Due to the bad economy, more and more homeowners can not keep up with the mortgage loan payments. If you are experiencing this hardship, you can get a quick relief from the loan modification bailout program. This program can help save your home from foreclosure.

Solid, ultra low interest rate jumbo mortgage loans are being actively funded by remembering the lending philosophy we relied on before the risk could be passed onto some unsuspecting pension fund via a CDO created by a trader at a Wall St Bank. With trillions in mortgage loan losses across the nation, major changes were needed. Regulatory reform passed Congress last week, but it wasn’t hard for the jumbo mortgage market to fix our own problems.

Normalcy has returned. The jumbo loan environment has settled into a prove it, we double verify it, and we fund it environment for well qualified borrowers. The recent national statistics show about 14% loans with a principal balance of 1m+ are at least 60 days late. This is up sharply in the last six months from the 9.78% figure that we ended 2009. Hopefully these default figures will flatten out and fall as the better jumbo loans of 09-10 perform much better than the loans closed in 04-08.

Against this backdrop jumbo loans are being funded only on a portfolio basis (Wall ST jumbo loan packaging is dead) to solid clients under the philosophy that the borrower and the amount of equity in the property should have an ample margin for the known/unknown risks a borrower/lender may face down the road. With regulators, taxpayers, shareholders and all stakeholders demanding sound lending the industry has delivered. I believe this only benefits the luxury market although it pushes out the marginal borrower and may result in some property value declines as the available buyers have thinned out a bit.

Sound lending has returned and borrowers are being ‘rewarded’ for their financial strength and prudence. Remember it’s a ‘prove it’ to us world now.

First and foremost, lenders are pulling copies of your tax returns directly from Uncle Sam. The idea here is to make sure that you haven’t altered the copy of your last two years’ tax returns that you provided when you signed your loan application. Lenders want to know if you might have exaggerated how much you earned.

Lenders also are going to great lengths to verify employment and liquid assets. We are seeking confirmation in writing from your H.R. department about what you earn, your position and how long you’ve worked there.

It’s the same for your bank or brokerage accounts. Rather than being satisfied solely with the copies of the statements you provided, lenders are going directly to your financial services company to secure another set of those statements to make sure the numbers line up or that you just lost 200k betting that the latest iPhone signal problem would crush Apple’s stock price.

Lenders are no longer taking the appraiser’s word for how much the property you want to buy or refinance is worth, either. Now, we are employing automated valuation models as well as an additional appraisal from a separate vendor to be certain the value estimate is on the money. This is especially true in highly distress markets or for very unique custom homes. After all, the bank is ‘buying’ the home and the borrower is signing to pay it back over 15-30 years.

Next in the line of close scrutiny is your credit score, but not just the score pulled when you applied for the loan. Now, our industry is pulling a second score shortly before closing to make sure that you haven’t taken out a luxury car lease/loan, bought a houseful of furniture on credit or done something else that might change your ability to make your house payments.

Having passed all these double checks, a well qualified client with 20%+ equity, a 740 FICO or better, borrowing $1m on a primary residence could lock in the following jumbo loan rates in the majority of states:

5/1 ARM 3.625%
7/1 ARM 4.50%
10/1 ARM 4.90%
15Y Fixed 4.50%
30Y Fixed 5.125%

With a bit more equity and a higher FICO score these jumbo loan rates are even lower. I think people need to strongly consider locking in the lowest fixed jumbo mortgage rates we have ever seen. Most client’s refinancing are saving 1-2 thousand dollars a month because they are dropping their interest rates over 1%. The majority of jumbo mortgage loans funded over the last quarter were 30Y fixed. Maybe running with the herd is right once in awhile. The latest chart should really demonstrate how much money is on sale for SOLID borrowers.

And above all please get a jumbo loan that makes sense for your short and long term financial plans. As always, have a prosperous day.

Mortgage Insider dishes it straight on housing and the mortgage market.

BTW, look at the Blue Moon Tonight. They only occur once every 19 years.

