The Mortgage Porter

How Disputes on Your Credit Report May Impact Obtaining a Mortgage

Reviewing your credit report and disputing information that is being wrongly reported about you is your right under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Obtaining your credit report and making sure that it's accurate is financially responsible and your duty to protect your credit. And the Federal Trade Commission provides you tips on how to dispute items on your credit report.  Did you know that lenders may not accept a credit report where it indicates there is a disputed item? 

It doesn't matter if you have perfect credit or a low loan to value, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guidelines are forcing lenders to provide a credit report without disputes. I've recently had transactions where the borrower doesn't recall disputing anything and the debtor doesn't have record of the dispute yet this "dispute" needs to be removed from the credit report or the lender/bank will not accept the loan. This is one reason why anyone considering a mortgage for refinancing or purchasing a home should obtain a copy of their credit report very early on. It can take a great deal of time to have disputes removed if a borrower does this on their own.  

The other option is for a "rapid rescore" which whittles down the process to days. The irony in this is that rapid rescore is not free and it is the credit bureaus and reporting agencies who profit when this service is done - I really have a problem with this when my client and the creditor state there are no disputes of record yet somebody has to pay to have these items quickly removed to accommodate a closing date. Often times, the lender absorbs the cost of the rapid rescore however this eventually drives up the overall cost of doing business and eventually, the consumer pays.

In my opinion, this is something that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac need to change pronto. Well qualified borrowers should not have to go through these hoops or have their mortgage denied. A simple written letter of explanation signed by the borrowers and possibly the creditor *should* suffice instead of requiring the credit report not show any sign of a dispute. Apparently back in 2009, Fannie was reviewing their policy however, I'm not aware of any significant changes.  

If our government wants to help the housing industry and our economy, this practice needs to stop now.

My thoughts on NAR's Pending Home Sales for April: Mortgage Guidelines are NOT "Excessively Tight"

This morning NAR released the Pending Home Sales report which revealed that "contract signings, dropped 11.6 percent in April from a downwardly revised 92.6 in March. The index is 26.5 percent below a cyclical peak of 111.5 in April 2010 when buyers were rushing to beat the contract deadline for the home buyer tax credit." Pending home sales is a forward indicator since it's reporting on contracts that are signed but not yet closed.

Lawrence Yun, NAR's Chief Economist states that part of reason for the larger than expected drop is due to how difficult it has become to obtain a mortgage. 

“No doubt the continuing excessively tight mortgage underwriting process is making the housing market recovery unnecessarily slow...We simply have to get back to sound, common-sense lending standards to provide mortgages to creditworthy borrowers who are buying homes well within their means. Bank balance sheets show rising cash reserves and declining loan balances – it’s time to loosen the purse strings....” 

It's my experience that it's not that difficult to obtain a mortgage and underwriting guidelines are not "excessively tight".  The difference between qualifying for a mortgage now and pre-2007 is that borrowers must now prove (provide supporting documentation) that they meet program guidelines.  Stated income, low or no-doc loans are gone.  

• Every penny of your down payment and funds for closing must be documented with complete bank statements (all pages) or other asset accounts being used.
• Large deposits on your bank statements must be sourced (more documentation) to show where the funds came from.
• Employment must be steady.  Buyers are not required to have been on the same job for the past two years...heck, they can be out of college (may count as employment) and there may be some unemployment periods...it needs to make sense and be documented.
• Income must be steady.  If a potential borrower is not paid salary (hourly, commission, bonus, self-employed, etc.) they need to show they've received this type of income for the past two years.
• Borrowers must be able to afford their home based on their income and debts. Some debts where payments are deferred, like student loans, are factored into your debt-to-income ratios...one day, you are going to have to make payments on it!  
• Borrowers who take out new debts before funding (closing) of their loan, may find they no longer qualify for their mortgage.  Doesn't this make sense? Yes, home buyers may need new a washer and dryer...however if they're borderline with their credit or pushed with their qualifying ratios, they risk blowing up the purchase just before closing due to "LQI".  Home buyers need to make sure they honestly reflect the loan application from the start of the transaction to finish.

