Friday, July 24, 2009.
1) So Boss' only client meeting was with the DW family. After the meeting, Boss told HK to do a 1035 Exchange on two of the existing annuities into a new annuity with new money. HK quickly told her, she could not do that, b/c both the existing annuities were qualified. So she just ended up creating a new annuity. Comment: why a client needs 5 different variable annuities is beyond me.
2) When filling out the application, HK noticed that the i4life that Boss was trying to set up didn't add up. HK went back to Boss to ask her the correct allocation. Boss gave her some numbers and they still didn't add up to the proper allocation of Bonds:Stocks. Comments: Boss couldn't add. This isn't the first time she's done this.
Thursday, July 23, 2009.
1) So we went to two audits today: Rep DR and BR. So today I had an opportunity to ask her some questions since she's always on the go and it's very difficult to find time to talk to her. So while I'm driving, I ask her about the Compliance E-Mail she received on the 17-July-2009 regarding that we have to send all incoming/outgoing correspondence items. So she asked me what do we have to send, and I told her that we need to basically send EVERYTHING (ie. statements, client notes, etc.) She got very upset in the car, because she said I should have asked someone in-house (eg. her) before I called Compliance. She was disputing that we do not need to send statements, because she argued that she did not have to do this and was told back in 1995. Comment: This is probably the main reason why I want to leave. If she wants me to help drive the Compliance Issues, how can I do my job if she's behaving on her own set of rules? One cannot evaluate on a case by case basis of what needs to be sent to Compliance. And what does Boss have to hide? What's the big deal on the documenation being sent to Compliance?
2) During the car she asked me if I printed the U-4's for the two reps. I told her that she didn't tell me specifically that they were needed for the audit. She says she told me (but, she didn't) and told me I had to figure out a way to get them. So we called the office and I spoke to HK to instruct her to send them to each of the reps. Boss told me to send both U-4's to rep DR. I asked her if that was okay, since we're sending a different U-4 to a different rep. She said it was fine. Comment: Well for starters, her instructions to me was very poor regarding having the U-4 in the file. And secondly, aren't there privacy issues about sending one's U-4 to another rep?
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
We ordered the GPS on Costco.com for her, so she'll be set when it arrives. Lets hope she can see to enter in directions on the GPS.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Future Registered Representative (RR) JG, Boss, and I drove out to Sequim to do RR AD's 2009 Audit. What bothers me about the Boss, she prejudges a lot. During our first drive out to Northgate for KN's 2009 audit, she saw me pull out my Garmin GPS, because we had Mapquest and said we did not need the device (ie. GPS) that I was holding. So on this trip, I pulled it out to use. Because it was a 1 hour 45 minute drive to Sequim, I wanted to use the GPS as a gauge to figure out both distance and time until we reached our final destination. As I was setting it up, Boss immediately said we don't need to use the 'toy'. I told her it would be helpful, and JG reaffirmed that it would be nice to have two sources and that Mapquest could be used as a backup. Although, Boss didn't want to use it, she finally agreed since we had practically already set it up to use. Within 5 minutes, after the GPS verbally gave instructions, Boss asked what is this? (This whole time, she had no idea what it was.) So I explained what the GPS device was. Needless to say, Boss did a 180 degree turn and you could hear the excitement in her voice that she wanted one. For the next 5 hours, I think I heard her say she wanted one and couldn't wait to get it at least 3 dozen times.
Monday, July 20, 2009.
Nothing to report. Everything was fine and she was busy.
