Eight Best Marketing Practices to Fund New Loans Faster

Join our expert panelists to learn which best marketing practices will help you get to your customer quickly with your best offer – and win their business for another loan term.

engage.marketing event: All eyes on purchase

To help power your business forward, we’re bringing together the smartest minds in purchase mortgage marketing to share the insights, tactics and strategies that set leaders apart.

Behind the executive exodus at Fannie Mae

What's behind the wave of executive departures at Fannie Mae? It's not just money, according to former employees of the GSE.

2021 Agent Rankings now live

Today RealTrends + Tom Ferry announce the 16th annual The Thousand of America's top 1,000 real estate sales and professionals and teams.

Politics & MoneyMortgage

Top CFPB official “hates” QM rules, jeopardizing safe harbor

Diane Thompson currently oversees the rule-making process at CFPB

compliance HW+

In 2013, George Ralph Elliott applied to refinance his Ohio home ahead of a separation from his fourth wife, claiming both his monthly rental income and the spousal support he would soon receive. He didn’t know it at the time, but Elliott’s application would later test a relatively obscure banking law — the CFPB’s Ability To Repay rule — and strike fear into the hearts of mortgage industry executives across the country. 

The two-story farmhouse in a rural corner of Milford Center, Ohio, was one of at least two homes that Elliott, who had been a real estate agent for 30 years, owned with his wife, Golan, who was also a Realtor.

First Federal Community Bank of Bucyrus’ loan committee initially rejected the application. But the soon-to-be ex-wife met with bank executives to assure them she would pay the support — which would provide $2,200 a month to Elliott. The in-person meeting worked, and the bank approved the loan. But the couple didn’t separate as planned.

Golan paid the spousal support for just three months before stopping. Elliott decided not to adhere to the separation agreement, instead seeking more alimony from the divorce court.

Then Elliott lost his job, and bills from the divorce proceedings began to pile up. The divorce judgment, which was far less favorable to Elliott than the separation agreement, ordered him to pay Golan a substantial amount. The divorce court also ordered Golan to pay Elliott just $250 per month in spousal support for three years. By early 2017, Elliott defaulted on his mortgage. 

Elliott went on the offensive. That same year, he sued his lender for violating the Truth in Lending Act.

This content is exclusively for HW+ members.

Start an HW+ Membership now for less than $1 a day.

Your HW+ Membership includes:

  • Unlimited access to HW+ articles and analysis
  • Exclusive access to the HW+ Slack community and virtual events
  • HousingWire Magazine delivered to your home or office
  • Become a member today

    Already a member? log in

    Most Popular Articles

    Fannie Mae gives go-ahead for digital verification

    Fannie Mae has given mortgage servicers the green light to use third-party digital vendors to verify income and asset information. Mortgage tech firms are thrilled.

    Jun 10, 2021 By

    Latest Articles

    How Rocket Pro TPO continues to give its broker partners the upper hand

    To remain competitive and create a better experience in this purchase environment, brokers need one thing above all: Speed. And there’s one lending partner that has the solutions and resources to give LOs just that.

    Jun 11, 2021 By
    3d rendering of a row of luxury townhouses along a street

    Log In

    Forgot Password?

    Don't have an account? Please