Will the Mortgage Market Ever Completely Return to ‘Normal’? via DS News

It has been seven years since the mortgage crisis first hit the country, and much has been written about “recovery” for housing and for the consumer lending market. Is that “recovery” finally upon us now?

According to a study released by TransUnion on Wednesday, yes, the consumer lending market will experience a full recovery from both the mortgage crisis and the subsequent Great Recession by the end of 2016.

More here @ DSNews.com

TransUnion’s 2016 Forecast Expects Consumer Credit Markets to Complete Recovery

FRB: Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey: January 2014

The October 2014 Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices addressed changes in the standards and terms on, and demand for, bank loans to businesses and households over the past three months. This summary discusses the responses from 76 domestic banks and 22 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks.

Questions on commercial real estate lending. A modest net fraction of banks reported that they had eased standards on construction and land development loans, while standards for loans secured by nonfarm nonresidential structures and multifamily residential properties remained about unchanged. Moderate net fractions of banks indicated that they had experienced stronger demand for all three subcategories of CRE loans. On balance, foreign banks also reported having eased lending standards on CRE loans and having seen stronger demand for such loans over the past three months.

Questions on residential real estate lending. A moderate net fraction of large banks reported that they had eased standards on prime residential mortgages over the past three months. Smaller banks reported that standards for prime residential mortgages were about unchanged on net. Reported changes in demand for mortgage loans were mixed. On net, although large banks reported that demand for prime mortgages had weakened, smaller banks experienced increases. However, demand for nontraditional mortgages was weaker, on net, across both bank size groups. Few banks reported having changed their standards on home-equity lines of credit, and respondents indicated that they had experienced little change in demand for such loans on net.

Calculated Risk: Update on FHA Mortgage Insurance Premium (MIP) Reduction

Calculated Risk: Update on FHA Mortgage Insurance Premium (MIP) Reduction.

Lenders can cancel loans in process so borrowers can obtain lower annual MIP. As Swanson notes, there will probably be a surge in loans starting January 26th (all the canceled loans, and an increase in refinance activity).

Read more at http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2015/01/update-on-fha-mortgage-insurance.html#ik3EP4Vc2pKSF12B.99″

No-Cost Mortgages – Mortgage Professor

A no-cost mortgage (NCM) is one on which all lender fees are waived, and (subject to the possible exceptions described below) other fees are paid by the lender. The quid pro quo is a relatively high interest rate, which makes the NCM costly for borrowers who expect to have their mortgage a long time. But if the borrower has limited cash, avoiding an upfront cash drain may be much more compelling than the higher interest cost spread over many years.

No-cost mortgages have one feature that I like a lot. Because lenders offering NCMs pay for services obtained from third-parties, such as title companies and appraisers, they have an incentive to find the service providers offering the lowest price. When borrowers pay for these services, which is most of the time, lenders generally accept high prices that make the service providers beholden to them.

The relative simplicity of a mortgage with only one price dimension is also attractive. In principle, it should make price-shopping much easier. Unfortunately, ambiguity about which costs are covered and which aren’t can nullify this benefit.

via No-Cost Mortgages – Mortgage Professor.

#FannieMae saves homes and pays off their loans.

What if you fell behind on your mortgage? Then by taking out a loan you were able to save your house and the lender made a profit off the loan. THEN, they came and took your home ANYWAY!

Why are we closing Fannie Mae, to help Banks, again. Housing needs the government to back residential loans. We have this faulting thinking about government agencies, “if it’s broke close and start another agency from the ground up.” Or, let businesses, in this case BANKS (hmm), control and regulate themselves and the industry. That sounds like what we’ve just been through – liberal banking, government intervention, start all over from the beginning.

Not only has Fannie Mae done its job, it’s paid it’s loan off with interest. The government MADE money. As was the case with the Auto industry. Let’s fix what’s broken, we’ve wasted enough time and money.