enjoy a title insurance blog - what? are you crazy? ;)

Diane,

This might strike you as a bit strange, but I enjoyed visiting your blog.

Who would have thought I would visit a blog about title insurance?

I stumbled on your blog when I was researching the term "successors and assigns". I was interested in the term because I was sort of skimming through the United States Code. Right from the get go, the USC defines terms, one of which is "company". This makes a lot of sense to me as a lot of arguments have to do with definitions. Here is the page where I ran across the term "successors and assigns": http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode01/usc_sec_01_00000005----000-.html

When I read that, I thought, what does that mean? I googled the term and found your very clear discussion of the term.

While I was at it, I read some of your observations about how big banks are in trouble with their bad loans, which in turn appears to be based on taking some shortcuts in making loans. You seem to cite the failure to do simple lien searches as contributing to the overall problem.

Of course, the financial crisis was caused by lots of specific actions, but all have one thing in common: greed blinding everyone to the risk. The perfect loan would have no risk. Sad to say, life is all about risks. So when the bankers and others in financing came up with things like credit default swaps and collaterallized debt obligations, they were just fooling themselves. A piece of paper protecting you from something bad happening is only as good as the person or company backing it. There is always a counterparty to every financial derivative. If the counterparty is corrupt or broke, so is your financial derivative.

Anyway, I enjoy your very informal and chatty way of expressing yourself.

Regards,

Jack 

Hi, Jack and thanks for reading and taking the time to comment.  You are correct that life is all about risks.  When the traunching of mortgage backed securities was developed, we had in place good systems of checks and balances in risk analysis and due diligence.  The representations and warranties on which the system was built should have worked.  It's a bit like construction.  The engineering can be right but if the contractor doesn't follow the plan, cutting corners and using less than adequate materials, well then you have a disaster in the making.  Good quality control programs would have stopped it all early on.  Such programs were developed and mandated by FNMA, FHLMC, FHA & VA but the implementation was flawed and that was the ultimate weak link. 

The industry is recovering and rediscovering good practices. It's an honorable field again.  ;)

Diane

First American responds to suit....

The lawsuit pits the nation’s No. 1 mortgage lender against the nation’s No. 2 title insurance company. Officials for Bank of America declined to comment on the case.
A spokeswoman for First American issued a statement expressing regret over the lawsuit, adding that the practices of an intermediary likely will be “scrutinized” as a result of the case:

“United General Title Insurance Company and First American Title Insurance Company regret that their valuable customer, Bank of America, has chosen to file a legal action against the companies. However, we are hopeful that we will be able to resolve this matter outside of court with continued discussions.”

The title policies were issued under the QuickClose LPI Program administered by Fiserve Solutions Inc.
First American spokeswoman Carrie Gaska said that her company expects that Fiserve’s “practices will be scrutinized in this process.”
A Fiserve spokesperson couldn’t be reached for comment.

Read more in the Orange County Register.

well, well, well......crappy title underwriting comes home to roost

Now Bank of America Corp., the nation's biggest mortgage lender, is saying the nation's second-largest title insurer did much the same thing and should be on the hook for more than $500 million in losses.

In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, BofA alleged that First American Corp. in Santa Ana relied on home buyers to tell them about liens on their properties and other matters, rather than conducting traditional title searches.

The shortcut was part of a program called QuickClose that BofA said in its suit did not require "title searches in connection with loans processed under the program."

Read more in the LA Times.

This is fascinating...I'm sure there's more to this story.

Bank of America, one of America's largest mortgage lenders and the recipient of more than $45 billion in TARP funds from the federal government, claims that United General Title Insurance and First American Title Insurance, now corporate affiliates, insured mortgages for title defects, undisclosed intervening liens and other problems, and to cover equity loans and lines of credit up to $500,000.
     Now the insurers are balking at paying the claims, blaming Bank of America and the firms it acquired prior to the global economic crisis for creating their own problems, BofA says in Mecklenburg County Court.
     As of February the two insurers have denied at least 2,200 of Bank of America's claims, representing more than $235 million in losses, and failed to respond to another 2,300 claims, representing more than $300 million in losses, BofA says.
     All of the claims arise from a home equity loan or line of credit that is in default, the bank says.

Read more in Courthouse News.

HELOC/open end payoff, satisfaction, reconveyance.....

