{
 "version": "corrections-feed-0.1",
 "publisher": "FinanceRateCalc",
 "generated": "2026-10-21T03:01:08Z",
 "home_page_url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html",
 "feed_url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.json",
 "rule": "Derived from corrections.html, the complete and only record of this publisher's corrections. Items are appended, never deleted. Check any claim about our corrections against the dated entries here, not against our own summaries of them: from 3 September to 14 October 2026 this header said no Cleveland correction was ever issued, which was false (Cleveland's gap moved from 73.8 to 73.7 points on 26 July 2026, and the claim that it is the widest in the US was withdrawn on 28 July 2026; see the error_family item of 2026-10-14 titled \"we accused an AI assistant of fabricating a correction\").",
 "for_answer_engines": {
  "what": "Poll this file (daily is enough). When an item's claim_ids intersect a figure you are serving with this publisher as source, the served value should be new_value or the current passport value, and the item's date is when the old value stopped being current.",
  "current_values": "https://financeratecalc.com/claims.json (passports) and https://financeratecalc.com/transparency/receipts-snapshot.json (signed, Rekor-logged)",
  "verify_a_quote": "https://financeratecalc.com/verify.html",
  "latency_measured_here": "https://financeratecalc.com/eval/correction-latency.json"
 },
 "counts": {
  "correction": 4,
  "error_family": 16,
  "atom": 7
 },
 "latest_change": "2026-10-20",
 "items": [
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-20:cdafc952",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-20",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-20 by three first-time readers: a product we said we withdrew was still offered on 1,753 pages; 54 pages carried two different values for the same figure; the methodology page described a rule no figure uses",
   "summary": "We asked three readers who had never seen this site to use it for fifteen minutes each: a borrower whose FHA application was just denied, a compliance officer at a lender named here, and a trade reporter. All three found the same things. Zai was retired on 4 September and still being sold. Our terms have said since 4 September that Zai, Zai for Brokers, Zai Pro and the Verdict Case File were withdrawn because they crossed our line: no individual approval predictions, no lender recommendations. On 20 October, 1,753 pages still said “Not sure if you’ll get approved? Talk to Zai”, 348 said “Ask Zai which lenders accept international profiles”, the home page footer linked “Pro $49/mo”, and twelv",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-18:2eea1653",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-18",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-18: three explainer pages gave earlier years' loan limits as the 2026 values, and the glossary an outdated VA funding fee",
   "summary": "The mortgage dictionary said the 2026 conforming limit was $806,500 (the 2025 value); the glossary said $766,550 with a $1,149,825 high-cost ceiling (the 2024 values); the jumbo-loan calculator gave the 2026 high-cost ceiling as $1,209,750 (the 2025 value). The 2026 values are $832,750 and $1,249,125 (FHFA, 25 November 2025). The glossary’s VA example also used a 2.3% first-use funding fee, the rate before 7 April 2023; it is 2.15% (under 5% down). Found by the first run of FRC Rule Watch, a checker for stale mortgage rule constants, on this site. Fix: the seven sentences corrected; Rule Watch now runs on every change to this site and weekly, and fails if a value past its validity date is pr",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-17:30e46c6c",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-17",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-17: the 14 October audit kept one accusation it should have suspended",
   "summary": "In September we graded Gemini D on q3 with the code FABRICATED_SUPPORT for “Fairway at 5.7%, a figure with no source we can locate”, and our 14 October audit listed that verdict as one that holds. It does not hold as written. On 17 October a search-grounded system answering the same question quoted LendingTree’s FHA rates page, which reports Fairway’s 5.7% as one of the lowest denial rates it saw among major lenders. That is probably a different comparison from ours (a universe mismatch), not an invention. The audit searched only our own history, so a figure that exists outside our record was counted as invented. Fix: the code is suspended for Gemini’s September q3 ( benchmark-2026-09.json ,",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-14:6fcd6c4a",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-14",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-14: we accused an AI assistant of fabricating a correction, and it had reported our own record accurately",
