Does this make sense? Mortgage question.

Started by takotsubo
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

takotsubo

...
15+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Im graduating residency in June, and looking to move to a new city.

Spoke with this mortgage co and they said in order to get a loan I have to produce 1st month's pay stub with my new job. Well obviously I'm not gonna have one UNTIL I move there.

How is any new physician suppose to get a loan to buy a house in a new city? Anyone have this problem before?

This is of course not a "physician loan" mortgage co, do I have to resort to using them?
 
The first pay stub requirement is a normal guideline for most lenders on any type of mortgage loan you do. The bank I work for will allow you to close anytime within 60 days of when your employment begins (you must start your job on or before your first day of employment). We require a copy of your employment contract, signed, and it must state your annual income. I'm sure other banks that offer physician loans are probably the same, but I don't know that for a fact.
 
You are lucky they only want one pay stub. You would probably be better off renting for at least a little while anyway. That way you can get to know the area better, be sure of where you want to live, see what the market is like, and figure out if it is even worth it to buy a place (if you are in a shorter residency may not make sense unless you plan to keep the place as a rental after)
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You are lucky they only want one pay stub. You would probably be better off renting for at least a little while anyway. That way you can get to know the area better, be sure of where you want to live, see what the market is like, and figure out if it is even worth it to buy a place (if you are in a shorter residency may not make sense unless you plan to keep the place as a rental after)

He said he's finishing residency in June
 
Im graduating residency in June, and looking to move to a new city.

Spoke with this mortgage co and they said in order to get a loan I have to produce 1st month's pay stub with my new job. Well obviously I'm not gonna have one UNTIL I move there.

How is any new physician suppose to get a loan to buy a house in a new city? Anyone have this problem before?

This is of course not a "physician loan" mortgage co, do I have to resort to using them?

Some mortgage companies will let you use a signed contract with salary specified in-lieu of first pay stub.

I would wager that most physicians don't dive into a mortgage so quickly, though. It's probably better to rent for at least a few months first. There are many benefits to this:
1. You can explore the area to know where you'd be happiest living.
2. You spend some time with the practice to learn if there are any red flags. Otherwise you might end up trapped into the practice by the mortgage you were so eager to sign.
3. You can save enough for a decent down payment that will eliminate PMI and get you a better rate, resulting in tens of thousands of dollars in savings over the life of the loan.

I can understand being eager, but a little waiting might be a blessing in disguise. Good luck!
 
He said he's finishing residency in June

Oops. Reading comprehension fail. Everything still applies except the part in parentheses. In fact, it is even more important. It is pretty difficult to change residency locations, but if you hate your first job it may be easier to change (depending on your contract and such). And when it comes time to renew/renegotiate your contract, if you have a mortgage there you will have less leverage (they figure you aren't as likely to just walk away from your house)
 
Im graduating residency in June, and looking to move to a new city.

Spoke with this mortgage co and they said in order to get a loan I have to produce 1st month's pay stub with my new job. Well obviously I'm not gonna have one UNTIL I move there.

How is any new physician suppose to get a loan to buy a house in a new city? Anyone have this problem before?

This is of course not a "physician loan" mortgage co, do I have to resort to using them?

Hello, one of the main advantages of a "physician loan" is the ability to purchase before your start date. Some lenders have a 60 day rule and others 120 days. Of course there are other advantages such as lower down payments, and NO PMI. Banks that offer these programs use this mortgage as a relationship building tool, and typically require you to open an account.
 
Some mortgage companies will let you use a signed contract with salary specified in-lieu of first pay stub.

I would wager that most physicians don't dive into a mortgage so quickly, though.

👍 The market has changed considerably recently. Even if you know your new city well, you should consider renting for a couple months while you plan a house purchase. You shouldn't be jumping into this lightly. Once you narrow down the area you want to purchase within, how do you know how much to offer? If you use a realtor, they could do the research for you, but they end up costing you quite a bit. Did you know that the seller's realtor and buyer's realtor each get a 3% or so cut of the house? If you do the work yourself, you may be able to save yourself 3% off without even beginning to negotiate.

If you do wish to do this quickly, talk to lenders about having a signed contract or possibly consider a "physicians loan" from private companies that specialize in this. These private companies have been known to be more expensive so again beware.
 
👍 The market has changed considerably recently. Even if you know your new city well, you should consider renting for a couple months while you plan a house purchase. You shouldn't be jumping into this lightly. Once you narrow down the area you want to purchase within, how do you know how much to offer? If you use a realtor, they could do the research for you, but they end up costing you quite a bit. Did you know that the seller's realtor and buyer's realtor each get a 3% or so cut of the house? If you do the work yourself, you may be able to save yourself 3% off without even beginning to negotiate.

If you do wish to do this quickly, talk to lenders about having a signed contract or possibly consider a "physicians loan" from private companies that specialize in this. These private companies have been known to be more expensive so again beware.
Realtor Fees come out of the purchase price at closing. Using a buyer's agent is usually free to you. Unless you are buying from a seller without an agent (FSBO), then the realtor fees would be irrelevant.
 
