Did you hear about the loan underwriter who demanded a letter from the borrower's doctor stating the borrower had been healed and his illness would not come back? How about the underwriter who wanted a verification of employment from the borrower who listed her occupation as "homemaker"?

Yes, things are tough out there. And despite some evidence that lenders are easing up just a tad, in the new world of "prove everything -- and prove it twice," there have been some unusual demands, to say the least.

For example, lenders like to determine the source of funds that are deposited into applicants' accounts. They want to make sure that money for a down payment is the applicant's, as opposed to loan from a friend, relative or other lending institution.

That makes sense. After all, if it's not the borrower's money, he has no skin in the game. And it becomes too easy for him to walk away from the mortgage later if he should not be able to pay as promised. Or he might not be able to afford to pay back two loans, one from the bank and the other from some unknown entity.

But in one case, the underwriter -- the person who is responsible for reviewing all documentation for your loan to make sure it conforms to the lender's requirements -- asked for a letter of explanation on a $6 deposit from a borrower who earned $10,000 a month. And in another instance, a borrower who had deposited $235 from a garage sale was asked for an ad proving she did, indeed, have the sale.

Yes, despite the need to know, some requests are just plain ridiculous.

"Absurd," says Karen Deis, who operates MortgageCurrentcy.com, a website that keeps loan officers, processors and underwriters current on the ever-changing regulations and guidelines for FHA loans, VA loans, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

"I don't know whether to laugh or cry," says Deis. She collected these and dozens of other anecdotes on her Facebook page after asking her clients to report the most absurd conditions they have seen. "People are scared. All you hear about are buybacks, audits and people losing their jobs" because they didn't verify this or confirm that.

These silly requests notwithstanding, Ellie Mae, the electronic mortgage processing system, reports that the average FICO scores of closed loans fell slightly in March, for the second month in a row -- from 745 to 743. That's the lowest since Ellie Mae began tracking loan profiles.

But according to FICO, the company that builds the algorithms on which the all-important credit scores are based, only 37 percent of all people with credit records have a FICO score above 750. That doesn't mean the other 60-plus percent didn't have a score high enough to obtain a mortgage. Rather, as Ellie Mae president Jonathan Corr explains, his company's benchmark is an average, so people with lower scores are obtaining financing. But they have to jump through hoops to do so.

"Even though there has been some loosening," Corr says, "what they're asking of people is not changing. It's still pretty comprehensive, and we're going to continue to hear stories like this."

With that in mind, then, would-be borrowers should be ready for anything, as these other unusual underwriting requests collected by Deis demonstrate:

-- A borrower who had been out of school for several years was asked to produce his high school transcript.

-- The underwriter asked for proof that the borrower was no longer under house arrest.

-- The underwriter wanted a letter explaining why the year-old child listed on the application was not named as a dependent on the previous year's tax return. Then, when the borrower wrote back that the child was not born until after the tax return was filed, the underwriter wanted a copy of the infant's birth certificate.

-- A borrower was asked for a death certificate for her recently deceased husband PLUS a letter explaining why her social security benefits had been reduced.

-- The borrower, a teacher at a Catholic high school, was asked for a letter testifying the school was part of the local Catholic school system.

-- A single father who had custody of his child was asked for a letter saying he did not have to pay child support.

-- The underwriter wanted verification that the borrower, who had written a $167 check to a local grocery store, did not have a loan with the grocer.

-- An updated appraisal was requested because the picture accompanying the original one was deemed too old. It must be old, the underwriter reasoned, because the evergreen trees in the background were still green and it was the middle of winter.

-- The underwriter demanded a letter from a borrower explaining why she changed her name after she married.

-- A borrower was asked for proof that he does not own a home he sold a decade earlier.

-- The underwriter wanted a letter from the U.S. Postal Service verifying that the borrower, whose mailing address was a post office box, actually owned the 10-inch box and that it was the borrower's primary address.

-- A borrower who worked for a well-known major company was asked for a letter explaining why his office was in a different location than the headquarters address listed on his pay stub.

-- A borrower who listed her occupation as "prostitute" and declared her income on her tax returns was required to obtain affidavits from her regular customers saying they were, indeed, her clients.

