3 of 4
3
Do you know people who are likely to lose their homes?
Posted: 22 May 2009 11:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3324
Joined  2007-01-02
hs_teacher - 22 May 2009 05:01 PM

my question is…. who’s suffering the most in this economy?  and who’s benefiting the most?

Hurting: (1) People with debt, (2) those who are out of work, and (3) those who own real estate. The unemployed with huge debts on real estate are suffering the most. There are many of these people.

Benefiting: (1) Renters with (2a) savings and (2b) no debt (3) that still have a job. These are the people who will get fantastic deals on real estate if they can be patient enough to wait for prices to fall to below rental parity.

Whichever list you are on and the more of the items you have is the degree to which you are hurting or benefiting from the collapse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2009 12:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]
Living with Parents
RankRank
Total Posts:  66
Joined  2008-08-25
stepping_up - 22 May 2009 05:22 PM

WTF! Taxable value is $183K, so this thing should be practically owned out right, yet it is a short sale at $299K? You have to wonder if something tragic happened or if they just ATM’d their house.
531 Pierpont

The only tragedy is that the rest of us chose not to abuse the system like this:

Recording Date:    01/09/2002
Mortgage Information
Mortgage Type:    NON-PURCHASE MONEY
Loan Amount:    $164,000

Recording Date:    11/20/2002
Mortgage Type:    NON-PURCHASE MONEY
Loan Amount:    $240,000
Loan Type:    STAND-ALONE FIRST

Recording Date:    08/10/2005
Mortgage Type:    NON-PURCHASE MONEY
Loan Amount:    $80,000
Loan Type:    CREDIT LINE (REVOLVING)

Recording Date:    11/22/2006
Mortgage Type:    NON-PURCHASE MONEY
Loan Amount:    $415,000

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2009 12:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1806
Joined  2008-03-24
IrvineRenter - 22 May 2009 06:29 PM
hs_teacher - 22 May 2009 05:01 PM

my question is…. who’s suffering the most in this economy?  and who’s benefiting the most?

Hurting: (1) People with debt, (2) those who are out of work, and (3) those who own real estate. The unemployed with huge debts on real estate are suffering the most. There are many of these people.

Benefiting: (1) Renters with (2a) savings and (2b) no debt (3) that still have a job. These are the people who will get fantastic deals on real estate if they can be patient enough to wait for prices to fall to below rental parity.

Whichever list you are on and the more of the items you have is the degree to which you are hurting or benefiting from the collapse.


you forgot:

Hurting (1) Renters (4) who lose their jobs = out on the street.

Benefiting (1) People with debt who (3) own/fake own real estate = living rent free at taxpayer expense

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2009 10:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]
Homeless Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  47
Joined  2009-05-17

I am not sure that prudent renters and savers are really benefiting.  They are only hurting less than the first group.

The way the government is handling this crisis, the only people that are truly a benefiting are bankrupt bank executives who are getting a free ride on the back of the taxpayers.

We’re seeing the results of the government intervention right now.  Debasing the currency, which will erode our savings in the long run.  Slowing down the foreclosures, which means waiting more years for prices to become realistic.  Creating perverse incentives for banks and debtors, so that instead of kicking them out of their houses, they get to live there rent-free for an year.  And so on, and so on.

I am disappointed because I am on the losing side of that trade (still renting even though I can afford to buy, but I can’t force myself to buy a depreciating asset).  I’ve been thinking about this for a long time and I worry daily about how this is going to play out.  And I don’t see myself really benefiting from this crisis.  Sure, I avoided much worse outcomes, but it still doesn’t feel like a win.  Just because at the end, after years of doing the prudent thing and holding out, we’ll be able to buy a nice house doesn’t mean that we’ve really won anything.  I suppose if one measures his success relative to his neighbors, he can feel good about this, but measured by absolute standards, everyone loses.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 May 2009 10:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2427
Joined  2008-08-26
freedomCM - 22 May 2009 07:17 PM

you forgot:

Hurting (1) Renters (4) who lose their jobs = out on the street.

Benefiting (1) People with debt who (3) own/fake own real estate = living rent free at taxpayer expense

That is so true. This morning I read an update from somebody I know on another site I’m on. She is married but she and her ex are the ones whose names are on the house she currently lives in without the ex. The ex is coming after her and her new husband for money to stay current with their shared mortgage (actually, 2 mortgages.) Her and her new husband have decided to see a lawyer about filing bankruptcy… to keep the ex away and also because they were already struggling with bills since her new husband lost his job last year. Here is what the lawyer told them to do. I will copy & paste:

“The appointment with the lawyer went okay yesterday. He said there was no immediate hurry to file, other than the wage garnishment that is coming down the pipeline next month. He said to definitely stop paying on all of our credit cards and the two mortgages, and to just save that money as best we can so we can move when the time comes. I guess in our area, foreclosures are taking 6-12 months. The lawyer said ideally, he’d like to see us file after the foreclosure has gone to court, so we can get the maximum amount of time, living without rent or mortgage expenses. The entire thing is going to cost us a few hundred more than I had expected, but it’s doable and I left the office feeling a bit better…we should be able to afford <extra things> with little problem since we’re not paying anything else now. ” She went on by saying she is dumping the mortgage on the ex and had to break the news to him about their bankruptcy. Well he responded by saying he’s decided to stop paying too and file Bk as well.

