It’s not news that the Real Estate and Mortgage Industry both have seen their fair share of challenges over the past few years, but sometimes out of those challenges come exciting innovations and new ideas. With that said, it my honor and privlage to announce the launch of E Loans Mortgage Inc.
Here at E Loans Mortgage our Mission is simple : To Provide The Highest Level Of Professional Mortgage Banking Services To Our Clients, Using The Latest Technologies To Help Our Borrowers Achieve Their Goals Through The Most Transparent, Easy To Understand Lending Practices Possible.
Through my many years of industry contacts I have built a strong network of Partner Wholesale Lenders and Service Providers who offer some of the best Mortgage Products available anywhere. By Leveraging These Contacts, we have been able to secure negotiated Mortgage Terms that will provide our Borrowers with some of the Best Rates and Closing Costs available anywhere.
The Team Here at E Loans Mortgage Inc is excited about the new opportunity to serve our borrowers, and it’s my personal belief that you wont find a better more educated team of Mortgage Professionals anywhere. Regardless if you are a First Time Home Buyer or a Seasoned Investor, rest assured we have a Mortgage Product to fit your individual needs. Being an independant Lender, E Loans Mortgage does not have to fit you into a specific box, this allows us the opportunity to custom tailor a Mortgage Plan designed to meet your specific financial goals and needs.
It’s not news that the Real Estate and Mortgage Industry both have seen their fair share of challenges over the past few years, but sometimes out of those challenges come exciting innovations and new ideas. With that said, it my honor and privlage to announce the launch of E Loans Mortgage Inc.
Here at E Loans Mortgage our Mission is simple : To Provide The Highest Level Of Professional Mortgage Banking Services To Our Clients, Using The Latest Technologies To Help Our Borrowers Achieve Their Goals Through The Most Transparent, Easy To Understand Lending Practices Possible.
Through my many years of industry contacts I have built a strong network of Partner Wholesale Lenders and Service Providers who offer some of the best Mortgage Products available anywhere. By Leveraging These Contacts, we have been able to secure negotiated Mortgage Terms that will provide our Borrowers with some of the Best Rates and Closing Costs available anywhere.
The Team Here at E Loans Mortgage Inc is excited about the new opportunity to serve our borrowers, and it’s my personal belief that you wont find a better more educated team of Mortgage Professionals anywhere. Regardless if you are a First Time Home Buyer or a Seasoned Investor, rest assured we have a Mortgage Product to fit your individual needs. Being an independant Lender, E Loans Mortgage does not have to fit you into a specific box, this allows us the opportunity to custom tailor a Mortgage Plan designed to meet your specific financial goals and needs.
Do You Know What is NOT Covered in Your Home Owners Insurance Policy?
You Might be Surprised
In recent years, insurance carriers in Florida have added many exclusions to property insurance policies, with little oversight or public debate. These exclusions are drafted into policy leaving consumers with less coverage for the same (if not higher) premium.
Because many policyholders rarely read every word of their large and complex policies, they may not even be aware of what is NOT covered. Since policyholders are unable to negotiate policy language, they are left with a choice of accepting the changes, purchasing new endorsements or seeking a different carrier.
Examples of common policy exclusions include:
Eliminating Your Rights to Appraisal – For 200 years, policies have included the binding appraisal process to settle disputes between insurance companies and the insured over amount of loss or value of damaged property. Many insurers are restricting or eliminating this provision, which provides important consumer protections.
Giving You a Sinking Feeling – Many policies no longer cover damage from sinkholes unless the sinkholes are deemed “catastrophic,” usually meaning large and sudden. But slowly occurring sinkholes can cause catastrophic damage to a home and its value. Damage can run into the hundreds of thousands, often more than the value of the home, leaving many homeowners with no other choice than to walk away from their mortgages.
