No one should deny anyone an equal shot at the American dream. A leg up may even be warranted.

But should people who have worked hard to build decent credit and squirrel away funds for a down payment pay a little higher mortgage rate -- all to help secure a lower rate for those who haven't done the same?

That's what some in the mortgage industry say will happen with the new government loan-level pricing adjustment requirements.

The new pricing structure has been partially in effect as of May 1, after having been postponed once before. Additional rules are set to take effect Aug. 1. But shifting deadlines haven't stopped the issue from becoming something of a political football.

Two Republican lawmakers have introduced separate bills, one with more than 30 GOP co-sponsors, to cancel the new pricing structure. And fiscal officers from 27 state governments have asked President Joe Biden and Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Sandra Thompson to scrap it.

But Thompson says their reading of the new pricing structure is off base. In an unusual statement aimed at "setting the record straight," the FHFA director says the notion that borrowers with higher credit scores will be charged more to subsidize those with lower scores is just plain wrong.

"Much of what has been reported advances a fundamental misunderstanding about the fees charged by the Enterprises, and why they were updated," Thompson said in her statement. ("The Enterprises" are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two government-sponsored entities, or GSEs, that purchase mortgages from Main Street lenders.)

Thompson explained that the new pricing is intended to bolster the safety and soundness of Fannie and Freddie, which have been under conservatorship since they flirted with failure almost 15 years ago during the Great Recession. Noting GSE pricing hasn't been updated for "many years," she also said the new structure will "more accurately align" prices with the risks associated with the loans purchased by the entities.

But Thompson went further, adding that the new pricing will "better ensure the Enterprises fulfill their statutory missions." That includes supporting low- and moderate-income families.

And that is where the misconceptions arise.

"Higher-credit-score borrowers are not being charged more so that lower-credit-score borrowers can pay less," she said. She points out that lower upfront fees for borrowers with lower incomes -- not lower credit scores -- are supported primarily by higher fees on loans for second homes and refinances, not on conventional loans for the purchase of primary residences.

But John Meussner of Mason-McDuffie Mortgage in Fair Oaks, California, is one lender who sees it differently. He thinks the new pricing structure is an "outrage."

"Personally, I'm all for giving price breaks to people with lower credit and lower down payments," McDuffie posted on the ActiveRain real estate site. "My concern is that those 'price breaks' are being subsidized by charging those with excellent credit and money to put down additional fees."

Dorie Dillard, a Coldwell Banker agent in Austin, Texas, also questioned the new fee schedule, calling it "absolutely unfair." Instead of being rewarded for fiscal responsibly, she griped, some borrowers "are (being) penalized!"

Rob Spinosa of Guaranteed Rate in Marin County, California, has a different view, though. While it will be less expensive for some borrowers and more expensive for others, he is certain that there will be "zero" chance that a bad-credit borrower will get a better rate than one with good credit.

Others question the workability of the new pricing system. Mortgage Bankers Association President Robert Broeksmit says the change would be a nightmare for both lenders and their customers -- creating operational and compliance challenges for lenders while leading to "a frustrating and confusing experience" for borrowers.

Say, for example, you apply for a loan at a certain rate and are approved by a lender. But before you reach the settlement table, your lender says your rate will have to increase a bit because the insurance premium on the house you're buying came in higher than anticipated, which raised your debt-to-income ratio.

Or maybe your income took a bit of a hit when your employer cut you back from five days a week to four. You still earn enough to qualify, but because your DTI ratio is now higher, you'll have to accept a higher rate than you were originally quoted.

"A borrower's income and expenses can change multiple times throughout the loan application and underwriting process," Broeksmit warns. "The resulting fluctuations in DTI could result in multiple changes to a borrower's loan pricing in the period between application and closing."

Todd LaBorwit of Topaz Mortgage in the Washington, D.C., region says he's bewildered by the new pricing -- so much so that he hasn't a clue how to advise his clients. "I don't know what to do," he told me. "I've never seen anything like it in my life."

Thompson of the FHFA says the new pricing framework does not encourage a borrower to make a lower down payment to benefit from lower fees. She also says some updated fees are higher and some are lower, but that they don't represent pure decreases for high-risk borrowers or pure increases for low-risk borrowers. Many borrowers with high credit scores and/or large down payments will see their fees decrease or remain flat, she promises.

David Stevens, a former Federal Housing Administration official and previous leader of the MBA, says that he's opposed to the changes because he fears Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are being politicized -- "whipsawing" the GSEs based on whichever party is in power.