Below is from Dr. Oz via www.huffingtonpost.com:

Mehmet Oz, M.D.

Vice-Chair and Professor of Surgery at Columbia University, author, radio and TV show host

?Here are my suggested resolutions for 2010: Have more sex, get more sleep, and never let yourself feel hungry. Sound hedonistic? These three resolutions will save and lengthen your life, and they are very realistic and noble goals. New Year’s resolutions were never so much fun — it’s all in how you see it. Let’s think about it for a minute, shall we?

Like millions of others, you are waking up on New Year’s Day with the best of intentions. It’s a new year and time for a clean slate. Resolutions come in all shapes and sizes and they are as varied as the people who make them. I get very excited about New Year’s resolutions — not because I have a long list, but because New Year’s is a teachable moment. Everyone is looking themselves in the mirror in a rare, private moment of honest reflection. I was being purposely provocative instructing you to have more sex in 2010, but the act of making a resolution isn’t flippant or funny — it’s actually sacred. Unlike any other time of year, I can have a heart-to-heart with my family, my friends, my patients, my audience and most importantly myself (I am right there with you!) and decide what needs to be changed for the better. Like all of you, I make a list. And like all of you, each year I fail at a considerable portion of that list. But over time I have seen the success column grow longer than the failure column. You can too.

I believe resolutions are so important that I devoted my show for the entire first week of January to creatively incite a revolution in your resolutions. The first salvo is that changing your life doesn’t have to be a painful effort leaving us demoralized and depressed. Food, sex and sleep, three critical components of a healthy life, are a solid starting point for any resolution list.

The most common intention that we wake up with on January first is to lose weight. That’s appropriate since a whopping 60 percent of us need to! What if I told you the best way to lose weight is to make sure you never let yourself feel hungry? Sound counterintuitive? It is. But you have a hormone named Ghrelin made in our intestines and stomach that lets you know when it’s time to eat. It’s the nasty hormone that makes your stomach growl and overwhelms your willpower. If Grhelin starts growling, you are going to overeat and likely eat the wrong foods. You have to always keep your Grhelin levels in check by lightly snacking on nuts, apples or other sensible foods. Keep the lion in its cage by feeling full and you will lose weight because you don’t have an uncontrolled urge to overeat.

On our January fourth episode we’ll show you exactly how to lose weight, but we will also caution you that your waist size is the better indicator of your health. If you aren’t sure whether you need to lose waist, here is an equation you can use: your waist must be half your height or roughly between 32.5 and 37 inches for a woman and between 35 and 40 inches for a man. For years I bet you have focused on the scale. Now, focus on the waist size – it’s all in how you see it.

Now, instead of seeing your New Year’s resolution as a diet, what if we broke it down into specific steps and played with the language a little bit? For instance: “My New Year’s Resolution is to never have anything in the house with these five items listed as the first five ingredients on the label: simple sugars, syrups, enriched flours, saturated fats, or trans fats. If you make your resolution about dumping out the bad food and bringing in the great substitutions that we show you on January fourth, you’ll feel you have a bit more control of the situation and you’ll forget the D word (Diet! Ahem.) See it differently and it will feel different. For a list of tips, recipes and a 14-day-plan visit?www.doctoroz.com.

Still want to hear about that resolution to have more sex? Let’s save the best for last and talk about sleep first. I want you to go into your bathroom at home, shut the door and have a conversation with yourself in the mirror. Take a good look at that person staring back at you and tell her that she is worth nurturing with seven hours of sleep per night. I am adamant about this. Sleep is one of the most important and most overlooked health drivers. You simply must give your brain time to re-organize its files and your tissues time to repair themselves. I do understand the pressures of parenting and working – I have four children and I have worked many long hours in the hospital over the years. I empathize with the stress life brings — and I feel infinitely more prepared to handle it when I am well rested. I have more energy. I think more clearly, my mood is better and my appetite stays in check. The benefits of sleep are too numerous to list and it comes down to a question you’ve heard me ask before: Are you willing to admit that your life is so far out of your control that you can’t get enough sleep each night? If, after proper planning, you aren’t able to fall asleep it could signify a serious illness that mandates a consult with your doctor. I want you to stop seeing sleep as a luxury where you can cut corners. It’s all in how you see it — so see it differently and put it on your resolution list!

