Author Archives: IrvineRenter

Desire for Mortgage Equity Withdrawal Inflated the Housing Bubble

The immediate access to home price appreciation through mortgage equity withdrawal motivated borrowers to take on crazy loans and inflate a massive Ponzi Scheme.

Are HELOC riches right around the corner? Today's featured property owner has already drained the equity. Do you want to pay off her bills?

Irvine Home Address … 2 MORNING SUN Irvine, CA 92603

Resale Home Price …… $875,000

{book1}

the bubble's are not reality but it's inside your mind,

making you forget where you're from and what's behind.

isn't it suspicious how the world is now your friend,

getting in return 1.000 more than what you could ever send.

oh yeah

we live in a bubble baby.

a bubble's not reality.

you gotta have a look outside.

nothing in a bubble, is the way it's supposed to be,

and when it blows you'll hit the ground.

Eiffel 65 — Living in a Bubble

We are all living in our own bubbles. Each of us has a tenuous grasp on reality, and with the steady flow of bullshit and propaganda that implants gross lies into our collective consciousness, our perception of reality becomes ever more distorted. It is a difficult and often time-consuming task to find Truth and Reality buried beneath obtuse writing and intentional obfuscation.

Bubble thinking is rampant, and the primary reason for its persistence is that people want the free spending money houses provide. The huge financial reward each bubble participant received as they went to the housing ATM gave a spender's high like no other. Absent another housing bubble, most bubble participants will never have access to that kind of money again.

The real estate lottery

When you reflect on it, mortgage equity withdrawal is similar to state run lotteries that sell hope to the poor at a major cost. If you are a worker who doesn't save money, you have no chance to acquire wealth. Lotteries give those who have no other opportunity for wealth a chance — slim though it may be.

If many people participate in the lottery, the payouts become enormous, and others become drawn to the action which further increases the payouts. This continues like a Ponzi Scheme until a big winner empties the lottery pool, and the game starts over.

Buying real estate is like buying a lottery ticket with important differences. When people participate in the real estate lottery, they are a guaranteed winner — for a while. Every participant gets to withdraw and spend their winnings as long as the pot grows. This makes the real estate lottery like no other, and it makes it much, much more desirable.

At some point, the real estate Ponzi Scheme collapses, the pool of equity "winnings" is emptied, and the game starts all over again. The big difference between the California lottery and the California real estate market is what happens to the losers. People who play the lottery are limited in their losses to the amount of money they invested. People who gamble in the real estate lottery have no limit to their losses; in fact, their losses may easily exceed their net worth resulting in bankruptcy. Most real estate losers also give up their homes.

The threat of foreclosure and bankruptcy doesn't deter people from playing the game, particularly the poor who have nothing to lose anyway. Most people take the free money and don't worry about the consequences because through either personal abdication of responsibility or a massive government bailout people will not face the consequences. Moral Hazard now rules the California real estate market.

A bubble here a bubble there

When I wrote The Great Housing Bubble, I scoured the academic journals for some insight as to why some markets bubbled and some did not. Some economists, like Paul Krugman, contend that growth restrictions that constrain supply are causal factors because the housing bubble was concentrated in coastal regions where development is more restricted than inland areas. There is some truth to the constrained supply argument; it can serve to precipitate the initial price movement that excites bubble thinking, but beyond that point, it's pure kool aid intoxication.

The growth restriction argument does not explain the housing bubble in Florida. I have worked in the land development industry in both Florida and California, and I can tell you California's process is much more restrictive of suburban sprawl. There was no shortage of supply in Florida as the glut of empty homes in South Florida attests to.

The growth restriction argument may explain why some some markets are more bubble prone because the restrictions are akin to lighting a match in a gas-filled cavern. The sparks may or may not cause a bigger explosion; it is merely a catalyst.

Show me the money

The real culprit in a housing bubble is expanding home mortgage balances — people take on more debt and bid up prices. The real question is, "why do people do it?" The short answer is to capture appreciation: kool aid intoxication. But the truth is more nuanced.

In order for home price appreciation to motivate people to pay stupid prices and inflate housing bubbles, they need a way to access this appreciation. The more immediate and plentiful this access to money, the more motivated buyers are to borrow and cash out. Mortgage equity withdrawal is the doorway to appreciation; it makes houses very desirable and very valuable.

Texas shows the way

To test this premise, we need to find a market with limited access to mortgage equity withdrawal and compare the home prices there to a market like California's where there are no restrictions at all. There is such a place: Texas.

I know Texas. I spent two and one-half years living in College Station studying real estate. Texas, along with California, was a big player in the Savings and Loan disaster. They inflated a commercial real estate bubble of epic standards, and even its residential real estate was volatile during that period. Texans are certainly not immune to the temptation to take free money from lenders. However, the delivery mechanism of the Savings and Loan disaster was through commercial lending whereas the delivery mechanism during the Great Housing Bubble was residential lending. Texas has different laws governing residential lending, and these laws prevented a housing bubble there.

The Lone Star Secret

How Texas avoided the worst of the real estate meltdown.

Posted Tuesday, March 30, 2010 – 4:01pm

It’s one of the great mysteries of the mortgage crisis: Why did Texas—Texas, of all places!—escape the real estate bust? Only a dozen states have lower mortgage foreclosure and default rates, and all of them are rural places like Montana and South Dakota, where they couldn’t have a real estate boom if they tried.

No, Texas’ 3.1 million mortgage borrowers are a breed of their own among big states with big cities. Just less than 6 percent of them are in or near foreclosure, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association; the national average is nearly 10 percent. Texas might look to outsiders an awful lot like Sunbelt sisters Arizona (13 percent) or Nevada (19)—flat and generous in letting real estate developers sprawl where they will. Texas was even the home base of two of the nation’s biggest bubble-era homebuilders, Centex and DR Horton (DHI).

Texas subprime borrowers do especially well compared with counterparts elsewhere. The foreclosure rate among subprime borrowers there, at less than 19 percent, is the lowest of any state except Alaska. Part of the state’s performance is due to the fact that Texas saw nothing like the stratospheric home-price run-ups other states experienced. On average, the 20 metro areas in the Case-Shiller Home Price Index saw their home-resale prices peak in 2006 after more than doubling since 2000. In Dallas, one of the 20, they went up just 25 percent, gradually, and have barely declined.

But there is a broader secret to Texas’s success, and Washington reformers ought to be paying very close attention. If there’s one single thing that Congress can do now to help protect borrowers from the worst lending excesses that fueled the mortgage and financial crises, it’s to follow the Lone Star State’s lead and put the brakes on “cash-out” refinancing and home-equity lending.

A cash-out refinance is a mortgage taken out for a higher balance than the one on an existing loan, net of fees. Across the nation, cash-outs became ubiquitous during the mortgage boom, as skyrocketing house prices made it possible for homeowners, even those with bad credit, to use their home equity like an ATM. But not in Texas. There, cash-outs and home-equity loans can’t total more than 80 percent of a home’s appraised value. There’s a 12-day cooling-off period after an application, during which the borrower can pull out. And when a borrower refinances a mortgage, it’s illegal to get even $1 back. Texas really means it: All these protections, and more, are in the state constitution. The Texas restrictions on mortgage borrowing date back to the first days of statehood in 1845, when the constitution banned home loans entirely.

“Delinquency and foreclosure rates are significantly lower in Texas,” boasts Scott Norman, the president of the Texas Mortgage Bankers Association. “The 80 percent loan-to-value limit—that’s the catalyst for a lot of this.”

In the Great Housing Bubble, one of the regulatory reforms I proposed is very similar: "The combined-loan-to-value of mortgage indebtedness cannot exceed 90% of the appraised value of the property or the purchase price, whichever value is smaller except in specially sanctioned government programs."

The incentive for people to spend their homes and remove their equity cushion must be removed. It makes HELOCs too desirable.

Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas backs Norman up. Texas’ low-ish unemployment rate, 8.6 percent, is a help. But so is the fact that fewer Texans took cash out of their home equity than did borrowers in any other state—and took out less when they did. The more prevalent cash-out refinances are in a state, the more likely it is that mortgage borrowers there will run into trouble. For every 1 percentage point increase in its share of subprime mortgages that are cash-out refinances, the likelihood of foreclosure in that state goes up by one-third of a percent.

During the boom, cash-out refinancings were the unofficial currency of bubble states from Florida to California, beloved by mortgage brokers as a way to persuade existing homeowners to take out new loans repeatedly. As home values surged, the sales pitch was a slam-dunk: Borrowers could refinance their homes at extremely low interest rates, and based on newly reappraised property values get more cash in their hands than they might earn in a year. Sure, these were teaser rates that would adjust upward after two years, but brokers routinely assured borrowers they could just refinance again before that happened.

Subprime cash-out refinancings became a standard way for borrowers drowning in credit card debt to pay it off, boost their credit scores so they could qualify in a few months to refinance into a lower-rate prime mortgage, and get a big tax deduction in the bargain. Ex-New York Times Federal Reserve reporter Edmund L. Andrews recounts in his underappreciated book Busted how he conjured $50,000 this way via a mortgage from Fremont Lending & Investment.

It is not news to readers here that there are bad incentives in the system. Free money was being given out, and people took it.

