January 3, 2013

Some Reality After Years Of Inflated Prices

The Comox Valley Local News reports from Canada. “Vancouver Island Regional Assessor, Bill MacGougan, encourages property owners to open their assessments and take a close look: ‘Property owners, they’re always interested in how the value of their biggest asset is holding up and from that perspective it’s a property owner’s market. I’m not commenting on the market going forward, but in terms of people receiving their assessments they can be assured that their asset hasn’t lost value.’”

The Vancouver Sun. “For the first time in many years, a significant number of homeowners in some areas of B.C. will see a drop in their property assessments, B.C. Assessment said. The most significant decreases will be seen in Whistler, Pemberton, on the Sunshine Coast and Bowen Island, said Jason Grant, B.C. Assessment Authority assessor for the Vancouver Sea to Sky region.”

“‘In stark contrast to last year, where (more than) 25-per-cent increases weren’t unusual, most residential homeowners (in Vancouver Sea to Sky) will open their assessment this year and say, ‘I’m within about five per cent off of where I was last year,’ said Grant McDonald, deputy assessor for B.C. Assessment’s Vancouver Sea to Sky region. ‘Looking at the city of Vancouver, if you drew a graph for a 10-year period from 2002 to 2012, it pretty much is a very steep curve in terms of value increases, with a blip in 2008 when values appeared to be falling a bit. Now it has sort of flattened off; the market is taking a bit of a breather.’”

From Saanich News. “B.C. Assessment’s area assessor for Greater Victoria Reuben Danakody stresses to homeowners that their assessment is not based on the current market, but on numbers from July 2012. ‘The market has softened since July,’ he said.”

The Province. “Pat Kelly, president of Whistler Real Estate, said vacation properties are still feeling the effects of a massive real estate downturn which began in the U.S. four years ago. ‘A year or so ago there was some [additional] consolidation of the market in Whistler,’ Kelly said. ‘Credit isn’t quite as available as it used to be. People are more conservation spending the extra $100,000,’ he said.”

The Times Colonist. “According to Sooke-based real estate agent Tim Ayres of Royal LePage Coast Capital, the drop in Sooke’s assessment average is no surprise given sales have dropped from 402 unit sales in 2009 to 261 in 2012. Ayres also noted the assessment is bringing some reality to the Sooke market after years of inflated prices. ‘Properties have tended to stay on the market longer and with less demand. Sellers have had to accept less than they’d hoped for in many cases,’ Ayres said.”

“Victoria Real Estate Board president Shelley Mann said similar drops in the average assessment — decreases of 6.69 per cent in Highlands and 6.36 per cent in Langford — is also all about correction after years of inflated pricing. ‘They were priced too aggressively for what they were and now the market has caught up to them and they had to come down in both assessments and market value,’ she said.”

The Globe & Mail. “Since 2000, the price of houses across Canada has risen 127 per cent; nearly 50 per cent since 2006. It’s no surprise that housing is expensive, but there’s no relief in sight. If anything, housing is likely to become even less affordable later this decade as interest rates return to more normal levels – unless there is a precipitous decline in real estate prices.”

“In the Vancouver market, houses are far less affordable now than they were even during those earlier interest-rate spikes, the Royal Bank’s figures show. The current ownership cost of an average two-storey house eats up close to 80 per cent of average household income. Elsewhere in the country, the average is closer to 50 per cent.”

“A health-care worker in southwestern Ontario who didn’t want his name used, said mortgage and child support payments make up roughly half of his take-home income, and that leaves very little for long-term investments such as RESP plans for his kids’ education, or retirement savings. ‘Any forward planning is really limited,’ he said. ‘When you are living this way it feels precarious, and that is with a great mortgage rate.’”

“The big worry, he said, is what will happen if rates rise and his payments increase significantly. That could require a drastic lifestyle change such as renting out his basement or selling the house and renting. ‘That weighs heavily on me,’ he said.”

“It was a sweltering afternoon in July, 2006, and David Dodge was meeting with executives at Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. in Ottawa, in search of the answer to a pressing question: Why were they lowering their standards in such a reckless fashion? As Canada’s largest mortgage insurer, federally-run CMHC is a gatekeeper to the housing market, influencing who gets to buy a home and who doesn’t. For decades it has sought to make it easier for people to enter the housing market, but it has also enforced some strict rules, requiring home buyers to make minimum down payments and pay off their mortgages in 25 years.”

