My Meeting With A Mortgage Broker
The following is the true story of how I showed my wife the truth behind the home mortgage swindle that all Federal Reserve Banks play upon people whose humble desire is to one day own a home of their own. As all financial statistics indicate, for most people, their home is their largest investment. Unfortunately, for most of them, that same home is also their biggest liability. This is because of the 360 payments that must be made over the course of thirty-years, in which the same home is paid for nearly three-times over, just so the individual can enjoy living in one home.
Home Mortgage Calculator
By the spring of 1998, my wife and I were ready to enter the market as first time homebuyers. Because of my background in both business and finance, I knew that the single transaction that would deliver the most bang for the buck would be to purchase a house by paying cash. This would deliver us a free and clear deed, and our semi-annual tax bills would show no outstanding mortgage. Here alone, we would save additional thousands of dollars by eliminating the need for tax escrow accounts. Finally, I would now be able to put to practical use, all of what I had learned in the previous twenty-years of working both as an investment banker, and as an owner of a small-business in the graphic art and commercial printing field.
Because of this business training, I knew that by purchasing a home outright, I would eliminate approximately a quarter of a million dollars in debt that I otherwise would have had to find some way of paying. The manner I have taken to explain the true level of mortgage debt is simply this --- I would have been paying for three houses just for the privilege of living in one! In March and April 1998, the precise time we were looking to purchase our home, the prevailing interest-rate was 7.21%. While the bank may claim that the loan is only at an interest-rate of 7.21%, by the time the loan-sharking concept of compounded-interest is added, the true interest-rate ends up closer to 125-150%, than 7.21%. I honestly wonder why this doesn’t seem to violate those truth-in-lending laws that are supposed to protect the individual.
At first, I had trouble convincing my wife that this was a transaction that would benefit us in the long run. I couldn’t blame her, as the truth about home mortgages is never taught in high school, or even in college. So, my compromise was to schedule a meeting with a financial advisor from one of the major banks in the Western New York area in which we live. As to not further embarrass this individual, who still works in this same position for this same bank, I will refer to him as simply, Mickey Mouse, as this was certainly the level of his so-called expert advice.
Likewise, as to not identify the bank, let me give it the fictitious name of “Buffalo Savings and Loan.”
One of the biggest hurdles that I had to overcome, as far as my wife was concerned, was the “This Is Just The Way It Is Done” argument. According to her, we might as well get a home-mortgage, because everyone we know has one. This was a powerful obstacle in which to overcome, because she was correct --- everyone we know does have a home-mortgage! We had known each other and had been together for a few month shy of ten years by that point, and I asked her to name me just one instance where I did anything merely because someone else was doing or had done it.
I carefully explained to her that I was a wolf and not a sheep, and was a leader instead of a follower. I sat her down several times with a calculator and a legal pad in front of each of us. I explained that the home-mortgage was complete loan-sharking, a scam that played fast and loose with semantics, and it bent the so-called truth-in-lending laws all out of proportion, so they were no longer of any real use or value. Finally, she said that we were getting a home-mortgage, and that was it. However, it was at that time that I explained to her that so long as I was alive and part of her life, there was no way I would agree to do something that I knew would cause harm to the both of us and the family we would one day have. As both of our names would be on the deed, I finally told her that I would refuse to sign any such home-mortgage contract.
We had begun to look at houses, and we went through a local real estate broker that I knew personally, and as a former business associate and friend, I knew that she would not take advantage of us in any way. I began to think if there was any way that I could get through to my wife on this issue, a matter about which she was clearly woefully misinformed. I finally asked her if she could give me one hour of her time, as that was all I would need to prove to her that the home-mortgage was a brutal form of financial rape. She asked me how I could teach her that much within one hour, and I replied by telling her that I would simply schedule a meeting with a local mortgage broker --- and it would be him or her that would show her the truth, and not me.
This was a highly unusual technique, and it did pique her curiosity. I immediately got the phone book out, and looked up the name and number of a local mortgage broker. I called and scheduled an appointment for the very next afternoon. After confirming the time and place of the appointment, I again repeated to my wife that it would be the mortgage broker that would be giving her the answer, and not myself. She doubted this, and asked me how I planned to get someone to admit that what he did for a living was actually a scam of monumental proportions.
“You’ll see,” was all I would say for the moment.