Requiring You to See Through Walls – Most insurance claims deal with water damage, often stemming from damage behind walls or under slabs that doesn’t become noticeable for weeks or months. Citizens and other insurance companies now deny claims for leakage occurring over more than 14 days, even if it is hidden from sight. In fact, Citizens has just announced plans to further expand its water exclusion.
Eliminating Coverage for Mold – Where there is water damage mold often forms. Though it is recommended that water be removed and damaged areas dried within 48-72 hours, company insurance adjusters often are unable to visit the home within that time. No matter the reason, if mold forms, most companies will no longer cover the cost of its removal.
Leaving Screened Structures Uncovered – Popular in Florida, screened enclosures used to be covered under most homeowner insurance policies. Many carriers have now added exclusions that remove screened structures from coverage.
Re-Defining “Falling Objects” – Typically, damage from falling objects in a home or condo (such as floor damage from a falling light fixture or fan) is covered. Citizens’ new condo policy, however, only covers such damage if the falling objects come down from the sky through your roof or walls. Great coverage for meteorites, but little else.
“REO” or Real Estate Owned are properties which have completed the foreclosure process and are currently owned by the bank or mortgage company. This is different than real estate up for foreclosure auction.
If you buy a property during a foreclosure sale, you must pay at least the loan balance plus any interest and other fees added during the foreclosure process. The buyer must also be able to pay with cash in hand. Finally, you’ll accept the property 100% as is.That could involve existing liens and even current denizens that need to be evicted. This process is generally known as “buying on the court house steps” This can be a very risky process and is generally more reserved for experienced investors with large capital and experience who also usually have a higher risk tollerance and is usally not for the amateur.
A bank-owned property, by contrast, is a more tidy and attractive option. The REO property did not find a buyer during foreclosure auction. The lender now owns it. The bank will see to the elimination of tax liens, evict occupants if needed and generally organize for the issuance of a title insurance policy to the buyer at closing. These are generally listed for sale in the local Hernando MLS systems, and can be a great value when acompanied with the guidance of an experienced realtor such as Tina Fingerman.
Note that REOs may be exempt from typical disclosure requirements. For example, in Florida, it is optional for foreclosures to have a Property Disclosure Statement, a document that ordinarily requires sellers to tell you about any defects they are informed of. By hiring Agent Trust Realty, you can rest assured knowing all parties are fulfilling Florida state disclosure requirements.
It is frequently believed that any REO must be a good deal and an opportunity for easy money. This isn’t always true. You have to be prudent about buying a repossession if your intent is make money. While it’s true that the bank is often eager to offload it promptly, they are also motivated to minimize any losses.
When considering what to pay for a foreclosure, carefully analyze comparable sales in the neighborhood and be sure to take into account the time and cost of any repairs or remodeling needed to prepare the house for resale. There are bargains with potential to make money, and many people do very well buying and selling foreclosures. However there are also many REOs that are not good buys and may not be money makers.
Most banks have a department dedicated to REO that you’ll work with when buying REO property from them. Usually the REO department will use a listing agent to get their REO properties listed on the local MLS.
Before making your offer, you’ll want to contact either the listing agent or REO department at the bank and learn as much as you can about what they know concerning the condition of the property and what their process is for getting offers. Since banks typically sell REO properties “as is”, it may be in your best interest to include an inspection contingency in your offer that gives you time to check for unseen damage and retract the offer if you find it. If, as a buyer, you can provide documentation proving your ability to pay, such as a pre-approval letter from a lender, your offer will be more attractive and likely be accepted. (This holds for any type of real estate offer.)
Once you’ve made your offer, it’s customary for the bank to respond with a counter offer. At this point it will be your decision whether to accept their counter, or offer a counter to the counter offer. Be aware, you’ll be dealing with a process that probably involves a group of people at the bank, and they don’t work evenings or weekends. It’s not unusual for the process of offers and counter offers to take days or even weeks. Agent Trust Realty is are used to working around the schedules of this type of seller and will do everything possible to ensure there are no unnecessary delays.
