April 30, 2007

Buyer Resistance Drives Prices Down

The Journal News reports from New York. “In Westchester, the median price for houses was $635,000, down 2.3 percent from a year earlier and the second quarter in a row of year-over-year declines. Real estate agents said buyer resistance to high prices in the county had helped drive them down; last quarter’s median was well below Westchester’s record of $716,126 set in the third quarter of last year.”

“‘Most of the new stuff is coming on with reasonable prices,’ said J.P. Endres, president of David Endres Real Estate in New Rochelle.”

“Westchester and Putnam are seeing growing inventories of property for sale, but as a smaller market, Putnam may be feeling the effect to a greater degree. The number of single family houses for sale at the end of last quarter, 942, was up 48 percent over three years earlier.”

“The number of months of inventory in Putnam, a measure of the amount of time it would take to sell all the houses for sale in the county, reached 20 in the first quarter. It’s the biggest first-quarter number since 1998, when it stood at 22.”

“Michael Barile, a retired builder, said he sees a disturbing trend in the growing number of foreclosures in the county. About 90 percent of the properties are being taken over by the bank at foreclosure sales, and at some point they’re going to wind up back on the market, he said.”

“‘When I built in the 1970s and 1980s, you never saw inventory over 500,’ he said. His daughter has been trying to sell a one-bedroom house in Carmel for $209,900. It’s been on the market two months, even though she cut the price by $10,000, he said.”

“Buyers are finding that getting financing is not as easy as it was a year ago. ‘To get approval is not very easy now,’ said Sonia Velasco, broker in Yonkers. ‘They have so many foreclosures coming up that they’re really making sure the buyers are really qualified and are able to keep the house.’”

The Gotham Gazette. “A crush of foreclosures in Queens, Brooklyn and the Bronx is raising alarms and leading many to call on city and state authorities to do more to go after the unscrupulous people at mortgage brokerage firms, at banks and on Wall Street who, they say, are fueling the problem.”

“Through March, more than 1,200 foreclosures had been filed this year in Queens on one- to four-family properties, a 57 percent increase over the same period last year. About 3,600 were filed in all of 2006 in the borough, according to the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project.”

“In Brooklyn, over 1,100 foreclosures had been filed from January to March compared to about 3,300 for all of last year.”

“The rates of subprime lending here are higher than the national averages. About 23 percent of home purchase loans are subprime, up from just 6.5 percent in 2002. Nationally, the proportion of home purchase loans that are subprime is 17 percent.”

“Queens attorney Oda Friedheim sees the city’s numbers as ominous. ‘The subprime market is going bust and so we will see more foreclosures,’ she said.”

“Kevin Squires, a loan officer at a Queens mortgage company, said the first scenario is common as homeowners are bombarded daily with offers to refinance their homes. The advertisements blare across virtually every medium.”

From Newsday. “Thomas and Joy Geist have lived in the same house in East Meadow for more than 50 years. Currently, however, the Geists’ house is a source of family worry. The couple, who paid off their original mortgage 30 years ago, are struggling to make monthly payments on a new $280,000, 30-year mortgage that their lawyer is contending should never have been made to them.”

“‘How can you give a 30-year loan on a paid-off house to an 82-year-old person?’ the plaintiffs’ Manhattan-based lawyer, Jacob Zamansky, said in a recent interview. The suit accuses members of the mortgage industry, including a Glen Head bank and two Long Island-based mortgage brokers, of ignoring numerous ‘red flags’ signaling that the loans shouldn’t be made.”

“With home foreclosures rising nationally, lawmakers are considering legislation that would impose suitability requirements on the mortgage industry.”

“The effort is hotly opposed by the industry. ‘It’s a bad idea, because rather than protect borrowers, it would prevent borrowers from getting access to credit,’ said Kurt Pfotenhauer, a senior VP for the Mortgage Bankers Association.”

The Times Union. “Home foreclosure filings in the Capital Region surged in the year’s first three months, according to newly released statistics. The five-county region’s first-quarter foreclosure filings climbed 93 percent when compared with the same period last year, according to RealtyTrac.”

“Foreclosures in Albany County jumped 109 percent, while filings in Rensselaer County spiked a staggering 218 percent. Rensselaer County, in fact, had more foreclosures filings in 2007’s first three months (54) than it had all of last year (51).”

“‘We’re getting more and more calls from people in a panic,’ said Bobbi Carter, director at a nonprofit that works to keep defaulting mortgage holders in their homes. TRIP had 33 mortgage-default clients for all of 2006, Carter said, and has already had that many for the first three months of this year.”

“Those working with local homeowners facing foreclosure say they are seeing a large number of middle- or higher-income families in trouble. Guy Criscione, an Albany bankruptcy attorney who said he’s seen an ‘unbelievable’ number of foreclosure clients in recent months, said many are couples with combined incomes of over $100,000 who still can’t make mortgage payments.”

“Sandra Demars, an attorney in Albany, said some of the office’s foreclosure clients are unable to cover rising tax payments, while others, facing spiking housing costs, borrowed at levels they can’t afford.”

“The RealtyTrac information, Demars said, ‘is reflective of what we’re seeing and what we were afraid was going to happen.’”

“Observers found the sharp increase in the Capital Region troubling, and worried it might be a warning of worse numbers to come.”

“‘We are so not at the apex of this problem,’ said Kirsten Keefe, a lawyer with the nonprofit Empire Justice Center in Albany.”




RSS feed | Trackback URI

121 Comments »

Comment by aladinsane
2007-04-30 06:22:21

Polter-Geist?

“Thomas and Joy Geist have lived in the same house in East Meadow for more than 50 years. Currently, however, the Geists’ house is a source of family worry. The couple, who paid off their original mortgage 30 years ago, are struggling to make monthly payments on a new $280,000, 30-year mortgage that their lawyer is contending should never have been made to them.”

Comment by solana beach
2007-04-30 06:54:33

After 82 years of life experience, didn’t they know they had to pay back the loan. Why are they blaming everyone else but them. There is something wrong here. And what did they do with 280,000.

