Home : Blogs : Richard Smith FHA VA Rural Development in TN GA : Richard's Real Estate Thoughts

NAMB must do better representing brokers before Congress

In this post, which started as Members Only but was posted public as comments grew, I falsely attributed to NAMB Government Affairs Committee Chariman, Denise Leonard, with calling yield spread premium a kickback and not being able to answer whether capitalism is the same as "survival of the fittest.

These comments were apparently made by the representative of Federal Reserve. Looking over the list of witnesses at the hearing, the Federal Reserve representative was Ms. Sandra Braunstein, Director of the Division of Consumer and Community Affairs.

Mark Green, of http://www.topofmind.com/, has researched and discovered my error. I apologize to NAMB, the AR community, and most especially to Denise Leonard.

I will leave this post active, prefaced with this apology. And express my regret but also my relief that the comments I heard were not made by a representative of NAMB.

The prepared statement that Ms Leonard gave before the committee is linked here, and was also included below in the original post.

When the transcript of the hearing is available, I will post it here.

Here is a link to my posted apology.

Richard Smith

The webcast that I heard is finally available. Here is the link. I joined while it was in progress and mistakenly thought the witness was Denise Leonard from NAMB. The hearing webcast is over 6 hours long. The part I viewed is around the 1 hour 30 minute point. The webcast gives a wide range of testimony.

Original post follows.

Today NAMB Government Affairs Committee Chairman, Denise Leonard, testified before the House Financial Services committee regarding HR 1728, the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009.

NAMB stands for National Association of Mortgage Brokers. Their website is www.namb.org.

Denise Leonard's testimony was disappointing in my mind. She seemed unprepared for many of the most basic questions.

When asked if yield spread premiums are kickbacks, she replied "yes."

When asked if capitalism is the same as "survival of the fittest" she replied, after some pause, that she was not able to answer that question.

It is not good that in the face of some very significant mortgage reform, mortgage brokers are being so under represented. At least under represented in my mind.

HR 1728, Mortgage Reform of 2009, is a very encompassing piece of legislation. It covers many issues that were addressed in 2008, such as the SAFE Act which called for national loan originator registration, HOEPA Rules revision which prohibits lending practices deemed deceptive, including "coercive appraisals", HUD's new RESPA reform, the new HVCC (appraisal ordering)policies.

This last policy has been negotiated between FHMA and Freddie Mac in a settlement over a law suit that charged a lender (not a broker, by the way) conspired to coerce inflated values with an appraisal management company (not an appraiser, by the way).

The new legislation for 2009 covers loan origination with a prohibition of steering incentive, sets minimum standards for tangible benefits, regulates mortgage defined as high cost, institutes appraisal requirements, and addresses mortgage servicing concerns.

With such important issues being considered, important for our industry as well as the economy as a whole, I wish our representation were a little better prepared to answer congressional inquiry.

If anyone else saw the testimony I would love to hear other thoughts. Maybe she gave better representation in parts of the testimony that I missed.

Here is the official NAMB statement on the pending legislation.

Here is the proposed bill, HR 1728.

Thank you for visiting. This is the professional blog for

Richard Smith
NMLS# 184479 TN# 40161 GA# 28928　

Conventional, FHA, FHA 203k, HUD $100 down purchases, VA, Jumbo VA, Rural Development, Jumbo, FannieMae Homepath, Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC).
Lending in Chattanooga, Tennessee and Georgia for over 20 years.

Stearns Lending, Inc

Cell phone: 423-280-0345 Email: Richard@HomeLoansChattanooga.com

Visit my website: www.RichardSmithHomeLoans.com To inquiry about a home loan Begin Here

Read my most recent articles in Scotsman Guide.

This blog represents the opinions of Richard Smith. The posts and comments written on the blog do not represent the opinions or positions of Stearns Lending, Inc.