SAN FRANCISCO – California’s attorney general filed lawsuits against mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Tuesday, demanding that the companies that own some 60 percent of the state’s mortgages respond to questions in a state investigation.
Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose office filed the lawsuits in San Francisco Superior Court, is investigating Freddie Mac’s and Fannie Mae’s involvement in 12,000 foreclosed properties in California where they served as landlords. She also wants to find out what role the companies played in selling or marketing mortgage-backed securities.
The essentially identical lawsuits ask the mortgage firms to respond to 51 investigative subpoenas that call on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to identify all the California homes on which theyforeclosed. They also want the mortgage firms to reveal whether they have information on the decreased value of those homes due to drug dealing or prostitution, as well as explosives and weapons found on those vacant properties.
“Foreclosures not only affect the families who lose their homes, but also the safety, health and welfare of the entire community,” the lawsuit said.
Harris also called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disclose whether they have complied with civil rights laws protecting minorities and members of the Armed Forces against unlawful convictions and foreclosures.
The suits also seek to determine whether the companies are in compliance with California’s securities and tax laws.
The companies were taken over by the federal government and put into conservatorship under the Federal Housing Finance Agency in September 2008 to save them from collapse.
An attorney representing the Federal Housing Finance Agency said in a letter attached to the lawsuits that the 51 subpoenas were “frequently vague and ambiguous,” and said state attorneys general did not have the authority to issue subpoenas against the federal conservator.
“The burden to collect that information would be nothing short of staggering,” the letter said.
Representatives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac said the companies would not comment on the lawsuits Tuesday.
The lawsuits could determine whether states have a right to investigate the mortgage firms while they are under federal control. Harris argues that since the mortgage companies own properties in California, they are subject to state law and demands.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy home loans from banks and other lenders, package them into bonds with a guarantee against default and then sell them to investors around the world. The two own or guarantee about half of U.S. mortgages, or nearly 31 million loans.
The companies have so far cost American taxpayers more than $150 billion — the largest bailout of the financial crisis. They could cost up to $259 billion, according to the FHFA.
Two former CEOs at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last week became the highest-profile individuals to be charged in connection with the 2008 financial crisis. In a lawsuit filed in New York, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought civil fraud charges against six former executives at the two firms, including former Fannie CEO Daniel Mudd and former Freddie CEO Richard Syron.
The executives were accused of understating the level of high-risk subprime mortgages that the companies held just before the housing bubble burst.
Harris has created a task force that is pursuing criminal charges and civil judgments in mortgage fraud cases. She has said that her office would not join a planned 50-state settlement over foreclosure abuses that federal officials and other state attorneys general are negotiating with major U.S. banks.
She said the settlement gave bank officials too much immunity from civil litigation.
Harris said 768,330 residential mortgages were foreclosed on in California between January 2007 and June of this year.
SAN FRANCISCO – California’s attorney general filed lawsuits against mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac on Tuesday, demanding that the companies that own some 60 percent of the state’s mortgages respond to questions in a state investigation.
Attorney General Kamala Harris, whose office filed the lawsuits in San Francisco Superior Court, is investigating Freddie Mac’s and Fannie Mae’s involvement in 12,000 foreclosed properties in California where they served as landlords. She also wants to find out what role the companies played in selling or marketing mortgage-backed securities.
The essentially identical lawsuits ask the mortgage firms to respond to 51 investigative subpoenas that call on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to identify all the California homes on which theyforeclosed. They also want the mortgage firms to reveal whether they have information on the decreased value of those homes due to drug dealing or prostitution, as well as explosives and weapons found on those vacant properties.
“Foreclosures not only affect the families who lose their homes, but also the safety, health and welfare of the entire community,” the lawsuit said.
Harris also called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to disclose whether they have complied with civil rights laws protecting minorities and members of the Armed Forces against unlawful convictions and foreclosures.
The suits also seek to determine whether the companies are in compliance with California’s securities and tax laws.