Another person responded by saying:

“You don’t have to lose the house. We filled Chap 13 and kept ours. The arrearage goes into the bankruptcy. You only pay one penny on the dollar on any unsecured debt. It isn’t as bad as most people believe it to be. It was really the best thing for us.”

o_O

[ Edited: 23 May 2009 10:41 AM by SoCal78 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 May 2009 05:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 56 ]
Starter Home
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  672
Joined  2009-03-23
hedgehog - 23 May 2009 05:51 AM

I am not sure that prudent renters and savers are really benefiting.  They are only hurting less than the first group.

The way the government is handling this crisis, the only people that are truly a benefiting are bankrupt bank executives who are getting a free ride on the back of the taxpayers.

We’re seeing the results of the government intervention right now.  Debasing the currency, which will erode our savings in the long run.  Slowing down the foreclosures, which means waiting more years for prices to become realistic.  Creating perverse incentives for banks and debtors, so that instead of kicking them out of their houses, they get to live there rent-free for an year.  And so on, and so on.

I am disappointed because I am on the losing side of that trade (still renting even though I can afford to buy, but I can’t force myself to buy a depreciating asset).  I’ve been thinking about this for a long time and I worry daily about how this is going to play out.  And I don’t see myself really benefiting from this crisis.  Sure, I avoided much worse outcomes, but it still doesn’t feel like a win.  Just because at the end, after years of doing the prudent thing and holding out, we’ll be able to buy a nice house doesn’t mean that we’ve really won anything.  I suppose if one measures his success relative to his neighbors, he can feel good about this, but measured by absolute standards, everyone loses.

The bank executives aren’t benefiting.  Many have been laid off, the rest are making much less than they used to.  They still make a lot, but if you go from making a million a year to $200k, you aren’t benefiting.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 May 2009 06:43 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 57 ]
Homeless Newbie
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  47
Joined  2009-05-17
Geotpf - 24 May 2009 12:21 AM

The bank executives aren’t benefiting.  Many have been laid off, the rest are making much less than they used to.  They still make a lot, but if you go from making a million a year to $200k, you aren’t benefiting.

Sure, I agree with that.  What I meant that they are benefiting from the government’s intervention, not from the economy.  Making 200K while the gov is propping up the bank instead of the bank being closed down and their being left without a job.  I’d call that benefiting.


Back on topic, I think I know only person who lost their home in San Clemente.  It was classing overstretching, bought at the peak of the bubble with something like 25% down, I believe.  After spending about an year in despair, he finally priced it aggressively under the rest of the houses in the area, sold it quickly, basically wiped out all of his downpayment, and is now trying to rebuild his life.
What I find most amazing is not how irresponsibly he lost a lot of money, but that he responsibly took the loss and moved on.  He could have done the same as all of the people who just stop paying and then live in the homes rent-free for 1 year or more.  Unfortunately, it seems that few would do the honorable thing in such a situation.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 May 2009 11:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 58 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1450
Joined  2007-07-26
SoCal78 - 23 May 2009 05:06 PM

That is so true. This morning I read an update from somebody I know on another site I’m on. She is married but she and her ex are the ones whose names are on the house she currently lives in without the ex. The ex is coming after her and her new husband for money to stay current with their shared mortgage (actually, 2 mortgages.) Her and her new husband have decided to see a lawyer about filing bankruptcy… to keep the ex away and also because they were already struggling with bills since her new husband lost his job last year. Here is what the lawyer told them to do. I will copy & paste:

“The appointment with the lawyer went okay yesterday. He said there was no immediate hurry to file, other than the wage garnishment that is coming down the pipeline next month. He said to definitely stop paying on all of our credit cards and the two mortgages, and to just save that money as best we can so we can move when the time comes. I guess in our area, foreclosures are taking 6-12 months. The lawyer said ideally, he’d like to see us file after the foreclosure has gone to court, so we can get the maximum amount of time, living without rent or mortgage expenses. The entire thing is going to cost us a few hundred more than I had expected, but it’s doable and I left the office feeling a bit better…we should be able to afford <extra things> with little problem since we’re not paying anything else now. ” She went on by saying she is dumping the mortgage on the ex and had to break the news to him about their bankruptcy. Well he responded by saying he’s decided to stop paying too and file Bk as well.

