Mortgage Discussion - Hard to get mortgage

Author

Hard to get mortgage

Phil & Joanne

2005-12-30, 7:21 pm

Does anyone know of a mortgage company that will lend 100% if you have a
foreclosure less than a year out?

Thank you,

Joanne
bluwater1@direcway.com

Jeff Strickland

2005-12-31, 2:21 am

There are lots of them. The Rate won't be very attractive, so you will need
to be making some pretty good money to qualify for the payments.

Call a Mortgage Broker in your area. Indeed, call a few of them and compare
the fees. It won't be pretty, but you can get a mortgage.

"Phil & Joanne" <bluwater1@direcway.com> wrote in message
news:0Aitf.1600$Hl6.805@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Does anyone know of a mortgage company that will lend 100% if you have a
> foreclosure less than a year out?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joanne
> bluwater1@direcway.com
>

Phil & Joanne

2005-12-31, 11:21 am

Thank you for the info. Will it help at all if we have a cosigner that has
really great credit?

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e8idnZTWm-iwgSveRVn-hg@ez2.net...
> There are lots of them. The Rate won't be very attractive, so you will
> need to be making some pretty good money to qualify for the payments.
>
> Call a Mortgage Broker in your area. Indeed, call a few of them and
> compare the fees. It won't be pretty, but you can get a mortgage.
>
>
>
>
> "Phil & Joanne" <bluwater1@direcway.com> wrote in message
> news:0Aitf.1600$Hl6.805@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>

mortgageforyou@gmail.com

2006-01-01, 1:21 pm

I do 100% financing with foreclosure seasoning of 1 year.

Jeremy G
646-322-4933

Jeff Strickland

2006-01-05, 1:21 pm

It might, but they will be processed as a non occupant co-borrower. And the
broker will only use them for income qualification, not credit worthiness.

Here's what the banks look at -- will we have to take possession of the
property? The bank does not want the property, they want the money. If they
have to take the property and sell it to get the money, they have costs they
would rather not have. They want the assurance YOU will pay the note off and
they won't have to take your house away again. They have risk associated
with giving you money because you have already given one house back, so the
ban is going to charge you a higher rate because you bring greater risk to
the table. The co-borrower does not mitigate the risk, they only bring more
money to the table.

The non occupant co borrower COULD get the loan, if they have enough income
to support two mortgages. If your house is more than about 70 miles from
theirs, they could take a Second Home mortgage and avoid the Investment
Property loan charges. Then, you keep detailed records of actually making
the payments for two years -- YOUR cancelled checks MADE ON TIME -- will be
required. After two years, you and the co-borrower go to the bank and
refinance the loan, you show that you have actually been making the payments
all along, not the co-borrowers, and you should be able to get the house
transferred to your name. The problem with this strategy is that your credit
will not be rebuilt during this time because the co-borrower will have the
Note in their name, so you will have to work on all of the other aspects of
your credit and get them cleaned up. If you go to the bank in two years and
say, "look, I've been making the payments here," but your credit card
history is in the crapper, you'll have the same problems getting a good rate
that you're having today.

Here's what I suggest,
Try to arrange an Interest Only 3/1 ARM. This means you want a 3-year fixed
rate interest only note that becomes adjustable in the 4th year. The
Interest Only quality of the note will give you the lowest possible
Qualification Payment -- the payment they measure against your income. After
2.5 years of making each and every payment on time, approach the bank for a
refinance to a normal 30-year mortgage. Frankly, I wouldn't even get a 30 if
I didn't plan on retiring in the house and having it paid off some day. If
you will be selling the house anyway, take out a loan that approximates the
duration of your staying there. I think that taking a loan in 5-year
increments makes sense IF the housing prices in your area are rising. The
rsik exposure to you in this scenario is that housing prices actually fall,
and when you are faced with selling or refinancing, you could owe more on
the home than it is worth, and you would have to come up with the shortfall
out of your own pocket. Most of us live in a steady-to-rising housing
market, so the worst case is that you do not gain any equity, but it is rare
that anybody loses equity -- but it happens and is a very real possibility
with a 100% loan. If the housing market rises, then your house is worth more
at some point in the future, and the equity value can help you.

