Many ineligible for 'Home Affordable' refis
Part 2: Will Obama's mortgage plan work?
By Jack Guttentag, Monday, April 13, 2009.
Editor's note: This is Part 2 of a three-part series. Read Part 1.
Last week I criticized the government's new two-part program "Making Home Affordable" for being too narrow and limited in scope. This article describes the refinance part of the program, which applies only to mortgages owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
Purpose: The objective of the refinance program is to allow borrowers to refinance who otherwise find it impossible or excessively costly because of declines in the value of their properties. Under the program, loan balances can range up to 105 percent of current property value, but in all other respects, borrowers must meet conventional underwriting requirements: their existing payments must be current; they cannot have more than one 30-day-late payment in the previous 12 months; and their income must be sufficient to cover the new payments.
Pricing: Interest rates under the program are "market rates," but what that means exactly is hard to say. It is not clear, for example, whether the agencies will charge more for a 90 percent loan that does not have mortgage insurance than for one that does. Whatever it means, we can be sure that prices will fluctuate from day to day, and that the prices loan originators quote to borrowers will include varying markups and fees on top of the prices at which they sell to the agencies. Markups will be particularly high on loans held by Freddie Mac, which will accept only those loans refinanced by the lender now servicing them.
Mortgage Insurance: An unusual feature of the program is that any mortgage insurance on the existing loan will be carried forward to the new loan. (Ordinarily, mortgage insurance is terminated when a loan is paid off and, if required, a new policy is issued on the new mortgage). The mortgage insurers have to agree to this arrangement, but since it is clearly in their interest, that should not be a problem.
This is a sensible idea, because it prevents a sudden drop in insurance premiums to the beleaguered mortgage insurers, and it also provides a way to comply with the rule that any loan acquired by Fannie or Freddie that exceeds 80 percent of property value carry mortgage insurance or its equivalent.
Borrowers who weren't required to obtain mortgage insurance on their original loan won't need insurance when refinancing, even if their loan-to-value ratio now exceeds 80 percent.
Rationale of the 105 percent Loan Cap: Capping the loan balance at 105 percent of value presumably is based on a judgment that borrowers with adequate income and a good payment record are not going to default just because they owe 5 percent more than their house is worth. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that borrowers with more than 5 percent negative equity are not eligible for the refinance program at all, and can't get their problem fixed by a loan modification under the second part of MHA, which is discussed next week. ...CONTINUED
All rights reserved. This article may not be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in part or in whole, without written permission of Inman News. Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright law.


You must login or register to post a comment.
Submitted by Beth Hornick on April 13, 2009 - 12:41pm.
As a loan officer with a lender who is participating- this program offers many advantages for my clients. 1) Fees and rates- fees are a little lower or same for borrowers as a regular refinance- additional fees for lower credit score borrowers are actually lower than ona regular refinance 2) the 105% LTV has been a BIG help for most borrowers in our area. Few are over the 105% when not counting any subordinate financing. When the subordinate financing is with our institution- we will always subordinate if the loan has been paid as agreed. Other lenders are cooperating so far but it is too soon to tell for sure 2) Rates are approx .125% higher- still a big savings for most borrowers 4) Second homes and investment properties are allowed 5) Reduced documentation for condos is a big help. Fannie and Freddie have tightened these rules in the last 12 months and this program allows condo owners a chance to refinance they did not have before.
Bottom line- is it a perfect program? No. Is it a help to many borrowers? YES!
Submitted by Isaac Bensussen on April 13, 2009 - 12:54pm.
I see this program as another band-aid for the housing problem that is affecting the nation.
Most people in default have seen their home values drop substantially so most would not qualify or receive any benefits since the maximum loan amount would be 105% of the "present market value".
Lets assume that someone bought a home in 2005 for $ 500,000. Lets also assume that they paid 5% downpayment or $ 25,000. Their loan amount is $ 475,000. In many areas of San Diego, this
$ 500,000 home is now worth only $ 350,000. With a maximum mortgage amount of 105% of the present home value, this would bring the loan to only
$ 367,500. This loan is not going to help this borrower that needs a loan for $ 475,000 or the majority of borrowers that are in the same position.
This program would only benefit people that do not need to refinance because if they own their home for a few years, they probably have a good fixed interest rate that they do not need to change.
Submitted by Kaye Thomas on April 13, 2009 - 1:55pm.
I find it just plain DUMB that while the majority of foreclosure problems are in CA, NV, AZ and FL; the government in its infinite wisdom is not addressing the problems that exist in those areas that have seen huge declines in value.
There are no programs designed to help those in the states that have been hit the hardest. The economies in these states will not turn around as long as the housing market has major problems and foreclosures continue in these states.
They give billions to the banks that created the problem and then ignore homeowners. CA has a number of areas that while considered to be at the higher end of the market will see major issues if owners are not able to refinance.
Submitted by Robert A. Hulme on April 13, 2009 - 3:23pm.
Any program that helps the homeowner to stay in their home is good, I just hope they continue to support programs that save and create more jobs.
Robert A. Hulme
Realtor, GRI, e-PRO
Prudential Utah Real Estate
Loan Officer
Mortgage Xpress
www.summitcountyrealestate.ws
www.wasatchcountyrealestate.ws
Submitted by Bruce Wagg on April 13, 2009 - 4:22pm.
California 'high home values' and subsequent losses will not be aided at all by this package. 105% of nothing is still nothing. We need some regional help that will address the specific problems our state encounters.
Bruce Wagg
Oakland Real Estate | Piedmont Real Estate