Dow+30.69up+0.29%
10,464.40
Nasdaq+6.87up+0.32%
2,176.05
S&P+4.98up+0.45%
1,110.63

MSN Money Video

Video on MSN Money
This video requires an updated version of the free Adobe Flash Player.
More video on MSN Money
house for sale  © Getty Images

Extra10/22/2009 12:01 AM ET

Get into a house for just 3.5% down

Dangerous subprime lending might be history, but you can still buy a home with little money down -- if you qualify for an FHA-backed mortgage. Is one right for you?

By SmartMoney

The days of putting little money down to buy a home aren't over.

After years of risky mortgages backed by small down payments, most lenders aren't underwriting loans without significant sums upfront and high credit scores. But a decades-old program can still put homebuyers in houses for next to nothing.

Mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration allow borrowers to get approved with down payments as small as 3.5%, without high credit scores.

As millions of Americans now realize, getting into a house with little money down has its disadvantages. Borrowers who have pumped scant equity into their homes are often more willing to walk away during lean times that keep them from making payments. This risk is further elevated when home values decline and troubled borrowers are unable to refinance or sell at a price that covers their losses.

Still, FHA-insured mortgages are far less risky than the subprime mortgages that lenders originated before the housing bust. FHA-insured mortgages require documentation and proof that the borrowers are capable of making the monthly payments. (Most subprime mortgages didn't require such proof.)

Compared with the terms of traditional home loans, the looser terms of FHA-insured mortgages have helped make them more popular. Today, FHA-insured mortgages make up about 25% of the mortgage market, up from 3% in 2006, FHA Commissioner David Stevens said. The FHA insured nearly 1.95 million loans in fiscal 2009 -- up 62.3% from a year earlier.

"FHA-insured mortgages are one of the only games in town, especially if you can't qualify for a traditional mortgage," said Gibran Nicholas, the chairman of the CMPS Institute in Ann Arbor, Mich., which trains and certifies mortgage lenders and brokers. "Now that the subprime market is gone, FHA is filling the gap."

Here's how to determine whether an FHA-insured mortgage is right for you.

Do you meet the qualifications?

Most borrowers of FHA-insured mortgages have stable incomes and need more flexibility with their credit histories and debt loads than conventional mortgages might allow, said Lemar Wooley, a spokesman for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, of which the FHA is a part.

"When analyzing the borrower's credit, we expect lenders to examine the overall pattern of credit behavior rather than isolated occurrences of poor performance or relying solely on a credit score," Wooley said. This includes a borrower's rental or mortgage payment history, debts, collections, previous foreclosures and bankruptcies. Borrowers with credit scores lower than 500 must make 10% down payments to be eligible, he said.

Today, 78% of FHA-insured purchase mortgages belong to first-time homebuyers, thanks to looser requirements and the comparatively small 3.5% down payment, Wooley said. Another perk is that borrowers are permitted gift assistance for the down payments from their families or their employers or from a government entity -- but not from the seller.

Rigorous documentation requirements mitigate the risk associated with making a small down payment -- in stark contrast to the glory days of subprime mortgages, when documentation was rarely required and verified, said Nicholas, of the CMPS Institute. FHA borrowers must prove that they have the cash to close the mortgage by presenting their most recent bank statements. They also must show W2 statements and pay stubs to prove that they can repay the mortgages.

In addition, borrowers' total mortgage payments (including principal, interest, taxes and insurance) cannot exceed 31% of their gross monthly income, and total debt-to-income ratio (total mortgage payment plus all other debts) cannot exceed 43% of their gross monthly income.

Can you afford the costs?

Interest rates on FHA mortgages are generally half a percentage point to three-quarters of a point higher than those on non-FHA mortgages. Thirty-year fixed-rate FHA-insured mortgages had an average rate of 5.86% on Oct. 22, compared with an average rate of 5.15% for similar non-FHA mortgages.

In addition, there are unique fees that accompany an FHA-insured mortgage. A borrower is required to pay 1.75% of the loan amount upfront, or that fee can be financed into the mortgage. FHA-insured mortgages also require a 0.5% annual premium based on the outstanding loan balance, which is financed into the mortgage. These fees pay for the FHA insurance that makes the loan possible, HUD spokesman Wooley said.

A borrower who has a high credit score -- typically, a minimum of 720 -- and a 20% down payment is often better off with a traditional, non-FHA mortgage, which carries fewer fees. However, the math gets tricky when a borrower has a high credit score but a down payment of less than 20%. In those cases, the borrower will have to pay for private mortgage insurance (PMI). Depending on your situation, PMI can cost less, the same as or more than FHA fees.

