Domain: tiger-web1.srvr.media3.us Anyone here have mortgage insurance? | Page 4 | Political Talk
Started By
Message

re: Anyone here have mortgage insurance?

Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:26 pm to
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
117150 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:26 pm to
quote:

Anyone here have mortgage insurance?


Nope. I don't have a mortgage.
Posted by 50_Tiger
Arlington TX
Member since Jan 2016
43356 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:45 pm to
I wouldn't necessarily say required by my work is in Irving. Las Colinas is on a whole nother level and I enjoy not having to worry about culcha as much.

Lewisville and The Colony were great to by < 300k but those homes got gobbled up for the most part quickly when Toyota and friends made camp along the SRT / DNT.

I can afford a 300k home mortgage (im pretty much doing that now.) It is the fact that a few of you in this thread want to do away with a program that allows people to get into a home sooner rather then 10 years down the road if everything works out.
Posted by Tigerdev
Member since Feb 2013
12287 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:47 pm to
I believe you are referring to FHA loans which have federally backed mortgage insurance. These loans can help a lot of people (in areas where the houses can meet the rigid FHA standards) because it requires a much smaller down payment relative to a conventional loan while still having a pretty low interest rate.

I don't think you are going to get a whole lot of people here to admit that they benefit from any federal program even though statistically (especially given the southern demographic on the board) it is very likely that great many here benefit from some sort of program...

My loan is conventional and FHA is a pain in the arse anyway so idc...
Posted by S1C EM
Athens, GA
Member since Nov 2007
11594 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:52 pm to
quote:

while still having a pretty low interest rate


FHA rates are traditionally about 1/8-1/4% LOWER than conventional. Have been for years. PMI is also lower. They're a no-brainer, even if you're putting 10% down. USDA is 100% (no down payment required at all) and also have lower rates than conventional. There is literally almost no reason to use a conventional loan in this day and age.
Posted by Tigerdev
Member since Feb 2013
12287 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:54 pm to
No doubt. It is just that not every home that is listed allows FHA which ultimately led me to a conventional...
Posted by spacewrangler
In my easy chair with my boots on..
Member since Sep 2009
9871 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:56 pm to
Hopefully you have been corrected but you heard wrong of you think he did anything that would effect people who currently have pmi.

A halt was put on a reduction in future annual MIP for FHA mortgage that was schedule for FHA mortgages originated-closed after 1-27-17. They want to study the proposal further before allowing the reduction to become in effect.

Posted by Aristo
Colorado
Member since Jan 2007
13292 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 12:57 pm to
You heard? Do you have any proof?
Posted by spacewrangler
In my easy chair with my boots on..
Member since Sep 2009
9871 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 1:11 pm to
There is literally almost no reason to use a conventional loan in this day and age.



As a 20+ year mortgage industry professional you are wrong.

FHA has an up front mortgage insurance premium of 1.75% (think of it as points) plus an annual MIP that is paid monthly. FHA PMI NEVER DROPS, you pay it for the life of the loan.


quote:

They're a no-brainer, even if you're putting 10% down


Wrong. For 10% down we can do a single premium paid financed pmi and it would be a much better overall deal than FHA.

FHA is a good program for those who do not have a lot of funds for down-payment and closing cost and who have limited credit.

USDA is a good program but you have to make less than the medium income for the county. Everyone in the household "combined" cannot make over $75k in my County. It is less if just a single applicant. There is a 2.5% funding fee imposed by USDA and annual MIP paid monthly. Yes the monthly is lower than a convention if at the same LTV but not when you include the up front cost your 5 year investment is much higher.

Depending on theach clients situation, long term goals and etc will determine the proper mortgage product.

Posted by spacewrangler
In my easy chair with my boots on..
Member since Sep 2009
9871 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 1:17 pm to
quote:

will more than likely put 3.5 down and as someone mentioned earlier refi after 7 years. Without this program you are asking me to save for a 300k home , 60 grand


Nope, conventional allows 5% down, can all be a gift, and the seller can pay closing cost and prepaid.

