I see there's a lot of ignorant people making comments on this article. But
that is expected amongst you people. Did anyone read the article? It
said "The U.S. sued New York-based GFI Mortgage Bankers Inc. for allegedly
charging higher rates to African American and Hispanic borrowers than white
borrowers IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS" That means that the credit score, life
style, and income were similar. They did a comparison before making these
claims. How could they issue a lawsuit without having facts, Duh.And
yes, in cities where blacks and hispanics are considered "Minorities"
they are often, finically challenged. Because Europeans try there best to
accomplish that in the minority communities. But in cities & states
like Atlanta, Florida, Washington, Texas, Charlotte, Maryland, etc. There's
a large population of successful minorities. Oh, and technically
whites are the minorities!!!!
Screwdriver, you are correct.
Several centuries of slavery and racism take time to recover from. There are
still large percentages of families that haven't had that leg up from
comming from a family that had disposible income for education and better
incomes that lead to good credit ratings. It's still racism, I'm sure
these same banks are "light" at the top as well.
Lending institutions do not give loans to avoid lawsuits. They consider credit
scores in everything that they do. Credit and house price explosion led to a
building boom and eventually to a surplus of unsold homes, which caused U.S.
housing prices to peak and begin declining in mid-2006.
Do you think a group like Fair Finance Watch and Inner City Press maybe has an
agenda?Reality conscious,The article does not give information
on credit profiles, so I am confused when you say speaking on facts and not
assumptions. I guess you are drawing information from another study not
mentioned in the article? I would also think the NCRC has a biased agenda, so I
would put less stock in their studies. Same can be said for BO’s HUD.If, as you suggest from studies by the Fed and FDIC (independent bank
regulatory agencies) it can be shown minorities with better credit profiles are
charged higher rates than non-minorities, the perpetrators of those crimes
should be punished.K is absolutely correct, the housing crisis and
our current economic malaise was brought about by the insistence from dems that
credit standards be thrown out the window so everybody can “buy” a
Giving loans to everybody to avoid law suits and make congress happy caused the
Speaking on facts and not assumptions, study shows that African Americans with
far better credit score and job security than Whites were denied loans and
African American homeowners who received sub-prime mortgage loans were more than
54 percent more likely to be issued a higher rate loan than Caucasian borrowers
with the same qualifications. In fact, upper income African Americans are more
than twice as likely to receive higher cost loans as their lower income White
counterparts. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition study
finds that discrimination against minorities persists in mortgage lending. The
Federal Reserve Board, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the
FDIC have all made similar observations.
@Clue BayMy point exactly. If it is determined that African
Americans were given higher interest rates than Caucasians with the same/similar
credit history, I would certainly consider this to be racially motivated.
However, if interest rates were truly based solely on credit factors, and
African Americans on average just tend to have lower credit ratings, then maybe
it is not the banks who deserve criticism. Either way, this is worth further
Could it be that a persons credit history and fiscal responsibility is the issue
and really has nothing to do with race?
Instead of criticizing this article, I applaud the writer for taking the time to
bring this to our attention on these banks predatory practices. The average
White American has most of their wealth in the equity in their home, which they
can use to take advantage of important opportunities. If African
American’s do not have this opportunity because of discrimination, that
dream remains a dream. What this article and the research that was done points
out is that African Americans who were discriminated against, do not have this
opportunity. Not because they are poor but when you look at history, you see a
history of oppression, a history of slavery, a history of de facto
discrimination, and a history where it's been difficult for Blacks to take
the little income they've had to create wealth. When they apply for these
loans, they are discriminated against. What they need to do is just Stop
Without any indication of the borrower's credit situation, this may not
tell the whole story. African Americans are statistically more likely to be
poor, so it is conceivable that these interest rates could have been based
entirely on factors unrelated to race. That being said, this certainly looks