Comment by East Meadow
2009-11-30 13:34:13

These people (the Geists) were duped by a “friend’ who was taking their “financial advisor”. They were not the only ones. Peter J. Dawson’s clients included elderly, terminally ill and handicapped people. He was featured last May on ABC World News Tonight where he outlined how he perpetuated his scheme. He was described as “Mini Madoff”. Dawson got his clients to trust him which is how he was able to do business. Nobody thought they would get rich with what he told them he was doing, nor did they think for one moment that the money would not have to be paid back. Dawson was paying the mortgages with his Ponzi scheme until it came crashing down. That’s how a ponzi scheme works. None of his victims realized this because as the police coined him quite correctly: Dawson could sell ice to the Eskimos. These people are honest people who trusted a friend who turned out to be a thief. For anyone’s interest here, some have lost their homes to foreclosure. Others have had family members come in to rescue the house. Dawson took their monies and used it for his lifestyle. Most of the victims were told not to “bother” their kids with what he was doing … because it was all going to be invested (which never happened). It was a nightmare (and still is — I can attest personally to that). The victims in this case are just that: victims. None are stupid. They were trusting. Period. This man used his church as his base. He should rot for what he did. As the old saying goes: walk a mile in my shoes … then you might not criticize. Con men are everywhere and they take advantage where they can. And for your information, nobody GOT $280,000 or ANY money. Dawson TOOK it all and promised to make investments that never happened. Read the article again.

 
 
Comment by solana beach
2007-04-30 06:54:40

After 82 years of life experience, didn’t they know they had to pay back the loan. Why are they blaming everyone else but them. There is something wrong here. And what did they do with 280,000.

Comment by az_lender
2007-04-30 07:54:36

My sentiments exactly. If the loan “never should have been made to them,” then presumably they still have a good portion of the money. If they still have quite a bit of it, they should pay down the loan (as much as they can or want to), so that their monthly payments will be manageable. If they don’t still have the money, it’s their own fault. I don’t care if they’re 82, their kids will have to cope with the situation the same as in any other family dealing with dementia.

Comment by az_lender
2007-04-30 08:00:14

OK, I see from link posted that the money all went to an investment fraudster, who is now in jail. So why the heck is the article oriented towards “mortgage” angle? The Geists’ problem is the investment fraudster. Granted, he did use a mortgage deal as a vehicle, but the practice of stealing senior citizens’ money in phony investment schemes is older than the Geists.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Housing Wizard
2007-04-30 08:19:51

Right , where did the 280 k go? There is no excuse for borrowers to not read their loan documents , but at the same time there is no excuse for a lender to put a borrower on a loan that they can’t afford long term . The loan agents were making so much money per loan that they did not care . The realtors were making so much money on a purchase that they did not care . The REIC believed their own cheerleading that real estate always goes up in spite of history telling us that affordability caps real estate prices .

 
Comment by statewithtomuchfunnybusiness
2007-04-30 09:08:27

Are you for real..that you are going to comment about 82 year olds “knowing better?” Just like you can remember the great way you grew up these people grew up in a generation of trust in people in finance..”the banker knows best”..”all doctors know what they are doing”..and so on..they can not be blamed for being taken advantage of..just like cigarette companies didn” let their generation know that smoking was bad for you”..you can’t blame someone who 1)doesn’t know better and 2)may not be mentally able to make a sound business decision…People have no problem complaining about 30 year olds making stupid mortgage decisions..but for 80 plus year olds the ability to recovery and move on can be near to impossible..

Comment by Isoldearly
2007-04-30 09:33:00

Baloney!! My Mother is 90 and you couldn’t sell her on “bankers know best” or anyone else when it comes to her money! Not all elders are easy targets without active brain cells. Is she more cranky? Yes, decidedly. Has she lost the capacity to make good financial decisions? Not one bit. Most of her buddies in assisted care are the same.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by lost in utah
2007-04-30 10:33:24

my dad at 86 had more horse sense than most people at any age. oculdn’t pull nuthin over on him…he was still designing circuits and inventing things. and he studied his bills like only those who have been through a depression could…
having said that, my mom was the opposite. Trusted everyone.

 
Comment by REhobbyist
2007-04-30 12:13:01

Based on watching my in-laws’ and parents’ aging-related financial misadventures, I’ve decided to give my children power of attorney over our finances when we reach our mid-seventies. It’s risky, but I’m afraid that based on genetics we’ll make the same mistakes if left to our own devices.

 
Comment by Falconsitter
2007-04-30 18:40:16

I don’t think they can get their minds around the fact that EVERYBODY you do business with is trying to screw you in one way or another either illegally or legally (read your home insurance or cellphone contract lately? Pretty much everything in them is designed to allow them to weasel out of their contractural obligations)

 
 
 
 
Comment by Banker B
2007-04-30 08:15:14

These people are mature enough to know that the loan has to be repaid regardless of the disposition of proceeds. And, do your on due diligence when you borrow money to invest, which is another topic of debate. Let me go on to make this point, if the Geists’ qualified for the loan and pushed to close it, how do you turn them down and not be a target for discriminatory action due to their age? I would bet the same attorney that represents them in this issue would be quick to take on a case where age discrimination was a factor in being denied the very same loan.

Comment by statewithtomuchfunnybusiness
2007-04-30 09:09:53

Oh really so let me visit you when you are 80 plus years old and see if you will buy the brooklyn bridge..real cheap? That is if you are still alive and not on oxygen..

Comment by kckid
2007-04-30 10:28:59

How much did you say you wanted for that bridge?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by crisrose
2007-04-30 09:12:20

More proof that 80-year-olds can also be greedy dumbf$#ks.

 
Comment by jmunnie
2007-04-30 10:37:12

Study Suggests Why Elderly are Good Scam Targets

“The possibility of losing money stresses young adults out, but it doesn’t seem to faze the elderly. New research reveals that while both young and old adults had similar levels of brain activity when anticipating rewards, certain brain regions in older adults didn’t activate when responding to a potential financial loss.

“Published in the April 29 online edition of the journal Nature Neuroscience, the results add to the understanding of how age affects mental processes. It could also explain why older people are more susceptible to monetary scams….

“On the other hand, not reacting to a potential loss could be detrimental if older adults are oblivious to signals of something harmful in their environment.

“’[Older adults] are fine dealing with gains but something is screwed up with how they deal with losses, because they’re not really anticipating them like the young people are,’ Samanez Larkin said. ‘One possible example is older adults are especially vulnerable to being scammed,’ and this lack of brain activation could be to blame.

“’So older adults are told, ‘here’s this situation where you stand to gain a lot, here are all these great things about it,’ and they are taking that lead,’ Samanez Larkin said, ‘but they aren’t seeing the warning signs, where the younger adults maybe would see those.’”

Comment by housegeek
2007-04-30 11:03:47

Thanks JMunnie — I have no idea what the conversation was when this couple got the loan –could be greed, could be high medical bills — could be they were just fast-talked into it — I grow weary of these presumptuous posts that assume all buyers are greedy and deserved to be ripped off.

