Loan Officer Compensation Under Fire in Senate - 05.13.10 | Zenet Negron : First Priority Financial : Stockton, CA

NWBANKERCHICK: (May 15, 2010 11:52pm)

Ok just an FYI guys...not ALL Banks "get" to charge and keep YSP. This here banker (working for one of the Big Four) has to give the borrower 100% of the YSP, just like a broker does, and I don't participate in the SRP, either. SO I actually make LESS than my broker bretheren. But hey, I've got a really nice coffee mug.

TwoMortgageGuys: (May 15, 2010 12:16am)

Love your message, guys. Just a comment on the single women idea--funny thing is, I looked at this about 4 years ago (just about the time of my divorce...) and it was 3 to 1 back then--27% of homes bought by single women; 9% by single men. Now, how to capitalize on it...

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 8:08pm)

I think the mortgage brokers and appraisers need to join forces and form a powerful lobby along the lines of the NAR. Reason no politican touches them and the fees they charge is they give millions to the corrupt bastards just like the mortgage bankers. Why do you think they're not touching SRP or carving out mortgages for 5% reserve requirements?? The big banks are up the ass of Congress.

FedUpW/Washington: (May 13, 2010 6:18pm)

On Facebook here is what looks to be a good one that just started: Real Estate Professionals - Stop The Corruption!

5pence: (May 13, 2010 5:54pm)

It seems for the most part they're bought and sold idiots. They most certainly are when they let the banks write the legislation. Can anyone think of any other reason for why they're doing what they're doing? They're so used to being greased in an easy job they don't know what to do when things get tough. But, really, rely on the banksters to make you look brilliant? Wrong choice

brokerbeech: (May 13, 2010 4:03pm)

OMG!!!! LIKE, UH WHAT PLANET IS THE SENATE ON??? I MEAN LIKE, UH SERIOUSLY.....WHERE DO U GUYS COME FROM??? LIKE, UH REALLY....IS THIS TRULY THE WAY YOU THINK EVERY MORTGAGE BROKER OUT THERE ON THIS GOD GIVEN EARTH ACTS? WE ARE ALL EDUCATED INDIVIDUALS TRYING TO MAKE A LIVING. WE ARE NOT BENEATH YOU, AS A MATTER OF FACT, IF IT WAS NOT FOR US AS CONSUMERS OURSELVES, YOU WOULD NOT BE IN YOUR VOTED POSITION. WE HAVE BEEN REGULATED AND POLICED ENOUGH. IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON TO BIGGER PROBLEMS...LIKE THE HEALTHCARE REFORM YOU IDIOTS JUST PASSED...ALLLLLLL FOR THE GOOOOOOOD OF THE CONSUMER.... TAKE OFF YOUR BLINDERS AND COME DOWN HERE WITH THE REST OF US THAT ACTUALLY WORK AND PAY TAXES!!! KUDOS MY FRIENDS!!!!!

Valuequestor: (May 13, 2010 2:06pm)

Yesterday's show was great by the way. I completed the Appraiser Survey with abundant commentary. RocksteadyRedhead: I think most appraisers must start their day with a big bowl of stupid as well. How else would we be so blindsided by anybody with a real estate bone to pick every 10 to 15 years.

5pence: (May 13, 2010 1:57pm)

There's enough disparate groups that if they were all brought together they could be a mighty political force for the people. People just have to admit to themselves truthfully that a 2 party system does not work in the 21st century, and support real change. Real change, like Obama promised but did not deliver.

Clulessdad: (May 13, 2010 1:50pm)

askandrew-I remember when ALL FHA ratesheets had the separation. In fact, one lender AMX, had it separately until Jan of this year. Since all wholesalers sell 100% of their loans, they all get SRP. Not very difficult to separate it out again. BTW- I hope the LO fees will be changed to a max of 3% or $3000, whichever is greater. Several lenders have that now.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 1:45pm)

also yes we need a real change to politics and too bad a 3rd party won't work, especially for president unless we can do away with the electorate. So until then we need to get in as many patriots as we can running unfortunately under the Concervative ticket, the lessor of two evils.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 1:41pm)

5pence - sorry for the confusion with my point. I understood your point. I was stating that if we, even peaceable assemble and protest somehow the government will construe it to be violent and put it down even if it was not. Look at the lies they tried to say about the T-party. At one point Former President Clinton tried to make the connection with the T-Party Movement as a bunch of wacks and extremests on the same page as Timothy McFay and OK City bombing. So you don't really think they will stand for another grass roots patriot movement do you? (retorical) sorry for the confussion.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 1:33pm)

clulessdad - I do remember rate sheets from CHASE RD out of Florida and they also broke out YSP separate from SRP. eventually they combined them into one. But just remember this, regardless of what the lender/bank is paying the broker or correspondent there is always SRP that is paid to the bank when they sell the loan, regardless of what they call in on the rate sheet. I am on the banker side working for a mortgage lender now so I don't broker much over the past 2 years but don't remember any rate sheets other than CHASE RD that used to have it and like I said they combined it into one price.