April 20-21 is Nationwide Open House weekend -- not exactly a national holiday, but rather an event contrived by the National Association of Realtors in which members far and wide are holding open houses on behalf of sellers.

But is the open house a sound sales tactic?

The numbers seem to indicate so. In 2012, nearly half of all buyers used an open house as a source in their search for a new residence, according to the NAR's latest "Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers."

But visiting an open house on a Saturday or Sunday doesn't always equate with buying. Which again begs the question: Is an open house worth the trouble?

Unfortunately, the jury is not just out on that one, it's hung. While many agents sing the praises of open houses, just as many, if not more, maintain they are an exercise in futility.

Almost every agent worth his or her salt has sold houses to people who have strolled in off the street to visit the property. But that's the exception, not the rule. Indeed, according to the NAR's buyer-seller profile, only one in every 10 buyers found the house they eventually purchased by going to open houses.

Still, there are several good reasons for agents to hold an open house. One is to get to know the seller better; another is to get to know the house. A third is to obtain some important feedback on the home's strengths and weaknesses through the eyes of potential buyers.

After all, agents have found that by having visitors point out things they don't like about the place, it is easier to persuade sellers to dig into their pocketbooks to repair, repaint or even upgrade.

But as a sales tool? Not so much.

You are better off simply sticking a for-sale sign in your front yard. About 53 percent of all buyers use yard signs to search for their next home as opposed to the 45 percent who attend open houses, according to NAR's study.

Nevertheless, most sellers view an open house as necessary and think they are being shortchanged if their agents skip what has become a real estate ritual. If your agent does agree to host one, it is far more likely that he or she will use the event to meet inquisitive neighbors, ask for referrals, or perhaps even lasso a few would-be buyers who have yet to align themselves with a real estate professional.

This year, though, your agent is just as likely to use Nationwide Open House weekend to promote realtor doctrine as to promote your property -- or even himself. According to a list of media talking points posted for NAR members about the event, agents are encouraged to engage consumers regarding the benefits of ownership.

"We need to make sure any changes to current (government) programs or incentives don't jeopardize a housing and economic recovery," is one such suggested talking point. "We need to ensure public policies that promote responsible, sustainable home ownership," reads another. And making certain "our country's leaders ... understand the vital role that real estate plays" in America's health is a third.

A more effective way to use an open house, at least to your advantage as opposed to that of your agent or the real estate business, is to invite a caravan of agents to see your place when it is first put on the market. That way, agents far and wide can preview your house on behalf of their clients, and if it happens to be what one or more are looking for, the agent can bring the client back for a private showing.

So, if open houses don't sell houses, what does? Why the Internet, of course.

Typical buyers these days -- nine out of 10, in fact -- first troll the Web to find houses they think are worth visiting.

As a result of their Internet searches, 76 percent of all buyers told NAR researchers that they actually jumped in their cars and drove by the places they liked. Some 62 percent walked through the homes they first saw online, and a whopping 42 percent say they ended up buying a place they first saw while cruising the Web.

Some agents say they get a good bang for their buck with weekly home magazines or weekend television shows. You know, the ones that feature a few shots of houses for sale, a brief description of each, and the listing agents' names and phone numbers.

But truth be told, like open houses, their primary benefit is to keep the agent's name in front of the public and generate leads from potential purchasers who, studies show, eventually buy a house -- just not the one they originally inquired about.

But getting back to open houses. Here are a few more stats from the NAR to keep in mind:

-- Repeat buyers are more likely to find a house from an open house than first-timers. So if yours is a modest house ideal for first-time owners, you might want to skip an open house and try something else.

-- Mid-income buyers, those with incomes between $55,000 and $75,000, are the most likely to find their homes though an open house when compared with other income brackets.

-- Older buyers, age 65 and over, are more likely to find their homes though an open house than any other age group. The younger the buyer, the less likely he or she will use an open house as a search tool. In fact, just slightly more than one in four buyers under the age of 24 will attend an open house.

The lending landscape shifted measurably earlier this month when the standard-bearer for first-time buyers and low-to-moderate income borrowers became more expensive than its private business counterpart.

