Homeowners Protection Act of 1998 Definition
The Homeowners Protection Act is a government regulation that came into force in 1998 as a measure to protect homeowners from the liability to pay for private mortgage insurance (PMI) when deemed unnecessary by law. The act also makes it obligatory for financiers to divulge to homeowners details about any PMI applicable to a mortgage. The Homeowners Protection Act also makes it mandatory for lenders to terminate the PMI automatically for homeowners who accrue the requisite amount of equity in their homes.
A Little More on What is the Homeowners Protection Act
The Homeowners Protection Act protects homeowners who purchased private residential mortgages after July 29, 1999. However, Veterans Affairs (VA) and Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans are out of bounds for this act.
PMI shields financiers from the risks involved with loan default and foreclosure, while empowering potential homeowners to obtain mortgages at reasonable rates. PMI also simplifies the process of disbursement of ‘‘high-ratio’’ loans, i.e. loans with loan-to-value (LTV) ratios exceeding 80 percent. PMI also facilitates a financier to recover costs related to the resale of foreclosed. PMI is discarded after a mortgage loan balance falls below the 80 percent loan-to-value ratio since it virtually ceases to offer protection to the lender, nor does it help the borrower in any way anymore.
Background of the Homeowners Protection Act
The Homeowners Protection Act was formulated to facilitate stress-free cancellation of PMI by homeowners. Until then, PMI cancellation had proven to be quite an arduous task for the borrower who had to wait for his/her home equity to drop to 20 percent for the lender to initiate cancellation procedures. In worse cases, lenders refused to cancel PMI, leaving the borrower with no viable legal recourse. The act shields borrowers by proscribing life-of-loan PMI coverage for PMI products paid for by the homeowner and instituting uniform measures for cancellation of PMI across the country. Financiers have used and in some cases, exploited the 80 percent loan-to-value ratio as a lending standard wherein they disburse loans with a 20 percent down payment. Such an arrangement guarantees sustained fiscal interest in the property on the part of the borrower and ensures that he/she continues making interest payments on the mortgage. It also makes foreclosure a less risky proposition for the lenders by ensuring that they have enough equity available.
Even so, with steeply escalating property prices, it came to be increasingly difficult for potential homeowners to pay even 20 percent of the assessed property value as down payment. For the sake of continued business, lenders had to start disbursing loans outside the 80 percent loan-to-value threshold. Nevertheless, as demand for home loans gained momentum, lenders started favoring arrangements that involved PMIs in order to mitigate risks associated with loans that allowed down payments below 20 percent of the sale prices.
References for Homeowner’s Protection Act
Homeowners Protection Act of 1998
Once is Not Enough: Preserving Consumers’ Rights to Bankruptcy Protection, DeJarnatt, S. L. (1998). Ind. LJ, 74, 455.
Monoline restrictions, with applications to mortgage insurance and title insurance, Jaffee, D. (2006). Review of Industrial Organization, 28(2), 83-108. This paper explores the use of multi-line basis as a mode of operation for insurance firms in the US. This paper investigates the conditions under which monoline restrictions represent efficient regulatory policy. The paper portrays monoline requirements as an intriguing issue because multiline insurance firms receive the diversification benefit that the firm’s capital is available to pay insurance claims on any of its lines. The paper shows, however, that the specific features of the mortgage and title insurance lines create a special case in which monoline restrictions may represent efficient regulatory policy.
Property Rights and Wrongs: Historic Preservation and Florida’s 1995 Private Property Rights Protection Act, Hunt, R. (1996). Property Rights and Wrongs: Historic Preservation and Florida’s 1995 Private Property Rights Protection Act. Fla. L. Rev., 48, 709.
… Place Like Home: Housing Discrimination against Disabled Persons and the Concept of Reasonable Accomodation under the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1998, Eisner, S. B. (1997). NYL Sch. J. Hum. Rts., 14, 435.
Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1998… And Its Effect on Adult-Only Housing for Florida’s Older Residents, The, Schorr, M. B. (1989). Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1998… And Its Effect on Adult-Only Housing for Florida’s Older Residents, The. Fla. BJ, 63, 11.
” Takings” Bills Threaten People, Property, Zoning, and the Environment, Sugameli, G. P. (1999). ” Takings” Bills Threaten People, Property, Zoning, and the Environment. The Urban Lawyer, 177-194.
Protecting Homeowners: Preventing Abusive Lending While Preserving Access to Credit, Saunders, M., & Union, C. (2003). Protecting Homeowners: Preventing Abusive Lending While Preserving Access to Credit. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity and Subcommittee on Financial Institutions ad Consumer Credit at Joint Hearing.
Truth in Lending Developments in 1999-Preparing for the New Millennium, Yen, E. C., & Meredith, T. P. (1999). Truth in Lending Developments in 1999-Preparing for the New Millennium. Bus. Law., 55, 1261.