Another person responded by saying:

“You don’t have to lose the house. We filled Chap 13 and kept ours. The arrearage goes into the bankruptcy. You only pay one penny on the dollar on any unsecured debt. It isn’t as bad as most people believe it to be. It was really the best thing for us.”

o_O

I find that entire situation disgusting.  My face scrunched up as I read.  Just terrible.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 59 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3324
Joined  2007-01-02

Foreclosure in Orange County: ‘Like a death’

Behind the numbers lie stories of family struggle, pain and endurance.

By GREG HARDESTY and RASHI KESARWANI
The Orange County Register

Where we love is home,

Home that our feet may leave, but not our hearts.

— Oliver Wendell Holmes

In January 2008, Kevin Palmer was told he would have to vacate his Laguna Niguel home in 30 days.

In reluctantly doing so, Palmer became one of the first homeowners in Orange County to be swept up in the recent wave of foreclosures that has drowned out the dreams of thousands.

“What do you do in 30 days to undo 10 years of your life?” Palmer says.

As foreclosures continue to stack up, vulnerable homeowners are coping with the reality — or prospect — of losing a huge part of their identity and starting over.

Some mental health experts liken the experience to grieving over a loved one’s death.

“Being foreclosed upon can sometimes be more than like a death in the family,” said Sharon Gerstenzang, Ph.D., a psychologist in Fountain Valley who specializes in high conflict, trauma and crisis.

“It’s like a repeated death. Every day the homeowner wakes up and thinks, ‘I just lost my house.’ They can feel mind-bending, soul-searing humiliation and shame.”

The number of people experiencing such wrenching feelings continues to grow in a county almost mockingly full of beautiful places, beautiful people, big cars, big homes – and a persistent promise of the good life even during tough times.

According to the latest numbers, lenders filed 2,946 notices of default in April in Orange County, down 15 percent from March but up 13 percent from a year ago, according to DataQuick. The total in March was the highest in at least 17 years.

A decline in foreclosures in April, when banks took 482 houses and condos in Orange County away from delinquent borrowers, the lowest total in 17 months and down 46 percent from a year ago, could be temporary, experts say.

A new state law in October has mostly delayed foreclosures, not prevented them, some experts believe.

The foreclosure fiasco continues to unspool stories of dread, anxiety and resolve.

BURNING SAVINGS

It took 10 years for Kevin Palmer to save $30,000 for his dream house, and less than a year to burn through that much as he fought to keep it.

Palmer, 49, still is struggling to pick up the pieces, looking for work and living at Mercy House, a transitional housing shelter in Santa Ana

He survives on weekly $235 unemployment checks and drives a 1991 Toyota Tercel with a shattered window. His Mercy House room costs $225 a month.

Less than a year and a half ago, Palmer was making $70,000 as a property manager and living in the condo he bought in 2000 for $198,000.

For years, he had handily made his $1,275 mortgage payment at a fixed rate of 12.75 percent.

A health issue he declined to discuss forced him to take out an adjustable-rate home-equity loan to pay for drugs that weren’t covered by insurance.

In January 2007, Palmer got a letter from his lender telling him his mortgage was going up to $2,850 per month. The higher payments started depleting his savings.

Then, in June 2007, his mortgage payment was adjusted upward again, to $3,550.

Palmer couldn’t afford it.

After burning through most of his savings, he defaulted on the loan and was told to leave his home by late January 2008.

“You never want to believe that you may lose your house,” says Palmer, who was laid off that same month

He moved into a windowless, 8-by-12-foot office suite in Lake Forest and showered at a gym until he landed the room at Mercy House.

He continues to look for work and has filed for Chapter 7 personal liquidation bankruptcy.

Palmer has a new attitude about people he sees on the street asking for handouts.

“I used to walk past them,’’ Palmer says. “Not anymore.”

ENDURING HOMELESSNESS

The Brixeys never saw it coming.

Since a bank repossessed their Ladera Ranch house in March 2008, the family — Jaxsen, 9, Mia, 7, Ashtynn, 5, Brielle, 3, Peyten, 2, and Cyrus, 11 months, along with mom Sunny, 33, and dad Jereme, 34 — remains adrift and uncertain about where they’ll eventually end up.

Their financial slide was gradual.

Jereme graduated from UC Irvine’s MBA program in 2004. He and his wife were hopeful that the degree would lead to a bump in his salary in his field of wireless consulting.

That didn’t happen.

Because of volatility in the business, Jereme was unable to maintain stable work for more than a year.

He eventually began working as a real estate agent — a common line of work in Ladera, where home prices ballooned until 2006.

The family also dipped into savings from selling their Ladera Ranch home in June 2005.

Sunny admits she had dollar signs in her eyes after the value of the house reached $890,000 in 2005 — $440,000 more than the purchase price four years earlier.

They reasoned they could capitalize on the hot real estate market by using the cash to pay off Jereme’s $70,000 in student loans, lease a second car and pay off medical bills.

At the time, friends in the red-hot mortgage industry suggested that the couple do 100-percent financing for a $700,000 house just a couple blocks away from the one they just sold. They ended up buying that house in 2005.

