Brokers - Improve your Image & Save Yourself Serious $$$$

[Secret!]

Brokers - Improve your Image & Save Yourself Serious $$$$

More and more in the industry press I continue to see one story after another about Buy-Backs increasing! Time to pre-empt the wholesalers, before they make you unhappy.

I recommend you contact the ones you do business with, and encourage them to let you help them with any collection problems they learn about from the servicer they're using on your former loans. This way, you'll have the chance to potentially save them from having to buy-back one of your loans from the secondary market and subsequently try and stuff it down your throat! Believe me, they'll find a reason why the delinquency is YOUR fault!

You should check with them around the 10th of each month, since by then they would know of any problems that developed at month-end the month before ... by following this advise, it could save you several hundreds of thousands of dollars!

[Troy]

Nothing makes your heart sink faster then receiving a fax saying you have to return a commission check!

troy

PS - Of course, if you meet all guidelines and your fees aren't ridiculous (or even borderline) this is rarely a problem.

[Secret!]

I read about buy-backs all the time, and more and more lately. 25 of my years in this industry, my company did wholesale and we demanded brokers buy-back transactions probably a half dozen times (we were very careful which loans got approved and who didn't). Today most major wholesaler names you know, are more than likely making demands like this on a weekly basis, I'm sure. It's not all that remote, and in most cases the mortgage broker doesn't have two nickles to rub together, so they get put out of biz with a judgnment against them.

[Troy]

This is an interesting topic...

So....what exactly was the ratio of dollar amount funded to dollar amount you demanded be repurchased over the years your wholesale lending institution was in business?

[Secret!]

Even if I still had access to those stats, vs today's degree of fraud by originators in the industry, they wouldn't be too relevent. There's a great deal o fthis sort of information in many industry trade journals, newspapers and magazines, if you would like more on a comparison. What you'll see over the next 6 months or so, this BUY-BACK activity turn into a frenzy with some wholesalers.

[Troy]

[quote=Secret!;189]Even if I still had access to those stats[/quote]

Wasn't it YOUR company? What do you mean "even if I still had access to those stats"? You should be able to produce your own company's stats.

[quote=Secret!;189]vs today's degree of fraud by originators in the industry, they wouldn't be too relevent.[/quote]

I would expect that the number of mortgage company's has grown exponentially while the number of buy backs has probably only grown geometrically. It would still represent growth, but I would imagine the statistics to be representative of volume within the industry. If nothing else, you could teach us about how mortgage lending was done "back in the day."

[quote=Secret!;189]There's a great deal o fthis sort of information in many industry trade journals, newspapers and magazines[/quote]

If you know where the stats are, why don't you quote us some? A good reporter/educator should always back up his opinion with some fact, otherwise it should only be considered a "scare tactic" of which the internet already has too much of.

troy

[hector]

Damn!!!!!

I always wondered if Secret had some kind of fact behind his opinions or if he was just full of propaganda.

I guess we will find out.

Good call Troy!

[Secret!]

troy: One thing I hav elkearnbed afrter posting nearly 10,000 posts on several industry discussi0on boards over the past 7 years or so, and that is that you cannot count on th esort o replies you get from staanger on the internet. Somethimes they're correct, other times, they're biased, sonmetimes they contain sufficient depth (even for the most combative personality like yours), etc.

Forrest Gumpo said it different, it;s like a box of chocklets, ya never know what you're gonna get! So, when I come here and post my opinion, like anybody else, I give all I intend to give most times.

However, not to be confrontational to you like you seem to love to act towards me, I'm humor your inquiry:

1. The Buy-Back piece I posted contained my own memory of this issue after many years as an owner/operator plus what I have sen in indistry publications a great eal lately. Since I wasn't shooting for a "grade" or anything like that, I felt no need to dig out my own company's old records

2. My fraud remark was in reply to your probe to try and the olds vs today and how much fraud did there used to be, so I reflected what ALL articles on that subject say ... fraud today is at run-away propoortions.



Your conclusion that with me posting all th eelevent supporting data fopr my piece, it must be a "scare tactic" - I think if we let that conclusion be drawn by the grown-ups that read it, they won't come to that conclusion, since it was a suggestion for all who saw it, to prepare to protect yourselves.

Saying that it was intended as a scare tactic is childish.

[Secret!]

Siunce you're so curious hector, I have a suggestion for you. Ever hear of google.com? Go there and google YOU and then google ME ... see what you learn .... at least you'll "find out"

[Troy]

[quote=Secret!;192]troy: One thing I hav elkearnbed afrter posting nearly 10,000 posts on several industry discussi0on boards over the past 7 years or so, and that is that you cannot count on th esort o replies you get from staanger on the internet. Somethimes they're correct, other times, they're biased, sonmetimes they contain sufficient depth (even for the most combative personality like yours), etc.[/quote]

First and foremost, I wasn't being combative merely asking appropriate questions to probe deeper into what your information was. If you could've tossed out some facts, I would've accepted them. Hell....you could've made them up and I probably wouldn't have been the wiser. After all, 62.7% of all statistics are fabricated.

In addition, the quantity of posts doesn't necessarily equate to anything except maybe that you have more free time then I do. If I had more spare time, I might spend more time posting on boards. I mean, you say yourself that you can't count on the sort of replies you get from a stranger on the internet.

[quote=Secret!;192] Forrest Gumpo said it different, it;s like a box of chocklets, ya never know what you're gonna get! So, when I come here and post my opinion, like anybody else, I give all I intend to give most times.[/quote]

If you've given all you intend to give in your posts, do us all a favor and just start a blog. A FORUM is for discussion. If you just want to speak your mind, do it on your own blog. If you want a discussion, more information, challenges, THEN utlilize a forum.

[quote=Secret!;192] 1. The Buy-Back piece I posted contained my own memory of this issue after many years as an owner/operator plus what I have sen in indistry publications a great eal lately. Since I wasn't shooting for a "grade" or anything like that, I felt no need to dig out my own company's old records[/quote]

To date, I've owned and operated three different corporations. Most of which I have direct recall of our level of production, revenue, payroll, and how much I paid the IRS each year. After all that was my least favorite check to write each year. However, I would've thought that at the least you would have most of your company stats at your finger tips somewhere on your computer. Did you have to produce it for me...no. However, don't get pissy at me for asking what it was. At the very least, I thought it would be interesting data to benchmark against today's trends.

[quote=Secret!;192]fraud today is at run-away propoortions.[/quote]

See...this is what I'm talking about. If you're going to make an opinionated statement, back it up with something. I'm not saying that I disagree. I almost completely agree with this statement. I just want some meat behind it. Site a source, quote another article, or find a stat somewhere. I would've been hammered should I ever use terminology like this in my debating days or papers I published.


[quote=Secret!;192] Your conclusion that with me posting all th eelevent supporting data fopr my piece, it must be a "scare tactic" - I think if we let that conclusion be drawn by the grown-ups that read it, they won't come to that conclusion, since it was a suggestion for all who saw it, to prepare to protect yourselves.

Saying that it was intended as a scare tactic is childish.[/quote]

It's not childish, it's "put up or shut up." Most mortgage pros who have visited a mortgage forum know that you tend to post a lot regarding compliance regs. I'm assuming you post this in an effort to sell products via your website. If you aren't trying to promote your products, then I apologize. I'm saying, if you sited some sources or quoted some mortgage authorities, then it would lend tremendous weight to your argument (and your credibility). Not that your statements are outlandish and impossible to believe (because they aren't....I actually began this thread by agreeing with you), but that if you make a claim you should be able to back it up. If you're not prepared to defend your statement or entertain inquiries, then don't make it.

troy