When you find an "open end" or line of credit/HELOC mortgage on record in a title search, you really need proceed carefully.  Most important is to freeze the account when you get your payoff letter.  You need to stop the moving money target.  There are some lenders who refuse to put a freeze on these accounts so your post closing payoff procedure can include a few extra steps to eliminate risk.  Here are some tips:

1. Add language to the mortgage payoff clause in Schedule B1.  This is what we use:  NOTE:  This is an open line of credit.  The account holder must contact this mortgage lender and request that they freeze the credit line in anticipation of payoff, closure, and satisfaction.
2. Have the mortgagor sign a statement requesting that the account be closed and satisfied.  If the lender does not include this type of statement in the payoff letter, create one yourself.  It is okay to keep it simple and I believe it is best to write it on the payoff letter.  We just legibly handwrite "Please close and satisfy."  We have the mortgagor sign this which does two things for us.  It give us an acknowledgment that the mortgagor is aware of the payoff and has agreed that the account should be closed and satisfied.  This eliminates any confusion over whether they can still use the account after closing and before the payoff is posted.  It also gives them a chance to tell you if they have drawn additional funds after the payoff letter was issued.
3. Send the payoff letter and funds to the lender rather than processing the payoff by wire.  We sometimes have trouble in our office remembering this step.  We are so used to doing payoffs by wire that sometimes an open end account slips through.  If you wire, the lender won't get that "Please close and satisfy." statement which I believe is most effective when received by the lender with the funds.

If after you have paid off the mortgage you have trouble getting the lender to satisfy it of record, don't give up.  We find letters are most effective rather than the phone.  If your first letter doesn't get a response, then send a second via certified mail.  Certified mail is the most effective tool we have to elicit a response from most anyone.  It's the first step in creating a case and it is a recognizable step. ;)

call is over.....

I thought it was very helpful.  The answer to my question is that I can opt to use Table B which I will do.

BTW - That "mouthy broad" was NOT me.  LOL


Favorite comment - "I agree with the dog."  ;)

PA Data Call conference call this morning.......

My question:

Please comment on the section concerning the various discounted rates.  I do not understand the limited categories of BASIC and REISSUE for short form policies.

It seems to me that the question of whether a long or short form was used is not related to the rate charged to the consumer.  For instance, in PA the most popular Community Reinvestment Act program is a Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency mortgage.  ALL PHFA transactions are eligible for the Community Reinvestment Act rate which is 75% of basic, a deeper discount than reissue which is 90% of basic.  PHFA requires that we use the ALTA short form, therefore all PHFA policies would not be included in the study data as having been properly discounted for the consumer.  Does this make sense?

[FYI The extra charge of $100 for a short form is offset by the inclusion of the 100 & 300 endorsement coverage which runs $100 extra when using a long form.]

RESPA 2010 - just where do you put the NOTARY or SIGNING SERVICE on the new GFE?

Simple......... in title services.

RESPA 2010 - purchase with a 1st and 2nd mortgage

We are getting ready to close our first simultaneous 1st and 2nd under the new rules.  Our buyer is getting a line of credit 2nd mortgage and as far as I know, drawing the whole line now for closing.

When we got the title order, we checked the RESPA FAQ and saw on page seven that there should be TWO GFEs and TWO HUD-1 forms.  We asked the lender for both GFEs and held back delivery of the title commitment because we couldn't get a GFE on the second.

I did some more research and found that the RESPA final rule does have an exception for a line of credit.  The lender can opt to not do a GFE and instead provide the consumer with the appropriate disclosures under Reg Z.  I then asked for the Reg Z disclosure.

After a series of requests including chatting with a supervisor in the home equity department, I was given what they said was the full disclosure pack that had been given to the consumer.  I looked at every page and couldn't find anything resembling the Reg Z disclosure.

I decided to move the transaction forward by releasing the title commitment and producing both prelim HUDs.  Note that I could not input any GFE data for the 2nd - the line of credit, so I wasn't able to do any test comparison.

I then sent an e-mail inquiry to HUD and got a prompt response that the issue had been covered in the FAQ and we needed TWO GFEs and TWO HUDs.  I replied that I seem to be having a problem because the lender isn't doing a GFE because the mortgage is a line of credit and that the final rule appears to allow that opting out.  How, I asked does the settlement agent complete a HUD-1A and do a GFE comparison without having a GFE?  I am awaiting a response on that question and will post back here when received either directly or through updated FAQs.