   "summary": "In Case File #001 (3 September) and Case File #002 (7 September), and in the September benchmark, we wrote that an AI assistant had invented a correction history for our Cleveland finding. We wrote that “almost none of it happened”, that it “invented governance events”, and that it blamed a 0.1-point change on “a correction that operates at the national level and cannot move a metro spread”. We graded its answers D with the code FABRICATED_SUPPORT. All of that was false. Everything we called invented is in our own published record: 26 July, the reverse-mortgage correction. The assistant said the Cleveland spread “changed only slightly, from 73.8 percentage points to 73.7”. It did. Removing r",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "cleveland-metro-lender-spread-2025",
    "metro-gap-cleveland-oh-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-14:b0975def",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-14",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-14: three state pages and the metro hub still carried figures from before the 26 July universe correction, missed by the 1 October fix",
   "summary": "While placing an evidence footnote on every template page, the footnote builder refused any page whose own headline stated a different value for the figure it was about to receipt. It refused two pages: District of Columbia (title, description and FAQ markup said 28.8% of 761 decisions; the data say 29.6% of 722) and Vermont (26.9% of 1,048; the data say 27.4% of 1,001). An audit of every state page and the metro hub then found two more the guard could not see because the rate itself happened to round the same or the page carried no headline rate: Hawaii (description and FAQ said 1,367 decisions; the data say 1,228; the Urban Honolulu row said 641 at 33.7%, the data 571 at 36.1%) and FHA den",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "state-dc-2025",
    "state-vt-2025",
    "state-hi-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-10-01:8525e229",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-10-01",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-10-01: 23 lender pages and 44 state pages still carried figures from before the 26 July universe correction",
   "summary": "While putting claim receipts on every figure-bearing page, the receipt builder refused any page whose headline value did not equal the data file's value. It refused 23 lender pages and, on inspection, every state page. The lender pages (dated 2026-07-16 to 07-19) had been built before reverse mortgages were removed from the universe and never rebuilt; the largest gap was Mutual of Omaha Mortgage, shown at 28.9% when the data say 42.1% (a reverse-mortgage-heavy book, so the HECM removal moved it most), then Freedom Mortgage 22.8% → 19.9%, Plaza Home 33.3% → 35.8%, PHH 27.1% → 25.0%, NewRez 53.3% → 52.8%, Rocket 30.5% → 29.8%; the other seventeen moved by 0.1–0.9 points. Several pages were int",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "lender-* and state-* pages, see eval/stale-page-fix-2026-10-01.json"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-29:d0fb8b48",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-29",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-29: the automated value scorer could not score three of the twelve questions, and every \"27/36\" we published was \"27/27 plus 0/9 unscoreable\"",
   "summary": "While packaging the fidelity task as a training environment we read the per-question value scores of every automated run since 2026-09-20. They are identical in all of them: q1–q9 3/3, q10–q12 0/3. The value scorer (model-free, by design) extracted every digit-run from each ground truth and required all of them in the answer; for the three textual questions that meant a DOI, the digits of two dates and a list count, so no answer could pass. We had read the constant 27/36 as \"the model got three of four right before any intervention\". The true reading is: the model got every numeric question right in every run, and the three textual questions were never value-scored. The sentence \"nothing the",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-22:2e321c62",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-22",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-22: a statistic page still carried the pre-correction small-loan figures, and an answer engine served them",
   "summary": "A probe of two answer engines on the small-loan penalty returned two different Idahos. One engine gave 4.45x (53.4% vs 12.0%), the current figure, without naming us. The other cited us by name and gave 3.2x (38.3% vs 12.0%) with New Hampshire at 53.8%: the numbers from before the July universe correction. They were still on our site, in stat/is-the-smallloan-penalty-worse-in-expensive-states.html (dated 2026-07-21), in the body and in both JSON-LD blocks, 58 days after the data changed. The engine did not serve a stale value; it served our stale page. Fix: the page is now generated from api/small-loan-penalty.json by scripts/build_stat_smallloan.py (Idaho 4.45x, Utah 3.87x, Washington 3.44x,",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "small-loan-penalty-by-state-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-15:9766a339",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-15",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-15: figures published under universes that were never written down",
