should I buy in temecula

[Ren]

[quote=bearishgurl]Ren, I don’t know how old you are but since the “coast” is where you want to retire, why don’t you consider purchasing a fixer (w/no MR or HOA) to rehab and then place into rental service there, using today’s low fixed interest rates, instead of investing in low-priced rentals in TV that may never appreciate and may even go down further. When scoping one out, do not get so caught up in “square footage” as long as it’s over 1000 sf with at least a one-car (attached or detached) garage and on a decent-sized lot. Remember, it will be a rental home and your retirement home.[/quote]

I won’t buy a fixer on the coast because even fixers are overpriced and I’d be lucky to break even. I’m among those who believe that buying at a lower price is usually better than buying at a low interest rate (depending on the numbers, of course), and appreciation shouldn’t be the goal, since real estate closely follows inflation in the long term (i.e., it doesn’t really appreciate, unless you buy at a low point in a cycle and sell at a high point). However, buying at a low point is extremely important for cash flow and in case you do decide to sell later on. Positive cash flow is really just icing on the cake when it comes to leveraged property. A bigger benefit is that someone else is paying the principal and interest. The real rewards come decades later. We will probably never be wealthy, but we will feel secure in retirement and our kids will have it relatively easy.

Of course there’s a limit to how much you can leverage, and you shouldn’t borrow on every property, but it’s not difficult to carry 4 or 5 mortgages. You couldn’t qualify for all of them at once, unless you had a huge income and/or the cash to back them up, in which case you might be better off with another strategy anyway (like flipping, if you really know what you’re doing).

[quote]I consider myself a bear in general but believe desireable “coastal” properties (west of the 5 in SD County) will NOT further deteriorate 20% like you think they will.[/quote]

Now there’s a discussion that has been done to death on this forum 😉 Suffice it to say that my opinion is based on careful examination of historical data, not wishful thinking. Just keep in mind that the last downturn lasted 6 years, we’re coming from a MUCH higher peak, we’re only 4 years into this one, the government has been doing it’s best to keep prices inflated, and price-to-income ratios are still out of whack (I’m not talking about SD on average, just the most desirable coastal areas).

[quote]With the scenario you painted, I see you over-invested in TV by the time you want to retire and not being able to easily unload your rental properties or successfully retrieve your full downpayments from sale. You’re banking here that all these newer +/- $100K condos in TV will still be looking good and crisp, fetch good rents and their HOA’s will be managed perfectly for the long term. How do you know the bulk of entire complexes won’t become 100% rentals, bought up by REITS (blocks of investors) and turned over to the Section 8 program? This has HAPPENED in PQ and a few other areas which were considered “upscale” at the time of buildout and for a few years afterwards. When this happens, the REIT’s pay about .50 on the dollar (or less) for these units and THAT IS THE *NEW* COMP.[/quote]

You just provided another good reason for buying near the bottom of an area’s market, which I have good reason to believe we are close to in Temecula. No, properties bought today won’t look stellar in 30 years, but I will have put 30-35% down at a GOOD price, and someone else will have paid the balance of the principal and interest and all maintenance. If that place should sell for 50 cents on the dollar in 30 years, I’ll still make a nice profit. But then you’re assuming we want to unload them when we retire, which isn’t necessarily the case. One or two might be sold during the college years, but the rest will go into a trust at some point, and when the kids reach a certain age, they can sell them if they desire, depending on condition of the unit/neighborhood.

You’re also assuming that we plan to buy everything in the same complex, when in fact we’ll be spread out all over, both condos and SFR’s (no apartment conversions, nothing without an attached garage – it’s important to think like prospective tenants), in areas that I believe will hold up well. There are many such areas in Temecula that are still nice after 15-20 years, like any city.

[quote]More than a few times, I’ve seen retirees who end up regretting they invested so heavily in low-income rentals they can’t easily unload. If you choose to leave TV when your kids go away to college, you may then find yourself running back up there several times a week to cope with endless tenant issues since you state you will manage your units yourself.[/quote]

Then your experience has been different than mine. I know more people who have done well with rentals than have lost, and those who lost are those who bought at the wrong time. Now is the wrong time to buy on the coast. As for tenant issues, I stated that we would manage them ourselves at first. That will change later. Also these are not “low income” properties – they are on the lower end of middle class for Temecula, but certainly not the poor house. $150k gets you a very nice condo here.