We ordered the GPS on Costco.com for her, so she'll be set when it arrives. Lets hope she can see to enter in directions on the GPS.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Future Registered Representative (RR) JG, Boss, and I drove out to Sequim to do RR AD's 2009 Audit. What bothers me about the Boss, she prejudges a lot. During our first drive out to Northgate for KN's 2009 audit, she saw me pull out my Garmin GPS, because we had Mapquest and said we did not need the device (ie. GPS) that I was holding. So on this trip, I pulled it out to use. Because it was a 1 hour 45 minute drive to Sequim, I wanted to use the GPS as a gauge to figure out both distance and time until we reached our final destination. As I was setting it up, Boss immediately said we don't need to use the 'toy'. I told her it would be helpful, and JG reaffirmed that it would be nice to have two sources and that Mapquest could be used as a backup. Although, Boss didn't want to use it, she finally agreed since we had practically already set it up to use. Within 5 minutes, after the GPS verbally gave instructions, Boss asked what is this? (This whole time, she had no idea what it was.) So I explained what the GPS device was. Needless to say, Boss did a 180 degree turn and you could hear the excitement in her voice that she wanted one. For the next 5 hours, I think I heard her say she wanted one and couldn't wait to get it at least 3 dozen times.
Monday, July 20, 2009.
Nothing to report. Everything was fine and she was busy.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Friday, July 17, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
1) On Wednesday, Client AH called when Boss was in a meeting and had a complaint that she thought that her $500k variable annuity was guaranteed when it has lost a couple hundred thousand. HK took the message and wrote it on the board. The next day Boss was upset that HK should have either interrupted her clients meeting or told me to tell her before I left. Comment: Per our in-house procedures, HK wrote it on the board. Boss probably did not read the board nor did she really have an intention to call her back. AH has been calling for 2 weeks and Boss has not called her back (ie. one of the weeks was because Boss was on vacation.)
1) On Wednesday, Client AH called when Boss was in a meeting and had a complaint that she thought that her $500k variable annuity was guaranteed when it has lost a couple hundred thousand. HK took the message and wrote it on the board. The next day Boss was upset that HK should have either interrupted her clients meeting or told me to tell her before I left. Comment: Per our in-house procedures, HK wrote it on the board. Boss probably did not read the board nor did she really have an intention to call her back. AH has been calling for 2 weeks and Boss has not called her back (ie. one of the weeks was because Boss was on vacation.)
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009.
She's back from being gone 5 business days, so it's to no surprise that I'll have a bunch of items to add.
1) HK wrote out some balances for her regarding a client statement. Boss could not see them. So HK wrote it bigger (ie. numbers the size of double spacing) and Boss could still not read it, because HK wrote a 7 and Boss asked why she wrote a 1.
2) JR of BE came with his wife for a quarterly meeting. Boss was giving her pitch about American Funds New World Fund and said that they needed it in their portfolio. JR corrected her and said it is in the portfolio. Boss responded that they must have did this in the last quarterly meeting. Unfortunately, they've had the fund since October 2008. Comment: She should have reviewed the portfolio prior to the meeting, but she probably couldn't see it.
3) Boss was reviewing each of the funds and wasn't reading the funds correctly, so the client assisted and read off the names of each fund on their statement.
4) Boss comes to HK during a meeting to ask her to research some Dreyfus documents that client EW & Son brought. HK researches it and realizes it's just a notice regarding automatic deposits/withdrawals, dividend re-investment, etc. HK goes into the meeting and tells Boss what it is. Boss overreacted in her voice tone and told HK that is not what she asked for. She asked for HK to see if there were any transfers in front of the clients. Comment: this might have been a coverup in front of the client to save Boss embarassment from not being able to see.
5) Boss gives HK some paperwork to process. It's an EW American Legacy allocation. HK tells Boss that the policy is not set up and that they are waiting for the check to fund the policy. Boss scolds HK for not reading the client notes and that HK should have communicated that the notes to Boss prior to the meeting. Comment: HK and I rarely prep for a client meeting, because either Boss is to busy or there is really nothing outstanding/pending. Another thing to mention regarding inconsistency is that Boss' second allocation was different than the original allocation two months ago. Even if the paperwork was processed two months ago, has the clients objective changed that much to merit a re-allocation?
She's back from being gone 5 business days, so it's to no surprise that I'll have a bunch of items to add.
