Foreclosures

[seven_sins]

What does the $179 a month HOA dues pay for?

 

[ejbonk]

If the bank would not accept offers for $680k, I'm guessing that the bank thinks they have a better chance of getting more than that by auctioning it. Why else would they do it?

To get it off their books and to comply with Federal and State Bank regulations. With no acceptable offers for the balance of the loan in the acceptable amount of time put forth in the Federal Reserve Banking Regulations the foreclosed property must be sold at Auction. However ,If the Bank feels the Highest Bid is Unacceptable to them. The Bank may bid on the property,it's self and reset the clock to despose of the property at a price considered acceptable to the bank.

But,under the current times ,we live in the banks ,very rarely purchase the property at Auction and instead take a pre-tax write-off against earnings.While still being able to recoup the difference from the previous owners. Then Usually the previous owners file for bankruptcy and the bank,is forced to eat the entire loss. Which the bank writes-off on it's pre-tax income.

My uncle is a retired Key Bank Corp President. He explain all this BS at the family Xmas Party.

 

[Croynan]

If the bank would not accept offers for $680k, I'm guessing that the bank thinks they have a better chance of getting more than that by auctioning it. Why else would they do it?

because they are stupid and greedy. i hope the place sells for under $500,000 thousand so that the bank really suffers a lose.

if the bank had accepted offers at $650,000 there would not be the crises there is in the housing market as it is.

many of these foreclosures could easily have been avoided if the banks would have worked with the homeowners who are in trouble with their loans in the first place.

people end up paying double the price for their homes via their home loans due to the greediness of the banks.

i do no feel one bit for the banks in the current housing crises - they and the mortgage companies allowed and played games with these sub prime mortgages and now all of us are paying for their greediness and lack of concern for the home owners in America.


it is the state and federal governements who are at real fault for the current housing crises as they did not have laws in place to prevent these sub prime mortgages to begin with.

​

eM.​

 

[ejbonk]

because they are stupid and greedy. i hope the place sells for under $500,000 thousand so that the bank really suffers a lose.

if the bank had accepted offers at $650,000 there would not be the crises there is in the housing market as it is.

many of these foreclosures could easily have been avoided if the banks would have worked with the homeowners who are in trouble with their loans in the first place.

people end up paying double the price for their homes via their home loans due to the greediness of the banks.

i do no feel one bit for the banks in the current housing crises - they and the mortgage companies allowed and played games with these sub prime mortgages and now all of us are paying for their greediness and lack of concern for the home owners in America.


it is the state and federal governements who are at real fault for the current housing crises as they did not have laws in place to prevent these sub prime mortgages to begin with.

​

eM.​

So,I'd guess your pulling for Hillary Clinton in the DNC Primary.

 

[justgofaster]

That house in my neighborhood would go for about $250,000. Maybe less. My dad has a 4 bedroom/3 bath house on a full acre of land that looks as nice as the one in the add. Dad's house was appraised at $225,000!

How can anyone afford to live in L.A.?

 

[drhladnjak]

Currently it baffles me why homes aren't selling. It's definately a buyers' market with huge inventories and descent prices with interest rates still historically low. Buyers' should be jumping at these opportunities before the dry up.

Well, let me debaffle you. These are the main reasons:

1. Not enough people can afford to buy the houses. Prices in many desirable areas are simply too high for somebody earning the kind of wages found in the corresponding job market. In particular, this is a problem for first time buyers who don't have the equity others have from the recent run up in prices.

2. Not enough people can get a mortgage. Standards for mortgages have gone way up in the past few months. Teaser rates, 0% down, stated income and subprime are all but history. Perhaps more importantly, lenders just aren't lending out as much money because the main funding source (mortgage backed securities) dried up when the secondary market disintegrated. Even as recently as a year ago, if you had a pulse you could get a loan. Now days, lenders are being much more careful in making sure buyers can repay their loan by verifying income. Moreover, they're requiring buyers put up more substantial down payments. If price of a house drops to the point where the borrower owes more than it's worth, they're much more likely to simply walk away and let the bank foreclose on the house. The higher the down payment, the less chance this will happen and hence less chance of foreclosure. In particular, fewer first time buyers have the down payments necessary.