I’m guessing that next you’ll start telling me tenant horror stories, but you should know I’ve thought of that, too. There are ways to ensure you get quality tenants, and that’s by pricing below market and checking references. If you get greedy and sacrifice quality for money, you’ll always get burned.

[quote]Also, with your “investment strategy,” keep in mind a couple of things. HOA dues always go UP, never down. Even though you can write HOA dues off on your taxes for a rental unit, you STILL have to PAY the dues first and they (as well as unexpected “special assessments”) can be VERY detrimental to your monthly cash flow.[/quote]

I can’t imagine a $46 HOA going up much, so that doesn’t concern me. Of course zero HOA would be better, but that’s difficult to find in newer areas, and buying newer properties is important for keeping maintenance costs down, which can make an HOA special assesment look like a parking ticket. The $200 HOA’s for condos carry more risk, as they cover much more than an SFR’s does. However, this again goes back to diversifying in different areas and paying a good price for all your properties in the first place. If something bad happens, you can absorb the loss. If not, you made mistakes along the way.

[quote]And when you go to purchase more property and already own rental unit(s), a lender typically only gives you credit for 9 mos. year rental income, NOT 11 months, as you previously stated. And you may have to prove to the lender the steady receipt of rental income over a period of time, when seeking another mortgage loan.[/quote]

Please read my posts carefully before getting confrontational. The “11 months” was my own estimate on actual occupancy, not what the lender would give me credit for. I’m well aware that they will not count all of the rental income, and I’m also well aware that they require a track record of occupancy. I’ve been saying that on this forum for years.

[quote]Just offering another perspective re: not putting all your eggs in one basket :=}[/quote]

All of our eggs are not in one basket. We have other sources of income and investments.

[paramount]

[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=paramount]
Talk to many who live in Temecula, and sooner or later most will say the following: we wanted to move to San Diego or we want to move to San Diego.[/quote]

That’s actually has been the question asked by many board members. Why have you not moved yet?

[quote=paramount]
My total mortgage is ~ $1600/month because I am in fact conservative, and very affordable as a % of my income. My taxes are barely over 1%.
[/quote]

Wait a minute. ~$1600/month is not that small. That is $300K loan at 5%. For a 1500sqft house, that’s too much. That just proves TG’s point that Temecula is bad for those who bought at the bubble years. If you instead only have $200K loan and you are able to refine at today’s approaching 4% 30-year fixed with FED’s help, then that’s only $1K per month. You will be able to close-to cash flow at this price. You can move to San Diego and leave this as a rental, and exactly Ren’s point.

[quote=paramount]
Temecula schools: not bad, not great either. They are average as far as I am concerned, nothing special.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

[quote=paramount]
Gangs: Yes, Temecula DOES have gangs. There was a gang murder just 2 months ago, look it up (my condolences and respect to the families). There has been plenty of gang crime and even gang related murder in Temecula. Go to pe.com and do your research.
[/quote]

No comment. Having lived in Brooklyn for a few years, I always don’t understand what Californian means by gangs.

[quote=paramount]
Basically no jobs
Long commute
Also, many of Temecula’s foreclosures/short sales were bought up by “investors” – on my street for example of about 30 houses, less than 10 are owner occupied.
[/quote]

I agree with all these and I think people do need to have rosy glasses in order not to see these bad sides of Temecula. In addition, the foreclosure and shortsales just kept coming up, not counting all the real hidden inventory (people who wanted to sell due to relocation, divorce, etc, but can’t afford at today’s price). On the other hand, brown lawn is definitely not as widespread as two years ago. I don’t know what’s the reason. I guess at least those who are foreclosed now at least can afford to pay water bills.
I therefore don’t think Temecula house price will appreciate further and faster at today’s price. Given the recent price increases, I don’t think they are particularly good for rental property as well. You get about break-even cash flow but no/little price appreciation (and possible price depreciation). So I don’t think one should look this way for investment opportunity. But buying as a replacement of renting does make sense. Because in worst case (if things didn’t work out for you), you can get out with break-even cash flow. That’s what you couldn’t do in most of San Diego.[/quote]

I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.

[paramount]

[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=paramount]
Talk to many who live in Temecula, and sooner or later most will say the following: we wanted to move to San Diego or we want to move to San Diego.[/quote]

That’s actually has been the question asked by many board members. Why have you not moved yet?

