Real Estate Investor · Portland, OR · Member since 2009 · 660 posts · 244 votes
From CNBC article today ....
"Multiple sources now tell me that the Administration, specifically over at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, is considering ways to get more investors into the housing market, possibly with the help of Fannie and Freddie. HUD would not confirm that, but Fannie Mae's chief economist Doug Duncan said it is definitely on the table both at HUD and at Fannie."
This is sure a nice change ... rather than villify the investor realize they can actually help right the housing market! :idea:
I don't want their help. Doing just fine, thank you. Also, they always seem to screw things up. Aren't these the same people that wanted to "help" middle class Americans get into their own homes?
It depends on what kind of "help" they're offering. If they want to be equity partners in our next purchase, they can take a flying leap. However, they can "help" by simply getting out of the way with all their restrictions.
[b]HELLO, I'm an attorney from Washington D.C. and I'm here to help you!
[/b](not!)
Actually, I like the SFAE Act, if only I could rewrite it a bit.
One, there would be no limitation on the number of loans an owner could do. Secondly, the license requirement for brokers would be a registration only. Since there is no one in HUD that can teach seller financing, they sure can't sign off on any instruction, which means the on going continued education for mortage brokers is worse than a Realtor requirement. It is what it is, an opportunity for state to generate fee income and allow the real estate education industry to gig you regularly for class fees.
I am all for the underwriting of seller financed notes. Such underwriting requirements are easily adopted and written to be followed. Counselling from a mortgage broker/lender group or a non-profit finance bunch concerning the borrower aspects would be good for those with low credit scores.
I would also be in favor of all seller financed notes to be foreclosed by judicial process. There is absolutely no reason why an eviction by a landlord should be harder than kicking out a non-paying homeowner!
Just having a judicial process for seller financed transactions would cut out most of the fraud and abuse and a judge could use several tools to adjust the transaction to be compliant, fair and equitable.
But while the SAFE Act was sold to us as a consumer law, I don't see it at all, it benefits the institutional lenders with the under currents from the wake of every paragraph.
I am all for the gov-mint getting COMPLETELY out of the financing market altogether. People pushing legislation to make everyone a homeowner was a big part of our current mess.
Having said that...if the government is going to stay they could at least get rid of the stupid limits on how many property loans they will guarantee. People with cheaper financing can always outbid people without cheaper financing so the current situation is polluting the whole market. If someone has the balance sheet for 12334534534 properties why should the government limit how many they can buy with their guaranteed financing?
GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT! Fannie and Freddie are absolute abortions that should no longer exist. This distortion in the housing market has gone on far too long.
To me, the fact that one NEEDS the government in order to be an investor is sufficiently indicative.
I don't see any investors saying they NEED the government's help to invest. But they can certainly benefit by the government either getting out of their way with all their restrictions or offering the same level of support they offer to other homeowners.
If you DON'T want the government helping investors, then they shouldn't be helping anybody else either. But as long as they are...