1) HK wrote out some balances for her regarding a client statement. Boss could not see them. So HK wrote it bigger (ie. numbers the size of double spacing) and Boss could still not read it, because HK wrote a 7 and Boss asked why she wrote a 1.
2) JR of BE came with his wife for a quarterly meeting. Boss was giving her pitch about American Funds New World Fund and said that they needed it in their portfolio. JR corrected her and said it is in the portfolio. Boss responded that they must have did this in the last quarterly meeting. Unfortunately, they've had the fund since October 2008. Comment: She should have reviewed the portfolio prior to the meeting, but she probably couldn't see it.
3) Boss was reviewing each of the funds and wasn't reading the funds correctly, so the client assisted and read off the names of each fund on their statement.
4) Boss comes to HK during a meeting to ask her to research some Dreyfus documents that client EW & Son brought. HK researches it and realizes it's just a notice regarding automatic deposits/withdrawals, dividend re-investment, etc. HK goes into the meeting and tells Boss what it is. Boss overreacted in her voice tone and told HK that is not what she asked for. She asked for HK to see if there were any transfers in front of the clients. Comment: this might have been a coverup in front of the client to save Boss embarassment from not being able to see.
5) Boss gives HK some paperwork to process. It's an EW American Legacy allocation. HK tells Boss that the policy is not set up and that they are waiting for the check to fund the policy. Boss scolds HK for not reading the client notes and that HK should have communicated that the notes to Boss prior to the meeting. Comment: HK and I rarely prep for a client meeting, because either Boss is to busy or there is really nothing outstanding/pending. Another thing to mention regarding inconsistency is that Boss' second allocation was different than the original allocation two months ago. Even if the paperwork was processed two months ago, has the clients objective changed that much to merit a re-allocation?
Friday, July 10, 2009
Friday, July 10, 2009
She called in for messages and here is went on:
1A) DS answered the phone and read her some of the messages on the board. Immediately after the last message on the board was read, Boss asked to be transferred to Helen and to 'make it quick'. Comment: Boss did not want to stay on the 1-800 number long due to costs.
1B) HK talked to her asking a few questions. HK had overheard DS/Boss talking and DS reading off messages, so HK was trying to explain one of the messages. Boss told HK that DS never read any messages and to not challenge her. HK had asked Boss what to do in terms of a signed Franklin application that KN needed signed. Boss told her that she didn't to sign and to send it in.
1C) VG client called today asking why a transaction was done. HK responded and said that per the meeting with Boss, this what was discussed. VG responded, "I don't recall talking about this. I thought mutual funds were to be held long-term and not traded. But okay."
She called in for messages and here is went on:
1A) DS answered the phone and read her some of the messages on the board. Immediately after the last message on the board was read, Boss asked to be transferred to Helen and to 'make it quick'. Comment: Boss did not want to stay on the 1-800 number long due to costs.
1B) HK talked to her asking a few questions. HK had overheard DS/Boss talking and DS reading off messages, so HK was trying to explain one of the messages. Boss told HK that DS never read any messages and to not challenge her. HK had asked Boss what to do in terms of a signed Franklin application that KN needed signed. Boss told her that she didn't to sign and to send it in.
1C) VG client called today asking why a transaction was done. HK responded and said that per the meeting with Boss, this what was discussed. VG responded, "I don't recall talking about this. I thought mutual funds were to be held long-term and not traded. But okay."
Thursday, July 09, 2009
Wednesday, July 08, 2009
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
1) We did not know this, but HK or I are suppose to write down exactly what is on her White Board after each meetings. Comment: She can't recall what she's writing? It's very possible she would deny that she wrote something too.
2) Client BS wanted to do a 401k rollover. When HK went to process the paperwork, she noticed there was no 401k statement. HK asked Boss if the client provided an estimation, and Boss said he never said. HK calls client and he says he told Boss several times it was $30k.
3) Boss told HK to do some asset reallocations. The number total was 90% when it should have been 100%.
