Conference 7.286::digital

    As long as you have 20% equity for a purchase or 30% equity for a
    refinance you should need PMI unless the rules have changed
    significantly in the last year....Ask...

	RE: .1 The thing I got out of it is that once upon a time working
	for Digital made it easier to get credit. Now it seems to make it
	harder.

			Alfred

I too am refinancing my house.  I'm going with 1st NH. They (1st NH) needed a 
letter from my boss stating that I have a high probability of future employment 
with DEC.  My boss understood because he too is refinancing his house with 1st 
NH, and he needed a letter from his boss.  It seems that this policy was 
instituted a couple months back.


							- Rick -

The standard form mortgage companies send to DEC asks (personnel) to rate
the likeliness of future employment.  So, this is nothing new.

On this same topic.  I'm currently going through my 4th home purchase,
all of which occurred while working for DEC.  In each and every case, the
mortgage company had some problem with verification of employment.  The
first time we got to closing and discovered that MRO personnel had never
sent in the verification forms.  The second and third times I had to
personally walk down to ZKO personnel and watch them search through a
pile of paper to find the requests, fill them out, and then walk them
down to the mail room.

The latest is that EQUIFAX called to verify employment while processing
my mortgage application.  They had no trouble verifying mine, but
personnel in both CXO1/2 and somewhere in New Hampshire told them my
wife "doesn't work here" and "she doesn't exist".  Now I know the problem
is that they didn't call the specific personnel department that handles
my wife's group (CXO3).  BUT, it is completely unforgivable for personnel
to say things like the above without verifying them as fact.  They should
say something like "she doesn't work in this department, try calling
xxx-yyyy (ie, some corporate personnel number)."  I explained this to
EQUIFAX and they were totally amazed that DEC's administrative systems
are so bad that the human resources department can't give them an
accurate answer as to if someone is employed at DEC or not.

Hal

	I just refinaced and closed on Tuesday.

	The only questions asked of me was length of employment and salary.

	I also went through a mortgage company and not a bank if that makes
	a difference.

	We did run into the problem of employment verification though that 
	.4 had.

	Mine came back from personnel but my wifes' was never responded
	to until we were contacted my the mortgage company that there was
	a problem and we pushed it through.

						Mike
						----

In the recent "How to lay people off" training I attended, the specific
question came up as to how to respond to lending institutions which might
call asking about the probability of continued employment for an individual.
(It was asked specifically in light of the person at high risk of TFSO,
 in view of the direction that no clues were to be volunteered to anyone not
 asking what their risk profile was, and the fact that a negative answer
 to a lender could easily turn into an inadvertant message from a rather
 embarassing source.)

Personnel's response was that such queries were not to be responded to
other than by referring the callers to personnel who would do nothing more
than verify current employment.

-Jack

>  <<< Note 2075.4 by COOKIE::BERENSON "If you think software is complex, try relocating" >>>
>                -< Keep a close eye on DEC employment verification >-
> 
>  The standard form mortgage companies send to DEC asks (personnel) to rate
>  the likeliness of future employment.  So, this is nothing new.


I think in this case it is a bit new (at least different).  All other inquires
(credit cards, mortgage, etc.) by a company went through personnel for 
verification of employment.  This is the first time I had to ask my boss to 
supply any information, specifically on likeliness of future employment.


							- Rick -

    re.7 The creditor asked for a letter from your boss? The process is
    suppose to work by the creditor sending a letter to your PSA requesting
    your information. Our personnel system has a automatic form print
    for letters of verification for each one of us and all the PSA has to
    do is run the form, transfer some salary information and sign it. Its
    the same form thats been in place for a while (pre-tfso). We don't now
    nor have we ever guaranteed future employment on those requests.
    
    BTW, in this site these requests are out within two days and we do have
    access to find out employment status of all employees no matter what
    site they reside in.

>Loan Officer: Well, it's not usually the PMI companies that require
>              that documentation.  Sometimes the investors get
>              somewhat nervous, though.  It probably won't be
>              an issue.  Now, if you worked for Digital, it might
>              be a problem.

>              Where do you work by the way?

    Glenn, and others,

    It would seem to me, and you can confirm this with a call to your 
state banking commissioner, that what you just heard is discrimination, 
pure and simple.....would they rather you work for Wang or Child World? How 
about a management history of working for JM Fields and Robert Halls? I 
think you have a case for resetting some loan officers attitude quite 
quickly, particularly if you can prove a history of this kind of checks 
because of your employer.....

    		Vic

    PS: I have only threatened a state banking commish on one banker once, 
but it got me a personal call from a bank VP within 1/2 hour on a friday 
nite, and complete satisfaction to my problem... 8^)

    I used to work in the Banking Industry.  Under the Fair Credit &
    Collections Act, Lending Institutions DO have the right to not only
    verify employment but also to recive a statement from the employer
    about the "Probabilities of Continued Emplyment."
    
