May 4, 2011

The Hole California Has Been Digging For Itself

The Anderson Valley Post reports from California. “Loan Modifications: It was touted as the savior of the American economy. For many north state residents, it offered a way out of a financial mess that would ultimately result in the loss of their home. Or so they thought. ‘I started the process in 2009,’ said Red Bluff resident Krista Carpenter. ‘I’m still waiting for my loan modification.’”

“But the truly horrifying part of this whole mess, claims Carpenter, is that many lenders are failing to notify property owners that they’ve fallen out of the Loan Modification process. And then the final stab in the back. ‘They complete the foreclosure process without telling you, too,’ said Carpenter.”

“Carpenter never received a notice of default. ‘All we received,’ she states, ‘Was a letter on the door with a sale date.’”

The San Francisco Bay Guardian. “‘Foreclosures are the new F-Word.’ So said Regina Davis, executive director of the San Francisco Housing Development Corporation, at an April 29 seminar at SFHDC’s office. ‘Wells-Fargo CEO John Stumpf took home $21 million in 2009 while his bank received $25 billion in TARP funds,’ stated a flier that ACCE (formerly ACORN) and the Home Defenders League are distributing.”

“‘He and his cronies fought tooth and nail to kill consumer protection bills in California and around the country and are currently trying to gut a 50-state Attorneys General settlement with homeowners that have been defrauded,’ the flier concluded. ‘We are also part of The New Bottom Line, a national campaign focused on creating an economy that works for the many, and not the few.’”

The Pacific Coast Business Times. “A Westlake Village attorney is asking a judge to rip up a homeowner’s mortgage and strike down the legal framework the lending industry uses to foreclose on notes that have been sliced, diced and sold so many times that it’s impossible for borrowers to tell who owns them. John Larson filed a lawsuit in Ventura County Superior Court on behalf of Sam Palmer, a senior citizen in Thousand Oaks facing foreclosure on an $862,000 home loan. The defendants are a number of loan servicers and MERS, or Mortgage Electronic Registration Services.”

“Larson’s complaint argues that the only parties with the right to foreclose on the mortgage are the thousands of investors who ended up owning Palmer’s loan and whose names are nowhere to be found in the Ventura County Recorder’s Office or in any other public record. Those investors, Larson alleges, are known only by numbers inside a computer system with accounts controlled by Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and other Wall Street giants. He wants Palmer’s mortgage erased unless the investors come forward.”

“‘Forfeiture is what [lenders] fear the most,’ Larson told the Business Times. ‘It’s the worst thing that can happen to a lender during one of these quiet title cases.’”

The Santa Cruz Sentinel. “Banks that foreclosed on 5,000 homeowners in Santa Cruz County over the past three years are selling those homes at prices that would have been unthinkable during the housing boom. The median sales price in March for a single-family home in Santa Cruz County was $476,900, according to Gary Gangnes of Real Options Realty, who tracks the numbers.”

“‘I think we’re turning a corner where friends of ours can afford to buy a home here again,’ said Jim Zenner of Karon Properties, who represented buyers of a three-bedroom, two-bath home in Santa Cruz for $510,000. The same house sold in 2005 for more than $700,000.”

“The condo market remains chilly, with condo owners walking away from homes they bought at the peak of the market five years ago and buyers reluctant to invest while prices fall. In March, 32 condos sold, half being distressed properties, and the median dropped to $247,000. During the boom, prices exceeded $500,000.”

“Zenner is looking for a young couple, first-time homebuyers interested in a three-bedroom, two-bath home in Santa Cruz for $500,000, but they have little to choose from. ‘There’s not a lot of inventory to work with right now,’ Zenner said.”

The Mercury News. “Listening to battle-scarred Realtors talk about all the short-sale funny business, fake landlords, mold-slimed foreclosure properties, bogus real estate agents and yappin’ junkyard dogs makes you wonder how any homes are getting bought and sold at all. With upside-down homeowners, overwhelmed banks and cash-toting low-ballers sucking up investment properties at bargain-basement prices, veteran real estate professionals around the Bay Area say they’ve never seen a market as whacked-out as the one we’re slogging through right now.”

“Steve Mohseni, a 15-year real estate broker with ReMax in Pleasanton, calls it ‘the wild, wild West. Whether they’re buying or selling or lending, people are just looking after their own neck, and the ones who are trying to act responsibly are the ones getting burned.’”

