BofA Reductions

[Arraya]

[quote=jpinpb]

[quote=Arraya]
Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

It’s a given that anyone upside-down is squatting/walking if not already, soon to be eventually. Just get it all over with instead of dragging it out.[/quote]

No doubt, we need to get this collapse moving forward which goes far beyond the us RE market. I just wouldn’t be too excited about profiting from it. It’s going to be ugly and it’s going to be global and it’s going to bring insanity.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Arraya]Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

Had foreclosures been pursued timely starting over three years ago, we would have been much further along in a recovery. Because they weren’t, we now have a lot of squatters who aren’t going anywhere until they are evicted.

Even the defaults filed today are in different stages. I don’t see all the properties being marketed at once. Once a lender acquires a property, they still have to take time to ready it for sale. This should take under a month.

Isn’t the REO inventory that’s out there moving fast, often with multiple bids to choose from?

There might be some initial dip in values when all the squatters are sent packing in the same 3-6 mo. time period, but then the resulting REO’s will be quickly snapped up and we can get back to a “regular” market.

I just glanced at the Amended AB1639. It states, in pertinent part: “The bill would also provide that the timelines set forth in the provision governing the exercise of the power of sale, as specified, would be suspended until the completion of the program, as specified.”

Of course, this only applies if the TRUSTOR MEETS WITH HIS LENDER, SIGNS UP FOR THE PROGRAM, begins making payments equaling 50% of his mtg. pymts. AND provides ALL THE FINANCIALS THE BANK IS ASKING FOR with the 15-DAY TIME ALOTTED. This doesn’t allow for too much delay on the part of the delinquent borrower. The lender can reactivate the NOD during ANY point where the trustor falls down on his end of the bargain.

I don’t see this new program as being a HUGE success. It’s already been tried under various other acronyms but w/o the 50% pymt. requirement and the NOD/NOS hanging in the balance.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Arraya]Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

Had foreclosures been pursued timely starting over three years ago, we would have been much further along in a recovery. Because they weren’t, we now have a lot of squatters who aren’t going anywhere until they are evicted.

Even the defaults filed today are in different stages. I don’t see all the properties being marketed at once. Once a lender acquires a property, they still have to take time to ready it for sale. This should take under a month.

Isn’t the REO inventory that’s out there moving fast, often with multiple bids to choose from?

There might be some initial dip in values when all the squatters are sent packing in the same 3-6 mo. time period, but then the resulting REO’s will be quickly snapped up and we can get back to a “regular” market.

I just glanced at the Amended AB1639. It states, in pertinent part: “The bill would also provide that the timelines set forth in the provision governing the exercise of the power of sale, as specified, would be suspended until the completion of the program, as specified.”

Of course, this only applies if the TRUSTOR MEETS WITH HIS LENDER, SIGNS UP FOR THE PROGRAM, begins making payments equaling 50% of his mtg. pymts. AND provides ALL THE FINANCIALS THE BANK IS ASKING FOR with the 15-DAY TIME ALOTTED. This doesn’t allow for too much delay on the part of the delinquent borrower. The lender can reactivate the NOD during ANY point where the trustor falls down on his end of the bargain.

I don’t see this new program as being a HUGE success. It’s already been tried under various other acronyms but w/o the 50% pymt. requirement and the NOD/NOS hanging in the balance.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Arraya]Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

Had foreclosures been pursued timely starting over three years ago, we would have been much further along in a recovery. Because they weren’t, we now have a lot of squatters who aren’t going anywhere until they are evicted.

Even the defaults filed today are in different stages. I don’t see all the properties being marketed at once. Once a lender acquires a property, they still have to take time to ready it for sale. This should take under a month.

Isn’t the REO inventory that’s out there moving fast, often with multiple bids to choose from?

There might be some initial dip in values when all the squatters are sent packing in the same 3-6 mo. time period, but then the resulting REO’s will be quickly snapped up and we can get back to a “regular” market.

I just glanced at the Amended AB1639. It states, in pertinent part: “The bill would also provide that the timelines set forth in the provision governing the exercise of the power of sale, as specified, would be suspended until the completion of the program, as specified.”

Of course, this only applies if the TRUSTOR MEETS WITH HIS LENDER, SIGNS UP FOR THE PROGRAM, begins making payments equaling 50% of his mtg. pymts. AND provides ALL THE FINANCIALS THE BANK IS ASKING FOR with the 15-DAY TIME ALOTTED. This doesn’t allow for too much delay on the part of the delinquent borrower. The lender can reactivate the NOD during ANY point where the trustor falls down on his end of the bargain.

