http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en 테스트 버전 0.2 (2004-04-26) ko http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=37

DES MOINES, Iowa, Feb. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, the nation's leading retail originator of reverse mortgages, will trim the margin it charges on a government-insured reverse mortgage product and begin offering the federally insured, variable Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) product using a lower margin for loan applications taken on or after Feb. 5, 2007.

In addition, effective Feb. 6, 2007, seniors who have already applied for a reverse mortgage with Wells Fargo will be offered the lower margin. This change will save borrowers money over the life of their loan and give them greater access to their home equity.

"Reverse mortgages are about making the most of the equity that seniors have built into their homes," said Jeff Taylor, vice president of Wells Fargo's Senior Products Group. "By lowering the margin, we are lowering the interest rate charged on a reverse mortgage. This means more seniors will be able to use the reverse mortgage program, giving them the ability to turn their home equity into additional retirement funds."

Wells Fargo is cutting the margin on its variable HECM by 50 basis points.

It's a move that will give seniors greater access to their home equity. As an example, a senior who is 70 years old with a home valued at $300,000 could get approximately $14,100 more in borrowing capacity than with a higher-margin HECM loan.

The HECM reverse mortgage is the most popular reverse mortgage in America today. Through the program, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development insures mortgages that allow homeowners age 62 or over to convert their home equity into tax-free income. The program has insured over 200,000 reverse mortgages since 1990.

With a HECM, a senior homeowner receives proceeds from a lender -- either in a lump sum, regular monthly payments, a line of credit or a combination of these. When the house is sold, or the last remaining borrower dies or moves out of the home, the loan amount plus the accrued interest is repaid. The borrower can't owe more than the value of the home.

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage helped senior Americans secure nearly one-third of all reverse mortgages originated in 2006.

For information, contact Wells Fargo Home Mortgage at (877) 937-9357 or find us on the Web at http://www.wellsfargo.com/reverse .

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage is the nation's No. 1 retail mortgage lender and a leading servicer of home mortgages.* As a division of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., it has a local presence in more than 2,500 mortgage stores and bank branches, plus the capabilities to serve the home financing needs of customers nationwide through its call centers, Internet presence and wholesale lending operations. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage services loans for 7.6 million servicing customers.]]> 평상심 Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:39:55 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=36 BLOOM


Feb. 5, 2007. 10:33 AM EST
A new offer is on the table from Vornado after last weeks rejection by the EOP's board members.]]> 평상심 Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:38:42 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=35


The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) recently made a preemptive strike against what it obviously perceives as the next threat against the mortgage industry - "suitability standards."

It is suggested by some consumer advocacy organizations that such standards should be imposed on the lending industry to insure that borrowers are obtaining mortgages that are in their best financial interests.

The driving force behind any demands that may be made by consumer groups is, of course, the proliferation of "exotic" mortgages such as interest only loans and option arms of which we have written frequently. Consumer groups are apparently seeking regulatory oversight of underwriting standards to insure that borrowers are only given mortgages suitable to their financial situation.




Striking back, probably even before most people, even industry insiders have even heard of the suitability issue, the MBA published a report titled Suitability - Don't Turn Back the Clock on Fair Lending and Homeownership Gains which argues that the mortgage industry should not be subject to restraints similar to those that have long been in place for securities dealers.

The association points to the increased availability and affordability of mortgages and homeownership and states that the greatest gains have been among minority and first-time homeowners. The report claims that these opportunities have been made possible because of fair lending and anti-redlining laws such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the Community Reinvestment Act.

Thus, the Association states the debate is no longer about whether credit is sufficiently accessible to borrowers but whether loans are in specific consumers' best interests. "While a specific proposal for a suitability standard...is not yet fully formed, a variety of approaches have been suggested." MBA maintains that most of these approaches would require more "rigid, prescribed underwriting standards, a duty of fair dealing at the inception of the loan, a subjective evaluation by the lender whether a product is best suited for that borrower, the establishment of a fiduciary obligation by the lender to the borrower, and a private right of action to redress any violations." There is also a suggestion, the association states, that a regulator be empowered to specifically outline such requirements.

