What is the meaning of Equal Housing Lender? Do non-banks need to display it?
At the top result of the Google search, on the Google results page it's sumarized as applicable to every lender participating in FDIC: The terms equal housing lender and equal opportunity lender are synonymous and refer to all banks insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the United States. Such banks are prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap, or familial status. If a bank is evaluating a persons qualifications to qualify for a loan they have to follow the FDIC and HUD guidelines for equal opportunity credit. If they offer mortgages they will use the phrase equal housing. from the lending club website (fine print area): 2 This depiction is a summary of the processes for obtaining a loan or   making an investment. Loans are issued by WebBank, an FDIC insured   Utah-chartered industrial bank located in Salt Lake City, Utah, Equal   Housing Lender. Investors do not invest directly in loans. Investors   purchase Member Dependent Notes from Lending Club. Loans are not   issued to borrowers in IA and ID. Individual borrowers must be a US   citizen or permanent resident and at least 18 years old. Valid bank   account and social security number/FEIN are required. All loans are   subject to credit review and approval. Your actual rate depends upon   credit score, loan amount, loan term, credit usage and history.   LendingClub notes are issued pursuant to a Prospectus on file with the   SEC. You should review the risks and uncertainties described in the   Prospectus related to your possible investment in the notes. Currently   only residents of the following states may invest in Lending Club   notes: AR, AZ, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA,   MA, ME, MN, MO, MS, MT, NE, NH, NV, NY, OK, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT,   VA, VT, WA, WI, WV, or WY. Our mailing address is: Lending Club, 71   Stevenson, Suite 300, San Francisco, CA 94105.
As the bank probably told you, a HOA has no assets.  Taking out loans like that is the domain of a co-op, which is a different kind of corporation and residents own shares in a corporation that owns the entire property as an asset. It is probably a bad idea to allow someone to be a guarantor of the loan.  These kinds of things may pop up in an annual audit of the books (why is a particular person being paid a monthly fee?) or may be seen as red flags by banks offering mortgages to buyers in the HOA. You're not responsible for the mortgages on the property - those are agreements between the lender and the borrower. The risk you have is that the title search missed something.  If the seller (i.e., the bank or banks who foreclosed) did not have full rights to sell the property, and there was another party who had a lien on the property or had an interest in it in some fashion, that party could make a claim that would interfere with your purchase.  You wouldn't be responsible for the loan, but you might not end up with the title to the property if that happened. It doesn't matter.  You will just renew your mortgage at the prevailing rates.  That's part of the mortgage contract.   The problem that happens is if you want to move your mortgage to another bank for a better rate, they may not accept you.  Your re-negotiating position is limited. Most mortgages have a portability option where you can even transfer the mortgage to another property, but you'd have to buy a cheaper house. If you have good credit, you already know the rate -- the bank has it posted in the window. If you don't have good credit, tell the loan officer your score. Don't have them run your credit until you know that you're interested in that bank. Running an application or prequal kicks off the sales process, which gets very annoying very quickly if you are dealing with multiple banks. A few pointers: You're looking for a plain vanilla 30 year loan, so avoid mortgage brokers -- they are just another middleman who is tacking on a cost. Brokers are great when you need more exotic loans. Always, always stay away from mortgage brokers (or inspectors or especially lawyers) recommended by realtors. Banks in New Zealand tend to take a lien that is higher than the amount of the loan, so that your only option for a second mortgage is with them. ASB wanted 50% more than the value of the loan when I had my mortgage with them. Of course, with house price inflation the way it's been in NZ, the value of your house may have outstripped the lien anyway, and you can mortgage the rest of it with anyone you like. I suspect your lawyer will need to inform the other lienholder, but you don't need their permission. "Johnny.  I recently bought my first home as well, and I have worked in the credit business (not mortgage), so I think I can answer some of your questions.  Disclaimer first that I'm in NY, and home buying does vary from state to state. In my experience, pre-qual is not too different from pre-approval.  Neither represents any real committment on the part of the bank (i.e. they can still deny approval at any point), and both are based on pulling your credit bureau and calculating ratios based on your stated (probably not documented) financial information.  It's theoretically possible that a seller would choose a pre-approved buyer over a pre-qualified buyer, all other things being equal, but all other things are seldom equal. Remember also that you don't need to ultimately get a mortgage from the same bank that you use for the pre-qual.  The pre-qual just shows that you are probably credit-worthy and serves to give you some credibility with sellers.  Once you have an accepted offer and need to find a real mortgage, you can shop around for the best rate and best loan structure.  Banks don't need to have pulled your credit to quote rates, but they will need to have a general idea of your FICO range.  