2003 Prices or Rollbacks

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p>This one in AV is a 2003 rollback too:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1473512">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1473512</a></p>

<p>In escrow now...</p>
 
When the bank "takes something back" they still have to buy it at auction, right? So if it was worth more someone would have offered more is my thinking. The bank's not a normal customer because it has the cash and has already effectively paid that same price. It just wants to get rid of junior liens, right? Not sure if I'm correct or there's some other process that allows them to mark the property down after it's abandoned or something.
 
Elric, the bank doesn't have to bid the full amount the loan has reached if it doesn't want to. According to this blog, banks tried bidding less, but nobody took them out. If they bid oodles less, maybe a vulture would have taken them out, but in this market, maybe not. After they are an owner, they can try to sell for whatever price they think they can get rid of the house for. Subject to being hassled by regulators if they keep the houses too long.
 
Right, so what I'm thinking is that the bank was the highest bidder. Why would they think they can get more by selling it later in a declining market? No one showed up to bid on it for a 20% discount that the bank got it at, why would a 10% be enough? The only rationale I could think of is that the bank things the need for 100% cash eliminates all eligible buyers but itself.
 
<p>The bank could sell those suckers at a low price and finance it themselves. they are banks, right?</p>

<p>But banks don't think anything. Banks are collections of people, most of whom have thoughts that don't count at all, even if they are very good logical thoughts. Banks are very top down, very non creative. And the people who know the least seem to be the top management. Now the mkt is punishing them. I'd say good, except for the bad stuff it does to the rest of us.</p>

<p>By the way, in Fla at least in the boom, there were bidders. Fla law sez that if more is bid than the mtg, the 2nd mtg gets the difference (if there is one) and if there's more left the owner gets some money. At the height, the owners were actually getting money. Interestingly enough, a feckless former secy of mine got foreclosed out and I had some issues with the property, which I now foreget. There was a 2nd. I said, why don't you attend the hearing and maybe the court will give you some of the extra money. The 2nd didn't bother to do anything.</p>

<p>So the judge awarded the difference which was about 7 grand to her, and the 2nd didn't get anything. It was a lot of money for her. She hardly said thanks, and didn't offer to even give me money for an hour's worth of work.</p>
 
16 New Haven was just sold by the bank. It closed escow on 3/7/2008 for $560K. The $684K sale was a related party transaction at above the market value.
 
<p>$1K more than July 2003 price in Orange.</p>

<p>2014 W Orchard AVE


Orange, CA 92868 </p>

<p><strong>Price: $360,000</strong></p>

<p>$/Sq. Ft.: $215</p>

<p>Beds: 3


Baths: 2.5


Sq. Ft.: 1,676


Lot Size: 6,300 sq. ft. </p>

<p>Sale History:</p>

<strong>Jul 01, 2003 $359,000</strong>


<p><img alt="" src="http://i-0.rfimg.us/photo/45/bigphoto/854/A08037854_0.jpg" /> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1557032">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1557032</a></p>
 
<p>cayci, is that house being sold by Eiffle 65?</p>

<p> </p>

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H25lz7gchaw&hl=en" width="425" height="355" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent"></embed>
 
<p>Jeez, Talega is like shooting fish in a barrel. I suppose if these were built in 2003 they may be back to those prices but they sure are fun to watch implode...enjoy!!</p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1328548">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1328548</a> </p>

<p>Price: $1,150,000







Dec 09, 2004

$1,466,000







</p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1330759">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1330759</a></p>

<p>Price: $1,999,000







Nov 30, 2006

$2,409,500







</p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1486153">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1486153</a></p>

<p>Price: $859,000







Sep 02, 2005

$1,041,000







</p>

<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=849246">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=849246</a></p>

<p>Price: $1,100,000







Nov 08, 2005

$1,269,500







</p>
 
<p><em>Subject to being hassled by regulators if they keep the houses too long.</em> </p>

<p>I think that's part of the double secret probation bail-out plan. The regulators aren't going to say boo about a bank holding thousands of REOs. If they do, the bank goes belly up and the Fed gets an even bigger problem.</p>

<p>The pressure will come from the shareholders finally get fed up.</p>
 
<p><a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=864594">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=864594</a></p>

<p>Price: <strong>$369,000</strong>



<thead>



Date

Price

Appreciation



</thead>





May 24, 1996

$128,000



--







Nov 12, 1999

$163,000



7.2%/yr







Aug 09, 2004

$410,000



21.5%/yr







Oct 28, 2005

$530,000



23.5%/yr









</p>

<p>I think this qualifies</p>
 
8 San Angelo posted by IPO gets the "Chasing the market downhill award"...







Listing Price History







<thead>



Date



Price



</thead>









Aug 20, 2007



$889,900











Nov 09, 2007



$799,900











Nov 21, 2007



$750,000











Feb 15, 2008



$700,000











Mar 14, 2008



$670,000




 
<em>The regulators aren't going to say boo about a bank holding thousands of REOs.





</em>Well, if history continues to repeat itself, then yes, they will be forced to dump the properties and speed up the foreclosure process. I have an article somewhere, that has a quote from John Karevoll of DataQuick from 96ish, where he talks about how the lenders sped up the process. Seeing as how the foreclosure numbers are already worse than 96, then I would imagine it will happen pretty soon.
 
<em>>>The regulators aren't going to say boo about a bank holding thousands of REOs.</em>





The shareholders likely will. Why hold a nonperforming illiquid asset that is costing you money (i.e., taxes, HOA fees, etc.) - and let's multiply that by the thousands, at least. They will be better off dumping the property cheap, taking the hit, and bringing in money that will allow them to bolster reserves and earn fees. <em></em>
 
Banks hate to admit they can make a mistake, much the a mistake on the size and scale of the Apocalypse. Whoever suggests this will be fired, and then hopefully the person who takes that person's place will have a contract that sez he is allowed to lose money.
 
<p>Almost June 16, 2003 here.</p>





Sales History



<p></p>





<thead>



Date

Price

Appreciation



</thead>





Jul 16, 2003

$410









<p> </p>

<p>882 North California ST Orange, CA 92867 </p>

<p><img height="225" alt="" width="300" src="http://i-0.rfimg.us/photo/46/bigphoto/250/P619250_0.jpg" /></p>

<p>Price: $419,000 </p>

<p>







Beds:

3





Baths:

2





Sq. Ft.:

1,412





$/Sq. Ft.:

$297





Lot Size:

6,057 Sq. Ft.





Type:

Single Family Residence





Style:

Other





Year Built:

1959





Stories:

One Level





Area:

Orange & Garden Grove, East of Harbor, North of 22 Freeway





County:

Orange





MLS#:

P619250





Status:

Active





On Redfin:

58 days







</p>

3 bebrooms 2 baths in great Orange location close to stores , banks restaurant and shopping centers

<a href="http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1427804">http://www.redfin.com/stingray/do/printable-listing?listing-id=1427804</a>

This thread is dying becaue it is becoming too easy to find 2003 rollbacks that last 60 days and don't move.

<p> </p>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top