[SDEngineer]

Just another note on these, since there are apparently a few people looking at them (we’ve been one of them)

The plan 6 in the Riverwalk townhomes has been expanded in the new phases being built now (something the builder probably won’t mention until the last of their early phase plan 6’s sell – it’s not mentioned in the model, nor on any of the brochures, unlike the plan 5 revamp which has large signs in the model pointing out what will be different in the new construction, and which has had the new floorplan pasted over the old one in their brochures).

They expanded the 3rd floor by roughly 180ft^2, most of which went into a larger master BR suite (full master bath now, with the seperate shower/oval tub, and the MBR went from somewhere around 12×14 (smallish MBR) to what I eyeballed at about 14×16 (reasonable MBR)). Total square footage in these units is now up to 2226 (may be less if the plan 6 has one of the expanded garage options).

Same prices roughly – they have 2 new plan 6’s ready for closing in june/july timeframe, asking 395K or so with most of the upgrades except flooring pre-planned and included (including fridge, washer and dryer as well), and also including 6% in closing costs/buydown credits/flooring options.

With the new plan, we’ve decided to bite the bullet and are going to go to contract on one of the available plan 6’s – the revamp of the 3rd floor made it a near ideal floor plan for us.

We’ll still lose some money in depreciation in the immediate future, but we think the plan and location is good long term, and we – like many others here – are just plain tired of renting 🙂

[SDEngineer]

Just to highlight one particular phrase here:

“The agency’s share of the mortgage market is up from 2 percent three years ago to nearly a third of the mortgages now made, its highest level in at least two decades, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry trade publication.”

It seems to me that if the amount of loans they make MORE than tripled during the time period under question (very likely considering the quote above, even in a declining housing market. If their market share went up by a factor of 16, then unless the overall number of mortgages fell by at least a factor of 5 (which it hasn’t), then their actual “instant default” rate has actually DROPPED).

I can understand why their overall rate of default is going up simply due to the economic times. Frankly, if you look at all loans originated during the 2005-2008 time frame, even the ultra-primes with perfect fico’s, 20% down payments, and heavy reserves are defaulting at higher rates now.

Since they didn’t actually indicate what the increase in the FHA’s overall default rates are, the article seems to me to be a bit weak in statistics to support their position (their only other measurable was a very high default condo-conversion complex located in one of the epicenters of housing wealth destruction). Though their position may in fact be true, the article as written does a poor job of supporting it’s conclusions.

[SDEngineer]

Just to highlight one particular phrase here:

“The agency’s share of the mortgage market is up from 2 percent three years ago to nearly a third of the mortgages now made, its highest level in at least two decades, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry trade publication.”

It seems to me that if the amount of loans they make MORE than tripled during the time period under question (very likely considering the quote above, even in a declining housing market. If their market share went up by a factor of 16, then unless the overall number of mortgages fell by at least a factor of 5 (which it hasn’t), then their actual “instant default” rate has actually DROPPED).

I can understand why their overall rate of default is going up simply due to the economic times. Frankly, if you look at all loans originated during the 2005-2008 time frame, even the ultra-primes with perfect fico’s, 20% down payments, and heavy reserves are defaulting at higher rates now.

Since they didn’t actually indicate what the increase in the FHA’s overall default rates are, the article seems to me to be a bit weak in statistics to support their position (their only other measurable was a very high default condo-conversion complex located in one of the epicenters of housing wealth destruction). Though their position may in fact be true, the article as written does a poor job of supporting it’s conclusions.

[SDEngineer]

Just to highlight one particular phrase here:

“The agency’s share of the mortgage market is up from 2 percent three years ago to nearly a third of the mortgages now made, its highest level in at least two decades, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry trade publication.”

It seems to me that if the amount of loans they make MORE than tripled during the time period under question (very likely considering the quote above, even in a declining housing market. If their market share went up by a factor of 16, then unless the overall number of mortgages fell by at least a factor of 5 (which it hasn’t), then their actual “instant default” rate has actually DROPPED).

