Posted by MistarellaFL on 5/8/07 12:21pm
Msg #189353

Lisa/FL, the 1003 continued?

Love to hear what response you might have received about single borrowers signing the top of the 1003.

Reply by Becca_FL on 5/8/07 1:43pm
Msg #189376

I would like to hear as well. Seems I missed all the hoopla while relaxing on the boat in the beautiful Florida sunshine. So, FWIW, here's my .02.

I used to only have the top of the 1003 signed if it was a joint application and I was not specifically instructed to have it signed. I took Paul's side on the argument until I had two of my main TC clients request that the 1003 be signed regardless. When that happened, I changed my stance on the subject, posted a mea culpa to Chicago Bob and let him know that I had joined his team. It's been over six months since I started having the darn thing signed and I have not had an issue.

Reply by Becca_FL on 5/8/07 1:46pm
Msg #189378

I found it. n/m

Reply by Becca_FL on 5/8/07 1:48pm
Msg #189379

Oops...My "Bob, you're right" post from 12/06

Funny and true, Bob.
Posted by Rebecca Fair of FL on 12/15/06 10:43pm Msg #166194
I'll be stocking up on at least 10 boxes first thing tomorrow. It's just too good a deal to pass up.

Oh, and Bob, I've come around to your way of thinking re: the 1003. It seems more TCs just say sign the darn thing. I give...you win.

Reply by christiSocal on 5/8/07 2:11pm
Msg #189385

Confusion everywhere

I did one last night, docs to single borrower. The instructions from the ss said " Only sign top of 1003's IF there are two borrowers". Fine, no prob, till I see the red arrow sticky on the 1003, saying SIGN HERE!!!
Yes, I had her sign.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 5/8/07 4:20pm
Msg #189399

The mortgage insdustry really has it's $hit together...

on this issue.
Trouble is , they have no idea where they left it.
My rule, when in doubt, have single bwr sign.
Much less chance of a 2nd trip.
I like Brenda's idea of two copies of first page of
1003 and have sngl bwr sign one and leave 2nd unsigned.
Especially important if they need to initial bottom of form
If not. lender could just print out a blank 1st page and use that.
Yes, Paul, I remember about your QC guy who was wondering who
the 2nd bwr was?

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 5/8/07 6:01pm
Msg #189424

Here it is, straight from FreddieMac & FannieMae

Freddie Mac: Spoke with Jim Judd, Call Center Team Lead. Posed question. He responded that while he was not qualified to answer the question, he did agree that in the instance of a singular Borrower, it should be signed on pg. 1 at the top. However, since he didn't feel qualified to give me a definate answer, he forwarded the question on to Pam Padgett, National Quality Control and Underwriting Department Director. He asked "Customer is asking about the requirement of Borrower to sign top of form 65 when there is no Co-applicant. My opinion is that the borrower DOES need to sign at the top of page 1 and if none of the boxes are applicable, then they would be left unchecked but the borrowers signature would be required. Do you agree?"

She responded with a one-word answer: "YES!!"

However, being the diligent National Quality Control and Underwriting Department Director that she is, Pam forwarded the querey on to the FreddieMac legal beagles. The legal department said that the language at the top of the form 65 (1003) is there to satisfy a certain California piece of legislation regarding marital property rights/domestic partnership rights. It is the legal departments opinion that it should only be signed in those cases. That being said, they agree and are aware that the language is confusing and ambiguous. It was intended to be open to interpretation by the LENDER since it is a LENDER DOCUMENT.
Period. Lender document. What the Lender says, goes. They concede that the vast majority of Lenders DO require a singular Borrower to sign page one at the top in the absence of a Co-Borrower, and that is their right. Those Lenders that DO require that it be signed consider it a funding issue if it is not.

Onward to my conversation with FannieMae.

I spoke a Senior Underwriter in Chicago today and asked her the same question. She said the change on the 1003 had caused a great deal of confusion and she is shocked that more closers/TC's/Lenders haven't called with the same question. She said that FannieMae DOES require a complete application (meaning no blank spaces whatsoever) BUT according to their 'Standards of Completion', the rules start at Section 1. The top 2"-3" of the page are ONLY there to satisfy 'some California legislation regarding community property' and it is wholly a LENDER ISSUE as to whether a singular Borrower need sign that first page. In other words, FannieMae does not take a position on this issue, nor do they care.
She reinterated that most Lenders do require a signature from a singular Borrower. She also stated that the word "Only" should be placed in front of the sentence "If this is an application for joint credit, both Borrower and Co-Borrower agree that we intend to apply for joint credit (sign below)" to clarify whether or not a singular borrower should sign.

So there you have it. No real resolution, is there?

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/8/07 6:12pm
Msg #189428

Re: Right back where we started from...

Print two first pages - get one signed and leave the other empty - let the Lender decide.

Reply by DCD/MI on 5/8/07 8:49pm
Msg #189452

Re: How about ON docs to Borrower? Have them sign or no? n/m

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 5/8/07 9:52pm
Msg #189461

What's the difference btwn ON or eDocs? Same determining

factors. Same quandry. No difference.
(Borrower shouldn't be signing without you present to witness anyway)

Reply by DCD/MI on 5/9/07 8:30am
Msg #189494

Re: How about ON docs to Borrower? Have them sign or no?

Meaning that if they are ON to the borrowers, there is no ability to make a copy to have them sign both ways.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 5/8/07 10:45pm
Msg #189465

Could not have said it better myself. Or maybe I could.....

have, but on the other hand, maybe not.
I'm confused, but I guess that puts me in good company.
Again, let's all thank Lalaland for making it interesting for the
rest of the country. Haven't had this much fun since OJ and Paris Hilton
Let's really muck it up.
Assume you have three bwrs, H & W and daddy as co-signer.
Kids both sign top of one 1003. Should dad sign by himself on top
of his own 1003 form??.

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 5/8/07 11:17pm
Msg #189469

Bob, I am getting my wooden spoons out RIGHT now! n/m

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 5/8/07 11:33pm
Msg #189471

Not sure if it would be as much fun as getting "NILFED, but.

I'll try anything once.