Okay, I'll admit that credit scoring has become tougher. Pre-2007, a person with 600 credit scores (or lower) could qualify for a mortgage.  Now you pretty much need a mid-credit score of 630 or higher for most loan programs.  And their are price hits (risked based pricing) that are factored into interest rates based on loan to value and credit scores.  Credit scores are reflective and borrowers can work on improving their credit scores (and should).  

Income is also scrutinized more than before with 4506Ts being required on every transaction. If your income is higher on your loan application than what you claim on your tax returns, be prepared...you'll be providing additional documentation (tax returns) even if you're paid a salary and your income may be adjusted lower.

Here's where Congress may really muck up the housing recovery, especially in light of this report:

• Lowering the conforming loan limits, which is scheduled to happen on October 1, 2011.  In the Seattle area, the current conforming loan limit is $567,500.  Effective October 1, 2011, it's set to roll back to $506,000 meaning that loan amounts of $506,001 or higher will be "jumbo" non-conforming.  Jumbo loans have much tougher guidelines and higher rates which does mean that fewer people will qualify for higher priced homes.  Loan limits are also set to be reduced for FHA and VA loans after September 30, 2011.  By the way, 2012 loan limits may be even lower!
• Increasing the minimum down payment for FHA loans from 3.5% to 5%. Congress is working on this right now and it's been tossed around by our government for quite a while.  Does having 1.5% more "skin" in the game really make a more responsible borrower?  I don't think so.  I would rather see that a borrower have that 1.5% in their savings than invested as down payment (where they do not have access to it should they have an emergency) in a home.

People can still get a mortgage today.  It bothers me that NAR and others are painting that mortgages are too tough to obtain...painting an inaccurate picture does not help the housing market either.  Today's buyer needs to be prepared to provide plenty of paperwork to support they actually qualify for the mortgage by showing they earn what they say, have the funds for closing and are employed.  What's wrong with that?

If you are considering buying a home, I do recommend meeting with a local licensed mortgage professional as early as possible to start on the prequalification process.  If your next home is located anywhere in Washington State, I'm happy to help you!  

PS: I still believe that it would tremendously help the housing markets recover IF home owners who want to refinance and who qualify based on credit, income and employment are allowed to without an appraisal...very similar to an FHA streamline refi. This would allow people who want to stay in their homes and who qualify, to be able to take advantage of today's lower rates and not cause them to be punished due to lower appraised values.

The Day After the Fed's Rule on Loan Originator Compensation

Like it or not, the Fed's rule on how mortgage originators can be compensated is in full effect today.   It's hard to tell exactly how much this has impacted mortgage rates as mortgage backed securities are being beat up pretty hard from fears of inflation (rates would be higher today regardless of the Fed's rule).

Mortgage originators no longer have flexibility to price rates as see as fair.  Mortgage originators can no longer use their commissions to help their clients pay for any closing cost and sometimes, this may take place without the borrower even knowing about it (extension fees, for example).  Even if a mortgage originator makes an error on the good faith estimate beyond the allowed tolerance, the mortgage originator cannot pay for it!   Because of the additional cost of having to pay mortgage originators not based on rate and having to absorb the cost to "cure" a good faith estimate, mortgage companies, credit unions and banks have had to slightly increase rates.   So who winds up paying for the Fed's new rule?  The borrower.