I can understand why their overall rate of default is going up simply due to the economic times. Frankly, if you look at all loans originated during the 2005-2008 time frame, even the ultra-primes with perfect fico’s, 20% down payments, and heavy reserves are defaulting at higher rates now.

Since they didn’t actually indicate what the increase in the FHA’s overall default rates are, the article seems to me to be a bit weak in statistics to support their position (their only other measurable was a very high default condo-conversion complex located in one of the epicenters of housing wealth destruction). Though their position may in fact be true, the article as written does a poor job of supporting it’s conclusions.

[SDEngineer]

Just to highlight one particular phrase here:

“The agency’s share of the mortgage market is up from 2 percent three years ago to nearly a third of the mortgages now made, its highest level in at least two decades, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry trade publication.”

It seems to me that if the amount of loans they make MORE than tripled during the time period under question (very likely considering the quote above, even in a declining housing market. If their market share went up by a factor of 16, then unless the overall number of mortgages fell by at least a factor of 5 (which it hasn’t), then their actual “instant default” rate has actually DROPPED).

I can understand why their overall rate of default is going up simply due to the economic times. Frankly, if you look at all loans originated during the 2005-2008 time frame, even the ultra-primes with perfect fico’s, 20% down payments, and heavy reserves are defaulting at higher rates now.

Since they didn’t actually indicate what the increase in the FHA’s overall default rates are, the article seems to me to be a bit weak in statistics to support their position (their only other measurable was a very high default condo-conversion complex located in one of the epicenters of housing wealth destruction). Though their position may in fact be true, the article as written does a poor job of supporting it’s conclusions.

[SDEngineer]

Just to highlight one particular phrase here:

“The agency’s share of the mortgage market is up from 2 percent three years ago to nearly a third of the mortgages now made, its highest level in at least two decades, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, an industry trade publication.”

It seems to me that if the amount of loans they make MORE than tripled during the time period under question (very likely considering the quote above, even in a declining housing market. If their market share went up by a factor of 16, then unless the overall number of mortgages fell by at least a factor of 5 (which it hasn’t), then their actual “instant default” rate has actually DROPPED).

I can understand why their overall rate of default is going up simply due to the economic times. Frankly, if you look at all loans originated during the 2005-2008 time frame, even the ultra-primes with perfect fico’s, 20% down payments, and heavy reserves are defaulting at higher rates now.

Since they didn’t actually indicate what the increase in the FHA’s overall default rates are, the article seems to me to be a bit weak in statistics to support their position (their only other measurable was a very high default condo-conversion complex located in one of the epicenters of housing wealth destruction). Though their position may in fact be true, the article as written does a poor job of supporting it’s conclusions.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]We also looked at Skyranch but never gave it a serious thought due to:

HOA was a big factor and I understand that it’s not tax-deductible. I’d rather have MR + low HOA for at least MR is tax-deductible.

Skyranch didn’t have mid-tier homes to choose. It start at sub-$400K townhouses to $600K+ houses (the least expensive Crestview homes were above $600K when I looked at them about a year ago) and nothing in between.

But the biggest gripe I had was the steep climb to the community. This would be very bad for the car, as it would worsen the gas mileage, wear out brake pad and tire tread much faster and make the engine work much harder and it normally would.

So I ended up buying in the Riverwalk community, north of the Trolley Center. Its townhouses are much nicer (and bigger for about the same price range) than Skyranch’s and it has the right mid-tier house that’s ideal for me. Low HOA and no MR!!![/quote]

Actually, although many people do wind up deducting Mello-Roos (mistakenly), they are NOT tax deductible in most cases, and if you get audited, you may be required to repay that deduction with penalties. They aren’t considered the same as your normal real estate taxes.

Here’s the FTB (Franchise Tax Board for CA) official word on Mello-Roos taxes:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/net/909.shtml

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]We also looked at Skyranch but never gave it a serious thought due to:

HOA was a big factor and I understand that it’s not tax-deductible. I’d rather have MR + low HOA for at least MR is tax-deductible.

