The shortage of houses for sale has changed the real estate landscape in numerous ways.

One is that finding just the right place has supplanted obtaining financing and wading through the necessary paperwork as the most difficult aspect of the buying process, according to the latest Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers from the National Association of Realtors.

But a survey from Chicago-based lender Guaranteed Rate finds that many buyers would rather do most anything else than go through the mortgage process again.

To be fair, a little over half the 1,000 people polled this fall found the buying-lending experience rather simple and easy to navigate. But nearly one in four said they'd rather gain 10 pounds, and almost one in eight would rather spend 24 hours with the person they dislike the most.

If you think that's bad, 7 percent would rather have a root canal, and almost that many would choose a night in prison over going through the mortgage process again.

Asked another way -- "Which of the following makes you extremely uneasy or anxious?" -- obtaining financing again scored very low in the Guaranteed Rate study. In fact, more people were more comfortable with public speaking, being in high places, flying in an airplane, being around snakes and being in a confined space than they were going through the mortgage process.

This flies in the face of the latest J.D. Power mortgage origination satisfaction study, which found that more borrowers were pleased with their lenders now than at any time in the last seven years.

Overall customer satisfaction improved for the third consecutive year. But as you might expect, rookie buyers who have never had to navigate the system weren't as tickled as repeat buyers and refinancers. Which prompts this bit of advice from Craig Martin, director of the financial services practice at J.D. Power:

"First-time buyers often have questions and should not be afraid to ask prospective lenders about the specifics of the mortgage process and how they will be kept informed. Much of the stress with borrowing comes from a lack of information and knowledge during the process. Asking when you will be updated and how that information will be provided are two key questions that may help improve the borrowing experience."

* *

More than three out of every four homebuyers polled in the National Association of Realtors' latest Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers said commuting costs are either "very" or "somewhat" important to their ultimate purchase decisions. After all, the combined cost of housing and transportation consumes close to half of the typical working family's monthly budget.

This makes a new tool from Uncle Sam that much more meaningful.

The Location Affordability Portal (LAP) from the Departments of Housing and Urban Development and Transportation allows users to estimate the combined housing and transportation costs for a specific region, neighborhood and even street.

LAP is actually two tools: one, a map-based Location Affordability Index, is a database that predicts annual housing and transport costs for a particular area. The other, My Transportation Cost Calculator, allows users to customize data for their own household and potential residential locations.

LAP includes diverse household profiles -- which vary by income, size and number of commuters -- and shows the affordability landscape for each one across an entire region. It was designed to help renters and homeowners -- plus planners, policymakers, developers and researchers -- get a more complete understanding of the costs of living in a location given the differences between households, neighborhoods and regions, all of which impact affordability. The data covers 94 percent of the U.S. population.

The cost calculator allows users to enter basic information about their own particular income, housing, cars and travel patterns. The customized estimates give a better understanding of transportation costs, how much they differ in other locations, and how much they are impacted by individual choices, so users can make more informed decisions about where to live and work.

"Many consumers make the mistake of thinking they can afford to live in a certain neighborhood or region just because they can afford the rent or mortgage payment," said HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan. "Housing affordability encompasses much more than that."

You can find the Location Affordability tool at portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/sustainable_housing_communities/location_affordability.

Now, if the powers that be could just come up with an accurate way to estimate a home's utility costs, the problem of over-extending beyond one's means could be solved.

Despite efforts at all levels of government to stamp out illegal schemes that promise to save the homes of financially strapped owners, the scams "remain at a high level," according to a new federal report.

Not only have the ripoff artists not gone away, their machinations have become more complex, the Government Accountability Office reported late last month. And perhaps worse, they now often involve attorneys, the supposed professionals people tend to trust the most.

It is difficult to get a precise count on the number of victims of these so-called "foreclosure rescue" scams: people who have been separated from their homes or lost a great deal of money. Many people never realize they've been snookered, while others are too embarrassed to report they've been victimized.

