May 19, 2011

These Boxes Are More Affordable Now

The Missoula Independent reports from Montana. “Celebrated Montana landscape artist, publisher and restaurateur Russell Chatham told the San Francisco Chronicle that he’s left Montana and returned to his home in West Marin in hopes of painting his way out of financial ruin. In short, Chatham made some bad investments in Livingston real estate. ‘I’m probably going to end up with foreclosures, and there’s nothing I can do about it,’ he’s quoted as saying.”

The San Francisco Chronicle. “Nearly 40 years after leaving West Marin to become a Montana landscape painter, Russell Chatham has ended up with an excess of Montana land. A speculative binge has about broken him at age 71, so he’s come home to paint his way out of it. ‘I did what these rich people who were buying paintings from me told me to do, which was to buy land,’ he says. ‘So I took all the money I had and bought land.’”

The Great Falls Tribune in Montana. “It’s a good time to buy or sell a house in the first-time buyer range of less than $200,000, Great Falls real estate brokers say, but a slow time to unload upper end homes in the plus-$300,000 range. Jack and Lorene Sands, a retired couple living in the Belview Palisades area, are putting their executive home on the market for the third spring in a row. It failed to sell the first two years.”

“‘We built it and have loved living in the four-level house with unobstructed views of the river,’ Sands said. ‘It’s big, 3,000 square-foot house that’s great for entertaining. But we’re getting older now — I’m 76 — it’s getting to be too big of a house now that our kids our raised. We’d like to move to a smaller house, on one level if possible.’”

“The couple listed the home at $444,000 originally, which he said might have been a little steep during the recession and have come down to $395,000 now. ‘We’re a little disappointed at the time it’s taken to sell the house,’ said Sands. ‘But we still enjoy living here.’”

The Mail Tribune in Oregon. “East Medford is checkered with lamentable reminders of failed or truncated projects crushed by the weight of the real estate bubble that burst. The collapse, which followed a heady run-up that ranked Jackson County property values among the nation’s fastest growing, cost hundreds of people their homes, robbed investors and speculators of millions of dollars and put regional banks in regulatory hot water.”

“Alex Pawlowski, a former LibertyBank executive and now the business loan development manager for Southern Oregon Regional Economic Development Inc., said there is no turnaround on the horizon. ‘If you are waiting for the real estate market to rebound, it will be a long wait,’ Pawlowski said. ‘When the bottom falls out, the only way for the bank to maintain its position is to ask the borrower to pay more of the loan down. How can they do that in a down market?’”

“California played a major role in the rising real estate market of the early 2000s. ‘That’s dried up because California is in the same holding pattern,’ Pawlowski said. ‘So we’ve gone from tremendous growth back to where we were previously. We saw an unprecedented boom-and-bust cycle. I don’t know of anybody who’s seen anything like this — it’s extraordinary what took place and I don’t see it repeating in my lifetime.’”

“Commercial real estate broker Wade Six likens what happened to local real estate developers to a game of musical chairs. ‘We all knew from 2006 into 2008 that at some point the music was going to stop,’ Six said. ‘Based on the trajectory (from earlier in the decade), developers were making the correct moves as long as things stayed the way they were. Then the music stopped and it was like someone put a new record on the machine and said ‘dance to this.’”

“‘The paradigm that existed several years ago is no more and isn’t coming back soon, if ever,’ Six said. The $400,000 homes that made many a development loan pencil out are no longer attracting buyers. ‘In those cases,’ Six said, ‘it almost takes a change of ownership to recalibrate the value and to create new value.’”

“The day of reckoning is once again at hand for hundreds of Jackson County property owners. Federal scrutiny, political pressure and legal proceedings combined to slow foreclosure rates to a relative trickle during the past year. Now, with agencies and politicians apparently satisfied, moratoriums have ended and many of the same property owners whose foreclosure activity was put on hold, are once again on the docket to see their homes sold on the courthouse steps.”

“The word filtering down to her through various government agency sources is that the latest cycle of increased foreclosures will be a long one. ‘That’s what the big boys tell me,’ said Diana Yates of Action Realty, which handles sales of foreclosures in the area for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.”