Employers of mortgage originators have had to create to compensation plans since a majority of LOs were paid by the borrower from origination points, the lender with rebate or a combination of both.  Many mortgage companies are trying to use this as an opportunity to recruit LOs by trying to offer a sweeter deal than what they've been presented.   Mortgage originators are also just learning how much their rates  have been adjusted to cover the increased cost.  There's going to be trade-offs.  The higher the LOs pay, the higher the rate will most-likely be...the Feds rule hasn't changed this...it's only prevented the LO from increasing the rate to increase their pay.    Many mortgage originators are receiving RAISES from the new rule if they did not overcharge borrowers in the past.  It's bittersweet since many of us would still rather not have this rule and would prefer to have the ability to help out our clients when they need it.  Mortgage companies can come out with different pricing plans "periodically".

I'm still trying to figure out how I'm going to do Monday's rate post odds are, most rates will not be priced with a flat point.  The consumer will pay or receive rebate what the exact pricing is from the lender.   Before the rule, if a rate was priced just under par, I would often absorb the difference and not charge the borrower - I am forbidden from that now. 

Regardless of what rate you pick, I'm going to be paid the same.  I actually don't mind that.  Here's current pricing for a purchase closing by April 29, 2011 in greater Seattle based on a sales price of $500,000 with 20% down payment and credit scores of 740 or higher using a 30 year fixed rate.  All of my rates will be priced with 1 point (origination) with the lender pricing to the borrower being the variable.   Example for $400,000 loan amount:

4.875% priced with 1% plus 0.042 discount = 1.042% = $4,168 cost. (APR 5.041).

5.000% priced with 1% plus -0.445 rebate = 0.555% = $2,220 cost. (APR 5.124).

5.125% priced w/1% plus -0.861 rebate = 0.139% = $556 cost. (APR 5.213).

5.250% priced w/1% plus -1.920 rebate = 0.92% credit = $3,680 closing cost credit (APR 5.244).

You can see that "rebate pricing" is still available.  The big difference is that credit towards closing cost (as far as your mortgage originator is concerned) can only be done when locking or adjusting the lock.  It cannot be from the mortgage originators commission. 

It will be interesting to see how everyone adjust to this new change and lack of flexibility.  Everything is fine...as long as you stick with the cheeseburger with pepsi and chips.

 

Your choices loan programs and pricing options are disappearing.

Mortgage Originators should only originate mortgages

I think it's unfortunate that the SAFE Act didn't address having professionals who are helping people with the possible largest transaction in their life be limited to originating mortgages.  I feel quite strongly that it is NOT in a consumers best interest to use the same person to originate their mortgage AND sell them their home.

There is simply too much to keep up with in this climate with both mortgage originating and being a real estate agent.  New laws are constantly being created and underwriting guidelines change in a blink of an eye.  How can someone doing two important jobs do either "one" full time job well if they're split between two?   And I guess I also wonder "why" people who act as mortgage originators and real estate agents feel they must do this.  I consider myself a fairly savvy mortgage professional and I'm sure I could sell a home--but I wouldn't dream of it.  I'm dedicated fully to my profession:  mortgage.  

I cringe at the thought of a buyer disclosing all of their financial information to a real estate agent acting as a mortgage originator...especially if they don't want to buy the "maximum" they potentially qualify for.  I often times work with buyers who could qualify to buy much more than their agent knows and they ask me to not reveal this information.  If you're working with someone who is originating your mortgage and selling  you a home, they can't keep this information separate - they  know how much you can buy. 

If you're considering using a mortgage originator who's also a real estate agent for your refinance, how do you know they won't try to sway you to selling (where they'l earn significantly more income) instead of refinancing?

It's almost a form a "dual agency" where you're having to rely a great deal on trust with the individual you've hired to care for your entire transaction.  For the "professional" who is acting as both your real estate agent and loan originator, this is simply too much commission (what a buyers agent is paid and the mortgage origination compensation at stake) to truly trust they're working in YOUR best interest.

HUD is not a fan of FHA mortgage originators having other employment in real estate related fields either (from HUD Handbook 4060.1 Chapter 2: Section 2-9)

Full, Part-Time and Outside Employment.  A mortgagee may employ staff full time or part time (less than the normal 40 hour work week). They may have other employment including self employment.  However, such outside employment may not be in mortgage lending, real estate, or a related field. Direct endorsement underwriters are included in this provision.