“Now CMHC was abandoning its old ways. Business was now being eroded as a result of the arrival of aggressive U.S. insurers into Canada. The American companies were willing to do things CMHC had never done. Some were even backing ‘zero-down’ mortgages in which the buyer borrowed every dollar needed to pay for the home. It was a race to the bottom, and CMHC was playing along.”

“‘We didn’t lead it … As we lost market share, we would follow what the American companies were doing,’ said former CMHC chairman Dino Chiesa. With money available and the economy booming, home buyers streamed into the market and prices soared.”

“One of the key changes was in mortgage length: CMHC would insure mortgages 35 and 40 years in length. The measures helped people like Sarah O’Brien, who bought her first home at the age of 26. She and her husband, Darryl Silva, purchased a condo three years ago in Etobicoke, on the western side of Toronto, with a down payment of just 5 per cent. Mortgage rates were low, which helped. But so did the bank’s willingness to give them a CMHC-insured 35-year mortgage. The longer amortization held their biweekly payments to about $700.”

“‘We’re young to be getting into the real estate market, so if the monthly amounts were significantly higher, we probably wouldn’t have,’ Ms. O’Brien said. ‘We probably would have waited.’”

“Home buyers have responded to low rates and easy mortgage rules ‘by bidding up the price of houses,’ said bank analyst Peter Routledge at National Bank Financial. Since 2000, the price of houses across Canada has risen 127 per cent; they’ve gone up nearly 50 per cent since 2006.”

“‘You can never really provide cheap housing,’ argues Moin Yahya, associate professor of law at the University of Alberta. ‘All you can really do is provide cheap cash, which of course then drives up the price of housing. You’re only distorting the market.’”

“But the zero-down mortgages created a new problem in the housing market: Buyers who weren’t building any equity in their properties, since the payments were primarily covering the interest in the early stages of the loan. When Ashleigh Egerton and her boyfriend bought a townhouse in Brampton, Ont., in May, 2008, they could have made a 5 per cent down payment – but opted to put nothing down instead. When Ms. Egerton moved out about two years later after splitting up with her boyfriend, the pair still didn’t have any equity in the home.”

“‘Instead of putting that money into the house, we felt like we’d be off to a better start if we had some money to furnish the house,’ Ms. Egerton says. ‘I wasn’t under the impression that I would be paying this house off. This wasn’t the house that we would be staying in forever, it was just about getting into the market, getting a place.’”




RSS feed

46 Comments »

Comment by Ben Jones
2013-01-03 07:03:01

‘A home on a 33-foot lot on the city’s west side fell more than $73,000, while a two-bedroom apartment downtown dropped $43,000. In Whistler, values in pricey Alpine Meadows dropped $107,000. Waterfront property on Bowen Island plummeted $400,000. ‘It’s a pullback absolutely,” McDonald said. “There was pretty rapid, strong appreciation and growth in value and this year it’s almost like it’s sort of plateaued.’

http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2013/01/02/property-assessments-a-mix-of-up-and-down

‘For the third year in a row, the overall property value of Whistler properties has dropped, with over $1 billion in value lost since 2010.’

http://www.whistlerquestion.com/article/20130103/WHISTLER01/301039961/-1/WHISTLER/whistler-property-values-drop-for-third-year-in-a-row

Comment by Beer and Cigar Guy
2013-01-03 09:42:48

Thank goodness that “its different in Canada”! Because if it weren’t, people up there would be in for a profound and righteous a$$-whooping as prices dropped like in every other country when their housing bubble burst. Oh, Canada!

 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 09:57:58

“There was pretty rapid, strong appreciation and growth in value and this year it’s almost like it’s sort of plateaued.”

Important detail: Is the plateau ‘permanently high’?

 
Comment by rms
2013-01-03 18:50:33

“Eugen Klein, Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver president, said there’s a “misconception in the marketplace” about what assessments mean when selling a home. He said the values should be considered when looking at a neighbourhood, but not individual homes, which might have renovations or other features that add value.”

Don’t forget that Vancouver’s mild winters add great value too! :)

 
 
Comment by In Colorado
2013-01-03 07:04:33

“For the first time in many years, a significant number of homeowners in some areas of B.C. will see a drop in their property assessments

Either property assessors in Canada are super honest, or property values are dropping so much that the can’t deny it. I’ve never heard of an assessment dropping by itself without a challenge.

