In case you did not know, effective June 1st, FHA-insured mortgages cost less (if you're not from the US, FHA stands for the Federal Housing Authority, an entity that insures mortgages and allows for laxer borrowing, so as to make it possible for more people to own a home).

The upfront mortgage insurance fee went from 1% of the loan amount to 0.01%; the annual premium went to 0.55% from 1.15%.

FHA has a streamline refinance program that requires no appraisal and, often, no income or credit verification (just that you've been paying on time and are current). No appraisal, if your home is now worth less than what you borrowed a few years ago, is awesome.

The drawback? It can be used only to refinance existing FHA mortgages.

The biggest drawback? FHA's rules are not laws, banks don't have to follow and big banks do not, so you'd have to go to a smaller bank or a mortgage broker.

I've heard criticism of the Streamline Refinance, the same that is leveled at FHA in general: it allows people who should not own a home (insufficient income, credit, etc.) to own a home; because of the no appraisal, no credit, no income requirements.

I disagree... Only existing FHA mortgages qualify. Which means, at least these days, that it's a good thing: rates are lower, so, by allowing people who owe more than the home is worth or who've lost their good paying job and now work for less, etc., to borrow at a lower rate without appraisal, income, credit verification, FHA is allowing them to lower their costs (and, as a matter of fact, one of the qualifying factors is that you end up with 5% at least less monthly payments).

People with lower monthly payments are in a better position to make those payments, are less likely to go into foreclosure. It's a win/win.

Here's the link to a New York Times article on FHA mortgages: http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/refinancing-your-f-h-a-mortgage-at-lower-cost/?src=recghttp://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/20/refinancing-your-f-h-a-mortgage-at-lower-cost/?src=recg