20% of FHA mortgages are either late or in foreclosure

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong

Link

President Obama Speaks - And Lies (Again)

President Obama stood in New York at "high noon" and talked about how we must have "change", and that we have "helped homeowners avoid foreclosures", how "we must put in place reforms" and that "we have helped come back from the brink" and "an irresponsible period of crisis."

In fact, in his speech he said:

So I want to urge you to demonstrate that you take this obligation to heart. To put greater effort into helping families who need their mortgages modified under my administration's homeownership plan. To help small business owners who desperately need loans and who are bearing the brunt of the decline in available credit. To help communities that would benefit from the financing you could provide, or the community development institutions you could support. To come up with creative approaches to improve financial education and to bring banking to those who live and work entirely outside the banking system. And, of course, to embrace serious financial reform, not fight it.

Really Mr. President?

Perhaps you would like to explain this - the outcome of the FHA under your Administration thus far?

Bluntly: You're lying when it comes to having these institutions make only sustainable, safe and sound loans, along with helping Americans keep their homes.

(The spreadsheet can be found here: http://spreadsheets.google.com...ZkpuZk9vTldBV1E&hl=en)

The worse news? The portfolio has doubled over the last two years, with 2.6 million loans added (of a total of 5.18 million.)

So what's the story on recent loans? We don't have an accurate number on that, but this much is clear: The claim that FHA only has a single-digit default and delinquency rate, and is helping Americans own and keep their homes is a BALD-FACED LIE.

Sustainable mortgages eh? "Helping homeowners" eh?

Not a snowball's chance in Hell according not to your lies but the mathematical FACTS as represented in ACTUAL default rates.

ONE IN FIVE FHA mortgages is either late or in foreclosure?

ONE IN FIVE?!

I'm tired of the lying and so is everyone else.

We The People demand THE TRUTH.

THE TRUTH is that:

FHA has been and still is putting Americans into loans they cannot afford, as is proved by the default and foreclosure statistics.

The housing and banking industry HAS NOT reformed its ways, specifically, pushing loans on people they cannot afford, and the FHA is blatantly conspiring with these clowns in APPROVING loans that statistically have a one in five shot at failure.

The claim that these mortgage programs are "helping Americans" is a damned lie. No program that winds up with one in five borrowers unable to pay - a rate double that of credit-card defaults - can be said to be "sustainable", "safe", or 'helping homeowners."

We must clear the bad, un-serviceable debt from the system. Papering it over or worse, transferring it to The Federal Government where you think people won't find it won't work.

The only solution to the housing crisis is that prices for homes must come down to where they are actually affordable on a long-term, sustainable basis. This means that we must demand 20% down payments, 28% front end and 36% back end ratios, without exception.

I have said this must happen for more than two years and now the results on "the alternative" pushed by the Federal Government, including Fannie, Freddie and the FHA are in: their promulgated "alternative" does not work, cannot work, and is leading to ruinously-bad default rates, leaving homeowners just as screwed as they were before - if not more so.

FHA and VA are today writing loans with 3.5% down (and in fact 0% down if you use the $8,000 "home buyers credit") and ignoring safe and sound front and back end ratio limits in a desperate attempt to prevent that which must happen to restore a sound housing industry: A decline in prices to sustainable levels.

THE EFFORT TO PAPER OVER THE TRUTH WITH MORE AND MORE LIES HAS FAILED.

I understand that the housing and lending "industry", particularly the latter, are desperate to prevent a contraction to sustainable pricing as house prices returning to sustainable levels will wipe out a huge number of banks - including some of our nation's largest institutions.

But whether they (or you) like it or not this has to happen and the longer we "resist" the inevitable decline all the way to sustainable pricing and closing the insolvent institutions you and The Fed are propping up through blatant accounting fictions the worse the outcome will be for America and our economy.

Thanks to Krista for digging up the facts. We cannot allow, as citizens, the outrageous lies of our government, delivered by a grinning teleprompter-reading handmaiden to those who have and continue to loot the public and its' Treasury, to stand unchallenged.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
LOL @ the person demanding ratios like they have any idea what they are talking about.