I don’t see this new program as being a HUGE success. It’s already been tried under various other acronyms but w/o the 50% pymt. requirement and the NOD/NOS hanging in the balance.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Arraya]Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

Had foreclosures been pursued timely starting over three years ago, we would have been much further along in a recovery. Because they weren’t, we now have a lot of squatters who aren’t going anywhere until they are evicted.

Even the defaults filed today are in different stages. I don’t see all the properties being marketed at once. Once a lender acquires a property, they still have to take time to ready it for sale. This should take under a month.

Isn’t the REO inventory that’s out there moving fast, often with multiple bids to choose from?

There might be some initial dip in values when all the squatters are sent packing in the same 3-6 mo. time period, but then the resulting REO’s will be quickly snapped up and we can get back to a “regular” market.

I just glanced at the Amended AB1639. It states, in pertinent part: “The bill would also provide that the timelines set forth in the provision governing the exercise of the power of sale, as specified, would be suspended until the completion of the program, as specified.”

Of course, this only applies if the TRUSTOR MEETS WITH HIS LENDER, SIGNS UP FOR THE PROGRAM, begins making payments equaling 50% of his mtg. pymts. AND provides ALL THE FINANCIALS THE BANK IS ASKING FOR with the 15-DAY TIME ALOTTED. This doesn’t allow for too much delay on the part of the delinquent borrower. The lender can reactivate the NOD during ANY point where the trustor falls down on his end of the bargain.

I don’t see this new program as being a HUGE success. It’s already been tried under various other acronyms but w/o the 50% pymt. requirement and the NOD/NOS hanging in the balance.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=Arraya]Which would be a train because unleashing 7 million homes to the market, >40K in SD alone would crush prices and trigger more defaults and deflationary pressure.[/quote]

Had foreclosures been pursued timely starting over three years ago, we would have been much further along in a recovery. Because they weren’t, we now have a lot of squatters who aren’t going anywhere until they are evicted.

Even the defaults filed today are in different stages. I don’t see all the properties being marketed at once. Once a lender acquires a property, they still have to take time to ready it for sale. This should take under a month.

Isn’t the REO inventory that’s out there moving fast, often with multiple bids to choose from?

There might be some initial dip in values when all the squatters are sent packing in the same 3-6 mo. time period, but then the resulting REO’s will be quickly snapped up and we can get back to a “regular” market.

I just glanced at the Amended AB1639. It states, in pertinent part: “The bill would also provide that the timelines set forth in the provision governing the exercise of the power of sale, as specified, would be suspended until the completion of the program, as specified.”

Of course, this only applies if the TRUSTOR MEETS WITH HIS LENDER, SIGNS UP FOR THE PROGRAM, begins making payments equaling 50% of his mtg. pymts. AND provides ALL THE FINANCIALS THE BANK IS ASKING FOR with the 15-DAY TIME ALOTTED. This doesn’t allow for too much delay on the part of the delinquent borrower. The lender can reactivate the NOD during ANY point where the trustor falls down on his end of the bargain.

I don’t see this new program as being a HUGE success. It’s already been tried under various other acronyms but w/o the 50% pymt. requirement and the NOD/NOS hanging in the balance.

[SK in CV]

Both plans, BofA’s and the proposed CA law make sense.

B of A will turn some bad loans into good loans. Good business decision. Though their requirement that loans be delinquent in order to enter the program seems misguided.

The proposed CA law will speed up the process while requiring interim payments from borrowers. The time frames for requesting entry into the mediation program, response from the lender, follow-ups, and mandatory meetings between lender and borrower are all within the first 45 days after NOD. Most foreclosures take 9 to 12 months with NO payments. Lenders should have been doing this all along.

Both appear to be pretty logical plans.

[SK in CV]

Both plans, BofA’s and the proposed CA law make sense.

B of A will turn some bad loans into good loans. Good business decision. Though their requirement that loans be delinquent in order to enter the program seems misguided.

The proposed CA law will speed up the process while requiring interim payments from borrowers. The time frames for requesting entry into the mediation program, response from the lender, follow-ups, and mandatory meetings between lender and borrower are all within the first 45 days after NOD. Most foreclosures take 9 to 12 months with NO payments. Lenders should have been doing this all along.

Both appear to be pretty logical plans.

[SK in CV]

Both plans, BofA’s and the proposed CA law make sense.

B of A will turn some bad loans into good loans. Good business decision. Though their requirement that loans be delinquent in order to enter the program seems misguided.