Rigid underwriting standards would result in some borrowers being denied credit. If a subjective suitability standard is put in place a lender might find himself caught between a suitability standard and longstanding requirements of equal credit laws and/or community investment rules. Even if the lender complies with all of these, he could be accused by a borrower who later gets into trouble with his loan of failing to follow suitability standards.

The risks of these competing requirements may force lenders to leave the business or protect themselves against increased liability; this could impact competition, ration credit, and increase prices.

The report asserts that product choices are not the primary cause of defaults, instead it is "life events" such a job loss, a medical crises or family problems that most often lead to bankruptcy and/or foreclosure.

The report reviews various Securities and Exchange Commission rules and regulations which impute a suitability requirement to securities market professionals. The requirement results from an agency theory that such professionals act as agents on behalf of the customer and thus should be "expected to only recommend securities that are suitable to the customer's financial means and investing goals." Brokerage houses typically do this by requiring new customers to submit financial statements and indicate their investment goals. While this usually seems to be a pro forma adherence to the regs, some companies do refuse to allow certain customers to invest in commodities, options, or other more risky markets.

MBA argues that mortgage lending is not analogous to the securities industry, primarily because securities dealers function as intermediaries between the customer and the market and represent themselves as investment consultants. Mortgage lenders conversely represent the investors and companies which provide mortgage funds and thus do not have a fiduciary responsibility to borrowers; in fact they probably cannot have a fiduciary relationship with a borrower because one already exists with their investors. Also, investors in securities usually develop a long-term relationship with their investment advisors but borrowers tend to shop among many brokers for the best deal. MBA also speculates that the suitability standard may not be working well in the securities industries as evidenced by the "magnitude of claims brought against brokers based upon suitability."

Instead of suitability requirements, the report states that it is to the benefit of all parties, consumers, advocacy organizations, regulators, and mortgage lenders that borrowers obtain loans they can repay but that the goal should be to make the lending process understandable and abuse-free and that Congress should resist pressure to enact a suitability standards that would remove the current "arms length" model in the mortgage industry. Congress, federal regulators, industry and consumer organizations should work to "create a uniform national lending standard, improving financial literacy and licensing, simplifying the mortgage process, streamlining disclosures, and establishing clear, objective restrictions to step lending abuses without destroying the market's ability to innovate for the benefit of consumers."]]> 평상심 Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:37:38 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=34
Mortgage giant Freddie Mac reported Thursday that 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages averaged 6.34 percent this week, up from 6.25 percent last week. It was the fourth consecutive weekly increase and pushed these mortgages to the highest level since they were at 6.40 percent the week of Oct. 26.

Analysts said financial markets were reacting to a string of better-than-expected economic reports showing the economy was rebounding at the end of 2006.]]> 평상심 Sat, 03 Feb 2007 09:03:47 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=33

With one exception, fixed rate mortgages (FRMs) increased during the week ended January 25 according to both Freddie Mac and the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) but both organization's surveys recorded a decline in rates for adjustable (ARM) products. This, however slightly, changed the yield curve in favor of ARMS which have been fairly unpalatable to consumers over the last year.

Freddie Mac's Primary Mortgage Market Survey for the week ended January 25 indicated that the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.25 percent compared to 6.23 the previous week. Points remained unchanged at 0.4. One year ago the rate for the 30-year ARM was 6.12 percent.


The 15-year FRM was the only product that remained unchanged from the previous week when it averaged 5.98 percent and 0.4 point. This figure was 28 basis points higher than the same week in 2006.

The five-year Treasury-indexed hybrid ARM dropped four basis points to 6.0 percent and fees and points also went down from 0.5 to 0.4. One year ago the 5/1 hybrid averaged 5.75 percent. This decline in the 5/1 narrows the gap but still means that its rate remains above the 15 year ARM; an inverted yield curve that has not changed much in the last year.

The one-year Treasury indexed adjustable rate mortgage dropped from 5.51 percent to 5.49 percent with fees and points unchanged. At this time last year the one-year carried an average rate of 5.20 percent.

According to Frank Nothaft, Freddie Mac vice president and chief economist, "Mortgage rates were mixed this week on news that December's leading indicators signaled steady growth in the coming months. In the housing market, December's new construction came in stronger than expected despite a decline in one-unit residence starts. Over the coming week, a flurry of reports will provide further readings on the strength of the housing market and economic conditions. Primary among these will be the first estimate of fourth quarter GDP growth, and we could see interest rates change in response."

