�I
offered $289K for a house but was not able to make a down payment.The seller�s realtor told me that so long as I could pay all the
closing costs, they would find a way to contribute 5% toward a down payment.When we sat down to sign the contract, the realtor had increased the
price of the house to $304K, and had a second mortgage contract from the seller
for $15K. I was told that the seller was lending me the $15K for the down
payment, and would"forgive"
the loan after the closing.So I
end up with a house worth $289K and one mortgage for $289K, and all I bring to
the table is the closing costs. Is this kosher?"
No.The lender is being scammed, and if you go along with it you will be a
participant in the scam.
The lender is
being led to believe that he is getting a loan with a 5% down payment. The
paperwork shows a price of$304K
for the house, and a first mortgage loan of $289K, with $15K of equity provided
by the buyer. But in truth there is no equity because the house is only worth
$289K.
For
this scam to work, the appraisal of the property must come in at $304K.This means that the appraiser is either hoodwinked by the fictitious sale
price, or is a party to the scam.
And
you will be a party to it as well.For
the loan to close, you will be obliged to lie about the source of the funds used
for the down payment.
Assuming
the deception is not caught and the loan goes through, it might be caught in a
post-closing audit, in which event the lender could elect to call the loan.All mortgage loans contain an �acceleration clause� which allows the
lender to demand immediate repayment if any information provided by the borrower
turns out to be false.
If
your deception is not caught in a post-closing audit but sometime down the road
you have difficulty making your mortgage payments, the same thing could happen.If they find you lied, you will get summary justice.
If your credit is good, you don�t need
to cheat to get 100% financing.It
is available in the form of combination loans � 80% first mortgage and 20%
second mortgage.It is also
available as 100% first mortgage.You
need a mortgage broker who is familiar with these options.
June 14, 2001
"At another mortgage
information website, I was reading about ways to purchase a house when you
have very little cash. One way was to ask the seller to increase the sale
price and contribute the same amount to the buyer�s cash requirement. Is
this legitimate?"
It is legitimate, provided you do
not conceal it from the lender, and the contribution pays settlement costs
rather than the buyer�s down payment.
Home sellers often gift buyers.
The purpose is to improve the buyer�s ability to purchase the house by
reducing the required cash. For it to work, the appraiser must say that
the house is worth the higher price.
For example, Jones offers his
house to Smith for $200,000, which Smith is willing to pay. But under the
best financing terms available to Smith, he needs $12,000, which he doesn�t
have. This is shown in the "Before" column of the table.
Before
After
Sale
Price
$200,000
$206,000
Appraised
Value
$206,000
Loan Amount
$194,000
$199,820
Down Payment (3%)
$6,000
$6,180
Total
Cash Required
$12,000
$6,360
Down Payment (3%)
$6,000
$6,180
Settlement Costs (3%)
$6,000
$6,180
Gift From Seller
0
$6,000
Buyer�s
Stated Equity
$6,000
$6,180
Buyer�s
Real Equity
$6,000-$12,000
$180-$6,180
So Jones and
Smith agree that Jones will raise the price of the house to $206,000 and
Jones will gift Smith $6,000. Assuming the appraiser goes along, the
amount of cash required of Smith drops from $12,000 to $6,360, making the
purchase affordable. Jones gets his price and Smith gets his house, so
everyone is happy -- except, perhaps, the lender.
Appraisals often ratify sale
prices, whether justified or not. If the house is actually only worth the
original offer price of $200,000, the buyer has only $180 of real equity
-- the difference between the original property value and the higher loan
amount -- rather than $6,180. Less equity means greater loss for the
lender if the loan goes into default.
For this reason, lenders and
mortgage insurers limit seller contributions to buyers. The smaller the
down payment requirement, the more critical the issue becomes. On
conventional loans (loans not insured by the Federal Government), it is
common to restrict seller contributions to 3% of sale price with 5% down,
and to 6% with 10% down.
On FHA loans, sellers can
contribute up to 6% of price to the buyer�s settlement costs, but
nothing to the down payment. FHA seems to believe that by limiting seller
contributions to the buyer�s settlement costs, the equity is protected.
But this is true only if the house is actually worth the sale price
inflated by the buyer�s contribution.
For example, assume the seller
marks up the house price from $100,000 to $106,000 based on a $6,000
contribution but the house is worth only $100,000. Then with a loan of
$102,820 and a down payment of $3180 (3%), the borrower�s equity is
minus $2,820.
Whether the $6,000 is used to pay
settlement costs or down payment, furthermore, doesn�t matter. The
impact of seller contributions on price depends on the size of the total
contribution.
FHA allows a contribution to the
down payment, but it must be an outright gift from a family member or
friend, the borrower�s employer or union, a charity, a government
agency, or a nonprofit corporation or charity. Such gifts don�t cause
price inflation, so the borrower�s equity is protected.
But FHA allows approved entities
to affiliate with sellers. Several nonprofit corporations have developed
programs offering down payment assistance using funds provided by sellers.
These include www.nehemiah.org, www.partnersincharity.org
and www.ameridream.org.
These programs have opened
homeownership opportunities for a segment of the population that would
otherwise be shut out of the market. On the other hand, since the funds
for down payment assistance come from sellers, they cause price inflation.
The combination of direct seller contributions to settlement costs on an
FHA loan and indirect contributions through down payment assistance
programs can add up to 9-10% of sale price.
The only rationale for allowing
seller-provided assistance through intermediaries that is prohibited when
made directly is that the intermediaries add value. For example, the
course in home ownership that Nehemiah requires borrowers to take might
reduce risk to FHA. FHA ought to establish what the benefits are or could
be, and set standards for the entities.
Alternatively, FHA should scrap
the distinction between contributions to settlement costs and to the down
payment, and adopt the practice of the conventional market of limiting the
total contribution of sellers. In line with FHA�s social agenda,
maximums tied to the buyer�s cash investment could be more liberal than
in the conventional market.
Copyright Jack Guttentag
2002
Jack Guttentag is Professor of Finance Emeritus at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Visit the Mortgage Professor's web site for more answers to commonly asked questions.
Related Articles From Mortgage Professor's web site:
Interest-Only Mortgage Tutorial
Here is
what you will learn in this tutorial:
1. What is an interest-only mortgage?
2. For what types of borrowers is it suitable?
3. What are the hazards you should watch out for?
4. What information do you need to assess an IO mortgage?
5. How ...
more...
Tutorial on Selecting Mortgage Features
Planning to shop for a
mortgage on-line? You need to answer the following questions first, so you know
exactly what you are shopping for.
1. What Type of Mortgage Should I Select?
2. Which Mortgage Options Should I Select?
3. How Long a Term Should I Take?
4. ...
more...
Qualifying For a Mortgage
December 12, 2000
Most potential borrowers are
nervous about getting a mortgage loan because they share a widespread
misperception: the misperception is that they have no bargaining power
relative to lenders, and therefore must approach them ...
more...
How Much Should I Put Down?
March 7, 2005
The Down
Payment Decision: Borrower Can Put Nothing Down
In answering this
question, I place borrowers into three groups. One group has no money for a down
payment, so they have no down payment decision to make. Their problem is
qualifying for a loan without a ...
more...