More Shadows…..

greenlander on June 28, 2009 at 9:56 pm

Does this mean that the high end is finally going to take a hit? I’m ready for the stalemate to be broken.

Ginger on June 28, 2009 at 10:00 pm

The only thing missing was the Pearl Jam music.

Actually, in this new age funkadelic metric math world, I have a solution for this whole mess:

Write the White House and tell Mr. Obama that the cat ate your ability to meet your mortgage responsibility and you would like those nice tax payers to take over.

Cheers!

tj and the bear on June 28, 2009 at 10:33 pm

You would think a million bucks would buy you more than 10 feet between you & your neighbor’s houses.

Jim, the loan data you provide in the video is staggering. Seems like none of these people could really afford these homes, and they’ve milked them for even more after they were in.

Anonymous on June 28, 2009 at 11:39 pm

That a hummer right at 5:15 on the video…!! LOL!

Blue Streak on June 28, 2009 at 11:41 pm

It’s going to be a long 2-3 years for this all to work itself out of the system.

Crazy!

No wonder economists and true real estate forecasters are saying a recovery won’t happen till 2011 / 2012.

I keep hearing of stories through friends of people just sitting back on free rent until they get kicked out.

Many people in trouble now know that the foreclosure process takes a long time, and they are waiting it out. They even know about the cash for keys, so they say they are waiting for their offer. All the mean time, they are banking their cash and building up their reserves.

So sad…

Ronald McMansion on June 29, 2009 at 12:04 am

Do these banks really want to help or are they just dragging this out in hopes that the other banks will fail first and they’ll be the lone survivor?

Some excerpts from…

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/business/29loanmod.html?hp

LOS ANGELES — Somewhere on earth, there must be a more difficult task than this: persuading American mortgage companies to lower payments for homeowners who can no longer afford their loans. But as Karina Montenegro struggles to accomplish this feat for a troubled borrower, she strains to imagine a more futile pursuit.

Ms. Montenegro, an intern at a local company that seeks loan modifications, dials Washington Mutual to check on the status of an application for a homeowner whose income has plummeted. She endures a Muzak-scored purgatory while on hold. Syrupy-voiced customer service representatives chide her for landing in the wrong department. She learns that the documents her company sent in have simply vanished — for the third time since November.

****

In the same office, Ms. Montenegro’s colleague, Sean Milotta, has run into a problem on a loan billed by American Home Mortgage Servicing. Though the borrower appears eligible for the Obama administration plan, the company refuses to take an application because the loan is owned by an investor who is unwilling to absorb a loss.

****

A note in the system shows that the bank confirmed receiving documents on April 29 — pay stubs, tax returns, a letter disclosing her hardship, bank statements. Since then, the company has been waiting for WaMu to review the file.

But when Mr. Lavi calls, a representative coolly discloses that the application has been rejected because one document, a proof-of-insurance form, is missing. He must start over.

“The file had been submitted properly, and you didn’t put the pieces together,” Mr. Lavi says, his body quivering with anger. “I’m not going to stand in line again for another six months.”

He demands to speak to a supervisor, but the representative says none is free. He hangs up and redials, hoping to land in a different call center. Eventually, he reaches Chase’s executive offices, where Becky takes over the call.

“We’re not taking cases now,” she says calmly.

“Why was I transferred to you?” Mr. Lavi asks. Becky does not know. He implores her to keep the file open while he faxes in the lone missing document.

“Impossible,” she says, warning of “the sheer amount of papers coming in.”

****

His clients, Dean and Nancy Piercy, owe $380,000 on the loan for their home in Shasta Lake, Calif. A logger, Mr. Piercy has lost work hours, making it hard for them keep up with their $2,048 monthly payment — soon set to rise.

Mr. Wasser has already negotiated a solution: GMAC will accept only $270,000 in repayment, allowing the couple to get a fixed rate mortgage from another bank.

But that suddenly is in disarray. The Piercys have been making their payments, but GMAC has been putting their checks aside, holding the money as “loss mitigation fees,” until their application is completed. It has notified credit bureaus that their loan is more than 90 days delinquent, which has lowered their credit score, disqualifying them for the next mortgage.

Mr. Wasser reaches GMAC’s loss mitigation department. He asks for the delinquency to be removed from their status. But that must be handled by a different department: customer service. He is transferred there, where Jessica picks up the call.