During the ride to the appointment, I explained to my wife exactly what we would say to the mortgage broker, and more importantly, what he would say to us, and what he would ultimately recommend that we do. I further explained that whatever his suggestion was, it would benefit the bank ONLY, and not us in any way. These ideas were met with genuine skepticism, as she had never heard of this before. But, just as I said on that day --- the home-mortgage scam is one of the dirtiest lies ever laid upon the good and honest people of the American middle class.
Here is an actual transcript of the meeting, which took place in March 1998, where we spoke with a financial advisor from Buffalo Savings and Loan [not its’ real name] a local Buffalo, New York USA bank well-known for its’ home-mortgage lending:
Mickey Mouse: “Good morning, what can I do for you today?”
Kentroversy: “Good morning, we would like to talk to you today about the best way of investing a sum of money we will be soon receiving in the form of a financial settlement. The sum total of what I will be receiving will be more than enough to purchase a house, if that is what you agree we should do.”
MM: “How much money are we talking about here?”
Kentroversy: “The total that we will be discussing today is a fraction of the entire settlement, but it is enough to purchase a house outright, for cash. Let us say that for the sake of this discussion, it is $100,000. We would like you to show us what would be the best way of investing this amount of money.”
He nodded to indicate that he understood.
MM: “Do you have a house in mind?”
Kentroversy: “Yes, the purchase price including all taxes and closing costs, will be $95,000.”
MM: “Is this going to be a one-time payment?”
Kentroversy: “Yes, it is.”
MM: “Uh-huh, I see.”
He then began to punch a series of numbers into his computer terminal, which was pointed away from us, therefore I could not see what he was doing exactly.
MM: “Here is what I would do if I were you,” he began. “Let me ask you the following question; is having liquid money important to you? You know, money that you can get your hands on whenever you want?”
Kentroversy: “Of course it is.”
I glanced over at my wife, and winked, as she nodded in agreement to what the mortgage-broker was saying.
MM: “Well then, what I would recommend is instead of purchasing the house outright and spending all of your available cash, I would recommend that you put down a very small down payment, and finance the rest. This way, you will have more money in your pocket from month to month.”
This clearly was an outright lie. What this man was telling us was that by holding a $90,000.00 home-mortgage, we would have more money in our pocket from month to month. At the quoted interest-rate of 7.21%, our monthly payment would be $679.47 per month. By the time the escrow account and taxes were included, this would cost us roughly $1,000.00 per month for the next 30 years (360 payments).
Kentroversy: “What amount do you recommend as a down-payment?”
MM: “I would put no more than five or ten thousand dollars down, and mortgage the rest. Doing this will allow you to keep more of that $100,000 for other things you enjoy doing, such as going on a vacation. You will be able to keep $90,000 to do with whatever you want, which is a big benefit to you.”
I was completely dumbfounded. How could this man tell us with a straight face, that an extra expense of nearly $1,000.00 per month benefits us in any way?
Kentroversy: “Okay, that sounds fine. We will sign the paperwork, but first, I would like you to answer me just one simple question about something I do not understand.”
MM: “Okay, go ahead and fire away.”
Kentroversy: “How does my paying for three houses, all for the benefit of owning and living in only one house, benefit me in any way? Because of the compound-interest scam your bank is trying to get me to agree to in complete ignorance, the 7.21% interest rate you quoted is in reality, closer to 150% by the time the thirtieth year of the mortgage is paid, and all of the compounded interest is added. Allow me to ask this in a slightly different way --- how does our paying $250,000 for a $95,000 house benefit us in any way?”
The mortgage-broker was visibly stunned. A look of shock overtook him, as he was truly at a loss for words. There was simply no way of answering my completely straightforward question, because he knew very well that such an arrangement benefits only the bank, and never the customer.
Worse yet, it was clear that I knew this, as well.
At that point, I looked over to my wife who was sitting next to me, and said the following, with a huge smile on my face:
Kentroversy: “See, I told you this is exactly what would happen. The home mortgage is a complete scam, and this gentleman’s reaction to my simple question proves this is true.”
It was then that the meeting was clearly over, with me saying the following to the mortgage-broker, who was completely blindsided by the manner in which I easily manipulated the conversation:
Kentroversy: “Thank you for your time today. You have proven beyond any doubt to my lovely wife here that you and people like you are predators, and this bank and the Federal Reserve Bank system condones this fraudulent activity. If I made this offer to you, I would be considered a ‘loan shark,’ and I could be arrested for just that. But, because it was you who made the offer to me, it is legally sanctioned by the criminal privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank system. Even though you broke no laws, it is still morally bankrupt for anyone to behave in such an unethical manner. You should be ashamed of yourself, because I certainly am.”