In Washington State, Real Estate Agents acting a Loan Orinators in a transaction are required to provide this written language as a Dual Capacity Disclosure:

This is to give you notice that I or one of my associates have/has acted as a Real Estate Broker or Salesperson representing the Buyer and/or Seller in the sale of this property to you.  I am also a Loan Originator and would like to provide mortgage services to you in connection with your loan to purchase the property.

You are not required to use me as al Loan Originator in connection with this transaction.  You are free to comparison shop and to select any Mortgage Broker or Lender of you choosing.

If you're getting ready to buy a home.  Select your professionals wisely.  You deserve a to work with a team of individuals who are dedicated and focused on their sole career.   This is a case where two heads are better than one.

If you're buying a home in the greater Seattle or Bellevue area, I'm happy to recommend a dedicated real estate agent and help you with your mortgage!

Click here if you would like a rate quote for a home located anywhere in Washington.

Related Post:

Who Does Your Loan Originator Really Work For?

Bribery to Work with the Builder's Preferred Lender

Is Your Agent in Bed with a Title Company?

My Thoughts on the Future of Home Mortgages and Home Ownership

Yesterday, I had the Future of Housing Finance playing in the background as I was working away on rate quotes and lock commitment confirmations for a few of my clients in the Seattle area.  Oh how I wish that I, or a fellow mortgage origintor who has been originating mortgages since pre-subprime days could be on the panel.  Since I'm not, I'm going to share a few of my thoughts on this post.

People who currently have a mortgage and who are credit and income qualified (have made their payments on time) should be allowed to refinance without an appraisal.  This would not only help home owners save hundreds of dollars each month with their mortgage payment, the end benefit would be real stimulus for the economy.

I believe all mortgage originators, regardless of the type of institution they work for, should be held to the highest standards of the SAFE Act.  (Currently mortgage originators who work for banks or credit unions are not licensed).  

I also feel strongly that those who present themselves to be residential mortgage originators (licensed or registered) should not be allowed to also sell real estate.  I'm concerned this has huge potential for fraud and the home buyer is not best served when a real estate agent knows the fine details of the buyers finances.  I view this as a huge conflict of interest.   HUD all ready has this standard: real estate agents cannot originate an FHA insured loan.  I'd like to see this implemented with conventional financing.

Last but not least, not everyone in American needs to or should own a home.   Owning a home is not a right, it's a privelidge that's one's personal financial choice.  And there's nothing wrong with renting a home.  Renting a home, like obtaining a mortgage, is a personal financial choice.  

What are your thoughts? 

Refinancing Guidelines Need to Loosen Up for Housing Recovery

This subject has been gnawing at me for a while and I'm actually surprised I haven't written about it here before.  In order for the housing market to really start recovering, I believe that the underwriting guidelines need to relax.  Whoa--you say, isn't that what got us into this mess in the first place?  Well, I'll argue that it was more of folks being able to buy more than they could afford (via stated income) that drove up prices and put them into homes where they could never afford the the payments over folks who used home equity by consolidating debts or doing who knows what with the cash (hopefully they banked it...in a safe place).

Helping someone keep their home by taking advantage of the lower interest rates prevents a foreclosure or short sale.  Yes, we have the Home Affordable Refinance Programs (HARP) thanks to President Obama--but many don't qualify and many who do are not taking advantage of this temporary program.   FHA Streamline refinances now require an appraisal OR no closing costs can be financed--how is that better for American home owners during this time? 

If it were up to me, I would make it possible for home owners who have demonstrated they pay their mortgage and debts on time and who have documented steady employment to have their appraisals waived and closing costs financed so they don't have to dip into their hard earned savings to finance their refinance.  Now this does happen sometimes with Fannie Mae's HARP program...but not with Freddie Mac (which requires an appraisal and limits closing costs) and not with FHA.

