Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/apr/18/joe-biden-hike-payments-good-credit-homebuyers-sub/

Homebuyers with good credit scores will soon encounter a costly surprise: a new federal rule forcing them to pay higher mortgage rates and fees to subsidize people with riskier credit ratings who are also in the market to buy houses.

The fee changes will go into effect May 1 as part of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s push for affordable housing, and they will affect mortgages originating at private banks across the country. The federally backed home mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will enact the loan-level price adjustments, or LLPAs.

Mortgage industry specialists say homebuyers with credit scores of 680 or higher will pay, for example, about $40 per month more on a home loan of $400,000. Homebuyers who make down payments of 15% to 20% will get socked with the largest fees.

The new fees will apply only to Americans buying houses or refinancing after May 1.

Is this true?

Hope it’s not true.

Anonymous wrote:Putting people in houses they cannot afford is generally a bad idea. People who have bad credit typically have bad credit for a reason and should pay the entire premium reprinting their risk profile to the lender.

That's how we had 2008 housing crash, giving loans to people who lack financial discipline is a risky business.

It is true



This from the Fannie Mae. Oh and one more thing, this was NOT voted on. It passed in secret. ILLEGAL AS HELL. It's straight up theft.
Ain't our government grand helping people that can't afford a house and using good credit "folks" to balance everything out ?
I remember buying our house and going through hard hoops including an FBI check, three credit checks and having to put up 35% as a down payment. That was what relocation rules demanded. Then it was decided we needed to add $300 to the mortgage monthly for some stupid shit because the powers that be said so. Still to this day I can't remember what that was for but it was tacked on for the life of the mortgage. Not insurance. It happened after we moved in. I think it was a property assessment tax. REassessment. A racket/scam/theft/mafia type shit. They bleed you and offer a bandaid to others that aren't bleeding.

I am so glad we paid off our house when we could. Now any thoughts of moving are not going to happen. The government made that decision for us. BUT if I see homes getting rented out, we are leaving. Nothing brings down home value like a bunch of rental homes where they shouldn't be.

Anonymous wrote:I’m laughing at the Lending Tree ad at the bottom of this thread.

That's funny.

I’m laughing at the Lending Tree ad at the bottom of this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unacceptable.

I guess I will have to tank my own credit score now.

The highest credit scores still get the lowest fees. If you have a 25% downpayment, your fee is 10x higher with 660 FICO (225bps) compared to someone with a 740 FICO (25bps).

Nothing wrong with the proposal, aside from rightwing outrage media machine manipulating your emotions.

You are totally missing the point AND trying to spin this. Do you think people are stupid here? Why should someone with good credit have to pay for those without good credit and then also have to complete with them to purchase possibly the same house?!

SMH at YOU trying to manipulate this!

It's more that people with good-but-not-great credit scores, and who borrow very high amounts for their purchases, pay slightly higher fees than they would otherwise pay so that people with low credit scores pay slightly lower fees than they would otherwise pay. If this affects you, and you think that lowering your credit will help you, you are an idiot and deserve to pay the penalties.

That's a total lie. It's anyone over a credit score of 680.

Please read up on the program. You don't know what you're talking about.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.newsweek.com/biden-raises-costs-homebuyers-good-credit-help-risky-borrowers-1795700

I’m black with great credit. Will this screw me over? Even though it says this is somehow helping racial disparities?

Anonymous wrote:Putting people in houses they cannot afford is generally a bad idea. People who have bad credit typically have bad credit for a reason and should pay the entire premium reprinting their risk profile to the lender.

*Representing not reprinting.

Also the ones with the good scores will just find an alternative way to finance to avoid this- ie private lending or cash.

Putting people in houses they cannot afford is generally a bad idea. People who have bad credit typically have bad credit for a reason and should pay the entire premium reprinting their risk profile to the lender.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Communism

more like socialism

Bingo!

Anonymous wrote:How are people with bad credit scores buying houses? My 21 year old DD has had a 770+ credit score on her own CC since she turned 18. I don’t mean that she’s an authorized user on our card. Pays for a lot of her life expenses at this point on her own. Pretty sure she’s not in a position to buy a house anytime soon.

They may have business related bankruptcies, but otherwise have a lot of cash and assets. Happens all the time with entrepreneurs who show little income on tax forms, but have lots of assets. They often have a very tough time financing a house.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I... don't understand the policy reason behind this?

I had mediocre credit (600 score) when we bought our current home and we wound up with a higher rate as a result. We also only had 10% down, which also impacted our rate. But I've worked incredibly hard for almost 15 years to improve my credit and sock away money, plus we've never missed a mortgage payment (including all our PMI payments since we were putting down less than 20%), and you're saying that because I now have a 800+ credit score and have worked diligently for two decades in order to save money and build equity, I now have to pay more money in order to help people who are now in the exact same situation I was in 15 years ago?

I don't understand. I did exactly what I was told I needed to do. Why am I the one being asked to help?

You've nailed. Just like those who diligently paid off their student loan debt.
(I took on a second job on nights and weekends to help supplement those early year paychecks to cover all my expenses, including at 10-year student loan for undergraduate studies at a state school).

This^. We deprived ourselves and our kids of luxuries so we can save for their colleges, once who didn't got aid or loan forgiveness. These measures should be done in a way to be fair to all.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/apr/18/joe-biden-hike-payments-good-credit-homebuyers-sub/

Homebuyers with good credit scores will soon encounter a costly surprise: a new federal rule forcing them to pay higher mortgage rates and fees to subsidize people with riskier credit ratings who are also in the market to buy houses.

The fee changes will go into effect May 1 as part of the Federal Housing Finance Agency’s push for affordable housing, and they will affect mortgages originating at private banks across the country. The federally backed home mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will enact the loan-level price adjustments, or LLPAs.

Mortgage industry specialists say homebuyers with credit scores of 680 or higher will pay, for example, about $40 per month more on a home loan of $400,000. Homebuyers who make down payments of 15% to 20% will get socked with the largest fees.

The new fees will apply only to Americans buying houses or refinancing after May 1.

Is this true?

If it is, democrats would never win another election.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is unacceptable.

I guess I will have to tank my own credit score now.

The highest credit scores still get the lowest fees. If you have a 25% downpayment, your fee is 10x higher with 660 FICO (225bps) compared to someone with a 740 FICO (25bps).

Nothing wrong with the proposal, aside from rightwing outrage media machine manipulating your emotions.

You are totally missing the point AND trying to spin this. Do you think people are stupid here? Why should someone with good credit have to pay for those without good credit and then also have to complete with them to purchase possibly the same house?!

SMH at YOU trying to manipulate this!

It's more that people with good-but-not-great credit scores, and who borrow very high amounts for their purchases, pay slightly higher fees than they would otherwise pay so that people with low credit scores pay slightly lower fees than they would otherwise pay. If this affects you, and you think that lowering your credit will help you, you are an idiot and deserve to pay the penalties.

That's a total lie. It's anyone over a credit score of 680.