San Diego Housing Bubble News and Analysis

Since it's mostly about supply & demand (or must-sell suplly & demand), I would disregard the data on DOM.

The data on DOM is marginally helpful & not worth the trouble of reading it.

The key thing to watch for is the growth/reduction of must-sell supply.

Cyphire -

All I can comment on is how the Sandicor DOM works.

However before I do that, I just want to throw something out there... when people see a for sale by owner or a private party sale, how do you find out how long that home has been on the market? What mechanism is there in place to reliably determine that information? The answer is none. You take the sellers word correct? If you can prove the seller is lying then great.

Okay so Sandicor works like this. When you enter a listing, that listing takes on a new life in the MLS. What happened before, what happens after is not pertinent. This listing is yours and only yours. As long as that listing is active the MT field, market time will increment each day. There is an alternate field called AMT and this field adjusts for time off the market, (this would be a home in escrow or withdrawn). So say a home is active for 50 days and then is withdrawn for 10 days and falls out. MT would be 60 and AMT would be 50.

Now when a listing is cancelled a new listing is created. Yes everything starts over.

********

Is it ethical or unethical? That is up for debate. However ANY informed buyer will always ask their Realtor to perform a full search history on homes they are seriously interested in. To claim that buyers have no recourse on this subject to me is not an adequate argument. I don't know about alot of things and I ask professionals about them whether it is taxes, legal issues, insurance issues, etc... Thus if there is a home you are seriously interested in you would ask your realtor to see the complete history of cancelleds, expireds, previous sales etc... Is it that hard to pick up the phone and do that?

Additionally why don't the free services like Zip, Realtor.com and other agencies do this? Why are they not targetted for complaints as well?

You know I am not a shill for NAR and I hate when I have to defend "the system" because in general I don't like the system. However, I just do not buy into the fact that there is a widespread victimization going on here. The information can more then readily be found.

SD Realtor

SD Realtor: While I would agree with your sentiment that there is not widespread victimization going on, I would also point out a slight flaw in your argument. You are predicating your argument on the fact that people are, by and large, educated and professional like yourself. If someone is knowledgeable and knows the right questions to ask, it is a very different proposition from someone who is not and does not.

A quick read on the sub-prime mess shows a whole lot of people who never thought twice about asking some fairly basic (and commonsensical) questions about something as significant as their mortgage. There is a level of basic financial fundamentals missing in this equation.

If a realtor or broker was looking to pull the wool over someone's eyes regarding D.O.M. metrics, I would think that, unless the person was someone knowledgeable about the process, it would be fairly easy to do.

You also have to remember (going along with your "ask professionals the questions" assertion) that most people have a certain level of deference to someone they perceive as a professional and take quite a bit of information at face value, as a result.

Since were're talking about database technology, it seems to me that Sandicor isn't in the business of providing accurate information. They are looking to slant data for the benefit of its membership.

The MLS could easily track sales and listing information using the parcel number and thus easily provide sales and listing history on a specific property since that parcel creation.

I would think that a buyer would be interested in the total sales history of a house. We need an open "carfax for houses" that would integrate sales and MLS information.

Hello Cy, welcome back to a gentler& kinder Piggingtons.

"Another positive sign in North San Diego County is the median days-on-market decreased to 43 days in May 2007 from 50 days in April 2007, and the average number of days on the market fell from 74 in April 2007 to 63 in May 2007."

That in my opinion is misrepresentation of a material fact. Additionally, for the houses that don't sell and cancell or expire, those days disappear instead being applied to the Average DOM. Correct me if I am wrong SDR?

Allan -

Granted your point is well made and I should assume a lower level of intelligence for the masses.

Rustico/Cyphire -

Yes the example you guys brought up is indeed what I would call a misrepresentation of the market. However I cannot 100% fault the MLS or the associations. The entire structure is rickety.

Yes the actual data should have had a disclaimer that reads,

"These statistics are compiled from only homes that have sold...are for this type of house... this particular zip code... etc...."

Rustico yes it is absolutely correct that the statistics over all are in fact gross misrepresentations about the state of the market. IMO the same is true about the median price, etc...

Thus let me retrace... in that sense the posting by Cyphire is correct. Yes it is abysmal what Realtors, what Dataquick, what most of the talking heads and economists say about the situation and how they use or shall I say misuse statistics. Equally bad is that boneheaded people, or buyers, slurp this stuff up and live and die by it. Agreed with you guys.

My point is that for many people it doesn't take extraordinary intelligence to get as much information as they need in light of the situation.