“We are not going to amend,” she says, after a strained back and forth. If Mr. Wasser wants it otherwise, he will have to talk to loss mitigation.

“I just talked to them five minutes ago,” he tells Jessica.

“No, you didn’t.”

“Are you accusing me of lying?”

Mr. Wasser asks for Jessica’s employee identification number, but the line goes dead. Jessica has apparently hung up.

greenlander on June 29, 2009 at 12:15 am

These stories about idiots trying to get workouts but failing at it are hilarious.

Now, if only we could get banks to get the foreclosure and REO machines going, we could have some actual price discovery in this market…

Ronald McMansion on June 29, 2009 at 1:12 am

Is there another bubble about to burst? The Chinese economy barely had a hiccup when the rest of the world began melting down, but will they be able to avoid the inevitable? Is it inevitable?

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/06/chinese-banks-accident-waiting-to.html

China’s banks are veering out of control. The half-reformed economy of the People’s Republic cannot absorb the $1,000bn (£600bn) blitz of new lending issued since December.

Money is leaking instead into Shanghai’s stock casino, or being used to keep bankrupt builders on life support. It is doing very little to help lift the world economy out of slump.

*****

“Future losses on stimulus could turn out to be larger than expected, and it is unclear what share the central and/or local governments ultimately will be willing or able to bear.”

Note the phrase “able to bear”. Fitch’s “macro-prudential risk” indicator for China threatens to jump from category 1 (safe) to category 3 (Iceland, et al). This is a surprise to me but Michael Pettis from Beijing University says China’s public debt may be as high as 50pc-70pc of GDP when “correctly counted”.

The regime is so hellbent on meeting its growth target of 8pc that it has given banks an implicit guarantee for what Fitch calls a “massive lending spree”.

Bank exposure to corporate debt has reached $4,200bn. It is rising at a 30pc rate, even as profits contract at a 35pc rate…Roll-over risk is rocketing. China’s monetary stimulus since November is arguably more extreme than the post-Lehman printing of the US Federal Reserve, though less obvious to the untrained eye….

China’s Banking Regulatory Commission fired a warning shot last week. “The top priority at the moment is to stop explosive lending. Banks should carefully monitor the process of credit approval and allocation, and make sure that loans flow into the real economy,” it said….

*****

Andy Xie, a Sino-bear and commentator for Caijing, said Western analysts are in for a rude shock if they think that China’s surging demand for raw materials implies genuine recovery.

Commodity speculators have been using cheap credit to play the arbitrage spread between futures and spot on the oil markets. They have even found ways to trade lumber to iron ore by sheer scale of leverage. “They’ve made everything open to speculation,” he said.

Mr Xie thinks the spring recovery is an inventory spike, to be followed a double-dip downturn into next year as stimulus wears off.

*****

Protectionism is a risky game for a country that lives off global trade and runs a surplus near 10pc of GDP. Mr Pettis said he fears China is nearing its “Smoot-Hawley moment”, repeating the US tariff blunder of 1930 that brought the world crashing down on Washington’s head.

Two facts stand out about China’s green shoots. While the Shanghai composite index is up 70pc since November, Chinese imports are down 25pc from a year ago. China is still draining real stimulus from the global economy.

If the world’s biggest surplus state ($400bn) is too structurally deformed to help offset the demand shock as Western debtors retrench, we are trapped in a long deflation slump.

Ronald McMansion on June 29, 2009 at 1:48 am

When will it end? How will it end?

Doctor Housing Bubble has some insight into the can that’s slowly being kicked down the road…

http://tinyurl.com/m32xp2

Alt-A and Option ARM Economic Disaster Update: California Solution? Workout 3,430 Alt-A loans in March. Good Job. All we have is an additional 643,000 Alt-A Loans in the State. At this Rate it will take us 15 years to Modify or Alter all Alt-A Loans.

March 2009 Active Alt-A loans

CA: 651,000+

April 2009 Active Alt-A loans:

CA: 643,000+

What is their idea of a workout? Well for 22 percent of the loans, they basically froze the interest teaser rate for less than five years. The next option which was used on 16 percent of the loans was lowering the interest rate to another teaser level. So already, nearly 40 percent of the “workouts” are being dealt with artificially low rates! This is the damn reason the Alt-A and option ARM loans are so toxic in the first place, they had freaking teaser rates to begin with. And this is the most popular method of fixing these loans? Come on now. 11 percent where kicked out the door through short-sales which really isn’t a workout and 5 percent were paid off. These are probably those folks buying in semi-prime and prime areas jumping in while they miss the next housing bubble. But you know what I love? Only 36 loans actually had their principal balance reduced! Bwahahahaha! Give me one second. Bwahahahaha! Their idea of a workout is basically turning underwater homeowners into indentured servants who have fewer options than renters.

