Foreclosure and distressed property topics

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
<p>FYI Slade's place was postponed to 10/26. It was a long drawn out auction today because recon trust's email was down. Oh god for bid you have to use the phone. Nothing sold and about 16 went back to the bank. What was fun was listening to one of the regular's joke with the auctioneer about how the house in Santa Ana wasn't worth $700k.</p>

<p>NSR,</p>

<p>I don't like to use population growth because it has grown faster than household growth. I was going to adjust by the housing stock which I think is a much better adjustment. I just haven't decided if I should use owner-occupied housing stock or housing stock by property tax bill. I'm leaning toward the tax bill number.</p>
 
<p>By measuring NODs or NOTs to population, you measure NODs/NOTs against potential demand verus measuring against supply (units). Excess supply has the potential to push prices, but collapsing demand is usually far more damaging. TIC also did much later cycle building for profits and not urban viability IMHO. The built fewer bigger 'executive' homes geared for increased profits with a supplemental supporting arrangement of largely glorified apartments IMHO.</p>

<p>GAs are no different than stocks, they either provide growth (appreciation), or value (income). Population drives rents, which in the absence of marked appreciation, will drive value. The lower half of the market is therefore tied to population and not units and population density is a measure of pschological strain. Via plankton theory, the upper ends of the market are tied to the lower end of the market. People choosing to live in a 2bd/2ba with an unrelated roommate is a financial decision based on non-affordability. Checking Countrywide or the other bank REO sites, appears to show a disporportionate number of "condo". Even though the population pressure is still there for this segment, the rates of foreclosure still increase.</p>
 
<p>NSR,</p>

<p>I see your point. I think the only fault to the population theory is that not everyone in the population has the capacity to purchase or rent a home. I.E. if a family of five moved here from Chicago the 1 family would be the demand not 5 population increase. The same could be said that the family living in Irvine with no kids in 2000 but popped out 5 kids since then the demand would still be one not five. However the plankton theory comes into play here if that family were living in in a 2/2 condo but couldn't afford to move up shows that while there is demand they are unable to attain that demand. </p>

<p>I will consider using household growth but I will still use housing stock as a guide. This from a historical perspective compares forclosures not so much on the demand but the actual supply. By using population it isn't a fair guide because not everyone in the 3mil population could get an NOD. It is only fair to look at who or what is possible to receive an NOD. Although I am sure there are plenty of people who wish they could give their NOD to someone else. I'm more interested in absolute numbers and when you are looking at the history of foreclosures this IMO is the best way. Incorporating the sales volume and comparing population with housing stock would be something to see. </p>

<p>It's been a long day so hopefully I understood your point and hopefully mine makes sense as well. Regardless you have made my brain churn and maybe that is why I am tired. It's always good to have a coversation like this.</p>
 
<p>But don't get me wrong the demand factor is part of the whole equation when you factor in supply. I have a whole theory in the back of my head that debunks the myth that supply hasn't kept up with the demand. I just have to put it all together. At first I thought of doing it all at once but it would make IR's longest post seem short. So now I just have to figure out how many parts to break it into and how it should flow. </p>
 
<p>I understood. I'll hold the rest of my thought until your blog post. One minor thought, Irvine is a little different than the county however the cause of the false shortage is very obvious at the county level.</p>
 
graphrix,





Always enjoy your insight.





I check the ReconTrust site every few days to see the upcoming roster and the "sold" information, but it's far from an aggregate picture and I find the pay sites like RealtyTrac useless. Any other suggestions for tracking foreclosure sales?
 
<p>TS,</p>

<p>Which recon trust site are you using? The <a href="http://www.fidelityasap.com/ts.aspx">Fidelity site</a> has all the foreclosures at the Santa Ana courthouse. I have yet to find a website that tracks the Placentia and Orange courthouse foreclosures. Which sucks because Placentia is seeing a lot these days.</p>

<p>As for pay sites I have only heard good things about <a href="http://www.foreclosureradar.com">www.foreclosureradar.com</a> . I have even emailed the CEO some questions and he has been very responsive. From what we discussed if I were to pay for the info this is the one I would use. In fact if I were to start a company like that I would have done what he is doing and he beat me to it. DOH!</p>

<p>As for tracking the numbers the info comes from the county recorders website. It is extremely accurate and it is basically the same info that DataQuick uses. The only fault is it just a name and number and nothing else. </p>

<p>I hope that helps and feel free to ask some more questions.</p>
 
<p>I seriously can not keep up with the foreclosures. As more and more happen it takes more time. So I will just do updates as I can. Here is what went back to the bank or sold in Irvine the last two weeks. Those that sold will be noted and the rest went back to the bank.</p>

<p>9/18 53 Avondale #27 92602 $634k.</p>

<p>9/19 39 Modesto #96 92602 $508k.</p>

<p>9/25 35 Modesto #116 92602 SOLD for $460K.</p>

<p>9/25 51 Appleglen 92602 $643k.</p>

<p>9/26 802 Terra Bella 92602 $486K.</p>

<p>9/27 43 Meadowgrass 92604 $401k.</p>

<p>The Santa Ana Court house had 507 scheduled for the auction and 197 that sold or went back to the bank. Hardly any sold and just a gues it was around 5 but no more than 10. I have 406 recorded as of 9/25, so Placentia must be seeing a lot these days. There are 747 scheduled for October and 177 for this week alone. This isn't pretty kids.</p>
 
I read an interesting comment regarding the foreclosures. The writer said that much of the reason the lenders are not lowering their prices on REO is because they have too much paper on property that is close to the property they own, and the lenders do not want to screw up the comps on the property for which they own the paper because that will encourage folks who are upside down to walk. Talk about between a rock and a hard place. All they can do is hold on and hope prices come back soon. Very soon.
 
