AZEsquire
Dist of Columbia,#2Consumer Comment
Fri, March 17, 2017
To the idiot that said this is "Obamanomics," I have to say reading is your friend, also facts. 1) The author clearly stated that this saga started in 2007. Who was president?; 2) It took years of DEREGULATION to get us to the housing bubble; and 3) Spell check is your friend.
Injustice Slayer
Virginia,#3Consumer Comment
Sun, March 01, 2015
Buyers should be very concerned about signing a construction contract with a lender that has not provided truth in lending disclosures. It is a trap. The mortgage instruty stipulates lenders must provide truth in lending and RESPA rules limit how much they can deviate from truth in lending figures and the agreed upon terms. I would avoid buying a new home with builders that channelize you to use thier lender before you have truth in lending and thier terms. At the end of the day, builder incentives are not real savings when you considered how they can make up the incentive in pricy lending terms. There are plenty of nice built homes that allow you to buy market value and without being trapped into shady deals. THier methods do not break the rules as their contract language allows them to skate around the rules that were put in place to protect consumers from shady lending practices. Be smart and do not fall for the sales trap.
Watching
Henderson,#4REBUTTAL Owner of company
Sun, June 30, 2013
This report of not getting finacing without more money down vs no money down speaks to the crisis we went through in this time of the real estate boom and later collaspe.
These folks were better off now if they did not buy. But the point was, the bank wanted more money down. I did not see anything wrong with the mortage company asking for more money down. Getting prequalified does elinate this problem by the way, you two.
As for all the back and forth e-mails and the squabling over this feature and that . Your really making the home builders job more dificult. You need to realize you are not the only ones buying a house and to nickel and dime so you can get free money speaks to the crisis that was about to happen. The mortage company knew it but was too weak to say you guys should not be buying if you can't put down money. To change features at the last minute, shows youre up to yur ears in leveraging. This was what the crisis that was about to happen had been based on. People like yourselves going crazy about spending your own money to buy your own house.
We could have eliminated all the the e-mail crap if you just admit you couldn't afford the house. Putting 10% down on a house you got to pay on anyways is no reason to blame the builder. You are going to eventually pay for the house, aren't you? Unless you were really are too broke to go forward with the whole purchase anyways.
And mortage companies are separate entities from builders, even though builders give incentives to use a SPECIFIC finace company. It has do do with (Commisions, Kickbacks) . Please educate yourself first before getting upset about how the whole industry functions
Its like complanning the airplane was tight and cramped, because the manufacture builds the plane too small. No, the airline has to cram enough people into the tiny furselage so they can give you the affordable airline ticket. so they the airline can pay the manufacture to sell them more airplanes. Get it? Unless you are big time and can fly on your own jet making your own rules you got to play by the industry rules. They are after all, nice enough to lend you the money, get it.
So what did we learn from this Ripoff report
1 People don't want to use there own money
2. People don't get prequalified.
3. Builders are not mortgage companies, they are builders.
4. Business are usually busy selling to people who can afford to buy.
KDR406
Rockville,#5Consumer Suggestion
Wed, May 02, 2012
I think the author did a great job making his case as to why he wanted to back out of this sale. NV's bussiness model had to adapt to the radical changes in lending laws that were changing at the exact time as this sale. Lending requirements were changing as lenders were beginning to see losses on 100% loans .
First of all any responciable lender would have suggested that you look at a mortage note of 35 % debit to income ratio. NV at time of sale was able to offer 100% financing on the day of the sale. As time went by lender terms became harder to come by. Banks were starting to take losses on the homes they sold at 100% Why you ask? Because the buyer had very little of their own money in the game. Owners who got pissed off at the lenders for selling them to much home began to walk away as well as take out their anger on the homes to hurt the lender back. This is the mess that was created when Barney Frank wanted to make everyone's dream come true by selling first time home buyers more home then they could afford making them house poor.
These rules were not invented by NV homes! The government lifted common sense lending practicies for political gain. Obamanomics it was called. We now will all pay for this mistake for years to come as it will take six more years to flush all these bad loans out. Home prices will fall for those who bought after 2005. Many will be upside down.
NV could not sell you the home if you could not get financing. If they could not get you a loan then you had the option to go elsewhere to get the terms you wanted. What the buyer did not understand was that they did agree to four go seller incentives to go go elsewhere for altunitive financing.
If the buyer gets cold feet , the seller can keep your money to cover their losses for the buyer backing out. Thank god these days are behind us now and lenders are forced to take more care getting a loan.
Rule of thumb , talk with your lender first before you enter a contract and don't know how to pay for it on the back end.
Ronald
Glen Allen,#6Consumer Comment
Mon, April 27, 2009
You can find records of donations to your government representatives you may think are protecting your rights as a consumer. Odds are high they have NVR money in their pocket, so to speak. Almost certainly if they are republican they are supported by NVR and their associates. Another inconvenient truth that is more clear than global warming, NVR's money is way more important than your vote to many of your government reps. They may talk like you matter when you are going to the poles, but when real life settles in, you really don't. I've now seen hundreds of stories about NVR situation like yours. And that's just from the few who post complaints. They pretty much come out the same. Hard to figure out why people keep dealing with NVR?