“The single-family residences, townhouses and smaller multiple-family dwellings Yates will market were typically bought for 3.5 percent down. The owners simply over-extended themselves and bought too much house or couldn’t handle adjustable-rate mortgage payments. ‘They are working-class people who got caught up in a bad market,’ Yates said. ‘Some got 100 percent loans they couldn’t afford and a lot of them got into a house knowing they couldn’t stay in it long term. They have held on as long as they can.’”

The Mercer Island Reporter in Washington. “Prices are still lower here for homes and condominiums, but the good news is that activity is holding steady. Prices on single family Island homes fell by more than 40 percent last month from February 2010, but more homes sold or are about to be sold at the end of February 2011, according to the latest statistics from the Northwest MLS.”

“But the number of homes that are bank-owned or in foreclosure is higher than before. Here on the Island, principal managing broker of Coldwell Banker Bain, EJ Bowlds, said that there are 39 homes in some state of foreclosure. Thirteen of those are bank-owned and have yet to be listed, and six are going to auction between now and the middle of May. In most cases, the seller owes more on the house than what it is worth.”

“‘Another 20 maybe have gone to auction, but the county records haven’t caught up with them yet,’ Bowlds said.”

“Bowlds said an internal company report stated that up to eight percent of Mercer Island homes on the market are distressed. Only one bank-owned property on Mercer Island is listed now.”

“The ‘2010 Year in Review’ report from Windermere Real Estate states that ‘bank-owned homes made up only 10 percent of all homes closed (23 of 220) on the Island for the year. Short sales and bank-owned properties did account for 40 percent of all condos sold on the Island in 2010 (16 out of 40 units, or 40 percent), the highest level in the region.”

From KXLY 4. “RealityTrac said one in every 793 Houses in Spokane County received a foreclosure notice in April. That’s more that 160 homes foreclosed in just one month. In Kootenai County, the rate is more than twice as high, with one home in every 320 foreclosed in April. However, not all of those foreclosures will stick. ‘Cases are popping up all over the country that are questioning the validity of foreclosures being conducted under the MERS system,’ said Attorney Jeff Crandall.”

“He is now working with a couple that lost their home on Hauser Lake. 53 year old Ed Brock said they were 2 1/2 years into their loan when they wanted to refinance. Their loan was sold several times, and in the process of trying to track down who owned it, they fell behind on payments. ‘We ended up losing our retirement house. It was the first and only house we ever bought,’ said Brock.”

The Coeur d’Alene Press in Idaho. “For Cynthia Griffin, the court victory is a small step in what has been a long fight. Nevertheless, for the first time in months, the stress of not knowing if she and husband Matthew Griffin will lose their home is gone. That burden was erased thanks to a First District judge ruling this week that the lending company which claimed it owned the mortgage on the home didn’t follow the proper steps to obtain it, so didn’t have the legal right to foreclose on the Coeur d’Alene couple’s house.”

“But the Griffins’ attorneys, Jeff Crandall and Regina McCrea, think the order could affect thousands of Idaho homeowners who have already foreclosed or are in the process of doing so. The attorneys estimated around 50 percent of mortgages have been filed with MERS in the state, so the effects could be far-reaching in Idaho. They called the electronic process a step the banking world skipped in order to avoid paying filing fees at the county records department.”

“‘It’s what led to the financial collapse,’ Crandall said of the lack of oversight in the sub-prime mortgage loan world.”

‘It’s crazy,’ Cynthia Griffin said. ‘I think people should check their mortgages and see who really owns it. It’s a real relief right now. It makes me feel better that I don’t have something like that looming over my head. But it’s not a solution.’”

“With apologies to Charles Dickens, this is the tale of two markets, the buyer’s market and the seller’s market, for it is both. For sellers this means selling at today’s prices will likely mean taking a loss if they bought after 2003, while buyers will find prices sharply discounted from the feeding frenzy days of 2005 and 2006 with interest rates remarkably low.”

“The problem isn’t that the conditions aren’t ripe for buyers, which makes it a good market for many sellers. Buyers see very plainly that prices are far below the recent bubble period. Sellers however, are not always as astute. Mom always said the older you get the faster time goes, so to many of these equity rich sellers, 2005 seems like yesterday. Most are reluctant, even resistant, to the reality that the home they have so many fond memories of, is worth significantly less than a couple years ago, before they were ready to sell.”