<p>Regading lenders and REOs - thankfully for us, there are regulators.</p>

<p><a href="http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2007/09/10/story1.html?b=1189396800%5E1517107">http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2007/09/10/story1.html?b=1189396800%5E1517107</a></p>

<p>So far, bank-owned home prices are holding stable. But with the ranks of foreclosed homes rising, that will change. For the time being, lenders are holding homes and hoping their foreclosed homes sell for close to list prices. </p>

<p style="BACKGROUND: white">But they soon could come under pressure from regulators and the market to unload the properties, whatever the cost.


…</p>

<p style="BACKGROUND: white">“The investors and the asset managers have not faced reality, and they think they are going to get a lot more for these homes than anyone is willing or able to pay now,” said Ron Leis, broker and co-owner of the Coldwell Banker franchise in Carmichael, the Diez & Leis Real Estate Group. “They are going to have to take huge, huge losses. There is some pain that has to be felt.”


…


How long lenders are willing to wait before they start slashing prices isn’t clear, but it is certain they can’t wait too long. Regulators won’t allow lenders to hold property indefinitely, which will force aggressive discounting. </p>

<p style="BACKGROUND: white">“Banks don’t want to be in the business of managing property,” said Anker Christensen, chief financial officer with River City Bank. He was previously a bank auditor with KPMG for 15 years. </p>

<p style="BACKGROUND: white">“It is a Catch-22 position,” he said, because banks are not allowed to invest in real estate for speculative purposes. They are allowed to hold real estate for some time while getting it off their books. That’s where the market comes into play: The value of a property is the price at which two parties agree to a transaction.</p>
 
<p>TS,</p>

<p>I checked the recon trust link and it is only recon trust. They have 4 of the 10 that are scheduled today. So the Fidelity site is better. Now if we can just find a site that tracks the Placentia courthouse I'd be really happy.</p>
 
<p>I went to the foreclosure auction with Matt Padilla today. I was shocked that in all of the 5 times I have been this year the place was packed today with about 30 people. It may have been that there was 32 properties that were going to be auctioned off today. But Matt and I agreed that we were not the only spectators there today. There was even a newbie there who had some sort of payment like bonds but not a cashiers check. I thought this was kind of strange since the auctioneer explained how it worked in that you need a cashiers check. What makes it even more strange is that every time a home is auctioned off the auctioneer asks if there are any bidders with proof of payment of a cashiers check. I wanted to say "dude do you not know what Google is?" </p>

<p>Anyway one property sold and 31 others went back to the bank. I had told Matt that usually a good portion gets cancelled or postponed but todat that was not the case and we were there for almost two hours. Luckily the auctioneer realized that there wasn't going to be many bidders so he sped things up. What is becoming more common is the minimum bid amount is discounted significantly from the NTS amount. There was one home in HB that was $120k 15% less than the NTS amount. This is a sign that some lenders really don't want the home. </p>

<p>For my Coto watchers 22 Via Andorra went back to the bank for $715k.</p>

<p>14881 Athel Ave. 92606 went back to the bank for the scary amount of $666k.</p>

<p>35 Echo Run #26 92614 went back to the bank for $399k. </p>

<p> </p>
 
<p>Graphrix &TS: </p>

<p>Thanks for posting the Fidelity, etc sites. Wondering if you have suggestions for national sites, since you don't seem to like RealtyTrac.</p>

<p>I ask because I work for a municipality in TX and our current subscription to RoddyReport is expired. We use the service at minimum to keep track of properties in our downpayment assistance program, but it would be nice to be able to do more analysis of local conditions. RealtyTrac has more features, but I don't know how comprehensive their listings are (although they seem better than others). Of course, i'm still just looking at the free stuff.</p>

<p>Any suggestions you have about sites to use/subscribe to, and the limitations of data, would be much appreciated.</p>
 
<p>That's quite the change on 35 modesto to what they intially wnated</p>

<p><a href="http://www.35modesto.com/">http://www.35modesto.com/</a></p>

<p>Offered at $719,900</p>

<p>Bedrooms: 3</p>

<p>Bathrooms: 2F+1P</p>

<p>Lot Size: 1 sq. ft.</p>

<p>Interior Size: 1600 sq. ft.</p>

<p>Parking: Double Garage Parking </p>

<p>MLS Number: P579936 </p>

<p>Property Status: Active </p>
 
I fixed the code so that it doesn't make the following posts all funky. The forum doesn't always do well with copy and paste.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top