5pence: (May 13, 2010 1:26pm)

@askandrewconner. "Next, 5pence, thanks for the patriot reminder, too bad lawyers can read into this and dispute and debate, just what is "becomes destructive of these ends" and "for light and transient causes". Do we really have a chance or is it too late and any attempt of overthrow will be deemed as rebellion and or an act of terror and squelched faster than it can be formed." >>> I'm not talking terrorists. I'm talking a 3rd political party dedicated to overthrowing the government through peaceful means - by votes. Look up Continental Congress, you'll see there was one formed in 2009. I just discovered it myself and haven't had the chance to find out what happened to it yet. But it has happened before. It just needs more support. This 2 party system does not work. There is no one to oversee the dirty deeds of the dirty twins - Repubs and Dems. We at least need a 3rd party to keep the banksters in check. A 2 party system doesn't work. What more proof do you need?

SBWitmer: (May 13, 2010 1:21pm)

I just faxed letters to all senators in every state I do business in (5) at their local state office and their Washington DC office explaining the damage this amendment will have on our industry and to our borrowers. I hope it helps. Please join at Facebook "Mortgage Professionals Unite".

SBWitmer: (May 13, 2010 1:20pm)

I just faxed letters to all senators in every state I do business in (5) at their local state office and their Washington DC office explaining the damage this amendment will have on our industry and to our borrowers. I hope it helps. Please join at Facebook "Mortgage Professionals Unite".

Clulessdad: (May 13, 2010 1:19pm)

GC and askandrew-yes, most rates sheets refer to pricing as YSP. But it isn't. FHA loans used to be paid as YSP and with SRP as a separate issue. FHA rates were also higher. But about 7-10 years ago, the lenders added the SRP to the YSP and gave it all out as a single compensation. I believe what they were trying to do was to show FHA rates equal to or better than agency. In fact one lender right now, Trust one, has it blanketed on every page, FHA and conv., that 2% SRP is included on all rates. If they separate the two, we should be OK. After all, the wholesale lenders will realize that this may be their end, and they need to adapt.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 1:18pm)

SRP maybe on the rate sheet of a Correspondent lender, and I'm unsure how legislation will affect this. but again there is always SRP that a bank makes, that can be argued, that indirectly affects the consumer so, it has no affect on the consumer. If Correspondents don't disclose YSP then they are a banker, but the reason for the grey area on correspondents is because they are still relying on the rate sheet of the lender as they don't sell to FNMA, FHLMC or GNMA. And, don't know how each lender will prepare its rate sheet? This ruling might affect all lender/Bankers/Brokers that don't sell direct. This might be what congress is shooting for. This way they only end up with 5 or so BIG banks that have the ability to securitize if FNMA & FHLMC go away. All part of the big picture or plan that we don't know about.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 1:13pm)

Ok a couple of things. first ssfranny, you're right in that it sure seems like the rhetoric wants everyone to own a home, but the actions speak louder that appear to eventually make it so only the elite will own housing because the cost of property will become so expensive, lending will also only be for the elite, and most people will live in cities and rely on the government for it's sustenance. Oh wait, isn't that Europe, and what kind of government do they have..... Next, 5pence, thanks for the patriot reminder, too bad lawyers can read into this and dispute and debate, just what is "becomes destructive of these ends" and "for light and transient causes". Do we really have a chance or is it too late and any attempt of overthrow will be deemed as rebellion and or an act of terror and squelched faster than it can be formed. All while real, known terrors are allowed to roam free... and finally for GC, what you are reading on your rate sheet as a Broker is YSP. continued.............

GC: (May 13, 2010 12:54pm)

Perhaps I'm missing something, but most all broker pricing I've ever seen INCLUDES SRP. Correspondent pricing is usually a little better but I figured that was merely because of higher risk.

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 12:51pm)

we ALL on here need to call our Senators and explain the Merkley Amendment will effectively "eliminate" the "no cost" refi. The only you can get paid out of the rate is to cover third party costs. YOu have to give the borrower the option to pay ALL fees out of rate. They already limited points and fees to 3%. This will increase the costs for the borrower by thousands of dollars.