“We desperately looked for a rental and nothing seemed to work out,” Sunny said.

With Sunny nine-months pregnant with Peyten, their fifth child, the Brixeys admit that they got sucked into making quick decisions out of desperation.

“It was almost like we had lit a fire under ourselves,” said Sunny, who went into panic mode when they couldn’t find a suitably sized home to rent in Ladera Ranch.

“Everything was going so fast and not in our favor,” Jereme said.

Sunny said the monthly payments on the $700,000 home they wound up purchasing increased as Jereme’s income as a Realtor dried up.

By early 2007, the family of seven — soon to be eight — had depleted its savings. Jereme and Sunny began to make hard choices about which bills they could afford to pay.

In September ‘07, one of their cars was repossessed. The second car was taken a month later.

The slide continued until the Brixey family was homeless.

And yet, the couple sees their financial demise as incidental to the miracle they say they’ve experienced with the healthy recovery of their baby.

Eleven-month old Cyrus was born last summer with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, considered to be a death sentence by cardiologists. Against all odds, he made it.

The family has bounced from one place to the next, staying for as little as a week and as long as a few months, with friends and relatives.

They currently are staying with a relative in Newport Beach but need to find a new place soon.

Using cars given to them by friends, they take their children to school in Ladera Ranch.

Attitude helps.

“We have hope and joy and we’re making a choice to believe that we will come out better than where we started,” Sunny said.

HANGING ON

Because of an unexpected job loss, Melissa and Bryan Tiffin of Trabuco Canyon haven’t been able to make their $2,900 monthly payment on their first mortgage since March 2008.

They’ve been paying $1,000 a month on their second mortgage since then as they continue to negotiate with their lender to lower the $2,900 payment.

So far, the bank has been willing to try to hammer out an agreement and not send them the Tiffins a notice of default.

“We’re sort of in a holding pattern, waiting to see what will happen,” says Melissa Tiffin, 37, a former public relations specialist who is looking for a job while raising three young daughters with her husband, Bryan, 40.

Bryan Tiffin makes a solid salary as a construction executive for Broadcom, but not enough to handily cover all the family expenses.

The value of stock options he holds have dried up, erasing a potential source of emergency funds.

He and his wife have been forced to sell off some possessions, such as a motorcycle.

Once a month, the Tiffins get free groceries from South County Outreach, a Lake Forest non-profit that helps individuals and families in crisis.

In August 2005, they bought their home for $545,000. It was a not a subprime loan; they got the loan based on two incomes. They wanted a backyard for their children, Ashley, 8, Krista, 7 and Allison, 3.

They bought their 1,250-square-foot home when the market was near its peak.

Flash forward to March 2009.

The Tiffins’ home is valued in the $290,000 to $320,000 range. They now owe more than it’s worth.

They can downsize, but desperately want to stay.

But when it comes to home, who doesn’t?

Contact the writer: (949) 454-7356 or ghardesty@ocregister.com

.

My note:

I find the “homeless” meme rather annoying. These people are not homeless; they are not living in a box under a bridge somewhere.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 08:53 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 60 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3324
Joined  2007-01-02

“Less than a year and a half ago, Palmer was making $70,000 as a property manager and living in the condo he bought in 2000 for $198,000.

For years, he had handily made his $1,275 mortgage payment at a fixed rate of 12.75 percent.

A health issue he declined to discuss forced him to take out an adjustable-rate home-equity loan to pay for drugs that weren’t covered by insurance.

In January 2007, Palmer got a letter from his lender telling him his mortgage was going up to $2,850 per month. The higher payments started depleting his savings.

Then, in June 2007, his mortgage payment was adjusted upward again, to $3,550.

Palmer couldn’t afford it.”

Does anyone else smell bullshit here? How much money did this guy pull out for “drugs that weren’t covered by insurance?”

If he was already in a ridiculously high interest rate loan, and his fully-amortized payment was $1,275 per month, and he refinanced into an ARM that would have had a much lower interest rate, the only way his payment could have adjusted upward to $3,550 would be through an enormous amount of mortgage equity withdrawal.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 09:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 61 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3324
Joined  2007-01-02

“Jereme graduated from UC Irvine’s MBA program in 2004. He and his wife were hopeful that the degree would lead to a bump in his salary in his field of wireless consulting. (dumb decision #1)

That didn’t happen.

Because of volatility in the business, Jereme was unable to maintain stable work for more than a year.

He eventually began working as a real estate agent (dumb decision #2) — a common line of work in Ladera, where home prices ballooned until 2006.

The family also dipped into savings from selling their Ladera Ranch home in June 2005. (dumb decision #3)

Sunny admits she had dollar signs in her eyes after the value of the house reached $890,000 in 2005 — $440,000 more than the purchase price four years earlier.