Posted by Richard Smith FHA VA Rural Development in TN GA on 04/24/2009 07:23 AM

Comments (58)

Mortgage Reform in the Mortgage / Finance Channel

mortgage reform, hr 1728, namb, yield spread premiums

Originally posted at: Richard's Real Estate Thoughts: NAMB must do better representing brokers before Congress

Generate short URL

Post is included in group: Mortgages
Post is included in group: Tennessee Realtors - Join Hands
Post is included in group: True Mortgage Professionals

58 Comments on NAMB must do better representing brokers before Congress

APR

2009

Hi Richard, I didn't see the testimony but I can well imagine how it went , if the responses as you quoted was what was said. Amazing. I would expect the membership to be getting very upset with the way the questions were answered.

William,

I really doubt that anyone is aware. The real problem is probably a lack of broker participation and involvement. I am sure that NAR has a greater percentage of dues paying members. We are probably getting the representation we paid for.

That said, I know dozens of loan officers in Chattanooga, and certainly have met more on AR who could have done much better.

I was shocked.

Richard

APR

2009

NAMB is obvioulsy underfunded to have illprepared persons representing brokers. By contrast the bank lobby is very well funded by our own tax payer TARP bailout money. How fair is that? The problem is that the broker organizations in national and state level trying to rouse independent contractors who are on the ropes and all are under funded. I paid a support legal fee to NAMB last year and it gets harder to justify when their efforts fall under the bus. I know loan officers who are not keeping up with all the changes because the participation is totally voluntary.

Hi Richard,

Wow. Somebody representing Mortg. Brokers calls YSP a "kickback". Maybe we would have been better off without any representation rather that what you outline above. I realize that there is more to lobbying and working on addressing legislation besides appearing before a committee, but that comment by itself stinks.

Brokers are just not represented in a way that will help their survival. Legislation here in NC is coming that will change the playing field forever for small to medium sized brokers. Banks here have the power so my thoughts are that it can't be that different elsewhere. Hmmm, guess all us brokers better prepare or else we'll be joining the dinosaurs.

Andy Holloman, NC Licensed Loan officer

www.MrMortg.com Raleigh/Durham NC

I actually watched the part of the testimony, expecting to see someone defending the cause. She did nothing to educate the congressional panel. It embarrassed me, at least the part I saw.

Andy, NC has some tough laws. I read a little on the most recent laws, and there are more coming?

I hope NAMB is aware of her statements before the committee. The legislation is due for mark up next week.

Richard

This is dumbfounding. If this person, representing mortgage brokers, believes that the YSP is a kickback, she should find, upon returning to her office, all of her belongings outside the door of her office with the locks changed. What on earth is going on???? How does she explain that statement to the membership?????

I would think Ms. Leonard should run for her life if the response from mortgage brokers to her testimony bears any resemblance to the response Miriam received to her innocent (I thought) post about mortgage brokers on ActiveRain a few weeks back....if I may add a link? Should You Use a Mortgage Broker? by Miriam Bernstein

Miriam was speaking to other real estate agents I believe.

Seems like those mortgage brokers who commented on Miriam's post would be looking to "tar and feather" Ms. Leonard, if they are members of the NAMB.

You get what you pay for-old saying. I am a loan officer for myself. Wow-it is hard to keep up with all the changes going on with the industry. So, I have decided to be on a team and take less of a cut so I can stay better informed.

As Andy mentioned, here in NC we have it tough. In fact, the authors of this bill are both from NC... it builds on the rules they have passed or are passing here. Our representation in NCAMP and NAMB is sorely lacking, but it is true that part of the blame is that few originators become members, choose to remain informed or do anything.

I am all for the education, credit and background check requirements they have implemented in NC. We need originators to be educated in finance and held accountable for the "advice" they offer. But we also need a level playing field where brokers are not getting blamed and squeezed while banks are getting bailed out.

It is frustrating to pay taxes to support my competition... especially when they are using the money to lobby against my profession!

IMHO it is more difficult for loan officers than it is for realtors. Unfortunately. Great post though it raises more questions about the effectiveness of the so-called "leadership" because when affects loan officers ultimately affects realtors.

Lenn,

How did this post get featured? Anyway, appreciate your comments.

If I had not heard her speak, and rather just read the quote in an article, I would not have believed it.

The direct question was, "Yield spread premiums are just kick back, right? Legal kick backs, but kick backs just the same."

Her response was simply, "Yes."

She seemed equally unequal to the task of differentiating between capitalism and survival of the fittest.

As I said, I would not believe it if I had not seen it. I have not been able to find a copy of the testimony, that I watched live.

Maybe in parts of the testimony I did not see, maybe there she gave us better representation.

Thanks,

Richard

Richard,

I've read a TON of information by mortgage brokers right here on ActiveRain over the last month or so (yes, even on Yield Spread Premiums) and it seems to me that your entire industry needs a good wringing out!

It's shameful how wrong so many can be about so much!!

Everyone's well-intentioned (or so it seems), their photos look professional, they're obviously passionate about what they do for a living, but OMG are they wrong on a LOT of things! It's no surprise to me whatsoever that Denise got it wrong too.

I have an extensive background in mortgage lending, so I'm not picking on you I swear. But the entire lending industry needs cleaning up. And although I haven't read all 151 pages of the bill, I'm supportive that there's a real initiative to get things back in order.

Do a search here on YSP...and you'll be surprised what you'll find!

Obligatory Note: I'm not lumping ALL mortgage brokers into my comments above. There are some who are the most professional I've ever seen. But having been exposed to the "others" who lurk all over the internet, or use their AR blogs to provide an "authoritative" podium for the world to view, all the while getting it wrong (and wrong-er)...it somehow just needs to stop somewhere. I guess now is as good a time as any!

Dave

Dave,

Thanks for the comment, and I hope to get back to your thoughts later. I am just concerned now which side I am on - the side that gets it right or that gets it wrong.

BTW, my photo is not professional looking. Need some help with that.

Thanks,

Richard

Would it hurt anyone's feelings if I made this post public? I thought I was just pointing something out to LO's, but if we are going to discuss YSP, it might be good to let everyone in.

Richard: Yes. You should post to the public. I agree with you. NAMB isn't helping. Although I'm on the banking side, it's pretty obvious what's going on. The banks aren't interested in helping the brokers any more. In fact, brokers are a dying breed. It's sad as that's the side I used to be on but the wise ones will affiliate in one way or another with a bank in order to stay in business. The ones that don't may not make it through.

Wow, that's quite the representation! You'd think that she'd have done a little homework on the most important issue of the day for mortgage brokers!

Lets look at the big picture here folks. You have less the 5% of all loans in foreclosure. So why focus on the 95% that are working and the system that put those in place. We also have 12% of the total loans out there as ARM mortgages. My guess would be that many of the failing loans would be ARM loans. It would seem to me that the old adage KISS would apply. Keep it simple stupid. If 95% of the loans are working why create a system more complex? I think it is insane that we are moving away from what worked for so long and worked so well. There should be stronger guidelines clearly but if we just would have never created in Greed (thanks mr Bank) ARM's we would be looking pretty good. Just a few thoughts.

Check my sources below.

The level will remain above $30 billion a month through September 2008. In all, the interest rates on about $1 trillion worth of mortgages, or 12 percent of the nation’s total, will reset for the first time this year or next. A couple of years ago, by comparison, only a marginal amount of mortgage debt — a few billion dollars — was resetting each month.

source http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/01/business/01leonhardt.html

Nearly 3 million homeowners, or about 6.3 percent, were behind in their monthly mortgage payments in January. By some estimates, more than 2 million families will have their homes foreclosed on this year. The number of homeowners facing foreclosure climbed almost 60 percent in January compared with the same month a year ago.

source: http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2008/04/four-percent-of-homes-in-foreclosure-by.html

I think that under the circumstances you should rise up and ask her to resign. Find someone that will not get befuddled by the basic mortgage questions. That sounds reasonable enough.

AR is great, isn't it!

One day, I'm totally ignorant of something.

Then I wake up, log on to AR, and wham!

Yield Spread Premiums?

NAMB -- I guess that is National Association of Mortgage Brokers.

It's a scary world out there. So much information.

I guess if I just hang in there, and keep trolling the AR posts, one day I'll wake up and see Yield Spread Premiums, or some other nuanced entity and know exactly what it is.

It's frightening what's happening, and most Realtors (and even mortgage brokers!) are not aware of the ramifications of what's being forced into legislation in all 50 states.

Here's the biggie: to get or keep your mortgage license, they will pull your credit and look at the last 3 years to determine whether you are "fiscally responsible" enough to help other people.

HELLO!!! 95% of the mortgage industry (and Realtors for that matter) have struggled through a TOUGH 2 years! People with 800 credit scores a year ago that never paid a thing late in their life will now be forced out of business because they took their lumps and stuck it out, but had some credit issues in the process!

How many Realtors made it through the last 2 years with perfect credit? Imagine if you were told that come January 1st your license will not be renewed if you have any credit issues in the last 3 years!

The result of all this? Big Banks (who are the ones getting all of the bail out money AND the ones that created the crazy loan programs to start with) will be the only place left standing to get a mortgage loan from. Funny how they'll come out and make Ba-Zillions off of a situation that they created and then were able to blame on the mortgage brokers!

I did not read the transcript. The one question on Capitalism is disturbing. As history is not taught or understood in this country anymore the importance of capitalism and property rights to human liberty and freedom is not understood.

There are problems with dis-honest people, many of them work in congress. I came out of Insurance. Any place with large amounts of money is going to draw dis-honest people and congressmen. There will always be problems with dis-honest people, but growing moral relativism in our culture is making the problem worse. A free market economy can only work in a culture with a moral center.

In most areas the Government will call for some legal notification to protect people. As more legal notification is added the less likely people will read it. Then they will call to have it simplified, then an attorney will come along and sue because it was vague or not accurate. Who profits? Politicians and Attorneys!

In the last year or so, I have come to notice that many folks who are in the hot seat are really not very good public speakers. If you watch any of the Congressional hearing or committees, then I am sure that you may agree. So, I am not surprised to read your concerns, although it is always very disappointing to hear that those that are given the opportunity to effect changemay not be competent in doing so.

Dear Mr. no name.

That is why over 90% of the business is done by 5% of the agents. your right many are bad and some have personal odor issues. Thanks for your info. Why don't you do something productive other then complain. Be part of the solution.

Had an unsigned comment with poor language and no constructive comments. I have deleted the comment.

Marcus' comment, immediately above this, was posted in reply to the deleted comment.

Thanks Marcus.

Richard

Scary. When Realtors can answer the question better than someone representing their field, it is not a good day. Yes capitalism is survival of the fittest. It's like I tell clients, it doesn't matter what a house appraised for since that day is over. it matters what the market says it is worth. The sam goes to ortgage companies in evaluating rates and services. As to yield spreads, that is a complex question. You do borrow money at a certian rate, and you also have risk premiums. A competitive market sets those numbers. If you go to low it is like a Realtor taking a commission cut down to the nubs, both will be out of business. What concerns me is brokers have to declare fiduciary duty, just like us.

Maureen,

I went to read Miriam's post and commented. Did not review what evidently were some not generous comments.

With regard your comment and somewhat to Miriam's issue, I think the broker world is too independent to be very active towards the NAMB.

Perhaps there is no fiduciary agreement because the industry is new. The real estate agent is much more established.

I wonder though does a bank mortgage loan officer sign a fiduciary agreement. I know several banks that are no more than brokers, sending their mortgages to the same lenders and underwriters that I use.

Please see my comments on her post.

Richard

Roland and Harry,

I do think that a big part of the poor representation is the poor participation from the broker community.

If we survive, we need to grow more responsible, more self policing, more active, better trained.

We should subscribe to a code of ethics. There should be some sort of board.

Real estate agents have an organization, an ethics board. They have developed a strong community over the years.

Mortgage brokers need to move in that direction.

Richard

Marcus,

You are right about the numbers on foreclosures, except I am thinking that it is passing 6% now. As far as the foreclosures though, the overall economic conditions are bringing additional pressures. These are in addition to the balloons, call, and resets that are still facing home owners.

The problem will get worse.

One thing to add to your numbers is the unbelievably large liability that exists in the credit default swaps. Those are still going on.

Congress and others are chasing after brokers and appraisers. They are ignoring the real problem that is with the big boys who funnel those nice large lobby checks to them.

Like RESPA - they worry that a broker charges $10 too much for a credit report, but not so much about the big dollars at higher levels.

Easy targets. Poorly defined catch phrases. All make for nice sound bits that help in elections.

Richard

Paul,

There are a lot of obstacles ahead for mortgage brokers. We can make it through I believe. I actually believe that we offer an essential service.

But we need better representation. That probably requires better involvement from each LO and each office.

Richard

Lyn,

It is not my place to call for her resignation. My hope is that NAMB is dealing with her responses. I did not hear the entire testimony and do not know what goes on behind the scenes.

I do wish she had made different statements at the hearing. I hope that she makes better representation in the future.

And I hope that brokers become more active in our organizations. I know I need to do so.

Richard

Andrew,

To explain yield spread premiums. Everyone is familiar with interest rates. When a loan is sold to an investor the loan has certain characteristics - a term, a credit quality, a rate, an LTV, a type (purchase/refinance).

The investor agrees to purchase that loan as a marketable security, and will offer a certain price for that security. The rate is part of the make up, the characteristics so to speak, of the marketable security.

Premium or discount is the price that the investor will pay.

Based on the total package the investor might pay either even money for the loan, called par. The investor might charge a discount fee to make the total package more profitable. Everyone knows about paying a discount to lower the rate. The investor might pay a premium, because the total package is attractive. This is the yield spread premium.

In actuality, various lenders may offer the same rate, but pay different prices. In many cases I have been able to find a lender that offers a lower rate plus a higher premium.

Banks charge a premium when they close a mortgage, but they are typically not required to show their premium. Only brokers. Our premiums are fully disclosed - not banks, not car sales, not car financing (F&I). Only brokers. The total fee charges is fully disclosed, initially, at lock, and at close by an attorney or a third party title company representative.

Sometimes the premium is used to offset other costs. Sometimes it is used to pay the mortgage broker.

But the language that the premium is a charge that is higher that the borrower is actually qualified for, is misleading and reveals a gross misunderstanding of the mortgage bond market.

There has been much abuse, especially in the subprime and Alt A market. Most definitely in the option arm market in which the premium was directly hidden in the margin adjustment. The borrower's were often not provided adequate explanation about the margin choices.

I'm rattling on too much.

Hope I have not made it more difficult.

You are right - turn on AR and see a whole new world. It's great.

Richard

Hi Richard -- When one can't answer basic questions, it's beyond embarrasing. Nervousness is acceptable, but lack of knowledge and/or communication is unacceptable.

APR

2009

When asked if yield spread premiums are kickbacks, she replied "yes."

This explains why NAMB is a joke. Yield Spread Premium(when properly disclosed and explained) is a way to defer closing closing costs. We don't need NAMB to change, they just need to go away.

Richard,

This is an important time for the entire mortgage industry, especially for brokers. They sorely need better representation than what they are obviously now getting. The borrower is the big loser the more the broker segment is squeezed.

Brian,

Appreciate your comments. We still need someone to represent our interests, and frankly as Esko writes so well, the interests of the borrower.

I wonder if anyone connected with NAMB has anything to add about their thoughts on the testimony.

The bill is scheduled for mark up next week, I think.

Richard

Esko,

Thank you for stopping by. Your point in my mind is the best one on this post. (Including the post itself.)

You so correctly and simply state what was missing in the testimony, at least the part that I heard.

The borrower will be hurt if the broker segment is gone. To convey that point should have the goal of NAMB's testimony.

And borrowers will be hurt as Congress has its way with their misdirected specious and poorly informed good intentions.

Richard

APR

2009

Appreciate your comments. We still need someone to represent our interests, and frankly as Esko writes so well, the interests of the borrower.

NAMB isn't it and never will be.

Brian,

I do wish someone with contacts from NAMB, or better from NAMB would comment.

Richard

APR

2009

Hi Richard, I meant to tune into the testimony but alas... got too busy. I was forwarded your article by a counterpart in the business.

I've been a supporter of NAMB for a little over 5 years now and have always been frustrated by what seems to be rampant, across the board ineptitude. That's not me bashing NAMB - it's just calling a spade a spade. If what you're saying is true, it takes ineptitude to new levels.

I have a blog and one of our contributors wrote what I found to be a couple very interesting articles:

Article #1: Does Your Mortgage Association Wield Political Clout or Inspire Political Doubt?

http://www.topofmind.com/blog/index.php/2009/02/does-your-mortgage-association-wield-political-clout-or-inspire-political-doubt/

Article #2: Leading a Horse to Water and the Politics of Thirst in the Desert:

http://www.topofmind.com/blog/index.php/2009/04/leading-a-horse-to-water-and-the-politics-of-thirst-in-the-desert/

Thanks for the article.

At this point I find myself no longer amazed by anything. Rather sad, but true. I will add this to the mix...there are bad loan officers on both the broker and lender level. It has nothing to do with the fact that they are a broker or a lender. It is simply a metter of ethics and morals. I have seen shammless issues on both sides.

If YSP is a "kickback" (which it is not by the way) then what are SRP's (service release preminums) Does it matter what the title is?

If we determine it is a "kickback" (again it is not) then would it not be the same for a lender and their SRP?

Just a thought...

Mark,

Thanks for stopping by. I read the first article and Brian Brady's response. It is clear that the broker lobby is under everything.

I wish someone from NAMB or TNAMB for that matter, or someone who knows someone, would comment.

At a luncheon session with a local congressman, some time ago, I happened to bring up issues about credit reporting.

The congressment quite plainly told me to go through my lobby.

I have not voted for that republican since. And I am republican.

Brokers provide an essential service. We should have a message that proclaims that service.

NAMB is not doing apparently is not.

BTW, I suscribed to you blog. And recommend it to others.

Richard

Tim Davis,

Next time you get my vote to testify before Congress.

Thanks,

Richard

I'm not sure which hearing you saw, but your account of what took place is completely UNTRUE!! This hearing had 3 panels. Denise Leonard was one of 8 witnesses on panel 3. I attended the hearing for all of panel 3 and I can tell you, not only didn't Denise answer that YSP was a kickback, no questions were asked of her at all!!! Only a small group of Congressman remained for the 3rd panel. Very few questions were asked. Most Congressman made statements. All of the few questions asked, went to the appraisers, realtors and MBA. I invite everyone to go to the Financial Services Committee website, I'm sure you can find a link to view the hearing. Furthermore Richard, you owe Ms. Leonard and NAMB an apology. A bit of advice, never BS about something that can be verifed from the record.

Moreover, Ms. Leonard was very well prepared and is extremely knowledgable of this and all other legislative issues.

Lastly, it appears many of those commenting are not NAMB members. This means you contribute nothing to the support of your industry. You're in business today, because NAMB takes care of business in Washington.

Marc Savitt, NAMB President

Lastly, it appears many of those commenting are not NAMB members. This means you contribute nothing to the support of your industry.

Sir, that's one arrogant statement. Good,clean business is a tremendous support of our industry. Mr. Savitt, with all due respect, I suggest you change your attitude from yelling to engagement. If you have an interest on why I don't see the value of NAMB (and what I would consider valuable), I'll have a conversation with you.

You're in business today, because NAMB takes care of business in Washington.

It is this arrogant attitude that has the leadership disconnected from the street-level originators. I welcome a conversation with you.

Marc,

Thank you for commenting. I have searched for a transcript of the hearing, because I actually could not believe what was being said.

I stated throughout the post that I did not hear the entire testimony. In my post and comments, I tried also to motivate brokers to join NAMB or the state association.

Now about the BS comment. In no way was there any BS in the post. If I made a mistake, apologies will be made. As publicly as I have resources to make. I went to the link provided by NAMB, and joined the session in progress.

I asked in my post for others to verify my version of the testimony, as well as someone to have NAMB comment. I also posted a link to the NAMB position paper.

And I do very much appreciate your comments.

Richard

Brian,

If I misheard the comments from Ms Leonard,I will correct the error with an apology as public as possible, to the best of my ability.

There remains the issues and frustrations of many brokers, which have been expressed in some small way here.

A post, by the way, that I orginially submitted to be viewed only by Active Rain members. And have been surprised by the response.

I do think that greater participation from individual brokers would help. But there appears to ba a sense that NAMB might have some fault with connecting to the broker community.

Richard

Good article. I agree we need to get better participation from individual Mortgage brokers.

Thanks Jacob for commenting.

Richard

Just a little in the way of response to the BS comment from Marc Savitt.

Here is a previous post, for general perspective on my BSing.

http://activerain.com/blogsview/586851/Support-Mortgage-Broker-Associations-Originators-consider-joining-and-becoming-certified

Richard

Hey Richard,

First off, thanks for reading the articles on our blog, and for your kind words.

I posted this article and ensuing comments on the Loan Toolbox Message Board. Victoria Johnson, the incoming NAMB membership chair, and a mortgage professional I like and respect, came to the quick defense of Denise Leonard. In fact, through Victoria, Ms. Leonard claims that the responses you heard did not come from her but rather from the woman representing the Fed.

Has anyone yet come up with the transcript? I'm gonna dig for it once I complete this comment.

Here's the rub with blogging, it's very easy for erroneous information to get "out there" VERY QUICKLY. In no way do I think you were being malicious if indeed your article was inaccurate - and quite frankly, my takeaway here is to conduct my own due diligence before taking a firm position in the comments. In fact, by posting the link at LTB, I'm responsible for adding fuel to the fire before substantiating the validity of your article's content.

Irregardless, I hope that good things will ultimately come from this thread. Maybe it's just creating a stronger sense of urgency that it's up to us to participate in the process... and not leave it up to the other guy. Now that we have the attention of Marc Savitt, I do have one question for him... suggested from another member of the LoanToolBox message board:

Marc, the NAR seems to have done a fantastic job of creating a brand for its constituents. REALTORs must contribute financially which fuels an impressive lobbying war chest. They have a firm code of ethics. What can NAMB do to create a similar structure and value proposition for mortgage professionals?

Mark,

Thanks for researching and bringing clarity to this. I searched the Financial Services page to find a transcript. As of today, it does not seem to be available.

I will post it here when available.

As far as the damage done by my fautly attribution, I will begin the apology process.

I am now concerned that the Fed representative gave the answers that I heard.

If you would make corrections to the LTB membership, I will be indebt.

The urgency of the matter before the financial services committee in no way justified me not verifying that the lady I heard was Ms Leonard.

Thanks,

Richard

Victoria Johnson, the incoming NAMB membership chair, and a mortgage professional I like and respect, came to the quick defense of Denise Leonard.

Victoria is good people. I met her 4-5 years ago when she started a chapter in North County San Diego. I had no idea she was going to be running NAMB. I respect the hell out of her.

What can NAMB do to create a similar structure and value proposition for mortgage professionals?

That's a really good question. I can't see the need for lobbying Congress but I do see the need to promote the brand in the consumers' eyes. The education designations NAMB offers a start but they're contingent upon service to a local chapter; busy originators want to serve customers, not an association. If NAMB designations were performance-based (ie- education and testing only) rather than service-based and dues went towards promotion of the "brand" to the consumer, that would be something to support.

Hi Richard,

I posted your comment above on the LTB Message Board. Until you're able to substantiate the content in your article one way or another, do you think it makes sense to go to the original article and make some updated editorial comments? Not sure how many people will get all the way down through these comments - and hopefully you can prevent others from permeating the story any further.

I'm actually quite relieved that it appears you're mistaken about Ms. Leonard's (non)comments. I quickly skimmed her prepared testimony and found it compelling and well articulated:

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/hearing/financialsvcs_dem/namb_-_leonard.pdf

Brian and Mark,

I hesitate to add more to this, but I do think that a branding campaign directed towards consumers, similar to NAR.

Esko said correctly that brokers perform an essential service to consumers. A campaign that helps to change the language of the discussion - predatory lending, steering, higher rates that borrowers are qualified to recieve.

Choice, affordability, lower costs, flexibility, responsiveness, come to mind.

Thanks for your comments.

Richard

Mark,

I had actually posted the prepared statement from NAMB with the original post, just below the link to the pending legislation.

Richard

I think it is embarrassing and selfish to leave the post active. It should be deleted immediately. Furthermore, the rampant dissemination of this information before any sort of verification is so high school that it makes me embarrassed to share a profession with most of you. Please stop jumping to conclusions about an association that works hard every day to support YOU, whether you are members or not.

I generally would delete an anonymous comment, but this seems appropriate to keep. Not sure really how to undo the "high school embarrassment" of the false attribution.

It seems best to me to leave the post, with a link to my apology and with the prefaced apology.

It does remain that the remarks were made in testimony before the House Financial Services Committee. The remarks themselves reveal a perception that needs to be corrected.

My hope is that NAMB and other, less "high school" representatives of our profession will be able to come together to correct that perception.

Of course though, if the Active Rain community or NAMB want the post deleted, I will do so immediately.

Thank you,

Richard

Please stop jumping to conclusions about an association that works hard every day to support YOU, whether you are members or not.

I don't think that's the case at all, anonymous. What an incredible opportunity for NAMB to engage people who want to know how they can help our businesses. I'll help them but NAMB has got to do better than to suggest that we don't contribute to our industry unless we're members. Originators on Active Rain have been educating consumers about best practices for three years. I see the opportunity in this; I hope NAMB does.

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?

Richard Smith FHA VA Rural Development in TN GA

Chattanooga, TN

More about me…

Address: 1961 Northpoint Blvd, Suite 110, Chattanooga, TN, 37343

Office Phone: (423) 280-0345

Cell Phone: (423) 280-0345

Email Me

NMLS ID: 184479; GA – 28928; TN – 40161;

1961 Northpoint Blvd., Suite 110, Chattanooga, TN 37343,

Company NMLS ID:

Start Your Approval Process Here

Mortgages, home loans, real estate market, home purchase and refinance lending, renovation, FHA 203k, investment, first time home buyer, local events in Chattanooga, Knoxville, Cleveland, Nashville, Memphis, North Georgia, Hamilton, Bradley, Sequatchie, Catoosa, Walker, Davidson, Tennessee, Georgia.

follow richardbsmith at http://twitter.com

Read my regular monthly article in Scotsman Guide - The Fine Print



Lead Article: Inside the Reg Z Maze

Listings

Links

Archives

Find TN real estate agents and Chattanooga real estate on ActiveRain.

Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.