“Then there’s the so-called ‘buy and bail,’ which one real estate agent explained this way: ‘Mom and pop bought a place for $600,000. Now they’re upside-down on their loan. So mom goes down the street and pays cash for another house just like theirs. She puts it in her name. Then once it closes they walk away from the original house. And they don’t care about their credit being ruined because they’ve now got their new house.’”

The Daily News. “The epidemic of foreclosure that began in 2008 has been devastating California’s families, communities and the state economy. Since then, more than 1.2 million Californians have lost their homes, and the number is expected to exceed 2 million by the end of next year. About one in five U.S. foreclosures is in California. More than a third of California homeowners with a mortgage already owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth.”

“As a result, home values in the state are estimated to plummet by $632 billion. That translates into a loss of more than $3.8 billion in property taxes. And just as local governments are starving for revenues, they are asked to deal with the increased costs - estimated at $17.4 billion over four years - caused by the foreclosure mess. A bill sponsored by San Fernando Valley Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield is currently going through legislative hearings - would require banks to pay their share of foreclosure costs. Backed by a broad coalition of consumer, community and labor groups, the bill would impose a $20,000 fine on banks for each foreclosure.”

“The foreclosure tsunami and the housing market crash are the primary causes of the severe budget crisis facing California’s municipalities and counties, forcing local officials to slash services and lay off tens of thousands of employees.”

The Chico Enterprise Record. “The city will pay 18 percent more for a piece of property than the lot was appraised for, following a 4-2 vote Tuesday night. The Chico City Council sitting as the Chico Redevelopment Agency agreed to buy the parcel for $100,000. It had a March appraised value of $85,000. The city has no developed plan for the lot.”

“Staff recommended the city buy the property including a house for $100,000. A year ago, the parcel was appraised at $140,000. Agency member Andy Holcombe said he supports paying more than the appraised price to reinforce the purpose of redevelopment. ‘I think the value is there,’ he said.”

The Record Searchlight. “That trench Caltrans is digging down the middle of Interstate 5 in Shasta County is all too apt a symbol of the hole the state of California has been digging for itself. A $5 million fiber-optic cable? Eleven electronic message signs, 22 traffic-monitoring stations and 37 cameras? All for the short stretch of freeway between Anderson and Mountain Gate? Did anyone stop to think this might be overkill? And in a time of relentless state budget cuts, did anyone ask if this was really a top priority for the public dollar?”

“This kind of full-spectrum electronic traffic management makes sense — indeed, it’s essential to keep cars moving — on the roads of a traffic-jammed metropolis. But in the north state? Even Caltrans says we don’t have the congestion to justify such a system. So why is the agency building it? Well, you see, in 2006, when the housing bubble was fully inflated, it seemed like a good idea.”

“Back then, Caltrans was urgently working to accommodate expected urban growth from multiple Shasta and Tehama County subdivisions with thousands of new homes. If and when developers actually build Sun City Tehama, The Vineyards at Anderson, Mountain Gate at Shasta and other megadevelopments, that gridlock could still occur. But at the current pace of housing growth — Redding had all of nine housing starts in the first four months of 2011 — we’ll run out of oil to fuel our cars and trucks before that happens.”

The Press Democrat. “North Coast construction activity remained flat for the first three months of the year, and some industry leaders took solace that at least things aren’t getting worse. North Coast builders pulled permits to construct 123 single-family homes during the first quarter, up from 85 a year ago. But five years ago, permits totaled 519 for the same period.”

“‘At this point even flat looks good,’ quipped Keith Woods, CEO for the North Coast Builders Exchange, a Santa Rosa trade group. ‘This is an industry that has been bleeding for so many years.’”

“DeNova Homes of Concord held a grand opening Saturday for its 96-unit Southgate development in west Petaluma. Ten homes are under construction and seven models are finished and furnished, said Lori Sanson, an executive VP. Homes start at $399,000.”

The Desert Sun. “Bank executives who have wrestled to put mortgage delinquencies, loan defaults and other issues behind them as a result of the valley and nation’s economic slump say they’re making headway. For some banks, however, the positive results are only just beginning to show. Pacific Premier Bank earned ’sound’ and ’superior’ ratings, which CEO Steve Gardner attributed to avoiding some risks that other banks opted to take.”

