| Author |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
 Posted - 01/26/2007 : 9:41:06 PM
|
Had my a.e. prequal a file...80/20 719 stated at FIELDSTONE...underwriter approved file, was called conditions on its way...2 days pass, where are conditions...only to find out, file went to 2nd underwriter for 2nd signature who declined it for PAYMENT shock...
call my A.E. in shock, we went overguidlines together...guidelines state if payment shock is over 200 then MUST have 3 mnths sourced and seasoned reserves (my client had 6 months) A/E went to bat, and was told this...
Fieldstone doesn't care about how much money he has, they have no SET payment shock amount, each file is considered case-by case.
Absolutely no guidelines to follow.
My own A.E. says that Fieldstone *****, 70 percent of his files were declined that would have been fine a month ago, says he is looking for a new JOB ASAP, and that I shouldnt even bother sending my files there, because they cannot make a decision, and it will probably just be declined....
Imagine that |
|
|
|
Chris Clark
5967 Posts |
Posted - 01/26/2007 : 9:49:54 PM
|
| Well, if your AE is telling you that, then wow! If UW is ignoring guidelines and just "winging it" then he probably should find a new company... |
|
|
bramous
1076 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 03:54:51 AM
|
| Our guidelines do read that payment shock in excess of 200% require 3 months PITI sourced and seasoned. My guess is that there were other issues with the file and an extreme payment shock created multiple layers of risk. Remember, guidelines are exactly that-a guide. If an underwriter doesn't feel comfortable with something in the file, they go to another U/W or Branch manager for a second opinion. With defaults and fraud on the rise, who can blame a person for wanting a second opinion when they don't feel comfortable. I would talk to your AE and ask what the real problem with the file was....chances are there was something else. As far as your AE's files being declined, yes our programs have changed, so have everyone elses. If AE's don't study up on new products, their files will be declined because of changing guidelines....maybe your file was one of them. Get to the root of the problem before you blast a whole company on a public site. |
|
|
braddexter
131 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 07:30:00 AM
|
| I've always had great luck with Fieldstone. I try them on every subprime or Alt A loan.. However, they just shut down the underwriting center we used. Not sure what is going on |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 07:37:21 AM
|
I too always like Fieldstone and am not blasting them the way referenced by the A,E who responded here..
Look if there own rep is not confident about loans how can i be,,
they just seem scared to lend and make a decision...
besides that, I heard they are in some financial trouble with renegotiated debt thru 7/2007...and then what????? |
|
|
Henry_Sun
1448 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 07:38:01 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DANKA
Had my a.e. prequal a file...80/20 719 stated at FIELDSTONE...underwriter approved file, was called conditions on its way...2 days pass, where are conditions...only to find out, file went to 2nd underwriter for 2nd signature who declined it for PAYMENT shock...
call my A.E. in shock, we went overguidlines together...guidelines state if payment shock is over 200 then MUST have 3 mnths sourced and seasoned reserves (my client had 6 months) A/E went to bat, and was told this...
Might I ask what the current housing payment and the proposed housing payment were? If your borrower is going from an $800/month rent to a $4500/month mortgage payment, then the underwriter could be thinking, "proposed payment - current payment = $3700 x 10 extra payment in the first year = $37,000 additional housing expense. Borrower has $14000 in the bank. Where is the additional $23000 going to come from later on in the year?"
Obviously, that's an extreme case but in my experience extreme examples get the point accross better than normal ones.
Henry_Sun |
|
|
blangtang
8 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 08:31:36 AM
|
sounds like fieldstone is about to blow up, implode as it were.
hope i'm wrong
TQ |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 08:51:56 AM
|
New payment was 4300.00 a month, customer had 33,000 in bank sourced and seasoned...current payment for rent was 1700.00, he was renting a condo, and the HOA was to verify his rent...besides, the program he was put under (719 FICO score have you) did not require a VOR at all, because of his score, and the VOD...
I never even got a chance for conditions on this file....it was just killed immediately by 2nd underwriter for payment shock...no chance to even present a VOD, bank statement even a VOR if necessary.... |
|
|
tristanhunt
3309 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 09:12:39 AM
|
| could be a sign of poor financial healh over at fieldstone, if what your ae says is true |
|
|
roslyngrant@sbcg
2264 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 10:26:18 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Henry_Sun
quote:
Originally posted by DANKA
Had my a.e. prequal a file...80/20 719 stated at FIELDSTONE...underwriter approved file, was called conditions on its way...2 days pass, where are conditions...only to find out, file went to 2nd underwriter for 2nd signature who declined it for PAYMENT shock...
call my A.E. in shock, we went overguidlines together...guidelines state if payment shock is over 200 then MUST have 3 mnths sourced and seasoned reserves (my client had 6 months) A/E went to bat, and was told this...