Comment by tresho
2013-01-03 08:29:15

I’ve never heard of an assessment dropping by itself without a challenge.
It’s so common it doesn’t make the news any more. Mine dropped from 110,000 to 98,000 last year. I did not challenge. However, hundreds or thousands of homeowners in my county did challenge.

Comment by Ben Jones
2013-01-03 08:35:21

Why would you challenge a lowering of the tax bill?

Comment by X-GSfixr
2013-01-03 08:49:19

Because it helps preserve the illusion that the property is “worth” the higher price.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by In Colorado
2013-01-03 08:50:54

I think he meant that his assessment dropped without a challenge.

Like I said, I’ve never seen that happen. What I’ve seen is that the assessor just leaves it unchanged.

I remember in the early 90’s in SoCal I would receive junk mail from people who claimed they could lower my assessment, which even during the price collapse back then rose the 2% maximum allowed by prop 13. I’ve also had to challenge assessments here in the Centennial state, as they tried to raise them when prices were dropping. It was easy to do, but I wonder how many people are too intimidated to try?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by tresho
2013-01-03 08:55:07

Why would you challenge a lowering of the tax bill?
All the challenges I referred to were BEFORE the last countywide reassessment. The penultimate assessment by the tax auditors created a huge (and laughable) spike in housing values, followed by an outcry and a wave of challenges (I considered filing one but didn’t follow through), followed by a stiff drop in assessments on the last fixing of values.
Yet somehow my tax bill did not get lower, only higher, as it has for 33 years. Strange how that works.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by MiddleCoaster
2013-01-03 13:45:17

Taxes only go up. Sorta like real estate. ;)

 
Comment by In Colorado
2013-01-03 19:52:52

Yet somehow my tax bill did not get lower, only higher, as it has for 33 years. Strange how that works.

Mine went down. Gotta love TABOR.

 
 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2013-01-03 09:19:07

And with lower assessment - it means lower taxes being taken in.

If Canadians are like American local, city and provincial governments - they spent ALL the tax money as fast as it comes it and promised their public unions the world.

With lower taxes coming in - they will start scream that they need higher taxes or they will close libraries and lay off police. Insane public union pensions and benefits will not be touched.

Comment by tresho
2013-01-03 09:42:39

Insane public union pensions and benefits will not be touched.
Not only that, they will be boosted. I live in one of the few Republican towns in my part of Ohio. Recently a $million windfall of taxes came in from an unexpected estate tax assessment. Our mayor and city council decided to simply give it away to the city’s employees as a bonus, in a city where services have been shrinking year by year and potholes are becoming more frequent and deeper. City fathers did not present the question before the decision was made.

Comment by nickpapageorgio
2013-01-03 21:19:28

That’s messed up.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by BetterRenter
2013-01-03 10:52:15

In Colorado said: “I’ve never heard of an assessment dropping by itself without a challenge.”

Well, hear it. It’s been happening around here in the rusty Midwest for years now. We undergo triennial reviews for PT, and I know lots of people who received automatic drops in their assessments in 2009 and now 2012.

 
 
Comment by Blue Skye
2013-01-03 08:07:23

“All you can really do is provide cheap cash, which of course then drives up the price of housing….”

Wow.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 09:59:12

How did the entire world fall in love with unaffordable housing prices?

Comment by Carl Morris
2013-01-03 10:01:26

When they were able to live their dreams on equity?

 
Comment by BetterRenter
2013-01-03 11:00:25

MAKE MONEY FAST

That’s how. It was all just another scam, but this time, it was cleverly crafted so that the most people possible could participate, and it was also cleverly disguised as a common lifestyle move of the working poor, the entire middle class, and the rich.

Gotta say this, though: It’s not like First Worlders knew any other way of getting their hands on tens of thousands of dollars. Work wasn’t producing that anymore. Inventiveness wasn’t either. Investment wasn’t. Really, all routes of expanding one’s wealth base slammed shut, so the working classes desperately looked for any means of getting out. And there were the bankers, dangling the ever-increasing mortgage bait.

 
 
Comment by AmazingRuss
2013-01-03 11:24:47

Enforced ponzi participation is our hope for the future!

 
 
Comment by Lemming with an innertube
2013-01-03 08:13:54

From the article:

The Province. “Pat Kelly, president of Whistler Real Estate, said vacation properties are still feeling the effects of a massive real estate downturn which began in the U.S. four years ago. ‘A year or so ago there was some [additional] consolidation of the market in Whistler,’ Kelly said. ‘Credit isn’t quite as available as it used to be. People are more conservation spending the extra $100,000,’ he said.”

