That's about right for your LTV. You might be able to do slightly better if you shop around a bit. Rates have drifted a bit downwards in the past couple of weeks so you might use that as leverage with the lender to allow you to re-lock at a lower rate.
BTW, don't waste your time contacting the scumbag spammers who post their "I can help!" garbage here. Most of them are scammers working out of Nigeria or Latvia or some other God-forsaken hellhole. Even if they're not, they're not bright enough to read the CG and TOS so would you REALLY want to trust them with a major item like a mortgage??
2007-09-12 13:04:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bostonian In MO 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Right now, while there might be a better deal around, I would take it. Check out bankrate.com for current rates in your area. Rates are still historically low. You have a good one.
If you can pay down your mortgage a little more quickly, you can probably get rid of the PMI in less time than they have scheduled. Issues in industry right now are the LTV; not as many are approving 95% LTV; many are trying to limit to under 90%. So instead of worrying so much about the small savings you might make chasing a better rate, I would work on getting rid of that PMI if at all possible. Also ask your broker if you can pay the PMI premium upfront in your mortgage loan instead of monthly. You may save money in the long run if you are not going to be able to pay down your balance to 80% in a fairly short time.
2007-09-12 11:32:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by MJ 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
With that scenario today I would be offering borrower's 6.000% on a 30 year fixed loan.
Rates have gone down slightly in the past week, but even for a two weeks ago it seems a little high. Overall it's certainly a good rate, but even two weeks ago my company was offering 6.250%
2007-09-12 11:54:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
at the start, the government (particularly the federal government), should not be mandating any variety of compelled decrease cost expenses application which includes Social risk-free practices. In concept it sounds reliable yet Constitutionally it incredibly is not a valid theory. Now, that aside, if we are to maintain the social risk-free practices application we in simple terms could enable the loose human beings of this large united states of america to make their very own alternatives on how they desire to take a place their very own money. in spite of everything, it incredibly is not the government's money. the government has not something except they take it from us. persons could then be waiting to take a place in a great style of investment thoughts from the inventory industry, mutual money, gold, actual sources, bonds or an uncomplicated classic decrease cost expenses account. This account could then be owned by capacity of the guy so as that they'd withdraw money on the age they opt for for retirment and that they'd will additionally their account to kinfolk upon dying. the only thank you to repair any of our issues is to maximise freedom and selection and cut back government involvement.
2016-10-10 11:19:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not a great deal. Good credit rates have dropped over the last two weeks.
2007-09-12 11:12:51
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bob D 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ryan be glad #1 it's fixed and #2 it's under 7%.
2007-09-12 12:14:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Could be worse, trust me. You could have credit like my husband's and not be able to get a loan, period. Take the best you can get, and those numbers aren't too shabby. Could be better, but if you can afford it, go for it.
2007-09-12 11:20:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Considering you are only putting down 5%, I think you are getting a great deal.
2007-09-12 11:15:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
That is not too bad since you are not making a normal down payment.
Don't contact the predators posting here, they are very bad news.
2007-09-12 12:49:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Landlord 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
I'd be happy with those numbers.
There are better deals out there, but these are solid numbers.
2007-09-12 11:07:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by saberhilt 4
·
1⤊
0⤋