Another short steal

[SD Realtor]

It is not fair to others on this site to indulge your lifestyle which is to sit around all day on your computer.

This is my last response to you on this thread.

Which part of my post was “jumping to conclusions?”

**pick your favorite**

Instead, they are believing the delinquent seller’s listing agent’s (friend/church buddy/relative?) bogus comps that are sent with an offer which will allow their broker to double end the commission.

**Really? How do you know the listing agent even sent any comps? How do you know they believed them if they did? I have not been asked to send comps on any of my short sales. This is what BPOs and appraisals are for and why they are done by independent agents. I am sure you already knew that.

Not necessarily the HIGHEST, but the BEST for the LISTING AGENT/BROKER and/or consisting of special out-of-escrow “perks” for his/her deadbeat sellers (who should be grateful they are even getting out of their [frequently ATM’ed to death] albatross). If the first TD holder had accepted researcher9’s offer, they may have been ABLE to satisfy the 2nd TD holder’s requirements.

**Sorry to say but this is jumping to a conclusion. Once more you have no proof of any of the above. Sorry but a posting on a website with someone who did not submit a written offer and we have no evidence of when the call was made as opposed to when the other offer may have been accepted. Furthermore as usual you are wrong and the payment was not made out of escrow. It was made in escrow and paid directly to the 2nd. You cannot make any payments OUT OF ESCROW. Do you think you can just drive to the lender and hand them a check? Furthermore this does not benefit the seller at all. It completes a short sale. The alternative is that the seller continues to live there for free being a deadbeat and the home goes to foreclosure. This may take months or years. The seller may let the house go and it looks like a piece of crap in the meantime. Letting the seller live there for that long free to me is placating the seller.

***************

Your post is an apt description of the “bribes” that I have no doubt take place to get the “short sale” of today done and I do agree that for a “winning” (lol) buyer, having only 20% of the purchase price on hand is low (depending on area of property).

**Really this is not jumping to any conclusion? How is what nsr posted a bribe? So why don’t you poll all the other people who have posted on here and ask what bribes they submitted? I am curious. Sounds like a great business.

**************

As for my short sale the payment made directly to the second was specified on the final HUD made through escrow. That is the only way to do it. The sales price is what is on the contract. I have no idea what the assessed value was for the home. If the assessor believes the sales price is to low, they can assess the home at whatever price they believe is market value. This is true for any REO, short sale and even properties purchased at trustee sale.

**************

Your broken recording of the current process not working is nothing that anyone argues with. You don’t solve any problems, nor do you actually help people find homes. It is much easier to sit around all day, post on line, complain about things, and then tell people what you would have done.

We all know the system sucks, we all know it is hard as crap to get the home you want and that there is corruption. Believe it or not some people deal with it and get over the hump and get the home they want in spite of that.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]Thanks NSR, your post read like a bullet list of exactly why short sales should be abolished.[/quote]Do Piggs realize how cheap trustees’ fees are, in comparison to putting up with a squatting delinquent seller (“DS”) for months/years who’s simultaneously stripping the joint or put up with their tenant (whom the DS is presumingly pocketing cash from every month)? Only to have these DS’s then request their lender(s) to “take it in the shorts” (so they, (the DS) can get out “clean”)?

Is there some reason why the taxpaying public should CARE whether these DS’s come out “clean” … or not?

I’m sure there’s more semi-retired auctioneers out there that can assume their positions on the steps of 220 W Bdwy, SD for 2-3 more scheduled trustees’ sales per day. In this economy, I’m all for full employment of idle auctioneers.

IMO, there’s no excuse for this debacle. Absolutely none.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]Thanks NSR, your post read like a bullet list of exactly why short sales should be abolished.[/quote]Do Piggs realize how cheap trustees’ fees are, in comparison to putting up with a squatting delinquent seller (“DS”) for months/years who’s simultaneously stripping the joint or put up with their tenant (whom the DS is presumingly pocketing cash from every month)? Only to have these DS’s then request their lender(s) to “take it in the shorts” (so they, (the DS) can get out “clean”)?

Is there some reason why the taxpaying public should CARE whether these DS’s come out “clean” … or not?

I’m sure there’s more semi-retired auctioneers out there that can assume their positions on the steps of 220 W Bdwy, SD for 2-3 more scheduled trustees’ sales per day. In this economy, I’m all for full employment of idle auctioneers.

IMO, there’s no excuse for this debacle. Absolutely none.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]Thanks NSR, your post read like a bullet list of exactly why short sales should be abolished.[/quote]Do Piggs realize how cheap trustees’ fees are, in comparison to putting up with a squatting delinquent seller (“DS”) for months/years who’s simultaneously stripping the joint or put up with their tenant (whom the DS is presumingly pocketing cash from every month)? Only to have these DS’s then request their lender(s) to “take it in the shorts” (so they, (the DS) can get out “clean”)?

