Vandyk Mortgage's Equal Treatment And Fair Lending Exam

The correct answer is "No" because the statement presents a belief in a religious order based solely on the premise that people named Justin have divine powers. This is not a logical or reasonable basis for a religious order, as it relies on a specific name rather than any spiritual or moral principles.

The loan originator's behavior in discussing only FHA financing with the minority couple while providing information on multiple loan programs to the non-minority couple suggests discrimination. By limiting the options for the minority couple based on their race or ethnicity, the loan originator is treating them differently and denying them the same opportunities as the non-minority couple. This behavior is a form of discrimination and goes against fair lending practices.

The person believes that they look older than their actual age. However, the answer "No" suggests that they do not look 35 years old at the age of 21.

The correct answer is the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. This law prohibits lenders from discriminating against borrowers based on factors such as race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or receipt of public assistance. In this case, the previous loan originator violated the law by suggesting the borrower apply with another lender solely because of her age.

Loan Originator Jonathan should have continued with the application process as normal. It is not his place to determine whether or not Patricia can afford the home she wants to buy. His role is to assist her with the mortgage application and provide her with the necessary information and options. It is ultimately up to the lender to decide if Patricia qualifies for the loan based on her financial situation and creditworthiness. Jonathan's statement was unprofessional and inappropriate.

The answer is "Yes" because the person is expressing interest in a single payment loan that is due in 13.5 years. This indicates that they are open to the idea of taking out a loan with a single payment that needs to be repaid within a specific timeframe.

Loan Originator Tom can consider the information shared by Justin, which is "I have never had a checking account, credit card, or loan." This information is relevant to Justin's financial history and can be taken into consideration when evaluating his eligibility for a mortgage.

Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, government monitoring questions are mandatory to ask. If the borrower decides not to provide these answers during a face-to-face application, the interviewer's responsibility is to make a visual observation. This means that the interviewer should assess the borrower's race, ethnicity, and sex based on their appearance, and report this information accurately in the loan application.

The statement "I am married, but sometimes wish I was not" indicates that the person has moments of dissatisfaction or regret about being married. The question asks whether this statement is true or not. By answering "No," it suggests that the person does not have these feelings of wishing they were not married.

In the case of an applicant whose main source of income is Social Security Disability, it is reasonable for a lender to require additional proof of the income's continuity. This is because Social Security Disability is subject to periodic reviews and may not be guaranteed to continue indefinitely. Requiring a note from a doctor stating that the disability is likely to continue for two years provides the lender with more assurance that the income will be sustained. Therefore, the statement is true.

Loan Originator Jonathan does have a problem. The problem is that Jane's income does not meet the debt to income guidelines of the loan program, which means she is not eligible for the loan. Jonathan suggests that Jane's husband co-signs for the loan, indicating that he is trying to find a solution to the problem. However, the fact that Jonathan needs a co-signer shows that there is an issue with Jane's loan application and her ability to meet the loan requirements on her own.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) prohibits lenders from discriminating against applicants based on factors such as race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age, or the fact that the applicant receives public assistance. In this scenario, when the lender suggested the applicant try another source because they did not like her neighborhood, it implies that the lender may be discriminating against the applicant based on the neighborhood she lives in, which would be a violation of the ECOA.

The statement implies that the person's current income is solely derived from social security payments. Since the answer is "No," it suggests that the person's current income is not solely derived from social security payments.