“Memories cannot be sold. They do not stay with the home, they live in your head and in your heart. A house without a family is only a house or, as the recently departed George Carlin said, ‘A house is just a big box where you keep your stuff.’”

“It is no secret that these boxes are more affordable now than last year, even cheaper than the year before and significantly cheaper than the year before that. Rather than dwell upon what your home was worth in 2006, if you want to sell it, remember what it was worth when you bought it. No doubt you will find you are making a handsome profit on your box, even after you take the memories with you.”




RSS feed

51 Comments »

Comment by Ben Jones
2011-05-19 06:17:21

‘Ed Brock said they were 2 1/2 years into their loan when they wanted to refinance’

Timing suggests they paid too much.

‘Their loan was sold several times, and in the process of trying to track down who owned it, they fell behind on payments’

Well, that’s a new one: “We were so busy looking for the owner we forgot to pay our mortgage.”

Comment by Kim
2011-05-19 07:48:44

“Refinance” sounds soooo much better to one’s self esteem than “modification”, I suppose.

 
Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2011-05-19 08:59:24

I’m sure the monthly mortgage stmt they received could have helped them locate the correct servicer address to mail the pmt to…

Comment by oxide
2011-05-19 16:07:51

+1.

Ben, it’s more like: “We were very busy not paying the mortgage because we were hoping that we could get a free house.”

I find it astonishing how bent out of shape people are over the robosigning. It can be easily fixed with a few temp analysts to do legit signings and a fee to the county. Done.

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2011-05-19 06:37:40

‘They are working-class people who got caught up in a bad market,’ Yates said. ‘Some got 100 percent loans they couldn’t afford and a lot of them got into a house knowing they couldn’t stay in it long term. They have held on as long as they can.’”

They could never afford the house in the first place. They all hoped for massive appreciation and to sell the house to the next fool…

Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 08:46:42

Still, it is the fault of the rich people.

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 13:08:39

Still, it is the fault of the rich people.

What is your point? Let’s simplify it since your response is a simplistic attempt of a simplistic swipe.

Who is most at fault for the housing bubble, the destructive effect on our economic base of globalization and trickle-down, “free-market claptrap? The powerful rich or the disorganized, impotent poor?

You look at America right now, our jobs base, our economic system, the fallout of our bailouts and bubbles and make me a case that most American’s problems were not caused by policies supported and implemented by the powerful rich. OK?

Make me the case that these problems were supported and implemented by the poor and middle-class. You can’t. You might say well “you voted for so and so” but as far as NAFTA, globalization, tax cuts for the rich etc, we were sold a pig in a poke-lied to.

Come on. Make the case.

Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 15:07:45

Thank you for biting.

I contend that it is not the rich as a group. Rather, that it is the monied corrupt and their bought servants in our government. I am getting to think that the angst against anyone who has accumulated wealth is a smokescreen for those who are corrupt and who do corrupt those whom we have elected to police them. The result of this smokescreen will be misdirected efforts at correcting imbalances in wealth, while allowing the thieves to continue their destruction in plain sight.

It is human nature to place blame on groups of people characterized by traits other than those which perpetrate evil. If the battle cry could be shifted slightly, toward rooting out corruption and influence peddling, I’m all in. This corruption is not just on the end of the powerful monied interests, their full partners are the yet unwealthy who have risen to positions of public trust, and participate in the system of favors and complicity to the harm of all.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 16:07:26

Thank you for biting.

You did not make the case that is unmakeable but you did make a mostly valid case however your case does not unmake my case.

I contend that it is not the rich as a group.

Of course it is not. However gross imbalances in wealth lead to gross imbalances in power and thus bad for a society.

the angst against anyone who has accumulated wealth is a smokescreen for those who are corrupt and who do corrupt those whom we have elected to police them. The result of this smokescreen will be misdirected efforts at correcting imbalances in wealth, while allowing the thieves to continue their destruction in plain sight.