3. Economists, politicians and even now regular people know the bottom hasn't been reached in this housing crisis. So long as big banks keep writing off losses and foreclosure rates rise, prices will continue to drop. Nobody wants to buy a house when they know it's just going to lose value over the next couple years. There's a saying that "nobody wants to catch a falling knife".

4. Everybody's worried about a recession coming right now. If you're worried you might lose your job in the next couple years, you're more likely to avoid tying it up in a 30 mortgage and a worsening housing market.

 

[Spiff]

And in more simple terms, house prices have steadily been rising at a faster rate than people's incomes. Most homeowners think that a home is an easy investment and think that a home's value will always increase at generous rates. But they never think about how incomes don't keep up.

 

[thewiz]

Having been watching the markets and housing for the past couple years, the problem was the quick run up in housing prices. Over the past two years, most real estate increased at rates unseen in history -- some areas of the country experienced 200% increases in home sale prices.

Something had to give; the market always corrects itself when it gets out of hand. Remember the dot-com days of not that many years ago? Well now it's the housing market finally getting corrected. When prices on things increase at ridiculous rates, the market economy will eventually correct.

Nearly 95% of American homeowners are CURRENT with their mortgages. I think a lot of hype is being put on the situation by the media who are always looking for something to scare us with. I think there is lots of blame for the current housing crisis; banks were greedy to get loans that they could package and sell at higher rates than they were giving on money; homeowners were buying mortages that they could not afford; credit was not being enforced, etc., etc.

I know I had a 2,800 square foot house in Michigan that I purchased eight years ago for 140,000 (it had 1 1/2 acres of land, two and half car garage, full basement, lots of decks and lots of woods). I sold it for $220,000 five months ago and I was ecstatic. Nothing was selling around me and I made money on the deal. The same house in DC would have sold for $1.4 million!

I'm looking at condos now and they have dropped in price nearly $100,000. They'll also pay two years of condo fees, 2 years of property taxes, and lots of other perks to unload them. However, in some areas of DC, they aren't doing anything and the condos are selling with no incentives.

I don't think the market has hit bottom; I think the election will open up additional housing (at least here in DC). So I'll wait until at least June to buy.....

 

[metta]

What does the $179 a month HOA dues pay for?

Actually, the dues just went up in Januay for the first time in over 5 1/2 years to a little over $190. They should update their numbers. The hoa dues are minimal when compared to others in the area and we have a lot more stuff to pay for:

• trails that go all aound the development
• The community events: cookie exchange, movie nights, annual luau, egg hunt, etc.
• management of the private gates
• private roads
• a private park
• a community club house
• a community pool
• a community jacuzzi
• the green belts all around the development and in front of every home. Some of the landsacped areas are pretty large. I think that it takes a full time staff to take care of all of it because there are always people working on it Mon.-Fri.
• the managent of the bridges. They had to build 2 major bridges over the river and one small one over the creek in order to build the development. A small developer could not have developed this property because it would be too costly for them to develop.
• the management of the pumps that need replacing every so many years (don't remember how many). The pumps pump out everything from water to sewage and they do through the bridges (you can't see it).
• The community lighting
• it also pays for some security, including a guard that drives around on irregular days and times and a pool monitor in the summer.
• They also manage the wought iron fencing around the perimeter of the property and behind each home.
• And they also have to keep the brush back in some of the areas, like the creek.

 

[metta]

That house in my neighborhood would go for about $250,000. Maybe less. My dad has a 4 bedroom/3 bath house on a full acre of land that looks as nice as the one in the add. Dad's house was appraised at $225,000!

How can anyone afford to live in L.A.?

Many people can. You would be surprised how many people have good enough incomes to buy homes that are much more than these in LA. $5 million dollar homes are not uncommon in Los Angeles County.