Once you find the bank you like with the best rate and actually apply for the loan, they will pull a hard bureau, and if your scores are different from what you said before, the rate may change, but within the same range, you'll generally be ok.  Also, banks do not necessarily pull all 3 bureaus; they may only pull 1, as it costs them for each pull. 2 potential downsides to this approach: Also, make sure you have a mortgage/funding clause in your contract, as banks are unpredictable, and make sure you have a great real estate lawyer, not a legal ""factory"" - the extra few hundred $ are worth it. Don't overthink this credit stuff too much.  Find a good house for a good price, and get a no-nonsense mortgage that you fully understand - no exotic stuff.  Good luck!" "The question isn't ""fair"", it's ""how much do you have to give them in order to get them to trust you with the money for a year rather than doing something else with it, and does that exceed what you are willing/able to give them, and how sure are you that you can either do without the money or find it elsewhere?""  This has to be negotiated. There is no standard answer, since there is no standard company or lender. Heck, even a simple bank loan is a negotiation, though that usually takes the form of shopping around for an acceptable rate and their deciding whether they'll accept you rather than going back and forth on what rate would be the best compromise." Banks consider investment mortgages (and any mortgage where you don't live in the property), as a riskier investment than an owner occupied, home collateral mortgage. The sources of increased risk range from concerns that you will screw up as a landlord, your tenants will destroy the place, you won't have tenants and can't afford to pay the bank, and/or you'll take out several other investment mortgages and over extend yourself. All of these risks are compounded by the fact that it is harder for the bank to convince you to pay when they can't put you out on the street if you default. Banks lend and invest in money, not real estate, so they would much rather have a paying loan than a foreclosed house, especially with the modern foreclosure glut. The increased risk means the bank will charge higher interest for the loan, may require a higher downpayment, and will require higher lending standards before issuing the loan. A new housing investor can get around these higher prices by living in the home for a few years before renting it out (though your lender could possibly require you to renegotiate the loan if you move out too soon). "I think the claim is that you shouldn't buy a house expecting it to increase in value as you would a stock portfolio. OTOH if you are looking at it from the stand point of ""I need housing, mortgage payments and rent are comparable and I build equity if I buy a house rather then rent"" that's potentiality a very different situation (that I'm not qualified to judge)." A friend recently bought an 800€ TV on 0% financing. Sounded like a sensible thing to do. Why pay 800 when you can pay 80pm for 10 months? It took 30mins to set up the 'loan'. She had to sign all kinds of documents, giving away much personal information (age, employment info, income, email address etc). She now has a financial relationship with an institution which has nothing to do with the item purchased. She is bombarded with all kinds of financial offerings. She regrets taking out the finance. She had the money. The hassle and the unwanted links to banks make the deal unattractive. Perhaps she should have tried to make a cash deal... It depends on the bank - In some cases(mine included :) ) the bank allowed for this but Emma had to sign on a document waiving the rights for the house in case the bank needs to liquidate assets in to recover their mortgage in case of delays or non-payment of dues in time. This had to be signed after taking independent legal advice from a legal adviser. "&gt; non-traditional borrowers (read: people who didn't meet the requirements for their traditional loan products)  There's a reason these ""non-traditional borrowers"" don't meet the requirements: They tend to be deadbeats.  The traditional requirements were developed over decades of experience to screen out deadbeats so lenders don't lose money." "Often the counter-party has obligations with respect to timelines as well -- if your buying a house, the seller probably is too, and may have a time-sensitive obligation to close on the deal. I'm that scenario, carrying the second mortgage may be enough to make that deal fall through or result in some other negative impact. Note that ""pre-approval"" means very little, banks can and do pass on deals, even if the buyer has a good payment history. That's especially true when the economy is not so hot -- bankers in 2011 are worried about not losing money... In 2006, they were worried about not making enough!" "Assuming the numbers you gave are forecasted 2013 annual income, you should really use an average and give the lender 1 number, as long as you can provide documentation to back it up. Lenders aren't as sophisticated as considering your monthly income fluctuations into their underwriting algorithm.  If you're not tied down to your existing lender, I highly recommend you to shop around. There isn't an ""universal lending requirement"". You'll be surprised at how flexible they are. Not as a recommendation to get around the rules, but just finding a lender that'll work with your situation. Try personal finance forums such as FatWallet or Slickdeal to find low-cost lenders: http://goo.gl/vIojT" I'm going to be buying a house / car / home theater system in the next few months, and this loan would show up on my credit report and negatively impact my score, making me unable to get the financing that I'll need.