[toddt]

I am in the public records business and it’s not common for mods (including principal reductions) to record. It does happen, and it’s happening more and more, but it’s not a matter of course.

[toddt]

I am in the public records business and it’s not common for mods (including principal reductions) to record. It does happen, and it’s happening more and more, but it’s not a matter of course.

[toddt]

I have built several SFR (2 at a time, so low volume) over the years and prices back in late 90s ran around $90 a foot as a GC, and went up to around $115 a foot in 2006. I’ve built medium quality homes in the 400-500k price range, 2500 square feet.

I also have bids from other GCs on some nicer property in SD at around $250 a foot, with some telling me they can do sub-200. The spec level on this would be higher-end custom, but not necessarily import or top-line quality. Price range on home is 2-3M.

When you get into high-end custom, much of your cost comes in finishes, and there is really no way to price that w/o specifics. The size you build is also very important for obvious reasons. Here in OC, I’ve seen reasonably mid-to high-end (semi-luxury) done for $175 a foot for very large homes(retail pricing), and very high end go as high as 750-1000 a foot for small beach homes.

The lowest I’ve seen for a custom home in a long-while, with pretty cheap finishes, is about $85 a foot retail, 70 at cost.

Hope that helps.

[toddt]

I have built several SFR (2 at a time, so low volume) over the years and prices back in late 90s ran around $90 a foot as a GC, and went up to around $115 a foot in 2006. I’ve built medium quality homes in the 400-500k price range, 2500 square feet.

I also have bids from other GCs on some nicer property in SD at around $250 a foot, with some telling me they can do sub-200. The spec level on this would be higher-end custom, but not necessarily import or top-line quality. Price range on home is 2-3M.

When you get into high-end custom, much of your cost comes in finishes, and there is really no way to price that w/o specifics. The size you build is also very important for obvious reasons. Here in OC, I’ve seen reasonably mid-to high-end (semi-luxury) done for $175 a foot for very large homes(retail pricing), and very high end go as high as 750-1000 a foot for small beach homes.

The lowest I’ve seen for a custom home in a long-while, with pretty cheap finishes, is about $85 a foot retail, 70 at cost.

Hope that helps.

[toddt]

I have built several SFR (2 at a time, so low volume) over the years and prices back in late 90s ran around $90 a foot as a GC, and went up to around $115 a foot in 2006. I’ve built medium quality homes in the 400-500k price range, 2500 square feet.

I also have bids from other GCs on some nicer property in SD at around $250 a foot, with some telling me they can do sub-200. The spec level on this would be higher-end custom, but not necessarily import or top-line quality. Price range on home is 2-3M.

When you get into high-end custom, much of your cost comes in finishes, and there is really no way to price that w/o specifics. The size you build is also very important for obvious reasons. Here in OC, I’ve seen reasonably mid-to high-end (semi-luxury) done for $175 a foot for very large homes(retail pricing), and very high end go as high as 750-1000 a foot for small beach homes.

The lowest I’ve seen for a custom home in a long-while, with pretty cheap finishes, is about $85 a foot retail, 70 at cost.

Hope that helps.

[toddt]

I have built several SFR (2 at a time, so low volume) over the years and prices back in late 90s ran around $90 a foot as a GC, and went up to around $115 a foot in 2006. I’ve built medium quality homes in the 400-500k price range, 2500 square feet.

I also have bids from other GCs on some nicer property in SD at around $250 a foot, with some telling me they can do sub-200. The spec level on this would be higher-end custom, but not necessarily import or top-line quality. Price range on home is 2-3M.

When you get into high-end custom, much of your cost comes in finishes, and there is really no way to price that w/o specifics. The size you build is also very important for obvious reasons. Here in OC, I’ve seen reasonably mid-to high-end (semi-luxury) done for $175 a foot for very large homes(retail pricing), and very high end go as high as 750-1000 a foot for small beach homes.

The lowest I’ve seen for a custom home in a long-while, with pretty cheap finishes, is about $85 a foot retail, 70 at cost.