The government is basically advocating that these loans all become option ARMs. 40 year mortgages? Deferral of principal amount? What is this? Did the government hire New Century Financial as consultants to devise this program? Even those prime workouts are being pushed into this crap.

shadash on June 29, 2009 at 5:23 am

Jim,

Why do you think banks are letting deadbeats live in these properties without paying? Is it because the “homeowners” are throwing up legal roadblocks to extend the free rent? Are banks unwilling to take such a huge loss. (5k a month is better than 500k all at once. But over time 5k loss per month is actually worse)

I understand money and I understand greed. I just can’t seem to understand what the banks are doing here.

NateTG on June 29, 2009 at 6:44 am

“I understand money and I understand greed. I just can’t seem to understand what the banks are doing here.”

The two most plausible theories that I’ve been aware of is that the banks are either overloaded by volume, that they’re trying to protect the notional value of the underlying real estate, or that they’re somehow trying to avoid booking the losses.

Consultant on June 29, 2009 at 6:45 am

Shadash,

“I understand money and I understand greed. I just can’t seem to understand what the banks are doing here.”

What the banks are doing is acting like the corporate criminals they have become. Please, repeat after me….the banks have become criminal organizations. Again,…the banks have become criminal organizations. One more time,…the banks have become criminal organizations.

This is why everyone agrees this whole thing was one giant Ponzi scheme. There is no negotiating with criminals to do the “right thing”. If they were interested in doing the right thing, we wouldn’t call them criminals.

Here’s the key. Right now we don’t have a housing problem, or even a financial problem. What we have is a law enforcement problem. Actually, we have a bigger problem than that, one that should make all of us go running to our mommies, is a cultural problem.

Our culture has changed significantly for the worse. We now accept at the highest levels in all of our institutions, criminal behavior. Criminals don’t want to do what’s right for society; what’s fair. They only want what is good for them, and they will pursue that by any means necessary.

That, Shadash, is how the world economy was brought to its knees. By criminals. And until we shut down many of the current criminals and their schemes, this chaos will only get worse.

arizonadude on June 29, 2009 at 7:14 am

Simple question here;

If you loaned somebody money would you want to modify the loan terms?

Consultant on June 29, 2009 at 7:39 am

“If you loaned somebody money would you want to modify the loan terms?”

This is not the right question. The people who now hold the loans, were not the people who originally made the loan. Those companies, many of which are now out of business, didn’t care if the homeowners could make the payments because they were selling the loan to some other sucker within a day or two.

Taking risk out of the mortgage business meant two people got hurt, the homeowners who sought the loan and the person/organization left holding the bag (the taxpayers). Everyone in between these two made off like bandits.

For many of these loans, fraud was happening on both sides of the closing table. The entire situation is one big fu#ked up deal. Just like Iraq, most of our options are bad.

My solution: reduce the mortgage to the historical mortgage to income ratios. If the homeowner still can’t make the mortgage, they lose the home. It would reek some havoc, but that’s going to happen anyway. This would be a lot more organized than what we have now, which is chaos.

NateTG on June 29, 2009 at 7:39 am

“If you loaned somebody money would you want to modify the loan terms?”

If it increases my expected returns.

Susan on June 29, 2009 at 8:13 am

I live in the Bressi Ranch in Carlsbad. I understand a lot of NODs are filed too. This sucks big time, because I got relocated, yet I can’t sell my home, I’d have to rent it out.

Mozart on June 29, 2009 at 8:20 am

I thought the first part of the video was a promotional for a garage door company. I would rename it “Garage Doors of Carmel Valley”.

Crazy big expensive homes. Even after having it explained to me I still don’t quite get the allure of tract home sprawl in Carmel Valley.

JtR’s long expected drop in Carmel Valley seems to be happening, but, even the short sale story where the guy bought the house that was $1.4MM for $1MM still seems like a huge chunk of change to me for a really nondescript garage with a house above it.