One thing I enjoyed very much on this blog’s early days is the fact that the people making pro-bubble arguments brought data to the table instead of high emotion — but it seems the opposite is starting to happen now that the bubble has burst and it’s time to throw blame.

The most educated guess I have so far is that flippers were greedy — and so were some homeowners. But a lot of non-flipper homeowners were just scared they’d be ‘priced forever.’ Some were just ignorant. Som e had no way else to pay the bills but to tap the ATM (the chief cause of bankruptcies in the USA, for instance, is high medical costs).

What they do have in common, however, is a lot of current misfortune to deal with, whether they deserve it or not. But the most important thing they have in common is they were all sold loans by banks and brokers who had no business doing so. Banks and brokers who collected huge fees, the riskier the loan they put these people in. The fiscal buck (and the bitching) needs to stop at their doorstep.

The

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by housegeek
2007-04-30 11:04:47

apologies -’priced out forever’ I mean

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by flatffplan
2007-04-30 06:32:32

prices are off 10%
tired of the BS median game
“In Westchester, the median price for houses was $635,000, down 2.3 percent from a year earlier

Comment by Anon E. Moose
2007-04-30 06:55:55

Median price does have weaknesses as a metric, for example people simply buying more house for the same money not being reflected. The reverse of this phenomemon influenced the run-up, “howmuchamonth” buyers shopping based solely on monthly payment, and with option ARMs their monethly payment imputed a much larger pricipal balance, but they failed to adjust their sights upward. You can take the people out of the neighborhood, but you can’t take the neighborhood out of the people. In other words, they have their heart set on THIS HOUSE OF THEIR DREAMS, and they’re going to pay whatever it takes to get it. To borrow a line from the lottery, people were not capable of dreaming bigger, though they were given the ability to pay bigger.

But in this article, it hides behind “year-over-year” (YoY) statistics. The article itself says the Q3 ‘06 median was $716,126, which means median price is 11% off its peak. I see no evidence of slowing.

 
Comment by crazyintheOC
2007-04-30 07:27:40

You are right about that, and even more in Long Island. We have a family friend in a high end town in Nassau county and they feel thier home is down 15-20% from last year based on what homes have been selling for recently(or more acurately-not selling for).

Comment by NYCityBoy
2007-04-30 07:35:56

There is no way you got a Long Islander to admit that their house is worth less money than it used to be. Next you will be telling us about the probing the little green guys gave you. I just don’t believe it. If this did actually happen, I hope they at least added, “but this is just until it turns back around”.

 
 
Comment by Darrell_in_PHX
2007-04-30 07:58:51

There is a future topic idea! Let’s talk about how sucky most of the available metrics are!!!

Instead of median home prices, how about median price per sq/ft. The median price has gone up because houses have gotten larger. That doesn’t mean that a specific house has gone UP! In fact, with median price falling slightly, but median house size up, it means that a specific house has gone down much more.

And, why are new home sales reported in the month they go to contract, and existing are reported at closing. Let’s get “went to contract” and “closed” for both numbers so we can see the numbers falling out.

And, with foreclosures, how about we get to see how many of those are bought by the bank. If banks really are buying the bulk, then they are simply sticking a band-aid on a gun shot wound. It makes their current month losses look better, but they’ll be losing money for months to come, until they finally dump that property and take the rest of the loss.

And, the contract amount used for appraisals needs to be reduced by ALL concessions… extras, cash back, repairs, etc.

 
 
Comment by Sobay
2007-04-30 06:32:37

‘How can you give a 30-year loan on a paid-off house to an 82-year-old person?’

Simple - Thomas and Joy Geist wanted the loan and they recieved it.

Comment by jim A
2007-04-30 07:02:02

Heck, they get to SPEND money that they’ll never have to repay. But seriously, how did they burn through 280 k so fast? I’d be tempted to guess medical bills.

Comment by Sarah in DC
2007-04-30 07:23:49

If anyone with their interests at heart had been advising them they would have gotten a reverse mortgage instead. That’s why people keep bringing up the question of fiduciary obligations. If the loan industry has none, then it’s ‘heads you win, tales I lose’ for the consumer. The easiest way — sometimes the only way– to really ’shop around’ for a rate is through a broker, but if they have no obligation to find you the best deal then you’re stuck either way.

Comment by Housing Wizard
2007-04-30 08:41:46

Why did a older couple take out equity to get a higher yield from a high risk venture ? After you reach a certain age you should not be making risky investments .

The Lincoln Savings /Keating scandal in the 80’s was just this very type of problem . The investors went for the higher yields Lincoln Savings was offering at the time only to find out they were not FDIC insured and the money was going into a risky Hotel project in Arizonia that went belly -up . Some of the old people that invested lost their life savings and some killed themselves .

Apparently the investors were mislead (by salespeople ) that the investments that Lincoln S&L were selling were insured .Keating (the Bank President ) went to jail and Lincoln savings went belly -up, but I don’t think the investors ever got their money back .

At the time Lincoln Bank was offering 2 to 3% over a insured money account . They use to have big full page paper ads in newpapers pushing that investment. Because a S&L was pushing this investment the people thought it was FDIC insured and apparently they proved in Court that the salespeople didn’t do anything to disclose that it wasn’t a insured investment .
Again we go back to salespeople cannot be trusted and one has to read their paper work . I have asked salespeople in Banks if a investment is insured and they always say yes but I don’t trust them . I have to see it in the paperwork to believe it .

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by phillygal
2007-04-30 08:33:55

What’s the closest casino?

 
 
Comment by Walker
2007-04-30 08:59:48

This place is getting like Slashdot. Everyone commenting on the excerpt, and not the article itself. As az_lender mentions above, this is part of an investment scam, so they lost all the money. This is does not completely excuse them, but we need to keep this in perspective.

Comment by crisrose
2007-04-30 09:14:06

If they weren’t something-for-nothing greedy a$$holes, they wouldn’t have been caught up in an investment scam.

‘You can’t cheat an honest man’

 
 
Comment by statewithtomuchfunnybusiness
2007-04-30 09:15:26

Here is the part of story you missed…
Thomas Geist is 82, and his wife is 80. They are among dozens of individuals, many of them elderly, ill or living on modest incomes, who fear that they face foreclosure on their homes as a result of an alleged Ponzi scheme by a Uniondale-based financial adviser.

As part of that scheme, the adviser, Peter Dawson, persuaded clients to take out mortgages for which there was no rational justification and have the proceeds paid directly to him, according to a lawsuit filed on behalf of the Geists and 38 other people in State Supreme Court in Mineola. The suit says Dawson promised to make the mortgage payments, and to produce profits by investing the money at a higher rate of return than the interest on the loan.

