3 Things That Decide How USDA Reads Valentina's Payment Shock
Three things decide how a USDA underwriter reads Valentina's payment shock: the 100 percent line, the "unmeasurable" trap, and a credit score of 640. Valentina is a fictional, illustrative first-time buyer near Elgin, SC. She is not a real client, but her situation comes up often for rural and first-time buyers considering a USDA loan.
Valentina's situation
Valentina lives with family. She pays little or no housing expense today. She has found a path to buy her first home, and a USDA loan looks like a fit. Most people in her spot assume that having no rent is a plus. It feels like proof she has room in her budget.
Here is the catch. Her file also has more than one risk layer, meaning more than one item that an underwriter has to weigh, such as an adverse credit waiver or a reliance on compensating factors. That combination is exactly what Paragraph 4.24.C speaks to.
What payment shock actually is
The USDA guideline defines it this way: "Payment shock represents the applicant's projected increase in housing expenses calculated as: (Total proposed PITI after subsidy / current housing expense excluding utilities) minus 1."
In plain words, the guideline compares the new proposed payment to the housing expense you have right now. When your current housing expense is very small, the new payment looks enormous next to it. When your current housing expense is zero, there is nothing to divide by, so the number cannot be measured at all. That is the "unmeasurable" trap.
The rule, word for word
The guideline continues: "In cases where payment shock is greater than 100 percent or could not be measured since the applicant has no current housing expenses, no additional risk layering (adverse credit waivers, compensating factors) should be allowed without strong justification. Multiple layers of risk may be justified with excellent credit history or a credit score of 640 or higher."
The three things, in order
First, the 100 percent line. If payment shock is greater than 100 percent, the file is in the zone where extra risk layers need strong justification.
Second, the unmeasurable trap. If there is no current housing expense, payment shock cannot be measured, and the same caution applies.
Third, the credit score of 640. The guideline says multiple layers of risk may be justified with excellent credit history or a credit score of 640 or higher. That is the justification the first two items are asking for.
How I would work a file like Valentina's
I read the file in the same order the guideline does. Is payment shock over 100 percent or unmeasurable? How many risk layers are stacked on the file? And what strong justification does it have? I start with credit history and the credit score, because that is where the justification lives. If it is thin, I want to know before the file ever reaches underwriting, not after.
What you can do today
If you are a first-time or rural buyer looking at USDA, ask your lender this exact question: "Under USDA Paragraph 4.24.C, is my payment shock over 100 percent or unmeasurable, and if it is, what strong justification does my file have, like my credit history or a credit score of 640 or higher?"
Then request the payment shock calculation. Ask to see how it was run and which risk layers are on your file. Valentina walks in prepared instead of surprised, and so can you.
This is educational information, not a loan approval. Every file is different, and guidelines are applied to the full picture of the borrower.
If you want to talk through your own situation, call me at 843-LOW-RATE. I find the path.
Home Loans Inc - Jason Sharon, Mortgage Broker. Company NMLS #1728740, Jason Sharon NMLS #1281448. Equal Housing Opportunity.
Learn more about this loan program: 3 Things That Decide How USDA Reads Valentina's Payment Shock