Why penalize home owners who's property values have plummeted because their neighbors sold their homes via short sale, lost it due to a legitimate foreclosure or plain walked away from their obligations?  Why punish home owners who have been making their payments and who qualify on every other point EXCEPT the appraised value?  If their payment is being reduced, it helps stabilize the neighborhood and reduces the risk of default for the mortgage servicer.  Loan to values need to be eliminated on rate-term refinances where a tangible benefit for the home owner exists.

We also need to eliminate the securitization factors of when Fannie or Freddie bought the existing mortgage for it to be eligible for a HARP refi.  I recently had a client where it showed on Fannie Mae's site that he indeed has a mortgage owned by Fannie Mae--it was not until we received an error message trying to underwrite it through DU (the automated underwriting system) that we called Fannie Mae to discover that the loan had been securitized (purchased by Fannie Mae) one day too late to qualify (March 1, 2009).  This person's loan closed in December 2008, was sold the the bank and then took months for Fannie Mae to purchase.  This means this upside-down home owner does not qualify to reduce his payment by $250 per month.  Imagine what the $250 a month would do for him and/or the economy.  It gives him some probably needed monthly financial wiggle room and he just might spend a little more which helps our economy too.  (Loans need to be purchased/securitized by Freddie Mac no later than May 31, 2009 to qualify).

These are just a few thoughts that have been a bee in my bonnet... or worse!   Don't get me started on home owners with existing mortgages that have private mortgage insurance hitting a brick wall when trying to do a HARP refi (most pmi companies are not cooperating) or not being able to include second mortgages (even "purchase money") in a HARP refi.   Or how FHA insured loans will soon be more expensive for borrowers seeking to refinance or purchase with the increase of the annual mortgage insurance premium.

Please contact your elected officials in Congress if you have had issues with obtaining financing...they are making originating loans tougher and tougher as I write this post. 

I'm afraid it's going to get worse before it will get better.  Many people who need help and who would qualify for the refinance with exception of the appraisal...are not able to get it.  Many don't want to risk the cost of the apprasial (around $500) to attempt a refinance in these economic times.

Who Does Your Loan Originator Really Work For?

I often wonder how a consumer can truly trust a mortgage originator who sits in a housing development or a real estate office.  Yes, it's convenient when you're checking out that new home and the loan originator that works with the builder or real estate company just happens to be sitting there waiting for you or the next person who'll walk through their door.  Is that the best option for you?

HUD is questioning this with regards to builders with in-house lenders and if this arrangement is a RESPA violation.  It is harmful to consumers if the closing costs or rates are increased to compensate for what the lender may have to shell out to be that builder's preferred lender. Often times, you may find that the builder has built any cost to bribe you to work with their lender by increasing the sales price of the home.  RESPA violations aside, I've always felt that if you work with the builder's lender, you're providing your personal information to the "seller" or the more specifically, the employee of the seller.   The loan originator may be employed by a bank, but when they're constantly fed by the builder...where do their loyalties rest?

I feel the same way about loan originators who work as "joint ventures" with real estate companies.  They may be paying rent inside your real estate agent's office or just be on their preferred providers list with some sort of business arrangement.  I believe most of the big real estate brokerages in the Seattle area have an arrangement made to steer you to their lender, title or escrow company.   When a loan originator, title rep or escrow officer are constantly fed or partially owned by a real estate company--where are their loyalties?  If you only want to get approved for a $400,000 sales price, and can afford to much higher--do you think the LO who's shacked up with the real estate agent will let that agent know when they press the LO for more info on you?

Yes, you pay for their origination, title or escrow fees, but who are these people really work for.  Shouldn't you have more of a choice?   Some real estate agents will tell you that there isn't much difference in rate or fees--which they may truly believe; however, it may not be accurate. 

