foreclosure search

You've no doubt seen all of them or read them. Glossy ads or four-color advances in publications and magazines promising to teach you every one of the juicy information regarding successful property investing. And all you should do to learn each one of these real property investing surface encounters chuck russo secrets is to pay a rather high sum for a one-or two-day seminar.




Often these kinds of slick property investing classes claim that you could make intelligent, profitable real-estate investments with simply no money down (other than, of program, the large fee you purchase the seminar). Now, how attractive is that? Make a profit from real estate investments you created using no funds. Possible? Not likely.




Successful investment requires cash flow. That's the type of any type of business or even investment, especially real estate investing. You put your cash into something which you desire and plan is likely to make you more money.




Unfortunately too few newbies towards the world of real estate investing believe it's the magical kind of business where standard company rules don't apply. Simply put, if you would like to stay in real estate investing for more than, say, a evening or 2, then you're going to have to create money to make use of and make investments.




While it could be true in which buying property with no money down is simple, anyone who's even made a fundamental investment (just like buying their particular home) knows there's a lot more involved in property investing that can cost you money. For illustration, what concerning any necessary repairs?




So, the number 1 rule people not used to real property investing must remember is to have accessible cash supplies. Before you decide to actually carry out any property investing, save some funds. Having slightly money inside the bank once you begin real property investing surface encounters chuck russo can help you make more profitable real estate investments in rental properties, for example.




When real-estate investing within rental properties, you'll want to be able to select just qualified tenants. If you've no cashflow when real estate investing within rental qualities, you could be pressured to take in a less qualified tenant because you need somebody to pay for you money so that you can take attention of fixes or lawyer fees.




For any kind of real estate investing, meaning leasing properties or perhaps properties you get to resell, having funds reserved can permit you to ask for any higher cost. You can require a increased price from your investment because you surface encounters chuck russo won't feel financially strapped as you wait for an offer. You won't be backed into a corner and forced to accept just any offer because you desperately need the money.




Another downfall of numerous new to property investing is actually, well, greed. Make a profit, yes, but don't become thus greedy that you simply ask regarding ridiculous rental or resell rates on many real est investments.




Those new to real est investing need to see property investing like a business, NOT a hobby. Don't think that real property investing is going to make you rich overnight. What company does?




It requires about six months to decide if real estate investing set for you. If you might have decided which, hey I love this, then offer yourself many years to really start making money. It usually takes at least five years being truly productive in real estate investing.




Persistence could be the key in order to success in real-estate investing. If you've decided that property investing is for you, surface encounters chuck russo keep plugging away at it and the rewards will be greater than you imagined.












(h/t Heather at VideoCafe)

It is a truism rarely acknowledged in this country: the single most important infrastructure investment we can make for the future is in education. I'm not talking about retrofitting the buildings or constructing more classrooms. No, we provide for the future by educating our young people, preparing them to become productive members of society. Study after study shows that the higher one's education level is, the higher the median income and the less likely one is to suffer unemployment.

But we're not doing that. No, in these austerity times, politicians clamor to cut services and jobs. Teachers are demonized. Vouchers are touted as the answer, when it's simply a way to privatize profits away from public schools. Hell, some GOP would be happy if we eliminate the Department of Education altogether.

A rare and welcome progressive appearance on the Sunday shows, Rep. Maxine Waters bemoans the disconnect between what politicians say we need to focus on and what they're really doing about it:

To tell you the truth, the plight of education in this country is shameful. Just a few days ago I learned that more cities, more states are reducing the number of education days down to four instead of five. And I could not help but stop and think, "Is this America? Is this the country that said and continues to say that education is a top priority?" Why are we not investing more in education? Why do we have dropouts? Why do we have educational systems that are failing? Why is it that we have a situation where many of our young people will not be able to compete in this high technological society because they're not properly educated? And so, no, we do pay lip service to education. We don't really invest in it, and that's got to change. But let me just say this, Americans want to work. This joblessness is not only hitting the middle class, but it is hitting all classes. It is absolutely unconscionable what is happening in the minority communities. When we look at this no jobs haven't been created in August and we find in the African-American community it has increased from 16 percent, 15.9, 16 percent, up now 16.7 percent, and now we're going to talk about cutting government by $1.5 trillion, this new 12 committee membership that we have after the raising the debt ceiling debate? And that means that we're going to lose more jobs, that means more people are going to be unemployed. The African-American rate will probably go up to about 20 percent. I don't know how our country can sustain that kind of...

Of course, David Gregory interrupts her at this point, because Lord know, the plight of the African American community doesn't concern him. But then again, he has the gall to say that we only play lip service to the importance of education. You know, the same guy who only pays lip service to journalism and who spent the better part of the last two years telling his viewers that Americans cared about the deficit when poll after poll proved him a lying hack with a corporate agenda.

Ashton Kutcher probably gets more pitches in Silicon Valley than Hollywood these days.

The movie actor and technology investor turned up the star power at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference this week in San Francisco, where start-up companies competed for his attention. Michael Arrington, fresh off his own Hollywood worthy drama, interviewed Kutcher on stage Tuesday.

Kutcher plays a tech investor in real life and in CBS' top-rated "Two and a Half Men" on TV. His character, Walden Schmidt, is an Internet billonaire who sold his company to Microsoft and now backs other entrepreneurs.