Ratios dont mean shit if you lose your job. FHA only approves loans that the borrower can afford. If the borrower goes out afterwards and buys a $400/mo car after he buys the house and gets behind on credit cards, you cant really blame them the underwriter.

I am for raising the minimum FICO requirement for the 3.5% down. It was 580 last year, now it is 620. I think 680 would bring those default numbers way down to sustainable levels.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Tell them to go to the ACORN housing office, they'll help keep you in that house with...umm..."creative" ideas.
 

CrackRabbit

Lifer
Mar 30, 2001
16,642
62
91
Originally posted by: OCguy
LOL @ the person demanding ratios like they have any idea what they are talking about.


Ratios dont mean shit if you lose your job. FHA only approves loans that the borrower can afford. If the borrower goes out afterwards and buys a $400/mo car after he buys the house and gets behind on credit cards, you cant really blame them the underwriter.

I am for raising the minimum FICO requirement for the 3.5% down. It was 580 last year, now it is 620. I think 680 would bring those default numbers way down to sustainable levels.

:thumbsup:
 

imported_inspire

Senior member
Jun 29, 2006
986
0
0
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
THE TRUTH is that:

FHA has been and still is putting Americans into loans they cannot afford, as is proved by the default and foreclosure statistics.

No. Much as I dislike the president, you're trying to pull a fast one there. To say that the FHA has put Americans into loans they cannot afford is entirely different from saying that they are still doing it. We would have to look at loans that were recently originated to know for sure. And how recently would depend on who you're trying to blame, but I'd go back no more than a year - to when legislation was first passed and lending practices really started to dry up.

I think the rest of your post is suspect. Most of the folks I know who have been extremely credit-worthy and in the market for a house have had a very difficult time securing a mortgage. Oftentimes they have trouble not for personal reasons, but because the lenders seem to demand that a property is flawless, especially in the case of townhomes and condos and even some subdivisions with common areas.
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
Originally posted by: inspire
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
THE TRUTH is that:

FHA has been and still is putting Americans into loans they cannot afford, as is proved by the default and foreclosure statistics.

No. Much as I dislike the president, you're trying to pull a fast one there. To say that the FHA has put Americans into loans they cannot afford is entirely different from saying that they are still doing it. We would have to look at loans that were recently originated to know for sure. And how recently would depend on who you're trying to blame, but I'd go back no more than a year - to when legislation was first passed and lending practices really started to dry up.

I think the rest of your post is suspect. Most of the folks I know who have been extremely credit-worthy and in the market for a house have had a very difficult time securing a mortgage. Oftentimes they have trouble not for personal reasons, but because the lenders seem to demand that a property is flawless, especially in the case of townhomes and condos and even some subdivisions with common areas.

OK, let's be clear. This is an article by Karl Denninger as linked.
The only thing I said is " Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong "
the rest are Karl's words
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
WSJ Link

This WSJ story of 8.11.09 on the FHA says it's an ongoing problem, with lending standards that are still too lax. "The housing lobby, which gets rich off FHA insurance, has long blocked these due-diligence reforms, saying there?s no threat to taxpayers. That?s what they also said about Fan and Fred?$400 billion ago"
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: inspire
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
THE TRUTH is that:

FHA has been and still is putting Americans into loans they cannot afford, as is proved by the default and foreclosure statistics.

No. Much as I dislike the president, you're trying to pull a fast one there. To say that the FHA has put Americans into loans they cannot afford is entirely different from saying that they are still doing it. We would have to look at loans that were recently originated to know for sure. And how recently would depend on who you're trying to blame, but I'd go back no more than a year - to when legislation was first passed and lending practices really started to dry up.

I think the rest of your post is suspect. Most of the folks I know who have been extremely credit-worthy and in the market for a house have had a very difficult time securing a mortgage. Oftentimes they have trouble not for personal reasons, but because the lenders seem to demand that a property is flawless, especially in the case of townhomes and condos and even some subdivisions with common areas.

OK, let's be clear. This is an article by Karl Denninger as linked.
The only thing I said is " Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong "
the rest are Karl's words

There's your first problem. Reading anything Denninger writes.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Delinquency and a forclosure are two different things.

