REOs will rise 50% in the next 4 months.

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1250631134]I think we need a Loan Mod count too... just for geotpf.</blockquote>
Those stats are a little bit more elusive to obtain then REO listings or REO closings.
 
[quote author="usctrojanman29" date=1250631520][quote author="irvine_home_owner" date=1250631134]I think we need a Loan Mod count too... just for geotpf.</blockquote>
Those stats are a little bit more elusive to obtain then REO listings or REO closings.</blockquote>
I forgot to add the [sarcasm] tag.



I think the loan mods themselves are more elusive.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1253243862]May I have an update on the REO sales for August from the MLS please?</blockquote>
8/09 - 547 (REO/Lender-owned + REO/Offer(s) Submitted)
 
Irvine total including 3rd party investors 941. Excluding investors 900.



NODs = 450.



NTSs = 370.



Tustin total including 3rd party investors = 503. Excluding investors = 477.



NODs = 242



NTSs = 186



Orange total including 3rd party investors = 865. Excluding investors = 819.



NODs = 352



NTSs = 365



92705 (This includes some crap from the ghetto of SA) total including 3rd party investors = 294. Excluding investors = 287.



NODs = 129



NTSs = 116



I will do the % increases/decreases (LOL) later.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1254887936]May I have an update on the September REO sales from the MLS please?</blockquote>
Total REO sales in OC for Sept. 2009 = 443
 
[quote author="USCTrojanCPA" date=1254888716][quote author="graphrix" date=1254887936]May I have an update on the September REO sales from the MLS please?</blockquote>
Total REO sales in OC for Sept. 2009 = 443</blockquote>


Nice! The pace of foreclosures continues to exceed the pace of REO sales. I will have to wait for the DQ numbers to come out, but judging from the FR numbers this should add another 150 or so to the list. That signals we should be headed for 9000+ in shadow inventory before the end of the year. Plus, this will drop the 3mo. avg. down and bump up the months of inventory.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1254889704]Nice! The pace of foreclosures continues to exceed the pace of REO sales. I will have to wait for the DQ numbers to come out, but judging from the FR numbers this should add another 150 or so to the list. That signals we should be headed for 9000+ in shadow inventory before the end of the year. Plus, this will drop the 3mo. avg. down and bump up the months of inventory.</blockquote>


Not to go all Geoptf(?) on you, but if banks are required to honor the terms of existing rental leases, I would think that we couldn't count those units as shadow inventory until the leases are up. Or, maybe my thinking is wrong, and the banks can still list those properties, but any buyer would have to buy them with possession subject to the existing lease, in which case they could be "shadow inventory."



Thoughts?
 
[quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1254910332][quote author="graphrix" date=1254889704]Nice! The pace of foreclosures continues to exceed the pace of REO sales. I will have to wait for the DQ numbers to come out, but judging from the FR numbers this should add another 150 or so to the list. That signals we should be headed for 9000+ in shadow inventory before the end of the year. Plus, this will drop the 3mo. avg. down and bump up the months of inventory.</blockquote>


Not to go all Geoptf(?) on you, but if banks are required to honor the terms of existing rental leases, I would think that we couldn't count those units as shadow inventory until the leases are up. Or, maybe my thinking is wrong, and the banks can still list those properties, but any buyer would have to buy them with possession subject to the existing lease, in which case they could be "shadow inventory."



Thoughts?</blockquote>


If I understand correctly, only Freddie and Fannie loans require honoring the leases and during the bubble not many loans were FM or FM. Still, I don't understand where all the REO's are???? I mean we know they are there, but they are just not being listed. I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but the line about the banks not having enough people to churn them seems lame because they are churning fewer and fewer than they were before. Something is definitely odd.
 
[quote author="stepping_up" date=1254911555][quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1254910332][quote author="graphrix" date=1254889704]Nice! The pace of foreclosures continues to exceed the pace of REO sales. I will have to wait for the DQ numbers to come out, but judging from the FR numbers this should add another 150 or so to the list. That signals we should be headed for 9000+ in shadow inventory before the end of the year. Plus, this will drop the 3mo. avg. down and bump up the months of inventory.</blockquote>


Not to go all Geoptf(?) on you, but if banks are required to honor the terms of existing rental leases, I would think that we couldn't count those units as shadow inventory until the leases are up. Or, maybe my thinking is wrong, and the banks can still list those properties, but any buyer would have to buy them with possession subject to the existing lease, in which case they could be "shadow inventory."