The companies were taken over by the federal government and put into conservatorship under the Federal Housing Finance Agency in September 2008 to save them from collapse.
An attorney representing the Federal Housing Finance Agency said in a letter attached to the lawsuits that the 51 subpoenas were “frequently vague and ambiguous,” and said state attorneys general did not have the authority to issue subpoenas against the federal conservator.
“The burden to collect that information would be nothing short of staggering,” the letter said.
Representatives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac said the companies would not comment on the lawsuits Tuesday.
The lawsuits could determine whether states have a right to investigate the mortgage firms while they are under federal control. Harris argues that since the mortgage companies own properties in California, they are subject to state law and demands.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy home loans from banks and other lenders, package them into bonds with a guarantee against default and then sell them to investors around the world. The two own or guarantee about half of U.S. mortgages, or nearly 31 million loans.
The companies have so far cost American taxpayers more than $150 billion — the largest bailout of the financial crisis. They could cost up to $259 billion, according to the FHFA.
Two former CEOs at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last week became the highest-profile individuals to be charged in connection with the 2008 financial crisis. In a lawsuit filed in New York, the Securities and Exchange Commission brought civil fraud charges against six former executives at the two firms, including former Fannie CEO Daniel Mudd and former Freddie CEO Richard Syron.
The executives were accused of understating the level of high-risk subprime mortgages that the companies held just before the housing bubble burst.
Harris has created a task force that is pursuing criminal charges and civil judgments in mortgage fraud cases. She has said that her office would not join a planned 50-state settlement over foreclosure abuses that federal officials and other state attorneys general are negotiating with major U.S. banks.
She said the settlement gave bank officials too much immunity from civil litigation.
Harris said 768,330 residential mortgages were foreclosed on in California between January 2007 and June of this year.
It was because he was going to retire anyway, lost a favorite port town in redistricting and had a tough race last time.
Was this really why Congressman Barney Frank announced today he’s retiring from the House of Representatives?
Perhaps another reason was he’s no longer chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and like a lot of bullies, Mr. Frank found it’s not easy to be stripped of the power to torment and humiliate others.
Brilliant, but acid tongued and generally unpleasant, Mr. Frank ruled with an iron gavel, ran over critics with delight and treated committee members and especially Republican colleagues as lesser forms of life.
Mr. Frank’s departure in January 2013 will remove from the House one of its more offensive members. Until then, this petulant, abrasive and downright nasty Congressman will keep making his presence known.
However, it is unlikely that Mr. Frank is leaving for the reason he should depart Congress: out of shame for all he did to stop reform of Fannie and Freddie while there was still time to avert the disaster that almost took down the American economy.
In 2003, he called Fannie and Freddie “fundamentally sound financially” and accused the Bush Administration of trying to “exaggerate a threat of safety… [to] conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see.”
A year later, he said talk of financial problems at Fannie and Freddie were “an artificial issue created by the administration…I don’t think we are in any remote danger here.”
In 2007, as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and just as Fannie and Freddie – overleveraged and stuffed to the gills with riskymortgages they’d encouraged and facilitated – were about to go over the cliff, Mr. Frank attacked President George W. Bush’s call for reform as “inane.”
Yet when Fannie and Freddie went belly up in the fall of 2008, Mr. Frank voted for the same Bush Administration reforms that could have averted the bankruptcies of Fannie and Freddie.
Why did Mr. Frank oppose giving these two gigantic financial institutions the same scrutiny as a local bank, a neighborhood savings and loan or a community credit union?
Fannie and Freddie provided “grease” for the Democratic political machine through hundreds of millions in charitable contributions to left wing community and advocacy groups that are critical to Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts.
Fannie and Freddie hired vast armies of influence peddlers – admittedly from both parties, but mostly Democrats – to forestall any efforts at reasonable regulation.
Fannie and, to a lesser extent, Freddie, were led by Democratic political power brokers, masquerading as mortgage bankers while advising Democratic presidents, vetting Democratic running mates, and plumping the election hopes of Congressional Democrats.
