Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SanDiegoDave
ParticipantThey should widen the 56 while they’re at it.
Actually, it should have been built 4-lanes on each side right from the beginning.
ParticipantThey should widen the 56 while they’re at it.
Actually, it should have been built 4-lanes on each side right from the beginning.
ParticipantHLS… call 100 lending agents today, and better than 90 of them are going to give their first quote based on an IO loan.
Coincidence? I highly doubt it. The likelier scenario is that they are making more money from it. Be it bonuses or whatever, there is a financial incentive built around them selling more IO’s – or else they wouldn’t be wasting theur time pushing them as hard as they do.
Just mentioning “30 YR Fixed” to these guys is met with sighs, and obfuscation. It’s like that let-down you see when you go to a car dealership, and after negotiating the final price of the car, telling the finance manager that you’re paying cash. They get dejected. They just don’t want to hear it. The mortgage lenders keep referring back to the “monthly payment”, and give no consideration to the the true total cost of the loan for the buyer.
ParticipantHLS… call 100 lending agents today, and better than 90 of them are going to give their first quote based on an IO loan.
Coincidence? I highly doubt it. The likelier scenario is that they are making more money from it. Be it bonuses or whatever, there is a financial incentive built around them selling more IO’s – or else they wouldn’t be wasting theur time pushing them as hard as they do.
Just mentioning “30 YR Fixed” to these guys is met with sighs, and obfuscation. It’s like that let-down you see when you go to a car dealership, and after negotiating the final price of the car, telling the finance manager that you’re paying cash. They get dejected. They just don’t want to hear it. The mortgage lenders keep referring back to the “monthly payment”, and give no consideration to the the true total cost of the loan for the buyer.
ParticipantInterest-only mortgages should be illegal.
Blanket statements like this are worthless.
My bad… I should have made it more clear that the statement was made tongue-in-cheek. – used a wink 😉 or something like that. I’m a libertarian; so I don’t really think they should be outlawed. The larger implication was just that there are less destructive business arrangements in the U.S. that actually are outlawed, and that IO loans deserve some scrutiny by way of comparison.
But I will submit, FormerSanDiegan, that you are far and away the exception, rather than the rule, when it comes to IO loans.
In reality, the vast majority of IO loans go to people who look at the maximum monthly payment they can afford (and often really can’t afford) and they figure they can buy more house with the IO loan.
The other big IO users are flippers. And we see how well that has been working for them lately…
ParticipantInterest-only mortgages should be illegal.
Blanket statements like this are worthless.
My bad… I should have made it more clear that the statement was made tongue-in-cheek. – used a wink 😉 or something like that. I’m a libertarian; so I don’t really think they should be outlawed. The larger implication was just that there are less destructive business arrangements in the U.S. that actually are outlawed, and that IO loans deserve some scrutiny by way of comparison.
But I will submit, FormerSanDiegan, that you are far and away the exception, rather than the rule, when it comes to IO loans.
In reality, the vast majority of IO loans go to people who look at the maximum monthly payment they can afford (and often really can’t afford) and they figure they can buy more house with the IO loan.
The other big IO users are flippers. And we see how well that has been working for them lately…
ParticipantHLS wrote: “In a few years, they can always pay down the balance IF they choose.”
That is the very “push-off-my-problems-until-tomorrow” mentality that has contributed to the housing bubble and massive consumer debt load in this country. It is an entirely irresponsible thing to do with one’s money, and no ethical financial adviser is his right mind would advise someone to sign on to that kind of agreement.
And I don’t buy this B.S. about a lending agent not making more one way or the other on interest-only vs. 30-year fixed. There is a reason they all keep pushing interest-only: because interest-only mortgages benefit only the lender.
Interest-only mortgages should be illegal.
I had to tell a lender on the phone a few weeks ago that if she said “interest only” one more time in emails, quotes, or on the phone with us that we’d move on – would cut all all considerations for using her, and that we’d warm other people to steer clear of her as well. And this was after repeatedly saying from Day 1 we are only interested in 30-year fixed. At this point we’re moving on from her anyway. She blew it pushing this kind of crap over and over in the first place.
ParticipantHLS wrote: “In a few years, they can always pay down the balance IF they choose.”
That is the very “push-off-my-problems-until-tomorrow” mentality that has contributed to the housing bubble and massive consumer debt load in this country. It is an entirely irresponsible thing to do with one’s money, and no ethical financial adviser is his right mind would advise someone to sign on to that kind of agreement.
And I don’t buy this B.S. about a lending agent not making more one way or the other on interest-only vs. 30-year fixed. There is a reason they all keep pushing interest-only: because interest-only mortgages benefit only the lender.
Interest-only mortgages should be illegal.
I had to tell a lender on the phone a few weeks ago that if she said “interest only” one more time in emails, quotes, or on the phone with us that we’d move on – would cut all all considerations for using her, and that we’d warm other people to steer clear of her as well. And this was after repeatedly saying from Day 1 we are only interested in 30-year fixed. At this point we’re moving on from her anyway. She blew it pushing this kind of crap over and over in the first place.
ParticipantAs Clark Howard always says:
“If you cannot afford the payments on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, you need to buy less house.”
ParticipantAs Clark Howard always says:
“If you cannot afford the payments on a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, you need to buy less house.”
ParticipantSD Realtor…
Thank you very much for the reply!
We have been tracking the house for quite a while. It was initially on the market for 120 days, and then expired. They re-listed it, as a “new” listing, so now it shows up as having been on the market for only ~20 days.