But the number of consumer complaints collected by federal agencies indicate that these schemes are on the rise again in 2013, often targeting the most vulnerable homeowners: minorities and seniors.

Any number of federal, state and local governments have programs to stop the charlatans, using tools from prosecution to informative websites. But the main program comes from the Federal Trade Commission, which issued the Mortgage Assistance Relief Services rule in late 2010.

MARS has two primary provisions: a ban on advance fees for foreclosure relief services, and a requirement that consumers be informed that a lender may refuse to modify their loans and that borrowers can reject any terms negotiated on their behalf.

But attorneys are generally exempt from the ban on upfront fees if they meet certain conditions. They must provide relief as part of their law practice. They must be licensed in the state where the house is located. They must place any money received from clients in a trust account. And they must abide by state laws regarding government attorney conduct.

The GAO, which is the investigative arm of Congress, says many of the officials it contacted for its latest report said attorney involvement has become a major concern in recent years. Illinois reported that roughly seven out of 10 complaints involved lawyers or law firms. The number of such cases is on the rise in California, as well.

There are any number of schemes designed to separate people from their money -- and their homes. But the latest have become more complex, and make it difficult for the authorities to prosecute, especially when lawyers are involved. The most recent iterations are:

-- Forensic audits. For a fee, scammers promise to review the borrower's mortgage documents to be sure the lender complied with lending law. If the audit reveals errors, they say, lenders would be forced to modify their loans by lowering their rates or making other concessions.

-- Bankruptcy to avoid foreclosure. The scammer promises to negotiate a loan modification for a fee, but instead files a bankruptcy case in the owner's name without his knowledge. The bankruptcy process temporarily stops all debt collection efforts, including foreclosure proceedings, so the owner believes foreclosure has been averted. And he continues to pay regular fees to the scammer.

-- Mass joinder lawsuits. This is a type of legal action usually put forth by an attorney or law firm. It is legal, but lawyers are usually paid only if the case is successful. Fraudulent schemes require the owner to pay a fee to participate.

The apparent increase in the prevalence of attorney-involved schemes presents new challenges for law enforcement, according to the GAO report.

For one thing, it is difficult to determine whether lawyers are providing legitimate services. For another, an attorney acting for a scammer may be brought in for only a short time, perhaps to file certain documents. And attorneys often cite attorney-client privilege as a way to avoid subpoenas and slow investigations.

Even when no attorney is involved, the authorities are finding it vexing to nab the bad guys. They can start up, shut down, move elsewhere and start up again in what seems like a blink. They operate under different names, making them difficult to track. And the small dollar amounts of individual losses make it less likely agencies will take on their cases.

Still, there have been some notable wins. Under a recent summary judgement, the FTC banned Dinamica Financiera, an outfit targeting Spanish-speaking consumers, from selling mortgage loan modification or foreclosure relief services. The FTC also nailed the Residential Relief Foundation, which charged upfront fees for bogus services and posed as a government assistance program.

But for every scheme that's halted, or every scammer who's nailed, others pop up to take their place. Worse, the market for skullduggery is ripe. According to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association, the number of borrowers who are two or more months past due and facing foreclosure "remains elevated."

To protect yourself from becoming a victim, follow this cardinal rule: Never give anyone any money in advance for services that have yet to be rendered. And check out the person or company, whether an attorney is involved or not.

If you need help, turn to free housing counseling from one of several thousand agencies nationwide that have been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (www.HUD.gov) or call the HOPE Hotline -- 888-995-HOPE -- a resource run by a nonprofit for a coalition of government agencies, financial institutions and other groups.

There is no need to go it alone, and there is no reason to be ripped off.

Millions of would-be homebuyers who do not otherwise have credit scores -- that all-important snapshot of how they use credit -- will soon be able to generate one. They can use the latest version of a highly predictive scoring model that is still trying to find its footing in the mortgage marketplace.