You can get in that $300k
home for $15k. You just need to speak with an experienced mortgage professional.
This post was edited on 1/21/17 at 1:19 pm
Posted by S1C EM
Athens, GA
Member since Nov 2007
11594 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 5:07 pm to
quote:

FHA has an up front mortgage insurance premium of 1.75% (think of it as points) plus an annual MIP that is paid monthly.


Yes, you're right about that. Upfront cost is actually more before you add-in the down payment. However, the difference in the rate on the life of the loan can be HUGE. When we bought our last one, there was roughly a .5% difference. That's pretty hard to overcome.

quote:

FHA PMI NEVER DROPS, you pay it for the life of the loan.


That is correct. I forgot about that and it may be an issue for some. That might make it worth considering a refi once you eclipse the 80/20 LTV mark. Personally, it would be hard for me because our rate is 3.5%. So 3-5 years from now, I couldn't say it would make any sense at all to refi just to get out of PMI. We'd still be paying more every month and likely in the long run at whatever the current rates will be.

quote:

Wrong. For 10% down we can do a single premium paid financed pmi and it would be a much better overall deal than FHA.


Not really familiar with what you're proposing and I know mortgage products vary greatly from lender to lender, but wouldn't that mean you're taking part of the 10% down payment away from the actual principal on the loan?

For me, there was literally no scenario where my payments would have been better outside of the FHA product. Now, long-term, I may be on the hook for more if my loan goes for a full 30 years; however, we'll likely pay it off in closer to 20 and with less going to interest....well, I don't know. I think if there were a long-term advantage to conventional, it would be nominal at best.
Posted by Crimson Wraith
Member since Jan 2014
29660 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 5:09 pm to
Had it built in 2008.
Posted by ljhog
Lake Jackson, Tx.
Member since Apr 2009
20446 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 5:40 pm to
nope. no got no mortgage insurance. no need it.
Posted by RTRinTampa
Central FL
Member since Jan 2013
5532 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 6:14 pm to
quote:

If you have a conventional loan mortgage insurance is required if you do not have at least 20% equity in the property. It has nothing to do with being "responsible" or not.


It has everything to do with being responsible. The default rate for those with less than a 20% down payment or 20% equity is much higher than for those with. "Skin in the game" so to speak.
Posted by RTRinTampa
Central FL
Member since Jan 2013
5532 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 6:15 pm to
quote:

If we got rid of the FHA/Fannie/Freddie guaranteees, housing prices would crash down to the level they should be at. All government guarantees do is raise the price.


Yep, just like student loans.
Posted by auggie
Opelika, Alabama
Member since Aug 2013
31252 posts
Posted on 1/21/17 at 6:29 pm to
quote:


I mean, you can buy a home with an FHA mortgage with 3.5% down payment. That's absurd.


I bet you would be singing a different tune,if you had a house you are trying to sell.
You wouldn't give a damn how much money the buyer had to pay down.
Posted by kaduwa
Montreal
Member since Nov 2016
16 posts
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:35 pm to
Ha ha .. republicans..
Posted by kaduwa
Montreal
Member since Nov 2016
16 posts
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:41 pm to
Do you think that is one and only option to solve the problem?
Posted by Bass Tiger
Member since Oct 2014
55060 posts
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:46 pm to
quote:

I heard that on his first day Trump eliminated subsidies that made mortgage insurance less expensive. This only effects Democrats. No Republicans have this mortgage insurance, right?




Probably true for 90% of conservatives not necessarily republicans, we like to put down at least 20% when purchasing a home and save that PMI for something else.
Posted by Sanfordhog
Tennessee
Member since Jan 2016
479 posts
Posted on 2/15/17 at 9:56 pm to
If the govt gets out of the mortgage "loan business" then that lender is less likely to give the loan.

Hopefully I didn't waste my time explaining but I'm guessing I did.
Posted by kaduwa
Montreal
Member since Nov 2016
16 posts
Posted on 2/15/17 at 10:03 pm to
I don't have mortgage insurance, but after reading the above conversations I went through some platform for mortgage insurance some say we need it some says we don't need it because insurance costs start adding up. Mortgage insurance, health insurance, Auto insurance in some cases and life insurance and most of us can't afford them all.
What do you guys think? Do we really need this?
This post was edited on 2/16/17 at 10:31 pm
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram