Admin

Did the Real Estate Agent Do Their Job?

By
Mortgage and Lending with KJ Financial

I was perusing the net and found a story online I wanted to share.  Let's put a little different angle in hopes of creating some responses from real estate agents.  Before I share the link I want to say first that the mortgage person depicted in this story is a criminal and deserves to go to jail.

The question I am asking is did the real estate agent do their job in looking out for their client or were they more interested in earning a commission or worse too ignorant/inexperienced about their job to realize what was going on.  Please understand that I am asking this question in the aftermath of what has gone on the last 6 years and especially in the past 2 or 3 years.  Before that time frame we weren't really concerned with what happened in this story, but now should we be?

It's a pretty quick read at http://www.housingpredictor.com/foreclosurecrisis.html

This starts out pretty regular where the McGregor family realizes they can buy a home with no money down and poor credit.  Where it goes south is with the mortgage broker (MB) (please understand that it was/is not only brokers doing this type of activity, but also banks and mortgage banks- I personally know of a Washington Mutual employee that argued with me for an hour how inflating an income was not mortgage fraud). 

The MB inflated income, so there is no documentation of income other than a verification of employment, and they charged $31,000 in fees that was rolled into the loan- I assume through a higher home price. Now more than 8% of the purchase price in closing costs seems to be extreme, it is in my area, but maybe elsewhere it isn't. 

The story says that the MB didn't care because he gets paid when the loan closes, well that is true for an overwhelming majority of lenders the originator doesn't get residual income from the monthly payments on the loan, but certainly not unique to MB.

Okay here is what I am getting to.  Was the real estate agent doing their job?  Here are my thoughts.  First, did the agent even ask them about how they qualified, a simple question "what type of income documentation did the lender require" could have raised a red flag? 

Next, did the agent get a GFE before and see those high fees? Granted, the lender could have jacked those fees up at closing.  Then of course the question would be why would you let your client work with a lender you don't know and therefore don't yet trust?

Did the agent know the loan was an adjustable that had the possibility of going up significantly in two years?  If they didn't shouldn't they?  All you need to ask for is the TIL and an ARM disclosure to realize that this loan could easily cause the payments to go up significantly.  If the agent had discovered that wouldn't it be prudent to go deeper with their client to make sure they could afford a big payment increase? 

It's no secret these two year ARMs were sold under the premise that you will have two years to get your credit cleaned up and we'll refinance you.  Come on how naïve is that?  What do people do when they buy a new home?  They spend money don't they?  How are they going to clean up their credit while they are spending all their money on their new home?  So wouldn't it be prudent to make sure the client could afford a new much higher payment?

Now I am sure I have most of you saying "well that's the job of the mortgage lender" and I fully agree.  The question I'll throw back at you is don't you think part of your job is to make sure that the lender your client is working with is doing right by the client?  Isn't that part of your fiduciary responsibility?  If it isn't shouldn't it be?  If it isn't do you think that Civil Attorneys could make it your responsibility?  Eight years ago maybe not, but now, today don't you think they have a hell of a lot of ammunition?

Do you think a financial services type "suitability" standard is that far off?  The media, Congress, NAR, NAMB and the MBA are already talking about it.  Heck the NAR President said that agents are partially to blame in all this because they weren't making sure their clients were getting into financially prudent loans.  There's a new much higher standard coming and by gosh we obviously need one and we are all going to be involved, because even if the powers that be don't do it the legal profession will likely take care of it for us.

Please don't take offense to this, I put a higher standard on my fellow mortgage originators I am just saying that the real estate agent doesn't deserve a pass in this.

Please share your thoughts.

 

Show All Comments Sort:
Missy Caulk
Missy Caulk TEAM - Ann Arbor, MI
Savvy Realtor - Ann Arbor Real Estate

Kurt, that is true, but sometimes the preditory lenders will not call back. The purchasers go find one, who will do the loan. Yes, the Realtor should have warned the clients !!!  This is sad, I had one similiar, we warned, none of our lenders could qualify them.

Two years later, they lost the house. Should never have been ALLOWED to buy it anyway. My title company refused to close it so the lenders title company did. Horrible experience.

Jul 29, 2007 02:07 AM
Leo Namiot - LeoLends.com
Canopy Mortgage - Leo Namiot - Saint Augustine, FL
More than just great rates
This is just one of thousands of stories like this across the USA, the past few years there were lenders and realtors who only cared about linning their pockets and not about what was best for the buyers. With sub prime pretty much gone these sharks are all pretty much out of the business and should make life better for those who are professionals and care!
Jul 29, 2007 02:11 AM
Joe Manausa - Tallahassee, FL
Joe Manausa Real Estate - Tallahassee, FL
Tallahassee Real Estate
Agreed. What Realtor worth his/her salt doesn't stay abreast of the lending process? A simple review of the GFE (which probably was created and signed at closing) would show the problems here.
Jul 29, 2007 02:20 AM
Kurt Jackson
KJ Financial - Kansas City, MO

Missy, in the past 6 or 7 years I have lost probably between 30 and 50 deals because I wouldn't do a 2 year ARM for them, I tried to help them slow down and take 30 days to 6 months or so to clean up their credit a little so we could get them into a FHA loan- everyone of them went to another lender that would do the loan- I did some research and several of them lost their houses to foreclosure- they get no sympathy from me they got exactly what they deserved.  If you have a lender telling you not to do a loan the chances are very good they are looking out for your best interests and not theirs.

Just goes to show you that to accomplish this type of crap you have to have industry insiders involved or it won't work.

Leo, I wish that was the case, there are still a bunch hanging on and they are still running roughshod over the industry because now that people are desparate they are easier targets.  As times get tougher in the industry you will likely see even more outlandish things that is why the real estate and mortgage industries- the true professionals have to really do everything we can to get the message out to the public and others in our industry.

Joe, I agree, the sad thing is I don't think there are very many out there worth their salt (same for the mortgage industry).  We are doing FREE workshops on how to identify these types of things to agents in our area we sent out 3600 invites guess how many came?  4, that's right 4.  That's a sad indictment on the real estate industry.  We even sent invites to the brokers of every office in our area and none of them came, nor their agents nor did they take us up on our offer to do them in their office.  I know that many of them have in house lenders, but they are part of the problem, and we are doing it as part of my radio show, (not as my mortgage company) the only mention of my company is when I tell people who I am and why I am a credible source.

When we did it for a small office I have a previous relationship with they were blown away.  My one hour presentation turned into a 2.5 hour question and answer session.  One top producer said understanding the info we shared was the key to her staying in business and remaining successful.

Jul 29, 2007 02:35 AM
J Perrin Cornell
Coldwell Banker Cascade Real Estate - Wenatchee, WA
Broker, ABR, VAMRES

I agree, however what should have been done? In Washington a Real Estate Agent, by law, is NOT a fiduciary. Reasonable care, honesty, fairness all yes but not fiduciary.

That said my standard is to 1) recommend three lenders (even if they have one) and encourage them to do a little comparison shopping getting at least two quotes. 2) I discuss note rate and APR. I point out that if they differ by more than .75% (which is a lot) they deserve an explanation and if not forth coming then they should look elsewhere. I also point out that they will probably should fget at least two Good Faith Estimates. One at or shortly after application and one prior to closing as thing often change and they need to have the information, that they should review the forms for variance and ask why.

I agree with Missy that many of the predatory lenders never bother to call back. I also try to encourage the clients to use a local lender because of reputation, control and ease of working with them if and when problems arise. But, in my opinion, that is about it and goes beyond "exercising reasonable care and knowledge" as required in our law.

Jul 29, 2007 02:36 AM
Lenn Harley
Lenn Harley, Homefinders.com, MD & VA Homes and Real Estate - Leesburg, VA
Real Estate Broker - Virginia & Maryland

Mmmmm.  Folks with bad credit CANNOT buy a home with a legitimate loan.  If buyers do not meet AT THE LEAST FHA or VA guidelines, they cannot buy a home with me.  That's it.

I don't care what lenders promise.  If folks can't meet at least FHA guidelines, something is fishy and I wouldn't be showing them homes. 

Don't get me wrong.  I have nothing against sub-prime loans if the buyers can qualify for the payments.  I have nothing against stated income loans if the income stated is accurate.  I have no problem with interest only in an appreciating market.  I have no problme with nagative am loans in an appreicating market.  These loans exist because there is a market for them and they serve a limited number of buyers.  I have no problem with anything, as long as it's honest and everything is disclosed. 

If not, then count me out. 

Jul 29, 2007 02:44 AM
Kurt Jackson
KJ Financial - Kansas City, MO

Perrin,

I understand that in many states you are not a fiduciary by law, but that law was implemented before the latest fiasco and knowing how the world really works is it that far fetched that you will soon be one?  The governing bodies for the real estate and mortgage industries are already talking about it, so is Congress and the media how long will it be for the Law Offices of James R. Sokolove start suing agents and loan officers as well as their companies for not taking care of their clients.

I know the 3 lender recommendation is what most agents do, my question is are you 100% sure those 3 lenders are doing right by the client?  Unless you do a lot of business how strong is your relationship with those three lenders?  Most top producers have one go to mortgage source and suggest very strongly that you work with that lender.  In the aftermath of the last few years do you think that JUST recommending three lenders will insulate you if one of them or the lender they choose doesn't put the client into a financal structure that is the best for them?  I am not talking about steering here, I am talking about being the quarterback for your client's financial team surrounding their house and making sure they are properly positioned for a successful homeownership experience. 

Jul 29, 2007 02:48 AM
Kurt Jackson
KJ Financial - Kansas City, MO

Lenn,

Interesting perspective.  So many agents in the past few years have all but written off FHA loans- I had one agent refuse to work with a client that qualified for a FHA loan, but couldn't go conventional he went to another lender got a 2 year arm and about 30 months later lost the house.  I guess the agent didn't care because she go her commission.

Sub prime loans serve their function and if they had fixed rate periods for at least 5 to 7 years AND the client can afford the payment then they aren't inherently bad, it's just having these short term ARMs with inflated incomes- come on a stated W-2 they don't make enough money to qualify for that much house- either buy less house or wait and improve your situation.

Jul 29, 2007 02:53 AM
J Perrin Cornell
Coldwell Banker Cascade Real Estate - Wenatchee, WA
Broker, ABR, VAMRES

Kurt...but from my post you can see i go farther... APR discussion and encouraging comparison shopping. All documented. I think there is also personal responsibility on the part of the buyer. I do not do dual agency in order to be fair to my client. I do more than a reasonable amount of counseling with my client on loan, terms and rates. I even discuss the additional costs they may not be aware of... swg etc. The final decision is not mine. Just like in underwriting IF a person has high debt limits BUT has demonstrated a willingness and ability to manage them (pay on time all the time) they may qualify.

So I agree with your premise and support your idea but not sure where to draw the line. And by the way I am a so called top producer... at least with 66 deals and pipeline deals through July 30 I think so... but I still use three lenders and lean on them very heavily to be fair and prudent. I specifically avoid certain lenders and cautiously encourage my clients to do the same if they are using one that I think is in doubt...so what kind of suit will I get from Sokolove for that?

Jul 30, 2007 01:13 AM