5 Comments

1. 

   The_Cynic

   October 24, 2011 at 8:24 am

   The standard for being on the HUD list has not changed one inch. Those who oversee the list have always added and deleted lenders based on HUD approved status. These overseers were, however, derelict for keeping the names of mini-eagles longer than January 1. TPOs should be happy that if they were on the HUD list eleven months ago their names were not removed on January 1. In fact it is angering that it has taken this long for the names of TPOs to have been removed. After all, mini-eagles went extinct on January 1, 2011.

   What difference is there between the HECM Advisor of yesteryear and a TPO of today other than potential compensation? HECM Advisors were not listed by anyone and neither should TPOs be listed by anyone, especially HUD or a HUD overseen entity.

   Should NMLS keep a list of TPOs which have been approved by lenders which have HUD approved eagle status? How is the NMLS to know if a TPO is approved one day and then no longer approved? With oversight of NMLS by HUD, this would be tacit to HUD approval. So, no, the NMLS should not maintain such a list.

   Perhaps NRMLA or the NAMB could maintain lists of TPOs who have been approved by lenders which have been approved by HUD as meeting full eagle status. But there should be a caveat (in font equal to the largest and most bold type used anywhere on the related website) that if the approved lender loses its status, the TPO could no longer provide HECMs unless or until it is approved by at least one other lender and that approved lenders can remove TPOs at will. Oops, perhaps TPOs would rather not be listed than have such a necessary caveat presented.

   It is amazing that TPOs are so put out that they are not recognized as …… what, who knows. HUD ended the mini-eagle status almost ten months ago. It seems many brokers have not reconciled themselves to the new world of extinction. Instead of suggesting ways of getting the recognition they so crave, many are reeling, accusing lender staff of being less educated and not being as acquainted with HECM rules as they are. If the standard for being a full eagle were that anyone who knows more than the latest approved lender hire, then all of these rightfully complaining TPOs should have full eagle status. Unfortunately, other rules apply.

   • Reply
   • Link
2. 

   Johnny Sweeney

   October 25, 2011 at 4:11 am

   Hi Shannon,
   I believe that it would be better of HUD would update their list. Based upon the fact that they are stating it to be a problematic issue, it may be easier to request NRMLA create a list as an alternative. After all, they already have a database with all of our names and licensing status, complaints filed, etc.

   • Reply
   • Link
   • 

     The_Critic

     October 25, 2011 at 8:42 am

     Johnny,

     How would HUD update their list? It has no idea if a TPO is approved by a HUD approved lender or not. For that matter neither does NRMLA.

     Other than the TPO itself and the related HUD approved lender(s), no one knows if a TPO can provide a HECM or not at any point in time.

     • Reply
     • Link
3. 

   Rick Roode

   October 25, 2011 at 10:54 am

   Today a client called to tell us his insurance agent told him we had lost our FHA approval. The client wants to know why we lost it.

   If I were a person wanting to do an FHA insured reverese mortgage, I would not feel comfortable working with a broker who had “lost their FHA approval”, especially with the immoral behavior of some lenders in the recent past. Sort of makes us sound like bad guys, don’t you think?

   Does anyone know why HUD decided to eliminate the correspondent lender category? Maybe the solution would be to reinstate the old system instead of continually making changes for the sake of change. I think the system worked better before this change than it does now.

   • Reply
   • Link
4. 

   The_Cynic

   October 25, 2011 at 3:40 pm

   Rick,

   You are so right.

   While it might be a win for HUD, it is no win for those who are not full eagle lenders. Personally I expect more problems not fewer as a result of the change.

   • Reply
   • Link