I "work for" Mortgage Master Service Corporation.  I'm paid by the consumer when we close a mortgage transaction together.  My business is dependent on my clients referring me to people they know who need a mortgage in the greater Seattle area.  I also have clients who find me from reading my blogs.   I am not part of any joint venture or arranged business agreements.  I'm not paid based on volume, quotas or selling a certain type of program.

Bottom line as a borrower in one of the largest transactions you may ever make in your lifetime, it is your responsibility to make sure you have the right team working for you.  Do as much research as possible before you've entered into a real estate contract.

Photo credit:  Sarah G... via Flickr

My "Ideal" Home Purchase Time Line

Previously I reviewed HUD's Home Purchasing Time Line, which I found several issues with if you're a home buyer in Washington State.  If I'm going to pick something apart, it's only right that I offer an example of how I think it should be corrected.

Below is HUD's suggested time line.

Here is how I see a successful purchase transaction evolving.  My modifications to HUD's time line are in blue below.

Rhonda Porter's Ideal Home Purchase Time Line   

Step 1: Determine what you can afford. Make sure you really consider how much home you can personally afford (not just how much home you qualify for or what a lender tells you).  Please do not stretch yourself to be "house poor".  Keep in mind the lessons that this economy is teaching all of us.

Step 2: Shop for a mortgage pro. Oh how I wish that instead of a shopping cart for rates (which is a moving target) and fees on page 3 of the new Good Faith Estimate, that it had a place for you to "shop" your mortgage professional instead.  Perhaps a place where you could compare resumes and available products instead of focusing so much on rate and fee.  The person who will be guiding through the process of obtaining one of the largest debts you may have in your lifetime should not be selected so casually.

Step 3:  Choose the best loan for you.  After selecting your mortgage professional; he or she should consider your financial goals and help provide you with information to allow you to make an educated decision on which mortgage program best suits your goals based on what you currently qualify for.  You need to know what your total payment will be and how much money will be required for your down payment and closing costs BEFORE you start looking for your next home.

Step 4: Find a real estate agent.  I recommend asking friends and family members who have recently purchased or sold a home and interview them.  If you need a recommendation for one around the greater Seattle area, please ask me!

Step 5: Shop for other service providers.  This has to happen BEFORE you prepare an offer on your next home assuming your lender permits you to shop (this is per RESPA guidelines--not a control freak mortgage originator).  If you select your own title and escrow service provider, there is no cap to how much their fees can change at closing.  If you use the providers from the mortgage originators preferred list, the accumulative fees at closing cannot exceed 10% from the good faith estimate.

Step 6: Find a home and negotiate contract terms.  Now you can start searching for your next home with confidence since you know what you can afford and you have your home buying team assembled.

Step 7: Have house inspected.  I recommend this even if your home is new construction.  I can tell you a few stories...but this post is all ready getting too long!

Step 7.5:  Shop and select your home owner insurance provider.  Do not wait until closing to do this.  Home owners insurance rates can vary and your credit score will impact your insurance rate.  Also if the home has a history with certain insurance claims, there could potentially be issues that are better to be aware of early in the process.

Step 8: Loan is processed.  Once we have a signed around agreement, your loan is processed and various services are ordered or set up.  This is also the time to review you lock options to determine whether you want to commit to an interest rate or float (not lock). 

Step 9: Loan is approved.  The loan approval may come back with conditions.  This happens after the underwriter reviews what has been submitted to them during the processing period. 

Step 10: Do the final walk through. 

Step 11: Go to settlement.  Prior to your escrow appointment, I recommend that you obtain a copy of your estimated HUD-1 Settlement Statement 1-2 days in advance so that you have time to review the final figures.  Be sure to let your mortgage professional and escrow officer/settlement agent know that you expect this as the lender will need to provide your loan documents to the closing company a few days earlier than "the norm".  The same is true if you want a complete copy of your loan documents to review prior to your signing appointment.