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 12:46pm)

Amen 5Pence: Its evident the liberals in congress want to expand the givt to the point where they choke off crucial industries like housing, auto and finance. Its becoming more and more evident that what happened in Greece will very well happen here. If these radicals get this all passed, theres no way the Repubs can undo it. Maybe 'de fund' health care but they better do something quick.

5pence: (May 13, 2010 12:46pm)

I'm thinking we need a new Continental Congress to establish forever a 3rd political party whose goal is to end the corruption of this 2 party system and end all government abuses of the people for corporations. A Constitutional party dedicated to preservation of the Constitution and the rights of the people to be governed and overthrow of this current system of corruption. What do you guys think?

5pence: (May 13, 2010 12:42pm)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,[71] that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 12:37pm)

mortgage "banking" is a scam. Some broker gets a "warehouse line" from a big bank, sits on the lone for a week or so until they buy loan, then sell "servicing rights" for a loan they kept for a week and never planned on servicing. I see the big banks like Wells and Citi cutting off warehouse lines altogether. Bankers have nor more risk really than a broker. Why we all have E&O insurance

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 12:34pm)

I think someone needs to investigate what the Dems like Schumer, Merkley, Levin and Boxer are getting in campaign contributions from MBA, NAR and the big banks. My guess is its a LOT. www.opensecrets.org

pathompson: (May 13, 2010 12:31pm)

Amen to that mark.

mark: (May 13, 2010 12:24pm)

I'm tired. Time to impeach Mr Obama and close down this corrupt govt

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:12pm)

Sorry about the extra entry. I hit the submit button too many times. Must be the slow internet speed and it didn't go right away. I wasn't trying to be redundant on purpose.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:11pm)

Look at it this way. SRP is unrealated to YSP in the YSP is part of the rate decision for the primary market side of the transaction where as SRP is part of the secondary market transaction. So even if there was a grey area with the Legislation all that would have to be explained is. The consumer was not affected by the SRP in that SRP is income the bank recieves for selling one of it's assets on it's books unrelated to the consumers primary market transaction. I'm sure this is how it will be handled even if there is this grey area.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:11pm)

Look at it this way. SRP is unrealated to YSP in the YSP is part of the rate decision for the primary market side of the transaction where as SRP is part of the secondary market transaction. So even if there was a grey area with the Legislation all that would have to be explained is. The consumer was not affected by the SRP in that SRP is income the bank recieves for selling one of it's assets on it's books unrelated to the consumers primary market transaction. I'm sure this is how it will be handled even if there is this grey area.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:11pm)

Look at it this way. SRP is unrealated to YSP in the YSP is part of the rate decision for the primary market side of the transaction where as SRP is part of the secondary market transaction. So even if there was a grey area with the Legislation all that would have to be explained is. The consumer was not affected by the SRP in that SRP is income the bank recieves for selling one of it's assets on it's books unrelated to the consumers primary market transaction. I'm sure this is how it will be handled even if there is this grey area.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:10pm)

Look at it this way. SRP is unrealated to YSP in the YSP is part of the rate decision for the primary market side of the transaction where as SRP is part of the secondary market transaction. So even if there was a grey area with the Legislation all that would have to be explained is. The consumer was not affected by the SRP in that SRP is income the bank recieves for selling one of it's assets on it's books unrelated to the consumers primary market transaction. I'm sure this is how it will be handled even if there is this grey area.

Funrunners: (May 13, 2010 12:10pm)

This idea I have sent to every Senator and have heard from none, so you know it would work. http://www.funrunnerstravel.com/Illegal.html This is a fair immediate solution to the immigration problem. Josh Porter and just for the record www.SouthlandAppraisersUnion.com we are being so badly raped because we have no representation.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 12:03pm)

SRP is totally different than YSP. SRP is paid to the lender when they sell the loan (Note) regardless if they intend to service the loan or not. Therefore it is money a lending institution receives outside of the primary market transaction and would have no affect on the LO in the bank quoting rate or offering a loan based on commission of any kind. LO's at Banks are also given a set rate sheet and told what to quote each day. Unlike the broker who can shop from lender to lender to seek out the highest YSP for the Lowest Rate to give to the customer. SRP is in addtion to YSP for a bank. There is always mark up that the broker doesn't see. SRP is something that is not seen by the LO on their rate sheet and therefore would have no bearing on the rate qouted. A bank can bonus monthly, quarterly or annually based on performance. This doesn't mean I agree with the double standard for the industry, but I did want to clarify for anyone that still had any confusion about YSP/SRP.

rhodyloans: (May 13, 2010 11:54am)

Hey guys. Was a broker for 20+ years and now with a Federally Chartered Lender. Everything you say is correct and I feel for the broker!! Can I still party with you guys? Looks like fun!