Me: The first thing that struck me was the name of the city, “Whistler”, as in whistling past the graveyard.

 
Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 08:37:50

Tax assessments are probably the last data point I’d want if I wanted to be reassured about my home’s “value”.

OK, maybe a Housing Pimp (Realtor) would be the last. But tax assessments generally reflect very little about the interior condition and property features while relying heavily on transactions which probably do not reflect short sales, foreclosures, etc. There is also a bias to make assessments fall in line with past assessments and avoid decreases in “value” because that means less revenue for the county/city.

Comment by tresho
2013-01-03 08:57:24

a bias to make assessments fall in line with past assessments and avoid decreases in “value” because that means less revenue for the county/city.
I agree the bias exists. There are legal standards behind the assessing process which respond to the electorate. Sometimes.

Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 09:10:48

Yes and no. How many people challenge their assessment? I’d bet it’s a small percentage. In addition, when you do challenge, I’d bet most challenge systems involve a city/county/state employee at the first level of review, followed by some sort of board of citizens. The citizens on the board are in a fiduciary responsibility and it’s not likely they have a lot of motivation to lower county/city/state revenues. Maybe in some jurisdictions where there is a large anti-tax contingent. But in those jurisdictions property tax rates are probably low to begin with… it would be incongruous to expect a jurisdiction with high property tax rates to have a review board stuffed with anti-tax teabillies. In jurisdictions with high prop tax rates, you’d expect a board with mostly people who support public spending on education, infrastructure, police, firefighters, etc.

Comment by tresho
2013-01-03 09:47:18

In addition, when you do challenge, I’d bet most challenge systems involve a city/county/state employee at the first level of review, followed by some sort of board of citizens. The citizens on the board are in a fiduciary responsibility and it’s not likely they have a lot of motivation to lower county/city/state revenues.
Yes, we have something like that in my county. The board’s responsibility is that properties are fairly valued with respect to how much they can sell for on the open market, and not on how much money the county thinks it needs. Many of the previous round of taxpayer challenges did succeed. Ultimately most of the county’s assessments were lowered on the next round.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 10:00:48

This might work in smallish or rural counties. Large counties and cities can’t afford to lower everyone’s tax bills… the way the system is supposed to work (what they house could sell for on the “open market”). They will, out of necessity, need to consider what their revenues are. I’d be willing to bet that most large jurisdictions have some type of “constant yield” provision in the property tax system, whereby if property “values” fall by x%, the tax rate will adjust upwards by x%. Baltimore City has this and I don’t think our city gov is particularly progressive.

The other limitation on challenging assessments being worthwhile is, in high Cost of Living areas, there are generally Homestead Tax Credit programs. Many people in these areas are already paying less than they’d be paying if they paid the fully “assessed” amount.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 08:40:41

“[A] health-care worker in southwestern Ontario who didn’t want his name used, said mortgage and child support payments make up roughly half of his take-home income.”

In the parlance of today’s youth: PWNED.

Comment by In Colorado
2013-01-03 08:53:05

And he doesn’t get an MID either.

Then again, a lot of Lucky Ducky renters pay half their income on rent.

Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 09:12:58

When TO property prices crash, Lucky Duckies should be able to get rent at least a little cheaper. This “owner” will still be paying the same mortgage payment, unless he walks away. Anyone know what foreclosure procedures are like in Ontario/TO? How does the BK code in Canada treat foreclosure “victims”?

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2013-01-03 09:21:17

OK everyone. Pop Test time.

List all that is wrong. And why it will end in disaster. Bonus points if you can make the homeowners asn”victims”

“One of the key changes was in mortgage length: CMHC would insure mortgages 35 and 40 years in length. The measures helped people like Sarah O’Brien, who bought her first home at the age of 26. She and her husband, Darryl Silva, purchased a condo three years ago in Etobicoke, on the western side of Toronto, with a down payment of just 5 per cent. Mortgage rates were low, which helped. But so did the bank’s willingness to give them a CMHC-insured 35-year mortgage. The longer amortization held their biweekly payments to about $700.”

Comment by rms
2013-01-03 19:01:52

“One of the key changes was in mortgage length: CMHC would insure mortgages 35 and 40 years in length.”

Isn’t a forty year mortgage near asymptotic?

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-04 00:13:48

Yes — especially if you are religious and believe in the hereafter.