It could be possible but I don’t think the corrupt rich have any interest in any “smokescreen” that would even potentially threaten their wealth and power because of the unintended consequences of any over-reach of any movement. In this day and age, things can snowball quickly into directions not wanted. It’s for this reason and the reason I stated above that I see don’t see efforts at correcting wealth imbalances as “misdirected”.

If the battle cry could be shifted slightly, toward rooting out corruption and influence peddling, I’m all in.

We should do that too. But you should be “all in” anyway because of cause and effect. Gross wealth inequality leads to gross power and influence inequality which in turn leads to corruption. There is less corruption in countries with less wealth inequality for a reason. Therefore correcting wealth imbalances when it is as out of whack as it is now in America is not “misdirected”.

This corruption is not just on the end of the powerful monied interests, their full partners are the yet unwealthy who have risen to positions of public trust, and participate in the system of favors and complicity to the harm of all.

Yes and they are “full partners” because they have great power and they have been put in their positions by the corrupt rich to further the corrupted’s aims with the assumption that when they leave power they will make bank by same people who put them in power. In this I agree with you that this needs to stop. Now.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 17:34:57

OK. Accumulation of wealth is not necessarily a bad thing, for the person or the community. Case in point, I make the same salary as the guy at the next desk, $100,000 just for round numbers. I live on $25K and save $25K per year. He lives on $75K and is in debt up to his eyeballs. After a career, I have some millions tucked away and he is headed for bankruptcy, as his flips have gone sour. I paid half my earnings in taxes, as did he (less so). Am I evil because of that? Is accumulation of wealth evil? Am I the enemy of the guy at the next desk? He sure has been laughing at me for about 30 years. The receptionist thinks I am a pretty good guy, I slipped her a few grand when her granddaughter needed surgery. Still the guy at the next desk hates me. He hates that I have stuff, like a yacht, and that I whisltle in the morning as I walk down the hall to my office. He hates that each of my four kids call me just to say “I love you Dad!” His call for money.

So Rio, do you hate me so much, because I have saved? I have not bought politicians. I have not been bought. I have started my career over several times for refusing to swim in the corruption that I was hired into. Fortune 1 company none the less. If I leave millions to my children, will you hate them for it?

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 17:58:48

Is accumulation of wealth evil?

1st of all, I’m not talking about the “wealth” accumulated by someone making 100K a year. I’m talking about wealth that matters, wealth that corrupts and influences public policy to the detriment of those making 100K per year.

2nd. Do yourself a favor and abstain from using AM radio, stupid buzzwords like “evil” and “do you “hate” me”.

It’s right out of the nutball’s playbook and makes you sound foolish or a mindless tool which I don’t think you are.

Am I “evil” because I point out the obvious………. why do you “hate” me for that ….geez…

 
Comment by oxide
2011-05-19 18:17:44

I make the same salary as the guy at the next desk, $100,000 just for round numbers.

In that one sentence, you just invalidated your entire argument. The unfairness and corruption takes place at the education stage, the who-do-you-know stage, the hiring stage, the layoff stage, the bye-bye-pension stage, the salary stage (CEO pay hello?) and the tax deductions stage. You’re assuming we live in a meritocracy. Ha.

Nobody resents you because you saved your $100K.* You are resented because there are probably many more who made $100K but their jobs were outsourced through no fault of their own. Or they saved their $100K — just as you did — but the Powers That Be manipuated the stock market and decimated the retirement funds. Or they were hit with an illness and are now in thrall to blood-sucking insurance companies. Or, someone was capable of doing your job, but never made it because some a-hole privitized the school system and the kid was left out, either in secondary school or college.

If you are truly able to turn that $100K into “millions,” then you did it on the backs of the American people somehow. I will not “hate” your children for it. I will want to TAX them for it, because those millions are INCOME, not much different from winning the lotto.

—————-
*I also notice that you conveniently use a $100K “desk” job, which is a comfortable living almost anywhere in this country (even DC if you rent), and it’s easy to save. Try saving on a $40K wage, when the tax system punishes you because you are not a Friend Of Senator or becuase you’re not a “producer.” And gas and food prices and college tuition are up, and you work a menial job which destroys your body before you’re 65.