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 11:53am)

So the way the 'Amendment' was written it says you can't get paid out of the rate...so the lenders will go any pay something similiar to SRP based on the loan amount. I just think its HILAROUS they put the exception to it in there about getting paid on the loan amount which means SRP. I would love to see what that liberal d-bag Merkley got from the bank lobby. He was the smae one who tried to propose a bill that banned YSP and also got a 'ban" of prepayment penatlies in the loan. We all need to call this tool and tell him how the industry works.

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 11:44am)

GaryP: The Amendment reads that you can;t be paid anything indirectly based on the rates or other terms of the loan, except loan amount. SRP is paid based on loan amount from what I understand. it also limits total points and fees to 3% so if that includes processing and lender fees like we now have to show in "origination charge" that will leave closer to 2% you can make on a loan. These idiots don;t realize that people won't do a $50,000 to $75,000 loan since they will make nothing on it.

Colorado Broker: (May 13, 2010 10:56am)

mtggrlaz, you hit the nail right on the head. The government wants to make sure they get our very last penny so we will be beholding to them and thankful to them for the very air we breath. So much for freedom.

Colorado Broker: (May 13, 2010 10:53am)

AbleRonny, I sure hope it works. Udall is so full of himself and the democrat adjenda that I don't know if it will do much good. Hopefully this November we will seem some big changes here in Colorado and go back to a more conservative State Government and help with more conservatives at the Federal level.

SBWitmer: (May 13, 2010 10:22am)

Sorry .. the Facebook page i created to discuss scenarios and questions and share wisdom is: " Mortgage Professionals Unite " Thanks for joining .. a big community will make us all stronger.

AbleRonny: (May 13, 2010 9:41am)

B and F, I just forwarded today's video to Senator Mark Udall. Hopefully, SOMEone will take the time and initiative to view it! Thanks for all your hard work and keeping information flowing.

askandrewconner.com: (May 13, 2010 9:33am)

I don't usually enter chats or online conversations. But I must state that I am in agreement with many of you that do find the current legislation to be unfair in that it only attacks the brokers, and that we all need to be held to the same standard. With that said, rather than our industry continuing to complain, we need to band together. Support the groups trying to make a change. I don't have a solution persay so I'm open to ideas. We need one real leader/s in our industry that can band the 5 or 6 groups together along with all of the states to acheive a united voice. But let's stop complaining and take action. I'm ready. I have some thoughts, but if someone can come up with a better way to unite I'm all for it. United we stand divided we fall. But regardless of who it is everyone needs to stand behind this person, e and I mean everyone. In this lies the problem.

5pence: (May 13, 2010 9:31am)

How about a little humor this morning? A man walks into a bar and takes a seat next to a very attractive woman. He gives her a quick glance then casually looks at his watch for a moment. > > The woman notices this and asks, "Is your date running late?" > > "No," he replies, "I bought this state-of the-art watch, and I was just testing it." > > The intrigued woman asks, "A state-of-the-art watch - what's so special about it?" > > The man explains, "It uses alpha waves to talk to me telepathically." > > The lady smiles and says, "What's it telling you now?" > > "Well, it says you're not wearing any panties." > > The woman giggles and replies, "Well it must be broken because I am wearing panties!" > > The man smiles, taps his watch and says, "Darn thing's an hour fast!"

vdaino: (May 13, 2010 9:15am)

remember when the word: Anti-trust existed?

5pence: (May 13, 2010 8:50am)

Apparently the administration doesn't think it's smart enough to regulate banks so they're letting the banks dictate the rules. They don't get it that too big to fail means too big to manage means too big to exist. It's really not that complicated when you consider the games the big boys are playing. They take debt, slice it up and pair it with other debt and then insure & sell it. They then do the same thing again so that the same mortgage gets sold over & over again so they can book profits now instead of the future. (Sounds like what just happened with the bailout, they are taking our childrens futures for the present). Anyway, selling the same mortgage over & over, because investors don't understand what's going on, is a shell game-a ponzi, where they can book at least twice the profits than the original debt & interest. It's like I can sell you and 10 of your friends a widgit, even tho I only have one, BUT because you don't take delivery, you don't know that. Illegal in real life.

loaner55: (May 13, 2010 8:41am)

Mortgage Girl - I understand what you are saying - but that is just what you see working for a small community bank, not a Wells or a Chase. Being a Broker for 14 years I have never had a problem tearing up a Banker quote. I have seen dozens and dozens of Banker GFE's and was shocked at the deception to the client. Just look at the screw job WAMU did to their clients and that is why they are under investigation. It comes down to one simple thing = the Government is trying to boot the Brokers because they have a heavy interest in the banking system. Anyone who believes otherwise has not been on the planet for a long while. Across the board regulation with the same rules for both sides only makes perfect sense, so why are we not seeing it?

