Showing posts with label Rocklin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rocklin. Show all posts
Friday, July 3, 2009
California shows recovery in Housing
California housing market shows pockets of recoveryA surge in home sales that started in some of California 's more affordable inland areas has begun to spread to several more expensive coastal areas, another indicator that the state's real estate market may be in recovery mode. Many homes in the lower end of the market are receiving multiple offers, with some prospective buyers bidding well above asking prices. Inventory levels for homes priced under $500,000 stood at 3.2 months in May 2009, compared with 9.4 months in May 2008.Some buyers, especially those in historically higher-priced markets such as the San Francisco Bay Area, are newly optimistic about buying homes and are realizing that the combination of low interest rates, favorable home prices, and first-time home buyer tax credits may not realign for many years.Some housing economists caution against interpreting signs of increased sales activity as meaning the market has bottomed. Interest rates on 30-year, fixed-rate prime mortgages have risen above 5 percent in recent weeks and could continue to increase as fears of inflation impact interest rates. Additionally, the federal tax credit for first-time home buyers is scheduled to end Nov. 30, which may remove the incentive to purchase.Although the median price in the state has risen for four consecutivemonths, prices in some higher-income neighborhoods still are declining. Some agents say that declining prices in these neighborhoods are a reflection of borrowers' problems getting jumbo mortgages to make purchases. This month's Market Snapshot features: Buyers who are having difficulty arranging financing or coming up with a down payment may want to consider rent-to-own or lease-options. Generally, these deals require buyers to pay extra amounts of rent each month, in addition to the normal market-rate rent, plus up-front fees of approximately 5 percent of the purchase price. The owner keeps the regular rent, but the additional payments are used to buy down the price of the home. While rent-to-own options may be a viable choice for some buyers, most real estate experts recommend buyers and sellers work with attorneys experienced in drafting lease-option agreements. Although rent-to-own options enable buyers to walk away from the deal for a variety of reasons, including deciding the home or neighborhood isn't a good fit; one drawback is that by walking away, buyers agree to forfeit the up-front fees and the additional monthly rent they've been paying. Additionally, at the end of the term, if the buyer still is unable to secure financing they also may have to forfeit the money.
Chinese Drywall Litigation about to Snowball Industry
Chinese Drywall Insurance Litigation
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
We have seen this to date from the perspective of increasing claims being made, both state and federal regulators seeking ways to regulate, protect consumers and also determine responsibility and liability for the damages caused by Chinese drywall. Concurrently, the first lawsuits regarding insurance coverage for these claims are starting to move through the courts. Following is a discussion of the issue from that perspective.
Homeowner's PoliciesIn March 2009, Baker v. American Home Assurance Company, No. 09-cv-188 was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Baker is the first complaint regarding homeowner’s insurance for drywall claims. In the Baker case, two Florida policyholders sued their homeowners’ insurer, seeking coverage for property damage resulting from Chinese drywall in their home. The Complaint filed was rather plain. with the policyholders alleging that they notified their insurer of a loss in December 2008 caused from the gases emitted by drywall. The Complaint alleges further that the insurer verbally denied the claim based on “contamination,” but that no formal declination has been issued. In its answer, the insurer denied coverage based upon policy exclusions for pollution, wear and tear, and faulty materials. The insurer also answered that the claim fell outside the policy period. Apparently, the insurer is trying to base some of its reasoning for denial of coverage that the damage occurred at the time the drywall was installed, not the time it began to emit noxious odors. Commercial General Liability PoliciesInsurance disputes concerning contractors' Commercial General Liability ("CGL") policies are also pending. In April 2009, it was reported that Lennar Corporation, one of the principal defendants in Florida’s Chinese drywall litigation, stated that it believed that its insurance would cover the drywall claims. There has been no comment from the insurer. However, the insurer of another homebuilder commenced a declaratory judgment action in the Eastern District of Virginia, Builders Mutual Insurance Company v. Dragas Management Corporation, 2:09-cv-185. Builders Mutual is seeking a declaration that it did not owe defense or indemnity to its insured for Chinese drywall based on the pollution exclusion and the work-product exclusions.