SD Realtor

I guess I just dont see this as a major issue. The actual numbers are pretty meaningless and I dont think people say "Omigosh, the days on market just went down so I better hurry up and buy!" MLS data will always be troublesome because it is self reported and that causes delays, inconsistencies and errors.

The problems today with the numbers existed last month and last year for that matter. The relevant point is that days on market went down and it probably did due to seasonality. here come's a groundbreaking prediction and you heard it here first. Days on market will increase through the Fall.

Knowing the product ,comps and market situation overall and negotiating well is more important than DOM. But how do you tell that to someone who has ample evidence that our industry is deceptive after a BS move like taking away days on market? It only increases the mistrust. Yes I hear you SD R. It is easy to get all info on a houses history. I feel that is not the point.

I think stuff like this reinforces the image that the REIC is monopolizing the business by making Realtors indispensible to the parties in a transaction, which of course is how it has always has worked, except for a few maverick FSBO'S.Yes the NAR lobbies for an uneven playing field. So does every other organization of national proportions. The situation may be breaking down we will see.

Realturds doctor photos to make properties look bigger. They falsify comps using cash-back schemes so nobody knows what the real sale price is on nearby homes. They advertise properties with asking prices they will never accept just so their house will show up in a lower-price-range search. They pressure appraisors by threatening not to use them again if they don't appraise at the price they want. They make a lot of money by doing these things. Why the issue with DOM? Why should they be ethical about that and nothing else?

Thanks for the welcome back Rustico and all! I've been a bit busy in my life lately, and have neglected the forum's for a while. I also plan on being more relaxed and "kinder and gentler"!

I appreciate all the arguments so far, for and against the days on market info as well as the many other factors which comprise getting reliable information.

I just want to focus on this one thing though:

- I received a flyer.
- The Days on Market data was a complete lie.
- The Realtor knows this (that the two houses I knew of were on the market for 200 days each but say 44 and 40 days respectively).
- The Realtor crowed about the great reduction in days on market to show the market's strength, even though knowing that the data is a complete fabrication.

Can you really explain that away SD Realtor?

This is fraud. This is specifically a broker lying and misleading - sending out advertising material which they know to be wrong. Just because this profession does it all the time doesn't make it right, and it doesn't say much for it's trust.

Have we lost all grip with reality? This is sanctioned fraud. Stating (as did the Realtor when I called her up) - that they would run a complete history on any house which a buyer is interested in doesn't fix it - it's still fraud.

Example: A used car lot has cars with all sorts of problems. They use a mechanical service to state that the cars are 98 percent defect free. They know that the average car is 75% defect free. They claim that the advertising of the 98% number is ok, because any specific car can be reexamined to find out the truth about it.... But they use the 98% number to mislead the public about the quality of their cars... This is FRAUD!

These folks at Prudential (and probably many others) are specifically making claims which are untrue - because there is no recourse to their falsehoods - other than people making dangerous financial decisions based on Realtors painting a fake, rosy picture.

When will there be recourse to this type of behavior?

p.s. I looked at the listing brokers web site (a different agency) which shows my house as sold at 10% higher (our listing price) then we actually sold at. More deception. and it goes on and on and on!!!

I just talked with my wife about this topic, Phoney DOM, and she pointed out how deceptive it is to sellers as well as buyers.(The topic has been up on other threads since you were here last Cy and we have mostly looked at it from the buyers perspective.)
Now if you were a FSBO you look at what Cyphire has recieved and you say "hey I have had my house on the market for 90 days and I can't sell it and this Realtor person is doing it in around 40 days at 97% of asking price, maybe I should pay that commission after all?

Cyphire -

I am not trying to explain it away nor am I trying to rationalize it.

If indeed that the listing you spoke of, was listed with this broker and had not been expired, cancelled, or withdrawn then yes it is clear fraud. However, do you know for a fact that it had not been in withdrawn status during the listing period? Do you know if it had been cancelled or had it expired once, maybe twice, maybe three times?

If you would like to give me the MLS number I can give you the exact history of the home with regard to listing status. If you don't have the MLS number you can give me the address.

Now you said this was a Prudential listing. Cyphire, I am sure you have read my posts and if anyone bangs pretty hard on Prudential I think I am in the front of that line. First off, we all live with fraud every day for most of our consumer products, as well as a host of other goods and services.

To say there is no recourse is not true. You and every single person on this site can go and file a complaint with the DRE. There is NOTHING STOPPING you. In fact it would be far more effective for people to complain to the DRE about the irregularities with MLS rules, mortgage brokering frauds and things like that rather then posting them on Piggingtons. Many a posting has been made on this site about suspected fraudulent transactions and cash back to buyers. Many of the times I have looked into them and debunked them or spoken my opinion that they looked clean. Yet there have been a few instances where they looked shaky.