(The Federal Reserve, meeting on January 31, was expected to leave federal rates unchanged.)

MBA's report on its Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ended January 26 essentially mirrored the Freddie Mac data although changes, in most cases were more dramatic. 30-year FRMs increased to 6.29 from 6.22 percent with points, including the origination fee, increasing to 1.07 from 0.97.

15-year fixed-rate mortgages increased to 6.01 percent from 5.93 percent; points increased to 1.07 from 1.02, and one-year ARMs decreased to 5.86 percent from 5.91, with points increasing to 0.83 from 0.81.

Mortgage application activity was up slightly both week-over-week and year-over-year. Applications increased 3.2 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis over the previous week and 5.9 percent when unadjusted. Compared to last year at this time applications were running at a pace that is 0.7 percent higher.

Refinancing's piece of the cake was down again, undoubtedly reflecting rising rates, to 47.4 from 47.8 percent while the share of adjustable rate mortgages rose slightly from 20.3 percent to 21.4.]]> 평상심 Sat, 03 Feb 2007 09:02:20 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=32 Hard against a federal rule that will keep it from buying a major bank or any other business with large holdings of traditional deposits, the growth-obsessed executives at the Charlotte-based company have spent the past year trying to find other ways to expand its already-massive customer base.

"Bank of America wants to be dominant in every major financial service area in the U.S.," said Jefferson Harralson, an equity analyst with Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Inc. in Atlanta. "It's just that things are a little trickier now."

The purchase of credit card issuer MBNA Corp. one year ago added millions of names to its ledger, and the bank is counting on an offer of free online stock trading to add even more. Once it completes its acquisition of wealth management company U.S. Trust, Bank of America will manage about $261 billion in assets for the very rich - more than any other U.S. bank. In all, Bank of America had $1.46 trillion in assets at the end of 2006, second only to chief rival Citigroup Inc. - the nation's largest financial services company with $1.88 trillion in assets.

Up next? Stay tuned: Chief executive Ken Lewis is scheduled to discuss the bank's "opportunities for growth" this morning at an investor conference in New York, ironically hosted by Citigroup. There are hints Lewis plans to push his bank further into the mortgage business, and Bank of America's history has observers looking for some sort of deal.

"It's just rumors," Harralson said. "They're unlikely. But any rumor attached to Bank of America will have people listen."

The latest came last week, when London's Financial Times reported Bank of America was in talks with Calabasas, Calif.-based mortgage lender Countrywide Financial Corp. to forge an alliance that would create the nation's largest mortgage lending group.

Both companies declined to "comment on market rumor or speculation," and analysts this week downplayed the likelihood of a takeover.

Bank of America already has a significant business in mortgages. At $241 billion, the bank's outstanding residential mortgage portfolio was worth more than all of its commercial loans combined at the end of 2006. Still, both analysts and bank executives have said mortgages are a market Bank of America has yet to fully tap.

The bank operates a large mortgage servicing facility in Amherst.

Since September, the company has been testing a new strategy, offering customers in Washington State no-fee mortgages, which eliminate an average of $2,800 or more in traditional closing costs. The bank hasn't yet decided whether to roll out the program nationally, said spokesman Terry Francisco.

Analysts think buying Countrywide would work financially for Bank of America, even if the price were as much $31 billion. But they note what the bank really wants is Countrywide's customers - not its ability to serve them.

"We consider a joint venture more likely than a purchase," wrote Gary Townsend, an analyst with Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. in Arlington, Va., in a research note. That kind of deal would also avoid problems Bank of America currently faces with the federal regulatory cap that bars any American bank from making a deal that would give it more than 10 percent of the nation's total bank deposits. The bank is closing in on the cap with 9 percent of U.S. deposits, and a deal for a thrift-based mortgage business could potentially push it to, or past, that limit.]]> 평상심 Thu, 01 Feb 2007 10:00:36 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=31 BLOOM

Jan. 30, 2007. 2:42 PM EST
Paul McCulley, PIMCO Managing Director, talks about the current state of the housing market and the affect of a warm December.]]> 평상심 Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:58:29 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=30 BLOOM


Jan. 29, 2007. 12:34 PM EST
Merrill Lynch buys First Republic Bank and it's luxury home mortgage business for $55 per share.]]> 평상심 Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:57:54 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=29
So it's a no-brainer that America needs more housing. After all, everybody has to be someplace and substandard housing, tent cities, and the back seats of automobiles are hardly good places for anyone to live let alone the elderly or families with young children.