And, with that, the meeting was over. The stunned look on this man’s face was truly something to behold. It is a memory that I cherish to this very day!
In the car on the way home, my wife thanked me for opening her eyes to a situation that would have clearly victimized her, had I not been there. And, within that few moments of clarity, I single-handedly eliminated over $150,000 in additional expense our household no longer has to worry about --- for the next thirty-years!
Now you know why I referred to this mortgage-broker as Mickey Mouse!
This was the first of many issues where I showed to my wife, another side to what most people refer to as “that’s just how things are done.” While this may be true, and this is the way in which most people buy a home, this does not mean that I have to condone or participate in it for myself. It is this follow the fool in front of you mentality that continues to rob people of what could otherwise be their life-savings, because “that’s just how things are done.” This was a truly priceless life-lesson for my wife, and this is also going to be taught to our son, in the hope that he too will be able to benefit from this knowledge, and the wisdom of his mother and father.
THE TRUTH HURTS:
One afternoon during the summer of 2001, a friend of mine named Mark that I have known since the beginning of high school, came over to visit. We got to discussing home mortgages, and I asked him if he truly understood what he would ultimately pay for his house. As we were beginning the conversation, he honestly believed that he knew. However, by the end of this conversation, my friend confirmed that he was clueless about the amount he would have ended up paying by the time the end of the thirtieth year of his mortgage was paid.
“Mark, let me start by asking --- what do you believe you paid for your house?” I began.
“$55,000.00” he answered rather quickly.
“And what interest rate did the bank charge you when you purchased the house?”
“10%,” he replied. “It was awhile ago, and the interest rates were much higher than they are now.”
“I can tell you for a fact that you paid much closer to $175,000 for your house that you just said had a $55,000 market value. In fact, here is how you can figure out for yourself what your final cost is. When you get back home after our visit, go to your desk drawer, and pull out your mortgage coupon book. Take the amount of your monthly payment and multiply that number by 360, which is because there are 360 months in thirty years. That amount will represent the true and final cost of the house you claim cost only $55,000.
When you are finished calculating this amount, call me back, and tell me the final cost you arrived at. Is that fair enough?” I asked.
He agreed that this was more than fair. About an hour after my friend left my house that day, my telephone rang. I picked up the receiver to hear the voice of my friend, who had by then, become rather irate, and proceeded to blame me for showing him something that he did not want to see. He was extremely upset, and I reminded him that the only person at whom he should be mad, was himself.
He even stated that it was somehow all my fault, to which I replied:
“I wasn’t the one that signed the loan agreement. You have nobody to blame but yourself by your agreeing to pay $174,000 for a home that has a $55,000 market value. As it is, I am only showing you part of the truth. It is up to you to see the rest of the truth for what it really is. Besides, would it have harmed you if you had taken a calculator into your meeting with the lending bank? Perhaps you could have been spared the added expense.
If your house was $55,000 and the bank charged a 10% interest rate, the maximum amount of that interest should have only been $5,500. That would have brought your final cost to a manageable $60,500 and that amount accurately portrays 10% interest. With the agreement you signed, you are paying interest that is 51 times the stated rate that you should have been reasonably expected to pay.”
My friend will have this financial noose around his neck for the next twenty years. As he will undoubtedly struggle to pay this debt, I will be enjoying the rest of my life, by having a level of disposable income about which, he can only dream. I hope he remembers this every time he sits down to write another check to pay off his home-mortgage loan shark.
CONCLUSION:
I live my life by the concept of informed-consent. Whatever the situation is, I seek to learn about all the ways in which it benefits me, or ultimately harms me. The truly ironic aspect of the financial slave-masters is that they literally hide their true agenda in plain sight. This can be found within the fine print that most people do not bother to read, or that same hidden truth can be located on the Internet, and it is only a quick search away from being at your fingertips. This is the reason why I made a great deal of effort to learn exactly how the Internet search engines work, such as Google.
It has been often said that at times of great uncertainty, the solution pops up seemingly from out of nowhere. The Internet connection to my home is one of the most valuable intellectual assets that I possess, and it is for the reasons that I state above that I have made tremendous effort to learn how to maximize its’ effectiveness. With an Internet connection, and specifically, a broadband Internet connection, I have an entire library sitting upon my desk. The advantages of having access to this type of information make me much more effective in finding solutions to the problems of every day life.