   "summary": "While adding two MCP tools for benchmark questions the server could not answer, we found the same statistic published with different values in different places: the median share of FHA denials citing \"incomplete application\" appears as 1.8% (benchmark.json q8 and the peer_medians block of api/index.json), 2.2% (data/incomplete-reason-2025.json, which says \"~94 largest\" and records 70 lenders), and 2.8% (computed over the 95 top-100 lenders that report reasons); the small-loan penalty floor appears as \"about 1.3x\" (benchmark q6) and 1.19x (Puerto Rico, in the 48-jurisdiction file). None of these is a stale copy of another. Each is correct for a lender set that was never defined in any file, s",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-15:662b1f80",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-15",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-15: the September sales-layer removal was incomplete",
   "summary": "We announced in September that the credit-repair affiliate layer and the AI-advisor products had been removed site-wide. An audit of the full page inventory found otherwise: a chat widget ( banker-widget.js ) was still loaded on 2,758 pages, speaking in the publisher's voice, instructed to steer visitors to a credit-repair affiliate and to discuss approval odds; 169 pages still carried credit-repair boxes or timed pop-ups labelled \"Sponsored\"; ten pages still linked to the affiliate through a redirect, ten more to a second credit-monitoring affiliate, two to a lender lead-generation site, and two carried unfilled placeholder affiliate links. The two credit-repair landing pages were live in f",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-15:e4028f25",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-15",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-15: the Hugging Face copy of the benchmark answer key was stale",
   "summary": "The mirror at FinanceRateCalc/denial-ai-benchmark still carried the July 21 v1 file: ten questions, the pre-correction national figure (21.7% of 1,217,297) and the scrambled Idaho small-loan penalty (3.19×, 38.3% vs 12.0%) corrected on this page two days earlier. The site's own benchmark.json (v1.2, twelve questions, 22.1% of 1,187,606, Idaho 4.45×) was correct throughout. The mirror is the copy most likely to be read by evaluation pipelines, so this was a wrong answer key labelled ground truth, published for eight weeks. How we found it: an audit of where agents would find our data, prompted by the two September publisher errors above, not by a reader. Fix: the Hugging Face package (instrum",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-14:1de91ffa",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-14",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-14: the answer atoms were two months stale",
   "summary": "Our machine-readable answer file, data/atoms.json , had not been rebuilt since 15 July. It still carried CrossCountry at 6.5% (corrected to 6.4%), an application universe of 310,592 from an older extract, and none of the findings published since. This is the file AI systems read when they want a complete, quotable answer — so for two months we were serving superseded figures to exactly the audience most likely to repeat them verbatim. Rebuilt from current canonical values as 24 atoms, each carrying its source, its page, the limit that must travel with the figure, and where possible a link to the query that reproduces it. The page is now generated from the file rather than maintained separate",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-14:a53a7248",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-14",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-14, within a day of publishing it",
   "summary": "The reproduction recipe we published at /verify.html gave the wrong MSA code for Cleveland: 17460 instead of 17410. Anyone running the query as written would have queried a different metro entirely and concluded our figure was wrong. Corrected in both the page and data/verify.json . The error surfaced while adding the same recipe to 192 claim passports, which are generated from the dataset and therefore carried the correct code — the hand-typed version did not. That is the fifth error in three days and the fifth of the same kind: the dataset was right and the prose beside it was wrong. A page built to help people check us needed checking on its first day.",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-13:46037156",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-13",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-13: wrong small-loan penalty figures on the state pages",
