A Message to all in the Irvine Housing Blog:

  • Thread starter Thread starter hwerghdg_IHB
  • Start date Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="Janet" date=1229738844]"In fact, you were repremanded by the admin to stop shilling at least twice."



Um.. it is you who is a liar. Try one message explaining the rules.</blockquote>


<a href="http://forums.redfin.com/rf/board/message?board.id=SanDiego&message;.id=418#M418">Here's one.</a>



<a href="http://forums.redfin.com/rf/board/message?board.id=LA_OC&thread;.id=75&view=by_date_ascending&page=10">And here's two.</a>



<img src="http://www.brodeur.com/openblog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/liar-liar-pants-on-fire.jpg" alt="" />



Four posts two repremands good job.
 
[quote author="Janet" date=1229738545]You really need to post whatever it is you are talking about, I have no idea what you mean. I stand by my comments. This is a stupid argument.</blockquote>


GREEN LIGHT!
 
Here are the two existing comments ever authored by me concerning brokering loans. They look like friendly advice, much like this:





http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/forums/viewthread/763/



"Hi,



I can answer your question. Your loan approval expiration is, more than anything, contingent upon your credit report. Credit reports have a "shelf life" (normally 90 days). After that, a new snapshot must be taken, because debts (and even scores) can change constantly.



You will need a pre-approval to be taken seriously on an offer. If your file expires, your credit report would need to be repulled and your file be reunderwritten.



As for credit scores: a mortgage inquiry "costs" you 3 points. You can "piggyback" multiple inquiries onto the original report if you keep all inquiries within a short period. Here is some verbiage on this from MyFico.com:



"Looking for a mortgage or an auto loan may cause multiple lenders to request your credit report, even though youre only looking for one loan. To compensate for this, the score ignores all mortgage and auto inquiries made in the 30 days prior to scoring. So if you find a loan within 30 days, the inquiries won't affect your score while you're rate shopping. In addition, the score looks on your credit report for auto or mortgage inquiries older than 30 days. If it finds some, it counts all those inquiries that fall in a typical shopping period as just one inquiry when determining your score."



I am an honest mortgage broker with access to really great rates and fantastic service. Please email me if I can help you now or in the future!





Hi,



I can answer this as well.



You can very easily get your own credit report and score, however, a broker or lender cannot give you a formal pre-approval without pulling their own report.



Additionally, the score you get could be different than what the lenders will get. Lenders use a "RMCR" "Residential Mortgage Credit Report" which is a "Tri-Merge" of all three bureau reports (Trans Union, Equifax and Experian). The lenders will use the "middle" of the three scores (not the highest or lowest). Often, an RMCR score will vary from the scores you can pull on yourself. Strange, but true!



Also, lenders use more credit data than just scores. They also look at number, type and age of accounts, and other credit factors.



I'm sorry, that's probably not what you want to hear, but it's how it works.



Best of luck to you! Let me know if I can help, now or in the future."



This is so damning!



Edit: there were apparently two other minor comments, much like these, i.e., ANSWERING someone's questions!
 
"Trust me, if my buyers appraiser would have accepted year-old comps, I would have sold my place for more. My buyers lender?s appraisal came back short of contract price because they only used RECENT comps. No lender in their right mind, nor appraiser worth their salt, would accept or use a comp that is a year old. Not in this market, not in any market. I?m quite sure you already know this?"



What part of July, 2008 are you struggling with?
 
[quote author="Janet" date=1229738627]"You should?ve used that access to land yourself a better deal.

Stop blaming others for your misfortune."



The price I paid was around $300 psf at the time, pratically unheard of for Irvine. I am not blaming anyone. Where did you see that? As I said, my complaints have zero to do with values.</blockquote>




Not concerned about values dropping, really?

Why the need to cry yourself to sleep every night?
 
I don't cry myself to sleep every night, but I do have anxiety, as many people do at this time. Your comments were quite rude, I must say. Why is that? That demonstrates quite beautifully what I find so offensive about housing bloggers.
 
No_vaseline, those "reprimands" were three minutes apart. You can save face now, if you are big enough.
 
[quote author="Janet" date=1229739678]I don't cry myself to sleep every night, but I do have anxiety, as many people do at this time. Your comments were quite rude, I must say. Why is that? That demonstrates quite beautifully what I find so offensive about housing bloggers.</blockquote>




You?re the one that?s uncivil, ripping and attacking members on this forum.

Blaming the good folks here at IHB for your circumstances and negative net worth.
 
I did not attack any members of this forum. Please show me what you mean. Anyone not nodding in agreement here is treated like sh1t. Please also show me where I blame anyone for anything. You know nothing of me or my story or my complaints.
 
[quote author="Janet" date=1229740041]No_vaseline, those "reprimands" were three minutes apart. You can save face now, if you are big enough.</blockquote>


You said there were one. I said "at least two".



I cited two.



I win. Among other things, you have issues with the truth.



<img src="http://babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/2008/08/16-22/liar syrup.jpg" alt="" />
 
You consider her pasting her comment in two places at (essentially) the same time, "two reprimands". That is shockingly dishonest of you. Your original implication was that I did not obey and had to be told twice, which is a blatant lie. You could apologize, but I know you won't.
 
Even if it was July 2008 (and it was posted as 765k not 800k)... appraisers won't use that for a comp.