People with no job for an extended period of time => people who can't pay mortgage => delinquency => foreclosure.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong

Link

President Obama Speaks - And Lies (Again)

Topic Title: 20% of FHA mortgages are either late or in foreclosure
Topic Summary: Holy underwriting batman!

What the fuck do expect with no fucking jobs that your heroes let all go overseas?

You're the Liar
 

Fear No Evil

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2008
5,922
0
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong

Link

President Obama Speaks - And Lies (Again)

Topic Title: 20% of FHA mortgages are either late or in foreclosure
Topic Summary: Holy underwriting batman!

What the fuck do expect with no fucking jobs that your heroes let all go overseas?

You're the Liar

I wouldn't call Obama a HERO.. Messiah maybe.. but not HERO.
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong

Link

President Obama Speaks - And Lies (Again)

Topic Title: 20% of FHA mortgages are either late or in foreclosure
Topic Summary: Holy underwriting batman!

What the fuck do expect with no fucking jobs that your heroes let all go overseas?

You're the Liar

I wouldn't call Obama a HERO.. Messiah maybe.. but not HERO.

I think for some reason cowen thinks I'm a republican. I am not. I have no use for fascist republicans like Bush, or socialist left wingers like Obama.
Nor I am the one that wrote the piece folks. My only comment is above the link.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,168
60
91
O'Bammah is in charge now and has nothing to change the real estate business. Where is Pelosi? The answer is Democrats dont care about people.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: piasabird
O'Bammah is in charge now and has nothing to change the real estate business. Where is Pelosi? The answer is Democrats dont care about people.

Still blaming the BofA/Merrill Lynch merger on Obama even though it finalized on 1/1/09? :roll:

The answer is partisans don't care about people. They care about party, by definition. And you're a partisan living in the hell you've created for yourself. Take some responsibility and quit expecting the rest of us to feel sorry for you.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
BTW, the OP doesn't have a fscking clue what he's talking about. 20% is pretty much the norm for delinquency rates at this time, and quite decent actually for the kind of high-LTV loans that the FHA insures. This is not an indication of FHA underwriting guidelines (which are anything BUT lax) but of the renters mentality which has overtaken the US real estate market wherein people who get a little upside down on their mortgage imagine some magical right to not have to pay on their obligations anymore, even when they still have the financial ability and no hardship.
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, the OP doesn't have a fscking clue what he's talking about. 20% is pretty much the norm for delinquency rates at this time, and quite decent actually for the kind of high-LTV loans that the FHA insures. This is not an indication of FHA underwriting guidelines (which are anything BUT lax) but of the renters mentality which has overtaken the US real estate market wherein people who get a little upside down on their mortgage imagine some magical right to not have to pay on their obligations anymore, even when they still have the financial ability and no hardship.

Oh Vic, I love it when you talk nasty to me. Smoochie big boy.

From the WSJ article linked here:
Link


"Among the FHA, Ginnie, Fannie and Freddie, nearly nine of every 10 new mortgages in America now carry a federal taxpayer guarantee.

Herein lies the problem. The FHA?s standard insurance program today is notoriously lax. It backs low downpayment loans, to buyers who often have below-average to poor credit ratings, and with almost no oversight to protect against fraud. Sound familiar? This is called subprime lending?the same financial roulette that busted Fannie, Freddie and large mortgage houses like Countrywide Financial.

On June 18, HUD?s Inspector General issued a scathing report on the FHA?s lax insurance practices. It found that the FHA?s default rate has grown to 7%, which is about double the level considered safe and sound for lenders, and that 13% of these loans are delinquent by more than 30 days. The FHA?s reserve fund was found to have fallen in half, to 3% from 6.4% in 2007?meaning it now has a 33 to 1 leverage ratio, which is into Bear Stearns territory. The IG says the FHA may need a ?Congressional appropriation intervention to make up the shortfall.?
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, the OP doesn't have a fscking clue what he's talking about. 20% is pretty much the norm for delinquency rates at this time, and quite decent actually for the kind of high-LTV loans that the FHA insures. This is not an indication of FHA underwriting guidelines (which are anything BUT lax) but of the renters mentality which has overtaken the US real estate market wherein people who get a little upside down on their mortgage imagine some magical right to not have to pay on their obligations anymore, even when they still have the financial ability and no hardship.