    This is just a matter of common sense...would you lend out money for a
    profit (after all, that's what lending institutions are in businees
    for) if you can not make a fair assumption if you were ever going to be
    repaid?
    
    Now, if an employer (like DEC was referred to a few notes back) would
    not make this answer this question to the satisfaction of the lender,
    the lender can reject the loan application AND the potential borrower
    can appeal, in writing, for a written explanation of the reasons for
    loan rejection.  Whatever the lending institution says in their
    response could be a means for any possible courtcase.

    My wife and I applied for refinancing last Friday and when I said
    that I work for Digital, I got the same comment about Digital
    verifying continued employment. Fortunately, we qualify for the
    mortgage based solely on my wife's income, but this still strikes
    a raw nerve with me, especially since I have worked for Digital
    16 years, and have a very clean credit history. 
    
    I probably will just let this slide, but God forbid if this mortgage
    company disapproves my mortgage. Mortgage companies have a policy
    of keeping your application fee and any other fees paid at the time
    of application even if you are disapproved. In my case, I stand to
    lose ~$600.00. 
    
    If the numbers we're seeing in the Newspapers are anywhere near
    accurate, Digital may lay off 30,000 of it's 120,000 employees. 
    This means that the average employees has better than an 80%
    chance of keeping their job. These are about the best odds that
    anyone can expect from any employer, even in a good economy.
    
    Mark
    

    Geez, I heard they were just going to lay off people that thought
    90,000 divided by 120,000 was greater than 80%  ;-)

> I probably will just let this slide

What else would you want to do?  The mortgage person was simply venturing
an opinion that DEC doesn't look like a rock-solid place to work these
days.   Scarcely anything to take offence at, in my opinion.
I can't imagine that it has anything to do with whether or not
you get the loan -- the approval has to do with reports by nasty
slimeball credit reporting agencies and the like, not by the
guy that collects the forms.

    Credit granting is quite often a judgement call, not the result of
    some algorhythm derived from income, debt,etc.
    
    Don't discount the guy collecting the forms...
    
    Edd

    re-.1 > the approval has to do with reports by nasy slimeball
            credit reporting agencies and the like......
    
      The slimeball credit agencies get there misinformation from
       the slimeball companys that don't accuratly report there
      information.  I would love to see a law that has credit agencys
      report to the consumer to verify accuracys BEFORE it goes on
     the reports.   I have had a lot of dealings in the recent past
     with credit agencies with bogus data that was supplied by companys
     that neglected to report the truth.
    
    BIll-

    I used to work for the UK susidiary of Household Finance Corporation
    (HFC) whom you may or may not have heard of.
    
    Their policy was, and still is, that each borrower is actively
    encouraged to take out accident, sickness and unemployment insurance, 
    as nobody in this day and age can say with a great deal of certainty 
    that they are still going to be in their present job.
    
    The loan officer, from what the originator has said, could be doing one
    of three things:
    
    1. He could be, as a previous respondent has stated, discriminating
       against DEC; 
    2. Stating the obvious ie that DEC doesn't look too sound at the
       moment;
    3. Opening up the conversation to ensure a sales opportunity for the
       insurance is created.
    
    Options 2 & 3, to my mind, are nothing to get worked up about but to
    act as a reinforcement of the current climate in which we all are working 
    and I, for one, would not hesitate to take out such cover. After all, the
    lender is most interested in the money lent being repaid and especially
    where the repayments are going to come from should the borrower be made
    redundant etc.
    
    Dave

I am just going through the refinancing ordeal.  One lender requested a written 
statement from Digital that I will not be affected by the lay-offs.
This was with a mortgage broker.  Now I am working with a local bank.  My first
question to them was "do you do loans for Digital employees?"
This is worse than dentist, but here at least I can go to the commisioner and 
complain (which I intend to do)

j-

    	I too am in the process of refinancing my home.  During the process
    (while I was on vacation and didn't have the chance to get extra
    heartburn over it), the mortgage company was told, by the bank that
    would purchase the mortgage, that they had issued a memo stating that
    they would require Digital employees to have a statement from the
    company giving the probability of their continued employment. 
    Fortunately for us, we had applied and locked a rate before this memo
    came out, and the mortgage company got them to waive the condition for
    us.  Otherwise we could have lost $600 ($300 application fee, $300
    pre-legal fee).

    	I can understand Digital's reluctance to making any such estimates
    of people's likelihood of employment.  What would happen if Digital
    says an employee is 90% likely to stay and then he/she gets laid off? 
    Would such a statement get Digital in legal trouble?  It seems to me
    that Digital should tell the mortgage companies to keep reading all the
    rumors they want in the papers; that's about as accurate a prediction
    of the future as any.

    	Anyway, the financial industry is populated by bozos who wouldn't
    recognize their own best interest if it smacked them in the face.  This
    is the industry that kept dumping huge bucks into commercial real
    estate when it was clear that there was serious over-development going
    on.  Now they're ready to red-line the employees of one of the region's
    largest companies, a course of action which can only exacerbate an
    already depressed real estate market.  This is not exactly far-sighted
    business practice.