Is there some reason why the taxpaying public should CARE whether these DS’s come out “clean” … or not?

I’m sure there’s more semi-retired auctioneers out there that can assume their positions on the steps of 220 W Bdwy, SD for 2-3 more scheduled trustees’ sales per day. In this economy, I’m all for full employment of idle auctioneers.

IMO, there’s no excuse for this debacle. Absolutely none.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]Thanks NSR, your post read like a bullet list of exactly why short sales should be abolished.[/quote]Do Piggs realize how cheap trustees’ fees are, in comparison to putting up with a squatting delinquent seller (“DS”) for months/years who’s simultaneously stripping the joint or put up with their tenant (whom the DS is presumingly pocketing cash from every month)? Only to have these DS’s then request their lender(s) to “take it in the shorts” (so they, (the DS) can get out “clean”)?

Is there some reason why the taxpaying public should CARE whether these DS’s come out “clean” … or not?

I’m sure there’s more semi-retired auctioneers out there that can assume their positions on the steps of 220 W Bdwy, SD for 2-3 more scheduled trustees’ sales per day. In this economy, I’m all for full employment of idle auctioneers.

IMO, there’s no excuse for this debacle. Absolutely none.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=pemeliza]Thanks NSR, your post read like a bullet list of exactly why short sales should be abolished.[/quote]Do Piggs realize how cheap trustees’ fees are, in comparison to putting up with a squatting delinquent seller (“DS”) for months/years who’s simultaneously stripping the joint or put up with their tenant (whom the DS is presumingly pocketing cash from every month)? Only to have these DS’s then request their lender(s) to “take it in the shorts” (so they, (the DS) can get out “clean”)?

Is there some reason why the taxpaying public should CARE whether these DS’s come out “clean” … or not?

I’m sure there’s more semi-retired auctioneers out there that can assume their positions on the steps of 220 W Bdwy, SD for 2-3 more scheduled trustees’ sales per day. In this economy, I’m all for full employment of idle auctioneers.

IMO, there’s no excuse for this debacle. Absolutely none.

[bearishgurl]

SDR, my question to you was apparently unclear to you. Let me rephrase it. Did the ultimate “sold” price you sold your subject “short-sale” (that you discussed here) reflect the (cash) payoff to the 2nd TD holder or didn’t it?

I didn’t ask if it was shown on the HUD-1. I asked if the 2nd TD payoff amount in your “short sale” was reflected in the final sold price, as shown in the sold comps on the MLS. Or did the final sold price only encompass the first TD holder’s accepted “short” amount?

Sorry for any confusion in this regard.

[bearishgurl]

SDR, my question to you was apparently unclear to you. Let me rephrase it. Did the ultimate “sold” price you sold your subject “short-sale” (that you discussed here) reflect the (cash) payoff to the 2nd TD holder or didn’t it?

I didn’t ask if it was shown on the HUD-1. I asked if the 2nd TD payoff amount in your “short sale” was reflected in the final sold price, as shown in the sold comps on the MLS. Or did the final sold price only encompass the first TD holder’s accepted “short” amount?

Sorry for any confusion in this regard.

[bearishgurl]

SDR, my question to you was apparently unclear to you. Let me rephrase it. Did the ultimate “sold” price you sold your subject “short-sale” (that you discussed here) reflect the (cash) payoff to the 2nd TD holder or didn’t it?

I didn’t ask if it was shown on the HUD-1. I asked if the 2nd TD payoff amount in your “short sale” was reflected in the final sold price, as shown in the sold comps on the MLS. Or did the final sold price only encompass the first TD holder’s accepted “short” amount?

Sorry for any confusion in this regard.

[bearishgurl]

SDR, my question to you was apparently unclear to you. Let me rephrase it. Did the ultimate “sold” price you sold your subject “short-sale” (that you discussed here) reflect the (cash) payoff to the 2nd TD holder or didn’t it?

I didn’t ask if it was shown on the HUD-1. I asked if the 2nd TD payoff amount in your “short sale” was reflected in the final sold price, as shown in the sold comps on the MLS. Or did the final sold price only encompass the first TD holder’s accepted “short” amount?

Sorry for any confusion in this regard.

[bearishgurl]

SDR, my question to you was apparently unclear to you. Let me rephrase it. Did the ultimate “sold” price you sold your subject “short-sale” (that you discussed here) reflect the (cash) payoff to the 2nd TD holder or didn’t it?

I didn’t ask if it was shown on the HUD-1. I asked if the 2nd TD payoff amount in your “short sale” was reflected in the final sold price, as shown in the sold comps on the MLS. Or did the final sold price only encompass the first TD holder’s accepted “short” amount?

Sorry for any confusion in this regard.

[bearishgurl]

delete

[bearishgurl]

delete

[bearishgurl]

delete

[bearishgurl]

delete

[Author]

Posts