Realtor Fees come out of the purchase price at closing. Using a buyer's agent is usually free to you. Unless you are buying from a seller without an agent (FSBO), then the realtor fees would be irrelevant.

You've been fooled. This is what the association of realtors want you to believe. If the seller has to pay 3% at closing vs 6%, they will often pass the savings on to you to get the house sold. Therefore you save an extra 3% if you can negotiate this without your own realtor. I did this and saved thousands.

Just because the seller pays the realtor fees at closing doesn't mean the costs aren't being passed to you as the buyer - just over a 15-30 year period.
 
Im graduating residency in June, and looking to move to a new city.

Spoke with this mortgage co and they said in order to get a loan I have to produce 1st month's pay stub with my new job. Well obviously I'm not gonna have one UNTIL I move there.

How is any new physician suppose to get a loan to buy a house in a new city? Anyone have this problem before?

This is of course not a "physician loan" mortgage co, do I have to resort to using them?[/QUote/ documentation requirement for mortgages, you could probably get around this by supplying an old "residency paycheck" stub together with a letter showing your new appointment and its terms. Or supply this requirement at the last minute before the loan is approved. You could pay the difference to the buyer in rent and get the home a little later as owner. The terms of your loan are determined by its future. For it to be "conforming," this means it will fit into a package of loans which will be sold as a large investment to an institutions such as a university endowment 0r a pension or and they must all be homogenous--terms, documentation, loan to value ratios, etc, so that when the institution buys the package of loans they can expect to get all loans which conform to certain standards. (This is what turned out to be the big lie in the subprime crisis, because there was so much cheating allowed in the documentation, so things have again become strict in terms of documentation. Many times irrationally strict. In a non conforming loan, your loan may not be sold at all, but retained by the bank who made you the loan, in which case they have more control over what is acceptable on a local level, as opposed to meeting some outside standards, which often, frankly, make little sense. There are a lot of ways to play in the mortgage sandbox. There was a mortgage, often used in Australia, and brought to the US right before the market fell to pieces, which was a great new product for the right buyer. It was bascially a HELOC (home equity line of credit) that was also a 30 year mortgage, marketed by a few lenders. It disappeared but may be back and is worth looking for. If you pay down a normal mortage by making extra principal payments, you can never get them back. With this mortgage, technically you could. It is a great system for the disciplined money manager, which many of you should be. It was marketed like "the last mortgage you will ever need" or a home equity conventional mortgage, can't quite remember the brand names. There is also software marketed to do this, but its not the same AT ALL. Always check bankrate.com for great mortgage rates ranked by area, and expect that service will vary a lot. If you know what you are doing you can get a great rate. If you are doing this for the first time, there are ways to get to 20% down payment that are creative if what you really need is 100%. Best advice ever: do NOT fall in love with a house. There are lots of them out there you haven't seen and are not on the market this minute but might be next minute, so you may do better than you think. This is one of the greatest buyers markets ever, so be smart and you should come out fine...also remember to buy low, that's the first half of the formula. On the other hand, losing money on a house isn't the wortst financial mistake you will make over time and at least you get to live in it! Best of luck. Oh, spend a month in a nice extended stay hotel with a pool and free breakfact and make the seller nervous--that works well too. The realtor will work to help this go through too.
 
You've been fooled. This is what the association of realtors want you to believe. If the seller has to pay 3% at closing vs 6%, they will often pass the savings on to you to get the house sold. Therefore you save an extra 3% if you can negotiate this without your own realtor. I did this and saved thousands.

Just because the seller pays the realtor fees at closing doesn't mean the costs aren't being passed to you as the buyer - just over a 15-30 year period.
All depends on how comfortable you are playing ball so to speak and how willing the seller/seller agent wants to play ball. This "deal" is not universal.
 
Realtor Fees come out of the purchase price at closing. Using a buyer's agent is usually free to you. Unless you are buying from a seller without an agent (FSBO), then the realtor fees would be irrelevant.

In normal transactions, only person to bring money to the table is the BUYER. Seller gets part of it, 3% goes to buyers agent, 3% goes to sellers agent, title insurance company takes the cut, some time you have mortgage insurance there as well....

You get the picture. So nothing is free to buyer becauser buyer pays for everything. If there are no agents in picture then you should pay 6% less because seller will still get to keep the same money. If there are no buyers agent then price should be 3% less.

It might or might not work out exactly as I am saying but it worthwhile to remmeber that as a buyer, you are paying for all frictional cost in the transaction.

For any reason if someone is missing, who usually takes the cut , then why should a buyer pay for the non-existant person/service?

I think this real estate brokerage will go same way as stock brokerage went in last 20-30 years. People used to pay too much for exchanging the share but with internet coming in big way, transaction cost for buying/selling has gone down a lot.

Buyer and seller are exchanging the house and money. Why agents etc should add up 10% of total cost of house is beyond my imagination. I meant , they don't really add value which is woth 10% of the total cost of moderately or higher priced house. You already have buyers agent working in many place with 1% commision(basically they get 3% but pay you back 2%).

Nowdays, most of the information is available online to do the research so slowly but surely 6% commission will get less and less popular.

Just my two cents...