So if private developers, government agencies, and non-profit organizations try to address the problem with new rental developments targeted at all income levels (a new luxury project should ultimately filter down and make more room at the lower end) that is a good thing. Right?

Well sure, except not in my back yard.

Not in My Back Yard or NIMBY as it has become widely known, has become such an obstacle for developers of multi-family housing that the National Multi Housing Council (NMHC) has issued a white paper for its members entitled "Overcoming Opposition to Multifamily Rental Housing."

The purpose of the publication is to identify and examine the nature of local resistance to apartments and how it can be overcome. Most of it is targeted at non-profits and real estate developers and would not be of particular interest to a general readership. Also it is 21 dense pages in PDF format and it is well beyond our purposes to report all of its contents, but a couple of points did catch our attention.

The paper explains the nature of objections to multi-family housing. NIMBY generally calls to mind angry abutters picketing outside of a construction site or storming a planning board meeting, but NMHC explains that type of opposition generally targets a specific project. More common are institutionalized barriers to development such as zoning regulations that prohibit high density or high rise developments. There are also, the paper says, jurisdictions in which multifamily housing "is nominally permitted, but every actual application for a building permit gets denied."

This is a very serious paper with one light entry, the introduction of several new terms in the NIMBY mode:

"LULUs" - Locally Unwanted Land Uses
"CAVEs" - Citizens Against Virtually Everything
"BANANAs" - Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone
NMHC lays out some of what it calls misconceptions about multifamily housing;

It lowers the value of single-family homes in the neighborhood;
It attracts less desirable neighbors and thus may boost the crime rate and/or antisocial behavior;
Apartments are a drain on the local economy, overloading schools, requiring more police and fire protection and other social and infrastructure support;
Developments adversely impact traffic and parking.
The paper presents some interesting information about the impact of multi-family housing on schools. On average, it states, single family owner-occupied houses have 0.51 school age children while apartments, utilized as they often are by singles, young marrieds, and empty nesters average 0.31 children per unit. In new construction, however, the disparity is even greater. New single family homes typically house 0.64 children compared to 0.29 in new apartments. While the ratios change by income level, going up as income declines, apartment dwellers on average almost always have fewer children per unit than similar occupants of single family homes.

According to the paper, apartments also often generate more revenue than single family houses to pay for their impact on schools and other community services. In most jurisdictions, it explains, apartment complexes are taxed as commercial property which often carries a higher ratio of property tax to property value. For apartments in urban areas this ratio tends to average around 50 basis points more than for single family houses.

NMHC also argues that other types of infrastructure actually operate more efficiently in high-density development than in single-family housing. For example, high density development requires shorter sewer lines and other utility delivery systems and police and fire protection per unit is cheaper when it covers a smaller area. Thus "higher density developments like apartments are actually more fiscally prudent than traditional suburban sprawl."

As to an increase in traffic and parking problems, the NMHC argument is that an increase in congestion may only be real when one compares an apartment development to the status quo, that is no development. But when compared to the alternative of single family houses apartments average only one car per unit compared to two for SFRs. Trips per housing units through various time periods - peak morning and evening, and various week-end times - range from 40 to 81 percent fewer for apartment units. This difference can be accounted for in a number of ways - for example more apartment units can be located close to public transportation nodes than single family houses or perhaps the lower number of children per unit accounts for fewer trips to the schools, grocery store, or soccer field.

The paper goes on to refute what is calls anecdotal information about reduced housing values and claims that renters do not have a stake in the community and concludes that while further research into the impact of multifamily housing would be welcome, that the available research provides strong indications that such housing does not impose greater costs on local government, increase traffic and parking problems, attract occupants who are less "neighborly" or more apt to engage in or attract criminal activity. And, when well-designed and appropriate to the community may even enhance property values.