“‘Probably the biggest key is the fact that during the run-up in the real estate markets, we avoided a lot of the single-family, construction and land loans,’ Gardner said. ‘We looked out in 2005 and 2006 and just thought things were getting a little too speculative and a little too loose in terms of credit. We left some money out on the table, but we sleep pretty well at night these days.’”

The Press Enterprise. “While investors and other corporate interests have revived the warehouse market in Inland Southern California, the office market got slightly worse in the first quarter. According to a report by commercial real estate firm Grubb & Ellis, the vacancy rate increased to 24.2 percent, up slightly from the first quarter and virtually unchanged from 12 months ago.”

“The Grubb & Ellis report found the highest vacancy rates in the Riverside-Corona area, at 26.3 percent. Vacancies are 25.4 percent in Temecula and Murrieta and 21.3 percent in San Bernardino. More than 24 percent of offices near Ontario International Airport, the area with some of the area’s most desirable buildings, are empty.”

“The market has been slow to come back because jobs are only trickling back to the Inland area. Also, many of those jobs are related to the housing market, which is not close to coming back. ‘We’re stuck, and I don’t see it changing until the mortgage crisis is over,’ Redlands-based economist John Husing said.”




RSS feed

38 Comments »

Comment by NewJerseyGuy
2011-05-04 09:41:24

“Back then, Caltrans was urgently working to accommodate expected urban growth from multiple Shasta and Tehama County subdivisions with thousands of new homes. If and when developers actually build Sun City Tehama, The Vineyards at Anderson, Mountain Gate at Shasta and other megadevelopments, that gridlock could still occur. But at the current pace of housing growth — Redding had all of nine housing starts in the first four months of 2011″

I came close to accepting a job for the city of Lake Shasta in 2003. I could only laugh at the thought of these mega- subdivisions back then. I especially laugh at anythought of it now.

Way to far away from any major job center, airport etc.

Just a bloody joke.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2011-05-04 09:55:45

“With upside-down homeowners, overwhelmed banks and cash-toting low-ballers sucking up investment properties at bargain-basement prices, veteran real estate professionals around the Bay Area say they’ve never seen a market as whacked-out as the one we’re slogging through right now.”

I wonder what could have whacked it out so badly?

Comment by Sarah
2011-05-04 10:13:12

Agreed. What was more whacked out than ppl making 50k a year with bad credit and no construction/renovation experience getting into bidding wars to buy houses they intended to flip for profit, and reality tv shows encouraging such behavior, or people living off of seriel refis?

Comment by Ben Jones
2011-05-04 10:24:54

This is pretty wacky:

‘Zenner is looking for a young couple, first-time homebuyers interested in a three-bedroom, two-bath home in Santa Cruz for $500,000, but they have little to choose from.’

Comment by Sarah
2011-05-04 10:56:36

If they are looking for something in a great neighborhood that doesnt need any work, unfortunately, that is still true in many major cities or otherwise desirable areas (close to beach, etc). I don’t want to spend over $500k in Denver and do not want a long commute, nor a condo, and I cannot find anything I think is worth it. It’s depressing to look at homes priced in the 400s and just seeing homes that need a gut job sitting on a bad lot. A slightly remodeled vanilla 1950’s ranch shouldn’t be above 500k (or even in the 400s for that matter).

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 13:35:43

Sarah
We’re in the same boat in So Ca. Ranchers on horrible lots, with not just cosmetic needs but lots of deferred maintenance (which I am sure you’re seeing as well). They are all priced at $400K (can you say collusion) and sold for $276Kish in 1992.

I hear you loud and clear. We’re paying cash and are just sick of this rigged market. Nothing is worth what these delusional sellers are asking.

You and I are “soul” sisters.

 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2011-05-04 19:30:53

I’d say it’s time to stop looking for a while, and let prices continue their nosedive. Why even waste the time?

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 01:49:08

The problem in CA is simply a supply/demand issue. There are not enough homes for the population. So the best opportunity to buy cheap is when a seller NEEDS to sell (lender/REO primarily). Otherwise, owners will be stubborn, and will not lower prices unless they really need to. A lot of those guys have already lost their homes or lowered their prices and sold.