The Component Not Product ArgumentInsurance industry experts are watching the Chinese drywall suits and comparing them to past litigation involving EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finishing Systems), a building product that provides exterior walls with an insulated finished surface, and waterproofing in an integrated composite material system. The analogy between Chins Drywall and EIFS is that both products are components incorporated into a structure, and as such were intended to have the same useful life of the structure. In Keck v Dryvit Systems, Inc., 830 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2002), the Alabama Supreme Court held that such components are not “products” within the meaning of the Alabama Extended Manufacturers Liability Doctrine (AEMLD), stating:
The owner of a house or of any building should reasonably expect that many components will have the same useful life as the house or building itself and will not need to be replaced over the life of the building. Such components include, by way of example, an exterior brick wall, a staircase, or a fireplace. There are also certain components of a house or a building the purchaser reasonably expects to wear out and to require replacement in the course of normal and ordinary usage, such as roof shingles, a dishwasher, a furnace, or a hot-water heater. Whether an item that is incorporated into real property may be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD is determined by whether the item is a part of the structural integrity of the house or building that is reasonably expected to last for the useful life of the house or building. If it is, then the item cannot be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD. However, if the item is attached or incorporated into real property and, yet its very function and nature clearly makes it an item that one would reasonably expect to repair or to replace during the useful life of the realty, the item may be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD. For instance, although paint, when applied to the structure of a wall, becomes incorporated into the surface of the wall, paint is a structural improvement that does not have the same useful life as the wall itself or the building to which the wall is attached; one would expect to have to repaint a wall to maintain the quality of the first application. Therefore, paint would be considered a product for purposes of the AEMLD.The Keck Court held that EIFS was intended to last for the useful life of the structure, and was not subject to the AEMLD. Further, the Court also held that it was not a “good” under the Uniform Commercial Code, and therefore was not subject to the rules concerning warranties of merchantability. An analogous argument could made that Chins drywall would satisfy the Court's test in Keck , and would therefore not be classified as either a “product” or a “good.”Of particular interest to the default servicing industry is whether a builder or installer would be potentially held liable on a negligence theory for the installation of Chinese drywall. This could be a key difference between Chinese drywall and EIFS litigation. The negligence theories against builders and installers in EIFS often revolved around arguments that the system was improperly installed, and that installation led to problems with moisture intrusion, termites, and other resulting problems. In contrast, the issues concerning Chins drywall are based upon the problems with the product itself, not the installation.. Note that generally, a builder is not liable for latent defects in building materials that are used and “he is not liable to the owner for the latent defect or liable for the amount of damage to the building caused by such defect.” 13 Am. Jur. 2d, Building and Construction Contracts § 27 (1997); Wood-Hopkins Contracting Co. v. Masonry Contractors, Inc., 235 So.2d 548 (Fla. Ct. App.1970). Unless a building owner is able to show that the builder or installer had knowledge of the problems associated with Chinese drywall, he or she may have problems with holding those entities accountable.
Civil LitigationGovernment and regulatory actions are occurring that may pave the way for a wave of civil lawsuits by or on behalf of homeowners affected by Chinese drywall. Florida Senators Mary Landrieu, D-La. and Bill Nelson, D-Fla, continue to voice concerns regarding Chinese drywall at the federal level. Both state and Federal agencies have been investigating the drywall itself. Procedures for developing interior air quality tests for the presence or impact of Chins drywall are reportedly being developed by a number of federal agenciesNew Orleans Times-Picayune reported on June 7, 2009 that Sen. Landrieu’s staff said that the federal tests could lay the groundwork for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to bring a civil action against the drywall manufacturers. Stephen Mysliwiec, a partner at the law firm DLA Piper, observed that it will not become clear who is liable for the defective product until consensus emerges on the precise cause of the problems. He noted that, one theory ventures that gypsum mined in China contains excessive sulfur, while another ventures that fly ash, a byproduct of the burning of coal, was used during the manufacturing process. "Until the science of what is causing the problem is settled, it is very difficult to know which party is going to be held liable for the cost of making repairs," Mysliwiec said. On June 15, 2009, a panel of federal judges ruled that lawsuits filed around the country against home builders, suppliers and manufacturers of Chinese drywall will be moved to New Orleans, where U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon will preside over discovery and pre-trial hearings. By transferring all of the cases to federal court in New Orleans, the judicial panel is trying to ensure that lawyers for both the plaintiffs and the defense would not have to duplicate their efforts in multiple courts during discovery. Of equal importance, the panel seeks to prevent judges in different districts from handing down inconsistent rulings.