Homeowners and mortgage brokers weren’t alone in their addiction to the cash that flowed from homes-as-ATMs. The entire U.S. economy was right there with them. One of Alan Greenspan’s lesser-known contributions to the annals of the credit crisis was a pair of studies he co-authored for the Fed, sizing up exactly how much Americans borrowed against their home equity in the bubble and what it was they were spending their newfound (phantom) wealth on. Greenspan estimated that four-fifths of the trifold increase in American households’ mortgage debt between 1990 and 2006 resulted from “discretionary extraction of home equity.” Only one-fifth resulted from the purchase of new homes. In 2005 alone, U.S. homeowners extracted a half-trillion-plus dollars from their real estate via home-equity loans and cash-out refinances. Some $263 billion of the proceeds went to consumer spending and to pay off other debts.

I have written about our HELOC economy. Calculated Risk has been updating mortgage equity withdrawal as it has fallen off a cliff:

As home prices skyrocketed in many markets, cash-out refinancings became standard, even in the relatively sober world of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. By 2006, Freddie Mac reported that 88 percent of refinance mortgages that it purchased were for amounts at least 5 percent higher than borrowers’ previous loan balances. Subprime, in insane pursuit of risk, piled on with cash-out refinances for high-risk borrowers, often approaching the entire appraised value of the home.

But not in Texas. A borrower there can secure a home-equity line of credit from a bank. And she can refinance her mortgage or take out a home-equity loan. But the total amount of debt on a home cannot exceed 80 percent of its appraised value, and any proceeds cannot be used to pay off other debts.

… Not everyone loves the state’s rules. Financial services companies have periodically lobbied to scale back the restrictions on home-equity borrowing, noting that the costs of compliance increase borrowers’ interest rates. But another reason the loans are more costly is that the Texas rules are unique in the nation, giving borrowers less opportunity to shop around.

… Despite these advantages, Texas-style brakes on home-equity withdrawals are not likely to get a welcome reception in Washington. For starters, they’re out of bounds for the proposed consumer agency now under consideration on the Hill. Both the House and Senate versions of the financial reform bill follow a ground rule straight out of the Obama administration’s financial reform blueprint: The agency can only take action on a product or practice when it determines that the harm the practice causes to consumers isn’t outweighed by benefits to consumers “or to competition.” This narrow lens allows lenders to argue, credibly, that their home-equity loans are a boon to consumers, who benefit from ready access to home equity. It’s only in the long term, and the big picture, that the terrible tradeoffs become clear.

Lenders dislike laws that restrict lending, no matter the obvious public good. Their lobbying efforts are maddening but not surprising. They want to continue putting borrowers into profitable loans irrespective of whether or not the borrower benefits. Now that the government is backstopping their foolishness, they don't have to be constrained by the threat of bad loans.

Lenders will make any loan if they believe someone else has the risk. During the bubble lenders thought this risk was disbursed through derivative trades, but now we know the US taxpayer is assuming all the risk, so responsible lending is no more. Given our current state of affairs, we should see some really looney loan products once the economy picks up again.

Economists at the Fed and Treasury are no more likely than Congress to entertain cutting off the tap that until now has kept consumer spending flowing, just when the economy desperately needs that jolt. But the truth is that plummeting home prices have sucked the mortgage equity withdrawal well dry. Mimicking Texas would be the perfect opportunity to get our home-equity debt addiction under control and learn to live as an 80 percent nation.

An 80% nation? California borrowers must be aghast at the idea. How will we live without the free money from our houses? The owners of today's featured property will need to adjust their lifestyles significantly.

HELOC Abuse

Today's sordid story is another where a woman spent her home after a divorce. You must admit, withdrawing money from the housing ATM is much easier than working. Why slave away to earn an income when the house can provide? Particularly if you are a divorcee and you have become accustomed to certain entitlements from the marriage. The temptation to sustain the entitled lifestyle would be great, especially when all the friends are doing the same. It sets up a nasty fall from entitlement.

  • This property was purchased for $420,000 in 1990. The couple got divorced in 2003, and probably as part of the settlement to pay off the husband, the wife took out a first mortgage of $543,750 and a second mortgage of $36,250. It is possible that she simply wanted the money and this was her first infusion of cash. There is no way to know.
  • Two months later on 8/20/2003, she opened a $25,000 HELOC.
  • On 12/2/2004 she opened a $19,750 HELOC and a $44,000 HELOC.
  • On 12/7/2004 she refinanced her first mortgage for $656,250. This sequence of loans looks suspicious to me. The HELOCs are at a different bank than the first mortgage. I looks as if she ran the applications in parallel so the loans would not show up on the underwriting. It doesn't matter though because she made things worse later.
  • On 2/15/2006 she refinanced her first mortgage for $750,000.
  • On 3/9/2006 she opened a $130,000 HELOC
  • Total property debt is $880,000.
  • Total mortgage equity withdrawal from just the x-wife is $300,000.

She pulled out $100,000 a year for three years. Who wouldn't want some of that action?

How desirable are HELOCs?

In the post California Personal Finance: Ponzi Style I discussed the reason HELOCs are so helpful to a family's income statement:

HELOC

Examine the graphic above. The first column shows a graphical breakdown of the income of a typical homeowner. Total home related debt (including taxes, insurance, HOA and other monthly expenses) is limited to 28% of gross income. Consumer debt including all other debt service payments is limited to 8%. Taxes take up about 24% (depending on income and tax bracket), and the remaining 40% is disposable income to cover the other expenses of daily life.

The second column shows what happens as people start to stretch to buy a home in a financial mania. The increasing home debt reduces the tax burden a little, but the increased consumer spending and home debt takes a big chunk out of disposable income. The recession of the early 90s lingered for so long here in California because the people who bought in the frenzy of the late 1980s found themselves with crushing debts and greatly reduced disposable income. Prior to the increase in housing debt, this disposable income would have been spent in the local economy; instead, this money was sent out of state to the creditor who made the loan.

The big financial innovation—if you want to call it that—of the Great Housing Bubble was the nearly unrestricted use of cash-out refinancing and HELOCs to tap into home price appreciation. The third column shows the impact this new source of credit had on personal income statements. HELOC money allowed people to pay off their consumer debt while only modestly increasing their home debt. Since this income was untaxed (borrowed money is not truly income), the extracted money was entirely converted to disposable income. This incredible influx of disposable income caused our economy to explode.

Unfortunately, as is documented in the post Our HELOC Economy, the loss of this HELOC income is having devastating effects on local tax revenues and our economy. When you examine the personal income statements of borrowers in column four, you see that home debt and consumer debt have now become so burdensome that there is no longer enough disposable income to cover life’s basic needs; borrowers are insolvent.

Think about the system here in California; imagine an isolated neighborhood of 20 homes similar today's featured property. Imagine they were new builds and purchased at the same time for $100,000.

It is five years later, and someone buys a house in the neighborhood for $130,000. The home value of the other 19 houses is now $130,000. This gives each homeowner in the neighborhood $30,000 they can withdraw from their housing ATM and spend. As we have witnessed repeatedly here at the IHB, many of those neighbors will do just that.

Since everyone knows that established owners obtain this monetary benefit of ownership, houses become very, very desirable. Lenders then eliminated all barriers to acquiring real estate including the down payment which essentially makes the house free. Who wouldn't want a free ATM machine capable of churning out hundreds of thousands of dollars?

Once prices start going up, comparable sales values justifies ever-larger mortgages, and with loan qualification standards eliminated through liar loans, there was no practical limit to loan balances. The resulting frenzy is a housing bubble.

Do we want to stop the music?

I see no movement in either State or Federal government to change this system. I have no doubt that if California limited mortgage equity withdrawal to an 80% LTV or even a 90% LTV we would no longer have severe housing bubbles. What surprises me is that everyone seems to want housing bubbles!

Housing bubbles encourage spending and investment that otherwise would not have occurred. We built many houses in Riverside County and the High Desert that never should have been built. We employed many people and enriched many others while building unnecessary housing. The people who benefited from this activity have no desire to see it curtailed. Besides most of those fools don't realize the bubble was abnormal; they think that is the way things are supposed to be.

We created our own monster, and we have the power to slay it. I simply don't see the desire.

Irvine Home Address … 2 MORNING SUN Irvine, CA 92603

Resale Home Price … $875,000

Home Purchase Price … $420,000

Home Purchase Date …. 6/24/1990

Net Gain (Loss) ………. $402,500

Percent Change ………. 108.3%

Annual Appreciation … 3.7%

Cost of Ownership

————————————————-

$875,000 ………. Asking Price

$175,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional

5.11% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$700,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$183,453 ………. Income Requirement

$3,805 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$758 ………. Property Tax

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$73 ………. Homeowners Insurance

$376 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$5,012 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$935 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$824 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment

$351 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$109 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$3,714 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$8,750 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$8,750 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$7,000 ………… Interest Points @1% of Loan

$175,000 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$199,500 ………. Total Cash Costs

$56,900 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$256,400 ………. Total Savings Needed

Property Details for 2 MORNING SUN Irvine, CA 92603

——————————————————————————

Beds: 2

Baths: 2 full 1 part baths

Home size: 2,022 sq ft

($433 / sq ft)

Lot Size: 5,000 sq ft

Year Built: 1979

Days on Market: 86

MLS Number: S600812

Property Type: Single Family, Residential

Community: Turtle Rock

Tract: Rp

——————————————————————————

According to the listing agent, this listing may be a pre-foreclosure or short sale.

2 Morning Sun has a wonderful view of Shady Canyon and Stawberry Farms Golf Course. This beautifully upgraded home also sides to a spacious greenbelt giving the owner a very private yet open feeling. The kitchen has been remodeled with custom cabinets, slab granite counters and stainless appliances. The beautifully done wood floors lead from the entry into the dining room and kitchen. Sit or dine on your cobblestone patio as you take in the views beyond. Ridgeview is a small, private community of only 86 single family attached homes. The ownership is unique in that you own the land, have the ability to remodel, with HOA approval. The Association also maintains the landscaping including the irrigation,the roofs and paints, to mention only a few of the many benefits. This is a home not to be missed.