Rooster Cogburn on June 29, 2009 at 8:42 am

Price compression here we come. Weeeeeee!!!!

ArtEclectic on June 29, 2009 at 8:50 am

Why do you think banks are letting deadbeats live in these properties without paying?

Shadash, what I’ve read (and agree with) is that the most likely answer to your question is that the banks are trying to stop the snowball effect. The more losses they book, the more damage to their balance sheet. The more foreclosures sitting out on the market will keep driving prices lower. The lower the values of all that high priced real estate, the more current owners that are underwater. Read the CR post http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/06/new-research-on-walking-away.html

“The researchers found that homeowners start to default once their negative equity passes 10% of the home’s value. After that, they “walk away massively” after decreases of 15%.”

The more values decline in the upper end, the more homeowners that will walk away.

So, that’s my theory of why the banks are doing what they are doing. Does anyone know what the amount of jumbo loans written 2005-2007 were as compared to subprime during that same time period?

GeneK on June 29, 2009 at 9:09 am

I’m wondering how much skin these banks actually have in the loans they hold. If I ran a healthy bank that didn’t write a lot of bad loans and acquired one that did, I would probably have looked at the “$1B” worth of mortgage paper that bank supposedly held and put it on my books at its “real value,” and that value would have been as close to zero as I could get it, so that my cost to acquire the institution was essentially the value of its offices, equipment and cash deposits. So perhaps a bank holding a $500k loan on a house now worth $250k actually has less than $250k invested in it and will still turn a profit on their acquisition of it if they restructure it down to a lower balance?

arizonadude on June 29, 2009 at 9:24 am

Why are the banks all of a sudden the bad guys?They loaned the money to people who wanted it and said they would pay it back.

Looks like madoff is about to meet bubba in an 8*8 cell.

Shakerosalt on June 29, 2009 at 9:41 am

It’s pretty pathetic that the houses are more car friendly (garages) than people friendly. Where the hell are the front doors? Crikey!

ArtEclectic on June 29, 2009 at 10:00 am

Shakerosalt, the thing with garages is that they are very subject to the mentality of the buying market during the time the house was built. Older houses like mine have their garages tucked back behind the house so that the front of the house is the focal point.

I’ve noticed that homes for the massively wealthy tend to have the garages tucked off to the side or hidden so that when you first see the house, you are struck by the grandeur of the entry and home facade. Homes built for the middle/upper middle tend to have garages front and center because the garage becomes a display of wealth. Especially the prominent three car garages shown on most of the houses in the video. When you pull up to one of those homes, you are supposed to be impressed by the fact that the homeowner is successful enough to have THREE cars. Front doors are hidden because those people don’t want to invite you to their door, they just want you to be amazed at their display of wealth from a safe distance out in the street.

Hummer parked out front is an optional accessory to identify those for whom money did not buy class or taste.

GeneK on June 29, 2009 at 10:10 am

It’s also difficult to put garages behind the house when you’re sizing the houses so big for their lots that you’re only leaving 6-8 ft between the house and the property line…

NateTG on June 29, 2009 at 10:20 am

“Why are the banks all of a sudden the bad guys? They loaned the money to people who wanted it and said they would pay it back.”

Because bubbles are caused by irrational borrowing and lending.

shoppingaround on June 29, 2009 at 10:30 am

tj,
Your comment: “You would think a million bucks would buy you more than 10 feet between you & your neighbor’s houses,” made me think of an article I read (in the LA TIMES?)a couple of years ago.

It was about people who thought they were “rich” because their homes had appreaciated to over $5M and they were excited to buy a new, better home. But they then found out that “$10M is the new million.” It went on to discuss how back in the day, $1M bought something really grand–but those days were done.

Perhaps they’ll make a come back?

JordanT on June 29, 2009 at 10:53 am

I read through that article and still don’t understand how they expect to pay off those loans. $4,400 a month for a $708K mortgage is less than a 30-year 5.5% fixed loan. Same with the $380K home at the $2035 a month payment. If they can’t afford a fixed 30-year payment at historically low rates they can’t afford that house period.

fd in to on June 29, 2009 at 11:17 am

Jim–I heard a real estate agent on a call-in show complaining about homeowners associations that gum up the works at closings. They inflate the cost of unpaid dues along with penalties and fees and lawyer bills at REO closings. He spoke of a recent sale he made in the Brentwood area of Sacramento. The house was originally sold for $1mil in the bubble but as a recent REO sold for $500,000. The HOA threatened liens if the bank didn’t pony up $12,000 for them and the closing was held up until the bank finally agreed. After all, it’s really the taxpayers paying it. Have you or any others experienced this. Sounds like blackmail since HOAs are way down the line in recourse yet can stall out a sale.