Mr. Frank is incapable of feeling shame, regret or a sense of personal responsibility. These are emotions for lesser beings. He’s leaving because of redistricting or to avoid having to raise money or facing those nasty little voters every two years. The House will be a better place for his departure.
Karl Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is a Fox News contributor and author of “Courage and Consequence” (Threshold Editions, 2010).
It was because he was going to retire anyway, lost a favorite port town in redistricting and had a tough race last time.
Was this really why Congressman Barney Frank announced today he’s retiring from the House of Representatives?
Perhaps another reason was he’s no longer chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and like a lot of bullies, Mr. Frank found it’s not easy to be stripped of the power to torment and humiliate others.
Brilliant, but acid tongued and generally unpleasant, Mr. Frank ruled with an iron gavel, ran over critics with delight and treated committee members and especially Republican colleagues as lesser forms of life.
Mr. Frank’s departure in January 2013 will remove from the House one of its more offensive members. Until then, this petulant, abrasive and downright nasty Congressman will keep making his presence known.
However, it is unlikely that Mr. Frank is leaving for the reason he should depart Congress: out of shame for all he did to stop reform of Fannie and Freddie while there was still time to avert the disaster that almost took down the American economy.
In 2003, he called Fannie and Freddie “fundamentally sound financially” and accused the Bush Administration of trying to “exaggerate a threat of safety… [to] conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see.”
A year later, he said talk of financial problems at Fannie and Freddie were “an artificial issue created by the administration…I don’t think we are in any remote danger here.”
In 2007, as Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee and just as Fannie and Freddie – overleveraged and stuffed to the gills with riskymortgages they’d encouraged and facilitated – were about to go over the cliff, Mr. Frank attacked President George W. Bush’s call for reform as “inane.”
Yet when Fannie and Freddie went belly up in the fall of 2008, Mr. Frank voted for the same Bush Administration reforms that could have averted the bankruptcies of Fannie and Freddie.
Why did Mr. Frank oppose giving these two gigantic financial institutions the same scrutiny as a local bank, a neighborhood savings and loan or a community credit union?
Fannie and Freddie provided “grease” for the Democratic political machine through hundreds of millions in charitable contributions to left wing community and advocacy groups that are critical to Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts.
Fannie and Freddie hired vast armies of influence peddlers – admittedly from both parties, but mostly Democrats – to forestall any efforts at reasonable regulation.
Fannie and, to a lesser extent, Freddie, were led by Democratic political power brokers, masquerading as mortgage bankers while advising Democratic presidents, vetting Democratic running mates, and plumping the election hopes of Congressional Democrats.
Mr. Frank is incapable of feeling shame, regret or a sense of personal responsibility. These are emotions for lesser beings. He’s leaving because of redistricting or to avoid having to raise money or facing those nasty little voters every two years. The House will be a better place for his departure.
Karl Rove is a former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush. He is a Fox News contributor and author of “Courage and Consequence” (Threshold Editions, 2010).
On February 7, 2012 FAIR announced a Class Action Lawsuit against Citizens Property Insurance. Attorney Mark Beausoleil, FAIR Regional Director David Welch, Steve Fingerman Board Member and President E Loans Mortgage Inc and Senator Mike Fasano, Announce FAIR’s Lawsuit against Citizens Property Insurance for their practices of inflating Replacement Cost Values and Overcharging Florida Consumers. Florida Association Of Insurance Reform Announced on Feb 7, 2012 A Class Action Lawsuit Brought Against Citizens Insurance by It’s Policy Holders at The Capital Building In Tallahassee
When considering what to pay for a foreclosure, carefully analyze comparable sales in the neighborhood and be sure to take into account the time and cost of any repairs or remodeling needed to prepare the house for resale. There are bargains with potential to make money, and many people do very well buying and selling foreclosures. However there are also many REOs that are not good buys and may not be money makers. 
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
YouTube
