Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 16, 2012 at 10:48 AM in reply to: On a refinance with closing costs, would you just add it to your loan balance or not? #741737April 16, 2012 at 10:43 AM in reply to: On a refinance with closing costs, would you just add it to your loan balance or not? #741736
bearishgurl
Participant[quote=HLS] . . . If CD rates go back to 5%-8% or higher, it will have been foolish to have accelerated payments to pay off a 3%-4% mortgage.
The unknown is ‘when’It’s also a matter of responsibility and having something better to do with the cash.
Never underestimate the importance of liquidity/cash.There’s a big difference between being broke and having debt & having cash earning higher rates
of interest and having debt.[/quote]Agree. And I also agree with flu if one can HANDLE the larger (or even MUCH larger) debtload without using their socked-away cash every month.
What’s the use of having a cash reserves if one might end up needing to deplete it gradually every month to satisfy their (now huge) debtload?
Why not just keep the lower payment on a lower amt owed, even it IS at a rate <1% than the prevailing mtg rate?
Not saying this is flu's situation as he doesn't appear here to want to take "cash out," just to roll +/- $3400 closing costs into a new mtg.
April 16, 2012 at 9:55 AM in reply to: On a refinance with closing costs, would you just add it to your loan balance or not? #741725Participant[quote=HLS]Comparing the payment savings is not the correct way to decide on the benefit of ANY refi, but it’s what most people do.
Did you get their quote for 3.00% ?
It may not make sense to take the lower rate with a cost. The recovery period could easily be 7-10 years.In the long you will always save more money at the lower interest rate.[/quote]
I agree with this, esp since flu was thinking of replacing/upgrading his personal residence if he finds a good deal in the coming months/years. The +/- $3400 is just money down the drain if this happens, IMHO.
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]Moneymaker, if you have purchased that same property or refied it in the last 3 years (is this still correct, HLS?), I believe you will qualify for a “short-term rate” on your ALTA title policy. This is a discount off the regular rate as they will search for liens against you or the property which were filed in the last three years only.
If you are eligible, be sure to ask your escrow officer for the “short term rate” on your title policy.
Most lenders who do refis require an *new* ALTA title policy, even if you just purchased or refied the property <=1 year ago. The exception is a HELOC lender who may conduct their own title search before extending the line of credit. The outcome of this search will help them to determine the amount of credit to extend to the property owner (if any). If these lenders DO require a title policy, they will usually pay for it.[/quote] edit: Clarification that an "ALTA" policy is a lender's title policy and a "CLTA" is an owner's title policy, purchased upon title transfer. The "CLTA" policy is significantly more expensive that an ALTA policy, for obvious reasons. Sorry for any confusion.
ParticipantMoneymaker, if you have purchased that same property or refied it in the last 3 years (is this still correct, HLS?), I believe you will qualify for a “short-term rate” on your ALTA title policy. This is a discount off the regular rate as they will search for liens against you or the property which were filed in the last three years only.
If you are eligible, be sure to ask your escrow officer for the “short term rate” on your title policy.
Most lenders who do refis require an *new* ALTA title policy, even if you just purchased or refied the property <=1 year ago. The exception is a HELOC lender who may conduct their own title search before extending the line of credit. The outcome of this search will help them to determine the amount of credit to extend to the property owner (if any). If these lenders DO require a title policy, they will usually pay for it.
April 16, 2012 at 9:38 AM in reply to: OT: Post your favorite pic of your town/neighborhood that you took. #741720Participant[quote=sdduuuude]I can’t say I have taken any.
But if I had to, I would take a photo of people hanging out in their garages watching TV. It’s a Clairemont thing.[/quote]
LOL….. with rolled-down fishnet or tarp “sunscreen” over the door opening when the door is raised. The “partiers” can see out but people in the street cannot see in during the day.
It’s also a Bay Park thing :=]
ParticipantJessica, if you have cash for a condo, why are you considering complexes which are in litigation and thus virtually unsaleable today and un-resellable in the future? There is a LOT out there to choose from!
Even if you only have enough cash for a small or cheap condo, why not consider better-built complexes or ones that have stood the test of time (w/o ever having to litigate). If you have to take out a small mtg to buy something worth owning, would that be so bad?
PBT plumbing was predominately used in SD County construction between 1980 and 1984, with an occasional year before that and up to two years after that. After multiple class action suits by HOAs and individual owners, the manufacturers of the PBT pipe settled with each affected owner in the class for about $4400 in 1994. The lawyers were the only ones who really “won” in these mammoth cases around the nation!
Previous posters are correct that if there are currently only small claims suits to collect delinquent dues, this is acceptable unless there have been more than 12 of them in the past five years.
The first thing you need to do upon an accepted offer on a condo is to get your competent inspector out there pronto and order the HOA financials. Have contingencies in your offer for both. If the seller will not accept these contingencies, move on.
This is why I don’t believe attached condos are good investments.
ParticipantYes, follow UCGal’s link first (to get case names) and then follow mine to find out what is currently happening on the case.
Participant[quote=Jessica]HOA pending litigation for construction defects (plumbing and thin walls?) affecting the entire complex. I am still searching for the history and the current status of the pending litigation (lawyer has not answered my calls yet). They only accept cash offers since no bank approves loans on the complex with HOA pending litigation. Thanks for those of you trying to help.[/quote]
If I were you, I would stay as far away from this complex as possible. If the HOA prevails in the lawsuit, they will likely NOT be able to replace every piece of the faulty (PBT?) plumbing. When it bursts (and it does) it floods affected units and eventually mold begins growing between the walls.