It was on the Internet, where I was pointed into the direction of truth regarding the many personal disadvantages of the home-mortgage. The answers are out there, among the eight-billion web pages that populate the Internet. If the reader is interested in learning how to effectively search for specific information, then I would recommend that the individual study and learn something called Boolean Logic. Boolean Logic is the language of the Internet search engines, such as Google, which is the most widely used of all such tools.
There is a wonderful little handbook entitled “Google Hacks: 100 Industrial-Strength Tips & Tools,” which was written by Tara Calishain and Rael Dornfest, and published by the technical publisher O’Reilly. This concise book contains all the pertinent information one needs to become much more effective in using Google™ as a partner in research, and in the compiling and sorting of research data. This book is now in its’ second edition, and it receives my highest recommendation, both as a writer-editor, and as a researcher and journalist.
Google Hacks: Tips and Tools For Smarter Searching
finance
home mortgage
consumer rip-offs
housing bubble
4 Comments:
I fail to see the great shock and discovery made. Any high school student can plainly see that, when using interest, things always cost more in the long run. What you don't mention is that each person is entitled to the same interest rates in various investments with the whole compounding principle working for them as well if they choose.
The other thing that you completely missed is that what the banker told you was completely true. You would have more money on hand if you made a smaller down payment and then the monthly payments of ~$1K a month. If you have $100K and makes a $10K down payment, after the first monthly payment you have $89K left over. This is a lot more than $0 if you pays it all up front. All of the money spent on the house is now no longer liquifiable: meaning it can not be used to buy, say, groceries or pay hospital bills or start another investment or to go on vacation. If this $100K represents your total cash, it would be a bit of a gamble to spend that all up front to buy the house. There might end up being a large, unexpected medical expense or there might not even be enough to live on, depending on the way pay paychecks are cut.
The other thing you completely neglected to explain is just how a 7.21% rate turns into 130% of the original price. When taking out the loan, one does not suddenly owe the bank $130K. Rather, one would have only owed them $90K (assuming a $10K down payment). After one month after interest and making the monthly payment, only $89,540.75 is owed. Following this it would take 130 months to pay off, or totalling about $130,000.00 to pay including interest. This is only about 11 years. The claim that you would then owe the bank $1000/month for thirty years is a bit of an exaggeration or is based on different data than were given.
Finally, you neglected to mention that one can always pay more than the minimum monthly required payment. Let's say that the exact same conditions apply, but instead of only paying the $1000 required, $2000 is paid each month. Now it only takes 53 months to pay it off and only costs $106,000.00. This is 40.1% of the original time in debt and only 118% of the original price as opposed to 130%. If $5000 is paid a month with the excess money left over it will only take 20 months and only cost $100,000.00, just a little over 110% of the original loan value!
So what if one took that $90K and invested it elsewhere? It is said that the stock market yields about 11% interest per year for investments. If one elected to take out the mortgage instead and invested all $90K into the stock market up front, he would have made $314,860.55 or had a net gain of $183,860.55 after subtracting the total amount he paid on the mortgage ($130K and assuming 11 years transpiring between initial investment and final mortgage payment). Now if he instead paid the $100K up front and only invested $1K per month into the stock market (and assuming this 11% APR on investments could be nicely divided into twelve equal parts for each month), he would have made only $251,428.03, netting him $151,428.03 (after subtracting just the $100K he did not have to pay interest on). He would have $32,432.52 more money by choosing this "losing" option of taking the mortgage! And this is just putting in the $90K without adding anything to it monthly as he does in the other example. If he can afford to pay $1000 every month after dropping $100K up front on the house, he can probably afford to put an extra $500 or so a month into the stock market while paying the $1000. Common sense will now plainly tell he will make even more money by choosing the mortgage-taking investment option.
It does need to be pointed out that there is no guarantee that the stock market will faithfully yield that investment rate. It could perform below 11%, but it could also perform above, that's the chance you take. There are other investment options aside from regular stocks. Mutual funds (still the stock market) are usually much less volatile, bonds, CDs, foreign currencies, Treasuries, etc.
Taking the mortgage on a house or paying for it all up front is all about opportunity cost. If there are no investment options that are going to yield a marginally better rate of return by taking a mortgage and using the excess sum to invest, then it makes a great deal of sense to just use that money and pay it all off up front: you'll probably come off farther ahead in the end. But if there are things that will offer a much higher rate of return, it makes more sense to put as much money as you can into that up front than to pay off a mortgage that has a lower percentage rate. Sure you will pay more money in interest on the house itself, but with the larger chunk of money available for investment up front, you still come out ahead investment-wise than paying for the house in cash.