4) Boss says it's a case by case situation when notarizations are required. Sometimes Boss can do notarizations with the client present and sometimes Boss can do notarizations without the client present. Comments: I believe the law requires both parties to be present for notary services.
Monday, July 6, 2009
1) Per the client statements we prepare, we were originally told to put the date the funds or assets acquired on the consolidated statement (we prepare) when FNIC took over. She now changed her mind based on Ross/Walters to put the cost basis of the fund or asset. We had originally told her this months ago, but she did not want it. Comment: This is a huge flaw, because around tax season in April, many clients were calling for cost basis on assets sold which HK and I had to allocate time to research.
2) Researched 8 Variable Annuity Transfer errors that I did. We executed them today as of 6-July-2009.
1) We did not know this, but HK or I are suppose to write down exactly what is on her White Board after each meetings. Comment: She can't recall what she's writing? It's very possible she would deny that she wrote something too.
2) Client BS wanted to do a 401k rollover. When HK went to process the paperwork, she noticed there was no 401k statement. HK asked Boss if the client provided an estimation, and Boss said he never said. HK calls client and he says he told Boss several times it was $30k.
3) Boss told HK to do some asset reallocations. The number total was 90% when it should have been 100%.
4) Boss says it's a case by case situation when notarizations are required. Sometimes Boss can do notarizations with the client present and sometimes Boss can do notarizations without the client present. Comments: I believe the law requires both parties to be present for notary services.
Monday, July 6, 2009
1) Per the client statements we prepare, we were originally told to put the date the funds or assets acquired on the consolidated statement (we prepare) when FNIC took over. She now changed her mind based on Ross/Walters to put the cost basis of the fund or asset. We had originally told her this months ago, but she did not want it. Comment: This is a huge flaw, because around tax season in April, many clients were calling for cost basis on assets sold which HK and I had to allocate time to research.
2) Researched 8 Variable Annuity Transfer errors that I did. We executed them today as of 6-July-2009.
Friday, July 03, 2009
Friday, July 2, 2009
1) Boss wanted HK to do some reallocation changes, but the changes she wanted to make were not even within the same annuity. I suppose if you have one client that has 3+ different annuities, it's hard to get them confused.
2) Boss did not know what 'F' shares were for mutual funds. HK to research.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Boss was busy with meetings all day and everything went fine.
1) Boss wanted HK to do some reallocation changes, but the changes she wanted to make were not even within the same annuity. I suppose if you have one client that has 3+ different annuities, it's hard to get them confused.
2) Boss did not know what 'F' shares were for mutual funds. HK to research.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Boss was busy with meetings all day and everything went fine.
Thursday, July 02, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
1) Rep KN came in to have some 401k paperwork completed, because her clients are going on vacation. HK gave the AIF to Boss to sign and Boss almost signed over where KN was suppose to sign. HK pointed her finger and held it there so Boss could not see.
2) Rep KN noticed Boss was using the sunlight to read a document. KN even made a comment about being able to do this business working from a wheelchair, but to not see, there's no way she could do this business. KN also made an analogy with her mom having Lasik.
3) Boss changed her mind about doing the statement for the WAH individual from yesterday.
1) Rep KN came in to have some 401k paperwork completed, because her clients are going on vacation. HK gave the AIF to Boss to sign and Boss almost signed over where KN was suppose to sign. HK pointed her finger and held it there so Boss could not see.
2) Rep KN noticed Boss was using the sunlight to read a document. KN even made a comment about being able to do this business working from a wheelchair, but to not see, there's no way she could do this business. KN also made an analogy with her mom having Lasik.
3) Boss changed her mind about doing the statement for the WAH individual from yesterday.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
1) Boss questioned a quarter end statement that I produced and wonder why it was only 1 page. I told her that's how it always been done. She seemed to doubt it, so I showed her the history, and the last time it was detailed was 09/30/2006.