Hope that helps.

[toddt]

I have built several SFR (2 at a time, so low volume) over the years and prices back in late 90s ran around $90 a foot as a GC, and went up to around $115 a foot in 2006. I’ve built medium quality homes in the 400-500k price range, 2500 square feet.

I also have bids from other GCs on some nicer property in SD at around $250 a foot, with some telling me they can do sub-200. The spec level on this would be higher-end custom, but not necessarily import or top-line quality. Price range on home is 2-3M.

When you get into high-end custom, much of your cost comes in finishes, and there is really no way to price that w/o specifics. The size you build is also very important for obvious reasons. Here in OC, I’ve seen reasonably mid-to high-end (semi-luxury) done for $175 a foot for very large homes(retail pricing), and very high end go as high as 750-1000 a foot for small beach homes.

The lowest I’ve seen for a custom home in a long-while, with pretty cheap finishes, is about $85 a foot retail, 70 at cost.

Hope that helps.

[toddt]

[quote=werewolf34]Mortgages are non-recourse loans, period. In the interest rate, they’ve have priced (or forgot to price) the risk that people walk away. [/quote]

State specific laws vary on recourse vs. non-recourse, and even CA is a recourse state when it comes to non-purchase money loans. That said, in CA, you rarely see judicial foreclosures (that allow for recourse) due to costs and the likely inability to collect on a judgement. But they do happen. Mainly when lots of assets are identifiable.

But, that’s sort of irrelevant when we’re discussing what should be done not what is happening. And what should be done is the players at all levels being held accountable for the things they can control, including buyers.

It’s not even a question of personal responsibility to me. You can’t teach that through policy – you either have it or you don’t from your upbringing. Too many buyers with lots of assets are walking away from homes and this is the one of the many areas we need to address so this problem doesn’t happen again. To say we shouldn’t try to address it is illogical to me.

[toddt]

[quote=werewolf34]Mortgages are non-recourse loans, period. In the interest rate, they’ve have priced (or forgot to price) the risk that people walk away. [/quote]

State specific laws vary on recourse vs. non-recourse, and even CA is a recourse state when it comes to non-purchase money loans. That said, in CA, you rarely see judicial foreclosures (that allow for recourse) due to costs and the likely inability to collect on a judgement. But they do happen. Mainly when lots of assets are identifiable.

But, that’s sort of irrelevant when we’re discussing what should be done not what is happening. And what should be done is the players at all levels being held accountable for the things they can control, including buyers.

It’s not even a question of personal responsibility to me. You can’t teach that through policy – you either have it or you don’t from your upbringing. Too many buyers with lots of assets are walking away from homes and this is the one of the many areas we need to address so this problem doesn’t happen again. To say we shouldn’t try to address it is illogical to me.

[toddt]

[quote=werewolf34]Mortgages are non-recourse loans, period. In the interest rate, they’ve have priced (or forgot to price) the risk that people walk away. [/quote]

State specific laws vary on recourse vs. non-recourse, and even CA is a recourse state when it comes to non-purchase money loans. That said, in CA, you rarely see judicial foreclosures (that allow for recourse) due to costs and the likely inability to collect on a judgement. But they do happen. Mainly when lots of assets are identifiable.

But, that’s sort of irrelevant when we’re discussing what should be done not what is happening. And what should be done is the players at all levels being held accountable for the things they can control, including buyers.

It’s not even a question of personal responsibility to me. You can’t teach that through policy – you either have it or you don’t from your upbringing. Too many buyers with lots of assets are walking away from homes and this is the one of the many areas we need to address so this problem doesn’t happen again. To say we shouldn’t try to address it is illogical to me.

[toddt]

[quote=werewolf34]Mortgages are non-recourse loans, period. In the interest rate, they’ve have priced (or forgot to price) the risk that people walk away. [/quote]

State specific laws vary on recourse vs. non-recourse, and even CA is a recourse state when it comes to non-purchase money loans. That said, in CA, you rarely see judicial foreclosures (that allow for recourse) due to costs and the likely inability to collect on a judgement. But they do happen. Mainly when lots of assets are identifiable.

