More than a year and a half ago, Uncle Sam decreed that the pertinent mortgage information disclosed to borrowers at closing be simplified. So far, though, the process has been anything but simple.

Which leads to the question: Will "simplification" end up making it more expensive or more complicated -- or both -- for homebuyers to close on their loans?

Originally, lenders had 18 months to comply with the new rules, which combine the longstanding Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) disclosure statements into one (supposedly) easier-to-understand form. The new form is called TRID, which stands for TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure.

The original Aug. 1 deadline has come and gone, but the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has granted lenders a two-month reprieve; they now have until Oct. 3 to start using the TRID disclosure form. But practically every wing of the home finance business has been grousing about the new requirements since the get-go. Their gripe: It's too expensive to reprogram their computers, and even more so to retrain their staffs to comply with the new edict.

Some background is in order here:

TILA and RESPA used to be administered by two separate federal agencies: TILA by the Federal Reserve and RESPA by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. But now, as part of 2010's Dodd-Frank consumer protection act, which lenders detest, those laws are under the purview of the CFPB. CFPB created the combined TRID form as part of its "Know Before You Owe" program.

By combining the two forms into one, the agency believes it has succeeded in making it easier for borrowers to understand exactly what they are getting into. It tested the new form in a quantitative validation study, and participants provided more correct answers using the new single form than they did using the previous disclosures.

"Our new disclosures are easier to understand and use than the existing disclosures," the CFPB said in a release about the TRID form. "In addition, the loan estimate you get after you apply for a mortgage and the closing disclosure you get before you close are designed to work with each other."

That's all well and good. But lenders maintain they are having a tough time implementing the new requirements.

According to Becky Walzak, president at rjbWalzak Consulting, a Deerfield Beach, Florida, firm that advises the lending community, there are something like 2,500 new calculations that have to be programmed into lender systems. And on top of that, employees also have to be "re-progammed."

Lenders that aren't currently in at least the beta testing stage on what they say is a massive undertaking are behind the eight ball, says Walzak. "People have been scared to death about this thing," she says.

Nevertheless, Walzak believes most lenders have not put off compliance until the last minute.

That may be true, but as an indication that not all lenders are on a fast track, compliance vendor Ellie Mae is still offering RESPA-TILA workshops. The latest one will occur just two weeks before the new TRID deadline. (Ellie Mae has posted on its website a countdown of the days left before the TRID "monster" takes effect. To illustrate how lenders feel about it, the post includes a cartoon T. rex getting ready to pounce.)

Even the CFPB itself is offering last-minute guidance for lender laggards on its website.

So, how will this all play out for homebuyers?

While TRID is indeed troublesome for lenders and may initially cause some disruptions that impact borrowers, Ann Fulmer, principal at mortgage consulting firm Paladin in Atlanta, says it will be "a positive thing." Above all, Fulmer says the new requirements will put an end to the unhappy surprises borrowers get at closing, such as when the amount they were told they could expect to pay at closing -- the TILA statement they received when they applied for a mortgage -- falls far short of what they must actually pay, according to RESPA's HUD-1 closing sheet.

"A lot of shenanigans creep in, a lot of errors creep in" during the period between loan approval and closing, Fulmer says.

The jury is out on whether the new rules will make it more expensive for borrowers, as lenders claim it will. But compared to other changes mandated by the CFPB, the costs associated with TRID may just be a "drop in the bucket," says Fulmer.

How about simpler? That, too, is a wait-and-see question. But Fulmer thinks TRID may help answer the most frequent consumer questions -- What is my interest rate? What is my monthly payment? -- by putting them upfront in boldface on the first page.

Receiving the new form three days in advance, as mandated under the new rules, should also help borrowers make sure they are getting the same deal at closing that they were promised originally.

At the same time, though, Fulmer points out that the new TRID statement contains so much verbiage that it could be even more confusing for consumers than the old ones.

"Some think there's so much information that it is going to cause a problem," she says.

(Freelance writer Mark Fogarty contributed to this article.)

Looking for work? Look no further than the residential construction business.

Builders across the land say the lack of workers is one of their most pressing problems -- even more important than the dearth of buildable home sites or tight lending standards.

According to a survey in June by the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), labor shortages have become more widespread over the past year, even as the new-home market has picked up steam.

Shortages are most acute for the basic skills that are necessary to building any house. For example, 69 percent of the builders who participated in the survey reported a shortage of workers who are willing and able to do even rudimentary carpentry. And 1 in 4 of them said the shortage was "serious."

But builders seem to be even more concerned about the availability of subcontractors. Nearly 75 percent of the work in building a typical single-family home is done by subs.

In the rough carpentry category, 74 percent of builders reported a shortage of subcontractors. Nearly 75 percent cited shortages of framing crews, 69 percent said they couldn't find enough finish carpenters and 56 percent reported a dearth of bricklayer-mason contractors.

And so it goes, on down the line. There aren't enough painters, electricians, plumbers, roofers and heating and air conditioning subs to satisfy the need.

"The incidence of shortages is surprisingly high given the rate of new home construction, which has only partially recovered from its 2008 downturn," said Paul Emrath, an economist with the NAHB.

How bad is it? Shortages in the nine trades covered in the NAHB survey are now "substantially higher" than they were at the peak of the 2004-2005 housing boom, when annual starts were averaging around 2 million (twice the current average). The last time labor shortages were so widespread was just before 2001, during a prolonged period of strong economic growth.

