Love this little tidbit that was tucked in at the end of the article:
Our local home prices have risen so quickly that it feels like we’re in ‘bubble’ conditions again – could the bubble burst this time?
The last two times the real estate bubble has popped, it was due to banks having to offload their foreclosed properties for whatever the market will bear. They flooded the market, and buyers – and prices – backed off.
But that has all changed now.
Look at the new devices being used to avoid a flood of desperate selling:
The accounting rules were altered so banks could hold their REO properties longer, and the California Homeowners Bill of Rights has, in effect, stopped foreclosing. Lenders are now required to offer a loan modification to anyone in default, and only if the homeowner can’t or won’t qualify are they at risk of being foreclosed. With today’s higher rents, there isn’t much relief for those in default to give back their house and go lease one nearby. Besides, with our higher home values today, they can always sell before getting foreclosed.
Homeowners who need money can get a reverse mortgage too, as long as they haven’t been tapping into their equity already.
We end up with virtually no desperate sellers who need to dump on price. Someone who wants to cash out quickly can price their home at last year’s comps and look like a deal!
The game is rigged – the Banking Cartel won’t let the bubble pop again!
For the bubble to pop, we would need a dramatic shift in the supply and demand – either a flood of homes hit the market, and/or we run out of buyers.
I thought we’d be seeing more baby boomers unloading their homes due to downsizing or sickness, and while the market consists mainly of those listings, there aren’t enough of them to call it a flood – at least not yet. Because they are in quality locations, more kids are probably trying to buy out their siblings and take over their parents’ house, rather than sell it. They could be moving in with the folks too, rather than sending them to assisted living.
Could we run out of buyers? You would think there would be a price point where buyers can’t or won’t go any higher, but there seems to be a steady flow of people with more horsepower. We saw two weeks ago the prediction that the population of San Diego County is expected to grow by 700,000 people by 2050, which is over 21,000 per year – where are they going to live? Will they be rich? They will need to be!
There hasn’t been enough (has there been any?) sellers so desperate that they had to dump on price – instead, they just keep waiting. We would need more than a few price-dumpers to start a panic, which could cause the market to flood with supply and burst the bubble.
Some air might escape occasionally, but it is doubtful that a market change could occur without the government finding a way to save the bankers.
People like this guy think the conditions are ripe for a downturn. But if prices started falling, sellers are more likely to wait, than dump, which would cause our market to stagnate, rather than crash.
The latest foreclosure numbers are out, and we’re down to less than 1% of all mortgages being in foreclosure:
The national foreclosure inventory – the number of loans in the foreclosure process – fell 29.6 percent year over year in August 2016, according to the latest CoreLogic Foreclosure Report. The foreclosure inventory has fallen on a year-over-year basis every month since November 2011 (Figure 1), and in August 2016 it was 77.5 percent below the January 2011 peak.
The foreclosure rate – the share of all loans in the foreclosure process – fell to 0.9 percent in August 2016, down from 1.3 percent in August 2015. While the foreclosure rate is back to 2007 levels, it is still above the pre-housing-crisis average foreclosure rate of 0.6 percent between 2000 and 2006.
But it still bugs me that NONE of the national real estate players or national media ever questions how or why foreclosures stopped. After 2+ years of 60% or more growth of foreclosures AND serious delinquencies, all of a sudden BOTH dropped off a cliff at the end of 2009.
Our federal government and the banking industry obviously conspired to stem the losses, and then funded community activist groups who buy mortgages at a discount. Here is an example:
Nevada’s distressed home loans are still caught in economic quicksand, but not for lack of trying to combat banker haste with consumer-oriented ideas. The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), for example, has invested significant donor funds in efforts to bail out underwater borrowers when banks won’t negotiate fairly.
“You want to keep families in place if possible, so foreclosure is the absolute last choice that we want, if we’re involved in the transaction,” NCLR Vice President for Housing and Community Development Lot Diaz told ThinkProgress.
Diaz’s colleagues at an affiliated non-profit called Hogar Hispano purchase distressed mortgages and then return the homes to the owners at a fair market price that restores their chances of building up equity in the property. Hogar Hispano did 463 of these distressed debt acquisitions in 2013 alone, and saw a favorable outcome for the original homeowner in 316 of those cases.
Hogar Hispano also buys up houses that have already been taken over by the bank, known as REO properties, and then finds a buyer for them or converts them into rental units targeted at low- and moderate-income families. The group says its REO work has created close to 900 new homeowners and turned bank-owned homes into occupied housing more than 1,100 times, in Nevada and elsewhere. (LINK)
The whole mess just got swept under the carpet, which gave the insiders a fantastic opportunity to profit! What a country!
Homes that were foreclosed back in the day have been re-selling – and someone you know just happens to have an extensive video library!
The original purchase price for this McMansion in Chula Vista was $1,301,500 in 2007, but got foreclosed 20 months later. The bank listed it for $585,900, and it closed for $630,000 in March, 2009.
This is how it looked then:
It resold again for $965,000 a year ago, and then it closed for $1,275,000 this month. Here is how it looked:
My all-time #1 most watched video (out of 2,155) from Christmas, 2008, The previous owners paid $927,500 in November, 2005 – I sold it for $485,000 in April, 2009 after 56 days on the market for $108/sf:
Just one more rerun before Kayla introduces our new listing tomorrow night.
This is the 7th most-watched video on Bubbleinfo TV, and is a greatest-hits tour through the REO-listing days. In April, 2008, the Bank of America had dumped twenty of their REOs in my lap, and over the next 12 months the JtR foreclosure extravaganza ensued.
A month after this video premiered here on the blog (March, 2009), I was on the front page of the L.A. Times, which led to the spot on ABC News Nightline:
We’re a little low on videos currently so let’s re-run an old favorite from February, 2009. This is the second-most viewed video from JimtheRealtor YouTube account, with 27,104 views!
For those who have joined us in just the last couple of years, this was a typical day on the blog during the foreclosure era:
For those wondering if there will ever be any more bank-owned properties for sale, here is the list of 38 houses between La Jolla and Carlsbad that are owned by lenders, or 3rd parties who purchased them at the trustee sale:
A few are listed for sale, and others are still waiting for occupants to vacate or lawsuits to be settled. This Bressi Ranch home was foreclosed in April, 2014, and just hit the open market last week at what most would consider to be pretty close to retail price:
The former owners had worked the system – they had been in default since 2008, and endured four different trustee-sale dates before finally giving up the ship. In the meantime, the lender probably did everything they could to modify the loans?
I don’t think anybody has to worry about getting foreclosed unless they have significant equity.
From the SD Union-Tribune:
Hat tip to Wendy for sending in this article on subprime vs. prime mortgages causing the crisis. The authors probably didn’t catch the fact that prime borrowers were getting neg-am loans based on FICO scores only, and those weren’t considered subprime loans:
We can draw two conclusions from this data. One is that your chances of being foreclosed upon in the past decade was more a matter of timing than anything else. If you were a subprime borrower in, for instance 2002, who bought a bigger house than a more prudent and creditworthy borrower would have bought, chances are you would have been fine. But a prime borrower who did everything right—bought a house he could easily afford, with a large downpayment—but did so in 2006 would have had a higher chance of defaulting than the subprime borrower with better timing.
Since whether you were hurt by the crisis had more to do with luck than anything else, Ferreira argues we should rethink whether doing more to help underwater homeowners would have been a good idea.