Skeet on June 29, 2009 at 11:41 am

Could a lot of these homeowners in Jim’s Vid be capable of paying, but choosing to default to get in the door of loan modification?

This would decrease the severity of the situation if it is the case.

I like the comments on research suggesting that once underwater more than 15% people start walking in large numbers. It does seem that the banks are trying to delay breaking some critical thresholds that could unleash really big declines. Maybe they will succeed – what do they need – 1 more year? 2 more years? with inflation coming and gov’t help in unbelievable quantity…. maybe they will wiggle through, and prices will not decline THAT much more.. maybe.

huh what? on June 29, 2009 at 11:46 am

ArtEclectic –> “…they just want you to be amazed at their display of wealth from a safe distance out in the street.”

how do you figure?

do you know an owner who told you this?

JK on June 29, 2009 at 11:48 am

God, those CV homes all look alike…

RBRenter on June 29, 2009 at 12:11 pm

“If you loaned somebody money would you want to modify the loan terms?”

If they were in default I’d be more likely to modify their kneecaps.

Gutless banks. The ugly truth they are hiding is just how many people are 90+ days in arrears. Hiding it is just delaying the inevitable. The banks are milking this for all it’s worth. Let the damn banks fail – that’s why have an FDIC. And liquidate the damn houses already!

tj and the bear on June 29, 2009 at 12:33 pm

shoppingaround,

I read that article too!!! 🙂 Yes, I really do think that million dollar homes will be much rarer in the future. For now we have thousands of pretenders (including all of those in the video).

tj and the bear on June 29, 2009 at 12:37 pm

My solution: reduce the mortgage to the historical mortgage to income ratios.

IOW, reward those that overbought and are now working the system for free rent? Sorry, no, that’s major moral hazard. Kick’em out!!!

Former RB Resident on June 29, 2009 at 12:37 pm

I can’t believe all the negative energy. Yes, there are some instances of people buying with no intention of repaying, but there’s plenty of shady loan agents too, selling loans where the terms change sooner than expected. Maybe that’s fraud, maybe its buyer stupidity, maybe both.

Banks make these deals when it makes sense. A high end property in foreclosure has big red F on it. I sure as hell wouldn’t buy one without a proctologist-worthy inspection. Outgoing owners, if bitter, can cause tons of latent damage. Plus, a house sitting vacant or poorly maintained for months or years will have problems- possibly bad problems. So, maybe we should applaud banks that actually will modify loans.

Locomotive Breath on June 29, 2009 at 12:38 pm

Homes built for the middle/upper middle tend to have garages front and center because the garage becomes a display of wealth. When you pull up to one of those homes, you are supposed to be impressed by the fact that the homeowner is successful enough to have THREE cars.

Hooo, somebody has a complex!!!

NO, arteclectic, the reason the garage is positioned as it is: easy access in and out of the garage!

I can walk outside each morning, open the door, back up and I’m gone!

I feel sorry for the dolts who purchased homes with garages out back or with tandem bays…or those newer homes with what appears to be an extra bay plopped down in the middle of what should have been the driveway! These folks bought these places for the way they looked, to hell with the practicality! I’m glad it’s them and not me who has to maneuver around a house or another car or in many cases has to play car jockey to get to their car.

Friggen’ ridiculous.

daniel on June 29, 2009 at 12:44 pm

Keeping people in homes means less deterioration of the property. Insurance may also not cover a vacant home. FDIC is running short of cash and probably couldn’t cover all the losses that need to be incurred. Finally, government at all levels do not want to see price adjustments downward because they will loose tax revenue. This situation really sucks, but it is what it is.

ocrenter on June 29, 2009 at 12:52 pm

over and over again, we kept pushing the idea that the second wave is coming. that the high end is not immune. that high end sh!t will hit the fan as scheduled circa 2011-2012.

This is a must see video for all of the nonbeliever of the “second wave theory.”