They reasoned they could capitalize on the hot real estate market by using the cash (dumb decision #4) to pay off Jereme’s $70,000 in student loans, lease a second car and pay off medical bills.

At the time, friends in the red-hot mortgage industry suggested (listening—dumb decision #5) that the couple do 100-percent financing for a $700,000 house just a couple blocks away from the one they just sold. They ended up buying that house in 2005. (dumb decision #6)

“We desperately looked for a rental and nothing seemed to work out,” Sunny said.”

.

Could these people have done anything more wrong? Every decision they made was stupid, and I find it hard to have much sympathy for them.

Idiots like this are giving the MBA program in Irvine a bad name. I wouldn’t hire this guy to manage a McDonalds.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 09:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 62 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1861
Joined  2008-06-13
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 03:53 PM

“Less than a year and a half ago, Palmer was making $70,000 as a property manager and living in the condo he bought in 2000 for $198,000.

For years, he had handily made his $1,275 mortgage payment at a fixed rate of 12.75 percent.

A health issue he declined to discuss forced him to take out an adjustable-rate home-equity loan to pay for drugs that weren’t covered by insurance.

In January 2007, Palmer got a letter from his lender telling him his mortgage was going up to $2,850 per month. The higher payments started depleting his savings.

Then, in June 2007, his mortgage payment was adjusted upward again, to $3,550.

Palmer couldn’t afford it.”

Does anyone else smell bullshit here? How much money did this guy pull out for “drugs that weren’t covered by insurance?”

If he was already in a ridiculously high interest rate loan, and his fully-amortized payment was $1,275 per month, and he refinanced into an ARM that would have had a much lower interest rate, the only way his payment could have adjusted upward to $3,550 would be through an enormous amount of mortgage equity withdrawal.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read this. The bottom line is that I want to feel sorry for people and some of them I actually do, but there always seems to be a few little facts in these stories that the writers leave unexplained. The unexplained parts invariably involve huge amounts of HELOC abuse for some crazy, out of control spending. Is there anyone else bothered by the lack of foresight of people who have 5 children and their only real means of support is a real estate job?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 09:11 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 63 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3324
Joined  2007-01-02

“They’ve been paying $1,000 a month on their second mortgage since then as they continue to negotiate with their lender to lower the $2,900 payment. (still paying on the second? That is stupid.)

So far, the bank has been willing to try to hammer out an agreement and not send them the Tiffins a notice of default.

“We’re sort of in a holding pattern, waiting to see what will happen,” says Melissa Tiffin, 37, a former public relations specialist who is looking for a job while raising three young daughters with her husband, Bryan, 40.

Bryan Tiffin makes a solid salary as a construction executive for Broadcom, but not enough to handily cover all the family expenses.

The value of stock options he holds have dried up, erasing a potential source of emergency funds. (stock options as a savings account? That is really stupid.)

He and his wife have been forced to sell off some possessions, such as a motorcycle. (I am crying for them. Did they stop taking Vegas vacations too?)

Once a month, the Tiffins get free groceries from South County Outreach, a Lake Forest non-profit that helps individuals and families in crisis. (This family has the balls to seek charity?)

In August 2005, they bought their home for $545,000. It was a not a subprime loan; they got the loan based on two incomes. They wanted a backyard for their children, Ashley, 8, Krista, 7 and Allison, 3. (They are entitled to live better than responsible people even if it means relying on charity.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 10:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 64 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2427
Joined  2008-08-26
caycifish - 24 May 2009 06:41 AM

I find that entire situation disgusting.  My face scrunched up as I read.  Just terrible.

I just saw her make a reply that she sees no moral hazard at all with residing in the house rent-free and having a premeditated plan to purposely stall the process by filing bankruptcy at the midnight hour before it goes to auction. She literally said her and her husband are “doing the bank a favor” by staying in the home rent-free during the foreclosure process. She says that’s what the bank wants so as to keep looters away and prevent the home from falling into disrepair. Self-entitlement - table for two?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 12:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 65 ]
Custom Estate
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5364
Joined  2007-01-28
tmare - 24 May 2009 04:07 PM
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 03:53 PM

“Less than a year and a half ago, Palmer was making $70,000 as a property manager and living in the condo he bought in 2000 for $198,000.

For years, he had handily made his $1,275 mortgage payment at a fixed rate of 12.75 percent.

A health issue he declined to discuss forced him to take out an adjustable-rate home-equity loan to pay for drugs that weren’t covered by insurance.

In January 2007, Palmer got a letter from his lender telling him his mortgage was going up to $2,850 per month. The higher payments started depleting his savings.

Then, in June 2007, his mortgage payment was adjusted upward again, to $3,550.

Palmer couldn’t afford it.”

Does anyone else smell bullshit here? How much money did this guy pull out for “drugs that weren’t covered by insurance?”