5pence: (May 13, 2010 8:31am)

The cats out of the bag, the banks are writing this new legislation. I mean, actually writing it and ensuring it passes.

mtggrlaz: (May 13, 2010 8:18am)

This is all about the government trying to get rid of small business. This is why they are trying to hurt the broker NOT the banks. This is why there is no stated income loans for small business owners who dont claim all their income to the government. The government wants to control everything and get rid of small business.

bobbrennerloans: (May 13, 2010 8:13am)

Hey Mortgage Girl, news flash - your success speaks volumes for the poor quality of your local brokers than the efficacy of your bank. In most other markets, seasoned brokers with decades of experience compete effectively with most banks. Why? They often know how to package a loan like a pro, have more effective operational support, timely underwriting, and they don't blow rate locks like most retail bank originators. In deed, the skill set that most retail bank originators bring to market today costs of their clients dearly with poor execution. So enjoy your local 100% closing ratio while you can. When your bank's secondary market channel loses it's appetite, your costco-like sales approach and advantage will disappear.

GODLIKE: (May 13, 2010 8:12am)

"Basically what we've just witnessed was similar to a run on a bank. It was pretty much a campaign year stunt with a lot of media sensationalism thrown in for good measure that got out of control. If you take out the "B" loan foreclosures, as "B" loans didn't come thru FNMA or FHLMC, and check the actual numbers you'll find that Fannie & Freddie foreclosure rates in most states are very near normal. Most of the issues are confined to 7 states and they break down into 2 different kinds of issues." 7 states? Kinda prophetic don't you think?

GODLIKE: (May 13, 2010 8:10am)

Remember this was a "cultural" thing so it made it un-PC to expect this group of people to change their habits. We were told that education aimed at that group would have been demeaning and completely out of the question. So we ended up with a very Politically Correct and fine sounding new mission statement from Fannie Mae: Our Mission is to tear down barriers, lower costs, and increase the opportunities for home ownership and affordable rental housing for all Americans. Because having a safe place to call home strengthens families, communities, and our nation as a whole. And as quickly as that all the prudent underwriting guidelines that had built FHA, VA, Fannie and Freddie were thrown out the window. At that point all of us in the industry knew it was just a matter of time. (I'm not bitter, why should I be bitter?)

GODLIKE: (May 13, 2010 8:09am)

I've got to do this in 2 posts as I can't fit it all in 1000 words, but here is part of a commentary by a local that was written 9/08. "In 1999 during Clinton's term we see the beginning of the present downfall when FNMA and FHLMC were required to change their qualifying and processing standards thru a politically motivated move to benefit a large, historically Democratic voting, Special Interest Group (SIG) that was being "undeserved". The SIG said "culturally" their group didn't save money and had lower credit scores than Fannie/Freddie required to buy a home so the qualifying standards were discriminatory. What group it was doesn't matter, all that matters is that the quasi-governmental connection allowed this level of political control."

Clulessdad: (May 13, 2010 7:59am)

Looked up NMLS and who regulates it. "About State Regulatory Registry LLC The Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) in cooperation with the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators (AARMR) established the State Regulatory Registry LLC (SRR) on September 29, 2006. A limited-liability company, SRR is to develop and operate nationwide systems for state regulators in the financial services industry" It is a private company put together by ................you guessed it. bank regulators!

charity: (May 13, 2010 7:58am)

SBWitmer - I checked FB and did not find Mortgage Professionals Unite. I found Mortgage Specialist Unite, Mortgage Professionals and Realtors Unite, and Real Estate Professionals Unite. Please advise.

Clulessdad: (May 13, 2010 7:51am)

Not having stated income loans is just stupid. If a borrower puts down 50% down payment, do you ever think they will walk away from that? Small business owners probably can't get a loan, but their W-2 employees can. Something silly with that logic.

Golfer: (May 13, 2010 7:38am)

i have one think to say about NMLS its not about accountability!! it's the ability to make money on our dime and our time ..Its all BS now if you are a dead beat mortgage broker that lives to screw customer's and should not be in the business anyway ,now you have the chance to go work in a bank and screw customers there...