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/chinese_drywall_lawsuits_to_be.html.
A legal conference on Chinese drywall, closed to the public, took place in New Orleans on June 18, 2009. The conference presented by HB Litigation Conferences is designed for representatives of homeowners, builders, insurance companies and government agencies.
http://blog.nola.com/tpmoney/2009/06/new_orleans_hosts_legal_confer.html
Wednesday, 24 June 2009
We have seen this to date from the perspective of increasing claims being made, both state and federal regulators seeking ways to regulate, protect consumers and also determine responsibility and liability for the damages caused by Chinese drywall. Concurrently, the first lawsuits regarding insurance coverage for these claims are starting to move through the courts. Following is a discussion of the issue from that perspective.
Homeowner's PoliciesIn March 2009, Baker v. American Home Assurance Company, No. 09-cv-188 was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Baker is the first complaint regarding homeowner’s insurance for drywall claims. In the Baker case, two Florida policyholders sued their homeowners’ insurer, seeking coverage for property damage resulting from Chinese drywall in their home. The Complaint filed was rather plain. with the policyholders alleging that they notified their insurer of a loss in December 2008 caused from the gases emitted by drywall. The Complaint alleges further that the insurer verbally denied the claim based on “contamination,” but that no formal declination has been issued. In its answer, the insurer denied coverage based upon policy exclusions for pollution, wear and tear, and faulty materials. The insurer also answered that the claim fell outside the policy period. Apparently, the insurer is trying to base some of its reasoning for denial of coverage that the damage occurred at the time the drywall was installed, not the time it began to emit noxious odors. Commercial General Liability PoliciesInsurance disputes concerning contractors' Commercial General Liability ("CGL") policies are also pending. In April 2009, it was reported that Lennar Corporation, one of the principal defendants in Florida’s Chinese drywall litigation, stated that it believed that its insurance would cover the drywall claims. There has been no comment from the insurer. However, the insurer of another homebuilder commenced a declaratory judgment action in the Eastern District of Virginia, Builders Mutual Insurance Company v. Dragas Management Corporation, 2:09-cv-185. Builders Mutual is seeking a declaration that it did not owe defense or indemnity to its insured for Chinese drywall based on the pollution exclusion and the work-product exclusions.
The Component Not Product ArgumentInsurance industry experts are watching the Chinese drywall suits and comparing them to past litigation involving EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finishing Systems), a building product that provides exterior walls with an insulated finished surface, and waterproofing in an integrated composite material system. The analogy between Chins Drywall and EIFS is that both products are components incorporated into a structure, and as such were intended to have the same useful life of the structure. In Keck v Dryvit Systems, Inc., 830 So.2d 1 (Ala. 2002), the Alabama Supreme Court held that such components are not “products” within the meaning of the Alabama Extended Manufacturers Liability Doctrine (AEMLD), stating:
The owner of a house or of any building should reasonably expect that many components will have the same useful life as the house or building itself and will not need to be replaced over the life of the building. Such components include, by way of example, an exterior brick wall, a staircase, or a fireplace. There are also certain components of a house or a building the purchaser reasonably expects to wear out and to require replacement in the course of normal and ordinary usage, such as roof shingles, a dishwasher, a furnace, or a hot-water heater. Whether an item that is incorporated into real property may be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD is determined by whether the item is a part of the structural integrity of the house or building that is reasonably expected to last for the useful life of the house or building. If it is, then the item cannot be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD. However, if the item