Skyranch didn’t have mid-tier homes to choose. It start at sub-$400K townhouses to $600K+ houses (the least expensive Crestview homes were above $600K when I looked at them about a year ago) and nothing in between.

But the biggest gripe I had was the steep climb to the community. This would be very bad for the car, as it would worsen the gas mileage, wear out brake pad and tire tread much faster and make the engine work much harder and it normally would.

So I ended up buying in the Riverwalk community, north of the Trolley Center. Its townhouses are much nicer (and bigger for about the same price range) than Skyranch’s and it has the right mid-tier house that’s ideal for me. Low HOA and no MR!!![/quote]

Actually, although many people do wind up deducting Mello-Roos (mistakenly), they are NOT tax deductible in most cases, and if you get audited, you may be required to repay that deduction with penalties. They aren’t considered the same as your normal real estate taxes.

Here’s the FTB (Franchise Tax Board for CA) official word on Mello-Roos taxes:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/net/909.shtml

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]We also looked at Skyranch but never gave it a serious thought due to:

HOA was a big factor and I understand that it’s not tax-deductible. I’d rather have MR + low HOA for at least MR is tax-deductible.

Skyranch didn’t have mid-tier homes to choose. It start at sub-$400K townhouses to $600K+ houses (the least expensive Crestview homes were above $600K when I looked at them about a year ago) and nothing in between.

But the biggest gripe I had was the steep climb to the community. This would be very bad for the car, as it would worsen the gas mileage, wear out brake pad and tire tread much faster and make the engine work much harder and it normally would.

So I ended up buying in the Riverwalk community, north of the Trolley Center. Its townhouses are much nicer (and bigger for about the same price range) than Skyranch’s and it has the right mid-tier house that’s ideal for me. Low HOA and no MR!!![/quote]

Actually, although many people do wind up deducting Mello-Roos (mistakenly), they are NOT tax deductible in most cases, and if you get audited, you may be required to repay that deduction with penalties. They aren’t considered the same as your normal real estate taxes.

Here’s the FTB (Franchise Tax Board for CA) official word on Mello-Roos taxes:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/net/909.shtml

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]We also looked at Skyranch but never gave it a serious thought due to:

HOA was a big factor and I understand that it’s not tax-deductible. I’d rather have MR + low HOA for at least MR is tax-deductible.

Skyranch didn’t have mid-tier homes to choose. It start at sub-$400K townhouses to $600K+ houses (the least expensive Crestview homes were above $600K when I looked at them about a year ago) and nothing in between.

But the biggest gripe I had was the steep climb to the community. This would be very bad for the car, as it would worsen the gas mileage, wear out brake pad and tire tread much faster and make the engine work much harder and it normally would.

So I ended up buying in the Riverwalk community, north of the Trolley Center. Its townhouses are much nicer (and bigger for about the same price range) than Skyranch’s and it has the right mid-tier house that’s ideal for me. Low HOA and no MR!!![/quote]

Actually, although many people do wind up deducting Mello-Roos (mistakenly), they are NOT tax deductible in most cases, and if you get audited, you may be required to repay that deduction with penalties. They aren’t considered the same as your normal real estate taxes.

Here’s the FTB (Franchise Tax Board for CA) official word on Mello-Roos taxes:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/net/909.shtml

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]We also looked at Skyranch but never gave it a serious thought due to:

HOA was a big factor and I understand that it’s not tax-deductible. I’d rather have MR + low HOA for at least MR is tax-deductible.

Skyranch didn’t have mid-tier homes to choose. It start at sub-$400K townhouses to $600K+ houses (the least expensive Crestview homes were above $600K when I looked at them about a year ago) and nothing in between.

But the biggest gripe I had was the steep climb to the community. This would be very bad for the car, as it would worsen the gas mileage, wear out brake pad and tire tread much faster and make the engine work much harder and it normally would.

