[permabear]

I think this is largely a semantic argument, but the shadow inventory data includes 90+ day lates and properties in the process of foreclosure, not just the end-game foreclosure evictions. I’ve heard thru friends of homes in their neighborhoods that people have walked away from, sitting vacant, that banks are nonetheless not foreclosing on. Hence the reason Fannie had to recently say “hey you guys need to foreclose on these”.

Personally, I know of 2 properties in Scripps Ranch (where I live) that are currently vacant but not listed for sale. They are easy to pick out because the yards are overgrown in an otherwise spotless neighborhood. Another one was just sold as an REO after being trashed by squatters who were living there for a year+ with the water off… you can imagine the scene inside. Heard it was “not pretty”. BTW the home sold for ~$900k.

And this article just popped up: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/11/lps-over-43-million-loans-90-days-or-in_23.html

• Over 4.3 million loans are 90 days or more delinquent or in foreclosure
• The average number of days delinquent for loans in foreclosure is a record 492 days
• Nearly 20% of loans that have been delinquent more than two years are still not in foreclosure

[permabear]

I think this is largely a semantic argument, but the shadow inventory data includes 90+ day lates and properties in the process of foreclosure, not just the end-game foreclosure evictions. I’ve heard thru friends of homes in their neighborhoods that people have walked away from, sitting vacant, that banks are nonetheless not foreclosing on. Hence the reason Fannie had to recently say “hey you guys need to foreclose on these”.

Personally, I know of 2 properties in Scripps Ranch (where I live) that are currently vacant but not listed for sale. They are easy to pick out because the yards are overgrown in an otherwise spotless neighborhood. Another one was just sold as an REO after being trashed by squatters who were living there for a year+ with the water off… you can imagine the scene inside. Heard it was “not pretty”. BTW the home sold for ~$900k.

And this article just popped up: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/11/lps-over-43-million-loans-90-days-or-in_23.html

• Over 4.3 million loans are 90 days or more delinquent or in foreclosure
• The average number of days delinquent for loans in foreclosure is a record 492 days
• Nearly 20% of loans that have been delinquent more than two years are still not in foreclosure

[permabear]

I think this is largely a semantic argument, but the shadow inventory data includes 90+ day lates and properties in the process of foreclosure, not just the end-game foreclosure evictions. I’ve heard thru friends of homes in their neighborhoods that people have walked away from, sitting vacant, that banks are nonetheless not foreclosing on. Hence the reason Fannie had to recently say “hey you guys need to foreclose on these”.

Personally, I know of 2 properties in Scripps Ranch (where I live) that are currently vacant but not listed for sale. They are easy to pick out because the yards are overgrown in an otherwise spotless neighborhood. Another one was just sold as an REO after being trashed by squatters who were living there for a year+ with the water off… you can imagine the scene inside. Heard it was “not pretty”. BTW the home sold for ~$900k.

And this article just popped up: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/11/lps-over-43-million-loans-90-days-or-in_23.html

• Over 4.3 million loans are 90 days or more delinquent or in foreclosure
• The average number of days delinquent for loans in foreclosure is a record 492 days
• Nearly 20% of loans that have been delinquent more than two years are still not in foreclosure

[permabear]

[quote=bearishgurl]Call this ambivalence if you wish, permabear, but I think I’ve said it before a few times, you pay for exactly what you get in this life.[/quote]

But you do realize that Prop 13 is part of what causes this, right? If people had their taxes increased along with inflation, the state would have more money to bury utilities and fund schools. On top of that, citizens would have some incentive to make a stink saying “hey we want fancy utilities like they get!” rather than the current “oh, well, you get what you pay for, and I’m only paying $527/year”.

[permabear]

[quote=bearishgurl]Call this ambivalence if you wish, permabear, but I think I’ve said it before a few times, you pay for exactly what you get in this life.[/quote]

But you do realize that Prop 13 is part of what causes this, right? If people had their taxes increased along with inflation, the state would have more money to bury utilities and fund schools. On top of that, citizens would have some incentive to make a stink saying “hey we want fancy utilities like they get!” rather than the current “oh, well, you get what you pay for, and I’m only paying $527/year”.