Bubble Market Psychology – Part 2

Psychological Stages of a Bubble

Once a bubble starts to form, it will go through several identifiable stages: enthusiasm, greed, denial, fear, capitulation, and despair. Each of these stages is characterized by different speculator emotional states and different resulting behaviors. There are outside forces that also act on the market in predictable ways in each one of these stages. Most often, these outside factors serve to reinforce the market’s herd behavior and exacerbate changes in price.

Precipitating Factor

There is often a precipitating factor causing the initial price rally that pushes prices above their supported fundamental values. A bubble rally is usually kicked off by some exogenous event, but it may occur simply because prices have been rising and investors take notice, or it can be merely the result of a lack of investor fear and the widespread belief prices cannot go down. [1] In a typical market, there is a significant selloff when prices exceed fundamental valuations. This selloff is a natural reaction to inflated prices as a decline to fundamental valuations is normal and expected. Many seasoned market observers will “sell short” here to profit from the initially inflated values caused during the take-off stage. However, in a financial mania, this sell off is short-lived, and it traps many who are bearish on asset pricing on the wrong side of the trade. This “short squeeze” may prompt a feverish activity of buying as short sellers cover their positions before their losses get too great. A short squeeze may act as a precipitating factor. In a securities market, a precipitating factor may be a very large order hitting the trading floor, and in a real estate market it may be a dramatic lowering of interest rates as it was in the Great Housing Bubble. Regardless of its cause, the initial price rise has the potential to spark sufficient interest to prompt further buying and set a series of events in motion which repeat with a remarkable consistency. Market bubbles can be found in all financial markets and on multiple timeframes.

Figure 35: Psychological Stages of a Bubble Market

Enthusiasm Stage

At the beginning of the enthusiasm stage, prices are already inflated, so there is cautious buying from traders looking for trends and momentum. If prices fail to drop to fundamental valuations and instead push higher, media attention is often drawn to the speculative market. The general public starts to take notice of the money being made by people who have bought the featured asset and they begin to participate in larger numbers. Of course, this stimulates more buying and prices continue to climb. The market sentiment turns very bullish. Buyers are everywhere and sellers are scarce. At this point, prices are completely detached from fundamental valuations, but people are not buying because of the underlying value, they are buying because prices are going up.

In residential real estate markets, the enthusiasm stage is often greeted by lenders with open arms. With prices rising, there is little risk of loss from default. If a borrower gets in trouble, they can simply sell into rising prices, and neither party takes a loss. With neither party fearing loss, and since lenders make most of their money on the transaction itself through origination fees, there is an inevitable lowering of standards to meet market demand. This in turn creates more market demand leading to further lowering of standards. The credit cycle reinforces the bullish psychology in the market and helps push prices even higher.

Greed Stage

In the greed stage, the bullish sentiment reaches a feverish pitch and prices rise very rapidly. Every owner in the market is making money and most believe it will go on forever. As prices continue to climb, buyers become very enthusiastic about owning the asset, and they tell all their friends about their great investment. The word-of-mouth awareness and increased media coverage bring even more buyers to the market. Egomania sets in as everyone thinks she is a financial genius. Any intellectual analysis at this stage is merely a cover for emotional buying and greed. During the Great Housing Bubble, there were many instances of properties receiving a dozen or more offers the day they were listed, with many in excess of the asking price. Encouraged by realtors, some buyers wrote emotional letters to sellers to convince them why they should be bestowed with the honor of home ownership. [ii]

Most people who are bullish already own the asset, but for prices to continue to rise there must be more buying. For buying to occur, someone who was either bearish or ignorant of the rally must be convinced to buy. In other words, a greater fool must be found. Once everyone is made aware of the market rally and is convinced to buy, you simply run out of new buyers. Once there is a shortage of potential buyers, prices can only go down.

Denial Stage

When the limit of affordability is reached and the pool of available buyers is exhausted, prices start to decline. At first market participants are still overwhelmed by greed, and they choose to ignore the signs that the party might be over. In 2007 most real estate markets were in the denial stage as prices had not dropped enough to cause real fear. Denial is apparent in polls in mid-2007 where 85 percent believed their home would rise in value during the next five years, and 63 percent believe a house is a good investment. That is denial. It is also apparent in the number of homes purchased during the greed stage that are held for sale at breakeven prices–even if this is above market. When the inventory is large, and houses stay on the market for a long time, prices are too high. Sellers who refuse to lower their prices to take a small loss are in denial about the state of the market. They believe bids will increase and some buyer will come along and pay their price–after all, that is the way it was just a couple of years prior. Buyers who bought in the enthusiasm stage are still ahead, so they feel no urgency to sell. They have made good money already and they will hold on with hopes of making a little more. Since they believe the asset will appreciate again (and they have no exit strategy), this group of buyers does not sell. [iii] In contrast, the few traders who still hold positions liquidate and go back into cash. Successful traders recognize the emotion of denial as a signal to exit their positions to lock in profits or prevent further damage.

In the denial stage of a residential real estate market, many speculators are unable to obtain the sale price they desire. [iv] The accumulation of unrealistically priced houses starts to build a large inventory of homes “hanging” over the market. Overhead supply is a condition in a financial market when many units are held for sale at prices above current market prices. Generally there will be a minor rally after the first price decline as those who missed the big rally but still believe prices will only go up enter the market and cause a short-term increase in prices. This is a bear rally. It is aptly named as those bullish on the market buy right before the bear market reverses and quickly declines. For prices to resume a sustained rally, the overhead supply must be absorbed by the market. Once prices stopped going up and actually began to fall, demand is lessened by diminished buyer enthusiasm and the contraction of credit caused by mounting lender losses. With increasing supply and diminished demand prices cannot rally to absorb the overhead supply. The overall bullish bias to market psychology has not changed much at this point, because owners are in denial about the new reality of the bear market; however, the insufficient quantity of buyers and the beginnings of a credit crunch signal the rally is over and the bubble has popped.

Fear Stage

In the grieving process there is a shift from denial to fear when the reality being denied becomes too obvious to be ignored or pushed out of awareness. There is no acceptance of reality, just the idea that reality might be fact. The fact that an investment might turn out to be a very poor financial decision with long-term repercussions to the speculator’s financial life is generally very difficult to accept. The imaginings of a horrifying future creates fear, and this fear causes people to make decisions regarding their investments.

The most important change in the market in the fear stage is caused by the belief that the rally is over. Price rallies are a self-sustaining price-to-price feedback loop: prices go up because rising prices induces people to buy which in turn drives prices even higher. Once it is widely believed that the rally is over, it is over. Market participants who once only cared about rising prices suddenly become concerned about valuations. Since prices are far above fundamental values and prices are not rising, there is little incentive to buy. The rally is dead.

Another major psychological change occurs in this stage after people accept the rally is dead: people reassess and change their relationship to debt. During the rally, debt becomes a means to take a position in the housing commodity market. Nobody cares how much they are borrowing because they never intend to pay off the loan through payments from their wage income. Most believe they will pay off whatever they borrow in the future when they sell the house for more than they paid. Once prices stop going up, people realize they are simply renting from the bank, and the only way to get ahead and build equity is to pay off a mortgage. The desire to borrow 8 to 10 times income diminishes rapidly as people realize they could never pay off such a large sum. What started in the denial stage as an involuntary contraction of credit, in the fear stage becomes a voluntary contraction of credit as people simply do not want to borrow such large amounts of money.

In August of 2007, a more serious credit crunch gripped financial markets, and during the times that followed there was increased liquidation of bank held inventory. Banks tried to get their wishing prices through the prime selling season, but by the end of the year, there was pressure to get these non-performing assets off their books. The sales of bank foreclosures and the ongoing tightening of credit drove prices down an additional 5% to 10%. This caused some major problems for owners of residential real estate. Fear began to grip the market.

By the time a financial market enters the fear stage, greed stage buyers are seriously underwater. Comparable properties may be selling for 10% less than their breakeven price, and there is little hope that prices will rally. Some sell at this point and take a loss, but most do not. People who bought in the enthusiasm stage come up to their breakeven price and face the same decision the greed stage buyers faced earlier: sell now or hold out for a rally. Even though there is good reason to fear, most do not sell here. They regret it later, but they hold on. Speculators generally only sell an asset when the pain of loss becomes acute. The pain threshold is different for each individual, but there is no real pain until the investment is worth less than the purchase price, so few sell for a profit or at breakeven. Inventories grow in the fear stage because many would like to sell, but sales volumes are light because few are willing to sell at prices buyers are willing to pay.

Prices do not rally here because there are even fewer buyers in the market and a reduced appetite for debt due to the change in market psychology. There are more and more sellers either choosing to sell or being forced to sell, and since there are more sellers than buyers, prices continue to drop. During the fear stage, a majority of buyers during the rally go underwater on their mortgages and endure the associated pain and stress. In the past, since the bubbles of the 80s and 90s were largely built on conventional mortgages, people just held on. During the Great Housing Bubble, people used exotic loan financing terms, and they simply could not afford to make their payments. They borrowed from other sources until their credit lines were exhausted and they imploded in foreclosure and bankruptcy. During this stage many renters who would otherwise have purchased a home put off their purchase and save more money because they correctly see the decline in prices has momentum and prices should continue to drop further.