"There are some parallels to my actual life," Kutcher said.

On the show, Kutcher said he covered his character's laptop with stickers of his "dream portfolio" companies but CBS balked at giving exposure to companies that hadn't paid for the privilege.

Kutcher told Arrington that his investments were a "witch hunt" for the next big thing "that is so magic you can't understand how it works."

"I wonder what would happen if a pilgrim would have seen a computer back in Massachusetts 200 years ago. They would have killed the person as a witch because the computer would look like magic. That's the essence of being a good investor, they're on witch hunts," he said. "That's what I’m trying to do."

Kutcher is not your typical celebrity investor. He was a biochemical engineering major in college so he gets technology but, because he was a model at 19, he says it's nice to be appreciated for "something substantial."

On TV Kutcher is in the funny business. But in technology he's hunting for happiness. Kutcher says he picks technologies that have the greatest potential to create more love, friendship and connectivity in the world.

He has made 40 investments in companies such as AirBNB, Path and Skype but does not disclose many of them.

"I think sometimes for the early-stage companies that I've invested in, disclosing that I'm an investor can be detrimental to the story of the company," Kutcher said.

RELATED:

Ashton Kutcher: Entrepreneur, investor

Star investors (and other stars) come out

Ashton Kutcher at TechCrunch50: Blah, blah, blah

-- Jessica Guynn

Photo: Hollywood actor and Silicon Valley investor Ashton Kutcher and TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington at TechCrunch Disrupt. Credit: Araya Diaz / Getty Images

foreclosure law

You've without doubt seen these or read them. Glossy advertisements or four-color spreads in publications and papers promising to instruct you all the juicy information about successful property investing. And all you have to do to learn every one of these real property investing surface encounters chuck russo secrets is to pay a rather high sum for a one-or two-day seminar.




Often these slick real-estate investing seminars claim that you can make smart, profitable real estate investments with simply no money straight down (other than, of training course, the hefty fee you purchase the seminar). Now, how attractive is which? Make a make money from real property investments you made with no funds. Possible? Not likely.




Successful real estate investment requires income. That's the nature of any type of business or even investment, especially property investing. You put your hard earned money into a thing that you desire and plan is likely to make you more money.




Unfortunately not enough newbies towards the world of real-estate investing believe that it's a magical kind of business in which standard company rules do not apply. Simply set, if you need to stay in property investing for a lot more than, say, a day time or a couple of, then you're going to have to create money to use and commit.




While it might be true in which buying real estate with absolutely no money down is easy, anyone who is even made a simple real estate investment (like buying their own home) is aware there's much more involved in real-estate investing that will set you back money. For example, what about any required repairs?




So, the primary rule people not used to real estate investing ought to remember is to have available cash supplies. Before you choose to actually do any property investing, save some money. Having just a little money within the bank when you start real est investing surface encounters chuck russo can help you make more profitable real estate investments in rental properties, for example.




When real-estate investing in rental properties, you'll want to be able to select just qualified tenants. If you might have no cash flow when real estate investing inside rental qualities, you might be pressured to take in a less qualified tenant since you need somebody to cover you money to be able to take care of fixes or lawyer fees.




For almost any real property investing, meaning local rental properties or even properties you buy to resell, having money reserved can allow you to ask for any higher price. You can ask for a greater price from your owning a home because an individual surface encounters chuck russo won't feel financially strapped as you wait for an offer. You won't be backed into a corner and forced to accept just any offer because you desperately need the money.




Another downfall of numerous new to property investing will be, well, greed. Make a profit, yes, but don't become thus greedy that you simply ask for ridiculous rental or resale rates on all of your real estate investments.




Those a new comer to real estate investing have to see property investing as a business, NOT a spare time activity. Don't believe real estate investing will make you rich overnight. What company does?




It takes about 6 months to determine if real-estate investing set for you. If you might have decided that, hey I love this, then provide yourself many years to truly start earning money. It often takes at minimum five years to get truly productive in real estate investing.




Persistence is the key to be able to success in property investing. If you have decided that property investing is for you, surface encounters chuck russo keep plugging away at it and the rewards will be greater than you imagined.

Ashton Kutcher probably gets more pitches in Silicon Valley than Hollywood these days.

The movie actor and technology investor turned up the star power at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference this week in San Francisco, where start-up companies competed for his attention. Michael Arrington, fresh off his own Hollywood worthy drama, interviewed Kutcher on stage Tuesday.

Kutcher plays a tech investor in real life and in CBS' top-rated "Two and a Half Men" on TV. His character, Walden Schmidt, is an Internet billonaire who sold his company to Microsoft and now backs other entrepreneurs.

"There are some parallels to my actual life," Kutcher said.

On the show, Kutcher said he covered his character's laptop with stickers of his "dream portfolio" companies but CBS balked at giving exposure to companies that hadn't paid for the privilege.

Kutcher told Arrington that his investments were a "witch hunt" for the next big thing "that is so magic you can't understand how it works."

"I wonder what would happen if a pilgrim would have seen a computer back in Massachusetts 200 years ago. They would have killed the person as a witch because the computer would look like magic. That's the essence of being a good investor, they're on witch hunts," he said. "That's what I’m trying to do."