Let's say you are buying today for $200,000, and the values are rising at 5%
per year for each of the next 5 years. After this period your house is worth
$255,250. The EQUITY of $55,000 is roughly 25%, and is closer to 30%
assuming you have made principle payments during that time. So, the next
loan will be for $200,000 minus any principle paydowns. If the new value is
$255k, and you take a loan for 190k, then 190k/255k = 75%. This means that
your new loan is 75% of the value of the property. The banks like this
because it assures them that you won't walk away from the house and forfiet
all of the equity. When you are buying the house with a 100% loan, there is
nothing there to keep you attached to the property other than your emotional
attachment. But when you have equity built up, you now have a financial hook
in the property that reduces the risk to the bank, and this will get you a
lower rate. Get it?

Sorry for top posting so much information.

"Phil & Joanne" <bluwater1@direcway.com> wrote in message
news:TXwtf.4537$nu6.550@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Thank you for the info. Will it help at all if we have a cosigner that
> has really great credit?
>
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:e8idnZTWm-iwgSveRVn-hg@ez2.net...
>
>

Phil & Joanne

2006-01-06, 1:21 pm

Thank you very much for this information. It is/will be very helpful and
greatly appreciated.

Joanne

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7rednTq0m5rY1SDeRVn-oQ@ez2.net...
> It might, but they will be processed as a non occupant co-borrower. And
> the broker will only use them for income qualification, not credit
> worthiness.
>
> Here's what the banks look at -- will we have to take possession of the
> property? The bank does not want the property, they want the money. If
> they have to take the property and sell it to get the money, they have
> costs they would rather not have. They want the assurance YOU will pay the
> note off and they won't have to take your house away again. They have risk
> associated with giving you money because you have already given one house
> back, so the ban is going to charge you a higher rate because you bring
> greater risk to the table. The co-borrower does not mitigate the risk,
> they only bring more money to the table.
>
> The non occupant co borrower COULD get the loan, if they have enough
> income to support two mortgages. If your house is more than about 70 miles
> from theirs, they could take a Second Home mortgage and avoid the
> Investment Property loan charges. Then, you keep detailed records of
> actually making the payments for two years -- YOUR cancelled checks MADE
> ON TIME -- will be required. After two years, you and the co-borrower go
> to the bank and refinance the loan, you show that you have actually been
> making the payments all along, not the co-borrowers, and you should be
> able to get the house transferred to your name. The problem with this
> strategy is that your credit will not be rebuilt during this time because
> the co-borrower will have the Note in their name, so you will have to work
> on all of the other aspects of your credit and get them cleaned up. If you
> go to the bank in two years and say, "look, I've been making the payments
> here," but your credit card history is in the crapper, you'll have the
> same problems getting a good rate that you're having today.
>
> Here's what I suggest,
> Try to arrange an Interest Only 3/1 ARM. This means you want a 3-year
> fixed rate interest only note that becomes adjustable in the 4th year. The
> Interest Only quality of the note will give you the lowest possible
> Qualification Payment -- the payment they measure against your income.
> After 2.5 years of making each and every payment on time, approach the
> bank for a refinance to a normal 30-year mortgage. Frankly, I wouldn't
> even get a 30 if I didn't plan on retiring in the house and having it paid
> off some day. If you will be selling the house anyway, take out a loan
> that approximates the duration of your staying there. I think that taking
> a loan in 5-year increments makes sense IF the housing prices in your area
> are rising. The rsik exposure to you in this scenario is that housing
> prices actually fall, and when you are faced with selling or refinancing,
> you could owe more on the home than it is worth, and you would have to
> come up with the shortfall out of your own pocket. Most of us live in a
> steady-to-rising housing market, so the worst case is that you do not gain
> any equity, but it is rare that anybody loses equity -- but it happens and
> is a very real possibility with a 100% loan. If the housing market rises,
> then your house is worth more at some point in the future, and the equity
> value can help you.
>
> Let's say you are buying today for $200,000, and the values are rising at
> 5% per year for each of the next 5 years. After this period your house is
> worth $255,250. The EQUITY of $55,000 is roughly 25%, and is closer to 30%
> assuming you have made principle payments during that time. So, the next
> loan will be for $200,000 minus any principle paydowns. If the new value
> is $255k, and you take a loan for 190k, then 190k/255k = 75%. This means
> that your new loan is 75% of the value of the property. The banks like
> this because it assures them that you won't walk away from the house and
> forfiet all of the equity. When you are buying the house with a 100% loan,
> there is nothing there to keep you attached to the property other than
> your emotional attachment. But when you have equity built up, you now have
> a financial hook in the property that reduces the risk to the bank, and
> this will get you a lower rate. Get it?
>
> Sorry for top posting so much information.
>
>
>
>
> "Phil & Joanne" <bluwater1@direcway.com> wrote in message
> news:TXwtf.4537$nu6.550@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>

LinkBot