What will be left after the foreclosure mess are people that were too stubborn to believe lower prices were justified. Given the cost of new development (green building standards, permitting costs, land costs, entitlement costs, difficulty in entitling land, mandatory fire sprinklers, etc.) in CA, existing homeowners don’t need to fear much for $120k new homes being built everywhere competing with them when they do decide to sell.

I’m not saying that waiting will hurt you. I doubt that it will in the near term. However, I would be surprised if there is much more than a 5-10% move down from today’s prices in CA. And, once the foreclosure crisis lessens, prices in CA will go up faster than other states (where it is cheaper and easier to build–increasing supply).

A couple of other pieces of data. There are no longer any CA markets in PMI’s Distressed Market List (all in NV, FL, AZ). They recently removed the last CA markets from the list.

Also, LPS used to offer state specific data on delinquencies. CA was improving faster than many other states. This last month, LPS didn’t release that specific data. When I called LPS to get the data, they told me that I needed to now pay for that data, they decided they were giving too much away…$1k per month, with a minimum contract of 12 months!

I find it curious that they required a minimum of 12 months. Preying on the fear of the market while there still is fear…I wonder when LPS expects the fear to subside to a point where people don’t want to buy the information for $1k per month…

 
Comment by jbunniii
2011-05-05 15:50:19

However, I would be surprised if there is much more than a 5-10% move down from today’s prices in CA.

What about the downward adjustment, later this year, of the maximum Fannie-backed loan from $729k to $625k?

Also, what happens when mortgage rates finally start to increase?

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 18:19:26

The difference in rates between Fannie/Freddie and other lenders isn’t that large (25-40 bps). My loan is not Fannie/Freddie, and my rate is low 5’s. I don’t expect the Fannie change to do much.

In CA, affordability (as traditionally measured, not the new, monkeyed with measure) is at very high levels relative to history going back to the late 80’s. The first time the affordability reading in CA was ever over 50 during that timeframe was in 2008. The reading today is at 50. Most typically, the reading throughout the mid 90’s (the last housing correction) was hovering around 40. Higher means more affordable.

This means prices/interest rates could rise by a fair amount, and homes in CA would still be as affordable as they were during the last downturn. If interest rates were the same, prices could rise by 10%-20% or more and homes would still be as affordable in CA as in the mid-90’s.

However, the supply/demand imbalance wasn’t as bad in the early/mid 90’s as it is today. Overall, the 90’s represent a decade where CA homebuilding was far, far behind population growth (something like only a million housing units built for 4 million new population). We never made up that ground in the 2000’s, as CA built ~1.5 million homes for about 3.5 million new population from 2000 to 2010.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 10:12:26

‘buy and bail’
These folks should get 3 hots and a cot. I thought they passed some sort of law on this?

Comment by Steve J
2011-05-04 15:17:42

The cost to incarcerate is more than $30k/ year.

California can’t afford that any more.

 
 
Comment by Real Estate Refugee
2011-05-04 10:44:44

‘We’re stuck, and I don’t see it changing until the mortgage crisis is over,’ Redlands-based economist John Husing said.”

This is insane. Mortgage crisis?

How about overbuilding crisis.

Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 01:59:13

It wasn’t overbuilding in CA. From the 2010 census, CA had the second lowest vacancy rate of all states (about the best and most timely data we’re going to get). For perspective, and comparison to other bubble states:

CA: 8.1%
AZ: 16.3%
FL: 17.45%
NV: 14.3%

Husing is a So Cal economist. His comments pretty much always relate only to CA conditions.

Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-05 05:23:50

Rental Watch
Great information, and you’re a bright “watcher”. Thanks for the info.

Usually the homes that would “work” have a noise problem. Reminds me of the peak. Lots of bad location stuff being dumped.

GrizzlyBear
My husband has Glaucoma, so we need to buy to lock in our housing costs. We’re paying multiple rents, and it’s killing us. You’re right, but we’re an unusual case.

Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 09:20:38

Full disclosure:

I’ve been watching for a long time. My primary business is RE investment (professionally; I work with an investment company). We were out of housing when it all crashed and bought land on the cheap post crash. Part of me wants to see the market recover, so I have an inherent interest in it doing so.

Then again, part of my nature is to zig when others are zagging, so when everyone says “permanently high plateau”, I think “sell”, and when everyone says “we have five more years of pain”, I think “buy”. I shudder when I hear “it’s different this time.”, both on the upswing and down. That is my sign to go the other way.

