Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's incredible that some people will adamantly yell against the truth when it dosen't support their idea that the financial industries in ths country are not color blind.
Please stop ignoring the fact that it has been proven time and time again that even with equally high credit scores and credit histories blacks will receive a higher percentage rate, require a larger down payment and be assesed more ambiguous fees associated with loans.
Please stop acting as if it's all about scores and histories only.
If you feel the need at all to dispute my statement just do yourself a favor and research the issue for yourself, just be willing to accept the facts you discover.
Sub-prime lenders have always been an issue with minorities. The one thing that I think happened is that sub-prime lenders were sometimes the only lender that a minority could get, regardless of their credit standing, due to mortgage redlining. Since that was the case, sub-prime lenders had a stronghold in minority communties long before traditional mortgages became available. It really had nothing to do with their education level, credit worthiness etc., even though I am sure these factors came into play. They just became a fixture in the community and became somewhat the lenders of choice by default. And they knew how to service the community so that the community tends to pay higher percentage rates, possibly without realizing the ramifications. Not sayihg that poor education is the cause, which I don't believe, but more like a naive understanding of home ownership and the way mortgages operate, since this is not something that has been passed down via generations in a lot of communities.
If recollection of some of the sub-prime horror stories are accurate, some of these people that were steered into the adjustable rate mortgages was not due to their credit rating but due to the financing company convincing them that it was the best thing for them. I mean it can be rough on anyone for their mortgage to jump up $500 or more per month. I think too many people believed that purchasing was somekind of golden egg and they got caught up in the hype without realizing the ramifications. Also, some of these lenders really took advantage of getting people to take out second mortgages on homes that were paid for or nearly paid for. It really is a shame.
This is such an excellent post. I think it explains the situation without bias. Many times people don't understand the ramifications of those second mortgages or even understand their home insurance policies. These people are often taken advantage of in the business world.
I live in Orlando where time shares are big money makers. The primary purchasers right now are minorities who possibly have no idea what they are getting into.
This is such an excellent post. I think it explains the situation without bias. Many times people don't understand the ramifications of those second mortgages or even understand their home insurance policies. These people are often taken advantage of in the business world.
I live in Orlando where time shares are big money makers. The primary purchasers right now are minorities who possibly have no idea what they are getting into.
Thanks. I think that when some people get involved in these things they are only told about the positives while no one accentuates the negatives that can occur and people go in with a false sense of security. Within a couple of years they are scrambling to off load and then they also will not tell people about the negatives. It is a real vicious cycle that tends to get worse.
It's incredible that some people will adamantly yell against the truth when it dosen't support their idea that the financial industries in ths country are not color blind.
Please stop ignoring the fact that it has been proven time and time again that even with equally high credit scores and credit histories blacks will receive a higher percentage rate, require a larger down payment and be assesed more ambiguous fees associated with loans.
Please stop acting as if it's all about scores and histories only.
If you feel the need at all to dispute my statement just do yourself a favor and research the issue for yourself, just be willing to accept the facts you discover.
You are sadly mistaken. My wife, sister and sister-in-law are all mortgage underwriters for Wachovia. I showed them this post and they scoffed. There are very strict rules in lending and the only basis for rates is credit rating, income,debt ratio, and down payment. If someone attempted to give a higher rate due to race, they would be fired and their professional license revoked. Have you never heard of the fair housing act? I recommend doing some honest research on underwriting guidelines and please link us to where race is involved in the offered rate for a loan. In fact, it is not even mandatory to answer what race you are on a mortgage app.
You are sadly mistaken. My wife, sister and sister-in-law are all mortgage underwriters for Wachovia. I showed them this post and they scoffed. There are very strict rules in lending and the only basis for rates is credit rating, income,debt ratio, and down payment. If someone attempted to give a higher rate due to race, they would be fired and their professional license revoked. Have you never heard of the fair housing act? I recommend doing some honest research on underwriting guidelines and please link us to where race is involved in the offered rate for a loan. In fact, it is not even mandatory to answer what race you are on a mortgage app.