“Lawyers” are not going to return your calls. You need to look the case up yourself and pull up the register of actions to see where it is if you are really interested in finding out. It takes years to litigate these claims due to the number of defendants. Each defendant is handled separately by the court and eventually most are dismissed from the case. Here is the link for SD County:
Participant[quote=AN][quote=bearishgurl]I understand the meaning of this term but don’t you think it can be fixed? It’s not like Clairemont’s location and lot sizes are inferior to most of the County. In fact, these factors there are superior to most of the County.
Everything except for location and lot size can be fixed.[/quote]
It can be fixed, but at what cost? It’s not always cheap to make addition and make it look like it was built that way. I hate tacky additions.Location is not just back the geographical location. It’s also about the relative location. If you’re surrounded by run down 1000 sq-ft bungalow, your brand new remodeled 3000 sq-ft would look completely out of place. BTW, lot size can be fixed as well, it’s just more expensive to do it. Buy the house next to you and tear it down. Lot size fixed.[/quote]
A 3000 sf house is not the typical remodel for Clairemont. It’s more like enlarging the FR and MBR suite into the backyard. At what cost would a homeowner in Clairemont buy the house next to him/her and tear it down? And why would they do that when their property would then be worth nearly double that of the neighbors’ homes??
The avg home in Clairemont is NOT 1100 sf (you might be mixing it up with Linda Vista which is same zip code) :=] The avg home (orig) size there is 1500-1600 sf, has 3-4 br and 1.5 ba, a 2 car gar and a 6800 sf lot and is approx 47 yrs old.
The avg (orig) home in Linda Vista has about 1100-1150 sf, 2-3 br, 1 bath and 1 – 1.5 car gar and a 5000 sf lot and is approx 55 yrs old.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]FWIW I don’t think it has anything to do with quality of construction or plumbing (whic can easily be repaired). It’s about functional obsolescence[/quote]
I understand the meaning of this term but don’t you think it can be fixed? It’s not like Clairemont’s location and lot sizes are inferior to most of the County. In fact, these factors there are superior to most of the County.
Everything except for location and lot size can be fixed.
Participant[quote=Orca]What do you think the long term future holds for “high tier” tract neighborhoods like Carmel Valley?[/quote]
As long as the school scores there hold up (and buyers are still willing to pay for school scores), then its values will remain stable. Otherwise, besides close proximity to tech jobs, there are no endearing qualities over the tracts there than anywhere else with the same age/size of houses.
Participant[quote=ltsdd][quote=sdduuuude][quote=Essbee]With the houses being of marginal quality in the first place and not designed to last 100+ years[/quote]
Lots of interesting thoughts here. I’m no sociologist so I’m not sure what will happen to Clairemont but I do know the houses are build to last 100 yrs.
I have personally ripped out ceiling joists and wall studs with my very own sawzall and those members are made of fir – not hemlock like most of today’s lumber. Hard as hell to cut through. Plus, they are only growing stronger with age – wood does that. Given San Diego’s mild climate, I don’t see any structural issues there. I think they are very well built and that is first-hand knowledge.[/quote]
sdduuuude,
Completely agree with you. The SFRs in Clairemont may be smallish and all that but one thing for sure is that they were solidly built. Though, I do agree with the OP that there are homes along both Clairemont Mesa Blvd and Clairemont Drive (those with 1-car garages and practically no driveway) may be better served by tearing them down and rebuild. I have never heard of anyone who ever had any problems with the plumbing system in that in area. Mira Mesa, on the other hand, with most homes built after 1970 and yet I have run across numerous homes that had gone through retrofitting of the pipes (going from street to the house). Architecturally, it’s nothing to write home about but the built quality is there.As for its future, I think it will be fine, it’s a middle-class community with a lot of long-timers. It may not have the manicured yards like other newer communities but it does not mean that the folks living there are neglecting their biggest piece of asset either.[/quote]
Agree, ltsdd. I want to add that defective polybutylene plumbing was used by builders primarily between 1979 and 1984 (when some MM tracts were built), hence those plumbing retrofits you are discussing here. Clairemont is too old to be facing this problem.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Like I said CM will be fine for many decades to come but eventually too many 1100 sq ft homes with master baths that have direct garage access and homes with 1.5 baths will come to roost. As a current homeowner I wouldn’t worry about it though. It’s way far off.[/quote]
For a “half bath,” is easy (and cheap) to take a little space out of the closet (or garage) on the other side and put a shower stall in … making it a “3/4 bath.” Most houses only need one bathtub. Any more is a waste as the vast majority of people take showers.
This is a no brainer. Location wins all selling contests.
Participant[quote=paramount][quote=CA renter]What “public employee union thugs” are you talking about, paramount?
This debacle is going to line the pockets of PRIVATE contractors, which is where most of the fraud and abuse of taxpayer money occurs.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/03/01/2743540/rail-project-will-accept-contractors.html%5B/quote%5D
The dems are pushing this sham project very hard, therefore the union thugs can’t be far behind.
Besides, much of the contract work will be outsourced to China. Including the financing.[/quote]
paramount, are you referring to card-carrying American tradesmen here? Or do the Chinese have unions??
-
AuthorPosts
