New Standards, Safer Mortgages, Longer Renters

The new rules will keep more people renting who shouldn't be taking on mortgages they may not be able to afford. Lisa Prevost of the New York Times, however, reports both sides of another but closely related argument.

Required under the Dodd-Frank Act, the rule prohibits the “no-doc” loans common during the bubble.


In a statement issued shortly after the release of the rule, Debra Still, the chairwoman of the Mortgage Bankers Association, applauded its “safe harbor” provision. But she expressed concern that some of the restrictions might curb competition and further tighten access to credit.

On the contrary, said Barry Zigas, the director of housing policy for the Consumer Federation of America, the rule’s clarity and legal protections ought to be a stabilizing force on the market. “In the case of prime loans,” he said, “lenders have a pretty broad protection from liability, which should be an incentive to offer these kinds of basic loans. The industry has been blaming regulatory uncertainty for tight credit. The test for them now, to put it bluntly, is to put up or shut up.”

via Mortgages — New Standards for ‘Safe’ Loans –

If you are an investor in 1-4 unit properties in Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, or Washington, please do the financially responsible thing and make sure you have proper Landlord Insurance with PropertyPak™. We love focusing on real estate and the economy in general, but we are also here to serve your insurance needs.

Hill & Usher (PropertyPak™ is a division) has many insurance offerings. See our menu above for more info and links.

Did this post help you? Let us know by leaving your comment below.

Note: This blog does not provide legal, financial, or accounting advice. Seek professional counsel.

Furthermore, we, as insurance producers, are prohibited by law from disparaging the insurance industry, carriers, other producers, etc. With that in mind, we provide links without staking out positions that violate the law. We provide them solely from a public-policy standpoint wherein we encourage our industry to be sure our profits, etc., are fair and balanced.

We do not necessarily fact checked the contents of every linked article or page, etc.

If we were to conclude any part or parts of our industry are in violation of fundamental fairness and the legal standards of a state or states, we'd address the issue through proper, legal channels. We trust you understand.

The laws that tie our tongues, so to speak, are designed to keep the public from losing confidence in the industry and the regulatory system overseeing it. Insurance commissioners around the country work very hard to analyze rates and to not allow the industry to be damaged by bad rate-settings and changes in coverages. The proper way for people in the industry to deal with such matters is by adhering to the laws, rules, and regulations of the applicable states and within industry associations where such matters may be discussed in private without giving the industry unnecessary black eyes. Ethics is very high on the list in the insurance industry, and we don't want to lose the people's trust. That said, the industry is not perfect; but what industry is?

For our part, we believe in strong regulations and strong regulators.

We welcome your comments and ask you to keep in mind that we cannot and will not reply in any way or ways where any insurance commissioner could rightly say we've violated the law of the given state.

We are allowed to share rating-bureau data/reports and industry-consultant opinions but make clear here that those opinions are theirs and do not necessarily reflect our position.