Kutcher is not your typical celebrity investor. He was a biochemical engineering major in college so he gets technology but, because he was a model at 19, he says it's nice to be appreciated for "something substantial."

On TV Kutcher is in the funny business. But in technology he's hunting for happiness. Kutcher says he picks technologies that have the greatest potential to create more love, friendship and connectivity in the world.

He has made 40 investments in companies such as AirBNB, Path and Skype but does not disclose many of them.

"I think sometimes for the early-stage companies that I've invested in, disclosing that I'm an investor can be detrimental to the story of the company," Kutcher said.

RELATED:

Ashton Kutcher: Entrepreneur, investor

Star investors (and other stars) come out

Ashton Kutcher at TechCrunch50: Blah, blah, blah

-- Jessica Guynn

Photo: Hollywood actor and Silicon Valley investor Ashton Kutcher and TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington at TechCrunch Disrupt. Credit: Araya Diaz / Getty Images

You wouldn't think Apple and Indonesia have much in common. On the surface, they don't, but they can still teach you a lot about investing. Let's start with Apple.

Apple made the news recently with two major events. It is locked in a battle with Exxon over which is the most valuable company by market capitalization -- a remarkable turnaround. Apple has a market value of over $344 billion. Then Steve Jobs announced his resignation at Chief Operating Officer for health related reasons.

According to a thoughtful blog by Weston Wellington of Dimensional Fund Advisors (not available online), it was not so long ago that the financial media was trashing Apple. In February 14, 2005, Robert Barker, in an article in BusinessWeek stated "...Apple doesn't tempt me..." I wonder what did. Maybe Lehman or Bear Stearns!

Steven Gandel weighed in with an article in Money on March 24, 2004. He quoted Transamerica portfolio manager Chris Bonavico who opined that Apple stock is "...crap from an investor standpoint."

Many analysts credit the remarkable sales of its Apples Stores as the key to Apple's success. In a quote attributed to David Goldstein, Channel Marketing Corp, which appeared in an article in BusinessWeek on May 21, 2001, Mr. Goldstein gave Apple "two years before they're turning out the lights on a very painful and expensive mistake."

What can you learn from these comments about Apple stock? Read the financial media if you find it entertaining. It's useless (and potentially harmful) as a source of reliable financial advice.

What about Indonesia?

The financial media was preoccupied with the downgrade by Standard & Poor's of the credit rating of the U.S, which lowered its rating from AAA status to AA plus. The new rating places the U.S. below the United Kingdom, Canada and even the Isle of Man.

Many investors viewed the lower rating with alarm and considered it a precursor of low stock returns for decades to come. The data tells a much different story, and may indicate there is no better time to invest in U.S. stocks and bonds.

In another blog, Wellington notes that Standard & Poor's rated the credit of Indonesia a "B" in July, 2001, which placed it in the "junk" category. Over the past decade, its credit rating has never risen to investment grade.

Investors in the Jakarta Composite have earned a total return of a whopping 29% per year over the last decade, ending June 30, 2011. According to Wellington, "If the Dow Jones Average had kept pace with Indonesian stocks over the past decade, it would be over 104,000 today."

Here's the lesson to be learned from Indonesia: A low (or reduced) credit rating on sovereign debt does not necessarily correlate to lower stock market returns. This is the opposite of what many investors and financial talking heads believe.

Most investors get their financial information from the financial media or brokers. As Dr. Phil would say: How is that working for you?

Dan Solin is a Senior Vice President of Index Funds Advisors (ifa.com). He is the author of the New York Times best sellers The Smartest Investment Book You'll Ever Read, The Smartest 401(k) Book You'll Ever Read, and The Smartest Retirement Book You'll Ever Read. His new book, The Smartest Portfolio You'll Ever Own, will be released in September, 2011. The views set forth in this blog are the opinions of the author alone and may not represent the views of any firm or entity with whom he is affiliated. The data, information, and content on this blog are for information, education, and non-commercial purposes only. Returns from index funds do not represent the performance of any investment advisory firm. The information on this blog does not involve the rendering of personalized investment advice and is limited to the dissemination of opinions on investing. No reader should construe these opinions as an offer of advisory services. Readers who require investment advice should retain the services of a competent investment professional. The information on this blog is not an offer to buy or sell, or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any securities or class of securities mentioned herein. Furthermore, the information on this blog should not be construed as an offer of advisory services. Please note that the author does not recommend specific securities nor is he responsible for comments made by persons posting on this blog.

foreclosure auctions

Recently I went to visit an acquaintance who was trashing out his own condo. There were hinges to be pried out of doorways and appliances to take for eBay. The house had become inert, a non-house: trapped somewhere between the building's association who wanted the fees owed to pay for the building's roof and walls and the like, the people who wanted the property taxes to pay for things like schools and street lights and roads and the people who were in charge of collecting (or more likely not collecting) the mortgage for whomever actually owned the mortgage debt (at the end of that chain, quite possibly you and me). These various claimants made the house largely worthless—more worthless than the latest assessment, which was… well, a comparable apartment nearby had recently sold for $120,000. It had been listed at $325,000 in May, 2009. That $120,000 sale price was not much higher than that apartment's last sale—twenty years ago.

Anyway, it was somewhat likely that, after the investment of some work on this apartment that was being trashed out, such as providing it with new door hinges and appliances, the association would find a renter unafraid of a possibly surprising ending to his rental agreement term in exchange for a below-market rent. That would be a best outcome.