[quote=paramount]
My total mortgage is ~ $1600/month because I am in fact conservative, and very affordable as a % of my income. My taxes are barely over 1%.
[/quote]

Wait a minute. ~$1600/month is not that small. That is $300K loan at 5%. For a 1500sqft house, that’s too much. That just proves TG’s point that Temecula is bad for those who bought at the bubble years. If you instead only have $200K loan and you are able to refine at today’s approaching 4% 30-year fixed with FED’s help, then that’s only $1K per month. You will be able to close-to cash flow at this price. You can move to San Diego and leave this as a rental, and exactly Ren’s point.

[quote=paramount]
Temecula schools: not bad, not great either. They are average as far as I am concerned, nothing special.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

[quote=paramount]
Gangs: Yes, Temecula DOES have gangs. There was a gang murder just 2 months ago, look it up (my condolences and respect to the families). There has been plenty of gang crime and even gang related murder in Temecula. Go to pe.com and do your research.
[/quote]

No comment. Having lived in Brooklyn for a few years, I always don’t understand what Californian means by gangs.

[quote=paramount]
Basically no jobs
Long commute
Also, many of Temecula’s foreclosures/short sales were bought up by “investors” – on my street for example of about 30 houses, less than 10 are owner occupied.
[/quote]

I agree with all these and I think people do need to have rosy glasses in order not to see these bad sides of Temecula. In addition, the foreclosure and shortsales just kept coming up, not counting all the real hidden inventory (people who wanted to sell due to relocation, divorce, etc, but can’t afford at today’s price). On the other hand, brown lawn is definitely not as widespread as two years ago. I don’t know what’s the reason. I guess at least those who are foreclosed now at least can afford to pay water bills.
I therefore don’t think Temecula house price will appreciate further and faster at today’s price. Given the recent price increases, I don’t think they are particularly good for rental property as well. You get about break-even cash flow but no/little price appreciation (and possible price depreciation). So I don’t think one should look this way for investment opportunity. But buying as a replacement of renting does make sense. Because in worst case (if things didn’t work out for you), you can get out with break-even cash flow. That’s what you couldn’t do in most of San Diego.[/quote]

I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.

[paramount]

[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=paramount]
Talk to many who live in Temecula, and sooner or later most will say the following: we wanted to move to San Diego or we want to move to San Diego.[/quote]

That’s actually has been the question asked by many board members. Why have you not moved yet?

[quote=paramount]
My total mortgage is ~ $1600/month because I am in fact conservative, and very affordable as a % of my income. My taxes are barely over 1%.
[/quote]

Wait a minute. ~$1600/month is not that small. That is $300K loan at 5%. For a 1500sqft house, that’s too much. That just proves TG’s point that Temecula is bad for those who bought at the bubble years. If you instead only have $200K loan and you are able to refine at today’s approaching 4% 30-year fixed with FED’s help, then that’s only $1K per month. You will be able to close-to cash flow at this price. You can move to San Diego and leave this as a rental, and exactly Ren’s point.

[quote=paramount]
Temecula schools: not bad, not great either. They are average as far as I am concerned, nothing special.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

[quote=paramount]
Gangs: Yes, Temecula DOES have gangs. There was a gang murder just 2 months ago, look it up (my condolences and respect to the families). There has been plenty of gang crime and even gang related murder in Temecula. Go to pe.com and do your research.
[/quote]

No comment. Having lived in Brooklyn for a few years, I always don’t understand what Californian means by gangs.

[quote=paramount]
Basically no jobs
Long commute
Also, many of Temecula’s foreclosures/short sales were bought up by “investors” – on my street for example of about 30 houses, less than 10 are owner occupied.
[/quote]

I agree with all these and I think people do need to have rosy glasses in order not to see these bad sides of Temecula. In addition, the foreclosure and shortsales just kept coming up, not counting all the real hidden inventory (people who wanted to sell due to relocation, divorce, etc, but can’t afford at today’s price). On the other hand, brown lawn is definitely not as widespread as two years ago. I don’t know what’s the reason. I guess at least those who are foreclosed now at least can afford to pay water bills.
I therefore don’t think Temecula house price will appreciate further and faster at today’s price. Given the recent price increases, I don’t think they are particularly good for rental property as well. You get about break-even cash flow but no/little price appreciation (and possible price depreciation). So I don’t think one should look this way for investment opportunity. But buying as a replacement of renting does make sense. Because in worst case (if things didn’t work out for you), you can get out with break-even cash flow. That’s what you couldn’t do in most of San Diego.[/quote]

I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.