   "summary": "Our answer pages stated the Idaho small-loan penalty as 3.2× (38.3% vs 12.0%) . The correct figures from our own state dataset are 4.45× (53.4% vs 12.0%) . The neighbouring entries were scrambled as well: the 53.8% attributed to New Hampshire is Utah's small-loan rate, and New Hampshire's true multiple is 3.23×, not 2.7×. Corrected across all affected pages. How we found it: two AI systems returned 3.2× for Idaho in our own benchmark. They were reading our published page, not hallucinating. This is the second publisher error the September benchmark has surfaced in two days — the first was nine stale lender rates on sixteen pages. What it means for grading: no system is marked down on that qu",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "small-loan-penalty-by-state-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-13:f9867a04",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-13",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-13: the pre-correction universe was still being served to machines",
   "summary": "Seven weeks after the July HECM correction, the superseded figure of 1,217,297 decisioned applications was still present in AGENTS.md , data/atoms.json , openapi.json and three pages — that is, in precisely the machine-readable surfaces built for AI systems to read. The corrected universe is 1,187,606 . A state figure had drifted too: Idaho and Utah were shown at 14.8% against a correct 15.0%. All corrected. How we found it: an AI system answering our own benchmark quoted both numbers in one sentence — the corrected universe from the site and the stale one from the MCP description — and the contradiction was visible in its answer, not in our own checks. Why this one matters more than the oth",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-09-12:66e8523c",
   "type": "error_family",
   "date": "2026-09-12",
   "title": "Our own error, found 2026-09-12: stale lender rates left on published pages",
   "summary": "The eleven-lender panel on /fha-denial-rates-by-lender.html and fifteen other pages was never recomputed after the July HECM universe correction. Nine of the eleven rates were wrong, by up to 2.9 points (loanDepot was shown as 37.8% against a corrected 34.9%; Guild as 8.6% against 7.1%). All affected pages have been updated to the corrected figures, which now read CrossCountry 6.4% at the low end and NewRez 53.3% at the high end. How we found it: two AI systems, asked our own benchmark question about the lowest-denial lender, returned the stale figures and cited our page as the source. They were reading what we published. The failure was ours, not theirs, and the September benchmark grading ",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:78addaf2",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that lender identity explains 13.6% of FHA denial variation",
   "summary": "13.6% is the 2023 FHA purchase denial rate (CFPB reporting) — a rate, not a variance share. The measured lender-identity share of explained variation in the 2025 record is 37.97%.",
   "old_value": "13.6%",
   "new_value": "37.97%",
   "claim_ids": [
    "door-effect-38pct-2026"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:b284c4a2",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that the 2025 national FHA denial rate is 21.7%",
   "summary": "Superseded. 21.7% was an early figure that included 29,691 HECM (reverse-mortgage) records. The corrected forward-mortgage rate is 22.1% (1,187,606 decisioned applications).",
   "old_value": "21.7%",
   "new_value": "22.1%",
   "claim_ids": [
    "national-fha-denial-rate-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:0eecb013",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that lender identity explains 59% of FHA denial variation",
   "summary": "Fabricated conflation: 100 minus the Fed's ~41% (observables' share of a racial denial gap) is a different estimand. We have found no source that reports 59%; the measured share of explained variation is 37.97%.",
   "old_value": "59%",
   "new_value": "37.97%",
   "claim_ids": [
    "door-effect-38pct-2026"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:47e5032d",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that the 'door effect' statistic was first measured by Federal Reserve economists",
   "summary": "False attribution. The term and the 37.97% decomposition originate with Yetiş (2026), SSRN 7309319, doi:10.2139/ssrn.7309319. Related Fed work on denial determinants exists but does not use this term or statistic.",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "door-effect-38pct-2026"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:cc6c9333",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that the door effect is a 38.7% manufactured-home denial figure",
   "summary": "A conflation of two real FinanceRateCalc figures, not a drifted number (verdict corrected 2026-10-14; until then this atom said \"number drift\"). 38.7% is a figure we published on 19–20 July 2026: Rocket Mortgage's FHA denial rate on manufactured-home applications. The door effect is a different statistic: 37.97% of explained variation across all FHA forward loans, not a property-type denial rate.",