2) HK researched 401k for WAH today with American Funds. HK went back to Boss with recommendations, and Boss wanted HK put together a business letter telling WAH the fees and options available what to do. Comment: Boss has no idea about the details of the 401k.
2) HK researched 401k for WAH today with American Funds. HK went back to Boss with recommendations, and Boss wanted HK put together a business letter telling WAH the fees and options available what to do. Comment: Boss has no idea about the details of the 401k.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
1) Boss argued with my partner that Publicly Traded Companies keep track of shareholders even though the stock certificates are in the Broker/Dealer name. (The client does not have any documentation of stocks held in a brokerage account, the client has not kept any record of statements for the last 17 years, and the exact broker/dealer is unknown.
2a) On 8-June-2009 a potential client called twice last week. I was told to research the folder (since my partner was on out vacation.) Because I was unsure of the paper trail, I called the potential cleint's broker/dealer operations to get caught up on the paperwork. I went back to tell my boss details on where we stood with the potential client and mentioned that I had spoken to his broker/dealer. She told me 3 times that we never call the broker/dealer or anyone where there account is being held, because incompetency is the result and word would get back to the potential client forcing them to not transfer their assets to us. I mentioned to my boss that the client had contacted his broker/dealer on paperwork we had sent.
2b) Client acknowledged today they would not transfer the account, but they were happy with the work effort we had demonstrated.
2a) On 8-June-2009 a potential client called twice last week. I was told to research the folder (since my partner was on out vacation.) Because I was unsure of the paper trail, I called the potential cleint's broker/dealer operations to get caught up on the paperwork. I went back to tell my boss details on where we stood with the potential client and mentioned that I had spoken to his broker/dealer. She told me 3 times that we never call the broker/dealer or anyone where there account is being held, because incompetency is the result and word would get back to the potential client forcing them to not transfer their assets to us. I mentioned to my boss that the client had contacted his broker/dealer on paperwork we had sent.
2b) Client acknowledged today they would not transfer the account, but they were happy with the work effort we had demonstrated.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Friday, July 06, 2007
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Monday, July 02, 2007
Online Mortgage Lender Directory Continues Free Advertising Drive
LendingGateway.com continues a generous free mortgage lender directory campaign by giving away valuable space in the LendingGateway.com state by state lender directory.
San Diego, CA (PRWEB) July 2, 2007 -- Times are tougher than ever for mortgage lenders big and small following the subprime shakeup that occurred in the first quarter this year. In an effort to demonstrate appreciation for their core clientele, LendingGateway.com announced the free directory ads for loan officers on June 10, 2007. Over the past two weeks this free ad drive has proven successful with more than 60 companies jumping onboard for the free advertising exposure.
"The free online advertising dovetails nicely with our premium services," remarked Scott Olson, Chief of Operations for LendingGateway.com. "The free advert allows us to introduce ourselves to loan officers who aren't quite ready to invest in a more aggressive advertising campaign by providing a needed service - helping consumers find the right local lender to help them."
Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://www.lendinggateway.com/" alt="Link to website">The free listings are great for lenders looking for some advertising exposure, but our premium services are where we can really help the loan officer get the best return on investment. We offer confirmed and guaranteed borrowers to our clientele, with some of the best loan closing percentages in the industry. When asked about the free ads, Alex Capio, Chief Executive Officer replies, "The free listings are great for lenders looking for some advertising exposure, but our premium services are where we can really help the loan officer get the best return on investment. We offer confirmed and guaranteed borrowers to our clientele, with some of the best loan closing percentages in the industry." He went on to add, "Additionally, we have our quality assurance department follow up with the borrower to make sure they got the loan they needed. That's not something every online company does for the consumer."
LendingGateway.com helps consumers find lenders who match up with the location and type of loan the consumer specifically needs. Shopping for a loan online with LendingGateway.com empowers the consumer with more choices, letting them choose the specific loan specialist from a directory or fill out a short application where the consumer will be matched with up to three lenders who specifically match their needs.