The others would most likely find no purchase for their attempts to collect (the owner was protected by bankruptcy), and certainly the bank had little incentive to collect the mortgage, although their claims on the title would likely make finding a purchaser difficult.

One of the few chairs remaining in the near-vacant condo was occupied by someone on the other side, as it were. Someone not in bankruptcy, for one thing. This person had recently made a $200,000 offer on two-bedroom apartment in a nice part of town. (Needless to say, this town was not New York City.)

But when he had gone to get a mortgage, the bank had balked, because that apartment now assessed at half that value, and so now his current offer for the two-bedroom was at something like $78,000, having come up from something like $65,000 or $72,000. That offer number was jiggling and that title too was somewhat not entirely not cloudy, because that condo association was trying to get a bit of the sale money for past unpaid maintenance under the old owner, which seems, if logical, a bit short-sighted of the association's best interests. They ran the risk of receiving zero dollars instead of some dollars, by dragging the potential new owner into someone else's debt.

But then, we're pretty much all subject to someone else's debt these days, even those of us who rent. Renters are shielded from what is happening with a property, except when they receive a stray envelope addressed to their landlords, or the records pop up online—and the record-keeping systems, when I look up mortgages and sales online, seem to me to be bogged down and very tardy. I imagine the one or two municipal employees in each town in America with the responsibility of making these things public crouched in some little cave, with a stack of depressing white and red and yellow paper towering over their little desks. (Really, it's probably all done by computers. With near- or off-shored labor—somewhere in Utah or Israel.)

In any event, there it was: the magical $78,000 two-bedroom apartment. The steal of a lifetime. The great American get-ahead.

I bring this up in part because this Sunday, at the Brooklyn Book Festival, there is a panel at noon which includes Naomi Klein and Kurt Andersen and Jordan Flaherty and also Paul Reyes. His new book, Exiles in Eden—some of which is in the August issue of Harper's—is an account of going to work for his father, who has for some time now been a trasher-outer of abandoned and foreclosed homes. In the book, Reyes follows the trail of breadcrumbs of the people who've abandoned or been evicted from their houses to the foreclosure auctions, and along the way meets people like the housing advocates who've installed squatters in vacant properties.

(The panel is slotted against "Me… In The World," which stars Sam Lipsyte, and a panel called "Pop Life: Music, Memory, and America’s Coming of Age," with Ta-Nehisi Coates, which may be more appealing and relaxing and better-attended, but then we all have to make difficult choices in these times.)

Reyes did the first reading from his book the other week and something odd happened. He did not get author-friendly questions about the precious process of writing his book. Instead, a long discussion ensued among the audience members about the financial system and the housing market. In the audience were brokers and bankers and homeowners and renters. A mass of anecdotage and experience and theory was shared. It was something like an impromptu consciousness-raising session, very thorough, and when the audience left, everyone had had time to sift through his and her experiences with the state of our financial system and to incorporate some fresh input.

"The audience reaction was exactly what I'd hoped for," Reyes wrote to me the other day. "I'm certainly happy to stand up there and blather for twenty minutes, but I'd much rather have an intense discussion about this issue and hear what people have been through and what their ideas are."

Although he'll be taking this conversation to the Times' Opinionator blog's Living Rooms section soon, he does not have at this time many in-person readings scheduled; author reading tours are not booked by publishers much these days.

"I'm trying to work the promotion of the book into a split personality tour of sorts–between the narrative journalist and housing wonk," Reyes wrote. "If all goes well, I'll drop in on university classes in the daytime, then hit the bookstores at night. I'll wear a different pair of glasses for each role, of course."

Next week, on the 14th, Reyes will be reading as well at the Enoch Pratt Library in Baltimore. Perhaps you'd like him to visit your fine local bookstore, classroom or community center. His email address is on his website.

Realtors are not reporting the true sold prices on homes.  Here are 2 examples.  If a home is listed on the MLS and then sells at a auction like Hudson & Marshal or RealtyBid, you can see the sold price online or if you attend the live auctions, see the house sell at open outcry auction.  The next day the houses are reported sold on the MLS but always at full price.

The example below sold for $115,000 at Realtybid but is listed as sold for $159,500 on the MLS.

Also, homes are listed on the MLS and sold on the HUD site.  You can see the sold area on HUD and the Bid Stats.  The house listed below sold on the Hud site for $90,061 but again was listed as sold for full price on the MLS $113,400.

These are only 2 examples, I have seen over 100 and assume it is occurring everywhere.  I understand that foreclosures are not included in the sales stats from the Realtor Assoc. but the stats they use are taken from the sold prices listed on the MLS.  They are all false.

Simply said, this means that any pricing data coming off Multiple Listing Services is fatally flawed, and if this observation is verified, could potentially be a simplistic means to misrepresent the true home price by up to 40% higher.

As for the examples, here is property 1 as represented by the MLS: note the price of $159,500

And below is the actual final auction price on the exact same property taken from RealtyBid:

The MLS certainly pulled all the correct information on the property... all except for the price.

Another example: 5572 Goodhue Ave, Rockford IL 61109. The house was sold in auction for a purchase price of $90,061 as the below screenshot from the HUD auction indicates:

Yet the very same property was listed on foreclosure.com, and subsequently pulled by Zillow, as having a value of $113,400

These are merely two examples.