Clulessdad: (May 13, 2010 7:38am)

I can't understand why the wholesale channel doesn't separate out the SRP from the YSP. It used to be separated for FHA loans. Some rate sheets say "2% SRP included in price" I have given the idea to several AE's. They liked it, but it doesn't seem like anyone else did. SRP is a fixed % of the loan amount and that is not tied into the rate. Maybe any AE out there have anything on this?

joecolorado: (May 13, 2010 7:31am)

not a problem,I like to start the day with my adrenaline flowing.thank you

pathompson: (May 13, 2010 7:31am)

I agree with you GODLIKE. And the GSE's(Government Sponsored Enterprises) created them. Again, our government at work.

Mortgage Girl: (May 13, 2010 7:26am)

Joe...I have to agree with Pat who says your anger is a bit misplaced. I hope you have a good day. Sorry to get your dander up....

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 7:26am)

patthompson: "They didn't create the NINA's or liars loans." They didn't? Who did then? The big Wall Street banks and Depositories created "non-conforming" loan products that they in turn sold onto the secondary market. You make it sound like the brokers were creating their own loan products. Brokers and mortgage bankers were just selling the products that were being made available to them by the financial heavy weights.

GODLIKE: (May 13, 2010 7:25am)

Patthompson you are correct. We'd had a crisis of mortgage product not one of dishonest lenders. Product comes down line from the Gods on high in Washington. 1999 was the beginning of the end because that's when the product was changed. We knew there was a problem then, but no one from on high was listening all they could hear was the votes they'd be creating.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 7:19am)

Here's another thing. We have a lot of low cost housing down here in Texas. I've done loans as small as $50K. How many fees do you think they are going to pay with 3% on a $50K loan, especially if you include guarnatee fees in tht 3%? I have a feeling that the folks in DC think that everybody lives in a $500K house like they do in suburban DC. This would essentailly destroy those markets and turn those low cost neighborhoods into ghost towns. Now that's really helping out the consumer, isn't it? We're struggling to get those deals closed as it is with the 5% MDIA cap. The only way I'm able to do itis by paying some fees with SRP. This amendment would make that impossible.

joecolorado: (May 13, 2010 7:19am)

I forgot,banks and brokers are best friends as banks are working in the brokers best interests currently.

Mortgage Girl: (May 13, 2010 7:17am)

I couldn't agree more guys - they're not looking at this correctly nor are they putting the broker/banker on level playing field. This is why I say "they're going about it all wrong". There are great lenders out there on BOTH sides and they are trying to get rid of the ones that are not good with over-regulating and hurting everyone. Not every broker is screwing his borrower by making 5 points on a loan. Not all Bankers are making huge SRP's (which are based on loan amount, by the way, not rate) and giving their borrowers higher than market rates. It's getting increasingly ridiculous trying to be in this business. I work for a small community bank that tries to do the right thing for our customers. That's all we're trying to do.

joecolorado: (May 13, 2010 7:13am)

The truth hurts,but no I never have worked for a bank,never wanted to, but promoting usury and manipulating the system to try and exclude beneficial orgs that promote banking such as credit unions which encourage saving by their members is just plain wrong.They want a monopoly,where everyone has to go to a bank for a loan,excluding every other org or individual(brokers)that can make a dime from a financial opportunity.

pathompson: (May 13, 2010 7:13am)

I think your anger is a bit misplaced joecolorado. Banks didn't create the Affordable Housing Program that put people that should not own homes in them. They didn't create the NINA's or liars loans. Banks and Brokers have worked alongside each other for years sucessfully. The problems are from our government. We need to stick together and fight these rediculous bill that they keep putting out there. And BTW banks don't run the nmls...

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 7:13am)

Godlike, Under this amendment, stated loans would never come back. It specially states what documentation is required to verify income. Essentially, the list comes straight from a full doc processing checklist. That was one of the things that tipped me off that some big bank lobbyists were involved in drafting the bill. In addition, there is just way too much mortgage jargon for some congressional staffers to have come up with it on their own.

frankgaray: (May 13, 2010 7:08am)