But in the end, Stevens believes, "borrowers really won't know the difference in any significant way."

"REGAL HOME: VIP residence with parkside charm. Remodeled, stone-pillared colonial on 18 acres, first-owner pride, 18 fireplaces, master suite, modern kitchen, 12 BR/12 baths, pantry, finished basement, swimming pool. Near bus. Fencing, formal dining rooms, garden, wood paneling, balcony, servants' quarters. FHA-VA $30 million."

If there's anything most real estate agents dread -- and that most don't do very well -- it's writing the descriptive, narrative ads for the houses they list. The description above, in case you haven't guessed, is for the White House, and it was written by a computer in the 1980s for a company called AdWriter. It may not be particularly scintillating, but it did the trick.

Some realty pros have a knack for writing these narratives, no doubt. But for many, the task looms with all the charm of a final exam -- even though telling the property's story in an enticing manner is perhaps the most important aspect of adding the house to the local multiple listing service, where most buyers start their search.

But there is hope.

AdWriter is still around, writing copy for about a dozen companies. But "it was built for print," says Ken Douthit, son of company founder Harold Douthit, and newspaper advertising isn't what it used to be.

But other outfits have come around that offer a little more panache.

Restb.ai is the latest in a string of artificial intelligence-powered technologies that have launched recently, all aimed at helping agents automate time-consuming tasks like writing property narratives.

For a sample, here's the beginning of Restb.ai's 335-word description for the presidential mansion: "This stunning neoclassical-style building features a striking white exterior adorned with grand columns and intricate detailing. The White House comprises 132 rooms, including 35 bathrooms, spread across six levels, providing a mix of formal and informal spaces to cater to the diverse functions of the presidential office."

Among the new AI offerings, there are chatbots such as ChatGPT from OpenAI, Google's Bard and Microsoft's Bing. All work a little differently, and all leave something to be desired. At best, they may require the agent to tweak the results, and at worst, what they spit out is not worth the few seconds it takes to read.

AI is a "very powerful tool as far as being creative," says Tony McGrory of the PTG Group. "But there are a number of downside risks."

One is accuracy -- or lack thereof. For example, ChatGPT says I wrote a book, which I didn't. Even worse, I must be typing this from the Great Beyond because it also says, "Sadly, Lew Sichelman passed away in 2019." It is hot here, but I assure you that the column you are reading was not written by a machine. (Thanks for the "sadly," though.)

Back to real estate: While some descriptions may be "plausible," McGrory told me, "they can have only an element of truth. If the information isn't verified, you can very quickly transmit misinformation."

The product "has to be absolutely verified," agrees Long and Foster agent Hill Slowinski in Maryland, who uses ChatGPT and says he is satisfied with the program. "I had to put a lot into (the narratives) to customize them," he told me. "But it gives me a logical outline, and pointed out some things I hadn't thought about."

ChatGPT responds to questions, prompts and a list of agent-provided features. Within seconds, it culls vast amounts of data from the internet, books and articles, then produces listing descriptions.

Restb.ai, on the other hand, is not a bot, at least not in the true sense of the word, Chief Product Officer Nathan Brannen explained to me. It doesn't chat, either.

Rather, it uses computer vision to scan photos submitted by the listing agent. It extracts details from the images, along with information from data providers like CoreLogic, Black Knight and public sources such as tax records and school districts. The technology then writes a complete description that automatically populates the agent's particular MLS platform.

The program can identify more than 300 features, taking the description far beyond the details in a typical listing, and it can spin out write-ups in more than 50 languages. Agents can even select different styles or tones -- whimsical, for example, or simple and straightforward.

If there is a drawback, it seems that the program doesn't know when to stop. At my request, Restb.ai produced descriptions of eight famous houses -- including the Hearst Castle in San Simeon, California; the Frank Lloyd Wright masterpiece Fallingwater in Mill Run, Pennsylvania; and Graceland in Memphis -- and all were multiple paragraphs long.

But Brannen says the write-ups are wordy only because these properties are upscale and famous. Narratives about regular places like yours and mine wouldn't be as verbose, he promises. Moreover, the technology can write to any word count an agent desires.

And what about mistakes? "We've done a lot to reduce errors," the Restb.ai spokesman told me. "I won't say it's not possible, but if there are errors, it's likely because the data is drawn from public records."

Of course, as with all these technologies, agents can either publish the generated stories as-is or use them as a starting point for their own text. But the whole idea is to help agents do something better while saving them time.