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 18:36:40

Do yourself a favor and abstain from using AM radio, stupid buzzwords like “evil” and “do you “hate” me”.

But I didn’t answer your question and maybe I was not clear. No, I don’t think wealth accumulating is “evil” and I don’t “hate” those who do. I’ve done it a little myself.

But I don’t think one needs to think of the rich as evil to call for a much more progressive tax system. I don’t think a mother hates her kid and thinks he’s evil when he doesn’t clean up his room either. Does Warren Buffet hate himself and think he’s evil because he wants more of a progressive tax? No.

It is a far-right AM radio host tactic to try to throw out straw men and red herrings by saying those who want a more even wealth distribution “hate” the rich and think they are all “evil”.

Now, do I think some banks and corrupt rich and some politicians are evil. Yes.

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 19:20:42

On the backs of the American People? Add the numbers up, just for the years you have been alive. It is easily a million or millions. Of course I spent it on kids. And you are really pissed, that this money passed through my hands while I was in the harness, that I might have saved it and speculated on Alpacas or some such stupid thing and made millions. It must have been on the backs of the American People. So you want it back so to speak, to maintain your way of life.

All the while, we avoid discussing the corruption and the influence buying in our government, that destroys our society, and the opportunity for the younger generation to make their fortune, and keep it.

 
Comment by oxide
2011-05-19 20:11:41

I call BS that we don’t discuss corruption in government. We discuss it all the time!

How many times has ecofeco repeated that Republicans filibustered keeping jobs on our shores, because of the corruption of tarriffs and trade agreements by the multinational manufacturers?

How many times has Rio in Brazil proven that some form of public health care would help American workers, and would happen if not for the influence-buying by the sicko health lobbyists?

How many times has alpha brought up that captial gains are income and should be taxed as such, if not for the influence-buying from very rich hedge-funds?

How many times has Prof Bear railed againt the vampire squid of Golden Sacks, who didn’t bother to buy influence and simply bought the entire Congress wholesale to futher feather their nests?

These are specific provable examples of WHY one guy gets that lucky $100K job and another equal guy does not, and why there is no opportunity for the younger generation. Meanwhile on the other side all I see are vague arguments about “they’re all corrupt” and “government in general is bad.”

As for making your fortune, yeah, keep (most of) it. But when your kids get it, why should they keep it, especially above a very high threshold? Were they “producers?”

 
 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2011-05-19 09:09:13

“They all hoped for massive appreciation and to sell the house to the next fool…”

And the battle cry was “everyone is doing it!” and to a degree it was true. It was probably hard for the mathematically and financially illiterate masses to resist when they saw their equally uneducated friends driving around in Escalades and taking trips to Disneyworld using HELOCs.

 
 
Comment by salinasron
2011-05-19 06:38:15

“Cynthia Griffin said. ‘I think people should check their mortgages and see who really owns it. It’s a real relief right now. It makes me feel better that I don’t have something like that looming over my head. But it’s not a solution.’”

Cynthia you and I have differing opinions of RELIEF! Relief would be to (a) have the money to make my payments (b) send in the keys and let the system sort things out (c) file BK and clear your current debt load. What does it look like down there with your head buried in the sand?

Comment by scdave
2011-05-19 07:22:16

Yeah, that quote bothered me also….She is “relieved” that she can stay in her house without paying anything….Forget about the fact that someone, somewhere, was expecting a payment for money that they loaned you…

I can accept the strategic default thing but this idea that you should be able to litigate and succeed at delaying the ability for a lender to receive his collateral back while the borrower continues to receive the benefit for free is a little sickening really..

Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 08:49:58

A stereotype of the Great Depression is the farm selling at auction for $1 because the neighbors all circled the place and wouldn’t let the carpetbaggers bid. The BK farmer then gets his farm back. Evil banks lose.

Now we have one for this go around.

Comment by 2banana
2011-05-19 09:32:43

yeah - I can see the neighbors now circling the wagons so that fools who took out home equity loans for trips to Europe/Disneyland, BMWs and granite countertops can be protected from the evil banks…

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 10:18:01

Pathetic, isn’t it?

 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 13:30:09

evil banks… Pathetic, isn’t it?