We have a simple question: which price is the NAR, Case-Shiler, and every other resi real estate index service pulling: the higher or the lower. For the ongoing credibility of the suddenly green shoot free recoveryless recovery, we at least hope it is the correct one. Which is why we ask readers to advise us of any comparable bifurcations between paid and listed price on properties they may be aware of.

Suddenly David Rosenberg's claim that no properties over $750,000 sold in the past month doesn't seem all that outlandish...

eric seiger

Z on TV: Fox <b>News</b> says it will not cover burning of Quran - TV <b>...</b>

Gentlemen: While I often find myself at odds with the opinions of your news network, I applaud your decision not to cover the Koran burning insanity. You are starving the attention-craving beast, precisely as necessary. Congratulations! ...

Betaworks and The Times Plan a Social <b>News</b> Service - NYTimes.com

Betaworks, a technology incubator in New York, is teaming up with The New York Times to introduce a social news service.

Small Business <b>News</b>: In The Trenches

Small business owners are in the trenches everyday creating businesses that change the world or their little corner of it. Starting a small business involves.

foreclosure sales

Actually, given the utter failure to replace the destroyed jobs over the last two years in this economy, the bigger surprise may have been that the numbers were dropping — until now.  Bloomberg reports that the percentage of home mortgages with one or more overdue payments rose in the second quarter, the first such increase in more than a year.  It might reflect the decline of the economy in the prelude to “Recovery Summer,” but it’s probably more useful as a signal of another wave of foreclosures:

The percentage of U.S. mortgages with one overdue payment rose in the second quarter, the first gain in early delinquencies in more than a year, as economic growth slowed and jobless claims rose.

Home loans overdue by a month rose to 3.51 percent, from 3.45 percent in the first quarter, according to a report today from the Washington-based Mortgage Bankers Association.

The gain suggests a slowing economy may increase foreclosures as mortgage holders lose their jobs, said Jay Brinkmann, chief economist of the group. New unemployment claims, measured as a monthly average, rose throughout the second quarter after falling in most of the prior period, according to data from the Labor Department in Washington.

“As we work through the bucket of troubled loans, we’re seeing an increase in a new crop of troubled loans,” Brinkmann said in an interview. “It’s primarily driven by the jobs market. It still takes a paycheck to make a mortgage payment.”

It’s an incremental increase, mainly significant for its direction and not its magnitude.  Absent other indicators, it would probably not mean much at all.  Furthermore, we don’t necessarily have enough context to know where a panic level is; it’s possible that this indicator fell far enough that a small rebound was inevitable, as foreclosures weeded out the failing borrowers and the averages returned to normal.

In fact, the news is a little more mixed — but still not good — when looking at the full summary from MBA:

“These latest delinquency numbers contain a mixture of somewhat good news and somewhat bad news.  The good news is that foreclosure starts are down and the inventory of homes anywhere in the process of foreclosure fell for the first time since 2006 and had the largest drop since 2005.  Loans 90 days or more past due, the largest share of delinquent loans, also fell.  The fact that both the 90+ delinquency rate fell and the foreclosure start rate fell means that a significant number of these seriously delinquent loans have been successfully modified and reclassified as performing, current loans,” said Jay Brinkmann, MBA’s chief economist.

“The disappointing news is that, after declining since the beginning of 2009, the rate of short-term delinquencies is going up and the increase in these short-term delinquencies may ultimately drive the foreclosure measures back up. The percent of loans one payment behind had peaked in the first quarter of 2009 at 3.77 percent and fell to 3.31 percent by the end of 2009.   Unfortunately that rate has now risen to 3.51 percent.  The causes are likely two-fold.  First, 30-day delinquencies are very closely tied to first-time claims for unemployment insurance.  The number of first-time claims fell through most of 2009 but leveled off in 2010 and have started to rise again.  This increase in unemployment directly impacts mortgage delinquencies.  Second, some percentage of the loans modified over the last several years have become delinquent again because those borrowers, by definition, have weak credit.

“Ultimately the housing story, whether it is delinquencies, homes sales or housing starts, is an employment story.  Only when we see a consistent increase in employment will we see an increase in sales and starts, and a sustained improvement in the delinquency numbers.  Until we see the increase in the number of households that comes with an increase in the number of paychecks, all measures of the health of the housing industry will continue to be weak,” Brinkmann said.

In other words, the collection of indicators gives this particular increase a little more weight.  While some of the longer-term delinquencies fade away, we are seeing a new wave of potential trouble if jobs don’t start opening up for the unemployed, and soon.  Note too that Brinkmann points out the failure of existing foreclosure-avoidance government programs because they have been treating the symptom while ignoring or deepening the disease.

We’re stuck in a cycle of futility, where government interventions create debt and uncertainties that dissuade investors from starting and expanding businesses, and the government thinks that more intervention will solve the trouble.  The results of Wreckovery Summer are demonstrating just how badly we have blundered in the wrong direction.

It was a busy week ...

Existing Home Sales lowest since 1996, 12.5 months of supply

The NAR reported:

Existing-home sales, which are completed transactions that include single-family, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops, dropped 27.2 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 3.83 million units in July from a downwardly revised 5.26 million in June, and are 25.5 percent below the 5.14 million-unit level in July 2009.
...
Total housing inventory at the end of July increased 2.5 percent to 3.98 million existing homes available for sale, which represents a 12.5-month supply at the current sales pace, up from an 8.9-month supply in June.