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2013-01-03 09:22:43

2nd Pop Test time.

Explain why we should bail out banks who made these foolish loans.

“But the zero-down mortgages created a new problem in the housing market: Buyers who weren’t building any equity in their properties, since the payments were primarily covering the interest in the early stages of the loan. When Ashleigh Egerton and her boyfriend bought a townhouse in Brampton, Ont., in May, 2008, they could have made a 5 per cent down payment – but opted to put nothing down instead. When Ms. Egerton moved out about two years later after splitting up with her boyfriend, the pair still didn’t have any equity in the home.”

Comment by Blue Skye
2013-01-03 19:18:14

There is only one thing that you should share with a girlfriend. It isn’t debt.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-04 00:14:48

“It isn’t debt.”

But it can be a precursor thereto.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 09:56:31

“For the first time in many years, a significant number of homeowners in some areas of B.C. will see a drop in their property assessments, B.C. Assessment said. The most significant decreases will be seen in Whistler, Pemberton, on the Sunshine Coast and Bowen Island, said Jason Grant, B.C. Assessment Authority assessor for the Vancouver Sea to Sky region.”

Suppose Vancouver’s housing market spectacularly crashes, along with housing in other parts of Canada where nobody suspected a bubble was inflating, leaving legions of recent buyers underwater on their mortgages. Doesn’t it follow, as the night the day, that the Canadian government will take measures to prop up the value of housing, in order to protect the interests of homeowners?

Or is it different in Canada compared to the U.S.?

Humpty-dumpty sat on a wall.
Humpty-dumpty had a great fall.
All the king’s horses and all the king’s men
Couldn’t put humpty together again.

Comment by joesmith
2013-01-03 10:11:56

Can Canadians wipe out mortgage debt with a BK like here in the US? If not, then it will be quite different for them. For the better or worse is up to where you stand…

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 11:04:53

I don’t see why their government can’t overhaul the rules of the game on a moment’s notice to provide whatever level of forbearance they choose, the way that ours did.

Comment by rms
2013-01-03 19:07:03

“I don’t see why their government can’t overhaul the rules of the game on a moment’s notice to provide whatever level of forbearance they choose, the way that ours did.”

+1 You can dance with the prettiest lady at the party when you’re the guy with the scepter.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by BetterRenter
2013-01-03 11:11:24

CIBT said: “Doesn’t it follow, as the night the day, that the Canadian government will take measures to prop up the value of housing, in order to protect the interests of homeowners?”

Yes, it does follow. Every government in the gigantic housing bubble that exists now in the First World, is actively moving to protect high housing prices. Canada will do the same. Wise men will know this is coming and will have prepared accordingly. Sadly, there will be a lot of snakes there too.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 11:39:39

Snakes bailing out of fly-by-night investments to capture the one-time increase in market values due to government-sponsored housing price inflation could provide a considerable headwind to sustainability of the plan.

 
 
 
Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-03 11:01:50

Why were they lowering their standards in such a reckless fashion? As Canada’s largest mortgage insurer, federally-run CMHC is a gatekeeper to the housing market, influencing who gets to buy a home and who doesn’t. For decades it has sought to make it easier for people to enter the housing market, but it has also enforced some strict rules, requiring home buyers to make minimum down payments and pay off their mortgages in 25 years.”

“Now CMHC was abandoning its old ways. Business was now being eroded as a result of the arrival of aggressive U.S. insurers into Canada. The American companies were willing to do things CMHC had never done. Some were even backing ‘zero-down’ mortgages in which the buyer borrowed every dollar needed to pay for the home. It was a race to the bottom, and CMHC was playing along.”

“‘We didn’t lead it … As we lost market share, we would follow what the American companies were doing,’ said former CMHC chairman Dino Chiesa.”

As ye sowed, shall ye reap.

 
Comment by CRATER!!!!
2013-01-03 20:52:32

CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASH!

And it’s coming to your neighborhood.

 
Comment by nickpapageorgio
2013-01-03 21:16:23

“The current ownership cost of an average two-storey house eats up close to 80 per cent of average household income.”

That’s the second time I have seen that in a Canadian article. The how-much-a-month buyers forget about all of the other costs associated with home ownership, and of course the Realtor is not going to tell them. Are you really living or just existing when your combined housing costs hit 80 percent? Sounds horrifying.

Comment by Cantankerous Intellectual Bomb Thrower™
2013-01-04 00:16:53

Sounds horrifying. stupid.

 
 
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