The bottom line for new homebuyers: It may take longer for your house to be built than you were told when you signed your contract. Worse, perhaps, your house may have more than the normal number of cosmetic defects like broken tile, chipped bathtubs and uneven paint.

Or worse yet, because builders are being forced to use neophyte workers, your new house may be both late and substandard.

CAR AND STUDENT LOANS WEIGHING DOWN HOMEOWNERS

Homeowners today are carrying more non-mortgage debt than at any time in the last 10 years -- too much, perhaps, to allow them to move up to a new house or even pay down their current loans, according to a new report.

On average, today's mortgage holders owe a whopping $25,000 on car loans, student loans, credit cards and the like, according to the data and mortgage analytics division of Black Knight Financial Services in Jacksonville, Florida.

That's $1,400 more on average than just one year ago, and nearly $2,600 more than in 2011.

The primary driver: auto-related debt, which accounted for 81 percent of the overall increase in non-mortgage debt over the past four years, Black Knight found. At the same time, student loan debt owed by homeowners is at an all-time high. Some 15 percent of all homeowners carry school loans, with average balances of nearly $35,000. The share of mortgage-holders carrying student loans has increased by 44 percent since 2006.

The offshoot of all this is that today's homeowners may owe so much that if they are hit by any kind of financial setback -- a major illness, for example, or a layoff -- they might not be able to make their house payments. Alternatively, they may not qualify for a new loan if they want to refinance or move up the housing ladder.

Non-mortgage debt among U.S. mortgage holders bears close watching due to its potential impact on both the lending and housing industries, says Ben Graboske, the executive who runs Black Knight's data and analytical division.

"Non-mortgage debt is another key piece of the home affordability puzzle -- the more total debt borrowers are carrying, and the higher monthly non-mortgage payments they have, the less money they have to put toward a new home purchase, or potentially even (to) their current mortgage obligations," Graboske says.

The company has already noticed "a clear correlation" between non-mortgage debt and borrowers inquiring about a new mortgage, with those who have recent mortgage inquiries on their credit reports carrying nearly 40 percent more debt than borrowers who do not.

If you've been turned down by your lender for a government-backed program that would allow you to refinance your mortgage at a lower rate and keep the foreclosure wolves from your door, you might want to give it another try.

The federal agency that runs the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) says that as a result of unconscionable denial rates, it has tweaked the program several times to make it easier for underwater borrowers to qualify -- and more difficult for lenders and the companies that service their loans to reject them.

The program's improvements came to light recently when the office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program -- better known in Washington circles as SIGTARP -- revealed HAMP's abysmal performance record. It reported that 7 out of 10 borrowers who applied for assistance under HAMP were rejected.

That is, from 2009 through this April, 4 million of the 5.7 million beleaguered borrowers who sought help were turned down.

One of the Obama administration's key programs aimed at helping borrowers stave off foreclosure, HAMP is designed to provide deep and meaningful savings for homeowners tripped up by unaffordable increases in expenses or reductions in income.

The voluntary program calls on lenders and servicers to change the terms of loans to a level that is affordable for borrowers now, as well as sustainable over the long term. It provides clear and consistent loan modification guidelines that the entire mortgage industry can use.

But despite the fact that it includes monetary incentives for servicers, and for the investors who own the loans, the program's track record is pretty poor.

Many borrowers were rejected through no fault of their own. In its study, SIGTARP found that fully a quarter of all applicants were turned away because their applications were labeled "incomplete," even after servicers required them to resubmit the same paperwork several times. Often, servicers extended the time it took to make a final decision, outlasting borrowers who gave up in frustration.

Some 18 percent of owners dropped out of the running by failing to accept the servicer's loan-modication offer.

Another top reason for turning people down was that their incomes were deemed too high. But the report said the program has long been plagued by servicers' income miscalculations.

For borrowers who are still trying to save their homes, the SIGTARP report isn't as important as the response from the Treasury Department, which runs HAMP. Treasury said that things aren't as bad they seem, and they certainly aren't as bad as they once were.

And therein lies an underlying message to those who have been rejected: Give it another try.

"Treasury closely monitors the number of HAMP denials and has made changes to the program to simplify documentation requirements and expand eligibility criteria to assist more homeowners," said Mark McArdle, chief of Treasury's Homeownership Preservation Office.

Among the improvements: Documentation requirements have been simplified multiple times, most recently in a "streamlined" version that targets seriously delinquent borrowers who have yet to complete a modification application.

Also, eligibility requirements have been expanded to provide a more flexible debt-to-income ratio, and allow modifications on certain rental properties.

As a result, McArdle said, "We have seen significant improvement in servicers' compliance with program guidelines, including proper evaluations and denial decisions."

So, if you are still having trouble paying your mortgage and you meet the eligibility requirements -- chief among them is that your loan is owned, insured or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Department of Agriculture -- you might look into giving HAMP a shot, even if you've been unsuccessful in the past. The program's life has been extended three times and now runs through Dec. 31, 2016.

Even if your loan is a conventional mortgage, not of the government-backed variety, you might want to consider asking your servicer for a modification.

As McArdle maintains, HAMP has not only helped more than 1.5 million homeowners modify their mortgages, it has also "indirectly assisted millions more by setting new standards for the mortgage industry that have led to more affordable and sustainable private modifications."