Oh Vic, I love it when you talk nasty to me. Smoochie big boy.

From the WSJ article linked here:
Link


"Among the FHA, Ginnie, Fannie and Freddie, nearly nine of every 10 new mortgages in America now carry a federal taxpayer guarantee.

Herein lies the problem. The FHA?s standard insurance program today is notoriously lax. It backs low downpayment loans, to buyers who often have below-average to poor credit ratings, and with almost no oversight to protect against fraud. Sound familiar? This is called subprime lending?the same financial roulette that busted Fannie, Freddie and large mortgage houses like Countrywide Financial.

On June 18, HUD?s Inspector General issued a scathing report on the FHA?s lax insurance practices. It found that the FHA?s default rate has grown to 7%, which is about double the level considered safe and sound for lenders, and that 13% of these loans are delinquent by more than 30 days. The FHA?s reserve fund was found to have fallen in half, to 3% from 6.4% in 2007?meaning it now has a 33 to 1 leverage ratio, which is into Bear Stearns territory. The IG says the FHA may need a ?Congressional appropriation intervention to make up the shortfall.?

Im in the business. As I've said, the only major issue with the FHA 3.5% down loans right now is the required middle FICO. As far as income, everyone is easily qualified at the time they purchase the house.

I process Fannie/Freddie/FHA/VA and underwrite Fannie/Freddie.


Every loan being originated today and backed by government entities is 100% legit, minus the fraud cases which are treated very harshly when discovered. There are no more "stated" loans. Every loan requires 30 days of paystubs plus the previous year's W-2, or two years tax returns for the self-employed or people claiming rental/dividend/interest income. Also, a transcript of your tax returns is obtained via 4506T from the IRS.
 

GeezerMan

Platinum Member
Jan 28, 2005
2,146
26
91
Originally posted by: OCguy
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: Vic
BTW, the OP doesn't have a fscking clue what he's talking about. 20% is pretty much the norm for delinquency rates at this time, and quite decent actually for the kind of high-LTV loans that the FHA insures. This is not an indication of FHA underwriting guidelines (which are anything BUT lax) but of the renters mentality which has overtaken the US real estate market wherein people who get a little upside down on their mortgage imagine some magical right to not have to pay on their obligations anymore, even when they still have the financial ability and no hardship.

Oh Vic, I love it when you talk nasty to me. Smoochie big boy.

From the WSJ article linked here:
Link


"Among the FHA, Ginnie, Fannie and Freddie, nearly nine of every 10 new mortgages in America now carry a federal taxpayer guarantee.

Herein lies the problem. The FHA?s standard insurance program today is notoriously lax. It backs low downpayment loans, to buyers who often have below-average to poor credit ratings, and with almost no oversight to protect against fraud. Sound familiar? This is called subprime lending?the same financial roulette that busted Fannie, Freddie and large mortgage houses like Countrywide Financial.

On June 18, HUD?s Inspector General issued a scathing report on the FHA?s lax insurance practices. It found that the FHA?s default rate has grown to 7%, which is about double the level considered safe and sound for lenders, and that 13% of these loans are delinquent by more than 30 days. The FHA?s reserve fund was found to have fallen in half, to 3% from 6.4% in 2007?meaning it now has a 33 to 1 leverage ratio, which is into Bear Stearns territory. The IG says the FHA may need a ?Congressional appropriation intervention to make up the shortfall.?

Im in the business. As I've said, the only major issue with the FHA 3.5% down loans right now is the required middle FICO. As far as income, everyone is easily qualified at the time they purchase the house.

I process Fannie/Freddie/FHA/VA and underwrite Fannie/Freddie.


Every loan being originated today and backed by government entities is 100% legit, minus the fraud cases which are treated very harshly when discovered. There are no more "stated" loans. Every loan requires 30 days of paystubs plus the previous year's W-2, or two years tax returns for the self-employed or people claiming rental/dividend/interest income. Also, a transcript of your tax returns is obtained via 4506T from the IRS.