Capitulation Stage

The transition from the fear stage to the capitulation stage is caused by the infectious belief that the rally is over. There is a tipping point where a critical mass of market participants either decide to sell or are forced to sell. In residential real estate, people are compelled to sell by anxiety, and the mechanism for force is foreclosure. Once a critical mass of selling is reached, the selling causes prices to decline further which in turn causes more selling. This convinces even more people the rally is over yielding even more selling: a downward spiral. The same price-to-price feedback mechanism that served to drive prices up during the rally works to drive prices down during the crash. Collectively, everyone in the market accepts prices are going to drop further, and they need to get out: Now! Of course when everyone knows prices are going to drop, and everyone is trying to sell, there are very few buyers. Each market participant has a different threshold for pain. Some give up early; some give up later; some stubbornly try to hold on, but in the end, by choice or by force, everyone who cannot afford their home sells out and capitulates to the forces of the market. Each seller accepts the market rally was a bubble, and the frenzy of selling activity clears out the overhead supply. The capitulation stage is the counterpart of the greed stage. Sellers are everywhere and buyers are scarce. This puts prices into free-fall until a critical mass of buyers is ready to buy again.

Since buyers in the aftermath of a bubble tend to be the risk averse who did not participate in it, they will make cautiously low offers on properties. Buyer caution is reinforced by lender caution. In stark contrast to the days of bubble lending, large downpayments are suddenly required, appraisals are carefully reviewed, eligibility is tighter, and most exotic loan programs are gone. This cautious buying together with desperate sellers causes the market to drop below normal valuation standards. The market enters the despair stage. Here the market participants think nobody wants the asset, and nobody ever will again. Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth as those who recognize the fundamental value of the asset are buying it in preparation for the next cycle.

Despair Stage

From a perspective of market psychology, it is difficult to tell when the capitulation stage ends and the despair stage begins. Both stages have an extremely negative bearish sentiment. It is called the despair stage because most who own the asset are in despair and wish they did not own it, and the general public is still selling. Most who still own their homes are able to afford the monthly payments, but realize they will face a large loss if they sell their house anytime soon. They feel like prisoners in their own homes because they are unable to relocate for a better job or any other reason. One distinguishing feature of the despair stage is the increased buying activity of investors–true investors, not the speculators who were wiped out during the price decline. Investors are not in despair during this stage. This is the time they were anticipating to make their purchases.

There is an extreme emotional toll paid by those who participated in the mania. Losing a home to foreclosure is devastating. The emotional ties to a home go beyond seeing it as an investment. A home is supposed to be a safe haven where people raise a family. It is a unique reflection of the family, adorned with mementos and family photographs. Being forced to leave the family home is difficult for reasons that have nothing to do with money. Unfortunately, this is often followed by personal bankruptcy, and the difficulties in bankruptcy have everything to do with money.

In some ways, those who endure foreclosure may be the lucky ones as they get to leave their debtor’s prison and go find an affordable rental. The income that used to go toward housing is now freed up to go toward living a life. Those homeowners who hang on, who are desperately underwater, and who are putting 50% or more of their income toward a house worth less than they owe on it, their circumstances are arguably even more dire. There is no light at the end of their tunnel; they must live with their pain every day.

The despair stage is not desperate for everyone. What makes the despair stage different from the capitulation stage is that buyers who focus on fundamentals like rental savings or positive cashflow return to the market and begin buying. Affordability has returned to the housing market, and those who did not participate in the mania finally get their chance to become homeowners–at reasonable prices. These buyers are not concerned with appreciation; they simply want an asset which provides a savings or a cash return on their investment. They are not frightened by falling prices because their financial returns are independent of the asset’s market valuation. It is the return of these people to the market that creates a bottom.

Bubbles as Cultural Pathology

What is a Cultural Pathology? There are certain beliefs if widely held and acted upon by a group of people leads inevitably to collective suffering and personal destruction. One example of a cultural pathology is demonstrated by the American auto industry. Before the age of imported cars, the American auto industry believed the quality of their product did not matter; people bought their product irrespective of quality. For many years, the industry was successful despite this pathology. This belief allowed offshore competitors to enter the market, build market share, and finally take over the industry. The American auto industry’s belief system had had a pathologic effect on their business which caused much suffering in Detroit. This commitment to quality in the industry is still suspect, and it may lead to the bankruptcy and destruction of our major automakers.

The best treatise on the pathology of cultural beliefs was George Orwell’s novel, 1984. [v] In Orwell’s vision, a totalitarian State had convinced the populace of the following:

  • WAR IS PEACE
  • FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

  • IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Although these statements are clearly contradictory, in the story the slogans do make sense to the State. For example, through constant “war”, the State can keep domestic peace; when the people obtain freedom, they become enslaved to it, and the ignorance of the populace is the strength of the State. Just as Orwell’s Big Brother convinced the populace the above contradictions were true, Californians and other bubble participants have convinced themselves of the following:

  • APPRECIATION IS INCOME
  • CREDIT IS SAVINGS

  • DEBT IS WEALTH

Just as these statements are contradictory and ridiculous, the proof that these statements are believed is that they are reflected in the actions of many homeowners during the Great Housing Bubble. For example, through borrowing against increasing home values, appreciation is turned to income; when people obtain more credit, they spend it like available savings, and a large amount of debt used to finance a large, opulent home makes one wealthy. To many buyers and homeowners during the Great Housing Bubble this made perfect sense.

The problem is rooted in a basic misunderstanding of what separates the rich from the poor: the habit of saving. There is an old expression, “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” It is more accurate to say the rich save money and the poor spend it: in the end, the rich will have money, and the poor will have none. [vi] This is not one of life’s inequities, but rather one of life’s simple truths. When the average Joe says he wants to be rich, what he is really saying is he wants unlimited spending power. He wants the ability to spend like the rich people he sees wearing Rolexes and driving BMWs to their mansions. This is why, when given the chance, poor people will emulate the rich by spending beyond their means in order to be rich. Of course, in the process, they spend themselves poor.

Appreciation is Income

There is a noticeable difference between the behavior of rich and poor when it comes to home price appreciation. The rich view home price appreciation as adding to their net worth. If lower interest rates allow them to refinance, they will restructure their debt to pay off the loan more quickly in order to increase their wealth. Poor people view home price appreciation as income; free money for them to spend. If lower interest rates allow them to refinance, they will restructure their loan to pull as much home equity as possible and reduce their payment as much as possible so they can spend more. If any net worth happens to accumulate, they obtain a home equity line of credit and spend the appreciation as quickly as possible–it makes them feel rich even though it really makes them poor.

Credit is Savings

So how do the rich and poor deal with credit? The rich do not carry consumer debt. Why would they pay interest on a credit balance when it almost always costs more than the income they earn on their savings? The rich will use credit sparingly and most often pay off any credit balances each month as the bill comes due. In contrast, the poor carry as much consumer debt as they can afford to service. Whenever they receive an increase in a credit line, they believe they have more money to spend, just like it was savings. In a strange way, a credit account is like a savings account, only it has a negative balance. In a savings account, the saver earns money; in a credit account, the spender pays money. Again, the rich have savings, and the poor have credit.

Debt is Wealth

There are a great many homeowners who live in big houses, and they believe that makes them rich. To them, the possession and use of an expensive house makes them wealthy even if they have no equity in the property. The rich buy less home than they can afford and work to pay off the debt in order to maximize their net worth. The poor stretch their finances to possess more home than they can afford with loan terms which never retire the debt, or in the case of negative amortization loans, actually increases their debt held against the property. This ensures they never gain any equity or only gain it by appreciation, and as mentioned previously, if prices appreciate they quickly withdraw the gain to fuel more consumer spending.

It’s a California Thing

So what happens when you give poor people money? They spend it. The stories of people who won the lottery and managed to spend themselves into bankruptcy a few years later are classic examples of the pathology of the beliefs of spenders. [vii] A great many Californians are spenders. This is why California has a strong cultural pathology. The main psychological reason house prices in California were bid up to such dizzying heights during the Great Housing Bubble was because there was a high percentage of the population in California that subscribed to the spending habits just described. They went out and borrowed as much money as they could with exotic loans, bought up all the real estate they could get their hands on, and in the process drove real estate prices into the stratosphere. In other areas of the country, reckless spending was not so trendy, and home prices were not bid up so high.

Pretentious displays of conspicuous consumption are less common in the Midwest, and consumerism is often viewed with contempt rather than envy. In short, there is a smaller percentage of the general population in the Midwest with the aforementioned pathologic beliefs. [viii] To substantiate this claim, observe the profile of Minnetonka, Minnesota, a suburb of Minneapolis with very similar income and demographics to Irvine, California. The median income in Minnetonka, Minnesota in 2006 was $84,024, and the median income in Irvine, California, in 2006 was $84,253. [ix] This is close enough to be a good comparison. The median home price in Minnetonka in 2006 was $305,600, and the median home price in Irvine in 2006 was $722,928. [x],[xi] If the thesis is correct, one would expect to find a much higher percentage of home loans utilizing exotic loan terms in Irvine as compared to Minnetonka. In 2006 the Minneapolis area had 8.7% of its loan originations were negative amortization, while Orange County had 32%.[xii] In all of California more than 80% of loan originations in 2006 were either Option ARM or interest-only. Here are two groups of people with the same median income, and with the same access to credit making very different choices. Potential homebuyers in Minnetonka and Irvine faced the same decision on taking out an exotic loan and buying more house than they can afford or choosing to live within their means. Very few in Minnetonka chose to overextend themselves, so they did not bid up the values of their houses. Residents of Irvine (and the rest of California) chose to utilize exotic financing and thereby real estate prices were bid much, much higher. The high utilization of exotic financing was the cause of the price increase, not the result of it. Nobody was forced to buy.

