There have been several interest rate reductions recently, and I don't think that we've seen the bottom of the mortgage hassles yet, so there could be more reductions in the cards. Especially since this is an election year and the gov't. folks will want to keep things running as smilingly as possible until Nov. Bubbamommie, How do you react to the idea of saving those ancillary costs and paying them upfront, if they turn out to be required, as adding them to the mortgage amount will mean that you go on paying on the increased amount for 15, 30 years? Are you finding it onerous to pay the current rate? My opinion is that it would be best to keep paying at that level, if possible, for reducing the monthly payment extends the time of paying by a substantial amount, especially since only a small amount annually in the early years goes to reduce the principal amount, as the current interest cost on that large debt is so high. Dave doesn't seem to agree, but quite a number of people feel that, so long as one has some cushion to tide one over emergencies, it's a good idea to make extra payments, as the contract allows, to pay down some on the principal annually, as far as one is able, for reducing that principal owing means that a smaller amount of the monthly payment must go to pay interest in each future year, resulting in the mortgage being paid off much earlier. I hope that you are pleased with your choice, throughout the life of the mortgage. ole joyful

"Suze Orman, financial expert, says that bills should be split according to income; if one makes 1000 a month and the other 500; then the 1000 a month should pay a larger portion." Wow, did Suze Orman really say that? I usually agree with her advice, but speaking as a person who usually earned WAY more than my roommates this sounds completely unfair! Why should I have paid more than my semi-employed roommates? Did I breathe more air or use more toilet paper? I don't think so. Sheesh.

Every business, commercial, construction, & consumer loan I've ever closed has included a statement stating that the information contained within the application was accurate as of the day of closing. The actual forms used varied substantially depending on the type of loan; but somewhere in the pile of papers that I put in front of borrowers was that statement... Be aware that if requested to initial and/or sign your application's accuracy at closing & you remain silent about your employment status...that is bank fraud. By including your income & having it verified by your lender...you are using that income to evidence your ability to service the debt. It sounds like your income is not necessary to qualify for the re-finance. However, bank fraud is bank fraud & never a good thing. How far along is your underwriting? You mentioned a mid-July closing. That's still a long ways off. When does your lock expire? If loss of your income really doesn't negatively impact your ratios...your lender should be able to make the adjustments long before a mid-July closing. And, you'll sleep much better knowing you were up front & honest in the information you provided to the lender & that they are, in turn, relying on. It's a bit trickier if you're still actually working on the day you close the re-finance. But, since you've had 'material notice' of the lay-off well in advance of closing the loan...your application is less than 100% truthful. You'll have to decide if you can live with that decision. Hmmm, I just thought about something. My DH is head of all leading at a large regional financial institution. He mentioned to me a few weeks ago (back during all the news hype over escalating layoffs) that they were asking employers when they called for employment verification whether any layoffs were planned at the company. DH said that some companies provided the information & others refused. But, there might be 'some' chance your re-finance lender will find out about your layoff directly from your employer. I have no idea how large that chance might be? Sorry about the loss of your job but glad to hear you'll be OK on just your DH's income. /tricia

Thanks, everyone! This is a small town, and the loan officer at the local credit union did seem to think that national banks might be more lenient? Of course, the credit union's fees are much lower than the banks I've tentatively looked at, and I had wanted to work with them because that's who I've gotten loans from in the past, always paid on time. :( Bill: The loan officer's fees were separate from the closing costs, in addition to them, and labeled as loan officer's fees. All the usual fees were also listed. The problem with living in a small town is there is not a lot of competition around, so fees are hiked up for EVERYTHING just because they can be. This county, incidentally, frequently has the highest price of gas in the continental U.S. It's just like that for everything - but it is a gorgeous place, very mild climate, surrounded on one side by the Pacific Ocean and pristine forests on the other, so people get really attached to this place despite the hassle. The credit history thing is really frustrating. I've even paid rent that was higher than the cost of this mortgage at the credit union (if I had qualified by being in business a few months longer). I have a phone appointment w/ Bank of America today - I'll see how that goes...(We don't even have a local loan officer for B of A, apparently)...