Now for the other resolution that involves your bedroom: sex. Stop seeing sex as something that is only for younger people or budding romances or those with enough time. I really need you to see this one differently because it’s a hugely important part of being healthy. I want you to make a New Year’s resolution that you will have sex several times a week with your partner. Believe it or not, that’s actually a lot of work for many people out there. It’s a lot of work because right now we are in the middle of a sexual famine in America. We simply aren’t having enough. Why is this an issue? Because a loving, healthy sexual relationship is an indicator that things are great all over, and a lack of one means the opposite. Sex is an indicator of many things, and if you aren’t having it at least once (and ideally more) a week for 30 minutes, it could mean something is dangerously wrong. Physical issues that get in the way of a healthy sex life are depression, heart disease, diabetes, and obesity to name a few. All of these can pose grave threats to your overall health. If none of these factors apply to you but you and your mate still aren’t wearing out the lock on the bedroom door then it’s time to examine your relationship. Sex is an expression of intimacy and is often a valuable indicator of the health of your relationship. Looking at the reasons you are struck by a sexual famine can be painful, but they will be well worth it, and may just save your life or relationship. So make a resolution to have more sex, and embrace all the obstacles along the way – the outcome will be blissful.

So join me in the resolution revolution – I bet you didn’t think that food, sleep and sex could make up such a great resolution list. It’s up to you in what order you want to start, and it probably depends what time of day you read this. Tune in the week of January 4 and we can go over each one in more detail. Happy New Year. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a resolution to keep, and I am not saying which one….

article link here.?

Mortgage Insider dishes it straight on housing and the mortgage market.

Standard and Poor’s released their report on various RMBS(jumbo mortage loan pools), we read the report and wanted to highlight a few of the more interesting points related to jumbo loans.

The percentage of delinquent prime jumbo RMBS transactions issued in 2004 climbed to 7.97% in November, up from 7.8% in October. Delinquencies in the 2005 vintage increased to 10.65% in November from 10.2%. For the 2006 vintage, delinquencies grew to 15.25% from 14.67%, and for the 2007 vintage, delinquencies increased to 14.74% in November from 14.24%, according to the report

Unfortunately, for the banks(read:US GOV) and investors that bought these loan vintages things are not ageing well at all. Reminds me of the bidder who bought decades old Rothschild wine only to have purchased the world’s most expensive vinegar. Book was “The Billionaire’s Vinegar”

Now who are the crazy lenders/banks that did these loans. Surely, it was those pesky subprime guys. Not at all my friend:

The 2007 vintage showed notably worse deterioration after 24 months of “seasoning,” according to the report. After the 24 months, delinquencies totaled 10.65% of the current aggregate pool balance compared to 2005’s 1.53% and 2006’s 4.57% delinquency rate after the same amount of seasoning. But 2006 showed a poorer performance than its prior vintages. After 36 months of seasoning, delinquencies accounted for 11.2% of the current aggregate pool balance, a 185% increase over the 2005 vintage.
Delinquencies and losses varied among the issuers and securitizers of prime jumbo RMBS transactions. For the 2005 vintage, the percentage of delinquent transactions reached 18.68% for?Countrywide, the most among issuers. For 2006, the leader was?Washington Mutual’s 22.2%, and for 2007,?Bear Stearns’ 20.25% led all issuers.

Remember the overall delinquency rate for jumbo mortgages of all vintages is running about 12%. Meaning at least 12% of loans are at least 60 days late. Realtors…. start calling the REO department of BOA, CHASE, etc as they now hold these loans that are surely to be nice foreclosure listings/deals in 6-9 months.