However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it.

Now well taken point about the car. Yet when I bought a car I never knew how long it sat on the lot. When I look at a boat I don't know if it had previous offers on it. Again, not to bang the drum over again, but NOBODY ever complains about Realtor.com or Zillow, or Zip not producing the information as well. Nobody complains about FSBOs being monitored or standardized in any way. Why is that?

Now regarding your listing selling 10% above list price. Yes to me that would be fraud. Was your home in a price range? Was the sold price 10% above the low end? I am not trying to rationalize the fraud here but I am just trying to form a clean angle on the who thing.

*********

In general Cyphire, I absolutely agree with your points. I am not trying to play devils advocate and man do I ever hate trying to defend the establishment or the way things are. I don't like it, and I don't do it. I can conduct the way I do business but I cannot police others. It would be suicidal for me to do so.

It does not make it right (what they do). I think there "may" be recourse when enough people take action.

SD Realtor

"However NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF THIS SITE have I ever heard of ANYONE actually filing a complaint to the DRE.

Why is that? Most likely because it is easier to complain about something then to actually put time and energy into following the system in place to remedy it. "

SD R The DRE won't do anything about this stuff. Maybe the fraud but not these practices like value range stuff, fake DOM, manipulated sales price data, the associations putting one face on the market for the public and then filling our trade magazines and web sites with tons of materials on short sells,foreclosures and surviving a down trending market, all the puffing going on until it was obvious the market was a disaster..
You know I am the squeaky wheel type and I have dealt with these basically dead beat agencies several times. I specifically complained about Prudentials value range. You have to get a lawyer and make a big case out of it. That is for the big guys(and it has already been done). I think you need to give us credit for realizing that if the baloney is so prevalent it is because nobody in authority cares?

We all know that you didn't and wouldn't make things the way they are btw.

Best Regards

Hey SD...

A little confused. I'm not saying that there is a specific fraud being committed by the owner of the house in question, or even prudential. I'm also not saying that it was Prudential's listing (It was on their sheet and I spoke to the broker about the specific listing). They probably did take it off the market for a day, then relist it. They did switch brokers, etc. This is probably within the rules - that is my point. They are manipulating the rules to change the days on market. No one wants to have admitted that they house was on the market for 200 days, so they gamed the system.

But what is worse in my opinion, is that the broker who made the advertisement knows that the data is wrong. They specifically called out how the days on market is dropping when they know that the house has actively been for sale for 200 days or longer.

The DRE would just say that as it came back on the next day they are allowed to show days on market at 0. These rules are perpetrating the fraud. Why would anyone trust the real estate establishment anymore?

If you ask me, it's the Realtors who should take a stand. And by taking a stand I don't mean contributing to any pro-real estate politician, I mean try to fix corrupt and misleading industry practices to make their own profession not look like whores.

As stated ad nauseum on this board before - most of the public doesn't realize how much of the data is wrong, misleading, or downright fraudulent. The ones that do include the Realtors themselves - but try talking to most of them! They will defend the most egregious of practices - and people wonder why they have no credibility!

I also understand that brokers have access to cumulative days on market. Why isn't this data presented to the public?

Rustico if you have made complaints to the DRE then that is great. I would also say that is the first time I have heard that you or anyone else on Piggington has ever done so. Good to see you back.

The fact that there is little or no action that the DRE takes is indeed a sad commentary. I agree with you guys. I also feel that this applies to the real estate industry, our own city council, our government, and many other staples of which our society relies on. That does not justify it nor does it make it right. Since this is a website dedicated to real estate issues, this is a correct forum to discuss these items. I guess I feel like we run across this every 2-3 months.

Cyphire, I am sorry I mistook the listing for a Prudential listing. My mistake. Again, when you take an MLS listing you cannot expedite the expiration date. Also let me ask you this question. One of the most common complaints I get when I go to listing appointments is that people do not want to get into long listing agreements. So then as a listing agent I lose both ways right? Did I make the listing intentionally short to get a quick expiration to reset the time on market? No I did it because I let my clients choose the length of the contract. As we all know there are a ton of things wrong with the way data is presented in the RE industry. My pet peeve is the way sold price data is presented. Personally I think this is much more damaging to the appraisal and industry as a whole then things like days on market.

I cannot or will not go on a crusade to clean up the industry. I work to much as it is and with two careers and a family it is simply not a priority for me. I can do more for my clients by saving them money and doing diligent work.

SD Realtor