Click on graph for larger image in new window.

This graph shows existing home sales, on a Seasonally Adjusted Annual Rate (SAAR) basis since 1993.

Sales in July 2010 (3.83 million SAAR) were 27.2% lower than last month, and were 25.5% lower than July 2009 (5.14 million SAAR).

The next graph shows the year-over-year (YoY) change in reported existing home inventory and months-of-supply. Inventory is not seasonally adjusted, so it really helps to look at the YoY change.

Although inventory increased from June 2010 to July 2010, inventory decreased 1.9% YoY in July. The slight year-over-year decline is probably because some sellers put their homes on the market in the Spring hoping to take advantage of the home buyer tax credit.

Note: Usually July is the peak month for inventory.

A normal housing market usually has under 6 months of supply. The following graph shows the relationship between supply and house prices (using Case-Shiller).

This graph show months of supply (through July 2010) and the annualized change in the Case-Shiller Composite 20 house price index (through May 2010).

Below 6 months of supply (blue line) house prices are typically rising (black line).

Above 6 or 7 months of supply, house prices are usually falling. This isn't perfect - it is just a guideline. This is a key reason why I expect house prices to fall further later this year as measured by the Case-Shiller and CoreLogic repeat sales house price indexes.

New Home Sales decline to Record Low in July

The Census Bureau reports New Home Sales in July were at a seasonally adjusted annual rate (SAAR) of 276 thousand. This is an decrease from the record low of 315 thousand in June (revised down from 330 thousand).

This graph shows New Home Sales vs. recessions for the last 47 years.

And another long term graph - this one for New Home Months of Supply.

Months of supply increased to 9.1 in July from 8.0 in June. The all time record was 12.4 months of supply in January 2009. This is still very high (less than 6 months supply is normal).

The 276 thousand annual sales rate for July is the all time record low (May was revised up a little). This was another very weak report. New home sales are important for the economy and jobs - and this indicates that residential investment will be a sharp drag on GDP in Q3.

MBA Q2 2010: 14.42% of Mortgage Loans Delinquent or in Foreclosure

Here is my post on the MBA Q2 delinquency report: 14.42% of Mortgage Loans Delinquent or in Foreclosure . This graph (from the earlier post) shows the delinquency rate by "bucket" (30 days, 60 days, 90+ days, and in foreclosure process):

The total percent of loans delinquent or in the foreclosure process declined only slightly in Q2 from Q1 - and the rate is the second highest on record.

Loans 30 days delinquent increased to 3.51%, and this is about the same levels as in Q4 2008 (slightly below the peak of 3.77% in Q1 2009).

Delinquent loans decreased in all other buckets - especially in the 90+ day bucket. MBA Chief Economist Jay Brinkmann suggested the decline in the 90+ day bucket was because of some successful modifications - since the lenders reported the loans as delinquent until the modification was made permanent.

The second graph shows the delinquency rate by state (red is seriously delinquent: 90+ days or in foreclosure, blue is delinquent less than 90 days).

Clearly Florida and Nevada have a large percentage of loans delinquent or in foreclosure. But the delinquency problem is widespread with 36 states and D.C. all having total delinquency rates above 10%.

With house prices falling - and growth slowing - the delinquency rate will probably increase later this year.

CoreLogic: 11 Million U.S. Properties with Negative Equity in Q2

Here is my post CoreLogic: 11 Million U.S. Properties with Negative Equity in Q2

This graph shows the negative equity and near negative equity by state.

Although Nevada, Arizona, Florida, Michigan and California, have the largest percentage of homeowners underwater, there is a negative equity problem in most states. In 33 states and the D.C., 10 percent or more of homeowners with mortgages have negative equity.

Other Economic Stories ...

From Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke: The Economic Outlook and Monetary Policy

BEA: Q2 real GDP revised down to 1.6% annualized growth rate

Estimate of Decennial Census impact on August payroll employment: minus 116,000

From Jon Hilsenrath at the WSJ on the debate at the August FOMC meeting: Fed Split on Move to Bolster Sluggish Economy

From the Richmond Fed: Manufacturing Growth Continued to Ease in August; Expectations Drifted Lower

Kansas City Fed: Manufacturing activity slowed in August

From MarketWatch: S&P downgrades Ireland on financial sector cost

The Department of Transportation (DOT) reported that vehicle miles driven in June were up 1.3% compared to June 2009.

ATA: "Truck freight tonnage has essentially gone sideways since April 2010"

Unofficial Problem Bank List increases to 840 institutions

Best wishes to all.

make money from home without stuffing envelopes

foreclosure law

mike fuljenz mike fuljenz mike fuljenz mike fuljenz mike fuljenz mike fuljenz mike fuljenz

Robert Naiman: Defense <b>News</b>: War Supplemental Not Needed to Fund <b>...</b>

If the war supplemental is not approved this week, the troops will still be paid and the troops will still be fully supplied. There is no "emergency" requiring action this week.

Player Profile: Brad Richards | Dallas Stars Blog | Sports <b>News</b> <b>...</b>

Dallas Stars Blog - Dallasnews.com's Dallas Stars coverage includes the latest news, notes, commentary, analysis, blogs, e-mail newsletters, photos and videos of the Stars.