If he was already in a ridiculously high interest rate loan, and his fully-amortized payment was $1,275 per month, and he refinanced into an ARM that would have had a much lower interest rate, the only way his payment could have adjusted upward to $3,550 would be through an enormous amount of mortgage equity withdrawal.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read this. The bottom line is that I want to feel sorry for people and some of them I actually do, but there always seems to be a few little facts in these stories that the writers leave unexplained. The unexplained parts invariably involve huge amounts of HELOC abuse for some crazy, out of control spending. Is there anyone else bothered by the lack of foresight of people who have 5 children and their only real means of support is a real estate job?

This is bull$hit! I got as far as this in the article and I wanted to rant.

First, the article states that Palmer saved $30k for his dream house, assuming he put all $30k down on his house with a rate of 12.75% fixed rate fully amortized loan, then his payment would be $1826 a month not $1275. Even the interest only payment would be $1785 a month. This guy is a liar, and the reporter sucks ass in fact checking the simple math.

Here is some further insight to Palmer’s situation that someone would know if they did some fact checking with a lender. He was obviously subprime back in 2000 when he bought his place. The saying in the business goes, once you are subprime you are always subprime. It was total BS when a lender would say don’t worry about the rate, in two years you will have cleaned up your credit and can get a better loan/rate. They never did, and they were addicted to MEW like it was crack. Now, back in 2000 people paid the price for being subprime and the spread above prime rates for subprime rates was about 200-800 basis points, usually on the higher side and this guy was obviously on the higher side of subprime at 12.75% (if that was really his rate) because prime rates were in the 7% range. It wasn’t until 2004 when the spreads between prime and subprime shrank to 100-500 BPS. Anyway, he kept coming back to refi and decided to get an ARM because he had to pay medical bills, because you can’t get a fixed rate loan to pay bills you have to get an ARM. At least from this article, that is what it is implying. Even if he really did have bills to pay, he didn’t need to extract that much MEW, or get an adjustable loan, he did it because he wanted it and because someone told him things will be better in the future and you will be able to get out of this. If you check county records, he did refi quite a bit between 04 and 05, and was a first payment default four months later after his refi in 05. So then he lived there rent free for year and a half before they foreclosed on him. So it really wasn’t the payment adjustment that bit him, it was the MEW that bit him in which he never intended to make a payment on. Good fact checking OCR, you suck and it is hack reporting like this as to why you are bankrupt.

I don’t even want to get started on the dumb breeders in Ladera. They are so stupid that they are not worth my time.

Like IR said, this whole homeless meme is a crock of sh*t. I wanna see breeder man at the Crown Valley off ramp with his entire family selling oranges before I call him homeless. This article just pisses me off. Yeah, I’m bitter when I pay my bills and don’t get in over my head, and these losers get a sympathy puff piece from the OCR. These people should be mocked, and made an example of what not to do. Don’t buy stuff you can’t afford. Man… people really are stupid.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 01:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 66 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1345
Joined  2008-04-28
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 03:53 PM

“Less than a year and a half ago, Palmer was making $70,000 as a property manager and living in the condo he bought in 2000 for $198,000.

For years, he had handily made his $1,275 mortgage payment at a fixed rate of 12.75 percent.

A health issue he declined to discuss forced him to take out an adjustable-rate home-equity loan to pay for drugs that weren’t covered by insurance.

In January 2007, Palmer got a letter from his lender telling him his mortgage was going up to $2,850 per month. The higher payments started depleting his savings.

Then, in June 2007, his mortgage payment was adjusted upward again, to $3,550.

Palmer couldn’t afford it.”

Does anyone else smell bullshit here? How much money did this guy pull out for “drugs that weren’t covered by insurance?”

If he was already in a ridiculously high interest rate loan, and his fully-amortized payment was $1,275 per month, and he refinanced into an ARM that would have had a much lower interest rate, the only way his payment could have adjusted upward to $3,550 would be through an enormous amount of mortgage equity withdrawal.

I thought his story was BS too. He could have re-fied into a 5% or so fixed rate, which would have saved him a few hundred a month.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 01:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 67 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1345
Joined  2008-04-28
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 04:06 PM

“Jereme graduated from UC Irvine’s MBA program in 2004. He and his wife were hopeful that the degree would lead to a bump in his salary in his field of wireless consulting. (dumb decision #1)

That didn’t happen.

Because of volatility in the business, Jereme was unable to maintain stable work for more than a year.

He eventually began working as a real estate agent (dumb decision #2) — a common line of work in Ladera, where home prices ballooned until 2006.

The family also dipped into savings from selling their Ladera Ranch home in June 2005. (dumb decision #3)

Sunny admits she had dollar signs in her eyes after the value of the house reached $890,000 in 2005 — $440,000 more than the purchase price four years earlier.

They reasoned they could capitalize on the hot real estate market by using the cash (dumb decision #4) to pay off Jereme’s $70,000 in student loans, lease a second car and pay off medical bills.