So basically it is the story of “suckering” nice old people who probably thought..”what a nice young man to take care of us since our kids obviously don’t…”

 
 
Comment by weez
2007-04-30 06:34:55

what percent of flippers were actually real estate agents or brokers????I’m guessing over 50% of speculators actually worked in the business??? Any ideas on this?

Comment by shadash
2007-04-30 06:36:38

Agree

Comment by tcm_guy
2007-04-30 07:05:39

I also agree, and it couldn’t have happened to a more deserving group of FBs.

Got 10% down?

 
Comment by bob
2007-04-30 08:15:14

Actually, i disagree. The amount of people in related fields that just ‘picked’ up a townhouse or condo as a great investment, was high. It blew me away the last 2 years - we woudl be waiting for the meeting to start - and someone would just blurt out that they had a offer accepted - and it was a great deal.

Crazy …

Comment by bob
2007-04-30 08:16:42

mean to say “unreleated” to real estate.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by shadash
2007-04-30 09:15:05

I know all kinds of brokers and agents that are bagholders in SD. I’m sure there was a large number of “flip that house” people. But I think the larger majority were industry people.

 
 
Comment by tcm_guy
2007-04-30 09:02:02

Good point bob about the number of people ‘fessing up at meetings, but these people where talking mostly about one property. The people in related RE fields where buying multiple houses.

Got 10% down?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Bill in Carolina
2007-04-30 06:35:05

“Thomas and Joy Geist have lived in the same house in East Meadow for more than 50 years. Currently, however, the Geists’ house is a source of family worry. The couple, who paid off their original mortgage 30 years ago, are struggling to make monthly payments on a new $280,000, 30-year mortgage that their lawyer is contending should never have been made to them.”

Is the reporter too stupid to ask what they did with the $280K? At that age they’re on Medicare, so high medical bills aren’t likely. They probably didn’t gamble it away. That’s an awful lot to give to lazy, mooching kids or grandkids. It’s not likely they’re BOTH senile since they’re in their early 80s.

Maybe if we did know what they did with the dough we wouldn’t have any sympathy for them.

Comment by rally monkey
2007-04-30 06:41:51

Maybe they invested in more properties.

 
Comment by SKB
2007-04-30 06:54:05

Instead of assuming, you should read the entire story and then you will see what they did with the money.
http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzcov5192601apr30,0,1614153.story?coll=ny-business-print

Comment by Mikey(2)
2007-04-30 07:05:52

This is a legitimate question: Barring mental illness, do people lose their sense of financial reason as they age, or are the decisions these elderly folks make based on a different time and different ethics of that time?

Comment by implosion
2007-04-30 07:16:10

Grand theft.

“Many of Dawson’s clients met him through a Long Island church where he was a member, and others met him through mutual acquaintances, according to the suit. The Geists say they have known Dawson through the church since he was 5 years old.”

Like I’ve said before, I can’t believe more of these guys aren’t taken out. Permanently.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Lionel
2007-04-30 07:37:10

Mikey, while I’m not a neurologist, I believe the answer is yes, you certainly could have a degradation of mental capacity as you age. Your eyesight, hearing, sense of balance, you name it, pretty much retards as you age. Impulse control and reasoning could certainly follow suit. It’s why it’s important to keep using your brain as often as possible as you get on in life. Crosswords, work, reading, anything that engages the mind. I don’t think there’s any doubt that the elderly fall prey to these kinds of schemes at a higher rate than the general population.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by crisrose
2007-04-30 09:19:33

“I don’t think there’s any doubt that the elderly fall prey to these kinds of schemes at a higher rate than the general population.”

Nope.

Most victims of fraud are too embarrassed to come forward and admit to their stupidity and greed.

The elderly can play the ‘I’m old and my brain is rotted out’ card.

 
Comment by Lionel
2007-04-30 09:51:09

Any stats on that crisrose? Or you just know this from your vast personal survey of humanity?

 
Comment by crisrose
2007-04-30 10:32:50

“Any stats on that crisrose? Or you just know this from your vast personal survey of humanity?”

Anecdotally from my years in law enforcement as well as statistical.

* Only 15% of fraud victims report their losses to authorities.(1)
* The only factors that appear to influence victimization is age and education. Race, income, region of the country sex or household size had no effect on victimization.(1)
* Individuals with some years of college or with a college degree appear to be more vulnerable than those with other levels of education.(1)
* The young are more likely to be the object of an attempted fraud and to lose money or property when it succeeds.(1)
* Monetary losses from fraud exceeds $40 billion annually.(1)
* In 1991, one-third of 1,246 people interviewed acknowledged a fraud attempt against them within the previous 12 months. Forty-eight percent admitted that the attempt was successful.(1)
* Attempts to defraud are more likely to succeed if the con artist is not a stranger to the victim, if the contact is made in person, if the prospective victim had not heard of the particular type of fraud and if the victim has made no attempt to investigate before responding.(1)
* A 1995 study of fraud victims prepared by the National Institute of Justice concluded that “Since victims who contact the authorities meet with little response, this suggests that they may merit more attention than they now receive.”(1)
* Frank Abagnale, the former master forger who is the subject of the 2003 movie, “Catch Me If You Can,” warns victims on his Web site http://www.abagnale.com/ “that punishment for fraud and recovery of stolen funds are so rare, prevention is the only viable course of action.”

http://www.straightshooter.net/fraudstats.htm

 
Comment by crisrose
2007-04-30 10:45:12

* Only 15% of fraud victims report their losses to authorities.(1)
* The only factors that appear to influence victimization is age and education. Race, income, region of the country sex or household size had no effect on victimization.(1)
* Individuals with some years of college or with a college degree appear to be more vulnerable than those with other levels of education.(1)
* The young are more likely to be the object of an attempted fraud and to lose money or property when it succeeds.(1)
* Monetary losses from fraud exceeds $40 billion annually.(1)
* In 1991, one-third of 1,246 people interviewed acknowledged a fraud attempt against them within the previous 12 months. Forty-eight percent admitted that the attempt was successful.(1)
* Attempts to defraud are more likely to succeed if the con artist is not a stranger to the victim, if the contact is made in person, if the prospective victim had not heard of the particular type of fraud and if the victim has
made no attempt to investigate before responding.(1)
* A 1995 study of fraud victims prepared by the National Institute of Justice concluded that “Since victims who contact the authorities meet with little response, this suggests that they may merit more attention than they now receive.”(1)
* Frank Abagnale, the former master forger who is the subject of the 2003 movie, “Catch Me If You Can,” warns victims on his Web site http://www.abagnale.com/ “that punishment for fraud and recovery of stolen funds are so rare, prevention is the only viable course of action.”

http://www.straightshooter.net/fraudstats.htm

 
Comment by Jeffrey
2007-04-30 10:52:31

Lionel, crossword puzzles - My grandma did the NY Times crossword puzzle every day till the day she died, she was as sharp as a tack.