Most of them just have very good paying jobs. Others have help from their family or have an inheritance. Two income families is the norm. A few homes have more than 2 incomes.

I have spent my entire life in California and could not imagine livng in any of the other States. So when I look for a home, I only look at the prices in the area where I want to live. It does not matter that they are several times more than other States. I'm sure that those other States are very nice. I would rather pay what I have to, to live where I want to live in a home that I want to live in. I just could not live too far away from independent theaters or the continuous events that are always going on.

A full acre of land in my area would be worth way over $1 million all by itself. If you live by the ocean, the most tiny lot you could imagine would be worth over $1 million. The last lot that I saw available that had a pad for a home and was over an acre it was over $2.5 million just for the lot. But then again, I'm not looking to buy lots right now. To get a property that is over an acre, you have to normally go to a city like Bradbury and prices will probably vary between $2 million to over $30 million.

 

[ejbonk]

Well,It is the Land of Fruits and Nuts. Nice place to visit ,but I wouldn't want to live there.

When the earth moves I prefer it be from great sex and not because of a fault line.

 

[metta]

I've only been to California twice (once to LA, once to SF) and I'm still trying to figure out WHY houses there are so expensive.

These places are international cites. And there are other cities around the world that cost more than LA and San Francisco. Look at London, Dublin, Hong Kong, St. Petersburg, etc. They are much higher there. Have you ever seen the prices of Sedona, Arizona? It is a beautiful place and it is very expensive.

I know a gay couple that has a villa in the south of france and a condo right on the mediteranean sea, a home in belgium, a place in india, and a couple places in LA. They have traveled all over the World and they will tell you that LA is the best place to live in the World. Of course that is a matter of opinon. Many would of course disagree. But there are a lot of people out there that agree with him. Some people will never get it while other people do. If you don't have the money to live here then I could see how that could be a problem to live here, but if you have a high enough income the cost does not become as much of a factor and you can live very well here. If everyone could afford to live here....more people would.

The same thing can be said for new york city.

 

[Huskerboy]

Holy Crap! Property out there (CA) is off the charts! No wonder people out there are selling their homes and moving to the Mid-West to retire!!!

 

[metta]

When I first decided I wanted to move to somewhere warmer I looked into California. I could afford to move there, I just didn't see what made it worth paying three times the price for half the house that you could get elsewhere. So, I guess you're right; it must be a matter of opinion.

If it cost the same to live in California as other States could you just imagine how many people would be living in California? We could end up with more than 1/2 of the population of the country. So, thank goodness it is high, or everyone would have to live in high rise buildings. I could not even begin to imagine what it is like to live in a cold state.

 

[ejbonk]

If it cost the same to live in California as other States could you just imagine how many people would be living in California? We could end up with more than 1/2 of the population of the country. So, thank goodness it is high, or everyone would have to live in high rise buildings. I could not even begin to imagine what it is like to live in a cold state.

LOL,I don't think so. (Singing)Ny is where I'd rather stay. Earthquakes,droughts,fires and mudslides arn't like making hay.
I just adore a Penthouse View.Darrling you may love California. But,Give me Park Avenue.

 

[LaloGS]

To get it off their books and to comply with Federal and State Bank regulations. With no acceptable offers for the balance of the loan in the acceptable amount of time put forth in the Federal Reserve Banking Regulations the foreclosed property must be sold at Auction. However ,If the Bank feels the Highest Bid is Unacceptable to them. The Bank may bid on the property,it's self and reset the clock to despose of the property at a price considered acceptable to the bank.

But,under the current times ,we live in the banks ,very rarely purchase the property at Auction and instead take a pre-tax write-off against earnings.While still being able to recoup the difference from the previous owners. Then Usually the previous owners file for bankruptcy and the bank,is forced to eat the entire loss. Which the bank writes-off on it's pre-tax income.

My uncle is a retired Key Bank Corp President. He explain all this BS at the family Xmas Party.