I couldn’t figure out why the kept having so many kids, particularly during the worst of their financial hardships.kjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj

At the time, friends in the red-hot mortgage industry suggested (listening—dumb decision #5) that the couple do 100-percent financing for a $700,000 house just a couple blocks away from the one they just sold. They ended up buying that house in 2005. (dumb decision #6)

“We desperately looked for a rental and nothing seemed to work out,” Sunny said.”

.

Could these people have done anything more wrong? Every decision they made was stupid, and I find it hard to have much sympathy for them.

Idiots like this are giving the MBA program in Irvine a bad name. I wouldn’t hire this guy to manage a McDonalds.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 01:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 68 ]
Condo
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  405
Joined  2009-03-17
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 03:48 PM

Bryan Tiffin makes a solid salary as a construction executive for Broadcom, but not enough to handily cover all the family expenses.

He and his wife have been forced to sell off some possessions, such as a motorcycle.

Once a month, the Tiffins get free groceries from South County Outreach, a Lake Forest non-profit that helps individuals and families in crisis.

They wanted a backyard for their children, Ashley, 8, Krista, 7 and Allison, 3.

They can downsize, but desperately want to stay.

Contact the writer: (949) 454-7356 or ghardesty@ocregister.com

Non-profit organizations are struggling in this economy and this story will do nothing but piss off the good people in our county who donate to South County Outreach.  Each of these stories pissed me off, but this story put me in a horrible mood.  So a Broadcom executive has been forced to sell off his motorcycle to live in a house that he and his wife cannot afford and shouldn’t have purchased in the first place.  But they had to buy it, they needed the yard for their kids because there are no decent parks in South OC.  Sure, they can downsize into a rental house or apartment, but they desperately want to stay, and they’ll even seek out groceries that should be reserved for families in crisis to do so!  I’m happy the OCR invited readers to contact the writer; I just might.

Edited to add:  I think each of us should call both writers next week.

[ Edited: 24 May 2009 01:43 PM by Sunshine ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2009 11:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 69 ]
McMansion
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1450
Joined  2007-07-26
SoCal78 - 24 May 2009 05:37 PM
caycifish - 24 May 2009 06:41 AM

I find that entire situation disgusting.  My face scrunched up as I read.  Just terrible.

I just saw her make a reply that she sees no moral hazard at all with residing in the house rent-free and having a premeditated plan to purposely stall the process by filing bankruptcy at the midnight hour before it goes to auction. She literally said her and her husband are “doing the bank a favor” by staying in the home rent-free during the foreclosure process. She says that’s what the bank wants so as to keep looters away and prevent the home from falling into disrepair. Self-entitlement - table for two?

Not only that, what about the ex who let her keep living in the house who is now getting shafted? What will this do to his credit score? I think I hate that woman.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2009 09:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 70 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2427
Joined  2008-08-26
caycifish - 25 May 2009 06:37 AM

Not only that, what about the ex who let her keep living in the house who is now getting shafted? What will this do to his credit score? I think I hate that woman.

Here’s what she says about that part of it (copy & paste):

“My ex is going to shit a brick.  Yeah, I think I mentioned that he is still on the mortgage.  This pretty much means he is going to have to file too, unless he wants to negotiate with the bank and move in or something.  I’m sure he doesn’t.  I wish it hadn’t turned out that this effects him, but there’s nothing I can do about it.  The thought makes me ill.”

(The next day…)

“After the lawyer visit, I called and had a conversation with my ex. God, that SUCKED. Having to tell him I was going to dump the mortgage on him was awful. However, he took it really well - I didn’t know it, but I guess he’s f$%ked up all the work I did on cleaning his credit reports and overextended himself (his new car, flat screen TV and leather couch - I guess this adds up in my head now), so without hesitation he said he would probably file for bankruptcy to get out of it all. He didn’t seem overly upset or pissed at me. I think I was more pissed at him when I realized what he had done to undo all my hard work. I don’t think that even makes a lot of sense when you think it through - me dumping this mortgage on him is going to screw up his credit anyway. Oh well, I was still angry inside at him.”

[ Edited: 25 May 2009 09:26 AM by SoCal78 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 May 2009 11:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 71 ]
Custom Estate
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3999
Joined  2007-10-22
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 04:06 PM


Idiots like this are giving the MBA program in Irvine a bad name. I wouldn’t hire this guy to manage a McDonalds.

Kinda OT hyjack:

I don’t think it was on purpose, but the diss of McDonalds managers is out of line.  I know a couple of franchisee owners, and sat next to a manager and a franchisee while eating lunch today (they were having a meeting).  Being a McDonalds manager is a decent wage (for somebody with little education) because it’s WAY HARD work and requires you to be very good at all functional areas.

While I was in MBA school, I heard the head of the department toss “Taco Bell Managers” under the bus.  I thought to myself “like, what - you’re opposed to honest work?”  (believe it or not, I held my tounge).  The audience of faculty and select students all laughed like hell.  I resented most of them from that point on. 