[paramount]

[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=paramount]
Talk to many who live in Temecula, and sooner or later most will say the following: we wanted to move to San Diego or we want to move to San Diego.[/quote]

That’s actually has been the question asked by many board members. Why have you not moved yet?

[quote=paramount]
My total mortgage is ~ $1600/month because I am in fact conservative, and very affordable as a % of my income. My taxes are barely over 1%.
[/quote]

Wait a minute. ~$1600/month is not that small. That is $300K loan at 5%. For a 1500sqft house, that’s too much. That just proves TG’s point that Temecula is bad for those who bought at the bubble years. If you instead only have $200K loan and you are able to refine at today’s approaching 4% 30-year fixed with FED’s help, then that’s only $1K per month. You will be able to close-to cash flow at this price. You can move to San Diego and leave this as a rental, and exactly Ren’s point.

[quote=paramount]
Temecula schools: not bad, not great either. They are average as far as I am concerned, nothing special.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

[quote=paramount]
Gangs: Yes, Temecula DOES have gangs. There was a gang murder just 2 months ago, look it up (my condolences and respect to the families). There has been plenty of gang crime and even gang related murder in Temecula. Go to pe.com and do your research.
[/quote]

No comment. Having lived in Brooklyn for a few years, I always don’t understand what Californian means by gangs.

[quote=paramount]
Basically no jobs
Long commute
Also, many of Temecula’s foreclosures/short sales were bought up by “investors” – on my street for example of about 30 houses, less than 10 are owner occupied.
[/quote]

I agree with all these and I think people do need to have rosy glasses in order not to see these bad sides of Temecula. In addition, the foreclosure and shortsales just kept coming up, not counting all the real hidden inventory (people who wanted to sell due to relocation, divorce, etc, but can’t afford at today’s price). On the other hand, brown lawn is definitely not as widespread as two years ago. I don’t know what’s the reason. I guess at least those who are foreclosed now at least can afford to pay water bills.
I therefore don’t think Temecula house price will appreciate further and faster at today’s price. Given the recent price increases, I don’t think they are particularly good for rental property as well. You get about break-even cash flow but no/little price appreciation (and possible price depreciation). So I don’t think one should look this way for investment opportunity. But buying as a replacement of renting does make sense. Because in worst case (if things didn’t work out for you), you can get out with break-even cash flow. That’s what you couldn’t do in most of San Diego.[/quote]

I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.

[paramount]

[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=paramount]
Talk to many who live in Temecula, and sooner or later most will say the following: we wanted to move to San Diego or we want to move to San Diego.[/quote]

That’s actually has been the question asked by many board members. Why have you not moved yet?

[quote=paramount]
My total mortgage is ~ $1600/month because I am in fact conservative, and very affordable as a % of my income. My taxes are barely over 1%.
[/quote]

Wait a minute. ~$1600/month is not that small. That is $300K loan at 5%. For a 1500sqft house, that’s too much. That just proves TG’s point that Temecula is bad for those who bought at the bubble years. If you instead only have $200K loan and you are able to refine at today’s approaching 4% 30-year fixed with FED’s help, then that’s only $1K per month. You will be able to close-to cash flow at this price. You can move to San Diego and leave this as a rental, and exactly Ren’s point.

[quote=paramount]
Temecula schools: not bad, not great either. They are average as far as I am concerned, nothing special.
[/quote]

I agree with this.

[quote=paramount]
Gangs: Yes, Temecula DOES have gangs. There was a gang murder just 2 months ago, look it up (my condolences and respect to the families). There has been plenty of gang crime and even gang related murder in Temecula. Go to pe.com and do your research.
[/quote]

No comment. Having lived in Brooklyn for a few years, I always don’t understand what Californian means by gangs.

[quote=paramount]
Basically no jobs
Long commute
Also, many of Temecula’s foreclosures/short sales were bought up by “investors” – on my street for example of about 30 houses, less than 10 are owner occupied.
[/quote]

I agree with all these and I think people do need to have rosy glasses in order not to see these bad sides of Temecula. In addition, the foreclosure and shortsales just kept coming up, not counting all the real hidden inventory (people who wanted to sell due to relocation, divorce, etc, but can’t afford at today’s price). On the other hand, brown lawn is definitely not as widespread as two years ago. I don’t know what’s the reason. I guess at least those who are foreclosed now at least can afford to pay water bills.
I therefore don’t think Temecula house price will appreciate further and faster at today’s price. Given the recent price increases, I don’t think they are particularly good for rental property as well. You get about break-even cash flow but no/little price appreciation (and possible price depreciation). So I don’t think one should look this way for investment opportunity. But buying as a replacement of renting does make sense. Because in worst case (if things didn’t work out for you), you can get out with break-even cash flow. That’s what you couldn’t do in most of San Diego.[/quote]