Step 12: Move in!  Yay--this can be such an exciting time!  Typically there may be a few days between signing your closing documents and moving into your new home. 

Always Read All of the Fine Print

I've been noticing at my bank a new promo offering "1% mortgage cash back".  My husband has enjoyed teasing me saying stuff like "why would anyone use you?"  And when he was at the bank branch, he asked a mortgage-teller if this was legit they replied something along the lines of "yeah, isn't this great!"

Today I received my monthly bank statement and sure enough, stuffed inside was an advertisement for the "1% mortgage cash back.  The bold print states that "you will receive 1% of your principal and interest payment back each year!"

But it's the fine print you need to read...by the way, the fine print takes up about 30% of this add...you really have to read everything word by word.  In the middle of the print, I found what I was looking for:

"There is a $500 calendar year cap on the principal reduction and cash back amount..."  and by the way, you must have (or get) a checking account with this bank in order to get up to $500.

And it get's better...when I priced out a refinance scenario based on excellent credit, a $400,000 loan amount and a home valued at $500,000; I was quoted 0.25% higher in rate than what I would offer today on a 30 year fixed rate (4.625%/APR 4.777).   Serious.   That bank is making pretty darn good change on that extra quarter point in interest while giving the consumer back a maximum of $500 per year.

In my opinion, this is a terrible way to potentially trick consumers into thinking they're getting back much more than $500.  To me, 1% of your mortgage sounds like 1% of your loan amount and with this promo, it's not.

A quarter point interest rate difference on a $400,000 loan amount will pay you about $60 per month or $720 a year!  Not to mention interest paid over the life of the loan.

My advice, work with someone who can offer you a more competitive ratedon't chase a bad gimmick from a bank.  

From the Junk Mail Bag

Seems like junk mail from random mortgage companies are on the rise again.   I recently had a client who I helped with a home purchase utilizing an FHA mortgage send me a piece of junk mail that he had received from a company (NOT Mortgage Master) that bothered him beyond the typical "deluge of refi offers from firms who's marketing strategy is to look up public records for a targeted mailing".

Some mortgage originators will buy list of home owners who have a specific type of mortgage, such as FHA, where they can offer a streamline refinance thinking if they use your originating mortgage companies name enough times, they just might fool someone into calling them. 

This piece of mail junk has many red flags that home owners should be aware of.

There is no return address on the mailer anywhere.  You have no idea who you will be calling or if they are even approved to do business in Washington State.  I would never contact a mortgage solicitor if you have no way of researching them first.

They are also miss-using HUD's logo in the upper right corner as if it is there own.  This is a big time no-no that I'm sure HUD would be interested to see.

There is no APR to go along with the rate and the small print on this doozie must be too small for my old eyes.

It is true that FHA streamline refinances do not require an appraisal (therefore you are not proving equity) and assets are not verified either.  However the scenario still needs to qualify and HUD frowns about this type of marketing.

The eligibility for a streamline FHA refinance DOES NOT EXPIRE.  This is a weak attempt to try to create a "call to action" to the home owner.  HUD or lenders couldchange guidelines that would have an impact on an FHA streamline refi. 

Oh by the way, IRRL is a term used for VA "streamlined" refinances--not FHA.

What really pushed my clients button was the outside of this mailer garbage.

 

Another attempt to make this look like it came from Mortgage Master and a nice little threat as a bonus to really make sure you don't disregard their efforts.

I've written about junk mail before many times at Mortgage Porter.  You are welcome to forward this type of crap to the local officials.  They do not want consumers mislead or taken advantage of either.  

As a Washington State home owner, or if you're receiving mail from a mortgage company in Washington State, you can forward mail that you feel is misleading to DFI:

Enforcement Unit, Division of Consumer Service

DFI, P.O. Box 41200, Olympia, WA 98504

A letter like this should also be forwarded to HUD.

I strongly recommend not selecting your mortgage professional by what randomly lands in your mail box.