LendingGateway.com is a privately owned online advertising company working with lenders and consumers. Borrowers can get help with their loans by visiting http://www.lendinggateway.com/apply.html and completing the short application. Lenders interested in the free listing or finding out more about LendingGateway.com's premium services should visit http://www.lendinggateway.com/affiliate.html or call toll-free (888) 278-4792.
LendingGateway.com continues a generous free mortgage lender directory campaign by giving away valuable space in the LendingGateway.com state by state lender directory.
San Diego, CA (PRWEB) July 2, 2007 -- Times are tougher than ever for mortgage lenders big and small following the subprime shakeup that occurred in the first quarter this year. In an effort to demonstrate appreciation for their core clientele, LendingGateway.com announced the free directory ads for loan officers on June 10, 2007. Over the past two weeks this free ad drive has proven successful with more than 60 companies jumping onboard for the free advertising exposure.
"The free online advertising dovetails nicely with our premium services," remarked Scott Olson, Chief of Operations for LendingGateway.com. "The free advert allows us to introduce ourselves to loan officers who aren't quite ready to invest in a more aggressive advertising campaign by providing a needed service - helping consumers find the right local lender to help them."
Helvetica, sans-serif; TEXT-DECORATION: none" href="http://www.lendinggateway.com/" alt="Link to website">The free listings are great for lenders looking for some advertising exposure, but our premium services are where we can really help the loan officer get the best return on investment. We offer confirmed and guaranteed borrowers to our clientele, with some of the best loan closing percentages in the industry. When asked about the free ads, Alex Capio, Chief Executive Officer replies, "The free listings are great for lenders looking for some advertising exposure, but our premium services are where we can really help the loan officer get the best return on investment. We offer confirmed and guaranteed borrowers to our clientele, with some of the best loan closing percentages in the industry." He went on to add, "Additionally, we have our quality assurance department follow up with the borrower to make sure they got the loan they needed. That's not something every online company does for the consumer."
LendingGateway.com helps consumers find lenders who match up with the location and type of loan the consumer specifically needs. Shopping for a loan online with LendingGateway.com empowers the consumer with more choices, letting them choose the specific loan specialist from a directory or fill out a short application where the consumer will be matched with up to three lenders who specifically match their needs.
LendingGateway.com is a privately owned online advertising company working with lenders and consumers. Borrowers can get help with their loans by visiting http://www.lendinggateway.com/apply.html and completing the short application. Lenders interested in the free listing or finding out more about LendingGateway.com's premium services should visit http://www.lendinggateway.com/affiliate.html or call toll-free (888) 278-4792.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Reuters
Home loan demand drops to 4-month lowWednesday June 27, 11:03 am ET By Julie Haviv
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Mortgage applications fell for a second straight week as interest rates remained near recent highs, an industry group said on Wednesday. The Mortgage Bankers Association said its seasonally adjusted index of mortgage applications, which includes both refinancing and purchasing loans, for the week ended June 22 fell 3.9 percent to 618.6 -- its lowest in four months. Applications, however, were 16.8 percent above their year-ago level. The four-week moving average of mortgage applications, which smooths the volatile weekly figures, was down 0.7 percent. James O'Sullivan, economist at UBS Securities in Stamford, Connecticut, still follows the indexes closely although he has noticed some dichotomies with other aspects of the housing market. "Clearly there has been a complete breakdown of the relationship between the purchase index and home sales in recent months, with home sales clearly falling in 2007 even as the purchase index shows it rising," he said. "The main story is the tightening of lending standards, so more applicants are being rejected and they're probably reapplying again," he said. "There was also a rush by some people to get their application in before rates headed higher and that has faded again." Many analysts view the housing market as a key factor in Federal Reserve interest rate policy. "Certainly housing has slowed enough to stop the Federal Reserve from tightening, but not enough to get them to ease," he said.
Rapidly rising defaults in the subprime mortgage market, which caters to borrowers with poor credit histories, has spurred a widespread tightening of underwriting standards by lenders.