I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=paramount]I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.[/quote](emphasis added)

paramount, I’m so sorry to hear about your predicament. It really does seem that life is unfair sometimes. This downturn has affected RE values as far back as 2000, esp. in hard-hit zip codes. I purchased in 2001 and even received a cash-back allowance at the time of sale, never refied or took “cash-out” and the only thing keeping me from being currently underwater is my 30% downpayment that I am hoping to recover in the next few years. Fortunately, my house is large and I am VERY well located and the sold comps around me are now picking up a little . . .

I don’t know what your current home value is but your situation seems so borderline like you could just get your lender to sell a “tiny bit short” enough to pay a *lower* RE commission and get out. It is MUCH easier to move kids in the summer, before school starts, if they are not in year-round school. The next best time would be winter break at the end of the year.

IMO, life’s too short to commute that long of a distance every day, esp. knowing that you will never recover your lost home value.

Selling short w/o wrecking your credit would probably be in your best interest but if you HAD to walk, depending on who your lender is, they may entertain a deed-in-lieu or cash-for-keys program with you. Fannie personnel are currently contracting with companies to handle these situations for them right now and compensating cooperating lenders. Why don’t you contact your lender, even though you’re current and see if they’ll explore your options with you. Tell them you and your spouse each commute 150 miles round trip a day and have kids or whatever else applies such as needing to live close to an ailing relative.

It may be possible after selling short or turning over the keys to obtain another mortgage in a couple of years or so, esp. if you can stay away from fannie and freddie and borrow from a direct (portfolio) lender. Run your credit score on ALL three repositories right now while it is good and save all the printouts. I know there are a lot of people in similar situations as you but this exercise will help you with your story later when you try to explain what happened and that you had NO WAY OUT but continue to drive for hours every day FOREVER. You struggled with the decision to let the property go but ultimately you had to move.

I’m being kind of dramatic here but just trying to figure out ways to later prove you are NOT the average joe-sixpack strategic walkaway that couldn’t manage his finances and so now wants a “break.”

IMHO, I don’t think trying to refi to a lower interest rate is worth it in your situation as it won’t do you much good except possibly add MORE to your principal. The sooner you can put this nightmare “investment” behind you, the better off you and your family will be.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=paramount]I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.[/quote](emphasis added)

paramount, I’m so sorry to hear about your predicament. It really does seem that life is unfair sometimes. This downturn has affected RE values as far back as 2000, esp. in hard-hit zip codes. I purchased in 2001 and even received a cash-back allowance at the time of sale, never refied or took “cash-out” and the only thing keeping me from being currently underwater is my 30% downpayment that I am hoping to recover in the next few years. Fortunately, my house is large and I am VERY well located and the sold comps around me are now picking up a little . . .

I don’t know what your current home value is but your situation seems so borderline like you could just get your lender to sell a “tiny bit short” enough to pay a *lower* RE commission and get out. It is MUCH easier to move kids in the summer, before school starts, if they are not in year-round school. The next best time would be winter break at the end of the year.

IMO, life’s too short to commute that long of a distance every day, esp. knowing that you will never recover your lost home value.

Selling short w/o wrecking your credit would probably be in your best interest but if you HAD to walk, depending on who your lender is, they may entertain a deed-in-lieu or cash-for-keys program with you. Fannie personnel are currently contracting with companies to handle these situations for them right now and compensating cooperating lenders. Why don’t you contact your lender, even though you’re current and see if they’ll explore your options with you. Tell them you and your spouse each commute 150 miles round trip a day and have kids or whatever else applies such as needing to live close to an ailing relative.

It may be possible after selling short or turning over the keys to obtain another mortgage in a couple of years or so, esp. if you can stay away from fannie and freddie and borrow from a direct (portfolio) lender. Run your credit score on ALL three repositories right now while it is good and save all the printouts. I know there are a lot of people in similar situations as you but this exercise will help you with your story later when you try to explain what happened and that you had NO WAY OUT but continue to drive for hours every day FOREVER. You struggled with the decision to let the property go but ultimately you had to move.

I’m being kind of dramatic here but just trying to figure out ways to later prove you are NOT the average joe-sixpack strategic walkaway that couldn’t manage his finances and so now wants a “break.”