We will take a look in the future at the Harvard Joint Center for Housing's study that provides information on the state of housing in the U.S. which forms, in part, the basis for this white paper.]]> 평상심 Thu, 01 Feb 2007 09:56:24 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=28

In December we published an article about a provision in the Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 which was passed in the waning days of the 109th Congress (December 12, PMI Deduction Buried in the Closing Acts of Congress.) The bill, H.R. 6111 contained, among dozens of other provisions and a boxcar of earmarks and pieces of pork, a section that would provide some tax relief to homeowners who were obliged, by virtue of down payments of less than 20 percent on their homes, to carry private mortgage insurance (PMI.)

At that time the final version of the bill was not publicly available, nor is it now, but here is an update and the news is not quite as good for the taxpayer as it first appeared.

The House overwhelmingly approved H.R. 6111 on December 8 and the Senate passed corresponding legislation on December 9. The President signed the bill, probably on December 20, and it is now known as Public Law Number 109-432. As of January 25 the Government Printing Office had not produced a final printed copy of the bill.

At the time of our original article we noted that H.R. 6111 appeared to include provisions from H.R. (which stands for House Resolution) 6408 and Senate 132. At the time it was presented to the House in early December it contained the following wording in Section 419:

Section 6050H of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to mortgage interest) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

In general.--Premiums paid or accrued for qualified mortgage insurance by a taxpayer during the taxable year in connection with acquisition indebtedness with respect to a qualified residence of the taxpayer shall be treated for purposes of this section as interest which is qualified residence interest.

We are relying on information on the law as signed by President Bush provided by BNA Tax Management a tax advisory site. According to BNA the following restrictions apply to what seemed like a general deduction for homeowners for private mortgage insurance premiums. These may have come about during conferences to resolve differences between House and Senate versions or may have been earlier defined by Section 6050H of the IRS Code to which Section 419 was appended.

The Act defines qualified mortgage insurance as that provided by the VA, the FHA, or the Rural Housing Administration or by private carriers and specifies that it be treated as interest on a qualified residence. This, however, is modified by the following "that premiums paid or accrued for qualified mortgage insurance by a taxpayer during the taxable year in connection with acquisition indebtedness." This is interpreted by BNA as meaning that the deduction is only available to homeowners who assume PMI payments during 2007. In other words, you may not qualify for the deduction if you bought a house subject to PMI in 2006 or earlier even though you are currently paying premiums.

Deductions seem to be further limited to 2007 by the following: no benefit will currently accrue to taxpayers for any amount paid or accrued beyond December 31 of this year "or properly allocable to any period after that date." We are not lawyers or tax authorities and we advise you, strongly, to consult your own tax professional, but it appears that this deduction is only available to taxpayers during the current calendar year and that paying premiums ahead as taxpayers are often advised to do with mortgage interest or property taxes at year end when deductions are needed will not work in this situation.

As we stated in our earlier article, the original House and Senate legislation was income-limited to $100,000 per household (or $50,000 for married homeowners filing separately) � a provision that appeared to disappear from the bill that was finally voted on in December. BNA, however, states that this provision did survive into the final version and that the allowable deduction for PMI is phased out by 10 percent for each $1000 the taxpayers adjusted gross income exceeds $100,000 (or every $500 above $50,000 for the married who file separately.) This would mean that the deduction is not available for anyone with adjusted income exceeding $110,000 or $55,000.

So, it appears that few homebuyers will be eligible to use this PMI deduction and that it will only be available for 12 months. It seems strange that Congress would pass such limited legislation and interpretations could be different as corresponding IRS regulations are written. Still, if you buy a house or refinance this year make a mental note to alert your tax advisor to check on this small perk before you file for the tax year ending December 31, 2007.]]> 평상심 Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:32:38 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=27
HOUSTON -- SigniaDocs, Inc., a service provider of compliance technology and solutions for mortgage document preparation, announced the release of its fourth-generation document preparation system, Signet Direct. The product of more than three years of research and development, Signet Direct provides an innovative way to process all loan data at the origination stage, and then view, print and deliver documents in a digital format. The company assures reliability and offers guaranteed compliance.