Since you are in this business, I would like to hear your views on what Denninger discussed on his page on 9-4-09:
"Oh, and let's not forget that instead of a safe and sound 20% down payment FHA permits 3.5% down, and with the $8,000 "home buyer credit" you can use that for the downstroke either in whole or part, so we have a whole lot of "new borrowers" with absolutely no skin in the game."


also, this link here is a interesting chat about the FHA:
Link
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Originally posted by: GeezerMan

Since you are in this business, I would like to hear your views on what Denninger discussed on his page on 9-4-09:
"Oh, and let's not forget that instead of a safe and sound 20% down payment FHA permits 3.5% down, and with the $8,000 "home buyer credit" you can use that for the downstroke either in whole or part, so we have a whole lot of "new borrowers" with absolutely no skin in the game."


also, this link here is a interesting chat about the FHA:
Link

I have no problem with the 3.5% down. In fact, I just helped my best friend into a condo here in OC using that program. He was more than qualified, and can easily afford the payments, as assured by the underwriter.

As I said, I disagree with the 620 middle FICO minimum to get this program. A 680 is much more reasonable, as it proves you are responsible with money.

In my years in the business, I have seen people who make $30K a year be far better borrowers than those who make $250K. It all depends on how you manage your money. The only real way for an u/w to see if you can handle money is through credit.

I am 100% behind tightening the requirements for FHA loans. Blaming it on the debt to income ratio, however, is stupid. It is all about credit scores.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Since you are in this business, I would like to hear your views on what Denninger discussed on his page on 9-4-09:
"Oh, and let's not forget that instead of a safe and sound 20% down payment FHA permits 3.5% down, and with the $8,000 "home buyer credit" you can use that for the downstroke either in whole or part, so we have a whole lot of "new borrowers" with absolutely no skin in the game."


also, this link here is a interesting chat about the FHA:
Link

FHA is a mortgage insurer, not a lender. Mortgage insurance is typically only required for loan with less than 20% down. So, if FHA required 20% down in its guidelines, there would be no point for the lender to require mortgage insurance, now would there?

Also, as OCguy noted, FHA is full-doc (no stated income) with tight debt-to-income ratios. The low down payment requirement has been the very purpose of FHA since its inception, and its credit requirements have actually tightened in recent years.
 

imported_inspire

Senior member
Jun 29, 2006
986
0
0
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Originally posted by: inspire
Originally posted by: GeezerMan
THE TRUTH is that:

FHA has been and still is putting Americans into loans they cannot afford, as is proved by the default and foreclosure statistics.

No. Much as I dislike the president, you're trying to pull a fast one there. To say that the FHA has put Americans into loans they cannot afford is entirely different from saying that they are still doing it. We would have to look at loans that were recently originated to know for sure. And how recently would depend on who you're trying to blame, but I'd go back no more than a year - to when legislation was first passed and lending practices really started to dry up.

I think the rest of your post is suspect. Most of the folks I know who have been extremely credit-worthy and in the market for a house have had a very difficult time securing a mortgage. Oftentimes they have trouble not for personal reasons, but because the lenders seem to demand that a property is flawless, especially in the case of townhomes and condos and even some subdivisions with common areas.

OK, let's be clear. This is an article by Karl Denninger as linked.
The only thing I said is " Mind blowing stats. I hope these are wrong "
the rest are Karl's words


Ah, my apologies.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
FHA has and always will have high foreclosure rates. They write loans to people who ordinarily couldn't even begin to buy a house.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I am 100% behind tightening the requirements for FHA loans. Blaming it on the debt to income ratio, however, is stupid. It is all about credit scores.
Credit score is indicative of intent. Income to debt is indicative of ability. A high score person with a high debt to income will probably do ok but as soon as he loses his job, regardless of how he's done in the past, he will be sinking quickly. As you are alluding to, a low debt to income with a poor credit score is indicative of a dead beat, because even with all that money he still cannot control himself.

Regarding denninger, it's clear now that he is entertaining to read/watch but also a conspiracy theorist. He will always see the devil in the details and absolutely always interprets the data to lead to the worst possible conclusion. He is sometimes right, sometimes wrong, but he always espouses doom, and frequently to a comedic level. A couple of days ago he recommended to Glen Beck not to take any private planes, hire a tester (I guess in case he's poisoned) and ensure he lives somewhere where he can carry a gun for self-defense. Karl has also been short the broad market for the last 1000 points, by his own admission.