Sorry for the pet peeve hyjack.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 May 2009 10:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 72 ]
Custom Estate
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2006
Joined  2007-05-11
no_vaseline - 26 May 2009 06:38 AM
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 04:06 PM


Idiots like this are giving the MBA program in Irvine a bad name. I wouldn’t hire this guy to manage a McDonalds.

Kinda OT hyjack:

I don’t think it was on purpose, but the diss of McDonalds managers is out of line.  I know a couple of franchisee owners, and sat next to a manager and a franchisee while eating lunch today (they were having a meeting).  Being a McDonalds manager is a decent wage (for somebody with little education) because it’s WAY HARD work and requires you to be very good at all functional areas.

While I was in MBA school, I heard the head of the department toss “Taco Bell Managers” under the bus.  I thought to myself “like, what - you’re opposed to honest work?”  (believe it or not, I held my tounge).  The audience of faculty and select students all laughed like hell.  I resented most of them from that point on. 

Sorry for the pet peeve hyjack.

Nothing like a business in which you have to produce a real and measurable product (ex. burger, taco) and collect real profits as you go, to judge good managers by.
Unlike, say, financial services where the more imaginary stuff you pretend to make, the more ficticious profits and bigger bonuses you can get ...

Food services manager: “We sold 100 more burgers today, that’s fantastic!”

Financial services manager with MBA: “Instead of loaning Wimpy enough money for a hamburger today to be paid back Tuesday, we lent him enough money for 100 burgers!  The plan is that each week he will carry his next burger forward instead of paying on Tuesday.  We estimate that in 5 years time, we will make 10000% profit when his burger balloon payment is due and he pays us back for all the burgers!  Let’s book that profit today and pay ourselves a big bonus, we rock as financial managers!”

[ Edited: 26 May 2009 11:59 AM by Anonymous ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2009 09:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 73 ]
Homeless Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  1
Joined  2009-05-29

Home Rescue Programs is delivering a free seminar in Irvine next week (and five other cities) on the subject of Loan Modification solutions and how real estate, mortgage and financial professionals can earn fees working with us. If this is of interest, please come see us!

See video invitation from our President here:  http://www.homerescueprograms.com/cms-registration_1.html

Come get a better understanding of the important work that needs to be done and how we compensate real estate, mortgage and financial professional while providing the tools and technology to our affiliates so we can work together and make a difference for distressed Home Owners.

See video invitation from our Vice President here: http://www.homerescueprograms.com/cms-register_2.html
Thank you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2009 10:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 74 ]
Living with Parents
RankRank
Total Posts:  76
Joined  2009-02-15
HRP - 29 May 2009 04:38 PM

Home Rescue Programs is delivering a free seminar in Irvine next week (and five other cities) on the subject of Loan Modification solutions and how real estate, mortgage and financial professionals can earn fees working with us. If this is of interest, please come see us!

See video invitation from our President here:  http://www.homerescueprograms.com/cms-registration_1.html

Come get a better understanding of the important work that needs to be done and how we compensate real estate, mortgage and financial professional while providing the tools and technology to our affiliates so we can work together and make a difference for distressed Home Owners.

See video invitation from our Vice President here: http://www.homerescueprograms.com/cms-register_2.html
Thank you!

Nice first post…... *sigh*

Profile
 
 
Posted: 29 May 2009 11:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 75 ]
Custom Estate
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4257
Joined  2007-05-16
IrvineRenter - 24 May 2009 04:06 PM

“Jereme graduated from UC Irvine’s MBA program in 2004. He and his wife were hopeful that the degree would lead to a bump in his salary in his field of wireless consulting. (dumb decision #1)

That didn’t happen.

Because of volatility in the business, Jereme was unable to maintain stable work for more than a year.

He eventually began working as a real estate agent (dumb decision #2) — a common line of work in Ladera, where home prices ballooned until 2006.

The family also dipped into savings from selling their Ladera Ranch home in June 2005. (dumb decision #3)

Sunny admits she had dollar signs in her eyes after the value of the house reached $890,000 in 2005 — $440,000 more than the purchase price four years earlier.

They reasoned they could capitalize on the hot real estate market by using the cash (dumb decision #4) to pay off Jereme’s $70,000 in student loans, lease a second car and pay off medical bills.

At the time, friends in the red-hot mortgage industry suggested (listening—dumb decision #5) that the couple do 100-percent financing for a $700,000 house just a couple blocks away from the one they just sold. They ended up buying that house in 2005. (dumb decision #6)

“We desperately looked for a rental and nothing seemed to work out,” Sunny said.”

.

Could these people have done anything more wrong? Every decision they made was stupid, and I find it hard to have much sympathy for them.

Idiots like this are giving the MBA program in Irvine a bad name. I wouldn’t hire this guy to manage a McDonalds.

Having 6 kids IMO was also a dumb decision.

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 4
3