SigniaDocs’ web-based, XML supported solution is built on the latest technology and incorporates industry-best practices for digital signatures, SMART docs and regulatory compliance. Signet Direct seamlessly integrates with other mortgage solutions, including Calyx Point, Data Trak, Byte, Empower and Emcompass, to automate the loan process from origination to closing. This significantly reduces input time and further promotes accuracy. By using SMART docs technology, clients can easily transfer data to an HTML format, making documents accessible on the Web.

“We provide our clients with the latest technology to electronically process loan data as well as the ability to view and store the loan document,” said Paul Anselmo, president and CEO, SigniaDocs. “Not only does this technology set us apart from our competitors, but our dedicated team of top legal professionals with more than 15 years of experience has catapulted SigniaDocs to a leader in the evolutionary shift toward truly electronic mortgages.”

In addition to a top legal team, SigniaDocs’ maintains a detailed, up-to-date database that is consistently monitored for all legal and regulatory changes throughout the mortgage industry to further assure compliance. Established relationships with major mortgage investors nationwide guarantee all custom mortgage loan products are maintained and compliant at all times.

Strategic partnerships with Brooks Systems and Encomia further enhance the quality of SigniaDocs’ solution. Brooks System, a leading provider of compliance technology, allows SigniaDocs to provide a rapid, online response for Truth-In-Lending (TIL) calculations and High-Cost Loan Analysis. In order to provide clients the ability to generate, validate and reserve a Mortgage Identification Number (MIN) with the system, SigniaDocs uses MERS?, an electronic loan registry created by the real estate finance industry to eliminate assignments when trading mortgage loans. MERS? receives all necessary data when SigniaDocs registers a loan, maximizing efficiency. SigniaDocs also established a partnership with Encomia, a leading provider of integrated solutions to electronically consolidate mortgage processes. Encomia technologically assists SigniaDocs to provide e-signature capabilities, allowing the end borrower to seamlessly view and sign the final processed loan in an electronic format.

“With the Signet Direct solution, costs associated with manually processing loans are significantly reduced, saving up to $250 per loan,” said Anselmo. “Lenders are able to process loans much quicker, and our communication platform between mortgage companies, buyers, title agencies, appraisers and surveyors increases the efficiency of loan closings.”

About SigniaDocs, Inc.
Headquartered in Houston, SigniaDocs is a mortgage loan product company that specializes in the area of document preparation with guaranteed compliance, as well as the capabilities to store and sell the loan in the secondary mortgage market. SigniaDocs’ senior consultants possess decades of experience within the mortgage industry, and a team of attorneys is dedicated to ensuring compliance for all of the company’s products. The company’s premier product, Signet Direct, is a full-MISMO compliant electronic document preparation system that merges the industry’s best practices using SMART docs and digital signatures with guaranteed compliance to seamlessly integrate with other mortgage solutions and automate the loan process from origination to closing and beyond, including electronic vault and secondary market delivery. For more information, contact SigniaDocs at or www.signiadocs.com.]]> 평상심 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:34:34 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=26 BLOOM


Jan. 26, 2007. 10:01 AM EST
December new home sales come in strong up 4.8% with 1.12 million units sold.]]> 평상심 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:31:18 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=25 BLOOM


Jan. 25, 2007. 10:01 AM EST
December existing homes fell 0.8% to a rate of 6.22 million units.]]> 평상심 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:30:33 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=24

First read the press release issued on Tuesday by the National Association of Realtors regarding data on the sale of existing homes in December and for all of 2006 and then read the New York Times article on the same topic. We will then have a spirited discussion on the subject of reality, slant, and spin.

NAR called 2006 the third-highest sales year on record (after 2005 and 2004) while using the term "eased" to describe the 0.8 percent seasonally adjusted decline in the annual rate of home sales in December as compared to revised rates in November (6.22 million versus 6.27 million). The Times on the other hand took the view that the 2006 figures represented the sharpest year over year decline in 17 years and the December figures showed a larger decline than analysts had expected.


Well, here are the figures, draw your own conclusions.

In addition to the November to December change noted above, sales of existing homes (including single-family, town houses, condos, and co-ops) dropped from 7,075,000 for all of 2005 to 6,480,000 in 2006, a decline of 8.4 percent. This is the 17 year record cited above. Annualized sales in December 2006 were 7.9 percent lower than in December 2005.