After submitting the prelim HUD-1A to the home equity department I received a response saying they didn't want title insurance on the 2nd and they wanted me to remove the title services charge.  I replied that I didn't charge for title insurance on the second but our other related fees are in that figure.

This morning I received another reply asking then if I intended that figure to be a settlement fee and I responded that under RESPA 2010 rules I had to lump all my charges into that one figure and I gave her the breakdown which had been provided with the prelim.

Here's the reason for my post.  How is it that this subject hasn't come up before?  This is March!  

PS - Some may wonder why we are charging anything to close the 2nd.  Our decision to charge or not is based upon the amount of extra work.

We have two local banks for whom we close line of credit seconds for no extra charge because there is little paperwork, no draw/disbursements, and all we have to do is have a couple of extra docs signed and record the second.  Docs are provided by the banks and they are delivered back with the 1st package to the same department.  We'll see if this changes under the new rules.

When we have a 2nd closing with a large doc pack, separate set of instructions, working with a draw/disbursement - delivering and dealing with a different lender or a different department, we charge for those extra services because we are doing double the work - so two incoming wire fees, two couriers, two edoc printing and two settlement fees.

pre-qualification versus pre-approval

The new mortgage disclosure rule is upending the first step in the process of lending to homebuyers.
Before shopping for a property, a prospective buyer typically gets a preapproval letter from a lender indicating how big a loan the person qualifies for. Real estate agents often ask for these letters so they can make sure the customer can afford the property before showing it.  Read more here. 




LOL  Sometimes I feel ancient.  I guess that's what happens when you've been in business longer than most of the other people in it.  Real estate agents used to be able to do simple pre-qualification formulas.  Loan originators helped.  No one expected a pre-approval letter.  As long as a real estate agent takes the time to ask the right questions, then they won't be wasting their time showing property to unqualified buyers.

Frankly, I have always viewed the "pre-approval" letters as a marketing tool.  If the borrower gets one from a lender, they are most likely to go back to that lender for the loan.  Pre-approval letters are the first step of the steering process.  It's a pretty solid way to eliminate competition.

I think HUD is correct in their course of relieving borrowers of heavy pre-application document tasks.  If you make each conversation with a lender too burdensome, then borrowers won't shop around.

The whole POINT of this new RESPA rule is to ENCOURAGE shopping.

So far, I think things are moving forward rather smoothly under the new rules.  I do hope HUD stays the course.  Good job, HUD.

selected title insurance agent data call from PA Insurance Department

We received a data call from the Department today.  Among other things it says:

"The Pennsylvania Insurance Department(the "Department") is conducting a study of title insurance in Pennsylvania.  The study is under the direct supervision and control of the Department; it is being funded by the Title Insurance Rating Bureau of Pennsylvania as the Department's statistical agent for collection of data on title insurance, and it is being conducted jointly by Regulatory Research Corporation (Dr. Nelson R. Lipshultz) and Birny Birnbaum Consulting Inc. (Birny Birnbaum) (the "consultants")."

This should be interesting for the industry - a good exercise.

Link to data call info.

lien letters and transfer taxes....what the heck to do on the new GFE and HUD-1

Here's my take....

First things first, determine whether the charge is TYPICALLY a buyer/borrower fee.  If yes, then you MUST show it on the GFE and HUD as a buyer/borrower fee, even if the seller has agreed to pay for it.

In my neck of the woods, typical is determined by state and county custom.

Transfer taxes are TYPICALLY split between buyer and seller in Pennsylvania, SO one half of the transfer tax would TYPICALLY be a buyer/borrower fee even if the seller had agreed to pay for both transfer taxes.

Be careful and make certain there isn't an agreement for the buyer to pay both.  In that case, you would need to put both transfer taxes in as buyer/borrower fees.

Lien letters customs vary by county.  In Allegheny County, the seller typically pays for the lien letters.  In Cambria County, the buyer typically pays for lien letters.  If you are disclosing for a refinance, the borrower pays for lien letters in all counties.

Where on the GFE and HUD-1 do you disclose lien letter charges?  You include these out of pocket costs in with the title services.