Aug, Sept, Oct, Nov, Dec... that's 5 months away... at least with my house... they only used 3 months. A 6-month comp would have been good for me too because I could have sold for about $50k more.



One 5-month old comp does not set the current going price.
 
Comps up to six months are fine. Some of those were quite recent, and could be adjusted to another floor plan. I just scored 100% on a Broker Price Opinon test, so I think I have a clue!



Also, I never said the unit will go for $799,000, I said a comp exists. The irresponsible trustee opened the door to a vulture and that means he will sell it quickly for what he can get. I swear, it is near impossible to have an honest discussion here.
 
According to county records, 21 Juneberry was settled for $765K on 6/27/08 and recorded 8/22/08.

The $800K sale was from 12/24/07, apparently from the builder.



<img src="http://irvinerealtorsite.com/21Juneberry.JPG" alt="" />
 
I'll assume that is accurate, despite the conflict in MLS. So, a four month old comp exists at $765,000.



For the record, I believe that 78 will sell at $650,000.
 
[quote author="Janet" date=1229741049]I'll assume that is accurate, despite the conflict in MLS. So, a four month old comp exists at $765,000.



For the record, I believe that 78 will sell at $650,000.</blockquote>


Can I ask why? Is 21 a better property? I haven't seen the pictures of the inside so I am really asking.



I would think they could get closer to 700k or even slightly higher if they got 21 juneberry for 765k in August unless its a weaker property.
 
Yes, 21 is a much better property (better location, better finished), and 78 is in the hands of a flipper. He will take his $125,000 and run. How do you think the bond holders would feel about that? If you have a 401k you could be that person.
 
shockingly dishonest is showing up on various forums to solicit business, then attempt to dispute on technicalities. oh it only happened once, not twice. well, it still happened. i read those other forums so i have seen your posts before. you've done it both here and other places so stop feigning bewilderment at the claim.



shockingly dishonest is blaming others for the decisions you've made. it's unfortunate your family's circumstances changed but it's not anyone's fault that you bought a $2m home. it's not the banks fault for auctioning homes at steep discount in your current neighborhood regardless of whether you like it or not.



shockingly dishonest is acting as if its somehow unfair that lower comps might be caused by homes going into foreclosure which are then dumped at auction by banks that are overwhelmed with, well, with homes going into foreclosure.



shockingly dishonest is claiming you would not walk away from your home and sacrifice your neighbors, then when confronted with the possibility of foreclosures destroying comps in your neighborhood, admit you'd have no qualms walking away.



shockingly dishonest is to caveat your walking away statement by claiming it would be the fault of banks for forcing you into that position by lowering comps, which of course means you will also contribute to lower comps by sticking the bank with your poor decision. if you think banks are being irresponsible for dumping properties at low prices, don't contribute to the problem and justify it with the second grader's but-everyone-else-is-doing it excuse. that shared (selfish) mentality is exactly what's contributing to a continued downward spiral.



shockingly dishonest is implying housing bloggers who were sitting on the sidelines had anything to do with the downward spiral which you actively participated in both professionally and personally.



i'm sure you did quite well for yourself in previous yrs. now the bubble has burst and everyone, including yourself, has to pay the price for it. my guess is you don't have to refund any of the nice earnings you made in the business of helping put people into homes they couldn't afford. you have a lot to apologize for, and my guess is you won't.
 
shockingly dishonest is showing up on various forums to solicit business, then attempt to dispute on technicalities. oh it only happened once, not twice. well, it still happened. i read those other forums so i have seen your posts before. you?ve done it both here and other places so stop feigning bewilderment at the claim.



(No, I did not do anything in "other places".) Correct me if I'm mistaken, but IR2 offers his heartelt assistance, and may obtain business, but it is okay for him and not for me?



shockingly dishonest is blaming others for the decisions you?ve made. it?s unfortunate your family?s circumstances changed but it?s not anyone?s fault that you bought a $2m home. it?s not the banks fault for auctioning homes at steep discount in your neighborhood regardless of whether you like it or not.



(Please show me where I placed this blame. You can't. For the record, I made $500,000 profit on the home I owned in Turtle Ridge. I downgraded after my husband got cancer.)



shockingly dishonest is act as if its somehow unfair that lower comps might be caused by homes going into foreclosure which are then dumped at auction by banks that are overwhelmed with, well, with homes going into foreclosure.



(It is not fair or unfair, it is an abdication of responsiblilty to the owners of those securities. The trustee has an obligation to act in the best interest of the bondholders.)



shockingly dishonest is claiming you would not walk away from your home and sacrifice your neighbors, then when confronted with the possibility of foreclosures destroying comps in your neighborhood, admit you?d have no qualms walking away.



(I clarified that I am not bulletproof and may not be able to absorb more losses. It depends on my income situation.)



shockingly dishonest is to caveat your walking away statement by claiming it would be the fault of banks for forcing you into that position by lowering comps, which of course means you will also contribute to lower comps by sticking the bank with your poor decision. that shared (selfish) mentality is exactly what?s contributing to a continued downward spiral.



(Same as above.)



shockingly dishonest is implying housing bloggers who were sitting on the sidelines had anything to do with chaos going on in the housing mkts which you actively participated in both professionally and personally.



(Please show me where I did this. You can't.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top