If you are so inclined to read the wonkish research of S&P it can be found here.

Mortgage Insider dishes it straight on housing and the mortgage market.

There are many alternatives available in the market in terms of applying for a financial loan. There are a few simple requirements which a customer desires with regards to going for a mortgage loan. More common desires are usually that the interest levels of the mortgage loan needs to be affordable.

We are impressed with Matt’s command of the subject from a financial, political and overall style of social commentary. We first noticed his work for Rollingstone.?

Without further introduction we have below

Fannie, Freddie, and the New Red and Blue

It has become conventional wisdom, perhaps even cliche, to pin the origins of the credit crisis on the big banks or, AIG or even the practice of financial modeling. Certainly, these actors have received the most play in the media, and have now endured the focus of populist ire for more than a year. We now think that the analysis leading commentators to focus blame on these entities is fatally flawed.

via?Origins of an American Kleptocracy | zero hedge.

Over the Christmas holiday a nasty thing happened: Tim Geithner’s Treasury Department decided to lift the cap on aid to the Government-Sponsored Entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, apparently in response to Obama administration fears that the two agencies would become insolvent. The cap was raised from $200 billion on each and government backstopping of the mortgage market will apparently now extend into infinity for at least three years, through 2012.

The move has already inspired a mini-firestorm, with several outlets delving deeply into the recent history of the GSEs and uncovering some disturbing new facts. Chief among those were an analysis of the GSEs by a former chief credit officer of Fannie named Edward Pinto, who found that Fannie and Freddie routinely mismarked subprime or Alt-A (a sort of purgatory class of nonprime risky mortgage, resting between subprime and prime) mortgages as prime. The?Wall Street Journal?explains:

In general, a subprime mortgage refers to the credit of the borrower. A FICO score of less than 660 is the dividing line between prime and subprime, but Fannie and Freddie were reporting these mortgages as prime, according to Mr. Pinto. Fannie has admitted this in a third-quarter 10-Q report in 2008.

This is a damning fact and if true certainly supports the?Journal?claim that the GSE actions were a “principal cause of the financial crisis.” But having established this, the?Journal?then goes in this direction:

Market observers, rating agencies and investors were unaware of the number of subprime and Alt-A mortgages infecting the financial system in late 2006 and early 2007. Of the 26 million subprime and Alt-A loans outstanding in 2008, 10 million were held or guaranteed by Fannie and Freddie, 5.2 million by other government agencies, and 1.4 million were on the books of the four largest U.S. banks.

Sometimes I’m amazed at the speed with which highly provocative information like this GSE business can be converted into distracting propaganda in this country. In the right hands Pinto’s analysis of the GSEs — just like the revelations in the past few years about practices at AIG, Moody’s, Countrywide, Goldman Sachs, the Fed, and, hell, let’s add the offices of Senator Chris Dodd — would have been a starting point for a deeper investigation into a financial system that is clearly a complex and intimate symbiosis of state and private corruption.

For what we’ve learned in the last few years as one scandal after another spilled onto the front pages is that the bubble economies of the last two decades were not merely monstrous Ponzi schemes that destroyed trillions in wealth while making a small handful of people rich. They were also a profound expression of the fundamentally criminal nature of our political system, in which state power/largess and the private pursuit of (mostly short-term) profit were brilliantly fused in a kind of ongoing theft scheme that sought to instant-cannibalize all the wealth America had stored up during its postwar glory, in the process keeping politicians in office and bankers in beach homes while continually moving the increasingly inevitable disaster to the future.

That is a terrible story and it is also sort of a taboo story, since we don’t really have a system of media now that is willing or even able to digest that dark and complicated truth. Instead, our media — which has always been at best an inadvertent accomplice to these messes — is basically set up to take every revelation about the underlying truth and split it down the middle, feeding half to one side of the political spectrum and one half to the other, where the actual point is then burned up in the useless smoke of a blame game.