Might I ask what the current housing payment and the proposed housing payment were? If your borrower is going from an $800/month rent to a $4500/month mortgage payment, then the underwriter could be thinking, "proposed payment - current payment = $3700 x 10 extra payment in the first year = $37,000 additional housing expense. Borrower has $14000 in the bank. Where is the additional $23000 going to come from later on in the year?"
Obviously, that's an extreme case but in my experience extreme examples get the point accross better than normal ones.
Henry_Sun
Not so extreme, it would seem. |
|
|
SteveM1
5 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:02:33 AM
|
| Sounds like they might be having funding difficulty and are using excuses not to make loans if 70% are getting declined that would have been accepted a month ago. I think their Lehman warehouse line expired on Friday. Did this line get extended to 7/2007, or was that something else that you were referring to? |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:26:09 AM
|
| dOesnt Lehman Brothers own Aurora Loan Services, and they are still doing 80/20 stateds (one loan) at 620? |
|
|
DustinStout
251 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:29:41 AM
|
| With defaults at a very high level, expect much tighter underwriting from all of your lenders. And if you find a lender that still has loose underwriting? Expect them to be out of business shortly. And you'll be lucky if your loan funds. We're in a new market. |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:33:09 AM
|
no problems with tight underwriting, understand that, but kill the loan before you even see the bank statements or VOD...
Guidelines state 3 months PITI in lieu of payment shock, and thats what kills me, the guidelines aren't even being followed...AUTOMATIC TURNDOWN...Its really bothering me....at list stip me for the VOD....
isnt that the reason we prequal loans.... |
|
|
KyleE
67 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:34:52 AM
|
This fits Alt-A, why did you go to Fieldstone in the first place?
Homecommings
Greenpoint
Aurora
many others |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:38:23 AM
|
| went to fieldstone because his longest trade line is 47 months... the other 4 are under 12 months..... |
|
|
emach0313
90 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:40:45 AM
|
| Communication. Most of the time I blame the a/e's for blowing smoke up my... there should be a clear line of communication from whoever is making the decisions to the a/e to the lo's. and cut the crap. |
|
|
SteveM1
5 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:41:31 AM
|
| Yes, Lehman owns Aurora. They also own BNC. I don't even think BNC is doing 80/20 stateds at 620 anymore. |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 11:42:38 AM
|
i went into BNC and their matrix updated on 1/27/07 shows they are doing them at 640....stated with no vor...maybe I should send my deal there.....
|
|
|
Henry_Sun
1448 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 1:45:02 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DANKA
New payment was 4300.00 a month, customer had 33,000 in bank sourced and seasoned...current payment for rent was 1700.00, he was renting a condo, and the HOA was to verify his rent...besides, the program he was put under (719 FICO score have you) did not require a VOR at all, because of his score, and the VOD...
I never even got a chance for conditions on this file....it was just killed immediately by 2nd underwriter for payment shock...no chance to even present a VOD, bank statement even a VOR if necessary....
Then I agree with your response. Did the 1003 include the assets?
Henry_Sun |
|
|
Tsnyder
10978 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 1:48:29 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by blangtang
sounds like fieldstone is about to blow up, implode as it were.
hope i'm wrong
TQ
This forum is funny...
Every time someone posts a mistake made by
a lender someone thinks they must be ready
to implode...
If mistakes are the standard every lender in
America will be out of business before the Spring
market hits.
Tsnyder |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 2:31:26 PM
|
| yes my `1003 did have the assets stated |
|
|
waynepbright
4027 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2007 : 7:04:09 PM
|
Even in my region - Pacific NW, Fieldstone has been extremely tough to deal with on certain levels and I know 1 former AE who was with Fieldstone for 11 mos and was apalled at the crap that's been going on behind the scenes there .. hmmm ?? |
|
|
Henry_Sun
1448 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 07:44:43 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by follmuth
I CAN DO THIS LOAN FOR YOU STATED 80/20 100% LTV. CALL ME JAN
This company appears to be a broker, not a wholesaler...
Henry_Sun |
|
|
mudshark
3921 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 08:00:56 AM
|
| From reading this, I see we have a payment shock of about 175% which to me would be an acceptable limit (even with exception). It seems this payment shock thing is the buzz for now. The only other thing that I see was that the uw did not like the way the income was being stated and used the payment shock as an excuse. |
|
|
DustinStout
251 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 08:46:06 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mudshark
From reading this, I see we have a payment shock of about 175% which to me would be an acceptable limit (even with exception). It seems this payment shock thing is the buzz for now. The only other thing that I see was that the uw did not like the way the income was being stated and used the payment shock as an excuse.