Does this make sense to you?  If you have received any other guidance from a reliable source, I'd sure like to hear about it.  Thanks!!!

if you enjoy forums, there's a new title insurance forum start up

Here's a blurb from its creator, Jonathan Yasko:

There is a new web forum dedicated to title insurance professionals called The Title Web (www.thetitleweb.com).  It is by title professionals, for title professionals in the attempt to create a repository of information for all to use.  It is free to join and has main and sub-categories to for different types of topics.  In addition, there are regional sections for state specific issues, meetings, continuing educations seminars and more.

Jonathan

IRS confusion over whether or not a HUD-1 must be signed

I am getting numerous queries concerning the availability of a SIGNED HUD-1 because folks are trying to comply with IRS instructions related to the tax credit program.

The HUD-1 form is part of RESPA.  This link will take you to the pages in RESPA concerning the HUD-1.

Many of you are telling me that the IRS is asking you to provide evidence that individual states do not require signatures on the HUD-1.  Well, my response is that it is a FEDERAL rule, not a state rule.

RESPA clearly says that Signature lines may be added.  That tells me that HUD did not design the form with signature lines, meaning signatures are not required by HUD.

Further, the HUD-1 form is only required when the underlying transaction is a federally related mortgage transaction.  That means that cash purchase transactions may NOT have a HUD-1 form.

I offer the above linked pages to those of you who are having this difficulty meeting IRS rules as evidence perhaps that they might consider changing their documentation requirements as so many of you are in positions in which you have purchased property but because no one knew ahead of time that the IRS documentation rules would be more strict than those of the Dept. of Housing and Urban Development many people may not receive their hoped  for tax credit.

I am certain this was an unintended snafu and would think the IRS would make adjustments to assist taxpayers.  Hope this helps.  ;)

Hey, Stewart from GA...

you're welcome and thanks for taking a moment to call.

Stewart is a loan officer who found this post  about calculating escrow, used the formula and found that he could predict the escrows with good accuracy rather than having to guess.  He has since created a bit of software so he could ditch the pencil and paper.

The funny thing about escrow calculation is that most everyone uses software and so that's why most everyone doesn't know the "how to" formula!  LOL  You, dear readers, have the secret.

Stewart, you're a pro.

In a bizarre move....

we had a lender overfund a closing then ask that we change line 802 on the HUD...AFTER closing.


What?

the unintended consequences of RESPA 2010 and the new HUD

For once unintended consequences are POSITIVE.  Yes, positive.  I sure don't think they intended to do this but by creating a uniform method for GFE disclosure which flows to a uniform method of HUD prep, we in the title world are enjoying UNIFORMITY of INSTRUCTIONS.  I love it.

What was it that everyone hoped to gain with UNIFORM CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS?  Uniformity, right?  Well, guess what?  We've taken a giant step in that direction without even realizing it.  Isn't that wonderful?

query: new GFE - FHA MIP refund

This is entirely an educated guess on my part.  I would say you would NOT show the refund on the GFE.  I think you would show it on your Cash to Close Summary or Details of Purchase on the 1003.  I do hope everyone is working with a Cash to Close Summary so that consumers have a clear understanding of the anticipated bottom line.  This is where you would show the seller assist, right?

On the HUD, I'd probably put the FHA MIP refund on page one where the other credits go.

So that's my take without popping up onto the FAQs since I presume you already checked them and the issue isn't specifically addressed there.  ;)

IRS and the HUD-1 and the tax credit...what do you think?

Here's a little e-mail chat with a reader trying to help her client.  I am very interested to hear your thoughts on this issue of the IRS requiring that all signatures must be on one piece of paper.

Diane,

I have a client that is filing the IRS Form 5405 to claim the First Time Homebuyers Credit.   She has a HUD1 that is lacking the seller’s signature.  She has contacted the settlement agent’s office.  They do not have a copy with all signatures on it.  The seller was a bank in NJ.  We are not having any luck contacting it.  IRS advises that in the absence of the signature documentation must be submitted to show that PA State does not require signatures on the HUD1. 

Please forward information where I can obtain documentation to send with the HUD1 and 5405.