The essentially complicit nature of the two ruling political parties was in this way covered up for decades, as the crimes of the Democrats were greedily consumed as entertainment by the Limbaugh crowd while the crimes of the Bushies became hot-selling t-shirts and bumper stickers for the?Air Americalistenership. The abiding mutual hatred the red/blue groups shared consistently prevented any kind of collective realization about the structure of the overall scheme.

What worries me is that we’re now reverting to the same old pattern with the financial crisis story. We’re starting to see fault lines develop, where one side blames the government while another side blames Wall Street for the messes of the last two decades. The side blaming the government tends to belong to the free-marketeer class and divines in safety-net purveyors like the GSEs and in the Fed’s money-printing fundamental corruptions of the capitalist ideal, while the side blaming the bankers tends to belong to the left-liberal tradition that focuses on greed and seeming absence of community conscience among the CEO class as primary corruptors of the social contract.

In the former view the government is to blame for punting on its oversight responsibilities and for corrupting the financial bloodstream with market-altering guarantees, while in the latter view the bankers are at fault for lobbying the politicians to make exactly the same moves. The antigovernment folks like to focus on the irresponsible (and typically low-income or minority) home-borrower and their political allies in Washington as chief villains, while the anti-banker crowd looks at the massive personal profits and outsized influence of the executive class and waves the?Cui bono??stick in that direction.

Both sides are right and both sides are wrong. I know that sounds like pox-on-both-their-houses pundit sophistry. But the point is that if you focus on one side and not the other, you miss the?entire?point. That’s why I get freaked out when I see an important story like this GSE thing come out, and have it be immediately accompanied by arguments that “market observers, rating agencies and investors were unaware of the number of subprime and Alt-A mortgages infecting the financial system,” as though the irresponsibility of the government agency precluded similar (and, I might add, intimately related) abuses on the private side.

I mean, really — market observers were?unaware?of the number of subprime mortgages infecting the system? Are we to understand that nobody caught on when outstanding mortgage debt?grew?by $3.7 trillion between 2003 and 2005, nearly equaling the entire value of all American real estate in the year 1990? They didn’t notice when subprime mortgages went from 3% of all mortgage lending in 1997 to 20% of the market in 2003? They didn’t notice when the volume of Alt-A loans and home equity loans surged through the early part of last decade?

Now I know that that’s not what Peter Wallison of the?Journal?is saying here; he’s saying that even if the market saw that increase in subprime loans, even those numbers were understated thanks to Fannie and Freddie’s deceptions. But the inference that the market was hoodwinked by the GSEs is absurd. It was plain to most everyone in the financial services industry that there was a bubble going on last decade, that something deeply fucked up was going on with the mortgage markets — just as it was plain to everyone in the late nineties that something was wrong with the stock markets, when companies like Theglobe.com with annual sales under $5 million could have a $5 billion stock valuation.

Everyone was involved in the mortgage scam. At the lender level the deceptions were myriad; liar’s loans, fraudulent income documentation, negative amortization loans, HELOCs, etc. The rush to get as many loans written as possible and then get those hot potatoes moved to the next sucker in the line was furious and extended from coast to coast, sinking?one lender after another?in Ponzoid debt and indictments.

Then there were the countless deceptions that emerged from the securitization process, the bad math that allowed banks like Goldman to do $474 million mortgage deals where the average equity in the home was just 0.71 percent, and sell 93% of that deal as investment grade paper.

Are we really to believe that the people who did those deals didn’t know what total crap they were selling? That the people who used CDO-squareds to magically turn BBB investments into AAA investments didn’t know how nuts that was?

There were the ratings agencies, who accepted all that bad math and slapped AAA ratings on crap mortgage-backed securities in exchange for the continued largess of the banks upon whom they were financially dependent — the same ratings agencies that later sputtered and coughed up bullshit my-dog-ate-my-homework excuses for mismarking mortgages, with the Moody’s revelation that a?computer error?caused them to misapply AAA ratings to billions’ worth of MBS being the comic low point.