is attached or incorporated into real property and, yet its very function and nature clearly makes it an item that one would reasonably expect to repair or to replace during the useful life of the realty, the item may be considered a “product” for purposes of the AEMLD. For instance, although paint, when applied to the structure of a wall, becomes incorporated into the surface of the wall, paint is a structural improvement that does not have the same useful life as the wall itself or the building to which the wall is attached; one would expect to have to repaint a wall to maintain the quality of the first application. Therefore, paint would be considered a product for purposes of the AEMLD.The Keck Court held that EIFS was intended to last for the useful life of the structure, and was not subject to the AEMLD. Further, the Court also held that it was not a “good” under the Uniform Commercial Code, and therefore was not subject to the rules concerning warranties of merchantability. An analogous argument could made that Chins drywall would satisfy the Court's test in Keck , and would therefore not be classified as either a “product” or a “good.”Of particular interest to the default servicing industry is whether a builder or installer would be potentially held liable on a negligence theory for the installation of Chinese drywall. This could be a key difference between Chinese drywall and EIFS litigation. The negligence theories against builders and installers in EIFS often revolved around arguments that the system was improperly installed, and that installation led to problems with moisture intrusion, termites, and other resulting problems. In contrast, the issues concerning Chins drywall are based upon the problems with the product itself, not the installation.. Note that generally, a builder is not liable for latent defects in building materials that are used and “he is not liable to the owner for the latent defect or liable for the amount of damage to the building caused by such defect.” 13 Am. Jur. 2d, Building and Construction Contracts § 27 (1997); Wood-Hopkins Contracting Co. v. Masonry Contractors, Inc., 235 So.2d 548 (Fla. Ct. App.1970). Unless a building owner is able to show that the builder or installer had knowledge of the problems associated with Chinese drywall, he or she may have problems with holding those entities accountable.
Civil LitigationGovernment and regulatory actions are occurring that may pave the way for a wave of civil lawsuits by or on behalf of homeowners affected by Chinese drywall. Florida Senators Mary Landrieu, D-La. and Bill Nelson, D-Fla, continue to voice concerns regarding Chinese drywall at the federal level. Both state and Federal agencies have been investigating the drywall itself. Procedures for developing interior air quality tests for the presence or impact of Chins drywall are reportedly being developed by a number of federal agenciesNew Orleans Times-Picayune reported on June 7, 2009 that Sen. Landrieu’s staff said that the federal tests could lay the groundwork for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to bring a civil action against the drywall manufacturers. Stephen Mysliwiec, a partner at the law firm DLA Piper, observed that it will not become clear who is liable for the defective product until consensus emerges on the precise cause of the problems. He noted that, one theory ventures that gypsum mined in China contains excessive sulfur, while another ventures that fly ash, a byproduct of the burning of coal, was used during the manufacturing process. "Until the science of what is causing the problem is settled, it is very difficult to know which party is going to be held liable for the cost of making repairs," Mysliwiec said. On June 15, 2009, a panel of federal judges ruled that lawsuits filed around the country against home builders, suppliers and manufacturers of Chinese drywall will be moved to New Orleans, where U.S. District Judge Eldon Fallon will preside over discovery and pre-trial hearings. By transferring all of the cases to federal court in New Orleans, the judicial panel is trying to ensure that lawyers for both the plaintiffs and the defense would not have to duplicate their efforts in multiple courts during discovery. Of equal importance, the panel seeks to prevent judges in different districts from handing down inconsistent rulings.
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2009/06/chinese_drywall_lawsuits_to_be.html.