Borrowing costs on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages, excluding fees, averaged 6.60 percent, unchanged from the previous week, but hovering around their highest since mid-2006. A year earlier the rates stood at 6.86 percent. The MBA's seasonally adjusted purchase index, widely considered a timely gauge of U.S. home sales, fell 4.9 percent to 428.9. The index was above its year-ago level of 389.0, a rise of 10.3 percent. The group's seasonally adjusted index of refinancing applications fell 2.5 percent to 1,731.6, its lowest this year. The index was up 27.7 percent from a year ago when the index stood at 1,356.0. The refinance share of applications increased to 38.7 percent from 38.0 percent the previous week. Fixed 15-year mortgage rates averaged 6.24 percent, down from 6.28 percent. ADJUSTABLE RATES DROP While rates on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages have been on an upward trend, rates on other types of loans plunged last week. Rates on one-year adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) decreased to 5.51 percent from 5.70 percent. The ARM share of activity increased to 20.4 percent from 20.3 percent the previous week. Recent data from home sales, released by other institutions, suggest a delayed recovery for the hard-hit sector. The MBA's survey covers about 50 percent of U.S. retail residential loans. Respondents include mortgage banks, commercial banks and thrifts.
Home loan demand drops to 4-month lowWednesday June 27, 11:03 am ET By Julie Haviv
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Mortgage applications fell for a second straight week as interest rates remained near recent highs, an industry group said on Wednesday. The Mortgage Bankers Association said its seasonally adjusted index of mortgage applications, which includes both refinancing and purchasing loans, for the week ended June 22 fell 3.9 percent to 618.6 -- its lowest in four months. Applications, however, were 16.8 percent above their year-ago level. The four-week moving average of mortgage applications, which smooths the volatile weekly figures, was down 0.7 percent. James O'Sullivan, economist at UBS Securities in Stamford, Connecticut, still follows the indexes closely although he has noticed some dichotomies with other aspects of the housing market. "Clearly there has been a complete breakdown of the relationship between the purchase index and home sales in recent months, with home sales clearly falling in 2007 even as the purchase index shows it rising," he said. "The main story is the tightening of lending standards, so more applicants are being rejected and they're probably reapplying again," he said. "There was also a rush by some people to get their application in before rates headed higher and that has faded again." Many analysts view the housing market as a key factor in Federal Reserve interest rate policy. "Certainly housing has slowed enough to stop the Federal Reserve from tightening, but not enough to get them to ease," he said.
Rapidly rising defaults in the subprime mortgage market, which caters to borrowers with poor credit histories, has spurred a widespread tightening of underwriting standards by lenders.
Borrowing costs on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages, excluding fees, averaged 6.60 percent, unchanged from the previous week, but hovering around their highest since mid-2006. A year earlier the rates stood at 6.86 percent. The MBA's seasonally adjusted purchase index, widely considered a timely gauge of U.S. home sales, fell 4.9 percent to 428.9. The index was above its year-ago level of 389.0, a rise of 10.3 percent. The group's seasonally adjusted index of refinancing applications fell 2.5 percent to 1,731.6, its lowest this year. The index was up 27.7 percent from a year ago when the index stood at 1,356.0. The refinance share of applications increased to 38.7 percent from 38.0 percent the previous week. Fixed 15-year mortgage rates averaged 6.24 percent, down from 6.28 percent. ADJUSTABLE RATES DROP While rates on 30-year fixed-rate mortgages have been on an upward trend, rates on other types of loans plunged last week. Rates on one-year adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) decreased to 5.51 percent from 5.70 percent. The ARM share of activity increased to 20.4 percent from 20.3 percent the previous week. Recent data from home sales, released by other institutions, suggest a delayed recovery for the hard-hit sector. The MBA's survey covers about 50 percent of U.S. retail residential loans. Respondents include mortgage banks, commercial banks and thrifts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)