Evil? Pathetic?

In light of the damage done and being done to our once great nation and economy…….

FB’s are not all innocent victims but……

Many banks behaviors fit the definition of evil: causing harm or destruction, usually specifically from the perception of deliberately violating some moral code…..harmful; injurious…characterized or accompanied by misfortune

Is to defend institutions conforming to the above descriptions not pathetic?

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 15:09:16

No, the granite countertops are pathetic.

 
Comment by CarrieAnn
2011-05-19 15:11:02

“yeah - I can see the neighbors now circling the wagons so that fools who took out home equity loans for trips to Europe/Disneyland, BMWs and granite countertops can be protected from the evil banks…”

If those neighbors are in the same boat as the homemoaner, they just might!

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2011-05-19 06:42:34

‘It’s crazy,’ Cynthia Griffin said. ‘I think people should check their mortgages and see who really owns it. It’s a real relief right now. It makes me feel better that I don’t have something like that looming over my head. But it’s not a solution.’”

Yeah - a solution is for you to pay the mortgage you agreed to pay.

Someone owns your worthless mortgage note - and eventually they will come for your house.

In the meantime, you title is clouded and you will never be able to sell or transfer your house. You may also have tax implications.

Karma will come around…

Comment by In Colorado
2011-05-19 09:11:20

“Karma will come around…”

If it did the vampire squid would die a painful death.

Karma is only for the little people.

 
Comment by Bad Andy
2011-05-19 09:22:11

“Someone owns your worthless mortgage note - and eventually they will come for your house.”

Usually it’s so many someones it’s impossible to tell.

Comment by oxide
2011-05-19 20:42:37

It just occured to me that nobody wants to go after any houses. The banks and brokers were going to flip those mortgages just like people flipped houses. Only, these guys didn’t couldn’t be arsed even to drive to Lowes for $200 in paint. They would never see a house, just move them around like generals move little flags on a map. They sat at a computer and watched electrons zip around and called themselves Masters of the Universe.

I remember those guys on the floor of othe Chi Merch Exch who cheered on Rick Santelli’s seminal tea party rant. Would any of those guys have the balls to actually get in a truck and secure one of those numbers-on-the-monitor for foreclosure and sale, like Ben does? They must think the money just grows on servers.

Oh, wait…

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2011-05-19 06:45:32

“Memories cannot be sold. They do not stay with the home, they live in your head and in your heart. A house without a family is only a house or, as the recently departed George Carlin said, ‘A house is just a big box where you keep your stuff.’”

A house is just a big box where you keep your stuff and is a huge depreciating asset that comes with large fixed costs…

 
Comment by scdave
2011-05-19 07:47:32

‘That’s dried up because California is in the same holding pattern,’ Pawlowski said ??

Holding pattern ?? Is that what you think we are figgen in Pawlo ?? My goodness…This guy was a Bank Executive eh ?? Now he’s works for the government…

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2011-05-19 07:47:33

“A speculative binge has about broken him at age 71, so he’s come home to paint his way out of it.”

Reading about fellows like him lead me to suspect it is going to take many years to unwind the widespread speculative real estate investing binge of the early-2000s.

Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 08:51:18

Most people cannot paint themselves out of a corner.

Comment by Prime_Is_Contained
2011-05-19 09:02:23

Awesome one, Blue Skye! :-)

 
 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2011-05-19 12:14:13

“A vastly over-sold Debacle…” Ben Jones

Taoist Poetry circa 2011 ;-)

 
Comment by oxide
2011-05-19 15:01:34

“So I took all the money I had and bought land.”

No you didn’t you moron. You probably borrowed a bunch of dough on top of “all the money you had.” If not, you wouldn’t be in trouble. You simply would have owned a lot of land.

And didn’t they teach this guy not to put all his paint tubes on one pallette? Diversify investments and whatnot?