A legal conference on Chinese drywall, closed to the public, took place in New Orleans on June 18, 2009. The conference presented by HB Litigation Conferences is designed for representatives of homeowners, builders, insurance companies and government agencies.
http://blog.nola.com/tpmoney/2009/06/new_orleans_hosts_legal_confer.html
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Market Update and How a 15 Year Mortage saves you $$P
Signs of more trouble ahead for housing marketSeveral recent market barometers, including declining housing inventory, increasing buyer competition, slowing price depreciation, and rising builder confidence all point to a real estate market rebound. However, other signs such as rising unemployment, lack of “move-up” buyers, stricter loan underwriting standards, and foreclosures also may impact the market’s recovery.Rising unemployment means that those who own a home, but are not currently employed, could lose their homes to foreclosure. While the first round of foreclosures mainly encompassed people who had difficulty affording their homes even when employed, a second wave may be brought on by those who lose their jobs and are not able to continue paying their mortgages. Numerous programs are in the works to help remedy this situation, including C.A.R.’s Mortgage Protection Program. Eligible first-time buyers who lose their job may be able to receive $1,500 for six months to help pay their mortgages. For more information on this program, please visit:
http://www.car.org/aboutus/hafmainpage/carhafmortgageprotection/While some housing analysts believe overall the state’s housing prices remain unaffordable; 69 percent of the state’s households could afford to purchase an entry-level home in California in the first quarter of this year, compared with 46 percent during the first quarter last year, according to C.A.R.’s First-time Buyer Housing Affordability Index (FTB-HAI).A study conducted by the Comptroller of the Currency found that more than half of modified mortgages again were delinquent within months of the modification, often because the homeowners still were unable to make regular mortgage payments despite the modified terms. However, the study was conducted prior to the Obama administration’s mortgage modification plan. For more information about the Obama administration’s foreclosure-prevention efforts, please visit:
http://www.car.org/newsstand/newsreleases/fapsummary
Mortgage News: This week’s Mortgage Update contains information about refinancing and 15-year mortgages.A battle plan for refinancing your mortgageHomeowners seeking to refinance their mortgages may be surprised by the amount of paperwork required. During the “easy credit” years, some lenders did not require proof of income or documentation. Nowadays, most lenders require borrowers to provide pay stubs, banks statements, brokerage statements, and possibly tax returns. Self-employed individuals may be asked for a profit-and-loss statement. Those relying on bonus income should expect that most lenders will assume this year’s bonus will be a lot less than last year’s, which could make securing approval more difficult. Determining the amount of equity in the home is key to being approved for a new loan. Homeowners whose mortgage obligations are less than 80 percent of the home’s value are more likely to have refinancing options available to them. Other homeowners who are current on their mortgages, owe 80 percent to 105 percent of the home’s value, and have a loan owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac may be able to refinance under the government’s “Making Home Affordable” program. Other factors to take into consideration when refinancing are the property’s appraised value, the homeowners’ credit score(s), whether or not the property has a second mortgage, and the length of the original loan.
MortgagesMore Takers for 15-Year Loans
THE 30-year fixed-rate mortgage has traditionally been the go-to loan for borrowers who want stability and lower payments. Adjustable-rate mortgages, by contrast, are often seen as more suitable for risk takers and those who expect to sell their homes in a short time.More recently, there has been increased activity in another loan alternative: a fixed-rate mortgage with a 15-year term. Debt shedding comes at a price. Those borrowing $400,000 on a 15-year loan, with a 4.375 percent interest rate, the average rate earlier this month, can expect to pay about $3,034 a month, compared with about $2,056 a month for a 30-year fixed-rate loan with a 4.625 percent average rate. (The payment excludes costs like property taxes and insurance.) Because a 15-year loan also has 180 fewer interest payments than a 30-year loan, the borrower with that 15-year loan would pay $194,000 less in interest over the life of the mortgage.