Rob Dawg on June 29, 2009 at 1:06 pm

These are just not million dollar houses. Potential renters at $7000/mo just don’t exist. Renters at $3000/mo? Do the math.

arizonadude on June 29, 2009 at 1:24 pm

Dawg, I heard they are filling up these million dollar homes with several familes paying rent.They rent you a room with kithcen priveledges.I guess you better like your roommates well.

Jim the Realtor on June 29, 2009 at 1:35 pm

Seen in CV today:

Enter thru rod iron courtyard gate

DESERT REALTOR on June 29, 2009 at 1:53 pm

Re comment about HOA’s demanding back dues…they are entitled to repayment/recovery of delinquent accounts by California law. Deficiencies in the defaulted owner’s account must be brought current to obtain clear title – the banks have to pay up. As well, HOA’s with insufficient funds, numerous delinquencies and insolvency will prevent new Buyer’s lender from making a loan on that property. This deal killer is happening in many condo projects.

JAP on June 29, 2009 at 2:03 pm

Great vid Jim!

In a few years these houses will be priced so low it’ll be hard to believe they ever were in the $1m – 1.5m range.

And 2011-2012 is suppose to be the bottom huh?

sdbri on June 29, 2009 at 2:09 pm

Epic video! Now we know what gated communities are for. =)

Geotpf on June 29, 2009 at 2:10 pm

I like my house. Corner lot. If you look at it from the actual front of the house, it looks like there’s no garage at all. But, of course, there is one, it just exits on the other street. Solves both the “garages are ugly” and the “but I want to be able to get in and out easily” arguments.

DESERT REALTOR on June 29, 2009 at 2:28 pm

Today’s video should be entitled “Bonnie and Clyde Live Here”. I’m shocked because I thought the Desert was in worse condition. All the Mil+ NOD’s in today’s video are evidence of a massive criminal fraud spree on the part of these homeowners. In my opinion, they are more culpable than the banks. Too bad CA is a non-judicial foreclosure state. You should send this video the the US Attorney General. Would not doubt that most of these were intentional frauds.

3clicks from da Beach on June 29, 2009 at 2:29 pm

I saw a Land Rover and Mercedes in the driveway of of one of the homes in Carlsbad.

Jim you featured these home on previous videos.

905 Melba Rd, 92024, 4 beds, 5.0 baths, 3,682 sq ft sold at 850K on 3/09/09 was that the REO Sale?

890 Bracero Rd, 92024, 3 beds, 4.0 baths, 3,480 sq ft finally sold for 1.1M from a builder high listing of 1.5M – 1.6M.

904 Bracero Rd (next door), 92024, 3 beds, 4.0 baths, 3,480 sq ft is still available and the builder high listing were 1.7M – 1.8M

677 Camino De Orchidia, 92024, 5 beds, 5.0 baths, 4,705 sq ft is offered for sale at 1.9M and this property has an ocean view.

BUT,

510 Camino De Orchidia CA 92024 5 beds, 4.0 baths, 4,915 sq ft went back to the bank at 1,338,750M at the Courthouse steps on 03/12/2009? The owner paid 2.3M in Dec ’05.

What do you think the ocean view premium is worth for the last two properties?

The house next door to 510 Camino de Orchidia has no lawn, moving boxes for window treatments and nobody is home – it has been this way for as long as I can remember. I did see the ‘owners’ boxing up items in the garage over a year ago and the owners paid 1.5M in May ’06.

518 Camino De Orchidia Encinitas CA 92024
4 beds, 4.5 baths, 4,616 sq ft

sdbri on June 29, 2009 at 2:36 pm

Free rent for millionaires please.

UCgal on June 29, 2009 at 2:46 pm

To comment on the garages in the front thing… The reason newer houses all have garages in the front is that alley’s have gone the way of the dinasaur. Garages in the back require either larger lots, smaller footprints for the houses, or alleys in the back.

UCgal on June 29, 2009 at 2:48 pm

Oops – “alleys” not “alley’s”

chrisanthemama on June 29, 2009 at 2:58 pm

Sorry to go completely off-topic:

“Top officials at the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department have ordered an internal affairs investigation into the use of pepper spray by a deputy to make an arrest at a fundraiser in Encinitas for a Democratic congressional hopeful.”