 
 
Comment by mikeinbend
2011-05-19 08:54:47

My mother is trying to buy a home for us to manage/live in after wife’s foreclosure goes thru. i am making a list of pros and cons; please forgive the verbose posts I make. Read it if you are interested.

pros:
1.Someone paid 111k for this home in 1999; she offered 108k. So it has corrected to the point of being priced the same as it was 12 years ago.
This home is affordable long term to her; and she really wants to know we can easily move into something in our school district. Flipping homes means my daughter has been to 8 schools in 6 years; she is happy where she is. Mom will pay PITI until we have a better income or group insurance. And when we lose our current home, moving into our own rental property that I own; this would eliminate our monthly rental income, which would change our yearly income from 33k to 23k. Keep in mind pain issues impede my productivity and teachers are being laid off rather than hired here.

2 It is in great condition, has RV parking and room for our spa and is fairly private for a cookie cutter.
3 Tenants keep things tip-top and are willing to stay, so vacancy will not be an issue while we await the other shoe to drop on wife’s pad
4. Another suitable home has been found; the owners paid 227k for it in 2007; and are asking 89k on short sale. This is a good neighborhood; in contrast to several other hoods we have looked at.
5. This is a landlord’s market; and I have extensive experience LLing; it has worked out for us for the most part over the last 15 yrs. With a lot of the housing stock empty and unavailable(in the shadows) and people pouring out of their foreclosures; rents are currently rising so we can raise the rent or if we move into it, have no worries finding a spot for our kids and pets. Should prices fall more; well, that will make for more foreclosures and and even stronger landlord market. And the payments are affordabe to Mom and PITI + maintainance will be comparable or less than the rent. Good tenants are looking for landlords not in jeopardy of losing their homes forcing tenants to move in short order.
6. It is in our school district.
7. Price is in line with 3x our income, if we don’t give up our rental income by moving into our paid-for home. A move to our home would require kids to move districts as well.
8. We could paint the walls purple and let the dogs trash the yard as only dogs will. The only reason we would not move into it directly is that we don’t know how much longer free rent will be offered to us by the bank. Also we will give some rentals a look that are even closer to school; this house gives us a clear option given we have kids and pets.
Cons:
1 It is a short sale. Lender likely may not like the offer, being BofA; also a comp closed across the street for 129k and Mom won’t pay that. Another foreclosure is directly comparable, but will not be used. Closing at 92k, it reflects the 36% discount expected in a foreclosure; which again puts it in line with the 129k comp.

Other cons? Regarding ad hominem attacks, feel free if they make you feel better saying what a scoundrel I am. My wife, kids, and friends do not think this. I realize some of you do not like my behaviors as described; but I offer a perspective that is not typical here.

One potential con, losing value, does not scare Mom as the home will remain affordabe to her, at about 5% PITI will be $800 and it is rented out at $975, and the house will provide a roof for her G-kids and keep us close by as they get old. So we will move in to it or manage it or find a rental that costs less than $975 if it is closer to school.

Comment by 2banana
2011-05-19 09:39:40

It sounds like you are putting your life back together after some bad decisions.

It sounds like you doing it honestly and ethically and within the law.

It sounds like you new lifestyle will be affordable and within your means and your kids will still be in the same school.

Charlie Mike

 
Comment by Blue Skye
2011-05-19 10:16:48

No one can criticize your mother’s goals or estate planning decisions. You might consider selling the house you own but do not want to move into. It would not be your primary residence so would be ripe fruit if you have another medical emergency.

On stretching out the “free rent” thing, just let it go. It has you stressed out, which is not worth it.

 
Comment by polly
2011-05-19 12:05:47

Mike,

You can list all the pros and cons here that you want, but no one here can help you make a decion. The issue isn’t what the pros and cons are since you have pretty much figured that out. The issue is how important you think each one is.

How much do your kids want to stay in the same district? How good or bad would the new one be? How guilty would you feel (if at all) for accepting this help from your mother? This is what the decision hinges on. Not the list, but how important the different items on the list are.

 
Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2011-05-19 12:17:44

It appears you’ve out-witted Aristotle. You’ve found a way to directly pursue happiness. ;-/

Comment by mikeinbend
2011-05-19 13:40:38

Teaching a class in personal finance right now; how ironic is that. blue skye, we really like our box and its not so stressful to stay in it until we are asked to leave. Not planning on fighting it.