 
Comment by Lionel
2007-04-30 15:00:38

Just so I’m clear about this, I’m not defending the couple; I’m merely stating a fact - come 80, cognition generally begins to diminish significantly. If you look at longitudinal studies of IQ, we make it through our seventies without much change, but when we hit eighty, look out below.

Years ago, a clever and evil group of fraudsters had accessed Alzheimer’s records and methodically went about targeting these people. The group was extraordinarily successful in their endeavors.

 
 
 
Comment by Sad but True
2007-04-30 10:12:34

I read about this couple and all the others mentioned.

At the end of the day, you have to believe that all these “victims” did it because of greed. God knows why an 82 year old would be in search of yield, but there is no other explanation.

 
 
Comment by Sarah in DC
2007-04-30 07:31:17

“Thomas Geist is 82, and his wife is 80. They are among dozens of individuals, many of them elderly, ill or living on modest incomes, who fear that they face foreclosure on their homes as a result of an alleged Ponzi scheme by a Uniondale-based financial adviser.

As part of that scheme, the adviser, Peter Dawson, persuaded clients to take out mortgages for which there was no rational justification and have the proceeds paid directly to him, according to a lawsuit filed on behalf of the Geists and 38 other people in State Supreme Court in Mineola. The suit says Dawson promised to make the mortgage payments, and to produce profits by investing the money at a higher rate of return than the interest on the loan.”

This reminds me so much of the S&L failures. I remember a story of another man in his 80’s back then who was steered into a non-FDIC annuity by a S&L officer who told him it was covered by FDIC. So when the S&L went under, he lost his life’s savings.

Comment by eastcoaster
2007-04-30 07:51:37

I’m such a skeptic, I’d never buy into this guy’s scheme. I don’t care how long I’d known him. While I get blasted from time to time about being so untrusting, sadly I think more people need to be like me.

Comment by Scott
2007-04-30 08:11:58

can one say greedy ?…It asks for cancellation of the mortgages, $200 million in compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by tcm_guy
2007-04-30 06:36:23

All we ever read in Ben’s blog is attorneys complaining about loans that should never have been made to their clients. But how many attorneys have these sub-prime and alt-A loans? I have been told by some people who have worked for attorneys that they are not always the best decision makers when it comes to money. Just saying.

Got 10% down?

Got 10% down?

Comment by aNYCdj
2007-04-30 08:23:05

Its all about THE FEES…………THE FEES

1 Million licensed lawyers in America they have to eat…..

 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2007-04-30 06:36:49

Very worrysome. Upstate didn’t have a price bubble, but foreclosures are rising. The Long Island couple didn’t buy at the peak, but mortgaged up the wazoo anyway.

The mortgage problem apparently goes far beyond the housing bubble and those buying at inflated prices. It is more an excess consumption issue that happens to have been financed in recent years by mortgages.

Comment by flatffplan
2007-04-30 06:42:46

duchess county and others had quite a pop considering incomes and business prospects for growth (bad)

 
Comment by housing_apocalypse_now
2007-04-30 07:29:34

For anyone who has a few minutes check out prices in Jamestown. You can buy nice old-school 3br houses there for about $30K. That’s thirty thousand. The listings on realtor.com show the rents they’re getting and they easily cashflow positive even accounting for heating costs.

The winters are no worse than Chicago’s, and in fact western NYS is quite pretty for six months out of the year.

Comment by NYCityBoy
2007-04-30 07:40:19

And Upstate New York was devastated economically in the early ’90s. Manufacturing left en masse. There were some military base closings. Upstate is very pretty but it is an economic disaster. Syracuse, Buffalo, Utica, Endicott, Rochester, etc have all been hit very hard. I can believe $30k in a lot of the outlying areas of these towns.

Comment by housing_apocalypse_now
2007-04-30 07:51:27

http://tinyurl.com/23zgpc

There are scores of similar listings. The neighborhoods look decent, too.

For those prices I can pay cash for a multi-unit building, rent the other units out, and if I get bored, work at wal-mart. (Jamestown is big enough to have one.)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by housing_apocalypse_now
2007-04-30 08:02:54

Oops, try this: http://tinyurl.com/2g8nl6

But you can just go to realtor.com and search on Jamestown; you’ll see

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by phillygal
2007-04-30 08:52:28

Lucille Ball is from Jamestown.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by LowTenant
2007-04-30 10:41:31

10,000 Maniacs (Natalie Merchant) are from Jamestown too.

 
 
 
 
Comment by seattle price drop
2007-04-30 18:53:55

WT-
Upstate DID have a price bubble. Homes that sold for 35-40K in 2000 were 80K in 2004. Homes that were 80K in 2000 were 200K in ‘04. That’s a price bubble.
And God only knows what they were selling for in ‘05/06.

I wish people would begin to understand that just because a price is “cheap” by one cities’ standard, that does not mean that it is not a bubble price. Or, people from “away” can just choose to ignore that fact, buy that “cheap” home and then lose money when the “cheap” market corrects post- bubble.

Sheesh! It shouldn’t be so hard to understand that different areas have different price levels.

A lot of people went up to Troy, near Albany, and bought overpriced homes because they were cheap compared to Boston and NYC. I know some of those people. No way are they going to get back what they paid when they sell. They bought at bubble prices. They only *thought* they were getting a screamin deal.

I used to live next door to that TRIP organization. Very little traffic on that street in ‘04. Sounds like the ‘hood’s getting more lively now with all the people going in about foreclosures.

I’m not surprised, not one little bit.

 
 
Comment by Mikey(2)
2007-04-30 06:46:08

His daughter has been trying to sell a one-bedroom house in Carmel for $209,900. It’s been on the market two months, even though she cut the price by $10,000, he said.

Oooh, big 5% price cut. THIS drives me nuts: the idea that the calculation of a house’s price is so accurate that a mere 5% reduction actually means something in and of itself. This guy’s daughter’s home has been on the market for 2 months because her price is too high, period. I’d bet that there have been offers, just not in the amounts that the seller thinks the house is worth.