Crunch the numbers here to see how much you would pay in PMI.

What protections are in place for the lender?

Lenders are comfortable providing FHA-insured mortgages because they don't bear the loss if a borrower defaults and goes into foreclosure -- the FHA does.

In such a scenario, the FHA pays the lender an insurance claim equal to the sum of the unpaid principal balance of the loan, the foregone interest and a portion of the foreclosure expenses, Wooley said. The FHA pays for these losses by dipping into its insurance fund, which holds the insurance fees borrowers pay, Nicholas said.

What about for the borrower?

When borrowers are unable to keep up with mortgage payments, lenders are required to work with them to avoid foreclosure, Wooley said. This is part of the FHA's loss-mitigation program.

Now mortgage servicers can use this program to reduce monthly mortgage payments to 31% of the borrower's monthly gross income, said Keith Gumbinger, a vice president at HSH Associates, which tracks mortgage data. To qualify, borrowers must be unable to keep up with their mortgage payments but cannot be more than 30 days delinquent.

Although this program can help prevent foreclosures, it doesn't guarantee that borrowers ultimately will be able to hold on to their homes, Gumbinger said.

Become a fan of MSN Money on Facebook

Who is taking the biggest risk?

Under certain circumstances -- primarily, rampant FHA-insured mortgage underwriting and declining home values -- these mortgages present a significant risk to the economy. When home values decline, a borrower who has little equity in a home and is falling behind on payments is more likely to walk away from the property than a borrower who has more invested in a home, said Dean Baker, a co-director at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C.

If a significant number of FHA-insured mortgage borrowers go into foreclosure, the FHA insurance fund could become depleted, and the government might have to bail it out, Nicholas said. Those losses could ultimately be borne by taxpayers or get added to the country's debt, Baker said.

This article was reported by AnnaMaria Andriotis for SmartMoney.

Published Oct. 23, 2009

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 24
Friday, October 23, 2009 6:04:35 AM
the author forgot a couple of major factors.  FHA requires 31/43 ratios on MANUAL underwrites and you can exceed that with compensating factors.  also, when you get automated approval, i've seen ratios as high as 57% on FHA... i love how these articles don't give you the whole story...FHA is a great program - it's always been better than conventional... the biggest drawback is the upfront mortgage insurance premium - which truly isn't that big of a deal since you can finance that into the loan amount.  it's not additional cash up front.
Friday, October 23, 2009 10:26:00 AM
You can still get a loan with 0% down and no PMI if you go with a USDA Rural Development Loan.  The requirements are basically the same as FHA, but the upfront fee is 2% (but you don't pay any PMI like you need to with FHA) and your house has to be in a rural area.   Our house is in the suburbs outside of Detroit and it is considered a "rural area".  This is really the best loan you can get if you can't afford to put 20% down.
Friday, October 23, 2009 10:26:50 AM

When I went to get a loan approval last April, I was surprised to see my credit report had FOUR accounts in default that had been paid in full over 5 years ago!  I'm working on getting the problem fixed now, but it made my credit score 670, too low for a conventional loan.  Lesson learned:  KEEP AN EYE ON YOUR CREDIT REPORT!  But I digress....

I had no choice but to go with an FHA loan, but it was nice because I only had to put down 3.5%, found a great house priced at a little over twice my annual income (mortgage with PMI and taxes is the same as my rent was), and life is good!

I have to admit though.....it was a pain in the butt going through the process with FHA.  They want copies of EVERYTHING!  All bank statements, W-2's, birth certificates of first born children, SS #'s of immigrated ancestors.....you name it! (okay, maybe I exaggerated a bit Open-mouthed).  And even thought it wasn't 20%, I still put nearly $10K of my own cash down as far as closing costs, down payment and repairs into my house.  Thats not a small chunk of money, at least not to me, so to say that people with FHA loans have little to lose and are more likely to walk away.....I call BS! Just because some of us don't put $50K down on a house, doesn't mean the amount we did put down is pocket change to us!  What seems like a small amount of money to you, may be HUGE to someone else!