Under the new VantageScore 3.0 model, predictive credit scores will reach as many as 35 million adults not covered by traditional scoring systems. That means so-called "thin file" homebuyers, who always trade in cash or have yet to establish credit, can now have a score, just like everyone else.

That's important because credit scores are the holy grail of the mortgage business. If you don't have a score, or if your score isn't high enough, many lenders don't want to touch you. If they do want to make you a loan, it will be at a somewhat higher rate.

Introduced in 2006, VantageScore was initially developed as a competitor to the better-known FICO scoring model by the nation's three major credit reporting agencies: Equifax, Experian and TransUnion.

Now an independently managed company, it is still looking for acceptance by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the two quasi-government companies that purchase mortgages from primary lenders. Because the government-sponsored enterprises buy the lion's share of home loans, what they say pretty much goes. And as yet, they have declined to buy loans originated with a VantageScore.

But the latest version of the scoring program is likely to win the hearts and minds of more and more lenders, and that should put more pressure on Fannie and Freddie to loosen up.

Roughly one out of every three lenders receives applications from otherwise unscorable borrowers. When that happens, the borrower typically ends up in one of two buckets: high-risk or additional cost. Either way, the chances of being approved narrow significantly.

"Tens of millions of consumers are excluded from traditional scoring methodologies," says Barrett Burns, president of VantageScore Solutions. "Many of these consumers are not high-risk, but they are invisible to lenders who are having trouble effectively assessing their risk profiles."

According to research by Experian, typical unscorable consumers fall into prime credit tiers and hold professional or skilled-labor jobs. "This profile surprised us," says Burns. "They are not necessarily unemployed or downtrodden."

Another surprising fact: A significant number of unscorables -- about 41 percent -- own their homes, many free and clear. Typically, they've already paid off their mortgages. A good number are retired.

A significant number of unscorables are folks who always use cash. "Lots of people live on a cash basis," says Burns. "First- and second-generation Hispanics, for example, (are sometimes) distrustful of the banking environment. We didn't realize how many minorities don't use credit. Yet, they are penalized for being independent."

Of all the people who fall into the unscorable category, recent college graduates and young borrowers with thin files -- little or no credit activity -- are the hardest to reach. Nearly all are future homebuyers, and nearly all are difficult to score.

To rate these and other would-be borrowers, VantageScore will build a score for someone as soon as they start using credit. FICO won't report a score until the file contains six months' credit use. But VantageScore will create a score for a divorced person, immigrant or recent college graduate when they make their first car or credit card payment.

In another "analytic breakthrough" for infrequent credit users, VantageScore also now accepts older credit file information, which it says is almost as predictive of how the applicant handles credit as more frequent data. Typically, if there is no activity in someone's credit file within the previous six months, no score is generated. But "we look back 24 months and it's still high predictive," says Burns.

In addition, VantageScore now uses rent, utility and mobile phone payments in building its score -- when they are part of your credit records. These payments aren't reported to the credit bureaus to any significant extent, says Burns, but when they are, they again are highly predictive.

Another big improvement, and one many segments of the mortgage business have been howling for: Paid collections -- payments made through third-party collection agencies -- will not be included when generating a VantageScore.

Many people believe that as long as they are paying, even through a collection agency, it should count in their favor. But every time a payment is made, it becomes a brand-new delinquency in the eyes of the traditional credit score. Under the new VantageScore model, though, as long as you are paying a collection account on a regular basis, it won't count against you.

"We've proven that you get no mathematically predictable lift" with paid collections, says Burns.

Also, if you are behind on your medical bills, it won't count against you as long as the charges are still coming from your medical provider. But if your account is turned over to a collection agency, it falls into the above bucket.

To make it easier for borrowers to figure out why they didn't score higher, VantageScore has reduced the number of explanatory "reason codes" to 80 and rewritten them in plain English.

Finally, in a nod to FICO -- and to make its score more user-friendly -- the new VantageScore model rates people on a numerical scale from 300 to 850, the same as the competition.