We get a lot of that with the older homes out here (in Phila ‘burbs) where it’s tough to find true comparables. We have a guy out here whose 75 year-old house has been listed at $879K for over 8 months. The realtor told me that the only offer he had was for 700K last year, then she rolled her eyes as if that was a ridiculously low price. News flash: The house was “worth” $700K last year, at least for a brief moment.

Comment by lineup32
2007-04-30 07:31:08

demand is nil- way below historical averages at this point. Lots of forward demand has allready been tapped. This is the situation SELLARS find themselves in. Even lowering the price significantly does not mean it will sell. We have a smaller more defined buyer pool who are location rather then price movtivated, everyone else can rot in hell trying to sell their dump for 600K 200K whatever.

Comment by Mail the Keys
2007-04-30 07:39:02

Not to mention the home builders can build new homes for less than the stuck FB’s paid 3 years ago.

 
Comment by Mikey(2)
2007-04-30 08:49:07

Everything house can sell regardless of its location. Granted, if the location sucks or has become sucky by virtue of the market, then it will not sell for as much as the seller would like, but it can sell. I’d buy in Florida if they’d start selling places for $1000. Well, maybe not. Depends on the location of the swamp that it’s in….

 
 
Comment by phillygal
2007-04-30 08:44:48

Mikey (2) -

Do you think the news about the softening NYC burbs and boroughs will get people around here to realize our market is also not bulletproof?

Comment by Mikey(2)
2007-04-30 09:18:31

Phillygal -

I go back and forth on this. There seems to be so much money out there. And forgive me for repeating myself, but I’ve posted this before: Theoretically, I think that the economic divide in this country manifests itself in the housing market. There’s a rich people’s market and a poor people’s market that aren’t necessarily dependent upon one another. “They” say that incomes are stagnant, but I know people on the upper income scales that are making boatloads of money year over year; the lower level workers might be having it tough with layoffs and having to take on even lower paying jobs , but I think the Wall Street folks and their ilk are doing better and better. Hence, wages appear stagnant, much like housing appears to be dipping but not so much in richer areas.

That said, I am seeing houses sitting on the market longer than I ever have. A few years back, I literally could not find a house because the houses were selling before they listing went on the MLS. Now, there are more houses than I have ever seen, many of which would have been gobbled up quickly a couple of years ago.

It’s going to take time, but even people with a lot of money don’t want to piss it away. To borrow a phrase, “How do you think they became so rich?”

As far as I can see, prices don’t seem to be going up, which is the first thing that has to happen before prices go down. So I’m going to wait at least until summer 2008 to see if things actually start going down.

 
 
Comment by Charles
2007-04-30 10:04:13

Even if it was priced right it might take two months for a 1 bedroom house to sell. Even a two bedroom house is going to be exceedingly difficult to unload. You really need three to be marketable (master, boys and girls). With one you can’t even have an office or guest bedroom.

 
 
Comment by MGNYC
2007-04-30 06:53:30

GOOD MORNING
ot- but just wanted to tell i found a beautiful rental which has everything we were looking for in the area we desired and a good price as well. the realtors were out in full force this weekend and the desperation is apparent by the open house signs littering every neighobrhood i visited.

viva la renting!!!!

 
Comment by MGNYC
2007-04-30 06:53:31

GOOD MORNING
ot- but just wanted to tell i found a beautiful rental which has everything we were looking for in the area we desired and a good price as well. the realtors were out in full force this weekend and the desperation is apparent by the open house signs littering every neighobrhood i visited.

viva la renting!!!!

Comment by eastcoaster
2007-04-30 07:46:23

I found a rental that is perfect for my son and I over the weekend, too. Problem is I’m in competition for it with many others. Why? It’s actually a decent rent compared to what other townhouses are asking around here (and they sit, vacant, week after week, month after month).

Fingers crossed (the owner seemed to really like my son…).

Comment by az_lender
2007-04-30 08:06:08

Don’t know what savings-resources you have, but I found back in 1996 that I could beat out the other tenant-applicants by offering to pay the whole year’s rent in advance. ( If you can’t do that, six months in advance might appeal to the landlord. )

Comment by Darrell_in _PHX
2007-04-30 09:19:46

Oh… BAD idea. What happens when the place gets foreclosed and you can’t get that rent back. If they are priced far enough below market to get lots of interest, they seem desperate, and desperate ai’t good to hand them that much rent money up front… IMO.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by SKB
2007-04-30 09:23:33

What if someone pre pays and a few months in the house foreclosures?
It would be impossible to re coup your losses.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by housing_apocalypse_now
2007-04-30 10:11:12

Never mind foreclosure; what if stuff breaks? The landlord already has a year’s worth of your money!

Many LLs are apprehensive towards renters who volunteer to pay so much cash in advance. They figure it comes from illegal income and don’t want a meth lab or whorehouse run out of their condo.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by MGNYC
2007-04-30 06:54:33

see i am so happy i had to post it twice
sorry for the dp but i am really happy

Comment by flatffplan
2007-04-30 07:09:32

soon you can brag at cocktail parties ” I RENT “

Comment by shadash
2007-04-30 08:14:00

The “owners” that stretched to get a loan still won’t get it. Even when they’re sitting on a box eating canned beans in a giant shell of house they can’t afford to furnish.

There’s a thing call “quality of life”. Not having to run around like a crackhead looking for the next money “score” to pay the monthly mortgage is pretty nice.

 
Comment by SKB
2007-04-30 09:29:10

Sellers will be boasting on whose losses were less.

First seller,” I lost 85,000 on my investment property”
Second seller, “Man, you got screwed!, I played my cards right and I only lost 50,000 on my investment, you didn’t time the market very well.”

 
 
Comment by housing_apocalypse_now
2007-04-30 07:32:02

Don’t worry; the joy of not throwing money away on a mortgage cannot be understated.

Comment by ajmstilt
2007-04-30 08:56:13

can I call non renters “Bitter Borrowers”?

 
 
 
Comment by KIA
2007-04-30 07:04:43

How long will it be until Congress and every whining weenie learns that the mortgage industry will, ultimately, self-police? When enough lenders get burned by bad loans and buyback demands, they will stop making loans to “high-risk” borrowers again. They will require adequate documentation and evidence of income and taxes. Nothing further need be done by anyone. Let the chips fall.

Comment by flatffplan
2007-04-30 07:14:32

contact hilary,bama,dodd, and others on that
market mechaincs work if you leave them alone

 
Comment by hd74man
2007-04-30 07:17:27

whining weenie

LMAO…I’d copyright that one

 
Comment by az_lender
2007-04-30 08:08:41

Exactly true, KIA. Why is my LTV down to 70% now? Because back in 2003 I lost a few thousand bucks on each of two repossessed properties, and the common factor in both cases was, insufficient down payment.