Part of the CA story was brought to my attention years ago by a gentleman much smarter than me, noting specifically the supply/demand imbalance. The supply/demand imbalance is the very reason why, once debt became freely available to everyone, that CA housing skyrocketed. Affordability was the prior limit on home prices, not a traditional supply/demand balance. With easy money, demand at all price points was lifted, causing the spiral up in prices, acting like a vortex, sucking in profit driven folks as well as people who just want to live in their homes.

All of that overpricing is now being washed out, but ultimately, after the foreclosure mess has burned itself out, the supply/demand imbalance will remain. CA’s population is still growing, and even now, CA is building less houses relative to their growth than the rest of the US. CA housing will eventually return to closer to the “norms” of affordability, meaning prices will rise from their current levels.

Despite being in the business of owning real estate (and being constantly subjected to “when are you going to buy” over the years by others in the business), I have been a lifelong renter.

I am now buying a house. I sign the loan documents today. So again, I want to believe that I’m right–I am definitely not an unbiased “watcher”.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by jbunniii
2011-05-05 15:57:09

Thanks for the disclosure. I’m not unbiased either as I hope to buy in the next year or two and obviously want lower prices.

I’m curious:

1) Which part of California are you in?
2) How much have prices dropped from the peak where you are?
3) How does the price you’re paying compare with what the same house would have cost in, say, 1997?

All of these indicators remain quite unfavorable where I am (Silicon Valley), though less horrible than two years ago.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 18:03:54

I’m also in Silicon Valley.

1. From the peak prices have fallen about 20-25% where I am.
2. Same house in 1997 would have cost about 40% less or so when adjusting for the permanent improvements that have gone into the house since it was built. I have a hard time with a perfect apples to apples comparison, as I know what it sold for in 1990 and 1995, but also know what has gone into the house in the meantime in permanent improvements (that are still in excellent condition).

So, implied rate of increase of about 3.7% per year from 1997, and 2.9% from 1990.

Funny, I didn’t do that math before we bought the house, but it doesn’t seem that bad when I put it in those terms compared to where real inflation has been over that same timeframe.

The biggest challenge where we are is multi-fold:
1. Almost every house is either a) brand new after someone paid too much for an old rancher, tore the old house down and rebuilt, with now massive price expectations, or b) a 50 year old rancher that we would need to do a lot of work to (and be exposed to the pain of cost overruns, delays, etc.); and
2. There is almost no new supply of single family homes in the best school districts. What you see is what you get.
3. It is very hard to expect further major price corrections in better homes in the better school districts on the Peninsula with Facebook (Menlo Park), LinkedIn (Mountain View), Twitter (SF), Zynga (SF) IPOs on their way.

The house we found was a nice tweener. Not brand new, but well maintained with many improvements less than 10 years old.

Ignoring sales costs, will I be able to sell the house for what I paid a year from now? If Facebook goes public within 12 months, almost definitely. If not, I still think a pretty good chance.

Will we enjoy living in the house? Absolutely.
Can we afford the house? Absolutely.
Will the house be functional for us an family for 10+ years? Absolutely.
Did we get a decent price? Based on watching the market for 7-10 years (in the same neighborhoods), probably.

The first three were the most important for me. If the house wasn’t something we loved, could afford and would work for our family for a decade, I think we would still be looking.

 
Comment by jbunniii
2011-05-05 19:01:36

Thanks for the info. I also am not expecting major price declines in SV, though I would welcome them. The tech job market is substantially better than a year ago and the IPOs you mentioned will have an effect, especially Facebook.

It does seem that there are still more foreclosures to come, though, and I hope this will bring a better selection of inventory over the next year or two, and maybe somewhat lower prices. I expect that will vary from one city to another.

I’m on the fence. With my downpayment budget I can afford $650k without borrowing more than 3x salary, but $650k doesn’t buy you much, and what it does buy would cost half as much almost anywhere else.

With another year or two of saving, I could afford to buy a place for cash elsewhere. Probably couldn’t make the SV salary, but also wouldn’t need it with a paid-for house. So it’s pretty tough to drop that cash on a typical piece of crap San Jose shack AND have to make payments on it [granted, less than my rent]. Looking at the Santa Cruz mountains as a possible tradeoff - more bang for the buck, better surroundings, but tougher commute.

