realtors Assessed so They Can Pay Off Legislators and Buy Votes

Sep 10th, 2010  
by IrvineRenter  in Library News

Astute Observations

Astute Observation by winstongator
2010-09-10 07:01 AM

I also consider the option-arm as a form of equity withdrawal, as the principal owed increased.  It is roughly 10k/yr in extra cash.  Not huge in heloc terms, but a 10k/yr post-tax raise/bonus is real money to most people.

Astute Observation by Jiggybal
2010-09-10 07:37 AM

This property was bought at an REDC auction this summer.  The property was occupied and it was the responsibility of the new owner to evict the tenants.

Astute Observation by rkp
2010-09-11 09:07 AM

IR-was this really bought at an REDC auction?  That would explain never making it to MLS.  Surprised a flipper bought at REDC as those deals are hardly deals.  In addition to the price of the home, I believe there are other fees so total outlay is greater.

Astute Observation by Jiggybal
2010-09-11 01:28 PM

I attended the auction in downtown LA and bid on this property but I couldn’t stomach going higher than $225,000 including the 5% buyer’s premium.  This property sold for $250,000 + 5% buyer’s premium

Astute Observation by Shevy
2010-09-13 09:40 AM

Exactly, because REDC auctions allow financing and advertise for months in advance, they are rarely deals at all. More often they set the new market value for neighborhoods and trick people into thinking they’re getting a deal because they purchased “at auction”.

Astute Observation by Phil Real
2010-09-10 08:00 AM

Really nice use of the Megadeth video to illustrate this conflict of interest situation.

Astute Observation by John
2010-09-10 10:45 AM

Anyone knows the answer to this:

when people short selling their homes, are they still paying their mortgage while waiting?

If they’re not paying, then wouldn’t that trigger foreclosure and not a short selling anymore? (unless the bank decides to extend and pretend)

Astute Observation by Swiller
2010-09-10 11:13 AM

No, people are not paying their mortgages during a short sale. I know a few people who have went through the process and one who is trying to short sale now.

Banks don’t want to foreclose because at this point in time it is cheaper to allow someone else to take care of the property then to force them out and process another loss. Not too mention it would cause the huge correction everyone citizen so longs for, but the government and Wall St. are deathly afraid of.

Astute Observation by John
2010-09-10 11:37 AM

But this is so mind boggling to me:

How can someone, whether it’s the bank or MBS investors, hold on to a nonperforming loan forever!!!???

WHO is paying or servicing the interest and principal on this loan?

WHERE is the source of money keep coming from to pay the MBS investors???

Greatly appreciate anyone with some insight on this.

Astute Observation by octal77
2010-09-10 11:58 AM

...hold on to a nonperforming loan forever!!!???...

In addition, who pays property taxes, HOA
dues and maintenance?

If the county of Orange puts a lien on a
property for non-payment of taxes, where
is the point of inflection at which the
(2st TD) note holder cries Uncle?

My understanding is that a property tax
lien is superior even to the first trust deed?

Unclear about the HOA dues.  Maybe someone
can clarify.

Is my understanding correct?

Astute Observation by octal77
2010-09-10 11:59 AM

correction

I meant “1st TD” not “2st TD”

Astute Observation by IrvineRenter
2010-09-10 01:35 PM

John,

It is mind boggling that this is going on.

The bank or the MBS investors can hold the asset as long as they wish. If the loan is non-performing, the bank is supposed to take a write down, but the FASB is allowing them to maintain the fantasy on their books that these loans will somehow get repaid. It is a sham.

Nobody is paying the interest and principal on the loan. The servicers are paying this money, but they are holding it against the MBS accounts, so in essence the MBS holders are paying themselves. Eventually, these MBS holders will be forced to recognize some massive write downs.

Astute Observation by John
2010-09-10 01:56 PM

Sorry for keep belaboring the point but i’m so itching for the truth:

“FASB is allowing them to maintain the fantasy”

OK, so they use fancy accounting.  but don’t you think at some point, the real money has to show up from somewhere?  I guess the banks will not be exposed of their insolvency until there’s a bank run.

“The servicers are paying this money, but they are holding it against the MBS accounts, so in essence the MBS holders are paying themselves.”

But where is the money the servicers use to pay the MBS investors coming from?  From their other source of revenue?  (if so why are they still so profitable?  Are they getting a loan?

One thing that amazes me is that this type of information are such well kept secrets.  After all these years, there’s no leak, no tell all from disgruntle/fired employees?

