They are usually easier to get because the Government insures the loan so that there is
much less risk to the lender.
Not exact matches
At a loan -
to - value ratio of 70 %
to 80 %,
lenders are
much more likely
to extend credit — as they are taking
less risk.
In practise though,
lenders aren't so keen on that scenario, they would rather have shareholders sharing the
risk, and lending a
less than 100 % proportion of the total of a companies finance means they are
much more likely
to get their money back if things go horribly wrong.
A mortgagor or a car
lender is
much less interested in your revolving credit balance than a credit card company, who might see you as a bit of a
risk if you've not used credit cards for a long time and suddenly asking for a card might be a sign that you just got laid off (or simply are going
to change your behavior).
Because of this increased
risk, a
lender is
less likely
to approve as
much as a secured loan.
Those with credit scores over 730 are considered
to be
much less of a
risk for
lenders.
Statistically, once you have at least 20 % vested in the house, you're
less likely
to walk away, and you're a
much smaller
risk to the
lenders.
Loans that fail
to qualify as QMs would be
less available and far costlier because
lenders and investors would face a
much greater
risk of violating the terms of the new ability -
to - repay requirement.