 
 
Comment by hd74man
2007-04-30 07:15:33

“‘How can you give a 30-year loan on a paid-off house to an 82-year-old person?’ the plaintiffs’ Manhattan-based lawyer, Jacob Zamansky, said in a recent interview. The suit accuses members of the mortgage industry, including a Glen Head bank and two Long Island-based mortgage brokers, of ignoring numerous ‘red flags’ signaling that the loans shouldn’t be made.”

WTF, Jacob…get a friggin’ life.

What Pollyanna world are you livin in?

You really think a pair of racketeerng mortgage sleazes give a rat’s azz about makin’ a 30 yr. loan to a senior cit?

They only thing on their mind is collectin’ their multi thousand dollar commission.

Honesty and concern for elderly grandmother’s is for suckers.

Comment by john
2007-04-30 07:34:02

Federal law says you can’t discriminate against certian conditions, age being one of them.

Comment by Darrell_in _PHX
2007-04-30 09:23:23

ouch… GREAT point! But, would their income support the loan.

Oh, we sooooo don’t want to go there. How many people in L.A. had the verified income to buy their $500K houses?

 
 
 
Comment by flatffplan
2007-04-30 07:44:07

can someone calculate a ben curve
the function of inventory + forclosure rate = price decline

Comment by az_lender
2007-04-30 08:16:25

Perhaps something like

dP/dT + A*I + B*dI/dT + C*dF/dT = 0,

where P=price per square foot, T=time in months, I=inventory (perhaps measured locally), F=number of active foreclosures, and A,B,C are constants to be determined by best fit to a variety of datasets. Obviously when dF/dT and dI/dT are positive numbers, dP/dT will be a negative number. Possibly the dP/dT thus calculated will show a time lag, like maybe 12 months after the F and I values and their derivatives are evaluated. Okay, I leave it to GetStucco to go further with this.

Comment by tcm_guy
2007-04-30 09:18:58

By my thinking, such a formula would have to include the differential with respect to time of interest rates as well, since a positive value (increasing interest rates) can accelerate a declining market.

Got 10% down?

 
Comment by Darrell_in _PHX
2007-04-30 09:52:51

I think you need to add a “housing affordability index” into the mix. If the median household only makes 25% the amount needed to buy the median house… Well, inventory and and foreclosures will make the price drop much more than if the median household makes 125% the amount needed to buy the median house.

While we’re at it, add in the tightening ability of people to get loans. Let’s call it the liquidity index. 33% of the poeple that could have qualified last year, can not qualify this year.

 
 
 
Comment by Casa$Loco
2007-04-30 08:05:02

60,002 home for sale in Metro Phoenix according to ZipRealty.com

Comment by zee_in_phx
2007-04-30 08:38:57

wahooo..
and a lot are trickling down to become REOs.

OT question: when does the REO starts to hurt the lender, i.e after gaining possession from the auction how long before the lender/bank has to dump the property to clear their books? Any comments would be appreciated.
I am seeing quite a few MLS listings of lender-owned properties, but they still have their wish price at 100% above what i think should be fair value (i.e cash flow value), so how long can the bank realistically let this listing languish before they have to reduce the price.
thanks in advance.

got cash?

Comment by Smithers
2007-04-30 09:46:57

In most cases, REO begins hurting on Day 1. Lender now has repair costs, insurance, management, HOA fees, property taxes, utilities to consider plus they pay the realtors commish. REO becomes a big drain on both human and financial resources of the banks.

Banks have to get a current appraisal when they take a property back and will write down their balance if appropriate. Then, if held longer than 12 months, most will get new appraisals and continue writing down until sold. Even if they get the 100%, they most likely will still lose $. A good way to bargain with them is to calculate their holding costs for 9-12 months and then base your offer on the discounted number. If they are smart, they’ll deal.

Theoretically, if the appraisals support the carrying amount, they don’t have to reduce the price ever . . . they can bleed for a while . . . but don’t want to be in the real estate biz.

 
 
 
Comment by turnoutthelights
2007-04-30 08:25:00

“‘We are so not at the apex of this problem,’ said Kirsten Keefe, a lawyer with the nonprofit Empire Justice Center in Albany.”

Oh, yeah. Now that’s the hot-shot experienced lawyer I want on my team. ‘Like it’s like totally messed up, like. Oh, like I totally love your shoes!’

Comment by aladinsane
2007-04-30 08:35:20

Albany & “Ironweed” will always be linked together for me…

Great book, Great movie.

 
 
Comment by phillygal
2007-04-30 08:42:45

P. Gilbert Mercurio, chief executive officer of the MLS, disputed the idea that more foreclosures would affect the regional housing market. The bad loans are not in numbers large enough to have an impact, he said.

“I wouldn’t bet on it,” Mercurio said. “I’m not prepared to say that that’s making any dent in the market at all.”

At which point Mr. Mercurio proceeded to polish the dent in his head.

addendum: P. Gilbert Mercurio also holds the distinction of chairing the Fingers in Ears, Eyes Closed While Singing LALALALALALA Committee.

 
Comment by Key Lime Toast
2007-04-30 09:04:51

WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Move, Inc. (NASDAQ:MOVE - News), the media leader for the when, where and how to move, announced today that Dr. David Lereah has joined the company as an executive vice president for Move, Inc. and serve as chairman and partner with Allan Dalton, who will be the president and CEO, of a new business entity which will launch in the third quarter of 2007 and which is expected to be transformational for both consumers and real estate professionals.

Lereah is the nation’s leading real estate economist . For seven years, he has served as senior vice president and chief economist of the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS® (NAR) as the Association’s spokesman on the U.S. economy, the housing and real estate markets as well as other economic and policy issues affecting the industry in the U.S. and abroad. He also directed the Association’s Research Division, the Regulatory and Industry Relations Division, the Real Estate Services Group and Strategic Planning Activities for the Association.

“David Lereah has established himself as the ultimate expert for the real estate industry,” said Allan Dalton. “Having David partner with me on this new venture will ensure that consumers and the industry will benefit from his unparalleled knowledge of financial issues and the real estate marketplace.”

Comment by aladinsane
2007-04-30 09:06:39

Very Baghdaddy of him…

 
Comment by aNYCdj
2007-04-30 09:07:36

hee bee gettin out before da sheeeet hitz da fan!

 
Comment by Key Lime Toast
2007-04-30 09:07:54

That’s a shame.

It looks like we don’t have DL to kick around anymore.

 
Comment by aladinsane
2007-04-30 09:14:46

Hows about some thoroughlygood George Thoroughgood?