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/06/san-diego-sheriff-calls-for-probe-into-pepper-spray-use-at-political-event.html

ArtEclectic on June 29, 2009 at 2:58 pm

I actually am not making that up about the garages – I can’t find the article right now and have to head back out, but the article was discussing changes in “fads” over time with residential architecture. Not unlike the current fetish of granite counters and stainless appliances…. The garage out front and prominent was not about access, it was about showing off the vehicles.

GameAgent on June 29, 2009 at 2:59 pm

Don’t like garages in the front? Bressi Ranch has lots of homes with alleys and garages in the back. Here’s a look:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=6302+Edendale+St,+Carlsbad,+CA+92009&sll=32.828681,-117.225089&sspn=0,359.984615&ie=UTF8&ll=33.122924,-117.257895&spn=0.012256,0.015385&z=16&iwloc=A&layer=c&cbll=33.122862,-117.257974&panoid=KLPiKCcvTNJJD7EgbCN6Jg&cbp=12,106,,0,23.95

huh what? on June 29, 2009 at 3:28 pm

agree with UCgal – back alleys have gone the way of the dinosaurs. I surmise mainly because it saves taxpayers and HOAs from the expense of building and maintaining extra roads. Sure, we can use them but we all know that they are essentially limited or private-use roads.

ArtEclectic, stating home owners use garages to flaunt their wealth is just as ridiculous as saying home owners buy houses with back garages because they are embarassed by their 20-year old clunkers.

Rob Dawg on June 29, 2009 at 3:45 pm

Back alleys are not acceptable to the urban planning elite. the same people that insist two fire trucks can pass while both sides of the street are double parked. The point is less private space, higher density and more “community” ownership/control of the local lifestyle.

CA renter on June 29, 2009 at 3:48 pm

Yep, what UCgal said.

Basically, when you place a garage up front, it preserves more lot space for the backyard and house. When you put a garage in the back, you waste a lot of space on the driveway, and have to space the houses further apart, given the same square footage. People are not willing to pay extra just for driveway space, instead of a larger (house) footprint or backyard space.

Developers love narrow, deep lots. You can get more houses per street (sunk cost, for the developer) that way. This is why you rarely see the wide, single-story, ranch-style homes these days.

If I were a developers, I’d find a way to buy some cheap land and build a development full of single-story, ranch-style homes on large lots. They’d sell out in an instant.

Todd on June 29, 2009 at 5:17 pm

What’s with the Mexican flags?

Rob Dawg on June 29, 2009 at 5:24 pm

If I were a developers, I’d find a way to buy some cheap land and build a development full of single-story, ranch-style homes on large lots. They’d sell out in an instant. – CA renter

Back in the day when I was JtRs only regular commenter we said the same thing.

Jim the Realtor on June 29, 2009 at 5:30 pm

Those were the days, weren’t they? CA Renter was #2.

One-story tent cities are looking more likely at this stage though. There has to be a way to make dough on those – rent them to the government?

arizonadude on June 29, 2009 at 5:43 pm

Madoff will spend the rest of his life scrubbing toilets and meeting new friends named bubba.Does the punishment fit the crime?I imagine he will weasel his way out of this somehow.

I fired my realtor today.She showed up at my house sh@tfaced trying to sell me a home.Easy come easy go!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rob Dawg on June 29, 2009 at 5:53 pm

Those were the days, weren’t they? CA Renter was #2.

One-story tent cities are looking more likely at this stage though. There has to be a way to make dough on those – rent them to the government? – Jim the Realtor

Mien Gott! I am the optimist here? In the late 40s/early 50s these were called Levittowns after an early pioneer. Modest square footage on adequate lots they propelled the US into a long period of increasing homeownership and personal wealth. I challenge anyone to try and replicate Levittowns again. They won’t happen. Not enough density, not enough public land dedications streets to narrow, on and on.

MountainMan on June 29, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Let me understand this: 500k or less, red hot market, 1 mil plus, sinking like the Titanic?

I bet none of those neighbors ever spoke to each other about their dire situations. But I am sure they had a pissing contest during the good times.

ArtEclectic on June 29, 2009 at 6:27 pm

Huh what – I didn’t say that is WHY people buy those houses, I said that was what drove the change in post WWII single family design. As auto ownership skyrocketed, demand to show them off by placing the garage front and center of the property drove a huge change in suburban design. In many places you can tell when a neighborhood was developed by the location of the garages.

