All Forum Posts by: Darryl Dahlen

There isn't much information on them, good or bad, to be found.

I will say that if they are scammers the net is usually full of irate customers posting their expereince on places like ripoffreport. I don't find that to be the case here. That's a good sign, but the lack of information on this company doesn't impart a lot of confidence either. Could be a new company with a new face using old tactics.

Unfortunately, the unsecured lines of credit world is full of intermediaries who promise the world, but most often are frauds. The lack of an upfront/application fee with this company is another promising sign, but I'd make sure you ask 10 different ways that there are no upfront fees of any kind before proceeding.

Keep in mind that the amounts they mention are at the upper-end of what's attainable. I wouldn't go into this thinking you're going to obtain $50,000. Most lines are much, much lower.

If you could in fact qualify for $50,000 you should go to Wachovia/Wells Fargo for a line of credit. They have a good program and you'll save 8 points.

A lot of the important points have already been hit on.

Most of the deals I have seen where the loan was assumable required the new borrower to be underwritten to evaluate financial capabilities or that person and their experience.

In most cases, the lender also charged a 1% fee.

Unfortunately, that is often the case.

I've thought about starting this very topic more than a few times over the past week.

As of late, there has been a surge in old topics being resurrected. And by old, I mean 2-4 years old where there has been no recent activity in ages.

I can understand someone doing a search and not seeing the date on the thread before they post in it. I've noticed when I do a search within BP it doesn't initially rank the search according to date. Perhaps that should be fixed.

Regardless, I believe there are some that will do a search for a specific topic and post in older threads simply to promote themselves and/or their product. Those are the ones that rile me up and get my blood pressure moving in the wrong direction, lol.

I'm a little rusty on my residential lending, so bare with me.

If you are applying for an FHA loan, most lenders will accept another lender's appraisal. If you are dealing with a conventional loan product, or a portfolio lender, you may run into issues since most of those lenders will want to order their own appraisal.

In the case where the lender, not the broker, and I don't think brokers order appraisals much anymore, ordered the appraisal, it is at the underwriter's discretion if they want to release the appraisal, and to honest, an UW doesn't care about saving you any money.

Again, I'm a little out of touch when it comes to residential lending, but I did a little checking into this issue, and from my digging around, this is the condensed version of the info I read.

As far as your broker not telling you who they're dealing with, that's an issue between you two. If you have a good working relationship with them it really shouldn't be an issue to disclose to you who the lender is.

Many borrowers don't care who the lender is as long as they're getting what they want, but in your case, perhaps there's more to a loan than just the rate.

I agree that if the lender is to blame for a loan not closing due to their lack of performance that they should at the very least be willing to release the appraisal.

I doubt they would pay for any fees associated with getting the appraisal re-certified, but in the scope of things it could be worse. At least they are releasing the appraisal which saves you $400 (this of course is providing the new lender will accept a re-certified appraisal).

This is one of those issues that boils down to relationships. If you have a good relationship with your broker/lender(s) they are far more likely to act in your best interest when they can't get the job done. If you go after what appears to be a good deal with an unknown, it can blow up in your face leaving you out in the cold when things go south.

The primary reason for the SAFE act was to create a national standard that brokers have to adhere to. An additional benefit is to reduce fraud while increasing borrower awareness.

By giving borrowers a copy of their appraisal, they can at least see how the value for their home was determined. I know in a lot of cases before the SAFE act, the borrower would never even see the appraisal which is crazy if you ask me.

I think the reason a lender won't accept a paper copy of an appraisal is obvious. It eliminates the chance for tampering. Just like credit reports, they're only good if they come from the source.

I'm not sure about this, but I think if an appraiser is going to re-certify the appraisal to another broker/lender they have to go out and check the property again to make sure nothing has changed. Most often, this incurs another small fee, but it's better than paying for another brand new appraisal.

Good point. Under that act, the borrower can at least obtain a copy, which before, they sometimes wouldn't even get that.

However, a copy won't help a borrower if they want to go to a new lender since only originals are accepted.

I sympathize. If for some reason I couldn't/can't do the loan, I don't have a problem assigning the appraisal to someone else. Sadly, people often let pride get in the way of doing what is best for the client.

If you are dealing directly with the lender you are likely to have a much harder time getting them to release the appraisal. One of the downsides of going direct.

Unless things have changed, the lender is not holding the appraisal hostage as it is theirs, not yours. I know that doesn't seem fair since it is the borrower who almost always pays to have it done, but it is almost always done in the name of the lender. That makes it their appraisal, not the borrowers.