    	I don't know how widespread this practice is, but I'd be surprised
    if the financial industry operated any differently from others--once a
    practice catches on, everybody does it...

    		David

    
    This makes no sense... Isn't it in your bank's interest to reduce your
    monthly payments so you can more easily afford your mortgage if you
    lose your job?
    
    /ljj
    

re .-1   (reducing monthly payments)

Yes, but who said the refinancing bank was the same as the
current mortgage holder?  This is probably just a new loan
to them.

re .16

Mortgage practice is very different between the UK and the
US (here, they don't expect you to behave responsibly -- for
example, I can't be trusted to pay my town taxes; I have
to pay a monthly amount to the mortgage company so they
can pay my semi-annual town taxes for me)

.20> Yes, but who said the refinancing bank was the same as the
.20> current mortgage holder?  This is probably just a new loan
.20> to them.

    	This is correct.  My current mortgage is at a fixed rate, and the
    bank would lose income if it renegotiated.  It does cost me money to
    refinance with another bank, which the current bank hopes is enough of
    a disincentive. However, given the chance to save $200/month, I'll take
    it.

    	There are adjustable rate mortgages, but the rate can go up as well
    as down, and I can't afford that gamble.  Given how the banks don't
    want to gamble on us Digits, maybe I couldn't get one anyway.

    	Now, back to the main line of discussion...

    		David

    
    Guess this touched a nerve.  Interesting to think that we might
    be being "redlined" because of where we work.
    
    Someone who responded to my basenote did put words to my feelings.
    I can remember a time (and I've only been here ~5 years) when saying
    you worked for Digital elicited the response, "Pleeease....just sign
    here."
    
    I remember a time before that when as long as you worked in high-tech,
    you got a similar response.  Things sure have changed.
    
    Glenn

    If anyone has a problem with this matter while they are trying to get
    ANY loan, whether it is a mortgage, car, etc., US law stipulates that
    you get a "Truth in Lending" Statement".  In that statement, it tells
    to whom the Federal Agencies are to whom you can appeal if you feel you
    are getting unfair consideration.
    
    Plus a letter or call to your local congressman can't hurt since this
    IS an election year!

    Interestingly enough, I was just at the bank this morning applying for
    a loan, and while chatting with the loan officer I told her (casually)
    about some of what I read in this notes string.
    
    Her reply was surprising.
    
    She told me that often the FDIC auditors will *require* that banks
    reclassify loans to individuals in shaky industries (e.g. steel) as
    non-performing, *even if the loan itself is current and the borrower
    has never missed a payment!*  Needless to say, this does not do wonders
    for a bank's bottom line.  My guess is that those banks who seem to
    be "red-lining" Digital are simply anticipating that the FDIC will 
    do the same thing and are seeking to reduce the number of such loans
    on their books before the FDIC descends on them...
    
    Now the question is:  If it's the FDIC rather than the bank that's
    guilty of red-lining, is there any recourse, or are they immune because
    they're a government agency?
    
    Curiouser and curiouser...
    
    --jim
    

I'm closing on a refinance Tuesday.  The only unusual 
condition is that I have to bring a (new) paystub 
photocopy.  Other than that, all has been "normal".

Of course, this may be because I'm going through DCU...

>>>I'm closing on a refinance Tuesday.  The only unusual 
>>>condition is that I have to bring a (new) paystub 
>>>photocopy.  Other than that, all has been "normal".
>>>
>>>Of course, this may be because I'm going through DCU...
    
    I am also refinancing but thru an outside company (not DCU).
    They are also requiring a copy of my current weeks paycheck. 
   

And other the other side of the pond, Bank of Scotland are still
offering loans to Digital employees at 2% below the normal public rate.

Maybe they think that DEC employees are a safe bet?

Craig

    re. 24
    
    Jim:
    
    A class action suit is probably the only way to attack a Federal Agency
    unless you know a congressman who'd be willing to do a favor for you in
    the election year and look into this matter.
    
    Ron

    re: -.1
    
    And, besides.  Buying off a congressman is cheaper and more convenient.
    
    Steve

    Since the last note, has the creditors attitudes towards DEC employees
    changed any?  
    
    Any first hand experiences?

    
    I was the base noter, and I can tell you that I closed last
    Thursday.  Apparently, the loan officer was engaging in a
    bit of hyperbole, because I was never asked for anything
    except proof of employment.  I ended up needing PMI as well,
    and the PMI company also never asked for anything "extra".
    
    Can't ask for more than that.
    
    Glenn

    I just closed a refinance a few days ago. I was never asked anything
    about employment execpt to supply a copy of my pay stub at the
    beginning of the process. It took about 90 days to complete the process
    but after the first pay stub nothing was mentioned about employment.

    Apparently no one in Upstate New York knows (or cares), we just had a
    closing (Equity Line of Credit) to finance a new mode of transportation
    and I just had to fork over a pay stub.
    
    .mike.