[permabear]

[quote=bearishgurl]Call this ambivalence if you wish, permabear, but I think I’ve said it before a few times, you pay for exactly what you get in this life.[/quote]

But you do realize that Prop 13 is part of what causes this, right? If people had their taxes increased along with inflation, the state would have more money to bury utilities and fund schools. On top of that, citizens would have some incentive to make a stink saying “hey we want fancy utilities like they get!” rather than the current “oh, well, you get what you pay for, and I’m only paying $527/year”.

[permabear]

[quote=bearishgurl]Call this ambivalence if you wish, permabear, but I think I’ve said it before a few times, you pay for exactly what you get in this life.[/quote]

But you do realize that Prop 13 is part of what causes this, right? If people had their taxes increased along with inflation, the state would have more money to bury utilities and fund schools. On top of that, citizens would have some incentive to make a stink saying “hey we want fancy utilities like they get!” rather than the current “oh, well, you get what you pay for, and I’m only paying $527/year”.

[permabear]

[quote=bearishgurl]Call this ambivalence if you wish, permabear, but I think I’ve said it before a few times, you pay for exactly what you get in this life.[/quote]

But you do realize that Prop 13 is part of what causes this, right? If people had their taxes increased along with inflation, the state would have more money to bury utilities and fund schools. On top of that, citizens would have some incentive to make a stink saying “hey we want fancy utilities like they get!” rather than the current “oh, well, you get what you pay for, and I’m only paying $527/year”.

[permabear]

I read somewhere that this happened during the Great Depression as well. A large number of homes sat vacant or were rented out by the banks, since selling them would realize massive losses. In many cases banks became long-term landlords until real estate recovered.

My bet is they do the same this time around. There’s no reason for them to rush to dump their shadow inventory on the market, decimating prices and incurring losses. Better to hold out. Just like individual “accidental landlords” – plus banks have the advantages of much larger staffs and balance sheets to weather the storm. Government backing is the icing on the cake.

[permabear]

I read somewhere that this happened during the Great Depression as well. A large number of homes sat vacant or were rented out by the banks, since selling them would realize massive losses. In many cases banks became long-term landlords until real estate recovered.

My bet is they do the same this time around. There’s no reason for them to rush to dump their shadow inventory on the market, decimating prices and incurring losses. Better to hold out. Just like individual “accidental landlords” – plus banks have the advantages of much larger staffs and balance sheets to weather the storm. Government backing is the icing on the cake.

[permabear]

I read somewhere that this happened during the Great Depression as well. A large number of homes sat vacant or were rented out by the banks, since selling them would realize massive losses. In many cases banks became long-term landlords until real estate recovered.

My bet is they do the same this time around. There’s no reason for them to rush to dump their shadow inventory on the market, decimating prices and incurring losses. Better to hold out. Just like individual “accidental landlords” – plus banks have the advantages of much larger staffs and balance sheets to weather the storm. Government backing is the icing on the cake.

[permabear]

I read somewhere that this happened during the Great Depression as well. A large number of homes sat vacant or were rented out by the banks, since selling them would realize massive losses. In many cases banks became long-term landlords until real estate recovered.

My bet is they do the same this time around. There’s no reason for them to rush to dump their shadow inventory on the market, decimating prices and incurring losses. Better to hold out. Just like individual “accidental landlords” – plus banks have the advantages of much larger staffs and balance sheets to weather the storm. Government backing is the icing on the cake.

[permabear]

I read somewhere that this happened during the Great Depression as well. A large number of homes sat vacant or were rented out by the banks, since selling them would realize massive losses. In many cases banks became long-term landlords until real estate recovered.

My bet is they do the same this time around. There’s no reason for them to rush to dump their shadow inventory on the market, decimating prices and incurring losses. Better to hold out. Just like individual “accidental landlords” – plus banks have the advantages of much larger staffs and balance sheets to weather the storm. Government backing is the icing on the cake.

[permabear]

You guys can’t be apologizing for the banks, can you? It’s so obvious that fraud has been perpetrated at every single level. There’s evidence that no-doc loans were very much desired by banks explicitly because then there was no paper trail if/when the whole securitization process was found to be a complete sham. A get out of jail free card, if you will.

[permabear]

You guys can’t be apologizing for the banks, can you? It’s so obvious that fraud has been perpetrated at every single level. There’s evidence that no-doc loans were very much desired by banks explicitly because then there was no paper trail if/when the whole securitization process was found to be a complete sham. A get out of jail free card, if you will.

[Author]

Posts