- Find a Real Estate Professional
- Realtors®
- Mortgage Lenders
- Home Improvement Pros
- Other Real Estate Services
- Review an Agent, Lender or Pro
- Marketing on Zillow
- Real Estate Agent Advertising
- Join the Professional Directory
- Popular
- Real Estate Market Reports
- More
Answers (1)
- Justin Sheftell, "Courtesy Mortgage"
- Contributions:3428
Lots of topics here, I'll just touch on a few. For starters, if you were applying FHA, it doesn't seem a very good decision to have an appraisal done, as the Streamline No Appraisal program would be much easier to complete.
The UFMIP refund lapses after 3 years, and is only available on Streamline, so if you have already had your loan for 3 years, the refund is not a factor.
Not nearly enough information to disect FHA vs. conventional. All things equal, with LTV 90-95%, the two programs tend to run pretty close when comparing.
As to the Final 1003 you were presented, it is not uncommon for an underwriter to remove assets if they were not sufficiently documented, or if they contained large deposits, the lender MIGHT have decided it would be "easier" to have their loan file a bit thinner for when it gets securitized. If your loan was approved, the amount of assets would not have any bearing on the terms you are offered. I wouldn't be overly concerned about that aspect, but you certainly are right to question it.
The UFMIP refund lapses after 3 years, and is only available on Streamline, so if you have already had your loan for 3 years, the refund is not a factor.
Not nearly enough information to disect FHA vs. conventional. All things equal, with LTV 90-95%, the two programs tend to run pretty close when comparing.
As to the Final 1003 you were presented, it is not uncommon for an underwriter to remove assets if they were not sufficiently documented, or if they contained large deposits, the lender MIGHT have decided it would be "easier" to have their loan file a bit thinner for when it gets securitized. If your loan was approved, the amount of assets would not have any bearing on the terms you are offered. I wouldn't be overly concerned about that aspect, but you certainly are right to question it.
Should we refinance FHA->FHA or go FHA->conventional?
To refinance, we chose a lender in August 2011 and dropped off an updated URLA on Sept 6th. We've gone round & back & through with an appraisal (now at $332,000) and missing paperwork and a rate lock extension (WITH FEE) (the rate is locked at 4.25%) and finally got a settlement statement from the lender's lawyer last Friday (November 4th) to close yesterday (Nov 7th, when the most recent lock expired).
When we got to the closing, the Settlement Statement was slightly different than the GFE's. We're fine with that. But also the URLA wasn't updated with all of our changes from September and other items (bank accounts, student loans) had been removed from the URLA. We are not fine with this.
So we didn't close on the refinance and we didn't give the check to the lawyer for the closing costs.
The lender called today to suggest we want to go with a conventional mortgage product that they offer (with a lower rate, at 4.125%), with no real explanation of why we would want to change the process we've been working through for more than two months now.
Suggestions & opinions are welcome on whether you think we should keep trying for the FHA refinance or shift towards the conventional loan product. (I think if we go FHA -> conventional we'd lose the FHA MIP prepayment we made at the closing in June 2008?)
Thanks!
Stating a discriminatory preference in an advertisement for housing is illegal. If you think this content is discriminatory or otherwise inappropriate and feel it should be removed from Zillow, please let us know by completing the information above.
We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.