http://www.car.org/aboutus/hafmainpage/carhafmortgageprotection/While some housing analysts believe overall the state’s housing prices remain unaffordable; 69 percent of the state’s households could afford to purchase an entry-level home in California in the first quarter of this year, compared with 46 percent during the first quarter last year, according to C.A.R.’s First-time Buyer Housing Affordability Index (FTB-HAI).A study conducted by the Comptroller of the Currency found that more than half of modified mortgages again were delinquent within months of the modification, often because the homeowners still were unable to make regular mortgage payments despite the modified terms. However, the study was conducted prior to the Obama administration’s mortgage modification plan. For more information about the Obama administration’s foreclosure-prevention efforts, please visit:
http://www.car.org/newsstand/newsreleases/fapsummary
Mortgage News: This week’s Mortgage Update contains information about refinancing and 15-year mortgages.A battle plan for refinancing your mortgageHomeowners seeking to refinance their mortgages may be surprised by the amount of paperwork required. During the “easy credit” years, some lenders did not require proof of income or documentation. Nowadays, most lenders require borrowers to provide pay stubs, banks statements, brokerage statements, and possibly tax returns. Self-employed individuals may be asked for a profit-and-loss statement. Those relying on bonus income should expect that most lenders will assume this year’s bonus will be a lot less than last year’s, which could make securing approval more difficult. Determining the amount of equity in the home is key to being approved for a new loan. Homeowners whose mortgage obligations are less than 80 percent of the home’s value are more likely to have refinancing options available to them. Other homeowners who are current on their mortgages, owe 80 percent to 105 percent of the home’s value, and have a loan owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac may be able to refinance under the government’s “Making Home Affordable” program. Other factors to take into consideration when refinancing are the property’s appraised value, the homeowners’ credit score(s), whether or not the property has a second mortgage, and the length of the original loan.
MortgagesMore Takers for 15-Year Loans
THE 30-year fixed-rate mortgage has traditionally been the go-to loan for borrowers who want stability and lower payments. Adjustable-rate mortgages, by contrast, are often seen as more suitable for risk takers and those who expect to sell their homes in a short time.More recently, there has been increased activity in another loan alternative: a fixed-rate mortgage with a 15-year term. Debt shedding comes at a price. Those borrowing $400,000 on a 15-year loan, with a 4.375 percent interest rate, the average rate earlier this month, can expect to pay about $3,034 a month, compared with about $2,056 a month for a 30-year fixed-rate loan with a 4.625 percent average rate. (The payment excludes costs like property taxes and insurance.) Because a 15-year loan also has 180 fewer interest payments than a 30-year loan, the borrower with that 15-year loan would pay $194,000 less in interest over the life of the mortgage.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Imported Chinese Drywall may have harmful materials EPA discusses
http://www.chinesedrywall.com/uploads/EPA_Analysis.pdf
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) confirmed Chinese drywall testing found that samples of wallboard imported from China between 2004 and 2008, contains certain potentially harmful chemicals that are not found in drywall manufactured in the United States.
To view the full EPA Analysis, please click on the following link:EPA Analysis As discussed below, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation convened a subcommittee hearing on Health and Product Safety Issues Associated with Imported Drywall on Thursday, May 21, 2009.
To view a webcast of the Hearing, please click on the following link:Health and Product Safety Issues Associated with Imported Drywall
A request for $2 million in emergency funding failed to move forward in the U.S. Senate, however the Consumer Product Safety Commission and other federal agencies will continue investigating the potential effects of imported drywall.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) confirmed Chinese drywall testing found that samples of wallboard imported from China between 2004 and 2008, contains certain potentially harmful chemicals that are not found in drywall manufactured in the United States.
To view the full EPA Analysis, please click on the following link:EPA Analysis As discussed below, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation convened a subcommittee hearing on Health and Product Safety Issues Associated with Imported Drywall on Thursday, May 21, 2009.
To view a webcast of the Hearing, please click on the following link:Health and Product Safety Issues Associated with Imported Drywall
A request for $2 million in emergency funding failed to move forward in the U.S. Senate, however the Consumer Product Safety Commission and other federal agencies will continue investigating the potential effects of imported drywall.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Freddie Mac has issued the following Single Family Seller/Servicer Guide Update
Freddie Mac has issued the following Single Family Seller/Servicer Guide Update regarding Bulletin 2009-9.
Today’s Single-Family Seller/Servicer Guide (Guide) Bulletin 2009-9, expands eligibility for the Freddie Mac Relief Refinance MortgageSM, making it easier for qualified borrowers to take advantage of this offering. Relief Refinance Mortgages are a key component of the administration’s Making Home Affordable Program and we are committed to supporting this national mandate by making Relief Refinance Mortgages available to as many qualified borrowers as possible. Today’s expanded eligibility will allow you to help more borrowers refinance into mortgages that position them for a successful and long-term homeownership experience.
With today’s Guide Bulletin, we are incorporating into the Guide the recently announced increase to our maximum loan limits as permitted under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). We are also announcing revisions to our requirements for super conforming mortgages that include the changes we previewed in our April 10 Single-Family Advisory e-mail.
It is important that you review today’s Guide Bulletin for detailed information on these changes.
Expanded Eligibility for Relief Refinance Mortgages
Today’s Guide Bulletin provides detailed information on updates to our requirements for Relief Refinance Mortgages. The following changes are effective immediately and include:
Clarifying that accrued interest through the payoff date may be included when paying off the mortgage being refinanced.
Permitting up to $250 cash back to the borrower.
Enabling the amortization term of the Relief Refinance Mortgage to be longer than the amortization term of the existing mortgage. For example, a 15-year fixed-rate mortgage may be refinanced as a 30-year fixed-rate Relief Refinance Mortgage.
Allowing second home and investment property mortgages that are now owner-occupied primary residences to be refinanced under the Relief Refinance Mortgage offering.
Permitting the transfer of property insurance from the mortgage being refinanced to the Relief Refinance Mortgage, if permitted by the insurance carrier, to alleviate the need for the borrower to prepay property insurance at settlement.
Additionally, when using Home Value Explorer® to determine property value, we are not requiring you to complete the “Year Built” and “Number of Bedrooms” fields on Form 11, Mortgage Submission Schedule and Form 13SF, Mortgage Submission Voucher.
Finally, we are reminding you that Relief Refinance Mortgages may not be sold to Freddie Mac through the selling system’s servicing-released process.
To view the online Bulletin in its entirety, please http://www.freddiemac.com/sell/guide/bulletins/pdf/bll099.pdf
Today’s Single-Family Seller/Servicer Guide (Guide) Bulletin 2009-9, expands eligibility for the Freddie Mac Relief Refinance MortgageSM, making it easier for qualified borrowers to take advantage of this offering. Relief Refinance Mortgages are a key component of the administration’s Making Home Affordable Program and we are committed to supporting this national mandate by making Relief Refinance Mortgages available to as many qualified borrowers as possible. Today’s expanded eligibility will allow you to help more borrowers refinance into mortgages that position them for a successful and long-term homeownership experience.
With today’s Guide Bulletin, we are incorporating into the Guide the recently announced increase to our maximum loan limits as permitted under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). We are also announcing revisions to our requirements for super conforming mortgages that include the changes we previewed in our April 10 Single-Family Advisory e-mail.
It is important that you review today’s Guide Bulletin for detailed information on these changes.
Expanded Eligibility for Relief Refinance Mortgages
Today’s Guide Bulletin provides detailed information on updates to our requirements for Relief Refinance Mortgages. The following changes are effective immediately and include:
Clarifying that accrued interest through the payoff date may be included when paying off the mortgage being refinanced.
Permitting up to $250 cash back to the borrower.
Enabling the amortization term of the Relief Refinance Mortgage to be longer than the amortization term of the existing mortgage. For example, a 15-year fixed-rate mortgage may be refinanced as a 30-year fixed-rate Relief Refinance Mortgage.
Allowing second home and investment property mortgages that are now owner-occupied primary residences to be refinanced under the Relief Refinance Mortgage offering.
Permitting the transfer of property insurance from the mortgage being refinanced to the Relief Refinance Mortgage, if permitted by the insurance carrier, to alleviate the need for the borrower to prepay property insurance at settlement.
Additionally, when using Home Value Explorer® to determine property value, we are not requiring you to complete the “Year Built” and “Number of Bedrooms” fields on Form 11, Mortgage Submission Schedule and Form 13SF, Mortgage Submission Voucher.
Finally, we are reminding you that Relief Refinance Mortgages may not be sold to Freddie Mac through the selling system’s servicing-released process.
To view the online Bulletin in its entirety, please http://www.freddiemac.com/sell/guide/bulletins/pdf/bll099.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