Hey Mortgage girl - I managed a branch for Wells from 2000 to 2003. Right now the way things are set up, a broker/banker can offer a rate to a consumer through their banking channel and pick a rate and get "rebate" that is NOT on the GFE or the HUD because it is SRP, not YSP. Yes there are restrictions, for us it's section 32. But, our point is that, an originator can still get a rebate for a loan based on rate by working within a banking channel. At least today they can. It seems that congress doesn't get that, or their just so clouded by the bankers in DC that it doesn't matter to them. If they really want to help the consumer they need to get a true understanding of how the industry works, rather than just saying something as stupid as "you can't make more than 3%". They truly are blind numb-skulls making amendments to a crucial bill without the proper knowledge which is grossly irresponsible on their part.

billv: (May 13, 2010 7:07am)

th's Klo ba char but here in Minnesota we have better names. She is clueless anlong with the others like Frankin, Dodd, Snowe and others that backed the bill. Oh, let's not forget Scott Brown

joecolorado: (May 13, 2010 7:05am)

banks charge to put money into your own account the charge to take money out of your own account,they charge you for a loan at exorbitant rates,they give you a measly rate of interest on your money banked with them, they cream you if you go overdrawn,They screw you on ATM fees for your own money.The dont like or want competition(Credit Unions had a serious problem advertising or even getting clients as it was a direct affront to the banking industry)So dont be too hard on banks as they are just working to ensure the shareholders in their private business get a return on their investment, mostky at the general publics expense..

GODLIKE: (May 13, 2010 7:05am)

I haven't read this bill, but if it also bans stated income loans then what will the self employed, commissioned or contract people do for a loan? There's always been the hope they would come back

GC: (May 13, 2010 7:03am)

Hey all. The treatment of brokers the past few years, while not quite like old Jim Crow laws, is certainly similar to the boiling of lobsters. Pain starts slowly but before they know it, it's too late. Handwriting is on the wall. Don't fight the Fed. Between the licensing and testing and YSP bs, the end of this movie is obvious. Once the pipeline is cleared, one has to think about simply going the Federally chartered route and avoid the hassle.

Mortgage Girl: (May 13, 2010 7:02am)

@joecolorado - Have YOU ever worked for a bank? Obviously not. Real professional come-back there Joe.

joecolorado: (May 13, 2010 6:58am)

Banks are non discriminatory as they screw all of the people equally.

Mortgage Girl: (May 13, 2010 6:51am)

Hey Frank and Brian - I know you guys are out for the good of all (us AND the consumer). However, have you ever worked for a bank? We are federally regulated institutions and, contrary to what you may believe, can NOT just charge whatever we want and get away with it. We have to be very, very careful not to treat any customer differently than the one before them or the one that comes after. This means we have to monitor our margins and be sure we are consistent in pricing and income. We often win deals from Broker shops who are charging the borrower a much higher rate and points and much higher fees. We can almost always do the same loan for the borrower but give them lower fees and a better rate (almost 100% of the time). I think this is what they are trying to regulate - but going about it all wrong.

Golfer: (May 13, 2010 6:51am)

Hey guys does anybody from congress wath this show in the morning if not lets get someone to watch it.. Capital Hill doesn't have a clue ..

rocksteadyredhead: (May 13, 2010 6:40am)

$2 trillion dollars that they REFUSE to disclose to Congress where it went??? Did all of government have a collective bowl of STUPID for breakfast???

SBWitmer: (May 13, 2010 6:40am)

Good morning everyone!! I have created a Facebook page "mortgage professionals unite" as a place to bounce ideas, loan scenarios, and general mortgage wisdom. I miss having a go to place for a high DTI loan or low Fico score borrower. Please logon and join "mortgage professionals unite". Make it a great day !!

hoosierpal: (May 13, 2010 6:07am)

Regarding the bulk of your show (which was a good one!) didn't Barney "Rubble" Franks state, in no uncertain terms, that the goal was to drive all non-banking financial institutions out of business? Seems this would certainly qualify.

bakers: (May 13, 2010 6:05am)

Hey guys, another point to be made in all this Broker vs. Banker....NMLS, who do you think oversees the NMLS?.......ITS BANKERS!!!! And you might've wondered why bankers only have to be REGISTERED and not LICENSED!!!!!