Astute Observation by SanJoseRenter
2010-09-10 02:55 PM

John:

As I commented earlier this week, the banks get money at 0% interest from the Fed and the squatter becomes a free caretaker. The squatter is also most responsible for property taxes and HOA fees before the foreclosure is finalized.

Astute Observation by Planet Reality
2010-09-10 09:21 PM

I’ve been saying this for a long time now, and the blogger disagreed only to now change his tune.

The banks can hold on forever, why? Because they can, it’s their most lucrative option to stay in business and invest 0% money with make believe assets.  They would be idiotic to do otherwise.

0% money invested in tbills, the longer this occurs the lower the risk premium on MBS and the lower mortgage rates go all backed by the tax payer.

Eventually inflation kicks in, and so does wage inflation.  But wage inflation won’t happen for everyone, and unemployment goes up.  Wage inflation only happens for the upper half which tends to be the majority of premium market buyers.  And wage inflation is concentrated at the top eating level.

What is the end game 50 years from now? Who knows, civil war?  The next 10 years should be pretty obvious for Irvine.  Rates will decline and wage inflation will happen for the jobs
In demand.  Sorry, not real estate related.

Astute Observation by Anonymous
2010-09-10 08:08 PM

We are all paying. The Fed loans money to the banks at close to zero percent, and the banks turn around and deposit that at the Fed or in T-bills and collect interest. This free money pays the bank’s obligations. Meanwhile, those counting in interest get a pathetic interest rate. So, basically those who saved and hold cash are paying for it

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/business/economy/09rates.html

Astute Observation by Anonymous
2010-09-10 08:11 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/business/economy/09rates.html

Astute Observation by Anonymous
2010-09-10 08:13 PM

Link keeps being cut. Go to nytimes.com and search for
“Falling Rates Aid Debtors, but Hamper Savers”
By GRAHAM BOWLEY
Published: September 8, 2010

Astute Observation by lowrydr310
2010-09-10 12:49 PM

It’s pretty sad that a flipper bought it for $267,000 just a few days ago and inflated his price so much, well it’s good for the flipper if he gets his asking price, but bad for a potential buyer who really likes the place but has to pay a $80K premium.

Regarding the down payment and income requirements, I don’t know a single person who has one year of their salary saved outside of their 401(k), especially Californians in the $70K household income bracket. That’s about $4K a month after taxes. It’s possible to save up a lot if you’re careful, but I’d wager that most people aren’t.

Astute Observation by Laura Louzader
2010-09-10 01:27 PM

It’s more likely the flipper will take a steep hit. This is an ugly place. How long was it on the market before the last sale at $267K? It’s not likely someone will soon pay a premium over that, even if wanted the place that badly, which is doubtful.

I hope this flipper gets creamed.

Astute Observation by Perspective
2010-09-10 04:31 PM

A year’s salary in cash is a high hurdle.  Just a couple years ago people would call you crazy for leaving a year’s salary in cash/savings and not “putting it to work” in some more “productive” asset.  I think that attitude’s changed a bit now considering the importance of liquidity.

The Mrs. and I have 9+ months of expenses in cash/savings and I’m still not comfortable with that.  We’re aggressively building the reserves for two reasons.  The first is like everyone else – we want a greater feeling of security.  The second is that we may consider refinancing within the next year or so and would need to bring a sizable check to the closing.

Astute Observation by wondering
2010-09-10 07:55 PM

Yeah, during the boom no one cared what people paid before them because they were sure they would be getting a piece of the housing appreciation.  Now I wonder if the mentality has changed.  Why would anyone pay $349K if someone just paid $267K so recently, baring some major renovations/improvements?!  Me, I wouldn’t.  And I’d rather not help a flipper out.

Astute Observation by SanJoseRenter
2010-09-10 01:55 PM

IR:

That’s a good idea for a post: in a squat, foreclosure and/or auction, what ranking do property taxes and HOA fees get compared to noteholders?

And what strategies are those parties using to squeeze the most blood out of the turnip? smile

Astute Observation by FoolishRenter
2010-09-10 09:12 PM

My understanding for CA is the RE taxes must be paid off by the “new buyer” at FC.  In really bad areas, the property may be abandoned and sold to pay off RE taxes.  For back due HOA, the HOA paying owner must bit it and pay for the FCed property.  If a regular sale, the old owner should, but ....  For condo with lots of back due bills, the new owner may be stuck with non-paying members.  Some other states allow a lein on the FC purchasers, but that only in some states.  You need to consult a local knowledgable professional.  Some judges can rule otherwise and the cost goes way up to correct the judgement. Best to avoid those situations if possible.