Truly a system designed to fuck families over.

 

[ejbonk]

Truly a system designed to fuck families over.

What do you expect? These go back to The Great Depression and were written by a Republican Congress and signed by a Democrat President after great compromises where made on both sides. Then,the Federal Reserve System (run by bankers to protect the banking system) amends these rules as they go along.

Families are never considered.Just the good of the Industry and the National Long Term Economy. Never a second thought to the little guy or the here and now.

 

[drhladnjak]

Truly a system designed to fuck families over.

Maybe families shouldn't have bought houses they couldn't afford by using dodgy zero down, teaser rate, stated income, subprime loans.

There were many parties who fucked up and brought this crisis upon us and, frankly, all of them are responsible in one way or another:

1. The banks and mortgage brokers made loans to people who shouldn't have gotten loans. For the most part, they didn't care because they're not who the borrowers were going to be paying back. They were selling them off in the form of mortgage backed securities (MBS) to investors (who are now left holding the bag).

2. The ratings agencies rated these MBSs as high quality when in fact they weren't because the lenders were the ones paying them to give good ratings. This in turn gave investors a false sense of risk and security wrt these MBSs. This gave the lenders more money to lend which caused them to further lower the standards for approving loans.

3. Regulators (like the Fed) let lenders do these predatory and dangerous practices.

4. Individuals and families shouldn't have borrowed more than they could afford. Every person being foreclosed on signed agreements basically describing what's happening now that they're behind on their mortgage. People just had to have that house they couldn't afford or they felt they'd be closed out from living "the American dream" forever.

Ultimately, it boils down to one thing--all four group's ignorant belief that, unlike every other class of assets in the history of the world, real estate always go up. Under that assumption, a house would pretty much always be worth more than what was owed on it. When that's the case, it's very rare for a house to enter foreclosure because the owner could just sell it and pay off the loan. Unfortunately, that's not a valid assumption and we're seeing the consequences now.

 

[ejbonk]

Maybe families shouldn't have bought houses they couldn't afford by using dodgy zero down, teaser rate, stated income, subprime loans.

There were many parties who fucked up and brought this crisis upon us and, frankly, all of them are responsible in one way or another:

1. The banks and mortgage brokers made loans to people who shouldn't have gotten loans. For the most part, they didn't care because they're not who the borrowers were going to be paying back. They were selling them off in the form of mortgage backed securities (MBS) to investors (who are now left holding the bag).

2. The ratings agencies rated these MBSs as high quality when in fact they weren't because the lenders were the ones paying them to give good ratings. This in turn gave investors a false sense of risk and security wrt these MBSs. This gave the lenders more money to lend which caused them to further lower the standards for approving loans.

3. Regulators (like the Fed) let lenders do these predatory and dangerous practices.

4. Individuals and families shouldn't have borrowed more than they could afford. Every person being foreclosed on signed agreements basically describing what's happening now that they're behind on their mortgage. People just had to have that house they couldn't afford or they felt they'd be closed out from living "the American dream" forever.

Ultimately, it boils down to one thing--all four group's ignorant belief that, unlike every other class of assets in the history of the world, real estate always go up. Under that assumption, a house would pretty much always be worth more than what was owed on it. When that's the case, it's very rare for a house to enter foreclosure because the owner could just sell it and pay off the loan. Unfortunately, that's not a valid assumption and we're seeing the consequences now.

It's a classic example of over extention of credit in an over heated market. Has happen several times though out history. Just like during the roaring 20's,post war50's,LBJ's swinging 60's,the laid back 70's ,the gogo preppy 80's and the techy 90's. Everything Old is New Again. Each Generation repeats and fucks up just like the one before it. Those ,who do not learn from History are Doomed to repeat it. sound like something you heard before?

 

[drhladnjak]

Very true ejbonk, but unfortunately this bubble is fixing to be worse than many in a while. Just think that actual (as opposed to inflation adjusted) housing prices dropped year-over-year nationwide last year for the first time since the Great Depression.