Then further along in the chain you had crooks like the folks at AIG, who took advantage of the basic nonexistence of derivatives regulation to issue billions in guarantees for these mortgage investments that they had never had any intention of paying off, to say nothing of actually having the ability to do so. And of course underwriting the entire enterprise was the implicit guarantee of Alan Greenspan’s Fed, which made it known time and time again that its modus operandi was to refuse to recognize the existence of bubbles until after they blew up, at which point it would rush in and clean up the mess, bailing out all the chief actors out with easy money.

Everyone had a hand in the bubble, from the congressmen who killed regulatory initiatives to the regulators who snoozed at the wheel to the GSEs to the Fed to the banks to the ratings agencies to the lenders. I don’t think it’s really controversial to say that, but it does seem like there’s an argument brewing about what that across-the-board complicity means.

My own personal feeling is that our recent bubbles weren’t much different than pyramid scams and lotteries; they’re the handiwork of an essentially regressive and deeply cynical political organization that systematically hoovers up taxes and investment money mainly from middle-class suckers, where it eventually gets eaten in short-term cashouts and mostly blown on sports cars and tropical vacations and eye jobs for the trophy wives of Wall Street executives. Crackonomics: take literally all the spare money from four square city blocks and turn it into one tricked-out Escalade.

For me the basic dynamic of the mortgage bubble is some Ivy League dickwad hawking a billion dollars of securitized subprime mortgages to a pension fund, and then Hobie-sailing off into the sunset with a bonus after they all blow up. Of course my seeing it that way might have a lot to do with my own personal psychological prejudices, and I get that some other person with different hangups might choose to focus on Barney Frank deciding to “roll the dice on home ownership” with the GSEs.

But what I don’t see is how anybody can say that all of this happened because Fannie and Freddie rigged the game to get Mexicans in homes, and then the banks and the ratings agencies just reacted organically to the corrupted market and helped the bubble along through no fault of their own. That’s just another (albeit more convincing) version of the early attempt to pin the disaster on the Community Reinvestment Act, which in turn is just another way of playing the red-blue blame game, which in turn is missing the point.

This GSE story is a big one, but if it gets used as a path back to a “The Market Reacted Rationally” version of history, we’re screwed. It has to be looked at as an important part of a diabolical whole, a symbiotic scheme in which the banks and the state were irreversibly intertwined in an enterprise that on both sides was never about market economics, but crime. Because otherwise… the diversionary notion that one side or the other is wholly to blame is part of what makes the whole scam possible.

p.s. Just to get this out of the way, I love Zero Hedge, and Marla Singer has been really nice to me personally. I just don’t completely agree with this particular thing. I don’t see any reason why focusing blame on the banks and the ratings agencies and AIG was “fundamentally flawed,” because, well, shit, they?were?to blame. The fact that Fannie and Freddie now get to jump in the pigpen with them doesn’t change that for me.

I think in the end what we’re going to find is that all the relevant actors had their own motivations for getting involved in the bubble. Two and now three presidential administrations let the Fed overheat the economy for political reasons that should be obvious. Alan Greenspan, hell, he did it because he loves seeing himself on magazine covers and wanted to keep getting invited to the right Manhattan parties. There were congressmen that converted the expansion of cheap credit into low-income votes. The bankers and lenders went along because the system of compensation on Wall Street is fucked and rewards short-term thinking while ignoring long-term consequences.

To me all of these people were equally guilty of making bad decisions to benefit themselves in the here and now at the expense of the whole in the future. When it comes to bubbles, It Takes a Village, and blaming the whole mess on the “socialist” aims of a pair of government agencies seems off base — particularly since the Randian protocapitalists running the banks benefited every bit as much from this socialism as actual homeowners, and perhaps even more, when one considers that homeowners get foreclosed upon, while bonuses are forever.

?Source.
?Be a citizen and comment.

Mortgage Insider dishes it straight on housing and the mortgage market.