Banks are delaying FC if:
1.  Borrower is way under water as some NB property—3 plus year of squatting when owing two or more million dollars above the FMV.
2.  if the owner has a chance to refinance a defective loan or by a sale.
3.  if FC will make their books look bad.
4.  if the FC will lower their reserve to be insolvent.
5.  if the loan is non-recourse or single action.

Banks will FC quickly if:
1.  Borrower was responsible and has equity, especially if borrower lacks clout to put us a fuss.
2.  The loan is not defective and owed by someone else—bank is just the servicer.
3.  If the loan is recourse and judical recovery is possible.

IMHO.
The HOA and paying members get squeezed the most (no bailout), the future taxpayers will be squeezed,  RE taxes will evenually get paid, banks are getting bailed out, the squatters are getting free housing.

Astute Observation by Mattman
2010-09-10 04:56 PM

A humorous take on the topic of lobbyists:

Astute Observation by Anonymous
2010-09-10 08:45 PM

Includes irvine unified

Published: Sept. 10, 2010
Updated: 4:59 p.m.
ACLU suit: 6 O.C. school districts charge illegal fees
By FERMIN LEAL
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER


http://www.ocregister.com/news/aclu-265945-unified-fees.html

Astute Observation by Shevy
2010-09-11 08:14 AM

NAR policies are a joke! Will Agents Stop Contributing to the Problem and Become Part of the Solution?
    Both the federal home buyer tax credit and the California home buyer tax credit were bad policy. Moreover, any legislation meant to artificially delay price depreciation or support the market only delays recovery and is bad policy for agents, their clients, and the American public. During the first time homebuyer tax credit I told my clients that prices would fall by at least $8000 soon after the tax credit went away. In many areas I told them that people were paying $30,000- $40,000 more to save $8,000 in taxes, this proved correct when demand dropped and prices are now following since the tax credit went away.
    Unfortunately for good agents, this policy was not only bad for America and their clients it will serve as more fuel for anti-agent sentiment. Despicably, many agents have become masters at creating an artificial sense of urgency to get their clients to buy. I saw numerous articles on active rain and in other places by agents describing to other agents how to use this tax credit to manipulate their clients. While if an agent is properly educating their client on rental parity, the importance of obtaining 15 or 30 year fixed financing, and the necessity to plan on a long term hold, ideally for the term of the loan, if the agent is in an area that the tax credit did not push the price up because of artificially low supply and shadow inventory, and the buyer is set on buying in the next 30-60 days regardless, there may be a reason for a buyer to take action this was probably not the case for 99% of agents that used this false sense of urgency.
  Moreover, this is not the first time NAR was tricked into supporting policies that hurt the general public, agents, and their clients, with the only benefit going to big banks. NARs continued support of loan modification programs that make loan owners indentured servants for at least the next 10+ years, limits loan owners mobility and economic opportunities, and if it accomplishes it’s goal will reduce transaction volume, it’s a lose-lose for everyone except for the banks.
  Moreover, the tax credit, is now hurting realtors that did not retire because there is an uncertainty in the market and many buyers are waiting for the next government incentive. If they come out with another incentive they will start a dangerous cycle. It’s also hurting flippers because demand was pushed forward and many flippers did not realize how much extra people would be willing to pay to save $8000 in taxes so they were buying in August use comparable sales from the tax incentive period and there’s less demand and more realistic buyers out there.
    In reality, buyers will buy a home based upon their income. If prices drop, new buyers will be able to buy a bigger home or in nicer areas that they deserve for responsibly saving and waiting. Moreover, responsible sellers that are looking to re-trade will also be able to have more selection if they are moving up. Furthermore, although if an agents has an area that they farm and focus on and only lists properties it may affect their listing fee, however, there will likely be more transactions and the market will eventually normalize instead of stagnate. 
    Americans in general are undereducated economically and financially. Instead of taking advantage of this or being ignorant and part of the problem, if agents want to be considered professionals they need to create a higher standard. Requirements to become an agent should be made tougher, no agent living month to month should be allowed to work on commission, CAR and NAR need to stop creating and supporting policies that artificially support market prices at the expense of everyone except the big banks, and most of all agents and their organizations need to take a long look in the mirror and start putting their clients first. The average American does not understand mortgages, amortization, credit cards, compound interest, or many of the most important principles that are key to economic success. If real estate agents want to stay viable, they need to understand and educate their clients rather than manipulate them. Unless something changes realtors will be left wondering why they are not longer needed and we are going to have a massive issue when the generations of American’s that live on credit cards and pay option ARM loans hit retirement age.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main