But, that’s sort of irrelevant when we’re discussing what should be done not what is happening. And what should be done is the players at all levels being held accountable for the things they can control, including buyers.

It’s not even a question of personal responsibility to me. You can’t teach that through policy – you either have it or you don’t from your upbringing. Too many buyers with lots of assets are walking away from homes and this is the one of the many areas we need to address so this problem doesn’t happen again. To say we shouldn’t try to address it is illogical to me.

[toddt]

[quote=werewolf34]Mortgages are non-recourse loans, period. In the interest rate, they’ve have priced (or forgot to price) the risk that people walk away. [/quote]

State specific laws vary on recourse vs. non-recourse, and even CA is a recourse state when it comes to non-purchase money loans. That said, in CA, you rarely see judicial foreclosures (that allow for recourse) due to costs and the likely inability to collect on a judgement. But they do happen. Mainly when lots of assets are identifiable.

But, that’s sort of irrelevant when we’re discussing what should be done not what is happening. And what should be done is the players at all levels being held accountable for the things they can control, including buyers.

It’s not even a question of personal responsibility to me. You can’t teach that through policy – you either have it or you don’t from your upbringing. Too many buyers with lots of assets are walking away from homes and this is the one of the many areas we need to address so this problem doesn’t happen again. To say we shouldn’t try to address it is illogical to me.

[toddt]

Many of the responses have focused on the how wrong the banks have been in all this, and that underwater homeowners are just making ‘business decisions’. I don’t have a problem with the line of thought, but it is misleading. The comparable ‘business decision’ everyone refers to would be bankruptcy not foreclosure.

Holding underwater homeowners responsible for debt is terrible policy if that is the only asset in question because it does amount to a servitude scenario and have little long-term positive results. I’d rather get them out of the situation, the home back on the market, and have a reformed debtor participating in our economy going forward. That’s what foreclosure is.

However, it is good policy to have recourse if there are other assets available. Bankruptcy should be the forced option here, including foreclosing on the home in question and taking an overall look at assets and liabilities to make a sound ‘business decision’ on the best plan.

Under our current laws, forced bankruptcy is not possible. That is, unless you are GM and Chrysler.

[toddt]

Many of the responses have focused on the how wrong the banks have been in all this, and that underwater homeowners are just making ‘business decisions’. I don’t have a problem with the line of thought, but it is misleading. The comparable ‘business decision’ everyone refers to would be bankruptcy not foreclosure.

Holding underwater homeowners responsible for debt is terrible policy if that is the only asset in question because it does amount to a servitude scenario and have little long-term positive results. I’d rather get them out of the situation, the home back on the market, and have a reformed debtor participating in our economy going forward. That’s what foreclosure is.

However, it is good policy to have recourse if there are other assets available. Bankruptcy should be the forced option here, including foreclosing on the home in question and taking an overall look at assets and liabilities to make a sound ‘business decision’ on the best plan.

Under our current laws, forced bankruptcy is not possible. That is, unless you are GM and Chrysler.

[toddt]

Many of the responses have focused on the how wrong the banks have been in all this, and that underwater homeowners are just making ‘business decisions’. I don’t have a problem with the line of thought, but it is misleading. The comparable ‘business decision’ everyone refers to would be bankruptcy not foreclosure.

Holding underwater homeowners responsible for debt is terrible policy if that is the only asset in question because it does amount to a servitude scenario and have little long-term positive results. I’d rather get them out of the situation, the home back on the market, and have a reformed debtor participating in our economy going forward. That’s what foreclosure is.

However, it is good policy to have recourse if there are other assets available. Bankruptcy should be the forced option here, including foreclosing on the home in question and taking an overall look at assets and liabilities to make a sound ‘business decision’ on the best plan.

Under our current laws, forced bankruptcy is not possible. That is, unless you are GM and Chrysler.

[Author]

Posts