So I ended up buying in the Riverwalk community, north of the Trolley Center. Its townhouses are much nicer (and bigger for about the same price range) than Skyranch’s and it has the right mid-tier house that’s ideal for me. Low HOA and no MR!!![/quote]

Actually, although many people do wind up deducting Mello-Roos (mistakenly), they are NOT tax deductible in most cases, and if you get audited, you may be required to repay that deduction with penalties. They aren’t considered the same as your normal real estate taxes.

Here’s the FTB (Franchise Tax Board for CA) official word on Mello-Roos taxes:

http://www.ftb.ca.gov/individuals/faq/net/909.shtml

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]I guess I’m one of the 5% that qualify for both federal and state tax credit programs:

– Have not owned a home for the past 3 years
– Family combined income of less than $150K
– Buying a new home (never been occupied)
– Will own only one home and plan to live there for at least 5-10 years.

However my lender informed me that neither program would provide immediate relief in terms of reducing closing costs or principle loan amount. If I have to wait until next year to benefit from the tax credit programs, that’s too long.[/quote]

True on the state credit. The Federal credit though is claimable immediately after closing. It won’t help with closing costs or any other expenses incurred during escrow or immediately thereafter, but even if you bought in the middle of this year, you could file an amended return and get the 8K credit as soon as the IRS can process and refund it.

And, of course, in the state case, you can always increase your witholdings to see some of it back this year – if you bought a house, you probably would do this anyway since you’d be getting money back now from the mortgage interest deduction.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]I guess I’m one of the 5% that qualify for both federal and state tax credit programs:

– Have not owned a home for the past 3 years
– Family combined income of less than $150K
– Buying a new home (never been occupied)
– Will own only one home and plan to live there for at least 5-10 years.

However my lender informed me that neither program would provide immediate relief in terms of reducing closing costs or principle loan amount. If I have to wait until next year to benefit from the tax credit programs, that’s too long.[/quote]

True on the state credit. The Federal credit though is claimable immediately after closing. It won’t help with closing costs or any other expenses incurred during escrow or immediately thereafter, but even if you bought in the middle of this year, you could file an amended return and get the 8K credit as soon as the IRS can process and refund it.

And, of course, in the state case, you can always increase your witholdings to see some of it back this year – if you bought a house, you probably would do this anyway since you’d be getting money back now from the mortgage interest deduction.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]I guess I’m one of the 5% that qualify for both federal and state tax credit programs:

– Have not owned a home for the past 3 years
– Family combined income of less than $150K
– Buying a new home (never been occupied)
– Will own only one home and plan to live there for at least 5-10 years.

However my lender informed me that neither program would provide immediate relief in terms of reducing closing costs or principle loan amount. If I have to wait until next year to benefit from the tax credit programs, that’s too long.[/quote]

True on the state credit. The Federal credit though is claimable immediately after closing. It won’t help with closing costs or any other expenses incurred during escrow or immediately thereafter, but even if you bought in the middle of this year, you could file an amended return and get the 8K credit as soon as the IRS can process and refund it.

And, of course, in the state case, you can always increase your witholdings to see some of it back this year – if you bought a house, you probably would do this anyway since you’d be getting money back now from the mortgage interest deduction.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=PKMAN]I guess I’m one of the 5% that qualify for both federal and state tax credit programs:

– Have not owned a home for the past 3 years
– Family combined income of less than $150K
– Buying a new home (never been occupied)
– Will own only one home and plan to live there for at least 5-10 years.

However my lender informed me that neither program would provide immediate relief in terms of reducing closing costs or principle loan amount. If I have to wait until next year to benefit from the tax credit programs, that’s too long.[/quote]

True on the state credit. The Federal credit though is claimable immediately after closing. It won’t help with closing costs or any other expenses incurred during escrow or immediately thereafter, but even if you bought in the middle of this year, you could file an amended return and get the 8K credit as soon as the IRS can process and refund it.

And, of course, in the state case, you can always increase your witholdings to see some of it back this year – if you bought a house, you probably would do this anyway since you’d be getting money back now from the mortgage interest deduction.

[Author]

Posts