are completely wrong. Here is a recent example.
I usually try to limit political comments in this blog since it is primarily intended to be a training and guideline update source designed to help loan officers originate and close FHA loans. However a June 21, 2008 editorial in the Wall Street Journal entitled “The FHA Time Bomb” has such a smörgåsbord of misinformation and misdirection that I feel compelled to comment.
On Thursday June 19, 2008 HUD issued a press release indicating that they were sending out letters to 675,000 “at risk” homeowners. As has been the case with most of HUD’s efforts for troubled borrowers, the gist of the letter leads this writer to believe that HUD is really going after borrowers with good credit. Syndicated author Peter Miller agrees with this viewpoint in his Friday post on FHA Mortgage Guide. As he notes, many of these borrowers might well have qualified for an FHA loan in the first place.
On Oct. 30, 2007, I published a post entitled “FHA Mortgage Co-brokering: Watch Out!” in which I warned of potential violations of FHA’s policy regarding payments to non-approved mortgage brokers. HUD made an announcement that day outlining their policy, but it was not issued in the form of an official Mortgagee Letter and it did not clearly identify that the policy applied to any fee paid by the borrower and not just payments made through yield spread premium.
In response to my post “Warning: Why HUD May Stop Your Loan From Closing“, HUD has now waived their anti-flipping rule in certain circumstances. (Just kidding about them responding to my post, but they have taken action.)
HUD continues to use higher default rates associated with loans using DPA as their rationale for killing off the non-profit down payment assistance programs. However, you can’t use HUD’s raw statistics to say DPA causes a higher foreclosure rate, only to show that DPA is associated with a higher foreclosure rate. The reason is that these raw figures aren’t adjusted to account for other factors such as credit, debt ratio, time on the job, local economic conditions etc.
The new FHA risk based mortgage insurance guidelines are set to take effect on July 14, 2008. They were originally set to take effect on January 1, but FHA held off due to public comments. The new guidelines appear to answer most of the concerns that I had about the original proposal.
The most notable part of this policy is that, although there is still substantial leniency, this is the first official adoption of minimum credit scores for the FHA program.