On April 1, fees for low-down-payment mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration went up for the third time in two years. The hike in fees serves a two-fold purpose: one, to help shore up the FHA's sagging mortgage insurance fund, which is dangerously low; two, to reduce the government's footprint in the mortgage market.

Only time will tell whether the first objective will be reached. But the second goal -- allowing private mortgage insurance (PMI) companies to gain a larger market share -- is likely to be met because PMI is now the less expensive alternative.

How much less expensive? Over a five-year period, borrowers with a 760 FICO score who make a 5 percent down payment on a 30-year, $170,000 mortgage could save more than $4,000 by opting for a loan insured by Genworth Financial, one of a half-dozen private mortgage insurers.

Of course, most folks don't have that high a credit score. But for nearly all borrowers who can come up with a down payment of at least 3.5 percent on a loan of up to $625,000, PMI is now probably the better deal.

The FHA has always been the first choice of borrowers with low down payments who couldn't meet the private sector's more rigid underwriting standards. And during the housing debacle, the agency picked up the slack as private insurers backed out of the market. A couple companies even went out of business altogether.

But the FHA paid dearly for its efforts in supporting the market. Foreclosures are up significantly, and the health of the insurance fund from which claims are paid is at or below the level required by Congress.

So, as of April 1, the agency raised its annual premium by 0.05-0.1 percent, depending on the loan amount and the all-important loan-to-value ratio. That's on top of an earlier 0.1 percent increase in the annual fee instituted last April, as well as the 0.75 percent hike in the upfront mortgage insurance premium, which is now 1.75 percent of the loan amount.

As a result, the choice between mortgages with private mortgage insurance and those insured by Uncle Sam has never been clearer.

Lenders require insurance, either private or government-based, on mortgages in which there is a down payment of less than 20 percent. Such loans are considered more likely to default than those in which borrowers have more of their own money on the line.

Here's how a 30-year, $170,000 FHA-insured loan with 5 percent down compares with one insured by Genworth.

The interest rate on the FHA loan is 4 percent, but because of secondary market fees charged on conventional loans, the rate on the Genworth-backed loan is 4.375 percent. But even though the privately insured mortgage carries a higher rate, it is still cheaper because the FHA's insurance fees are higher.

First, there's the 1.75 percent upfront mortgage insurance premium. In this case, that amounts to $2,975, bringing the total loan amount to $172,975. Then there's the 1.3 percent monthly premium, which adds $184.17 to the monthly mortgage payment, bringing your total monthly payout to $1,009.98.

Genworth, on the other hand, isn't charging an upfront premium, so the loan amount remains at $170,000. Moreover, its monthly premium is just 0.59 percent, or $83.58. So the total monthly payment is $932.37, a difference of $77.61 a month. Over a five-year period, the savings is $4,656.60.

Now look at the same loan with 10 percent down.

Again, the coupon rate is somewhat higher on the Genworth-insured loan because of the secondary market charges. But the company wants no upfront fee, whereas Uncle Sam wants 1.75 percent at closing. Thus, just as with the "5 percent down" scenario, you are borrowing $172,975 with an FHA-insured loan versus $170,000 otherwise.

The other big difference is the monthly mortgage insurance premium: the FHA's 1.3 percent, or $184.17, versus Genworth's 0.44 percent, or $62.33.

In total, then, the monthly payment would be $1,009.98 on the government mortgage as opposed to $911.12 for the privately insured loan. Over a five-year period, the savings on this 10-percent-down mortgage is $5,931.60.

Another advantage a privately insured loan has over one backed by the government is that PMI can be cancelled. And in a market where housing values are rising, this is an extra added benefit on top of lower monthly costs.

Currently, the FHA will allow borrowers to cancel coverage once their loan-to-value ratio reaches 78 percent of the original loan balance. But starting June 3, the government will require borrowers to pay the premium as long as the loan is in force. In other words, the only way the insurance can be ended is by refinancing or otherwise paying off the loan.

On the other hand, PMI can be cancelled at the borrower's request when his equity reaches 20 percent -- as long as he is current on his payments and the value is backed by a new appraisal. Termination is automatic when the loan amortizes to a 78 percent loan-to-value ratio -- again, as long as you are current.