	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: HUD Brings Back The Swat Team</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fhaloanpros.com/2009/04/hud-brings-back-the-swat-team/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fhaloanpros.com/2009/04/hud-brings-back-the-swat-team/</link>
	<description>The Unofficial Guide to FHA Loans &#038; Mortgages</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chandler Real Estate</title>
		<link>http://www.fhaloanpros.com/2009/04/hud-brings-back-the-swat-team/#comment-47707</link>
		<dc:creator>Chandler Real Estate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 05:44:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fhaloanpros.com/?p=979#comment-47707</guid>
		<description>We are seeing more of an approach in the marketplace and government entities to follow-up to see how processes and programs are actually functioning.  This is something that seemed lost on so many entities in the past and in my opinion, is a critical ingredient to developing a healthy marketplace.  

I like the idea of FHA being proactive to check on lenders in this regard.  To not do this, I believe, would add a level of risk to the FHA portfolio over time.

Regulation or deregulation - there appears to be a healthy dose of regulation with some sense of restraint in the marketplace.

Thanks for talking to the FHA SWAT in this regard.
David Lorti</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We are seeing more of an approach in the marketplace and government entities to follow-up to see how processes and programs are actually functioning.  This is something that seemed lost on so many entities in the past and in my opinion, is a critical ingredient to developing a healthy marketplace.  </p>
<p>I like the idea of FHA being proactive to check on lenders in this regard.  To not do this, I believe, would add a level of risk to the FHA portfolio over time.</p>
<p>Regulation or deregulation - there appears to be a healthy dose of regulation with some sense of restraint in the marketplace.</p>
<p>Thanks for talking to the FHA SWAT in this regard.<br />
David Lorti</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Donlin</title>
		<link>http://www.fhaloanpros.com/2009/04/hud-brings-back-the-swat-team/#comment-47680</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Donlin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:58:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fhaloanpros.com/?p=979#comment-47680</guid>
		<description>"For every action, there is an equal, but opposite reaction."

While I abhor government sticking its bulbous nose into private enterprise, this last 3-4 years proves a public policy statement is in order.

As FHA becomes the newest source of mortgage money for Americans, there must be a reasonable amount of oversight by the Feds. The "big" points 1, 2, &#38; 4 listed in the article are just part of a prudent lending practice. No problem here.

#3 Advertising, will be a monstrous beast to corral, maybe not worth the Fed creating an "Advertising Police" division.

#5 Fees; is where the Fed should stay out of the picture. Reg Z and Section 32 are already on the books. Just enforce those, don't create more rules.

I completely agree with HUD's policy to terminate a mortgagee's approval if they repeatedly violate policies. 

The Golden Rule of Money applies here. "Those with the gold, make the rules."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;For every action, there is an equal, but opposite reaction.&#8221;</p>
<p>While I abhor government sticking its bulbous nose into private enterprise, this last 3-4 years proves a public policy statement is in order.</p>
<p>As FHA becomes the newest source of mortgage money for Americans, there must be a reasonable amount of oversight by the Feds. The &#8220;big&#8221; points 1, 2, &amp; 4 listed in the article are just part of a prudent lending practice. No problem here.</p>
<p>#3 Advertising, will be a monstrous beast to corral, maybe not worth the Fed creating an &#8220;Advertising Police&#8221; division.</p>
<p>#5 Fees; is where the Fed should stay out of the picture. Reg Z and Section 32 are already on the books. Just enforce those, don&#8217;t create more rules.</p>
<p>I completely agree with HUD&#8217;s policy to terminate a mortgagee&#8217;s approval if they repeatedly violate policies. </p>
<p>The Golden Rule of Money applies here. &#8220;Those with the gold, make the rules.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
