A synopsis of the bill's mortgage provisions:
Mortgage Reform and Handling the Mortgage Crisis
- Establishes a federal standard for home loans, and requires that institutions ensure that borrowers can repay their loans
- Prohibits financial incentives for subprime loans that encourage lenders to steer borrowers towards more expensive loans
- Requires lenders to disclose the maximum amount a consumer might may on a variable rate mortgage
- Establishes the Office of Housing Counseling (within HUD)
- Provides $1 billion to states and localities to rehabilitate, redevelop, and reuse abandoned and foreclosed properties
- Provides $1 billion to help cover mortgage payments for unemployed homeowners with reasonable prospects for reemployment
- Authorizes a HUD program to help provide forecloseure legal assistance to low- and moderate-income homeowners and tenants
Your National Association of REALTORS fought very hard on your behalf for this provision. Following is how NAR influenced the bill (Your RPAC dollars at Work!):
MORTGAGES
Risk Retention – Qualified Mortgage Exemption- At NAR’s request, Congress included a qualified mortgage exemption from potentially costly--for both lenders and consumers--risk retention requirements.
- Congress gave the regulator flexibility in determining what a qualified mortgage is, however the mortgage must meet the standards laid out in the predatory lending portion of the bill. These standards include underwriting based upon full documentation, ability to repay, and limitations on fees among other things.
- NAR will work with the regulators to ensure that the regulatory framework maximizes access to affordable mortgages for consumers.
- A safe harbor from the “ability to repay” requirement was created, which limits the total points and fees collected by lenders and their affiliates to 3. This provision was included over NAR’s strenuous and repeated objection.
- However, we believe there is some regulatory flexibility in this provision including flexibility for smaller loan amounts with “smaller” being left undefined.
- NAR will work diligently to ensure this provision is interpreted in a manner consistent with the best interests of real estate professionals, their lender partners, and their clients and customers.
- NAR was successful in getting the legislation amended to allow an individual to conduct three seller financed transactions in a 12 month period without being subject to the complicated mortgage rules in the new Act. NAR has asked HUD to adopt a similar approach to exempt seller financing, up to three transactions in a 12 month period, from loan originator licensing requirements under the S.A.F.E. Act.
To learn about the other provisions in the bill where NAR advocated on behalf of the industry and the consumer click here.
To read about the bill itself click here
"OpenCongress is a free, open-source, not-for-profit, and non-partisan web resource with a mission to make Congress more transparent and to encourage civic engagement. OpenCongress is a joint project of two 501c3 non-profit organizations, the Participatory Politics Foundation and the Sunlight Foundation. To read more about our mission, our open data sources, and how Congress works, see About OpenCongress. To read more about how individuals and organizations can use this site to find and share valuable info about their political interests, see How To Use OpenCongress."
1 comment:
New regulations introduced by the Frank-Dodd act have put new limits on seller financing at a time when the real estate market can hardly handle any more shocks. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (PL-111-203), which was signed into law July 21, 2010, allows only up to three residential carrybacks within any 12 month period. (Hint: this is not much.) Sellers who wish to carry back a fourth note must obtain a mortgage originator’s licence in order to be able to do so legally.
The Dodd-Frank act has amended the S.A.F.E. act by increasing the number of allowable nonlicensed owner carrybacks from one to three per year (which was the prior HUD interpretation). But why limit them to three and not to five or seven or not limit them at all is anyone’s guess.
http://realpropertycheck.com/latest/2010/10/frank-dodd-limits-on-seller-financing-only-three-allowable-carrybacks-in-residential-property/
Post a Comment