Econbrowser: More disappointing <b>news</b>

More disappointing news. Just a quick note on a couple of new data releases today. The Chicago Fed National Activity Index aims to summarize in a single number 85 separate measures of real economic activity that are now available for ...

bank foreclosure

You know when I was growing up, foreclosure was a scandal. And in the early days of the burst housing bubble, most people still thought that it was. The people losing their homes were treated by courts, press, and society at large like deadbeats and ne’er-do-wells.

Then we began to learn the truth about predatory lending practices that steered homeowners away from conventional mortgages and into subprime mortgages. We began to learn that mortgage originators wrote loans with no assessment of whether or not the homeowner could actually make the monthly payment, because the originators were making their money on the fees, not on the loan repayment.

We learned that Too Big To Fail banks got paid 100 cents on the dollar in federal bailout money for the toxic assets supposedly backed by these mortgages. Doesn’t that mean the mortgage debt has been paid in full by the feds? Doesn’t the federal government own those mortgages now? Still, the banks and their servicers continue to file foreclosure actions on houses for which the debt has already been paid by the government.

Is it any wonder that people who thought they were entering into a legitimate business transaction and faithfully paid their mortgage for as long as they could found out that their lenders were not dealing with them in good faith on mortgage modifications? And this is despite the fact the government mandated and paid the lenders to do such modifications under HAMP and HARP. Is it any wonder they feel that the social contract between them and the bank has been broken?

So, it’s not surprising that homeowners no longer feel a stigma attached to foreclosure. It’s no wonder they now feel free to just turn in the keys and walk away. The social contract that is a part of every contract—a meeting of the minds and a basic level of fair dealing—has been broken by the banking industry. And that trust, once broken, can have a devastating long term effect on those banks. HuffPo even recommended that depositors move their money out of TBTF banks and into local community banks.

I think that Bank of America has sniffed the wind and realized that they have to start dealing in good faith on mortgage modifications pretty damn soon.

From a report emailed to me over the weekend:

At the core of the foreclosure-prevention strategy is ignoring delinquencies. The percentage of older delinquent loans not yet in foreclosure is startling: 60% have at least 12 missed payments, and 35% have at least 18 missed payments. Add to this that three-fourths of delinquent loans are not in foreclosure, and we see that hidden losses well exceed those in the open.

Uh, they're not being "ignored" - this is systemic and intentional fraud.

Remember, these loans are either being held by someone or securitized into some sort of package.  When you have a loan that has no chance of "curing" (to cure a loan with 12 missed payments the borrower would have to come up with the 12 payments to bring it current!) that loan should be carried at its recovery value - that is, the value of the collateral that can be seized and sold, LESS the cost of eviction, remediation and resale.

Does anyone recall all the entries I've written about getting competent legal and accounting (tax) advice before proceeding with any sort of action regarding walking away, short sales or foreclosure?  This same report says:

Many homeowners would be better off going into foreclosure, than doing a short sale. Short sales are fraught with potential legal, credit, and complicated tax issues. For example, someone who refinanced could owe capital gains taxes, which are not forgiven under federal and California temporary debt relief acts. In the foreclosure route, borrowers can live in their house mortgage-free for at least one year, maybe two years. Both short sales and foreclosures are reported as “account not paid in full”, and are equally damaging to a credit score. An exception exists if short sellers can negotiate better terms with their lender on recourse liens. The other possible advantage to a short sale is the ability to get a mortgage again in 2 years (Fannie, Freddie), rather than having to wait 3-5 years after a foreclosure.

Homeowners pursue short sales, unaware of the problems they are creating for themselves. Their agents never warned them of deficiencies, ruined credit, taxes due on forgiven debt, or legal consequences. Agents made flowery promises to get listings, and now the lawsuits are starting.

No, really?  You mean that people in the real estate business are less than truthful with their clients?  That would never, ever happen with licensed professionals, right?

Then there's this, which I also have written about:

Another gray area is junior lien holders asking buyers for additional payments. As the market improved, juniors were no longer content with $3k thrown to them from the senior. They now want 10% of the junior note. They argue the additional payment is legal practice because the payment is made to escrow and appears on the HUD-1. However, they are actually hoping the senior lien holder does not read the HUD-1. The California Association of REALTORS® position is that all payments made by the buyer or agent in the purchase of a short sale must be part of the written short sale agreement signed by the senior lien holder. Concealing payments from seniors is loan fraud, and omitting these payments from the HUD-1 closing statement may violate RESPA. Some seniors reinstate their security interests because of the fraud. It’s surprising that the biggest banks are responding, when pressed on the fraud of their request, “just do it if you want the deal done”.

Right.  Big banks saying "just do it"?  Why would they do that?  Is it so they can re-instate their security interests?  No, nobody would ever do anything that hoses the consumer, would they?  Naw.....

Few people understand that the bank that gave them their mortgage turned around and sold it into a mortgage bond, and the “bank” on their mortgage statement is actually a servicer.

Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that.

As I've been working on (and writing on) for a long time, and as a few attorneys are now starting to understand, the entirety of this process was corrupted and is rife with outright fraud from top to bottom.