Polly, thanks. I would feel guilty not letting my mom help us out as she has trouble sleeping due to being a worrywort. And they don’t need to cancel their trip(s) to Austrailia, Europe, or NZ; or change their snowbird lifestyle for this to occur.

They seem to accrue 20k per year savings, and being thrifty they see no value in having their estate come in over the untaxable 1.whatever million they can have to pass on w/o 40% estate taxes.
Hwy, Whiskey Tango Foxtrot; cryptic as usual. We love our kids and the early semi-retirement period of our lives that we took off to raise the kids.

Now I am networking to get a teaching job; cervical MRI looked good so I know my post fusion pain is not gonna kill me; just gotta deal w osteoarthritis and stenosis and function best I can. Big psychological boost when I have a sore back or a stiff neck. Doc says go surfing!!! Been dealing with pain for 12 of my 42 years; gotta get on with my life; the pain is not going away but it is not killing me either.

 
 
Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 13:57:57

this would eliminate our monthly rental income, which would change our yearly income from 33k to 23k.

Would this help your entire family qualify for that Oregon heath insurance thing?

People accept help from their parents all the time. It’s a natural part of life. Just as your parents will be happy for your and your family’s help as they grow older.

I personally wouldn’t worry too much about a 100K house “losing value” if I was able to live in it happily or rent it out. Let’s even say everything went wrong, you had to move or sell and it lost 30K in value. Well, a lot of us have taken bigger losses than that and life goes on.

Either way you go, I can’t see it as a bad decision.

Comment by mikeinbend
2011-05-19 15:20:55

Nah we qualify either way; just have to go uninsured for a couple months or longer, depending on how long they decide to take to give you Oregon Health Plan. No guarantees on how long you remain uninsured. Wife needs hysterectomy at some point; uterine fibroids run in her family; I have constant pain management needs which consists of meds at this point after 4 surgeries on neck, shoulder, ankle. Had an accident 12 years ago which triggered chronic pain. Osteoarthritis+rotator cuff damage from chronic surfing; I guess it aint that ergonamic.

Hey, check out the pro-surfing contest they have there in Rio right now if you can!

Comment by RioAmericanInBrasil
2011-05-19 16:18:15

pro-surfing contest they have there in Rio right now

Thanks. It’s a short walk from my house. I’m going there tomorrow.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2011-05-19 11:01:28

‘I did what these rich people who were buying paintings from me told me to do, which was to buy land,’ he says. ‘So I took all the money I had and bought land.’

That what he gets for listening instead of thinking. But there is a strong element to our culture that places a great deal of value on “insider” information.

Of course, for the very rich buying Montana real estate was but a lark. They weren’t dumping their life savings into it.

Comment by Ben Jones
2011-05-19 11:21:55

Not to mention that if he is losing the property in foreclosure, he borrowed money to buy it, or refinanced or both. So what he was really doing was speculating. And his gambling likely contributed to driving up prices out of the reach of local families.

Comment by Hwy50ina49Dodge
2011-05-19 12:23:15

So what he was really doing was speculating.

Yep.

And his gambling likely contributed to driving up prices out of the reach of local families.

Yepper’s again!

Back to your Marin village to suffer with your fellow Marinfindels! Iffin you need tax help please contact Hwy’s big bro! ;-)

 
 
Comment by Arizona Slim
2011-05-19 11:49:56

Having had a number of rich clients over the years, I’ve heard more than a few insider tips. But, since many of those tips have involved a lot more money than I can easily part with, I’ve let ‘em go in one ear and out the other.

 
Comment by Carl Morris
2011-05-19 12:21:23

But there is a strong element to our culture that places a great deal of value on “insider” information.

Now that I think about it, there’s probably a good reason for that.

Comment by In Colorado
2011-05-19 12:33:22

Correct, what our “Marinfidel” overlooked is that the truly rich don’t share that information with the little people.

 
 
Comment by GrizzlyBear
2011-05-19 19:14:24

‘I did what these rich people who were buying paintings from me told me to do, which was to buy land,’ he says. ‘So I took all the money I had and bought land.’

I cannot tell you how many people did just this. There is so much land sitting in people’s hands who had hoped to make millions off it that it’s hard to even find any for sale. I’m really wondering when all this land is going to make it to market.

 
 
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