Jersey Girl: (May 13, 2010 5:33am)

Frank & Brian: I have to agree that women have their sh** together more than men. ;) Loved that club skit...hilarious. Have a great day!

dpapiernik: (May 13, 2010 5:31am)

All these moves are directed at clearing the playing field so only large banks are left with no competition. And without competition, the banks can up the rates and charge more and have healthier profits. The big banks are telling Congress and the Senate "You see what happens to our economy when the banks are not healthy Senator, so vote for this and it is protection for the consumer. You will look good, you want to protect the consumer, don't you?" This is a whole bowl of wrong that they are feeding them and they are buying into it! When the banks win this battle, then they will march in to their loan officers and cut thier pay. Without anywhere else to originate loans where else are you going to go? Supply and demand will dictate you either change careers or take the scraps the bank is willing to pay you. Take action now!

pathompson: (May 13, 2010 5:06am)

GaryP, I am a national bank and I do get YSP. I can also receive SRP. I receive and disclose YSP on every loan we close.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 5:04am)

Does anyone know what percentage of mortgage origination goes through brokers and mortgage bankers in the US? I'm guessing that its's about 60-70%. If this amendment eliminates that capacity, who is taking to absorb that volume? Depository banks that are already at 60-90 day turntimes in their retail channels? I pointed out to my Senators that ths is basically government price fixing, creating a monopoly, anti-competitive, and it will have a huge impact on unemployment in an industry that is already hard hit.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 4:59am)

patthompsaon. I'm sorry, you are incorrect. Mortgage banks don't get YSP, they get SRP and SRP does not have to be disclosed. That was not changed by RESPA 2010. I'm a mortgage banker and there is no discosure on my GFE or HUD.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 4:56am)

I was furiously sending emails to my Senators while the Merkley amendment was being voted on. They introduced the amendment on Tues. night and voted on it Wed. AM. They basically snuck it in beforethere could be any negative comment. We need to get NAR and NAHB involved in fighting this. We all know by now that the mortgage lobby is basically powerless. Th big bank lobby's, especially the big 4, fingerprints are all over this. I'm sure they would be happy for us to just go away. I can forsee a day when $10/hr. depository bank LO's with no licensing or education and 6 month turn times will be standard. Its obvious that no one considered the "unintended consequences" of this bill. Of course there was no comment period for them to be even raised. David Stevens and the folks from HUD neet to comment on this too. I assume that they realize what this would do to the entire mortgage industry. Whatever happened to "too big to fail?"

pathompson: (May 13, 2010 4:52am)

Banks do have to disclose YSP. The 2010 GFE requires it to be listed. It shows as what they are paying for their rate.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 4:48am)

FYI, a few other jewels on this loan. Stated loans are banned (duh). And guess what? We have to make sure that borrowers can re-pay their loans (double DUH!). Where are these gyuys coming from? Do they have a clue what is going on in the industry right now? Ohhh, one more thing. The way that I read the bill, any guarantee fee above 1% on a government loan has to be included in he 3%. So depending on what FHA ends up doing on UFMIP, that could just about eliminate almost all governement loans. USDA is talking about raising their guarantee fee to 3% to make them self supporting as part of the re-authorization bill.

Phattues: (May 13, 2010 4:47am)

The laws are created by the bankers to help the bankers. Brokers are too small and don't have enough lobbying power to have voice.

GaryP: (May 13, 2010 4:42am)

Hey guys, I think you missed out on the Merkel amendement. The way that I read it, it does include SRP. It bans all LO cmpensation baed on the "terms of the loan," i.e. interest rate. Here is a clip from the actual amendment on "steering." For any consumer credit transaction secured by real property or a dwelling, no loan originator shall receive from any person and no person shall pay to a loan originator, directly or indirectly, compensation that varies based on the terms of the loan (other than the amount of the principal). So, in other words, us mortgage bankers and correspondents are in the same boat as brokers.

stantheman: (May 13, 2010 3:05am)

This is simple. The Appraisers Got The Money. Lets Blame Them. They have NO power

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 1:18am)

http://www.loansafe.org/senate-passes-merkley-klobuchar-amendment-to-protect-homeowners-from-deceptive-mortgage-practices#respond

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 1:16am)

Sorry meant Dodd bill and 5% reserve requirements...kinda tired haha

ssfranny: (May 13, 2010 1:15am)

Merkley bill doesn't limit what a person can make its worse. They voted to eliminate payments to loan originators for "steering" into a high cost loan. You can't get compensated based on the rate or other terms of the loan. This should include SRP but most correspondents make both. They should have to disclose YSP as well. Isn't SRP based on the rate or terms of the loan??? Another reason these idiots have no clue. Funny how this amendment came along and was worse language than the Boxer Amendment SA 3805. There is a strong liberal anti-business group dictating this Doss bill. Look who the co sponsors were on Merkley bill, 2 Repubs Scott Brown and Olympia Snowe. Heres your 2 GOP traitors. Also, Sen Corker proposed an amendment to make down payments all at min 5% and to take 4% reserve requirements out of bill and it got rejected 57-42. They will be going after EVERYONE with this bill bankers and brokers.