Thoughts?</blockquote>


If I understand correctly, only Freddie and Fannie loans require honoring the leases and during the bubble not many loans were FM or FM. Still, I don't understand where all the REO's are???? I mean we know they are there, but they are just not being listed. I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but the line about the banks not having enough people to churn them seems lame because they are churning fewer and fewer than they were before. Something is definitely odd.</blockquote>


It isn't only Fannie and Freddie, it is a new law that was passed about 3-6 months ago. It applies to banks and investors at the foreclosure auction. Deuce linked it for awgee when I was too lazy, as I am now, to look it up. You have to honor the lease or give them enough cash for the keys to leave. I also noted how an investor caught a guy forging a lease and had to have him arrested.



However, my thoughts: I do not think this is the problem on why the banks are not churning the properties faster. Part of it still has to do with man power, but more of it may be due to political power. I track several homes and even keep an eye on several homes I pass by on a daily basis that I know are REO. Countryfried is usually pretty good about getting the owner/tenant/squatter out and getting the home to market, but... in areas where they have a high concentration of REOs they seem to really lag. One in particular was taken back in the beginning of May and they didn't boot the "owners" out until July. Then it sat until August once they got around to cleaning the place out of the personal belongings and putting up the "no trespassing" signs. Just recently they got around to placing the "NO PARKING" signs and that your vehicle could be towed because it is in a permit only parking neighborhood (gasp... it isn't even in Irvine and they enforce the CC&Rs;) if you park in the driveway (because people know that it is REO and have been parking there for months). And... it is still not listed and it has not been sold, not even in bulk purchase because the owner on title is still "CWMBS INC TRUST 2007-11".



Why would they do this? 1. They know how the $8k credit has helped them, so why not wait for the extension of the credit and the possible increase to $15k. 2. They know there are several LARGE vulture funds are waiting for Q1 and Q2 of 2010 to pounce and buy in LARGE bulk purchases. If you were a bank, wouldn't you hold out on this kind of hope, especially when we know that the $8k credit will be extended and increased to $15k? And you have had discussions with LARGE vulture funds with cash waiting to buy in bulk? I know I would!



<em>Disclosure: Part of above is purely opinion, while it may become factual, there are no guarantees and pure speculation on my part. Some comes from personal inside knowledge, however it is not in my control, and minds/business can change without notice and should be considered as pure speculation on my part. Take it for what it is worth, while it may be true at the moment, in the future there is no guarantee. However, if none of which I speak of is true, then many banks are fawked and I will be shorting the shite out of them if this speculation does not come to fruition.</em>
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1254918702][quote author="EvaLSeraphim" date=1254910332][quote author="graphrix" date=1254889704]Nice! The pace of foreclosures continues to exceed the pace of REO sales. I will have to wait for the DQ numbers to come out, but judging from the FR numbers this should add another 150 or so to the list. That signals we should be headed for 9000+ in shadow inventory before the end of the year. Plus, this will drop the 3mo. avg. down and bump up the months of inventory.</blockquote>


Not to go all Geoptf(?) on you, but if banks are required to honor the terms of existing rental leases, I would think that we couldn't count those units as shadow inventory until the leases are up. Or, maybe my thinking is wrong, and the banks can still list those properties, but any buyer would have to buy them with possession subject to the existing lease, in which case they could be "shadow inventory."



Thoughts?</blockquote>






<em>Disclosure: Part of above is purely opinion, while it may become factual, there are no guarantees and pure speculation on my part. Some comes from personal inside knowledge, however it is not in my control, and minds/business can change without notice and should be considered as pure speculation on my part. Take it for what it is worth, while it may be true at the moment, in the future there is no guarantee. However, if none of which I speak of is true, then many banks are fawked and I will be shorting the shite out of them if this speculation does not come to fruition.</em></blockquote>


Very cool disclosure. :-)
 
[quote author="irvinebullhousing" date=1254919915][quote author="graphrix" date=1254918702]<em>Disclosure: Part of above is purely opinion, while it may become factual, there are no guarantees and pure speculation on my part. Some comes from personal inside knowledge, however it is not in my control, and minds/business can change without notice and should be considered as pure speculation on my part. Take it for what it is worth, while it may be true at the moment, in the future there is no guarantee. However, if none of which I speak of is true, then many banks are fawked and I will be shorting the shite out of them if this speculation does not come to fruition.</em></blockquote>