David Lereah, NAR's chief economist, said home sales remain historically high. "Despite all of the doom-and-gloom stories and dire predictions over the last year, 2006 was the third strongest year on record for existing-home sales," he said. "It looks like we're moving beyond the low for the housing cycle last fall, and buyers are responding to historically low interest rates and competitive pricing by home sellers. In addition, a tightening inventory of homes on the market is supporting prices."

The inventory of available existing homes dropped to 3.51 million at the end of December, a 7.9 percent decline from November. This is a 6.8 month supply at the current sales pace compared to a 7.3 month backlog in November.

The median home prices for all housing types was $222,000, identical to the median price one year earlier. This was also the median price for all of 2006 which represented a slight increase from the median for 2005 of $219,000.

If only single family homes are taken into account, those sales slipped 1.3 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.44 million in December from 5.51 million in November. Sales for 2006 were down 8.1 percent to 5.68 million compared to 2005 and were, like overall sales, the third highest on record. The median price for an existing single family residence was 221,600, again unchanged from December 2005.

The Census Bureau and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development released their joint report on new residential sales for December on Friday. New home sales were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1,120,000 units, an increase of 4.8 percent above the revised November figures but 11 percent below the rate in December 2005. A total of 1,061,000 new homes were sold last year, a 17.3 percent decline from the 1,283,000 sold in 2005.

The median home price in December was $235,000 and the average was $290,100. In November the median sales price was $251,700 and the average price was $294,900.

There are an estimated 537,000 new homes currently on the market, a supply of 5.9 months at the current sales rate. The revised figure for inventory backlog in November was 6.1 months.]]> 평상심 Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:28:42 -0700 http://www.bmlee.com/bbs/board.php?bo_table=mortgage_news_en&wr_id=9 30-year fixed edges up to 6.25 percent from 6.23 percent last week.
January 25 2007: 4:33 PM EST


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- December's leading indicators that showed steady growth in the coming months kept mortgage rates steady, according to a survey.

The 30-year fixed mortgage rate averaged 6.25 percent for the week ending Jan. 25, up from 6.23 last week, according to Freddie Mac's (down $0.43 to $64.50, Charts) Primary Mortgage Market Survey released Thursday. Last year at this time, the 30-year fixed mortgage rate averaged 6.12 percent.


Current Mortgage Rates 

Type Overall avgs

30 yr fixed mtg 5.85%
15 yr fixed mtg 5.61%
30 yr fixed jumbo mtg 6.08%
5/1 ARM 5.63%
5/1 jumbo ARM 5.76%
 
 
The 15-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 5.98 percent for the week ending Jan. 25, unchanged from last week. Last year at this time, the 15-year fixed-rate averaged 5.70.

"Mortgage rates were mixed this week on news that December's leading indicators, a measure of future economic activity, signaled steady growth in the coming months," said Frank Nothaft, Freddie Mac vice president and chief economist.

"And in the housing market, December's new construction came in stronger than expected despite a decline in one-unit residence starts," he added.

Shorter term mortgages turned down.

The five-year adjustable-rate mortgage averaged 6.00 percent, down from 6.04 percent last week. Last year at this time it averaged 5.75 percent.

The one-year ARM averaged 5.49 percent, down from 5.51 percent last week. The previous year it averaged 5.20 percent.

"Over the coming week, a flurry of reports will provide further readings on the strength of the housing market and economic conditions. Primary among these will be the first estimate of fourth quarter GDP growth, and we could see interest rates change in response," said Nothaft.

"Also, Fed monetary policy makers will convene over the 30th and 31st next week and decide on whether to adjust the target short-term interest rate as well," he remarked.

Lending companies affected by the mortgage rates changes include Countrywide Financial Corp. (down $1.64 to $40.29, Charts) and Wachovia (down $0.73 to $55.76, Charts), while major homebuilders sensitive to the size of the housing market include Pulte (down $1.13 to $33.07, Charts), Centex Corp. (down $1.77 to $51.87, Charts), and D.R. Horton Inc. (down $0.50 to $28.25, Charts)]]> 평상심 Sat, 27 Jan 2007 03:12:25 -0700