I don’t know how much equity the sellers have in the home (where do I find that?). But I do know they are the original owners and have lived there for over 20 years.
The day before their initial listing expired (we didn’t know it was about to expire) we had our agent call theirs to ask the standard questions. He told our agent (this was over a month ago) that he had three offers on it (above what we were offering), and that they were countering even above those other offers.
Then the thing expired the next day. We, and our agent, were quite perplexed by this. One day from expiring, and their agent says nothing about it?
Then it got re-listed a few days later.
We waited about two more weeks, figuring that if their agent was right about having those three other offers that it would be dropping off into escrow at any moment.
But there it sat. Day after day. Not going into escrow.
We assumed then that their agent was either lying or incompetent (he just can’t close even one of three offers that was within 2% of the asking price??) We figured we would throw our offer out there to see how they officially reply.
The official counter came back, with the whopping $500 drop and a claim in writing that he has these three other offers going. Assuming these are the same three offers he claimed to have had two weeks earlier, they would no longer be valid. Right? Unless he was implying that he had three NEW offers (and all at EXACTLY the same price btw).
It all seemed a very dubious claim designed solely to scare us off or make us raise our offer way up. That’s why we think he’s lying about the other offers.
We countered again with what would have been our “planned” counter-counter – a full $20k higher – had they responded with a reasonable counter of their own. Our thought was, we’ll leave it at that – and if it’s still on the market 100 days from now we can ask him how those three other offers are coming along.
But their second counter was even weirder. They dropped another $500 (gee, THANKS!) But he actually asked our agent, in writing, why he didn’t have us “ask or counter back with the seller carry back 2nd trust deed for the difference”.
Huh?
Again, this guy (and/or his client) is either delusional or just incompetent. Our paperwork in the offers clearly stated our situation: well-qualified buyers (mid-FICO in the 790’s), 30% down, and not contingent. Coming up with the money is not the problem. The problem is that they’re asking too much for the freakin’ house.
Anyway… I understand that some people simply will not (or cannot) sell a house below a certain price. But if an agent has to resort to lying – which I believe to be the case here – rather than just stating outright that they absolutely cannot go below a certain price, I think it’s unethical and deserving of a complaint.
ParticipantSD Realtor…
Thank you very much for the reply!
We have been tracking the house for quite a while. It was initially on the market for 120 days, and then expired. They re-listed it, as a “new” listing, so now it shows up as having been on the market for only ~20 days.
I don’t know how much equity the sellers have in the home (where do I find that?). But I do know they are the original owners and have lived there for over 20 years.
The day before their initial listing expired (we didn’t know it was about to expire) we had our agent call theirs to ask the standard questions. He told our agent (this was over a month ago) that he had three offers on it (above what we were offering), and that they were countering even above those other offers.
Then the thing expired the next day. We, and our agent, were quite perplexed by this. One day from expiring, and their agent says nothing about it?
Then it got re-listed a few days later.
We waited about two more weeks, figuring that if their agent was right about having those three other offers that it would be dropping off into escrow at any moment.
But there it sat. Day after day. Not going into escrow.
We assumed then that their agent was either lying or incompetent (he just can’t close even one of three offers that was within 2% of the asking price??) We figured we would throw our offer out there to see how they officially reply.
The official counter came back, with the whopping $500 drop and a claim in writing that he has these three other offers going. Assuming these are the same three offers he claimed to have had two weeks earlier, they would no longer be valid. Right? Unless he was implying that he had three NEW offers (and all at EXACTLY the same price btw).
It all seemed a very dubious claim designed solely to scare us off or make us raise our offer way up. That’s why we think he’s lying about the other offers.
We countered again with what would have been our “planned” counter-counter – a full $20k higher – had they responded with a reasonable counter of their own. Our thought was, we’ll leave it at that – and if it’s still on the market 100 days from now we can ask him how those three other offers are coming along.
But their second counter was even weirder. They dropped another $500 (gee, THANKS!) But he actually asked our agent, in writing, why he didn’t have us “ask or counter back with the seller carry back 2nd trust deed for the difference”.
Huh?
Again, this guy (and/or his client) is either delusional or just incompetent. Our paperwork in the offers clearly stated our situation: well-qualified buyers (mid-FICO in the 790’s), 30% down, and not contingent. Coming up with the money is not the problem. The problem is that they’re asking too much for the freakin’ house.
Anyway… I understand that some people simply will not (or cannot) sell a house below a certain price. But if an agent has to resort to lying – which I believe to be the case here – rather than just stating outright that they absolutely cannot go below a certain price, I think it’s unethical and deserving of a complaint.
ParticipantWe’re “looking”, but not yet buying. Although I will admit that we’re not your typical San Diego buyer. We actually will be able to put up a 25%-35% down payment. No 100%, “stated income” mortgages here. And we’re looking for a place to STAY, not flip and move out of in 6 months. All above-board and fiscally responsible.
The million dollar question, of course, is when do prices stop declining? We’re in absolutely no rush. We simply want a larger place in which to raise some rugrats. (and we want to be in the Carmel Valley area.)
ParticipantWe’re “looking”, but not yet buying. Although I will admit that we’re not your typical San Diego buyer. We actually will be able to put up a 25%-35% down payment. No 100%, “stated income” mortgages here. And we’re looking for a place to STAY, not flip and move out of in 6 months. All above-board and fiscally responsible.
The million dollar question, of course, is when do prices stop declining? We’re in absolutely no rush. We simply want a larger place in which to raise some rugrats. (and we want to be in the Carmel Valley area.)
-
AuthorPosts