On the day he was born, the nurses all gathered ’round

and they gazed in wide wonder, at this r.e. shill they had found

The head nurse spoke up, said leave this one alone

she could tell right away, that he was Baghdad Bob and bad to the bone

Bad to the bone

Bad to the bone

B-B-B-B Baghdad Bob’s got a new home

B-B-B-B Bad

B-B-B-B Bad

Bad to the bone…

 
Comment by phillygal
2007-04-30 09:20:15

“David Lereah has established himself as the ultimate expert b!tch for the real estate industry,” said Allan Dalton.

 
Comment by crisrose
Comment by Betamax
2007-04-30 09:55:42

That company will be a joke in a declining market. But at least they have Diamond Dave to spin it all the way down. Investors will no doubt be thrilled by his monthly “Now we’ve hit bottom” reports.

 
 
 
Comment by GetStucco
2007-04-30 09:35:52

“The effort is hotly opposed by the industry. ‘It’s a bad idea, because rather than protect borrowers, it would prevent borrowers from getting access to credit,’ said Kurt Pfotenhauer, a senior VP for the Mortgage Bankers Association.”

It’s a bad idea, because it would prevent predatory lenders from making high risk loans to help GFs buy homes they can’t afford.

Comment by Darrell_in _PHX
2007-04-30 10:03:06

““The effort is hotly opposed by the industry. ‘It’s a bad idea, because rather than protect borrowers, it would prevent borrowers from getting access to credit,’ said Kurt Pfotenhauer, a senior VP for the Mortgage Bankers Association.”

It’s a bad idea, because it would prevent predatory lenders from making high risk loans to help GFs buy homes they can’t afford. ”

Back in the 2000 presidential election, you had Bush pushing private social security accounts (bad idea designed to keep the stock bubble going longer). Gore counters with “that is promising the money to two sets of people. Today’s retirees and today’s workers”.

The OBVIOUS question to BOTH is… So, are you admitting that today’s retirees are taking every dime of social security, leaving nothing for today’s workers?!?!?!???! Those of us in today’s work force really want to hear you say “yes” so that those in today’s retiree catagory will stop squealing like stuck pigs whenever we talking about fixing cosial security…. but I digress.

When this dude says that regulations ensuring people can’t get into loans they can’t afford is bad, the next question is, “so, people being in loans they can’t afford is good?????”

 
 
Comment by Domi
2007-04-30 09:57:27

“Those working with local homeowners facing foreclosure say they are seeing a large number of middle- or higher-income families in trouble. Guy Criscione, an Albany bankruptcy attorney who said he’s seen an ‘unbelievable’ number of foreclosure clients in recent months, said many are couples with combined incomes of over $100,000 who still can’t make mortgage payments.”

This just goes to show that Subprime issue not immune to Rich people.

Comment by Army No. Va.
2007-04-30 12:40:51

Income over $100,000 is not “rich”. Net worth over a couple/few million is rich, perhaps. $4 million is a good retirement number for those making $150K +/- to retain current lifestyle .

Comment by Anon E. Moose
2007-04-30 15:49:56

If your investments only keep up with inflation, you can draw down a corpus of $2.5 MM at 4% rate and pull $100k/yr. Considering elimination of work-related expenses, downsizing living space, your expenses come down considerably. If today’s workers retire on Roth (i.e., tax-free) money, it goes even farther/lasts longer. Ditto if your investments do better than inflation. If you don’t live as long as 25 years in retirement (age 92 from retiring at 67), you get to leave some inheritance.

Are you globe-trotting? No. But you’re not eating the cat food, either.

 
 
 
Comment by Blackbox
2007-04-30 10:00:45

“Those working with local homeowners facing foreclosure say they are seeing a large number of middle- or higher-income families in trouble. Guy Criscione, an Albany bankruptcy attorney who said he’s seen an ‘unbelievable’ number of foreclosure clients in recent months, said many are couples with combined incomes of over $100,000 who still can’t make mortgage payments.”

Wow, you mean that couples making on the high end of the middle class income foodchain could not afford homes prices?
But, but, how is that possible if people were buying 600K to 700K in Butt F$ck Egypt?
Well, they were not buying really. They were just given keys in exchange for a signature…….Heck, if you are not really handing over any of your money, why not bid 10K to 20K more for that house you really, really want.
why, oh, why could prices just not keep going up. Damn it!
I came this close to selling or a refi. Don’t stop 100%, no doc loans please until I get out of mine……oh, I mean, I think I was a victim of predatory lending! Yeah, that’s it. I got screwed. The little guy gets screwed again by those big bad mortgage companies. My credit score is also ruined. I need someone to take me whole!

Haha, well, musical chairs is a B$tch when you music stops, and you were dreaming of a Luxury LazyBoy while everyone else got a seat.
Good riddence!

 
Comment by tcm_guy
2007-04-30 10:06:47

“‘Most of the new stuff is coming on with reasonable prices,’ said J.P. Endres, president of David Endres Real Estate in New Rochelle.”

But what are “reasonable prices”? To have a better understanding of what “reasonable prices” are, check back with Mr. Endres in April 2009. (If he is even still in the RE business at that time.)

Got 10% down?

 
Comment by Renterfornow
2007-04-30 10:37:02

“In Westchester, the median price for houses was $635,000, down 2.3 percent from a year earlier and the second quarter in a row of year-over-year declines. Real estate agents said buyer resistance to high prices in the county had helped drive them down; last quarter’s median was well below Westchester’s record of $716,126 set in the third quarter of last year.”

So prices have fallen -11.34% since 3rd qtr last year. It’s a start but much more work on the downside to go.

Now with lereah on the out maybe the NAR will get some religion and admit affordability is a huge issue and prices need to drop to the long term trendline. in some bubble markets this could be 50% drops.

 
Comment by HarryD
2007-05-01 01:02:32

“What’s more, the Calderales’ son and daughter Richard and Christine Calderale, who live next door, and their other daughter, Laurin Buske and her husband, Jason, were convinced by Dawson to refinance their homes for sums “far beyond” their original mortgages, according to the lawsuit. The suit says Dawson also has stopped paying those mortgages.”

Best advice: adopt and don’t keep this gene pool going much further

 
Comment by stanleyjohnson
2007-05-02 07:25:16

“‘How can you give a 30-year loan on a paid-off house to an 82-year-old person?’ the plaintiffs’ Manhattan-based lawyer, Jacob Zamansky,

Personally I don’t see a problem here. Lots of people are now living to 112 to 115 years of age especially with new technics of life support.

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post