Perhaps Californians were just more financially sophisticated than the rubes back on the farm in the Midwest? If many in California were spending freely, feeling rich, and enjoying life, where is the pathology? The beliefs and resulting behavior is pathological because it is not sustainable. There is an inevitable Day of Reckoning when all debts must be paid. Charles Ponzi was the most excessive example of this pathology. So extreme were his activities, that the term Ponzi Scheme has become synonymous with the use of ever increasing amounts of investment or debt. [xiii] This scheme is also encapsulated in the expression “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” The twentieth century economist Hyman Minsky wrote about the “Minsky Moment” when borrowers must liquidate assets to pay off debts which in turn lowers asset prices and creates more margin calls and even more asset liquidation. [xiv] At some point, the debt becomes so large that no lender is willing to loan more money, no greater fool can be found to bail them out, and the whole system comes crashing down. However, while the debt was building, the debtor becomes accustomed to a certain lifestyle and level of spending. When the credit is cut off, the debtor can no longer spend, and a great deal of suffering ensues. This is Armageddon for debtors: the spending stops, they lose their homes and with it their illusion of wealth, and they definitely are not enjoying life. The cause of all the weeping and gnashing of teeth is not an exogenous event, but rather a direct result of the circumstances they themselves created.

The California Social Contract

Satire is often more revealing than detailed explanations. The pathology of a collection of beliefs becomes apparent when the natural end result of a group of people acting on those beliefs is an absurd contradiction and an obviously unsustainable state. The following is a satirical essay written from the point of view of a desperate homeowner trying to sustain the Ponzi Scheme of the Great Housing Bubble:

You fence-sitters are failing to fulfill your part of the California Social Contract. Your failure to continue buying homes is disrupting the social order, and it is causing those of us who bought before you psychological, emotional and financial damage. It is time for you to get off the fence and buy–NOW!!!

In any social contract, you give up something personally for the greater good. When those of us who bought before you purchased our homes, we had to commit unrealistic percentages of our income to housing, lie on mortgage applications, and take out financing on unstable mortgage terms in order to do our part for the continuing social good. We made these sacrifices willingly because the benefits of maintaining the social contract are worth the price we paid. Look what those who bought before us received in return:

  1. Dramatic increases in wealth through home equity. I think we can all agree this is desirable. You want to be rich, right?
  2. The ability to spend more than what is earned through productive activities like work. Think of all the BMWs, Mercedes, vacations to Maui, Coach Bags, designer jeans, Rolex watches and other items purchased with home equity lines of credit. You want to double your spending power, right?
  3. The ability to buy furniture and home improvements without saving or spending income. Your house should be a self-sustaining asset which provides the ability to maintain itself with perpetual appreciation. Who would not want that?

We provided all of this to the buyers who came before us, and all we ask is that you do the same for us. Is not this a fair bargain? You want the same for yourself, right? If you do this, the next generation of buyers will learn from your example, and they will be willing to do the same.

Some have argued it is our fault that the social contract is falling apart. If we recent homebuyers had simply made our payments, the contract would not have been broken. This is rubbish. The lenders failed us. They knew we could not make those payments when we took out the loans. They knew we were not truthful on our loan applications. They knew they were going to have to provide opportunities for serial refinancing of ever increasing amounts of debt. They failed us. They are the ones who broke the social contract, not us.

The tightening of credit just means you will have to make more significant sacrifices to keep the social contract. You may need to borrow money from family members or solicit larger gifts. You may need to become more creative in your attempts to inflate your income or assets. All we had to do was sign some fraudulent paperwork, but you may have to forge some documents or buy a seasoned credit line or find a hard-money lender who does not record the debt (loan sharks). It is going to be tough, but look at the benefits listed above. Is it not worth the sacrifice?

It is time for you to buy now. Trees really can grow to the sky; prices really can go up forever–if you hold up your end of the California Social Contract. To paraphrase Winston Churchill,

Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the {California Social Contract} last for a thousand years, men will still say, ‘This was their finest hour.’

This is your chance to stand up for what is right and perpetuate a system that is beneficial to our society. History will remember what you do. Will you be the generation that lived up to its duties, or will this be the end of the world as we know it? You decide.


[1] In Risk and Return in the U.S. Housing Market: A Cross-Sectional Asset-Pricing Approach (Cannon, Miller, & Pandher, 2006), the authors noted a 10% increase in volatility with each 2.48% increase in annual returns. This strongly suggests bubble volatility occurs just because prices are rising.

[ii] An article in Real Estate Journal.com (http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/markettrends/20050106-capell.html) from the Greed stage in the bubble anecdotally documents properties selling for over list and realtors telling clients to write emotional letters to sellers (Capell, 2004).

[iii] Karl Case and Robert Shiller noted (Case & Shiller, The Behavior of Home Buyers in Boom and Post-Boom Markets, 1988) that prices in the early 80s leveled off, but they did not decline at the conclusion of the first California housing bubble of the late 1970s. This convinced people that prices could not decline and that if they just waited long enough prices would come back. This belief caused people to bid up prices even higher in the coastal bubble of the late 1980s. When the decline of that bubble (25%) was forgotten, market participants inflated the Great Housing Bubble.

[iv] In Robert Shiller’s studies, very few market participants said they would lower their prices until they found a buyer (Case & Shiller, The Behavior of Home Buyers in Boom and Post-Boom Markets, 1988).

[v] (Orwell, 1950)

[vi] Vernon L. Smith noted in Human Nature: An Economic Perspective that “We should all love rich people, because they consume such a small percentage of their accumulation, leaving almost all of it to work in the economy and make the rest of us better off.” (Smith, Human Nature: An Economic Perspective, 2004)

[vii] Newspapers frequently print stories of lottery winners who spent all their winnings or were unhappy after the windfall (Geary, 2002) (Sullivan, 2006).

[viii] Karl Case and Robert Shiller noted (Case & Shiller, Is There a Bubble in the Housing Market, 2004) that Wisconsin had almost no volatility in the ratio of house price to income whereas the coastal bubble markets have price volatility where income only explains about half of the movement in price seen over longer terms.

[ix] Median income information is available from the US Census Bureau:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/income.html

[x] Median home sales price from US Census Bureau.

[xi] Data for the California market is from DataQuick Information Systems and the California Association of Realtors.

[xii] BusinessWeek wrote one of the finest articles on the mortgage problem in 2006. In it they reference the now infamous Map of Misery showing the distribution of Option ARMs throughout the United States. The source of their data is not given. The data presented in this work on the loans in Minnetonka, MN and Orange County, California, come from this map. Two of the most moronic lender statements of the housing bubble are in the article’s final paragraph, “Analyst Frederick Cannon of Keefe Bruyette & Woods says most banks don't apologize for their option ARM businesses. ’Almost without exception everyone says [the option ARM] is a great loan, it's plenty regulated, and don't bug us,’ he says. In an April letter to regulators, Cindy Manzettie, chief credit officer for Fifth Third Bank in Cincinnati, said it's not the ‘lender's responsibility to help the consumer determine the appropriate payment option each month…. Paternalistic regulations that underestimate the intelligence of the American public do not work.’” Those statements are wrong on every point, but they do serve to illustrate the mindset of lenders during the bubble.

[xiii] Charles Ponzi was an Italian immigrant who arrived in the United States in 1903. He was a consummate schemer and tried numerous get-rich-quick schemes. He hit the con-man’s jackpot in 1920 with a scheme involving international postal reply coupons. When the structure collapsed, Ponzi paid out all his gains and ended up penniless. He was sentenced to prison in 1921 for mail fraud. (Zuckoff, 2005)

[xiv] Hyman Minsky was a controversial economist of the late 20th century. He wrote extensively as a professor of economics at Washington University in St. Louis. (Minsky, Can "It" Happen Again? Essays on Instability and Finance, 1982) (Minsky, Stablizing an Unstable Economy, 2008) As the Great Housing Bubble began to deflate, the causes were readily identified in Minsky’s work from decades earlier. His writings rose from obscurity and attained a new prominence due to his prescience.

IHB News 4-3-2010

This weekend's property is an REO priced near rental parity.

Irvine Home Address … 13 COLUMBUS Irvine, CA 92620

Resale Home Price …… $745,000

{book1}

Regrets I've had a few

But then again too few to mention

I did what I had to do

And saw it through without exemption

I planned each charted course

Each careful step along the byway

And more, much more than this

I did it my way

Frank Sinatra — My Way

IHB News

This was an eventful week with several national blogs picking up on Monday's story that Bank of America to Increase Foreclosure Rate by 600% in 2010. We were picked up again by Patrick.net with Loan Modifications Succeed by Increasing Borrower Entitlements. We had over 30,000 visitors for the week.