Incidentally, as garage-centric housing grew in predominance and garages became larger and still larger to accommodate the larger and larger vehicles – the backlash against “snout houses” also grew. It is becoming increasingly popular for cities to ban that type of construction altogether, or at the very least limit the design so that the garage takes up no more than 50% of the front facade. Another rule gaining popularity is that front entries must be clearly visible from the street.

Houses with excessive amounts of front garage space have been termed “garage mahals.”

http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20000526_snouthomes.htm

http://homes.wsj.com/homegarden/20001018-fletcher.html

http://rismedia.com/2007-05-09/parked-out-back-many-new-homes-put-garages-out-of-sight/

DESERT REALTOR on June 29, 2009 at 6:36 pm

Check out MORTGAGEFRAUDBLOG.COM – really scary as to the extent of indictments and arrests for massive fraud – $$billions of losses on a weekly basis.

Rob Dawg on June 29, 2009 at 6:45 pm

Let’s be clear. The sub $450k market is currently red hot and the plus $900k market stone cold but neither of these disparate market sees the potential problem with that. I see one more capitulation event that will likely damage recently executed positions. Let me reiterate; SD is a great place to live and a good place over all. It just isn’t a good place to invest if that is what you were looking for. This is a change as a year ago I would have said was a bad investment and a poor prospect for living there as a homeowner. Homeownership, especially at the low end is becoming viable.

Jim the Realtor on June 29, 2009 at 6:54 pm

The first story on the website mentioned in comment #64…..Integrity Mortgage…..:

Warren Clifton Pierce, a former mortgage broker operating as Integrity Mortgage, Inc. entered a guilty plea on Monday, June 1, 2009, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, to the crime of Conspiracy to Commit Mail Fraud and Wire Fraud for his role in a scheme to fraudulently obtain mortgage loans totaling…

Dacounselor on June 29, 2009 at 6:54 pm

“Mien Gott! I am the optimist here? In the late 40s/early 50s these were called Levittowns after an early pioneer. Modest square footage on adequate lots they propelled the US into a long period of increasing homeownership and personal wealth. I challenge anyone to try and replicate Levittowns again. They won’t happen. Not enough density, not enough public land dedications streets to narrow, on and on.”
________________________

The old Levittowns were the Carmel Valleys of 50 years ago. I grew up in Willingboro NJ, the whole damn borough was built by Levitt. Modest homes on 1/3 to 1/2 acre lots, schools/shopping/golf course/community pools all part of the deal. A master-planned burb of the past. Pops bought the house in ’67 for $27K and sold it in ’76 for $47K.

Old Levitt (or his sons, I guess) has gone BK and left alot of folks shy a deposit, including alot of seniors. Such is life. Will we see a return to Levitt-esque communities – meaning less Mcmansions and alot more modesty? I don’t know if builders, when they really start to build again, will follow that model.

Jim the Realtor on June 29, 2009 at 6:57 pm

I challenge anyone to try and replicate Levittowns again. They won’t happen.

Maybe out in the desert? Streets optional. A mess hall and a nurse station.

Just a big campout where flower children re-kindle their roots.

DESERT REALTOR on June 29, 2009 at 7:41 pm

JtR – keep scrolling down on the website mentioned in my No. 64 comment and you will see the Wanted Poster for the blonde chick from the Inland Empire (Rancho Cucamonga). Just like the wild west with Hoppy and the possies.

Tamar on June 29, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Uh Jim…those of us who like you a lot prefer that you not make movies WHILE DRIVING!!! Oy gevalt!

Rooster Cogburn on June 29, 2009 at 10:40 pm

Funny! My family rented in Willingboro NJ back in 1963 while the house i grew up was being built about 30 minutes away.

mybleachhouse on June 30, 2009 at 2:13 am

I don’t know what’s so great about CV. There’s nothing to do and every house looks exactly the same. All the homes are crammed next to each other and it’s only “desirable” because it’s expensive.
Rancho Santa Fe, Del Mar, La Jolla, Coronado, and Point Loma are the only true areas that deserve a million dollar price tag.

cv owner on June 30, 2009 at 8:07 am

it’s only “desirable” because it’s expensive.

mybleachhouse, you clearly have no idea.

CV is desirable for a lot of reasons. In fact, it is so desirable we bought a house in CV *despite* it being relatively expensive. And guess what, we still would have bought the house even if it was not expensive 😉

Written by Jim the Realtor

June 28, 2009

73 Comments

73 Comments

Pin It on Pinterest