IMHO, I don’t think trying to refi to a lower interest rate is worth it in your situation as it won’t do you much good except possibly add MORE to your principal. The sooner you can put this nightmare “investment” behind you, the better off you and your family will be.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=paramount]I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.[/quote](emphasis added)

paramount, I’m so sorry to hear about your predicament. It really does seem that life is unfair sometimes. This downturn has affected RE values as far back as 2000, esp. in hard-hit zip codes. I purchased in 2001 and even received a cash-back allowance at the time of sale, never refied or took “cash-out” and the only thing keeping me from being currently underwater is my 30% downpayment that I am hoping to recover in the next few years. Fortunately, my house is large and I am VERY well located and the sold comps around me are now picking up a little . . .

I don’t know what your current home value is but your situation seems so borderline like you could just get your lender to sell a “tiny bit short” enough to pay a *lower* RE commission and get out. It is MUCH easier to move kids in the summer, before school starts, if they are not in year-round school. The next best time would be winter break at the end of the year.

IMO, life’s too short to commute that long of a distance every day, esp. knowing that you will never recover your lost home value.

Selling short w/o wrecking your credit would probably be in your best interest but if you HAD to walk, depending on who your lender is, they may entertain a deed-in-lieu or cash-for-keys program with you. Fannie personnel are currently contracting with companies to handle these situations for them right now and compensating cooperating lenders. Why don’t you contact your lender, even though you’re current and see if they’ll explore your options with you. Tell them you and your spouse each commute 150 miles round trip a day and have kids or whatever else applies such as needing to live close to an ailing relative.

It may be possible after selling short or turning over the keys to obtain another mortgage in a couple of years or so, esp. if you can stay away from fannie and freddie and borrow from a direct (portfolio) lender. Run your credit score on ALL three repositories right now while it is good and save all the printouts. I know there are a lot of people in similar situations as you but this exercise will help you with your story later when you try to explain what happened and that you had NO WAY OUT but continue to drive for hours every day FOREVER. You struggled with the decision to let the property go but ultimately you had to move.

I’m being kind of dramatic here but just trying to figure out ways to later prove you are NOT the average joe-sixpack strategic walkaway that couldn’t manage his finances and so now wants a “break.”

IMHO, I don’t think trying to refi to a lower interest rate is worth it in your situation as it won’t do you much good except possibly add MORE to your principal. The sooner you can put this nightmare “investment” behind you, the better off you and your family will be.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=paramount]I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.[/quote](emphasis added)

paramount, I’m so sorry to hear about your predicament. It really does seem that life is unfair sometimes. This downturn has affected RE values as far back as 2000, esp. in hard-hit zip codes. I purchased in 2001 and even received a cash-back allowance at the time of sale, never refied or took “cash-out” and the only thing keeping me from being currently underwater is my 30% downpayment that I am hoping to recover in the next few years. Fortunately, my house is large and I am VERY well located and the sold comps around me are now picking up a little . . .

I don’t know what your current home value is but your situation seems so borderline like you could just get your lender to sell a “tiny bit short” enough to pay a *lower* RE commission and get out. It is MUCH easier to move kids in the summer, before school starts, if they are not in year-round school. The next best time would be winter break at the end of the year.

IMO, life’s too short to commute that long of a distance every day, esp. knowing that you will never recover your lost home value.

Selling short w/o wrecking your credit would probably be in your best interest but if you HAD to walk, depending on who your lender is, they may entertain a deed-in-lieu or cash-for-keys program with you. Fannie personnel are currently contracting with companies to handle these situations for them right now and compensating cooperating lenders. Why don’t you contact your lender, even though you’re current and see if they’ll explore your options with you. Tell them you and your spouse each commute 150 miles round trip a day and have kids or whatever else applies such as needing to live close to an ailing relative.

It may be possible after selling short or turning over the keys to obtain another mortgage in a couple of years or so, esp. if you can stay away from fannie and freddie and borrow from a direct (portfolio) lender. Run your credit score on ALL three repositories right now while it is good and save all the printouts. I know there are a lot of people in similar situations as you but this exercise will help you with your story later when you try to explain what happened and that you had NO WAY OUT but continue to drive for hours every day FOREVER. You struggled with the decision to let the property go but ultimately you had to move.

I’m being kind of dramatic here but just trying to figure out ways to later prove you are NOT the average joe-sixpack strategic walkaway that couldn’t manage his finances and so now wants a “break.”