Very cool disclosure. :-)</blockquote>


Just know that they are kicking the can down the road. If what I say does not come to fruition, then we will have a serious REO problem on our hands. Not only that, but if the tax credit does stimulate buying homes it fawks commercial RE in the apartment sector. That means more defaults and capital ratios getting screwed for any bank with commercial holdings. I.E. rental rates go into the tank even further than they already have, and cap rates and values of commercial rental properties tank. Then you have to factor the cost to the taxpayer how much a $8k or even $15k costs, when it costs anywhere between $40k-$60k per buyer for the $8k credit since most would be buying anyway, then you up it to $15K and it becomes a cost of $70k to $150k that would be buying. If you are cool with that subsidization to hold your home value, then I suggest you really analyze the cost, because it sucks for an owner or a renter. Then... what if the credit doesn't stimulate... LOL... that would be even funnier.



Sad, but this is the perfect analogy of shooting oneself in the foot.
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1254924665][quote author="irvinebullhousing" date=1254919915][quote author="graphrix" date=1254918702]<em>Disclosure: Part of above is purely opinion, while it may become factual, there are no guarantees and pure speculation on my part. Some comes from personal inside knowledge, however it is not in my control, and minds/business can change without notice and should be considered as pure speculation on my part. Take it for what it is worth, while it may be true at the moment, in the future there is no guarantee. However, if none of which I speak of is true, then many banks are fawked and I will be shorting the shite out of them if this speculation does not come to fruition.</em></blockquote>


Very cool disclosure. :-)</blockquote>


Just know that they are kicking the can down the road. If what I say does not come to fruition, then we will have a serious REO problem on our hands. Not only that, but if the tax credit does stimulate buying homes it fawks commercial RE in the apartment sector. That means more defaults and capital ratios getting screwed for any bank with commercial holdings. I.E. rental rates go into the tank even further than they already have, and cap rates and values of commercial rental properties tank. Then you have to factor the cost to the taxpayer how much a $8k or even $15k costs, when it costs anywhere between $40k-$60k per buyer for the $8k credit since most would be buying anyway, then you up it to $15K and it becomes a cost of $70k to $150k that would be buying. If you are cool with that subsidization to hold your home value, then I suggest you really analyze the cost, because it sucks for an owner or a renter. Then... what if the credit doesn't stimulate... LOL... that would be even funnier.



Sad, but this is the perfect analogy of shooting oneself in the foot.</blockquote>
Graph, give me your percentages for the following 4 possibilities with the tax credit:



1) They let it expire

2) They extent it as is

3) They extent it leaving it at $8k but drop the income phase-outs

4) They jack up it up to $10k-$15k without income income phase-outs
 
[quote author="USCTrojanCPA" date=1254926797]Graph, give me your percentages for the following 4 possibilities with the tax credit:



1) They let it expire

2) They extent it as is

3) They extent it leaving it at $8k but drop the income phase-outs

4) They jack up it up to $10k-$15k without income income phase-outs</blockquote>


Percentages of what? Not sure what you want here, but if you clarify what you mean then I can answer what it is what you are looking for. Percentage of sales increases?
 
[quote author="graphrix" date=1254930772][quote author="USCTrojanCPA" date=1254926797]Graph, give me your percentages for the following 4 possibilities with the tax credit:



1) They let it expire

2) They extent it as is

3) They extent it leaving it at $8k but drop the income phase-outs

4) They jack up it up to $10k-$15k without income income phase-outs</blockquote>


Percentages of what? Not sure what you want here, but if you clarify what you mean then I can answer what it is what you are looking for. Percentage of sales increases?</blockquote>
Sorry about not being clear....percentage chance of each of the 4 possible scenarios happening. For example, I give the following scenarios these percentages of happening:



1) 50%

2) 20%

3) 15%

4) 15%
 
[quote author="USCTrojanCPA" date=1254926797]Graph, give me your percentages for the following 4 possibilities with the tax credit:



1) They let it expire

2) They extent it as is

3) They extent it leaving it at $8k but drop the income phase-outs

4) They jack up it up to $10k-$15k without income income phase-outs</blockquote>


You should start a poll and see what people respond. I go for 1).
 
A study by Fitch Ratings found that 46% of option ARMs were 30 days past due last month, even though just 12% of such loans have reset to higher monthly payments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top