Let's go through a (partial) list of the problems:

• 
  
  Penis enlargement pills
  
  
  
  

  You know when I was growing up, foreclosure was a scandal. And in the early days of the burst housing bubble, most people still thought that it was. The people losing their homes were treated by courts, press, and society at large like deadbeats and ne’er-do-wells.

  
  

  Then we began to learn the truth about predatory lending practices that steered homeowners away from conventional mortgages and into subprime mortgages. We began to learn that mortgage originators wrote loans with no assessment of whether or not the homeowner could actually make the monthly payment, because the originators were making their money on the fees, not on the loan repayment.

  
  

  We learned that Too Big To Fail banks got paid 100 cents on the dollar in federal bailout money for the toxic assets supposedly backed by these mortgages. Doesn’t that mean the mortgage debt has been paid in full by the feds? Doesn’t the federal government own those mortgages now? Still, the banks and their servicers continue to file foreclosure actions on houses for which the debt has already been paid by the government.

  
  

  Is it any wonder that people who thought they were entering into a legitimate business transaction and faithfully paid their mortgage for as long as they could found out that their lenders were not dealing with them in good faith on mortgage modifications? And this is despite the fact the government mandated and paid the lenders to do such modifications under HAMP and HARP. Is it any wonder they feel that the social contract between them and the bank has been broken?

  
  

  So, it’s not surprising that homeowners no longer feel a stigma attached to foreclosure. It’s no wonder they now feel free to just turn in the keys and walk away. The social contract that is a part of every contract—a meeting of the minds and a basic level of fair dealing—has been broken by the banking industry. And that trust, once broken, can have a devastating long term effect on those banks. HuffPo even recommended that depositors move their money out of TBTF banks and into local community banks.

  
  

  I think that Bank of America has sniffed the wind and realized that they have to start dealing in good faith on mortgage modifications pretty damn soon.

  
  

  
  

  From a report emailed to me over the weekend:

  
  

  
  

  At the core of the foreclosure-prevention strategy is ignoring delinquencies. The percentage of older delinquent loans not yet in foreclosure is startling: 60% have at least 12 missed payments, and 35% have at least 18 missed payments. Add to this that three-fourths of delinquent loans are not in foreclosure, and we see that hidden losses well exceed those in the open.

  
  

  Uh, they're not being "ignored" - this is systemic and intentional fraud.

  
  

  Remember, these loans are either being held by someone or securitized into some sort of package.  When you have a loan that has no chance of "curing" (to cure a loan with 12 missed payments the borrower would have to come up with the 12 payments to bring it current!) that loan should be carried at its recovery value - that is, the value of the collateral that can be seized and sold, LESS the cost of eviction, remediation and resale.

  
  

  Does anyone recall all the entries I've written about getting competent legal and accounting (tax) advice before proceeding with any sort of action regarding walking away, short sales or foreclosure?  This same report says:

  
  

  
  

  Many homeowners would be better off going into foreclosure, than doing a short sale. Short sales are fraught with potential legal, credit, and complicated tax issues. For example, someone who refinanced could owe capital gains taxes, which are not forgiven under federal and California temporary debt relief acts. In the foreclosure route, borrowers can live in their house mortgage-free for at least one year, maybe two years. Both short sales and foreclosures are reported as “account not paid in full”, and are equally damaging to a credit score. An exception exists if short sellers can negotiate better terms with their lender on recourse liens. The other possible advantage to a short sale is the ability to get a mortgage again in 2 years (Fannie, Freddie), rather than having to wait 3-5 years after a foreclosure.

  
  

  Homeowners pursue short sales, unaware of the problems they are creating for themselves. Their agents never warned them of deficiencies, ruined credit, taxes due on forgiven debt, or legal consequences. Agents made flowery promises to get listings, and now the lawsuits are starting.

  
  

  No, really?  You mean that people in the real estate business are less than truthful with their clients?  That would never, ever happen with licensed professionals, right?

  
  

  Then there's this, which I also have written about:

  
  

  
  

  Another gray area is junior lien holders asking buyers for additional payments. As the market improved, juniors were no longer content with $3k thrown to them from the senior. They now want 10% of the junior note. They argue the additional payment is legal practice because the payment is made to escrow and appears on the HUD-1. However, they are actually hoping the senior lien holder does not read the HUD-1. The California Association of REALTORS® position is that all payments made by the buyer or agent in the purchase of a short sale must be part of the written short sale agreement signed by the senior lien holder. Concealing payments from seniors is loan fraud, and omitting these payments from the HUD-1 closing statement may violate RESPA. Some seniors reinstate their security interests because of the fraud. It’s surprising that the biggest banks are responding, when pressed on the fraud of their request, “just do it if you want the deal done”.

  
  

  Right.  Big banks saying "just do it"?  Why would they do that?  Is it so they can re-instate their security interests?  No, nobody would ever do anything that hoses the consumer, would they?  Naw.....

  
  

  
  

  Few people understand that the bank that gave them their mortgage turned around and sold it into a mortgage bond, and the “bank” on their mortgage statement is actually a servicer.

  
  

  Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that.

  
  

  As I've been working on (and writing on) for a long time, and as a few attorneys are now starting to understand, the entirety of this process was corrupted and is rife with outright fraud from top to bottom.

  
  

  Let's go through a (partial) list of the problems:

  
  

  •