Friday, October 23, 2009 12:38:34 PM

All this is another sub prime mortgage situation in the making. Let me give you an example of a particular situation. A house is appraised by the local county property appraiser's office at $139,400, which in our area is about 10 - 12% below market value. This would put the house in the $155-160 K market value range. A young couple with one kid falls in love with the house which is on the market for $209,500. The real estate agent, a fine middle aged lady goes to work for the buyer to help them get the house of their dream. The inflated appraisal comes in a 199,900, what a good deal for the young couple. The couple does not have the down payment and the grandmotherly agent arranges for the down payment of $6,997. First the couple had to provide a copy their 2008 tax return. They then signed an amended 2008 tax return claiming the first time home buyer credit. You can go the the head of the class it if you said, "the refund was direct deposit to the agents bank account". Of course the $3,500 upfront loan amount and the $1,000 annual mortgage insurance was financed into the mortgage. The young couple are now in a house with no money down and an upside down mortgage all at the expense of the taxpayer. In the event you are wondering where the remaining $1,003 from the first time buyer credit went, the buyers signed the full $8,000 refund to the agent.

 

This makes one wonder how many times this or something similar has played out during the past year.

Friday, October 23, 2009 1:04:53 PM

Here's a tip I learned recently from an attorney friend - don't pay for credit watching companies.

You pay $10.00/reporting agency (or $30.00) to freeze your credit - has no bearing on your credit or score.

As long as you're not planning on opening new credit cards or taking out new loans, this is a fool-proof way of protecting your credit and identity.

The draw back is the inconvenience - takes up to 30 days and you  have to pay each time you take off or put back the hold.

All-in-all, I think it's worth it.  I have my home loan, car loan and all the credit cards I need, so really, paying $30.00 to freeze my credit is pretty cheap!

Friday, October 23, 2009 1:10:03 PM
 The couple does not have the down payment and the grandmotherly agent arranges for the down payment of $6,997. First the couple had to provide a copy their 2008 tax return. They then signed an amended 2008 tax return claiming the first time home buyer credit. You can go the the head of the class it if you said, "the refund was direct deposit to the agents bank account".
This would be considered the "gifting process" and it is against the law in any way for either the selling or buying agent to gift this amount to the seller, thereby benefiting from the sale.  There are strick measures set to ensure that the gift is coming from a family member, employer, etc., and NOT from either agent.  They requirement bank statements from the gifter, so there is no way this could happen!
Friday, October 23, 2009 2:08:46 PM

The couple does not have the down payment and the grandmotherly agent arranges for the down payment of $6,997. First the couple had to provide a copy their 2008 tax return. They then signed an amended 2008 tax return claiming the first time home buyer credit. You can go the the head of the class it if you said, "the refund was direct deposit to the agents bank account".

 

In my experience in the mortgage world, this would constitute fraud.  If you know you are correct, a simple phone call to HUD would be in order.

Saturday, October 24, 2009 10:55:58 AM

Hurley1980, I think you meant, "there is no way this could have happened.....LEGALLY" and I agree. Legally, "all first time homebuyers", are truly first time homebuyers; however, IRS just released a report where they have discovered many cases of fraud in the program. I wish we lived in a fraud less world and could trust everyone, but that is not the case. Let me give you a case that happened to me a few years ago. I wanted to purchase an additional rental property. Since I owned a rental property, with a very low mortgage, I decided to get a 2nd mortgage on the property for the down payment on the new property. A few days after completing the application with the bank I received a phone call from a person who indentified himself as an appraiser that would be inspecting my property and wanted to ask me a few questions. One of many questions was how much was my current mortgage and another was how much did I want on my second mortgage? Knowing that the first and second mortgage would be no more than 70% of the market value, I asked, "why do you need the mortgage information? His reply was, "I am interested in helping you get your request loan amount".  Isn't one of the problems with the current real estate market the result of suspected fraudulent appraisals? 

Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:18:54 PM
We haven't been enough trouble with deadbeats qualifying for loans they don't qualify for, make it easier again....real freakin smart.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009 2:21:58 PM
At last count, reported in the news, at least 100,000 of the homebuyer tax credits were fraudulent some to kids 4 years old.  There were and still are bad appraisers in the market, but until someone, (ie the lender/borrower) reports them to a state licensing board, they will continue.  Even if reported, the state boards are so handcuffed by "due process laws" not near enough penalties will be secured.  The same holds for the real estate agents/lenders, etc.  What most people don't realize is that in the average $200,000 home sale, the lender makes $1800 to upwards of $9000, the real agent gets $12,000, and the appraiser is paid $350.  Yet the deal will not go without an appraisal.    
1 - 10 of 24
To add a comment, pleasesign in