Housing Bubble News from Patrick.net

Spring Outlook: Housing Sales Looking as Bleak as Ever (realestate.yahoo.com)

Chicago Sees Nation's Steepest House Price Drop For January (cbs2chicago.com)

More housing trouble (thehill.com)

Loan Modifications Succeed by Increasing Borrower Entitlements (irvinehousingblog.com)

Californians may have to pay income tax on canceled mortgage debt (mercurynews.com)

Hear why foreclosures dampen housing's future (lansner.freedomblogging.com)

MLS Inventory Creeping up, Section 8 Vouchers for Granite Countertops (doctorhousingbubble.com)

Watch out for fraud in short sales (mortgage.freedomblogging.com)

No Flood Insurance? No Problem! (cnbc.com)

Countdown to Renter's New Year (reallyf'edhomeowner.com)

Irish Banks: "Worst Fears Have Been Surpassed" (Mish)

Irish taxpayers takes on banks' toxic debt (thisismoney.co.uk)

Half of commercial RE mortgages to be underwater (bubblemeter.blogspot.com)

Multi-Generational Loans Program Starts Up (patrick.net)

House price dip continues (money.cnn.com)

Case-Shiller House Prices Go Up — and Down (timiacono.com)

Housing prices headed for double dip (cnbc.com)

From bucolic bliss to 'gated ghetto' (latimes.com)

Real Estate Still Overpriced in California (mybudget360.com)

Should houses be worth twice what they were in 1996? (gregfielding.housingstorm.com)

U.S. housing market shifts from liar loans to hard cash (theglobeandmail.com)

Signs point to higher mortgage rates ahead (heraldtribune.com)

California lawmakers are the highest paid in the nation (latimesblogs.latimes.com)

Failing US banks need to fear government closure (news.yahoo.com)

States of Bewilderment: The Mad Hatter reigns supreme (theautomaticearth.blogspot.com)

Downtown NYC Towers Empty as Best Market Falters (bloomberg.com)

Unstoppable Canadian housing market may have met its match (financialpost.com)

10 Signs of Speculative Mania in China (Mish)

House prices post smallest annual loss in 3 years (latimes.com)

Realtors expect house values to decline or remain flat (heraldtribune.com)

How Speculative Madness Changed the Housing Market (realestatechannel.com)

Some who can afford mortgages prefer to walk (chron.com)

Bank of America to Increase Foreclosure Rate by 600% in 2010 (irvinehousingblog.com)

Obama's mortgage plan won't bring relief (guardian.co.uk)

New foreclosures far outpacing new loan modifications (washingtonpost.com)

With foreclosures, python refuses to digest pig (snl.com)

Some CA house buyers get new state tax credit (sfgate.com)

Silicon Valley firms slip in workplace rankings (sfgate.com)

A Silicon Valley/Venture Capital Solution to the Housing Crisis (watchingmarcitz.com)

4 Problems With The Mortgage Interest Deduction (theatlantic.com)

Irish bank declares Wisconsin school trusts in default (google.com)

Wealthy Unload Munis; Junk, Corporates, Equities; Take Some Chips Off The Table (Mish)

In gold we trust (theglobeandmail.com)

Guaranteeing your neighbor's mortgage with your money (theautomaticearth.blogspot.com)

Best Protection Against Another Housing Bubble May be Painful Lessons (housingwatch.com)

House sellers are getting desperate on Flickr (flickr.com)

Lower House Prices Can Fix What Government Can't (businessweek.com)

Artifically inflated prices means houses remain unaffordable to responsible buyers (Charles Hugh Smith)

Can new program curb foreclosures (to raise cost of house for young families)? (heraldtribune.com)

Second mortgages complicate efforts to harm homebuyers (washingtonpost.com)

Being penalized again and again for not taking stupid risks (eyeonmiami.blogspot.com)

End of Risk-subsidy Programs May Delay Housing Inflation (time.com)

Act like you can't make house payment; you might get a write down (lewrockwell.com)

Houseowners Debate a Bailout (Overspend and Cry is best strategy) (nytimes.com)

Financial Blogger On Ethics Of Mortgage Modification (npr.org)

Some people are too far gone (theautomaticearth.blogspot.com)

Report shows "strategic defaults" increasing (blogs.reuters.com)

Get ready for at least 5 more years of underwater mortgages (weblogs.sun-sentinel.com)

Pinpointing Bay Area house price falls by ZIP code (sfgate.com)

California unemployment rate holds steady at miserable 12.5% (latimes.com)

Honolulu rents fall, but still 2nd priciest in U.S. (honoluluadvertiser.com)

Shake, Rattle, Seattle (nytimes.com)

Why your house is not investment you think it is (old but good) (finance.yahoo.com)

Why We Have An Income Tax (patrick.net)

Another Advantage for the Biggest Banks (nytimes.com)

The Party of Cruelty (kunstler.com)

Writer's Corner

I have decided to take a small piece on the weekend open thread for me. I have always tried to keep my personal interests unrelated to real estate out of my posts. I am not very interesting, and people come here for news and analysis rather than because I am interesting. I recognize that, so I keep myself out of it — mostly.

If you have no interest in anything outside of my views on real estate, you may skip the writer's corner, and you will not miss a thing.

My beliefs and character come through in my daily real estate commentary, so you already know me in ways that matter, but I want a place where I can share off-the-wall things that catch my eye during the week, a place I can talk about my interests an hobbies: writing, blogging, video games, science, astronomy, biology, history, local destinations, the Green Bay Packers, golf course design, whether or not Tiger Woods will win the Masters, anything I am focused on at the moment.

Saturn's Hexagon Cloud

For Christmas I bought my two pre-teen cousins the Universe series on DVD. I thought it was so cool I bought a copy for myself, and I either watch it or Star Wars: The Clone Wars with my morning breakfast all this year… Yes, I am a total nerd.

I was watching Universe's discussion about new images from the Cassini spacecraft of a strange but persistent cloud formation on Saturn that forms a nearly perfect hexagon. How does that happen? I was floored when I saw this. I thought it was made up.

Scientists don't have a clue how such a formation can exist. From Wikipedia: "The straight sides of the northern polar hexagon are each about 13 800 km long. The entire structure rotates with a period of 10h 39 m 24s, the same period as that of the planet's radio emissions, which is assumed to be equal to the period of rotation of Saturn's interior. The hexagonal feature does not shift in longitude like the other clouds in the visible atmosphere."

Very strange.

Featured property

This REO is priced near rental parity. With no HOA or Mello Roos, the cost of ownership is under $3,000 per month.

Irvine Home Address … 13 COLUMBUS Irvine, CA 92620

Resale Home Price … $745,000

Home Purchase Price … $644,739

Home Purchase Date …. 1/19/2010

Net Gain (Loss) ………. $55,561

Percent Change ………. 15.6%

Annual Appreciation … 59.2%

Cost of Ownership

————————————————-

$745,000 ………. Asking Price

$149,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional

5.11% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$596,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$156,197 ………. Income Requirement

$3,240 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$646 ………. Property Tax

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$62 ………. Homeowners Insurance

$0 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$3,947 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$796 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$702 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment

$299 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$93 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$2,842 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$7,450 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$7,450 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$5,960 ………… Interest Points @1% of Loan

$149,000 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$169,860 ………. Total Cash Costs

$43,500 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$213,360 ………. Total Savings Needed

Property Details for 13 COLUMBUS Irvine, CA 92620

——————————————————————————

Beds: 4

Baths: 2 full 1 part baths

Home size: 2,508 sq ft

($297 / sq ft)

Lot Size: 5,250 sq ft

Year Built: 1980

Days on Market: 3

MLS Number: S611281

Property Type: Single Family, Residential

Community: Northwood

Tract: Pl

——————————————————————————

According to the listing agent, this listing is a bank owned (foreclosed) property.

4 bedroom, 3 bathroom pool home located in charming neighborhood. Bonus room can easily be 5th bedroom as well. Entertainer's kitchen offers granite counters and cherrywood cabinets and built-in cabinet lights. Cherrywood Staircase and built-ins in living room. Fabulous backyard with pool. Upstairs Loft and much more. Hurry! this home will not be around long!

Happy Easter

Squatting Laguna Beach Style

Squatting is usually a problem we associate with the indigent; however, many pretenders are hold up in opulent properties. Today we look at one such property in Laguna Beach, California.

Irvine Home Address … 150 Cress St Laguna Beach, CA 92651

Resale Home Price …… $5,990,000

{book1}

Love, Love, Love

Love, American Style,

Truer than the Red, White and Blue.

Love, American Style,

That's me and you.

And on a star spangled night my love, (My love come to me).

You can rest you head on my shoulder.

Out by the dawn's early light, my love

I will defend your right to try.

Love, American Style,

That's me and you.

Charles Fox & Arnold Margolin — Love, American Style

I hear that jingle in my head whenever I profile the lifestyles of the pretending-to-be rich and famous. We Americans have a unique style, and Californians and their debt pathologies are fascinating. Last weekend we looked at Squatting Newport Coast Style, and today will drive down the coast a few miles and look at a beautiful ocean-view property in the heart of the action.

I love this property. If I thought I could squat there for a year and a half, I would do it. It is an oversized lot in a prime location. Have you ever been to K'ya? If you are standing on the rooftop deck, you are looking down on this property.

The property boasts unobstructed ocean views:

It has a great office for writing blog posts:

The master bedroom is beautiful, and even the crappers are nice:

You don't need the K'ya party deck when you have your own:

Delusional to the end

You can buy this property for a little over double what the owner paid in 2005. Did prices double since 2005? Can prices really go from $750,000 to $5,990,000 in 14 years?

I am astonished that people come to believe this is possible. This guy should be hiding his face in shame.

I can imagine the conversations between this freeloader and the lender:

Freeloader: "I will pay you as soon as I sell the property. The market is a bit soft right now, as you know."

Lender: "Our comps show this property would resale for about $2,500,000. Isn't your $5,990,000 asking price unrealistic?"

Freeloader: "Laguna Beach is different. Prices only go up here. Look how much it went up between 1997 and 2005."

Lender: "That was a housing bubble, and you are the bagholder. Your loans are recourse, and we will go after your assets if you don't pay us back."

Freeloader: "Give me some time and prices will recover."

Lender: "How much time do you need?"

Freeloader: "As long as it takes for prices to come back. Besides, if you foreclose now, I am insolvent, and it would be your fault. When I filled out the loan documents, I stated my income based on anticipated home-price appreciation. You are removing my income."