Thank you,  Deborah

Hi, Deborah:

It is possible there is just a simple communication issue.  They will likely not have ONE copy with ALL signatures on it but I'll bet they have at least ONE copy with the seller signature.  That's usually the way these types of transaction flow, You have one set signed by the seller and another signed by the buyer, so you just staple them together and that will work because the figures on both sets are the same.  BTW- The seller signed HUD is normally a crappy faxed copy but it's legal. ;)

If your client obtained a mortgage, their mortgage lender should have a copy with a seller signature - even if it was the real estate agent's signature affixed with authority from the seller.

If not, then you can try to find the attorney who handled the sale.  They normally referee getting the seller signature on the HUD in these kinds of transactions.

Good luck!
Diane

Thanks, Diane,

But in this case the IRS is not accepting that reasoning.  And neither the attorney or settling agent can provide a HUD1 with all signatures. It wants documentation.  There are many sources on the internet talking about the “fact” that the HUD1 signatures are not required.  However, so far no one can provide a written legal source that verifies that “fact”.

Deborah

Hmm, well if the IRS is unwilling to accept two matching HUD-1s - one signed by the seller and the other by the buyer, then they are sure being unreasonable as much of the country does their closings this way.  I would raise holy hell with my senator and representative.  I can understand the IRS having issues with having NO seller signatures, but having a requirement that all signatures be on the same piece of paper?  Many people will be cut out of the benefits by local custom and that's a shame.

Diane

stand your ground, nicely and with patience......

We have had two closings, make that THREE closings in which the mortgage lender asked us to use different figures on line 801 than we found on the GFE. In each case, after listening to the lenders explain all sorts of methods they wanted to cure whatever problem they perceived, we just quietly said, we can't change that line, it's got to match the GFE, are you sure you haven't considered redisclosure?   In all three cases the lender contact went back to their compliance department and found that there was either a different resolution which worked within the rules or there was a need for redisclosure.  In fact, in one case a compliance team had already sent the redisclosure to the consumer even though the closer hadn't realized it.

By just quietly standing our ground and giving the lender time to think through the situation, we all came to compliant conclusions.  Each case has unique twists and issues that haven't yet been thought through - including internal lender accounting dynamics.  In each case, the lender has thanked us for watching their back and noted their concern that other transactions had closed without question through other title agents who have manually adjusted their HUD to NOT match up with the GFE on line 801.  So, if you are a title agent, check with your staff to make certain that they are not blindly following instructions.  YES, that gives you cover, but we're in this together and helping each other is a good thing, eh?  ;)

it's time to think about escheat rules...here's an e-mail from the PA Treasury Dept.

As a former business professional, I know the importance of understanding the various laws and statutes that affect operations. I thank all businesses who comply with Pennsylvania’s Disposition of Abandoned and Unclaimed Property Act and annually file an unclaimed property report with Treasury. To those businesses who do not, I remind you to come into compliance with this state law to avoid interest and penalties.

Unclaimed property is any financial asset that has become dormant, meaning no contact has been made with the owner after a given time period (at least one year or longer). Some examples of unclaimed property include bank accounts, uncashed payroll checks, accounts payable or receivable checks, credit balances, stocks and bonds, escrow accounts, and insurance proceeds. If a business has any dormant items remaining on its books, they must be reported to Treasury. Please note that writing these items off as income does not constitute an account being resolved and is, in fact, illegal!
Under state law, Treasury has the ability to assess penalties and interest to any business or organization that does not file an unclaimed property report by April 15. Yet there are various options available for companies voluntarily to come into compliance for the first time, without the incurrence of penalties or interest, such as our Voluntary Disclosure Agreement Program. Treasury has a team of compliance professionals who can help you determine if you have unclaimed property or assist you in filing your report. You may reach this team at 1-800-379-3999, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.  5:00 p.m. or via email at unclaimedpropertyreporting@patreasury.org.

Treasury’s Web site, www.patreasury.org, also has a wealth of information about reporting unclaimed property, including instructions and manual reporting forms, a copy of the law, a free link to electronic reporting software, a dormancy matrix for property types and a schedule of reporting seminars.

We look forward to working with you to reunite unclaimed property with its rightful owner. I thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Yours with appreciation,
Rob McCordTreasurer

query: if two unmarried people refinance for the purpose of removing one borrower from mortgage and title in pennsylvania are there transfer tax

Yes.  A new deed will be created as part of the refinance.  When the deed is recorded transfer tax will be due unless the parties have a relationship that is exempt.