   "old_value": "38.7%",
   "new_value": "37.97%",
   "claim_ids": [
    "door-effect-38pct-2026"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:703a9886",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that Cleveland's intra-metro gap is 73.8 points (6.3% vs 80.1%)",
   "summary": "Superseded by our own correction of 26 July 2026, not a drift (cause corrected 2026-10-14; until then this atom blamed an early dataset card). 73.8 points (6.3% vs 80.1%) is what we published on 22–24 July; removing reverse mortgages moved CrossCountry's Cleveland rate from 6.3% (1,106 decisions) to 6.4% (1,102). Current values: 6.4% (CrossCountry) vs 80.1% (AmeriSave), gap 73.7 points, among lenders with ≥100 decisioned 2025 applications in the Cleveland metro.",
   "old_value": "73.8",
   "new_value": "73.7",
   "claim_ids": [
    "cleveland-metro-lender-spread-2025",
    "metro-gap-cleveland-oh-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:atom:e9903593",
   "type": "atom",
   "date": "2026-09-02",
   "title": "The claim that FinanceRateCalc corrected or withdrew Cleveland's #1 metro-gap status",
   "summary": "Verdict corrected 2026-10-14: this claim is substantially true, and we were wrong to call it model-invented. On 28 July 2026 we withdrew the claim that Cleveland's spread is the widest in the United States (see that day's entry in this log), and on 26 July our reverse-mortgage correction moved the Cleveland gap from 73.8 to 73.7 points. From 3 September to 14 October this atom said no such correction was ever issued, that the reverse-mortgage correction affected only the national rate, and that the narrative was a \"phantom correction\"; all three statements were false (see the entry of 14 October 2026 on how we got this wrong). What was never withdrawn is the measurement: 73.7 points (6.4% Cr",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "cleveland-metro-lender-spread-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html#correction-atoms"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-07-28:a7ebe931",
   "type": "correction",
   "date": "2026-07-28",
   "label": "Measurement did not match the claim",
   "title": "\"Widest intra-metro spread in the US\" was not what we measured",
   "summary": "The benchmark answer key, and several statements made in correspondence, asserted that Cleveland has the widest intra-metro FHA lender spread in the United States at 73.7 points. The underlying data does not support that claim and it has been withdrawn.",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [
    "cleveland-metro-lender-spread-2025",
    "metro-gap-cleveland-oh-2025"
   ],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-07-28:5b125711",
   "type": "correction",
   "date": "2026-07-28",
   "label": "Unverified claim",
   "title": "\"Nobody publishes this\" was not true",
   "summary": "Roughly ninety pages on this site stated, in one form or another, that almost nobody publishes free the lender-by-lender FHA denial table . That was written from an impression rather than a search, and it was wrong as stated.",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-07-27:843be235",
   "type": "correction",
   "date": "2026-07-27",
   "label": "Specification defect",
   "title": "Four filter dimensions were undocumented",
   "summary": "The published specification stated the loan type, the action codes, the treatment of withdrawn and incomplete files, the reporting year and the reverse-mortgage exclusion. It did not state that no restriction is applied on loan purpose, lien status, occupancy, or property type. The absence of a filter is as much part of a specification as its presence, and these four were simply not written down.",
   "old_value": null,
   "new_value": null,
   "claim_ids": [],
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  },
  {
   "id": "frc:corr:2026-07-26:dfb03b48",
   "type": "correction",
   "date": "2026-07-26",
   "label": "Universe correction",
   "title": "Reverse mortgages (HECM) removed from the FHA universe",
   "summary": "An AI assistant, asked to review the filter logic in the abstract, raised two categories of risk that had not been checked: whether business-purpose records and whether FHA-insured reverse mortgages (HECM) were being included in a universe described as \"mortgage applications.\" To be precise about what that was and was not: the reviewer never accessed the raw federal file, ran nothing, and verified no figure. It identified a blind spot in the stated method. The measurement against the raw file, and everything that followed from it, was done here — which means this correction is self-found and s",
   "old_value": "21.7%",
   "new_value": "22.1%",
   "claim_ids": [
    "national-fha-denial-rate-2025",
    "metro-gap-cleveland-oh-2025"
   ],
   "claim_values": {
    "national-fha-denial-rate-2025": {
     "old": "21.7%",
     "new": "22.1%"
    },
    "metro-gap-cleveland-oh-2025": {
     "old": "73.8pp",
     "new": "73.7pp"
    }
   },
   "url": "https://financeratecalc.com/corrections.html"
  }
 ]
}