High LTV Stated WE loans have become the most difficult to sell right now -- I'm actually quite surprised there is still an 80/20 stated WE product out there. |
|
|
azbroker
2613 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 08:59:01 AM
|
| Take that deal to IndyMac ALT A. You don't need a VOR with that score and even though they can be difficult to navigate their pricing is awesome. |
|
|
DANKA
904 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 10:44:16 AM
|
| my loan is not w-2 my borrower is 1099 self employed |
|
|
mudshark
3921 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 1:10:19 PM
|
| I think you do have a case of UW attitude. Perhaps there might be something going on internally that doesn't concern you. That is becoming the new land mine in a file. It's just about the only way to blow up a qualifying no-doc loan. |
|
|
ac_crusade
789 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 1:58:54 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by DANKA
dOesnt Lehman Brothers own Aurora Loan Services, and they are still doing 80/20 stateds (one loan) at 620?
I think Aurora also went up to 640 for STATED/STATED. I just sent a file out there and it was clean. The only killer is that turn-around-time is about 3 to 4 days right now. |
|
|
efrederick
1259 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2007 : 8:15:50 PM
|
EquiFirst is still doing 80/20 stated combos with a 640 as well.
|
|
|
bramous
1076 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 04:08:00 AM
|
| The market is changing. Talk of internal strife, underwrtiter attitude, companies in trouble, and possible closings are forever ingrained in conversation. The bottom line is that companies that want to make it, unlike OwnIt or MLN, are looking at the files closer than before. Like I mentioned earlier, files with multiple layers of risk are being scrutinized more. Just because a file technically "fits the guidelines" does not mean that it is a good loan or even that it makes sense. Suppose a borrower has 3 tradelines one of which is 24 months old, is a stated W2 borrower, a FTHB, and has 6months reserves, payment shock, and a 700 mid score. Does it make sense to lend this borrower 100% financing on a $1million dollar property? NO...it doesnt', even though they technically fit guidelines. This is a loan in which a second opinion or signature is required and is soley up to underwriter discretion. If lenders did not want to close loans, we would not be here. We simply do not want to close loans that will come back to us as defaults or delinquencies. Common sense underwriting is a two way road. Look at the file as a whole and if it makes sense, run with it. If you would not lend the money yourself, ask the question of what would make the file stronger and sensible. If you can't answer or produce a good argument, most likely neither could the underwriter. |
|
|
wdecki68
61 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 04:35:59 AM
|
Bramos I agree with you 100%. I would like to add this, just because the borrower is over 700 doesn't mean that they are qualified. Look at the whole picture. If the borrower "qualified" from the get go you would have gone full doc or bank statements, right? There is a reason for going stated. Self Employed borrower's do deposit money into banks. Go bank stmts? or wait they don't qualify?
I work for a wholesale lender. Some say we are a pain at times, but who isn't. Please look at the entire picture before blasting. My goodness your borrower wants to buy a house over $400K and only has 1 tradeline witha 47 month history and the rest are all under 12 months. Where is the credit depth? Is there any proof of the borrower making a monthly payment so great? Let me guess 3 credit cards with $300 limits and maybe an auto? I would question the repayment of this loan as well. No housing history because they pay in cash? Why do all "borrower pay in cash" these days.
|
|
|
cmlassiter
175 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 08:42:46 AM
|
| My Rep at Fieldstone has found employment elsewhere. So if the AE's are leaving, so are the files I was going to send there. |
|
|
bramous
1076 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 09:02:04 AM
|
Corey,
If you need a new rep, call me. We have had some people leave the company over the past 6 months. They simply couldn't adjust to the changing market. Those of us that are here have enjoyed a long, succesful career with Fieldstone and will be around for a long time. I'm in your area and would be happy to stop by and do a meet and greet. |
|
|
chade
166 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 09:49:07 AM
|
| Fieldstone *****, I sent a file there and they killed it because they thought just because I had another home I was doing the new purchase as NOO, and no OO. I went to Aurora, horrible turntimes, but they should get it done. |
|
|
Dennis_IL
583 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 11:00:20 AM
|
My 2 Cents.
I like Fieldstone. My rep is very good and never promises something he can't deliver. He tells everyone that they can be a little more strict then other sub-prime lenders, but they worth it.
People leave good companies all the time. Of all of the industries I have worked in none have had more fightly employees then the mortgages industry.
Don't base your decision on one dissatisfied rep. Think like a business. |
|
|
Henry_Sun
1448 Posts |
Posted - 01/29/2007 : 8:07:08 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by chade
Fieldstone *****, I sent a file there and they killed it because they thought just because I had another home I was doing the new purchase as NOO, and no OO. I went to Aurora, horrible turntimes, but they should get it done.
Generally speaking, with occupancy fraud as rampant as it has been in the past, I'm not at all surprised that Fieldstone had an issue with flipping the owner occ transaction to a non owner.
I'm more than a little surprised to hear that ALS might do this, because I've sold to them in the past and in my experience they were substantially more strict on those sorts of things than Fieldstone ever was.
Henry_Sun |
|
|
| |
Previous Topic | Next Topic |
|