IMHO, I don’t think trying to refi to a lower interest rate is worth it in your situation as it won’t do you much good except possibly add MORE to your principal. The sooner you can put this nightmare “investment” behind you, the better off you and your family will be.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=paramount]I bought early 2003, were those bubble years? I never even knew what a RE bubble was until around 2005~2006. The $1600 = PITI.

I bought for 270k and put 30k down (of my own hard earned dollars), I have been making payments (never even one day late) for almost 8 years now. I have nothing to show for it, nothing. It’s all gone. I never expected to ‘make’ money on my house, but I never expected it to be a liability either.

I told my wife this past weekend if there is some sort of August surprise and we are not offered any relief that we should positively walk.

It was my intention to move to San Diego this summer, closer to my office. This still may happen, it’s just difficult to do particularly with kids.[/quote](emphasis added)

paramount, I’m so sorry to hear about your predicament. It really does seem that life is unfair sometimes. This downturn has affected RE values as far back as 2000, esp. in hard-hit zip codes. I purchased in 2001 and even received a cash-back allowance at the time of sale, never refied or took “cash-out” and the only thing keeping me from being currently underwater is my 30% downpayment that I am hoping to recover in the next few years. Fortunately, my house is large and I am VERY well located and the sold comps around me are now picking up a little . . .

I don’t know what your current home value is but your situation seems so borderline like you could just get your lender to sell a “tiny bit short” enough to pay a *lower* RE commission and get out. It is MUCH easier to move kids in the summer, before school starts, if they are not in year-round school. The next best time would be winter break at the end of the year.

IMO, life’s too short to commute that long of a distance every day, esp. knowing that you will never recover your lost home value.

Selling short w/o wrecking your credit would probably be in your best interest but if you HAD to walk, depending on who your lender is, they may entertain a deed-in-lieu or cash-for-keys program with you. Fannie personnel are currently contracting with companies to handle these situations for them right now and compensating cooperating lenders. Why don’t you contact your lender, even though you’re current and see if they’ll explore your options with you. Tell them you and your spouse each commute 150 miles round trip a day and have kids or whatever else applies such as needing to live close to an ailing relative.

It may be possible after selling short or turning over the keys to obtain another mortgage in a couple of years or so, esp. if you can stay away from fannie and freddie and borrow from a direct (portfolio) lender. Run your credit score on ALL three repositories right now while it is good and save all the printouts. I know there are a lot of people in similar situations as you but this exercise will help you with your story later when you try to explain what happened and that you had NO WAY OUT but continue to drive for hours every day FOREVER. You struggled with the decision to let the property go but ultimately you had to move.

I’m being kind of dramatic here but just trying to figure out ways to later prove you are NOT the average joe-sixpack strategic walkaway that couldn’t manage his finances and so now wants a “break.”

IMHO, I don’t think trying to refi to a lower interest rate is worth it in your situation as it won’t do you much good except possibly add MORE to your principal. The sooner you can put this nightmare “investment” behind you, the better off you and your family will be.

[temeculaguy]

But the situation has more to do with chronology than geography. 2003 should have been the peak of the last cycle had it not been extended through creative financing.

I have someone very close to me who bought in Pt. Loma at the same time you did and paid almost the exact same amount. They have also made every payment and have nothing to show for it at the moment, like you. They are actually in a worse off situation as the going rent is about 1100 to 1200 with 300 in hoa fees. Like many folks they have a relatively high interest rate and cannot refi because of the negative equity, and have an I/O that will be resetting. You are in a fixed loan, have stable employment, the lack of appreciation is all you have to contend with. So is it the location, or the timing? Granted it’s a 1 br condo, but it is what 270ish bought you in 2003 in pt. loma. Their ony hope is to refi to current rates and convert to a fixed. They never intended on making a profit. Of course in 2008 they could have bought two townhomes in temecula for that price and rented one for 1500 and lived in the other. So was it 2008 vs 2003 or san diego vs temecula. They will keep it, if their housing needs change, they can afford to keep it as a rental and just ride it out, most people are like that, their net worth on paper doesn’t bend them out of shape, my explanation did, but there’s more to life than savvy investments. Enjoy San Diego paramount, I’m not being sarcastic when I say that, this is a good place for those of us who enjoy it, it didn’t work out for you, I hope your next stop does work for you, wherever it may be. But remember, the person that said location is everything in real estate was incorrect, timing is everything. The same holds true for sex and slot machines, timing is the most important factor.