Lender: "Appreciation is not income. Besides, we can foreclose and make that income. We want your wage income."

Freeloader: "That was never part of the deal."

Property History for 150 Cress St

Date Event Price Appreciation
Nov 13, 2009 Listed $5,990,000
Jun 02, 2005 Sold (Public Records) $2,900,000 14.9%/yr
Oct 22, 1999 Sold (Public Records) $1,333,000 36.3%/yr
Dec 12, 1997 Sold (Public Records) $750,000

HELOC abuse

As you may have guessed, even with the near-peak purchase, this owner still managed to milk a few hundred thousand dollars out of the property before he resorted to squatting.

  • The property was purchased on 6/2/2005 for $2,900,000. The owner used a $1,885,000 first mortgage, a $145,000 HELOC, and a $870,000 down payment.
  • On 6/15/2006 he opened a HELOC for $910,743.
  • On 8/28/2006 he refinanced with a $2,870,000 Option ARM courtesy of Washington Mutual.
  • On 9/27/2006 WAMU gave him a $500,000 HELOC.
  • Total property debt is $3,370,000.
  • Total mortgage equity withdrawal is $1,340,000 including his substantial down payment.
  • He still extracted $470,000 of the bank's money.

When Chase bought WAMU, their losses on the WAMU portfolio were subject to a backstop agreement. If the losses are large enough on the portfolio, the US taxpayer — you — will pick up the tab.

If you knew you were paying for it, you might have stopped in and had a drink on yourself rather than go to K'ya and pay for it. That is for the little people.

Squatting

If it isn't bad enough that this guy walked away with hundreds of thousands of dollars in money you will end up paying for, he is still there! He has been squatting without a payment since late 2008!

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 08/03/2009

Document Type: Notice of Sale (aka Notice of Trustee's Sale)

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 04/30/2009

Document Type: Notice of Default

He may have paid through January of 2009, but with has slow as lenders are to foreclose, what makes you think they were timely when filing their NOD?

This owner has been squatting for well over a year, and the dance continues. The sale is scheduled for May 7. Will they postpone again to dance more? If so, you should be invited to the party; you are paying for it.

What do we usually associate with squatting?

Most squatters don't do quite as well as our Laguna Beach squatter.

Historically, squatting has been looked down upon, and squatters do not live in relative luxury.

Only in America would we permit squatters to live in luxury beachfront mansions.

Irvine Home Address … 150 Cress St Laguna Beach, CA 92651

Resale Home Price … $5,990,000

Home Purchase Price … $2,900,000

Home Purchase Date …. 6/2/2005

Net Gain (Loss) ………. $2,730,600

Percent Change ………. 106.6%

Annual Appreciation … 14.8%

Cost of Ownership

————————————————-

$5,990,000 ………. Asking Price

$1,198,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional

5.11% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$4,792,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$1,255,867 ………. Income Requirement

$26,048 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$5191 ………. Property Tax

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$499 ………. Homeowners Insurance

$0 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$31,738 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$2646 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$5642 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment

$2403 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$749 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$26,602 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$59,900 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$59,900 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$47,920 ………… Interest Points @1% of Loan

$1,198,000 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$1,365,720 ………. Total Cash Costs

$407,700 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$1,773,420 ………. Total Savings Needed

Property Details for 150 Cress St Laguna Beach, CA 92651

——————————————————————————

Beds:: 8

Baths:: 0006

Sq. Ft.:: 3300

$1,815

Lot Size:: 7,200 Acres

Year Built:: 2007

Days on Market: 106

MLS#:: 20932446

Property Type:: Residential, Detached, Single Family

Community: Laguna Beach

——————————————————————————

Dazzling, best in class, posh family compound consisting of 3 villas nestled on prime, oceanfront location in world-famous Laguna Beach. Luxuriously appointed, featuring exotic and imported fixtures, marble, granite & rich woods. High-tech touches include individual HVAC systems, high-speed internet & flat screen tv's. Each kitchen is designed for gourmet cooking. Outdoor spaces include 4 fire pits, terraces & a bar/dining counter.

I hope you have enjoyed this week, and thank you for reading the Irvine Housing Blog: astutely observing the Irvine home market and combating California Kool-Aid since 2006.

Have a great weekend,

Irvine Renter

One Land Baron's Heartbreaking Implosion

Land barons acquire multiple negative-cashflow properties with hope of profiting from appreciation. It is a foolish investment strategy guaranteed to fail when the Ponzi Scheme implodes. Today we see the self-inflicted suffering of one failed land baron.

Today's featured property belongs to a knife catching squatter who managed to close on the day that marks the beginning of the credit crunch.

Irvine Home Address … 10 BLUEJAY Irvine, CA 92604

Resale Home Price …… $720,000

{book1}

Turn the key

Walk through the gate

The great ascent

To reach a higher state

A rite of passage

The final stage

A sacred home

Unlock the door

And lay the cornerstone

A rite of passage

Dream Theater — A Rite of Passage

A rite of passage is is a ritual event that marks a person's progress from one status to another. Foreclosure is a rite of passage. Bankruptcy is a rite of passage. Many view foreclosure and bankruptcy at the hell fires of destruction when in reality they are a cleansing baptism into a new life — a life unburdened by debt and obligation — at least for a while. Many return to their lives of sin and indebtedness.

Everyone facing the fire shudders at the prospect. Many people face their fears and walk through fire — I did it at a weekend retreat in August of 2007. The entire event happens in the first step; having the courage to face the fear of the unknown, the spectre of pain — facing those fears can allow you to do tremendous things.

Debtors who are hunkered down in their bunkers of entitlement are going to experience the purifying fire of foreclosure. They can either embrace this opportunity, or curse their bad fortune. Which attitude do you think will get them farther in life?

Some homeowners facing the prospect of repeated foreclosures

March 21, 2010

[Brenda Duchemin offers a small moment of comfort to her husband, Mohammad Ashraf, as he sorts through a maze of paperwork related to the foreclosure of their Diamond Bar home. > > > > Multimedia (Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)]

Every morning at 6 a.m., Brenda Duchemin kneels down on two plush throw pillows in front of a carved teak shrine in her Diamond Bar home and chants.

In front of a cluster of oranges, a small teacup and a golden lotus flower on the shrine, the slight 53-year-old tries to expel the negative images: the two homes she and her husband, Mohammad Ashraf, lost to foreclosure auctions last month, the bankruptcy petition they were forced to file in 2009, and their ongoing battle to stay in their spacious and airy home, which is furnished with soft blankets, leather couches and Elvis commemorative plates on the walls.

Daily chanting helps her karma, Duchemin says, which is currently not in such a good state.

"We don't know what we did in a past life to bring this out," she said, a slight Boston accent tinting her speech. "I must have been a horrendous person down the line."

I think it is sad that she believes that. Her suffering has little to do with transgressions in her past life and much to do with her attachments to possessions and a lifestyle she cannot afford in this life. Her failure to realize this is causing self-recrimination in the wrong area.

Though signs of recovery in the housing market are emerging, thousands of people throughout the Southland are still in a precarious position on the brink of foreclosure, struggling with monthly bills and mortgage payments.

Duchemin and Ashraf are an extreme example because they've gone through foreclosures on two homes and are in danger of losing a third. They aren't alone: Flimsy lending practices mean that thousands of other borrowers face the prospect of repeated foreclosures, mortgage and foreclosure experts said.

… "It wasn't unusual to allow folks to buy not only two homes but three, four or five," said Sean O'Toole, founder of data-tracking firm ForeclosureRadar.

Because people thought the price of real estate would keep climbing, O'Toole said, they figured that the more homes they bought, the more they'd earn eventually.

"In a lot of cases, you had folks in this gold rush mentality: 'Real estate is going up, the more houses I buy, the more money I'll make.' "

Sean gets it. This is the second bubble he has cleaned up after.

Duchemin and Ashraf say they are anything but flippers. Had not both their health and the economy taken bad turns, they say, their finances would have been able to support their real estate investments.

Bullshit. Only continued appreciation and continued Ponzi Scheme borrowing based on that appreciation was going to sustain the empire they built. There actions, as revealed below, demonstrate that they were property flippers regardless of how they may view themselves.

The couple bought their Diamond Bar house for $550,000 in 2006, hoping to finance the purchase by selling their town home in Brea — a sale that never materialized, they say, because of the housing crash. The year before, they'd also bought a $340,000 home in Las Vegas as a retirement property, which they rented to a tenant until last year. At the time of the purchases, their only sources of income were workers' compensation insurance payments and Social Security, but that wasn't a problem for the lender.

Their health problems were an issue before they bought. How does the economy impact their income an ability to make payments? They were expecting the payment to come from borrowing against the properties themselves. That is the essence of a Ponzi Scheme.

"We don't know how much longer we can keep going," Duchemin said, stroking their white Maltipoo, Sugar, one of four dogs the couple keep segregated in various areas of their house because the pets fight.

Ashraf, a warehouse supervisor, was injured in 2003 and had to have three discs replaced in his back. The surgery went poorly: He was in the intensive care unit for six days and had a stroke during that time. He now takes fistfuls of medicine each day, and has been even more subdued since his father died in Pakistan in 2008.

Duchemin was hit by an 18-wheeler truck in 1994 and has suffered severe seizures since then, although she had a device inserted in her chest to stem the seizures.

Ashraf is just a shell of the man he once was, Duchemin says. "This is a man who took pride in supporting me, making me feel like I was a queen — he was one of the strongest men I ever met," said Duchemin, who has voluminous brown hair and carefully sculpted eyebrows. "To see him go from that to an invalid. . . . " she said, trailing off.

