Question by Brad F: What if I signed an intent to occupy on an FHA mortgage, visit this page and didn’t end up moving into the property?
My mortgage broker didn’t mention I signed an intent to occupy on my mortgage. My intention was to use the property as a rental property. What happens if I do not occupy the property??
Best answer:
Answer by Patrick
If you signed the paperwork saying you would live there and you do not live there then it would be considered mortgage fraud. I’d try to get this corrected because if they find out on their own that you rented the place out they may call the mortgage due immediately.
Also most “intent to occupy” clauses only last for 1 to 2 years. Check the document you signed to see what the time you must occupy is.
Good Luck!
Add your own answer in the comments!
SOCCER-CUP-SPONSOR by Sisa Majola
SOCCER-CUP-SPONSOR by Sisa Majola. JOHANNESBURG July 31 Sapa. THERE WAS NO SPONSORSHIP ISSUE: KHOZA. Premier Soccer League (PSL) chairman Irvin Khoza said on Tuesday the new sponsorship deal for the MTN8 cup tournament had …
For more informaiton please visit here…
Hankyoreh Korea's most trusted newspaper for 8th straight year
The Hankyoreh was chosen as the most trusted newspaper the 8th year in a row in a survey of experts conducted by Sisa Journal, cheapest an independent weekly magazine. On August 12, prostate Sisa Journal announced the results of a survey titled 'Who Moves Korea …
For more informaiton please visit here…
Melbourne end five game losing streak
Cooper Cronk, Justin O'Neill and Sisa Waqa all finished the match with doubles as the visitors left AAMI Park looking for answers following Melbourne's return to form. Under pressure coming into the match, Craig Bellamy's side got off to the best start …
If you would like more informaiton please visit here…
Question by : Trying to refinance an underwater mortgage using new FHA guidelines?
My house is under water, pilule I was trying to refinance using the new FHA guidelines where they will write off as much as 10% of the principle. The rules say that you have to work with your current lender. I was doing that but now my lender says that they can’t work with me because they don’t own the loan, it is in a mortgage backed security.
What can I do?
Thanks Acermil, you said
Lenders who own current loans are not required to participate in the FHA program, under the new guidelines. Such participation is purely voluntary. If your lender will not participate, there is nothing you can do about it. Your lender must be willing to reduce your principal by at least ten percent. If they will not provide a reduction, you cannot refinance under the FHA program.
My understanding is that in order to finance under the new FHA regulations, you MUST be current in your loan.
What is the point of new FHA regulations if the lenders are not required to use them?
Why would they do a principle reduction if they don’t have to?
My house is 100K under water, the loans are at 6 and 7 percent, I just want to refi at 4.5%
Best answer:
Answer by acermill
Lenders who own current loans are not required to participate in the FHA program, under the new guidelines. Such participation is purely voluntary. If your lender will not participate, there is nothing you can do about it. Your lender must be willing to reduce your principal by at least ten percent. If they will not provide a reduction, you cannot refinance under the FHA program.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!
The program was supposed to help millions of homeowners the program is and was called “Hope for Homeowners” and it was a complete flop. After 6 months I think I heard that the program worked for under 100 homeowners. It was far from thought through and thrown together as a band-aid that did not even come close to helping because it was strictly voluntary. The new program HAMP (not so new anymore) is the new principal reduction program. If you stay current (continue to make payments) under the HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) you will be credited $ 1,000 for every year for the first 5 years. Is that really principal reduction, I would say no.