 
Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 22:30:19

My wife and I are in a good position. Both of us have jobs that we love, and are both on the Peninsula (neither of us will have a commute longer than 20-30 minutes)…we’re pretty locked into the area for the long term, so it is easy to plant the roots with a purchase with an expectation that we will be around for a while.

Like I said above, if we didn’t find a place that we loved, we would not be buying. That’s the tough part, finding a place that you love without destroying your life with a commute.

One potential byproduct of the tech IPOs is that people who suddenly find themselves with money might move up to bigger homes, but rent out their old place rather than sell now…you might be able to upgrade to a better rental.

Best of luck to you…sounds like you’ve saved a nice down and put yourself in a position to be able to buy a place if you find one at the right price/location…it’s just a question of whether you find a place that you want to own at a reasonable price.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2011-05-04 11:00:28

Or so they thought. ‘I started the process in 2009,’ said Red Bluff resident Krista Carpenter. ‘I’m still waiting for my loan modification.’”

“But the truly horrifying part of this whole mess, claims Carpenter, is that many lenders are failing to notify property owners that they’ve fallen out of the Loan Modification process. And then the final stab in the back. ‘They complete the foreclosure process without telling you, too,’ said Carpenter.”

“Carpenter never received a notice of default. ‘All we received,’ she states, ‘Was a letter on the door with a sale date.’”

No FB dollar will be allowed to escape…

Comment by Ben Jones
2011-05-04 11:47:01

‘Carpenter never received a notice of default. ‘All we received,’ she states, ‘Was a letter on the door with a sale date’

It’s kinda aggravating that this stuff gets put out in the media like this. It depends on the state, of course, but if she is in default, she isn’t making the required payments and the NOD is simply a record of that. She knows she isn’t making payments before the lender figures it out! They may not be required to send her a NOD but if your not making your payments you should probably expect this has been filed. Also, don’t you suppose she’s gotten a letter of two if she isn’t making payments? When I go to foreclosed houses, letters from lenders are usually in plain sight, unopened. Many times there are even fedex documents from lenders unopened.

Around here the letter on the door is for the trustee sale. Again, if you aren’t making payments, they are going to take the house! What does she want, for it to be taped to her forehead?

This from one of the other articles:

‘Larson’s complaint argues that the only parties with the right to foreclose on the mortgage are the thousands of investors who ended up owning Palmer’s loan’

So Palmer has no problem ripping off these “other” investors. You know who these people are? Probably the people reading here, if you have a pension fund, or 401k, or happen to pay taxes.

Here’s a suggestion for you Mr Palmer; why don’t you pay what you promised? Then this will all go away.

Comment by SaladSD
2011-05-04 12:07:55

Yeah, and I want my mortgage ripped up too, la de dah. Unbelievable. Side story: My sister witnessed a colleague have her car repoed at work. At first the woman acted shocked. A veritable waterworks. My sis, being a direct kinda gal asked her, “Have you been paying your car loan?’ Well, “No” said the woman, “its’ been months.”

Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 13:44:24

SaladSD
And what did the little lady expect, a free “ride”. Just goes to show the moral hazard of the times in which we live. There is a word for her action of not paying her car note “consequence”. And she is employed for goodness-sake.

I’ll give the lady credit for chutzpah.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 02:16:46

Ben,

I think the issue comes down in some cases to the confusion of “dual tracking”. CA tried to pass a law that outlaws the practice of continuing with a foreclosure process while there is a pending modification (the law got shot down). The way it is working today in CA to my understanding, a lender can tell you whatever they want (don’t make payments, you need to show distress, we’re working on a mod), while still working through the foreclosure. 120 days later, the lender can say “sorry about what we told you about not making your payment, there will be no modification, but we’re taking your house tomorrow”.

Not saying I have much sympathy for them, but the way banks work is very odd. We are extending a commercial loan, and the terms of the extension have been negotiated and agreed. We are waiting for loan documents. While waiting, one bank officer told us (in writing) to NOT make payments prior to receipt of the loan docs. So we didn’t. We then got a letter from a different department at the bank saying we were past due. So immediately, we went down to the bank with a check (the asset generates plenty of cash to pay the mortgage). The conflicting messages coming from the banks are silly.