The proposed CA law will speed up the process while requiring interim payments from borrowers. The time frames for requesting entry into the mediation program, response from the lender, follow-ups, and mandatory meetings between lender and borrower are all within the first 45 days after NOD. Most foreclosures take 9 to 12 months with NO payments. Lenders should have been doing this all along.

Both appear to be pretty logical plans.

[SK in CV]

Both plans, BofA’s and the proposed CA law make sense.

B of A will turn some bad loans into good loans. Good business decision. Though their requirement that loans be delinquent in order to enter the program seems misguided.

The proposed CA law will speed up the process while requiring interim payments from borrowers. The time frames for requesting entry into the mediation program, response from the lender, follow-ups, and mandatory meetings between lender and borrower are all within the first 45 days after NOD. Most foreclosures take 9 to 12 months with NO payments. Lenders should have been doing this all along.

Both appear to be pretty logical plans.

[SK in CV]

Both plans, BofA’s and the proposed CA law make sense.

B of A will turn some bad loans into good loans. Good business decision. Though their requirement that loans be delinquent in order to enter the program seems misguided.

The proposed CA law will speed up the process while requiring interim payments from borrowers. The time frames for requesting entry into the mediation program, response from the lender, follow-ups, and mandatory meetings between lender and borrower are all within the first 45 days after NOD. Most foreclosures take 9 to 12 months with NO payments. Lenders should have been doing this all along.

Both appear to be pretty logical plans.

[SD Realtor]

Yes it is all fine to prognosticate what would have been done and should have been done. The problem is the golden rule. Those that have the gold rule. For those of you who think this is the end of the little tricks they will play and that the taxpayers will no longer tolerate subsidies, I hate to say it but you are pulling the same ostrich with your head in the sand that illogical sellers did when the market started to deteriorate. What those in power are doing is not right. However they do not have an objective to make things right, to promote a free market, or to provide an affordable home for a San Diego citizen. They have an objective to continue to make money and continue to stay in power. Unfortunately this is orthogonal to your objective. It is not a good time to buy or a bad time to buy. However it is a good time to realize where you stand in the overall order of things and plan accordingly. It will be credit or lack there of that brings the house of cards down. The problem is that there are alot of cards still left in the deck.

[SD Realtor]

Yes it is all fine to prognosticate what would have been done and should have been done. The problem is the golden rule. Those that have the gold rule. For those of you who think this is the end of the little tricks they will play and that the taxpayers will no longer tolerate subsidies, I hate to say it but you are pulling the same ostrich with your head in the sand that illogical sellers did when the market started to deteriorate. What those in power are doing is not right. However they do not have an objective to make things right, to promote a free market, or to provide an affordable home for a San Diego citizen. They have an objective to continue to make money and continue to stay in power. Unfortunately this is orthogonal to your objective. It is not a good time to buy or a bad time to buy. However it is a good time to realize where you stand in the overall order of things and plan accordingly. It will be credit or lack there of that brings the house of cards down. The problem is that there are alot of cards still left in the deck.

[SD Realtor]

Yes it is all fine to prognosticate what would have been done and should have been done. The problem is the golden rule. Those that have the gold rule. For those of you who think this is the end of the little tricks they will play and that the taxpayers will no longer tolerate subsidies, I hate to say it but you are pulling the same ostrich with your head in the sand that illogical sellers did when the market started to deteriorate. What those in power are doing is not right. However they do not have an objective to make things right, to promote a free market, or to provide an affordable home for a San Diego citizen. They have an objective to continue to make money and continue to stay in power. Unfortunately this is orthogonal to your objective. It is not a good time to buy or a bad time to buy. However it is a good time to realize where you stand in the overall order of things and plan accordingly. It will be credit or lack there of that brings the house of cards down. The problem is that there are alot of cards still left in the deck.

[SD Realtor]

Yes it is all fine to prognosticate what would have been done and should have been done. The problem is the golden rule. Those that have the gold rule. For those of you who think this is the end of the little tricks they will play and that the taxpayers will no longer tolerate subsidies, I hate to say it but you are pulling the same ostrich with your head in the sand that illogical sellers did when the market started to deteriorate. What those in power are doing is not right. However they do not have an objective to make things right, to promote a free market, or to provide an affordable home for a San Diego citizen. They have an objective to continue to make money and continue to stay in power. Unfortunately this is orthogonal to your objective. It is not a good time to buy or a bad time to buy. However it is a good time to realize where you stand in the overall order of things and plan accordingly. It will be credit or lack there of that brings the house of cards down. The problem is that there are alot of cards still left in the deck.

[Author]

Posts