Your'e sadly naive. If I want to target blacks or other minorities for sub prime or even conventional mortgages with higher fees I don't have to ask their race to know they are black. I can look at urban areas such as detroit mi or highland park mi and automatically know that 90% of those applicants will be minorities. Have I ever heard of the fair housing act,please. Why do you think that act was established in the first place, it was because qualifed minorities were being denied loans and mortgages simply due to their race and no other reason.
Have your "professional" relatives and friends ever heard of red lining, block busting, housing covenants or deed restrictions.
I'm not trying to be sarcastic but you are attempting to tell me something about the history of my race and their experiences in this area from the perspective of one who will never experience it and therefore denies it exists.
It may no longer be as blatant but like most of these type of practices, it just finds a sneakier way to assert itself.
Sub-prime lenders have always been an issue with minorities. The one thing that I think happened is that sub-prime lenders were sometimes the only lender that a minority could get, regardless of their credit standing, due to mortgage redlining. Since that was the case, sub-prime lenders had a stronghold in minority communties long before traditional mortgages became available. It really had nothing to do with their education level, credit worthiness etc., even though I am sure these factors came into play. They just became a fixture in the community and became somewhat the lenders of choice by default. And they knew how to service the community so that the community tends to pay higher percentage rates, possibly without realizing the ramifications. Not sayihg that poor education is the cause, which I don't believe, but more like a naive understanding of home ownership and the way mortgages operate, since this is not something that has been passed down via generations in a lot of communities.
If recollection of some of the sub-prime horror stories are accurate, some of these people that were steered into the adjustable rate mortgages was not due to their credit rating but due to the financing company convincing them that it was the best thing for them. I mean it can be rough on anyone for their mortgage to jump up $500 or more per month. I think too many people believed that purchasing was somekind of golden egg and they got caught up in the hype without realizing the ramifications. Also, some of these lenders really took advantage of getting people to take out second mortgages on homes that were paid for or nearly paid for. It really is a shame.
And what happens when the interest rate goes up? Good grief. Anybody with half a brain can see the danger in that.
Sub-prime lenders have always been an issue with minorities. The one thing that I think happened is that sub-prime lenders were sometimes the only lender that a minority could get, regardless of their credit standing, due to mortgage redlining. Since that was the case, sub-prime lenders had a stronghold in minority communties long before traditional mortgages became available. It really had nothing to do with their education level, credit worthiness etc., even though I am sure these factors came into play. They just became a fixture in the community and became somewhat the lenders of choice by default. And they knew how to service the community so that the community tends to pay higher percentage rates, possibly without realizing the ramifications. Not sayihg that poor education is the cause, which I don't believe, but more like a naive understanding of home ownership and the way mortgages operate, since this is not something that has been passed down via generations in a lot of communities.
If recollection of some of the sub-prime horror stories are accurate, some of these people that were steered into the adjustable rate mortgages was not due to their credit rating but due to the financing company convincing them that it was the best thing for them. I mean it can be rough on anyone for their mortgage to jump up $500 or more per month. I think too many people believed that purchasing was somekind of golden egg and they got caught up in the hype without realizing the ramifications. Also, some of these lenders really took advantage of getting people to take out second mortgages on homes that were paid for or nearly paid for. It really is a shame.
"redlining" and "steering" are both now illegal practices, just to be clear. Also, subprime and variable rate mortgages were not just limited to minorities.
"redlining" and "steering" are both now illegal practices, just to be clear. Also, subprime and variable rate mortgages were not just limited to minorities.
Because something is now illegal doesn't mean it is still not happening. It's just applied in sneakier ways.
No one said this was limited to minorities, however minorities irregardless of credit and credit histories are steered into these types of mortgages at a much higher rate than white people. That's a fact.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
