After the Fall - The Federal Reserve Board Proposes Radical Changes Mortgage Disclosures
Here is an excerpt from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke's comments:. "Consumers need and the appropriate tools to determine whether a particular mortgage loan is their condition, it is often said that the family home is" the most important asset, and it is the responsibility of the Federal Reserve shows that borrowers receive the information they need to protect this property.
Now here's my comment: Are you kidding me? Where were you when the housing value jumps to 10% - 20% per year, of the exact types of loans, now want to "protect" consumers from access? Here you will come after you rent rates, securities portfolios and 401K is just collapsed... Now you want to "protect" the U.S.?
Governor Elizabeth A. Duke's comments Now here it is: "Our goal is to ensure that consumers receive the information they are applying for a fixed-rate mortgage payment level for 30 years, or an adjustable rate mortgage with a low initial payments that can increase sharply. Bearing this in mind Information should be revised in order to draw attention to the potentially risky features such as adjustable rates, pre penalties, and negative amortization. "
Yuk! Does anyone else see the ridiculousness of these comments? Average listener, these notes can cause them to feel that there are people in government that are looking for them., But for those who understand the true nature of the problem, it is so easy to see through the white wash language.
Okay, so enough ranting. I want to touch base points of the proposed changes. Here they are:
Improved disclosure of the annual percentage rate (APR) so it captures most fees and settlement costs paid by
Item 1 - In this April already reflect all lender and broker fees. Let's just jack that April is even greater, including such things as title insurance that April is even less useful than it already is.
2 - borrowers know that their interest rate is higher because of their below average FICO score... we need this law? Right, because the loan officer to leave that little tidbit of information... give me a break.
3 - Not a bad idea, but it's just another way for the lender rate lock-in "accidentally" ends. "Oh, we're sorry, your rate lock expired, because you can not get the same reveal the information, we were required to provide to you within 3 days of the request, and today's rates are higher," Sound familiar?
Item 4 - "may" increase? Yes, that sounds useful. I still facetious, of course.
Now it will be even better.
According to the Board, he also recognizes that disclosures alone may not always be sufficient to protect consumers from unfair practices. " So, his infinite wisdom, to prevent loan originators from "steering" consumers of more expensive loans, the Board proposal:
Prohibit a mortgage broker or loan interest rates or other terms and conditions, which are based on the loan officer payments;
Prohibit a mortgage broker or loan officer from "steering" consumers to transactions that are not in their interest to increase the mortgage broker or loan officer compensation.
On the first point, they offer more than one recommendation, as a loan officer should be appointed. I feel sorry for all of us, the loan officers have all been paid. The most well-trained and experienced loan officers immediately leave the industry - company now!
The second point - wow, it really sounds great does not it? And just as they offer to recognize, manage and regulate the insurance?
There are also some home equity lines of "recommendations":
Prohibit creditors the reason for termination related to a payment account, unless the consumer is more than 30 days late in payment.
To provide additional protection to the account suspensions and credit limit reductions, and reinstatement of accounts.
Item 1 - What is meant by "payment-related reasons" are no late payments!
2 - this is the only place I agree with. Having two separate lines of credit limit, because it is not due to my fault, this is one of the areas that I can relate to. Why does the lender to be able to just replace them agreed after the loan was granted loan terms?
Once again, our government has failed us and allowed the damage to the country's taxpayers. Believes that equity trillions of dollars were destroyed. Now, they are coming, parading as a white knight, comes to our rescue, but only after the damage.
Their answer, of course, is that the transfer of these regulations will result in better protection against this kind of crisis again. It's kind of reminds me of our health care system. We have to "help the sick system, we would have a lot more to" save the health system. Our government wants to enact new legislation, rather than doing a better job of enforcing the laws that already exist.
Now here's my comment: Are you kidding me? Where were you when the housing value jumps to 10% - 20% per year, of the exact types of loans, now want to "protect" consumers from access? Here you will come after you rent rates, securities portfolios and 401K is just collapsed... Now you want to "protect" the U.S.?
Governor Elizabeth A. Duke's comments Now here it is: "Our goal is to ensure that consumers receive the information they are applying for a fixed-rate mortgage payment level for 30 years, or an adjustable rate mortgage with a low initial payments that can increase sharply. Bearing this in mind Information should be revised in order to draw attention to the potentially risky features such as adjustable rates, pre penalties, and negative amortization. "
Yuk! Does anyone else see the ridiculousness of these comments? Average listener, these notes can cause them to feel that there are people in government that are looking for them., But for those who understand the true nature of the problem, it is so easy to see through the white wash language.
Okay, so enough ranting. I want to touch base points of the proposed changes. Here they are:
Improved disclosure of the annual percentage rate (APR) so it captures most fees and settlement costs paid by
Item 1 - In this April already reflect all lender and broker fees. Let's just jack that April is even greater, including such things as title insurance that April is even less useful than it already is.
2 - borrowers know that their interest rate is higher because of their below average FICO score... we need this law? Right, because the loan officer to leave that little tidbit of information... give me a break.
3 - Not a bad idea, but it's just another way for the lender rate lock-in "accidentally" ends. "Oh, we're sorry, your rate lock expired, because you can not get the same reveal the information, we were required to provide to you within 3 days of the request, and today's rates are higher," Sound familiar?
Item 4 - "may" increase? Yes, that sounds useful. I still facetious, of course.
Now it will be even better.
According to the Board, he also recognizes that disclosures alone may not always be sufficient to protect consumers from unfair practices. " So, his infinite wisdom, to prevent loan originators from "steering" consumers of more expensive loans, the Board proposal:
Prohibit a mortgage broker or loan interest rates or other terms and conditions, which are based on the loan officer payments;
Prohibit a mortgage broker or loan officer from "steering" consumers to transactions that are not in their interest to increase the mortgage broker or loan officer compensation.
On the first point, they offer more than one recommendation, as a loan officer should be appointed. I feel sorry for all of us, the loan officers have all been paid. The most well-trained and experienced loan officers immediately leave the industry - company now!
The second point - wow, it really sounds great does not it? And just as they offer to recognize, manage and regulate the insurance?
There are also some home equity lines of "recommendations":
Prohibit creditors the reason for termination related to a payment account, unless the consumer is more than 30 days late in payment.
To provide additional protection to the account suspensions and credit limit reductions, and reinstatement of accounts.
Item 1 - What is meant by "payment-related reasons" are no late payments!
2 - this is the only place I agree with. Having two separate lines of credit limit, because it is not due to my fault, this is one of the areas that I can relate to. Why does the lender to be able to just replace them agreed after the loan was granted loan terms?
Once again, our government has failed us and allowed the damage to the country's taxpayers. Believes that equity trillions of dollars were destroyed. Now, they are coming, parading as a white knight, comes to our rescue, but only after the damage.
Their answer, of course, is that the transfer of these regulations will result in better protection against this kind of crisis again. It's kind of reminds me of our health care system. We have to "help the sick system, we would have a lot more to" save the health system. Our government wants to enact new legislation, rather than doing a better job of enforcing the laws that already exist.
Source...