Before we turn on the water works, let's take a look at what is sad and what is not. It is very sad that this couple has had personal accidents and injuries that has left them unable to earn the same amounts after the accident. When this happens to people, unless they have sufficient disability insurance, they will experience a decline in their standard of living. They suffer to the degree they cannot accept their new life.

The drop in their standard of living should have occurred years ago. It would have been sad, but it would have been over, and it would not have made the LA Times. It would have been an ordinary and unceremonious fall from entitlement.

This couple cooked up a Ponzi Scheme that worked for a while. They believed they had secured a style of life that was, in fact, an illusion. That is not sad. That is foolishness. These people developed attachments to an illusion, and this attachment makes their pain more intense and creates unnecessary suffering. That is sad.

If these people had not been lead to believe they could save their home and have a prosperous retirement on the appreciation of three houses, they would not now be suffering the loss of that dream — a dream sold to them by greedy lenders, mortgage brokers and realtors. That isn't sad. That is wrong, and it makes me angry.

Three houses is certainly capable of providing a comfortable retirement. It is part of my plan, but I intend to own them with no debt and live off the cashflow. That works. Owning three houses and milking them for appreciation by adding debt; that is a Ponzi Scheme. That doesn't work.

Many people have sad stories, and some people have foolish stories; this story is both. We need to be able to separate the two, or we will learn the wrong lesson. These people embarked on a foolish investment strategy. Land Barons all implode in the end, not because the economy turns, but because the investment strategy is foolish and the bad economy exposes that fact.

Should we all share our personal heartbreaks? This couple's sad medical problems have nothing to do with their investment Ponzi Scheme. Should everyone who has a sufficiently sad story get a government handout for their foolish investments that fail? If you can't separate sad from foolish, you might support helping people like this sustain their unsustainable and entitled lives. This report was designed to generate that sympathy, but when you see the truth beneath the story, you realize these people do not need or deserve any bailout assistance.

Ashraf's workers' comp payments were cut in half in 2008, hampering the couple's ability to pay any of their three mortgages.

Duchemin, who has worked as a teacher's assistant, a marketer for a chiropractic office and a locksmith, among other things, started looking for work last year but hasn't had any luck. Now she's applying for jobs that a high school student would be overqualified for, she says.

She's tired of hearing people say the economic downturn is ending. "There is no recovery," she said.

Though they were heartened by the news that the government was trying to help homeowners, the couple doesn't have much hope for mortgage help. They informed Washington Mutual in March 2008 that they were in trouble and asked for a modification on the Diamond Bar home, but tried to pay the mortgages on all three of their houses, missing a payment here, a payment there.

They received an initial boost of denial from one of the various government bailout attempts — notice the reporter doesn't bother to mention which one because they are all the same — and now that the denial has worn off, they are back where they started.

They eventually lost the Brea town house and Las Vegas home to foreclosure, and both properties went up for auction last month.

Duchemin and Ashraf say they are doing everything they can to keep their Diamond Bar house.

They filed for bankruptcy protection in July in the hope that it would enable them to keep the house. They've been to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Los Angeles three times since October to get their bankruptcy confirmed, but each time a problem has arisen. The next date is Monday.

They have been getting advice on how to game the system and prolong the misery. Do you think they are being helped? I think they would have been better off walking away and declaring bankruptcy months ago because then it would be over. All they are accomplishing now is prolonging their own agony; they are going to lose everything. The denial of their fate is causing suffering as is waiting for the inevitable foreclosure. When it is over, they can end to their suffering and rebuild their lives. Only their attachments are causing them pain.

To keep making payments on their home, they sold their Toyota Tacoma and family jewelry, including a gold anchor necklace Ashraf had since he served in the merchant marine. They canceled every service they could except for the Internet, which allows Ashraf to keep in touch with his family in Pakistan.

Duchemin rides her bike everywhere to save money on gas — when she goes out. Mostly they stay at home, worrying that the water or electricity will be turned off soon.

If they are forced to move, the two don't know where they'll come up with a deposit for a new place — filing for bankruptcy has ruined their credit.

"We can't afford to stay in our home, but we can't afford to move," Duchemin said.

This is what we want people to do. This is what HAMP applicants are supposed to do but don't. These people have cut everything to the bone, and they still can't make it. That doesn't mean they should be bailed out of their foolish Ponzi Scheme at your expense, does it?

Let's also remember their suffering is both self-created and relative to their level of entitlement. Others do not have it as good as they do.

They're entrenched for now: Board games are stacked up on tables, crystal figurines shine on display in a case, and the four bedrooms are packed full of stuff, including Duchemin's artwork and teddy bears bigger than a toddler.

But every day finds them on edge, waiting to see what happens next. They spend their days trying to appreciate the home they love, with its hand-laid brick walkway, fig and lemon trees in the yard and "Wizard of Oz" paintings on the walls, wondering what went wrong.

"I can't provide the way I used to provide everything for. . . . Excuse me," Ashraf said, breaking down. "For my family," he continued. "And I just — at this point, I don't know what I'm going to do."

It is not difficult to figure out what he is going to do. He is going to move out of his house into a rental and live within his means just like frugal and responsible people everywhere. He will abandon his dreams, and he will endure The Unceremonious Fall from Entitlement.

Is that sad?

I prefer to see these things from the perspective of a Phoenix, not the city, the mythical creature that rises from the ashes of destruction. Once this couple accepts their new lifestyle and standard of living, their suffering will stop, and their new lives will begin. It may not be the fairy tale they hoped for, but it is better than the nightmare they live today.

Today's featured property

Since I began writing for the IHB, I have advised people to rent, particularly in 2007 when there was no plausible scenario where people could benefit financially from owning real estate. Today's featured property was active in mid-2007, and one knife catcher picked the property up for $810,000.

Ordinarily, that would be an opportunity for me to say, "I was right, and the buyers were wrong," but this case is not so clear. Believe it or not, as late as 8 August 2007, lenders were underwriting 100% financing deals. This must have been one of the last because early August 2007 was when the credit crunch gripped mortgage lending. In short, these people bought at the worst possible time — or did they?

Since they did obtain the property with no money down, it was less expensive than moving into a rental. And since they quickly defaulted, and since they have been squatting in the property since they quit making payments in late 2008, their cost of housing has been much lower than mine during that time. And if I had been wrong and they had been right, they stood to make a fortune. Of course, now their credit is ruined, and they are facing foreclosure, but the squatting seems to go on with no end.

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 07/24/2009

Document Type: Notice of Sale

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 04/17/2009

Document Type: Notice of Default

Is frugality and self-restraint dead?

How do I advise people to do the right thing? I believe retiring debt is a positive, but the government goes out of its way to make debt positive — to the point of offering the possibility of free money through debt forgiveness. Is my advice old and outdated? Has the new permanent Ponzi Scheme mentality made my concern for the financial well-being of others quaint and endearing but not particularly helpful?

I am genuinely concerned about the system we are setting up. The incentives are all wrong. People are obtaining entitlements at the expense of others. People are gaming the system to stay in houses that do not rightfully belong to them. And the government has told our lenders this is OK because we will cover all the losses.

Perhaps it is better to game the system like everyone else? I would have enjoyed living in a nicer place rent-free for the last couple of years.

If 100% financing comes around again in the next cycle, it will be very tempting to take the money — and I am one of the people who think it's a bad idea. You know the spenders who don't care will be maxing out their HELOCs.

Our lenders are rightfully doomed, and we will pay dearly for the next bailout. Will you get your piece?

Irvine Home Address … 10 BLUEJAY Irvine, CA 92604

Resale Home Price … $720,000

Home Purchase Price … $810,000

Home Purchase Date …. 8/8/2007

Net Gain (Loss) ………. $(133,200)

Percent Change ………. -11.1%

Annual Appreciation … -4.3%

Cost of Ownership

————————————————-

$720,000 ………. Asking Price

$144,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional

5.11% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$576,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$150,956 ………. Income Requirement

$3,131 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$624 ………. Property Tax

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$60 ………. Homeowners Insurance

$87 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$3,902 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$769 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$678 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment

$289 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$90 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$2,833 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$7,200 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$7,200 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$5,760 ………… Interest Points @1% of Loan

$144,000 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$164,160 ………. Total Cash Costs

$43,400 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$207,560 ………. Total Savings Needed

Property Details for 10 BLUEJAY Irvine, CA 92604

——————————————————————————

Beds: 4

Baths: 3 baths

Home size: 2,257 sq ft

($319 / sq ft)

Lot Size: 4,050 sq ft

Year Built: 1976

Days on Market: 139

MLS Number: S596056

Property Type: Single Family, Residential

Community: Woodbridge

Tract: Ck

——————————————————————————

According to the listing agent, this listing may be a pre-foreclosure or short sale.

This property is in backup or contingent offer status.

This is a must see now! Won't last long, very popular Woodbridge home. Motivated Sellers, Excellent value, priced to sell NOW! Elegant and Large 4BR home in Prestigious Woodbridge, with a Rose-Lined front yard, close to the lake, across the from the Park on a single loaded street. Very Quiet neighborhood, walking distance to all schools (award-winning Irvine Unified School District). Bright and spacious, vaulted ceiling, large family room plus living room. Mr. and Mrs. Clean live here! Big backyard, well maintained. Unique interior Patio, seen from different parts of the home. Schedule an appointment to see it now, it won't last long!

I am looking into Mr. Clean's toilet, and I am looking at Mr. Clean's toiletries.

.