Housing and Recovery Act of 2008

Here is the summary according to the original document

1. Long-term affordability.

The program is built on the idea, expressed by Federal Reserve Chairman
Bernanke, that creating new equity for troubled homeowners is likely to be a
more effective way to avoid foreclosures. New loans will be based on a family's
ability to repay the loan, ensuring affordability and sustained homeownership.

2. No investor lor lender bailout.

Investors and/or lenders will have to take significant losses in order to benefit for the proceeds of the loans refinanced with government insurance. However, these losses would be less than the losses associated with foreclosure.

3. No windfall for borrowers.

Borrowers will share their new equity and future appreciation equally with the FHA. Borrowers will pay for the FHA insurance.

4. Voluntary participation.

This will be a voluntary program. No lenders, services, or investors will be compelled to participate.

5. Restore confidence, liquidity, and transparency.

Credit markets are fearful and frozen in part because banks and other financial
institutions do not know what their subprime mortgages and related securities
are worth. The uncertainty is forcing lenders to hoard capital and stop the lending necessary for economic growth. This program will help restore confidence and get markets flowing again.

Customer Service Story

I would like to take a moment to share with you a customer service story about one of our own here at CRES. Our customer Debbie thought it was a positive experience worthy of a blog post!

The snippet from the Chico Home Blog:

Emotions of real estate
By Debbie Brodie

I was reminded of an important life law this past week: “It is rarely about you.”

I had a week where all the forces of my universe collided, making things feel off balance. I could make you a list, but this article is “not about me.” I will tell you the part that impressed me.

I am coming up on the fifth anniversary of my business, and I was buried with reports and applications for renewals, along with my regular work.

One company e-mailed me an 11-page attachment to print out, fill in and return. The document was full color, with lots of dark ink. Pages 8 and 9 were two full pages of ink — a sales flyer for another product.

This tipped me over. I called the company and complained about the sales piece and all the ink, and why wouldn’t they create an e-mail without all the heavy graphics? I wasn’t mean, but I wouldn’t have been surprised if she called me something rhyming with witch when she hung up the phone.

Yet, the company representative was extremely polite, customer-service focused, and treated me with total respect. She did not get defensive, or give excuses. She was the rare individual that realized “it wasn’t about her.” In this case, it was about me and my week.

She happily mailed out the information with snail mail, using a full cartridge of their ink! She followed up, and stayed the total professional. I was so impressed, I called her and thanked her for her great people skills, and apologized for being grumpy. I then put it in writing, and hope she gets a promotion.

To further read this post, please go to: Emotions of real estate

Don’t be a California Worker’s Comp “enforcement target”.

The California Division of Industrial Relations has launched operation Insurance Coverage. The operation is designed to target employers who do not purchase Worker’s Compensation Insurance. John Dugan, head of the Division, says the program is designed to “systematically identify unlawfully uninsured employers to prioritize as enforcement targets.”

The project is funded by SB 869, which authorized a special fund to be used. The fund will receive credits for enforcement penalties, so expect DIR to be aggressive with fines and penalties so as to recoup the investigative dollars spent. Several state agencies have agreed to share data, including the EDD, UEF, and rating agencies licensed by the Insurance Department.

For more information, visit www.dir.ca.gov

Not sure if you comply, call us at 800-880-2747

Customers Say

“We have been associated with CRES since the late 90's and have always felt totally protected. We have received quick service from the legal department who responds quickly and I got the helpful attention from our AE who has been there to resolve issues and answer questions for me. It has been a rewarding relationship starting with the friendliness of the receptionist who answers the phone instead of having to listen to a long menu. And the low cost of this service makes it very worthwhile for this company.”
Barbara Thomson, Broker/Realtor
Century 21 Palmieri

StressLess Hotline

Are you using all of the Member benefits afforded to you by CRES Insurance?

CRES Website - Visit www.cresdirect.com and log into the Members Only section to access our Legal Forum’s Risk Management information. This info is designed to help reduce the likelihood of a lawsuit. Sample Disclosure Letters and Risk Management Updates are continually being added to the site. They contain claim examples and hot topics in the industry. Log on now!

CRES StressLess Hotline - All Members have access to the CRES StressLess Hotline. Have an issue that you think may lead to a claim or want to run a scenario by the CRES Legal Forum? Call the StressLess Hotline at 877 CRES-INS. We want to protect your company’s future. These calls do not reflect against your policy and are free as part of the services provided to you when you are a CRES member.

CRES Insurance…we mean Business.

Find out more about our StressLess Hotline HERE.

Will Purchasers Have To Reimburse PMI?

From Inman News

"I had a loan that was greater than 80 percent of the value of my home. My loan required me to purchase private mortgage insurance (PMI).

But I recently had to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure because I could no longer afford the increases in the adjustable-rate mortgage. Now the PMI company has come after me for the $43,000 it paid the lender due to the deed in lieu.

Is the PMI company allowed to subrogate and go after me for its loss? Isn't the reason you buy premiums for this coverage and insurance is a calculated risk on their part, so that I wouldn't have to pay?"

For the answer to this question, please click here to read the full article at Inman News.

NAR and DOJ settle Antitrust suit.

There is a proposed settlement of the 2005 lawsuit against NAR by the Department of Justice surrounding NAR’s IDX/VOW rules. Deborah A. Garza, deputy assistant attorney general for the U.S. Justice Department, today characterized the settlement as "a full success" for the department. "We were able to achieve full relief with respect to the practices we were concerned about," she said. The proposed settlement provides that an MLS "may not prohibit, restrict, or impede a participant from referring registrants to any person or from obtaining a fee for such referral."

The controversy surrounded NAR-adopted policies governing online sharing and display of listings, and the circumstances under which those listings were shared, or sharable, to other real estate professionals. The main beef of the DOJ was NAR rules that required MLS’s to selectively withhold property listings from companies that operate VOW-based search sites that feature a collection of property listings from MLS members.

The settlement proposal provides that the display of listing information on a VOW site "does not require separate permission from the participant whose listings will be available on the VOW," but does provide that individual sellers can choose to block information about their home from display on the Internet.

The proposed settlement will be published in the Federal Register and is subject to a 60-day comment period and a 30-day review by a judge before it is final.