Sorry Shaun, but you are mistaken . . .
The stock market for the past several years, since the NASDAQ market crash of spring 2000, has NOT been delivering anything near 11% return per year. Just in the past year alone, both the Dow Jones and NASDAQ markets have been at 0% gain and 1.2% gain, respectively. Currently, the NASDAQ market is trading at approximately 2000, down from the high of 5,000 in late 1999. This represents a 60% LOSS.
The WORST THING a person can do at this point is invest in the stock market.
However, during the past twelve months, silver has increased by 22.6% and gold is up 10.02%. You can have your precious pieces of paper, while those who are invested in both gold and silver are making real gains.
Your assertion that my paying $244,000 for a $95,000 house somehow puts more money in my pocket --- what this truly does is see me run a DEFICIT of $149,000 --- which in no way puts more money in my pocket.
The mortgage broker lied to us, and attempted to get us to agree to a fradulalent and totally unethical mortgage contract. So, your comment that what he said "was completely true" is factually incorrect.
However, I do thank you for your comments just the same.
If you look at the DJI and NASDAQ gains over the past one year (July 04 - July 05), they have increased by ~6% and ~18% respectively. Comparing the DOW and NASDAQ on Yahoo's finance page shows this. There are always market fluctuations and small depressions for a period. If you wait to invest until the market is doing well, you merely guarantee yourself a place among the thousands and thousands of people who lose most of their money when the market "loses its momentum" (as in the market prior to Black Tuesday or just before the dot-com burst). While unpredictable in the future, the stock market has always shown a cyclical pattern with increases in the market often followed by plateaus or decreases, but they are always made up in the future.
Over the past two years, the market has turned out ~25% increase for NASDAQ and ~15% increase for DJI. The past five years is admittedly more bleak since 2000 is right around the time the market finally compensated (so to speak) for the dot-com hype. The crash resulted from over-speculation in untried industries and practices, similar (though to a lesser degree) to what caused the market crash leading to the Great Depression.
The stock market is a poor place for putting money in for anything less than five years. Even that is pushing it. The 11% return rate quoted is gathered from looking at the market history since 1930 and is a long-running average. If you take shorter periods of time, the market shows much more volatile tendencies, as in the crash in the 1980s, or the dot-com bubble. However, ten years is not a bad length of time to expect a marginally good rate of return on money, and 30 years in the market is almost certain to increase more than anything else, even with the market spikes and crashes that occur.
Gold and silver would have been excellent investments at the beginning of the dot-com burst, occuring around the turn of the century. When the stock market begins to fumble, invariably people panic and seek to place their money into something more solid, and gold and silver are favorites. Spikes in gold nearly always coincide with market difficulties, but the price always declines again when the market gets back on its feet (http://www.gold.org/value/stats/statistics/monthlysince1971.html). A balanced investment portfolio should probably include treasuries, bonds, savings, and even some gold investment so they balance each other out.
The only way to end up paying the bank ~$225K dollars for the house is to make payments of around $570, which then would take about 30 years, and not the $1000 quoted in the article. Unless there are other fees or some other interest being charged, paying the thousand a month has the loan paid off in about 10 years with $130K. The mortgage calculator itself shows that.
Greetings:
Thank you for reading my writing, as I am interested in hearing the comments of anyone who cares to post them . . .
Unfortunately, you seem to have misunderstood what I clearly stated about the monthly mortgage expense.
I quote directly from the article itself:
This clearly was an outright lie. What this man was telling us was that by holding a $90,000.00 home-mortgage, we would have more money in our pocket from month to month. At the quoted interest-rate of 7.21%, our monthly payment would be $679.47 per month. By the time the escrow account and taxes were included, this would cost us roughly $1,000.00 per month for the next 30 years (360 payments).
As I stated, the payment quoted was $679.47 PLUS semi-annual property taxes that would have brought the TOTAL payments to a little over $1,000 per month.
This $1,000 amount was not intended to pay off the mortgage quicker, but were merely semi-annual property taxes that will last throughout the entire thirty-years --- and which will increase many times over that thirty years.
By the way, because both the city and county in which I live are currently bankrupt --- the local politicians are attempting to merge the governments of Western New York's Erie County with that of the city of Buffalo.
I am expecting that this merger will likely raise my property taxes to DOUBLE what they are and have been.
That increases the monthly payment even further, especially if I was foolish enough to sign a variable-rate mortgage.
Post a Comment
<< Home