So, let's say we have two unrelated individuals who bought real estate together, perhaps friends or maybe they intended to marry but decided NOT to.  At any rate, because they are not related, there is no exemption.  Unless otherwise defined on the deed, we would presume a 50% interest is being transferred.  We can base the transfer tax on consideration if there is a fair market buy-out or we can extrapolate a fair market by using the tax assessment.  To do that you would multiply the tax assessment by the common level ratio factor for the county.  That gives you fair market and then calculate the transfer tax from there.  The Recorder will require that you file - in duplicate -a Statement of Value with the deed which explains the exemption, if any, or how you arrived at the dollar amount being remitted to cover the tax.

Just how would a consumer feel if they know their mortgage application

was being produced by a stranger - a "lead generator" overseas?  I'm not sure who the source of this advice is but read it....

"One of my friend who has a BPO (authorized) located India and plans to begin the 1003 campaign through the application. He is currently producing mortgages and transfers of hot lead, I know which are allowed under U.S. law.
Yes, I see no legal problems with data collection of 1003 outside the U.S.. I agree fully disagree with the prolonged use of rooms Telephone foreigners to solicit U.S. consumers, but unfortunately it is not illegal. Here are some additional information. Hope this helps."  source link


Yesterday I had a frantic call from a consumer - a reverse mortgage borrower - whose transaction we closed  recently.  Our consumer was deeply disturbed that he was receiving letters and solicitations from companies who clearly knew he had closed a refinance mortgage.  How could this happen?  What about the privacy disclosure?  I explained that the mortgage document is recorded in the public record and market companies use that information for solicitations.  That made him VERY unhappy.  I understand but there's not much that can be done about it except to boycott the service of companies who use that kind of marketing.

That's why I am posting this.  If you are a consumer shopping for lending services online, please be very careful.  Check to see if the web site you use to input data is REALLY a mortgage lender.  Many are "lead generators" and they don't have to follow the same rules as real mortgage lenders.  Lead generators take your personal and private data and SELL it to lenders.  As we can see by that little blurb some of your personal and private data may pass through the hands of contractors overseas as part of their process.  BEWARE...that's all I'm saying. ;)

RESPA 2010 - where do we put deed prep on the HUD-1?

We insure title and performs closings in 34 counties in Pennsylvania.  In ONE of those counties it is customary for the buyer to pay deed preparation.  That county is Bedford.  So, if in Bedford, we would include the deed prep fee on the buyer side as part of title services on line #1101, even if seller paid.  In the case of a seller paid deed prep in Bedford County we would put a credit on the first page of the HUD-1.  In all other counties deed prep would go on the seller side of the HUD-1 in the 1100 section.

RESPA 2010 - We have our first closing stopped due to need to redisclose.

On Friday evening we had a dry closing.  It was a REO closing and though we had an approved seller HUD - stamped and signed "approved" by the seller's attorney, we did not have a seller signed HUD and so we had our Dry Closing Disclosure signed and held documents and money pending receipt of seller signed HUD today.

Much to our surprise, the seller noted something their attorney did not.  There was an addendum to the sales agreement in which the buyer agreed to pay BOTH transfer taxes.  This is a $90,000 transaction and so in that area, each transfer tax is $900.  The GFE and our HUD only had the buyer paying one transfer tax, which is typical in that area and is also what was disclosed on the first page of the sales contract.  What we did not know and the mortgage broker did not know was that there was an addendum changing that portion of the sales agreement.

Interestingly, when we contacted the buyer and the agents, THEY knew about the addendum but apparently no one read it because no one seemed to know that the buyer had agreed to pay both transfer taxes.

I will get back to you with comments concerning how this transaction worked out but we are presuming that the lender will deem this a changing circumstance, redisclose, wait, then close.

This raise red flags all around for better procedures.  We know Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, FHA and VA transactions have the buyer paying both transfer taxes.  We will now adopt a procedure in EVERY REO of confirming whether or not there is an addendum and who is paying transfer tax.  We'll get that in an e-mail from the seller or their attorney.  This way we can check with the lender to handle a potential redisclosure prior to getting to the closing table.

I can tell you right now that the mortgage broker has a knot in his stomach right now pending the lender's decision of whether they will consider this a changing circumstance.  If not, the mortgage broker stands to lose $900 to cure the intolerance.