[temeculaguy]

But the situation has more to do with chronology than geography. 2003 should have been the peak of the last cycle had it not been extended through creative financing.

I have someone very close to me who bought in Pt. Loma at the same time you did and paid almost the exact same amount. They have also made every payment and have nothing to show for it at the moment, like you. They are actually in a worse off situation as the going rent is about 1100 to 1200 with 300 in hoa fees. Like many folks they have a relatively high interest rate and cannot refi because of the negative equity, and have an I/O that will be resetting. You are in a fixed loan, have stable employment, the lack of appreciation is all you have to contend with. So is it the location, or the timing? Granted it’s a 1 br condo, but it is what 270ish bought you in 2003 in pt. loma. Their ony hope is to refi to current rates and convert to a fixed. They never intended on making a profit. Of course in 2008 they could have bought two townhomes in temecula for that price and rented one for 1500 and lived in the other. So was it 2008 vs 2003 or san diego vs temecula. They will keep it, if their housing needs change, they can afford to keep it as a rental and just ride it out, most people are like that, their net worth on paper doesn’t bend them out of shape, my explanation did, but there’s more to life than savvy investments. Enjoy San Diego paramount, I’m not being sarcastic when I say that, this is a good place for those of us who enjoy it, it didn’t work out for you, I hope your next stop does work for you, wherever it may be. But remember, the person that said location is everything in real estate was incorrect, timing is everything. The same holds true for sex and slot machines, timing is the most important factor.

[temeculaguy]

But the situation has more to do with chronology than geography. 2003 should have been the peak of the last cycle had it not been extended through creative financing.

I have someone very close to me who bought in Pt. Loma at the same time you did and paid almost the exact same amount. They have also made every payment and have nothing to show for it at the moment, like you. They are actually in a worse off situation as the going rent is about 1100 to 1200 with 300 in hoa fees. Like many folks they have a relatively high interest rate and cannot refi because of the negative equity, and have an I/O that will be resetting. You are in a fixed loan, have stable employment, the lack of appreciation is all you have to contend with. So is it the location, or the timing? Granted it’s a 1 br condo, but it is what 270ish bought you in 2003 in pt. loma. Their ony hope is to refi to current rates and convert to a fixed. They never intended on making a profit. Of course in 2008 they could have bought two townhomes in temecula for that price and rented one for 1500 and lived in the other. So was it 2008 vs 2003 or san diego vs temecula. They will keep it, if their housing needs change, they can afford to keep it as a rental and just ride it out, most people are like that, their net worth on paper doesn’t bend them out of shape, my explanation did, but there’s more to life than savvy investments. Enjoy San Diego paramount, I’m not being sarcastic when I say that, this is a good place for those of us who enjoy it, it didn’t work out for you, I hope your next stop does work for you, wherever it may be. But remember, the person that said location is everything in real estate was incorrect, timing is everything. The same holds true for sex and slot machines, timing is the most important factor.

[temeculaguy]

But the situation has more to do with chronology than geography. 2003 should have been the peak of the last cycle had it not been extended through creative financing.

I have someone very close to me who bought in Pt. Loma at the same time you did and paid almost the exact same amount. They have also made every payment and have nothing to show for it at the moment, like you. They are actually in a worse off situation as the going rent is about 1100 to 1200 with 300 in hoa fees. Like many folks they have a relatively high interest rate and cannot refi because of the negative equity, and have an I/O that will be resetting. You are in a fixed loan, have stable employment, the lack of appreciation is all you have to contend with. So is it the location, or the timing? Granted it’s a 1 br condo, but it is what 270ish bought you in 2003 in pt. loma. Their ony hope is to refi to current rates and convert to a fixed. They never intended on making a profit. Of course in 2008 they could have bought two townhomes in temecula for that price and rented one for 1500 and lived in the other. So was it 2008 vs 2003 or san diego vs temecula. They will keep it, if their housing needs change, they can afford to keep it as a rental and just ride it out, most people are like that, their net worth on paper doesn’t bend them out of shape, my explanation did, but there’s more to life than savvy investments. Enjoy San Diego paramount, I’m not being sarcastic when I say that, this is a good place for those of us who enjoy it, it didn’t work out for you, I hope your next stop does work for you, wherever it may be. But remember, the person that said location is everything in real estate was incorrect, timing is everything. The same holds true for sex and slot machines, timing is the most important factor.

[Author]

Posts