 
 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-04 12:01:13

“cash-toting low-ballers sucking up investment properties at bargain-basement prices”

Feel the love.

House shopper: “I am looking for afordable housing. I have cash.”

Realtor: “You one of those low-baller scum?”

 
Comment by Jiji
2011-05-04 13:25:33

I don’t’ think people really grasp the Stuck factor and how it effects the entire national economy (not just I.E.) We all are not going anywhere until the majority of underwater home owners are no longer underwater,

Job’s will be harder to get and hang on to, and it won’t end, until home owners are no longer underwater period…

Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 13:45:39

Jiji
Another lost decade or so?

Comment by Jiji
2011-05-04 18:12:22

I don’t think so, maybe 5 years for the major metro’s a bit longer for the outlying areas.

 
 
 
Comment by sold in 04
2011-05-04 14:16:09

sold my house in san fern valley in 3/2005 for 640k, its been on the market for 80 days,priced was lowered to 475 k and now its in escrow. 4644 beck ave la ca 91602……i told my wife as she cried in escrow about never owning a home again,we will be able to buy the house back for 200k less….my wife was right , we have been happy renters since our sale….

Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 14:44:14

sold in 04
I zillowed it, and you had an adorable cozy home. Nice pictorial. Those WWII (and post WWII) NoHo homes are charming. I grew up in that area. My Mother (now a widow) lives in “Valley Village”.

 
Comment by rms
2011-05-04 21:52:46

“sold my house in san fern valley in 3/2005 for 640k, its been on the market for 80 days,priced was lowered to 475 k and now its in escrow.”

How does cat-food granny pay for a little place like with her SS check? That’s a $50k place up here in Washington’s Columbia Basin.

 
 
Comment by Awaiting
2011-05-04 14:53:40

sold in 04
Looks like the Agent “bought” the listing. I use to live at Colfax and Kling. Beck is within walking distance. That area became Hollywood “adjacent” so to speak and prices are ridiculous, imo.

Some really neato areas around there. My Mother is at Belaire and Magnolia. Nothing is pretty than Chandler, when it comes to trees. What a pretty drive.

Comment by sold in 04
2011-05-05 14:05:15

how did you find that info,this was the agent that rep her in the deal w/ me….nice n-hood but 640k for a home that was bought for 230K.the appreciation in the sfv valley was crazy during the bubble years.the profit helped
financed a move to Pismo beach where i surf and bike everyday………

 
Comment by jbunniii
2011-05-05 16:01:51

That area became Hollywood “adjacent” so to speak and prices are ridiculous, imo.

Wasn’t so long ago (mid ’90s) that Hollywood-adjacent wasn’t necessarily a positive thing.

 
 
Comment by rms
2011-05-04 21:32:52

“‘I think we’re turning a corner where friends of ours can afford to buy a home here again,’ said Jim Zenner of Karon Properties, who represented buyers of a three-bedroom, two-bath home in Santa Cruz for $510,000. The same house sold in 2005 for more than $700,000.”

Wow, only $510k? I’m glad I’m not your friend.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2011-05-04 21:53:19

A colleague shared a tale of woe with me today which seemed a bit different than the normal default-to-foreclosure progression which many loanowners seem to follow. Her hubbie insisted on going into debt to fund a remodel of their home in a nice part of town, ramping up their mortgage payment from manageable to aggressive. Then, thanks in part to working in a real-estate dependent industry, his income dropped, making it no longer possible to pay the mortgage. Downsizing of their living space is in the works, including a sale of their home in the nice part of town for less desirable, more affordable living space.

My questions for the HBB brain trust are:

1) Is this an isolated instance, or representative of a wider malaise?

2) If widespread, is it safe to assume that this downsizing phenomenon is adding to low-end demand, taking anything near affordable off the market, and to high-end supply, fueling the glut of desirable homes that sit on the market for months or years?

Comment by Rental Watch
2011-05-05 02:30:17

The lucky ones have little enough debt for them to sell and add to demand at the lower end.

The unlucky ones have too much debt to sell at today’s prices…they are stuck and wind up in short sale/foreclosureland…

I’m not seeing a “glut of desireable homes”, so I’m not sure the scenario you are describing is widespread (at least in the markets I’m familiar with).

 
 
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