![]() Real Estate News and Advice |
| February 10, 2012 |
|
Need Product Help?
Local Guides
All Local Guides
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut DC Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming |
Rejection Rates for Minority Mortgage Applicants Growing, Study Says
by Trey Garrison
Bankers, Lenders Say Data Tells A Different Story... Mortgage and banking industry experts are disputing a new study by a Washington, D.C.-based lobby group that claims the industry has not done enough to reach out to black and Hispanic applicants seeking conventional home mortgage loans have grown nationwide since 1995. The study, put out by ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, used public data under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), and says that rejection rates for conventional home mortgages for black and Hispanic applicants are growing. Sharolyn Rosier, a spokeswoman for the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, also based in Washington, D.C., said MBAA had not seen the ACORN study. However, she noted, MBAA's own research of HMDA data showed that between 1993 and 1997, the number of loans funded to black applicants alone has grown 58.4% ACORN's study, in turn, is based on loan data from 9,041 lenders in 35 U.S. cities, and concludes from the data gathered that with unemployment and interest rates so low, recent gains by black and Hispanic borrowers are disappearing. "In general we found a pattern of disparity in conventional home loans between white applicants and African American and Latino applicants that is growing," said Patrick Woodall, policy analyst at ACORN. "What we see is that the rejection ratios are increasing." Woodall said ACORN believes that what is driving the disparity is combination of lending discrimination based on "inflexible" computerized credit scoring, racial discrimination, the steering of minority applicants to costlier government-backed lending vehicles and the national trend of bank consolidations, which he said puts them more out of touch with communities in which they do business. "More than twenty years after the enactment of the Community Reinvestment Act and over thirty years after the enactment of Fair Housing and Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the racial disparities in lending patterns continue to be significant and, in some measures, are growing more uneven," the ACORN report states in its conclusion. The ACORN study, incidentally, was released less than two weeks after a Richmond, Va., civil jury found that insurer Nationwide Insurance Enterprise should be forced to pay $100 million for discrimination and for leaving minority neighborhoods out of marketing campaigns. Nationwide plans to appeal the decision to the Virginia Supreme Court, and legal experts point out that such nine-figure awards are usually reduced even if the facts are upheld on appeal. A spokesman for the American Bankers Association said they aggressively seek out minority applicants. In fact, many major institutions have adopted a strategy of reviewing once rejected applications to determine if computer credit models were too inflexible. The lenders ACORN's study examined took 4.91 million applications for both conventional and government home purchase mortgages between 1995 and 1997 and originated 3.48 million loans over this period. ACORN's researchers determined that, in their view, racial disparities in lending are significant, and increasing, as revealed by an examination of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data. "Though there were improvements in the trends in the early part of the decade, many of the gains made by African Americans and Latinos have disappeared," the study stated. "On average, the situation is growing worse by almost every measurement and certain markets are demonstrating particularly alarming trends in the disparity of the mortgage markets." One problem those in the mortgage and banking industry seized on was that the ACORN study did not take into account credit histories and income levels. Contrary to the ACORN findings, Rosier said MBAA researchers found the industry as a whole has made great strides in reaching out to minority applicants. "Our research on the HMDA data shows that the industry has done an excellent job in reaching out to minority applicants," she said. "In 1993, there were 162.370 loans funded to African Americans. In 1997, there were 257,233 -- a 58.4% increase." Woodall said credit histories are not required by the HMDA Act, and were therefore inaccessible. He further stated that minority applicants deserve a separate criteria of credit requirements, because they often have fewer credit references in general and live in a more "usurious" environment. Inner-city minorities, he said, are often dogged by bad credit from "rent-to-own" businesses. The ACORN study's findings Include:
The study says the denial rate for African Americans and Latinos has increased between 1995 and 1997. In 1995, one in four African Americans applicants (25.6%) were rejected for conventional mortgages, by 1997 nearly one in three were (30.7%) -- a 20.1% increase. The Latino rejection rate increased even faster. In 1995 21.5% of Latino applicants were rejected, by 1997 the figure was 27.9% -- a 29.5% increase. Seven cities, according to ACORN, rejected more than half of all African American applicants: Little Rock, AR (61.2%), Pine Bluff, AR (63.7%), Baton Rouge, LA, Lake Charles, LA (63.2%), New Orleans (50.3%), Shreveport, LA (58.4%), and Columbia, SC (68.78%). Five cities rejected more than forty percent of all Latino applicants: Wichita, KS (40.3%), Kalamazoo, MI (50.5%), Albuquerque (52.1%), Columbia, SC (57.0%), and Dallas (45.8%). Eight cities rejected African American applicants less than one quarter of the time: San Jose (24.3%), Des Moines, IA (18.5%), Boston (20.6%), Baltimore (24.0%), Minneapolis-St. Paul (22.5%), and Milwaukee (21.5%). In six cities, Latino applicants were rejected less than one fifth of the time: Oakland (19.5%), Bridgeport, CT (12.6%), Chicago (15.4%), Boston (14.7%), Philadelphia (19.6%), and Milwaukee (14.7%). In four MSAs, the share of the African American population was four times the share of conventional loans to African Americans. In Little Rock, AR African Americans make up 19.9% of the population but received 4.3% of the loans; in Washington, DC African Americans make up 25.4% of the population but received 6.1% of the loans; and in Detroit African Americans make up 22.1% of the population but received 5.3% of the loans. In four MSAs the share of the Latino population exceeds the share of loans to Latinos by a factor of three. In Phoenix, Latinos make up 17.0% of the population but received 4.8% of the loans; in Washington, DC Latinos make up 5.4% of the population but received 1.8% of the loans; and in Detroit, Latinos make up 2.0% of the population but received 0.6% of the loans. Only in three MSAs was the share of the African American population less than twice the share of conventional loans to African Americans. In Bridgeport, African Americans make up 10.0% of the population and received 5.2% of the loans; in Boston, African Americans make up 4.9% of the population and receive 3.0% of the loans; and in Minneapolis-St. Paul, African Americans make up 3.6% of the population and receive 2.0% of the loans. In four cities the share of the Latino population was nearly one and a half times the share of Latino loans. In Miami, Latinos made up 49.2% of the population but received 59.4% of the loans; in Atlanta, Latinos made up 2.0% of the population and received 1.7% of the loans; in Philadelphia, Latinos make up 3.6% of the population and received 2.4% of the loans; and in Milwaukee, Latinos make up 3.6% of the population and received 2.5% of the loans. "After years of self congratulations from bankers and regulators over the increase in lending to minority communities, the most recent figures should be a wake up call for the Clinton Administration and the industry," the study states. "The administration had used previous years improvements to justify a hands-off approach to banks and a combative approach to community groups concerned about lending discrimination. Meanwhile, the industry has been transformed by mega-mergers and shifting underwriting standards and practices which exert downward pressure on credit availability for minority and low-income borrowers." Published: November 11, 1998 Use of this article without permission is a violation of federal copyright laws. Related Articles: |
Real Estate News Network
Today's Real Estate Outlook
Mortgage Rates
30 Year Fixed: 3.87% 15 Year Fixed: 3.16% 1 Year Adj: 2.78% (U.S. Weekly Averages) Today's Headlines 11/11/1998
Spotlight
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
for Agents
Readers' Choice
Our most popular recent articles
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||