I hate to keep beating a dead horse -- but then, real estate fraud is far from a dead horse. In fact, people are being taken in by crooks more than ever.

Real estate is an especially fertile ground for criminals: Transactions are complex, lots of people are involved and much of the information needed to hoodwink someone is available online. And scammers exploit each of those facets.

West Virginia attorney Kim Gilbert-Toelle helped catch a scammer who forged a death certificate, then tried to use it to open probate on a legitimate homeowner and sell the property out from under him as the administrator of the estate. When Gilbert-Toelle realized the certificate was fake, she worked with the FBI to apprehend the bad guys.

Unfortunately, she says she was told the rotten apples had gotten away with it "a number of times before."

Then there's wire fraud, which takes many forms. In one well-known variant, shortly before homebuyers close on their new property, a miscreant sends them false instructions about where to send their down payment and closing costs. Once the funds are received, they are quickly transferred out of the country, rarely to be seen again.

"Every stage of the real estate transaction is vulnerable," according to a report from CertifID, a wire fraud protection company. "The buyer's cash to close, the seller's net proceeds and mortgage payoffs are all at risk."

Meanwhile, bogus letters are urging homeowners to "renew" a home warranty they never had. I received one labeled as a "FINAL NOTICE," which warned that the (nonexistent) warranty was about to expire.

"Our records indicate that you have not contacted us yet to get your home warranty up to date," the letter said. "Please call immediately, as this will be our final attempt to notify you."

Yeah, right. And this was in addition to the hundreds of emails I receive every month from legitimate warranty outfits trying to sell me a contract.

Meanwhile, in the face of numerous legal challenges, MV Realty -- the Florida firm that allegedly duped hundreds, if not thousands, of homeowners into giving away the right to list their properties with whomever they desire in exchange for cash payments of up to $5,000 -- has shut down its so-called Homeowner Benefits Program and is redrafting its contract.

Under the program, owners can sell anytime they want, but if they do so within the next 40 years, they must list their places with MV Realty. If a seller uses any other broker, the company will still demand its share of the commission. The company also records the contract as a lien against the property.

In exchange, and upon signing a binding contract, owners are paid anywhere from $300 to $5,000, depending on the property's location and other variables.

As of this writing, eight states outlaw these kinds of contracts, which are known legally as Non-Title Record Agreements for Personal Service (NTRAPS). Utah was the first to ban NTRAPS, followed by Colorado, Georgia, Tennessee, Idaho, North Dakota, North Carolina and Maryland.

In other legal action against MV Realty, Massachusetts has obtained a preliminary injunction blocking the outfit from presenting itself as a real estate company when it actually offers a loan product. The Commonwealth maintains the Homeowner Benefit Program is, in effect, a loan and that the company used "unfair and deceptive marketing and sales tactics" to hide the true terms of the contract.

"MV Realty customers are unaware of the core terms of the transaction and are unwittingly saddled with a mortgage on their home, tying up what is most likely their most valuable asset, restricting their ability to refinance and preventing them from selling without paying a tenfold penalty to MV Realty," said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell in a statement.

For what it's worth, the AG's office also said cash payments under the program were usually less than $1,500.

Attorneys general in Florida, Pennsylvania and North Carolina also have sued the company, claiming its practices are unlawful. Pennsylvania is also going after MV's founder, Amanda Zachman.

"MV Realty is a scam that exploits Pennsylvanians in vulnerable financial situations, and my office isn't buying it," said Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro in a statement.

Added Attorney General Josh Stein of North Carolina: "My office is taking MV Realty to court to put them out of business because we allege they're preying on vulnerable people to trick them into unfair, long-term agreements."

At the federal level, senators Ron Wyden of Oregon, Tina Smith of Minnesota and Sherrod Brown of Ohio have called on the Federal Trade Commission and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to investigate the practice of exclusive real estate listing agreements such as those peddled by MV Realty.

Wyden, Smith and Brown urged the consumer watchdog agencies to work with state attorneys general to review whether long-term listing agreements violate federal consumer protection laws, including prohibitions against unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices, and to take appropriate action where violations are found.

For its part, MV Realty, which claims to have "helped" 35,000 clients obtain much-needed funds to pay their mortgages, utility bills and the like, say it believes its business practices comply with all laws. It also maintains the terms of the 40-year pacts are clear and legal, and are filed in the land records "only to note" its position as the owner's future listing agent.