[urbanrealtor]

And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.

[urbanrealtor]

And the other problem is that those remarks are in the public section.
Generally they are in the confidential section with the lockbox combo and the fact that the dog has no teeth.

WOW.
Somebody needs to improve their MLS entry skills.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=beelzebub]Thank you all for your comments. I’m pretty sure the mod was done within the same loan, and a new loan was not drawn up. And, besides, we have no assets, save for couple of old cars and a government pension.

We’re about $65k underwater. We bought our house in Sept 2007, a small 2bd/1ba house in Mira Mesa, for $327k through BofA + ACORN first time buyer program. We owe $315k on it, and it’s now worth about $250k. We had a 2nd child, so now the house feels too small, but we’re stuck. It seems like if we stay, we’d have to wait at least 5-7 years, if not more, for the market to recover to a point where we can sell. Walking away might make sense, but we’re not sure of the consequences. We like home ownership, and would like to eventually be able to buy again.

Any comments on our situation?[/quote]

Plan a short sale.
Move out, rent it out, and be up front with tenants.
Rent (or buy if you have the ability) a new place now.
It will make more sense for you to stop paying down the road and you want to do this before your credit is damaged.
If you rent for yourself, make sure you get a decent lease and try to renew it before it runs out (assuming you like the place).
Getting out of a lease is much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

I am actually running 2 of these for clients right now.
I manage the rental and run interference with the seller’s bank.
Others may disagree but I really think full disclosure with the tenants is a good policy.

That’s my 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=beelzebub]Thank you all for your comments. I’m pretty sure the mod was done within the same loan, and a new loan was not drawn up. And, besides, we have no assets, save for couple of old cars and a government pension.

We’re about $65k underwater. We bought our house in Sept 2007, a small 2bd/1ba house in Mira Mesa, for $327k through BofA + ACORN first time buyer program. We owe $315k on it, and it’s now worth about $250k. We had a 2nd child, so now the house feels too small, but we’re stuck. It seems like if we stay, we’d have to wait at least 5-7 years, if not more, for the market to recover to a point where we can sell. Walking away might make sense, but we’re not sure of the consequences. We like home ownership, and would like to eventually be able to buy again.

Any comments on our situation?[/quote]

Plan a short sale.
Move out, rent it out, and be up front with tenants.
Rent (or buy if you have the ability) a new place now.
It will make more sense for you to stop paying down the road and you want to do this before your credit is damaged.
If you rent for yourself, make sure you get a decent lease and try to renew it before it runs out (assuming you like the place).
Getting out of a lease is much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

I am actually running 2 of these for clients right now.
I manage the rental and run interference with the seller’s bank.
Others may disagree but I really think full disclosure with the tenants is a good policy.

That’s my 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=beelzebub]Thank you all for your comments. I’m pretty sure the mod was done within the same loan, and a new loan was not drawn up. And, besides, we have no assets, save for couple of old cars and a government pension.

We’re about $65k underwater. We bought our house in Sept 2007, a small 2bd/1ba house in Mira Mesa, for $327k through BofA + ACORN first time buyer program. We owe $315k on it, and it’s now worth about $250k. We had a 2nd child, so now the house feels too small, but we’re stuck. It seems like if we stay, we’d have to wait at least 5-7 years, if not more, for the market to recover to a point where we can sell. Walking away might make sense, but we’re not sure of the consequences. We like home ownership, and would like to eventually be able to buy again.

Any comments on our situation?[/quote]

Plan a short sale.
Move out, rent it out, and be up front with tenants.
Rent (or buy if you have the ability) a new place now.
It will make more sense for you to stop paying down the road and you want to do this before your credit is damaged.
If you rent for yourself, make sure you get a decent lease and try to renew it before it runs out (assuming you like the place).
Getting out of a lease is much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

I am actually running 2 of these for clients right now.
I manage the rental and run interference with the seller’s bank.
Others may disagree but I really think full disclosure with the tenants is a good policy.

That’s my 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=beelzebub]Thank you all for your comments. I’m pretty sure the mod was done within the same loan, and a new loan was not drawn up. And, besides, we have no assets, save for couple of old cars and a government pension.

We’re about $65k underwater. We bought our house in Sept 2007, a small 2bd/1ba house in Mira Mesa, for $327k through BofA + ACORN first time buyer program. We owe $315k on it, and it’s now worth about $250k. We had a 2nd child, so now the house feels too small, but we’re stuck. It seems like if we stay, we’d have to wait at least 5-7 years, if not more, for the market to recover to a point where we can sell. Walking away might make sense, but we’re not sure of the consequences. We like home ownership, and would like to eventually be able to buy again.

Any comments on our situation?[/quote]

Plan a short sale.
Move out, rent it out, and be up front with tenants.
Rent (or buy if you have the ability) a new place now.
It will make more sense for you to stop paying down the road and you want to do this before your credit is damaged.
If you rent for yourself, make sure you get a decent lease and try to renew it before it runs out (assuming you like the place).
Getting out of a lease is much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

I am actually running 2 of these for clients right now.
I manage the rental and run interference with the seller’s bank.
Others may disagree but I really think full disclosure with the tenants is a good policy.

That’s my 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=beelzebub]Thank you all for your comments. I’m pretty sure the mod was done within the same loan, and a new loan was not drawn up. And, besides, we have no assets, save for couple of old cars and a government pension.

We’re about $65k underwater. We bought our house in Sept 2007, a small 2bd/1ba house in Mira Mesa, for $327k through BofA + ACORN first time buyer program. We owe $315k on it, and it’s now worth about $250k. We had a 2nd child, so now the house feels too small, but we’re stuck. It seems like if we stay, we’d have to wait at least 5-7 years, if not more, for the market to recover to a point where we can sell. Walking away might make sense, but we’re not sure of the consequences. We like home ownership, and would like to eventually be able to buy again.

Any comments on our situation?[/quote]

Plan a short sale.
Move out, rent it out, and be up front with tenants.
Rent (or buy if you have the ability) a new place now.
It will make more sense for you to stop paying down the road and you want to do this before your credit is damaged.
If you rent for yourself, make sure you get a decent lease and try to renew it before it runs out (assuming you like the place).
Getting out of a lease is much easier for a tenant than a landlord.

I am actually running 2 of these for clients right now.
I manage the rental and run interference with the seller’s bank.
Others may disagree but I really think full disclosure with the tenants is a good policy.

That’s my 2 bits.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]
Good point, but Prop 13 protection can be passed on to wealthy heirs and protect wealthy corporations that survive in perpetuity. You can transfer the share of the corporation (and thus ownership of property) but keep the Prop 13 benefits. [/quote]

The reality of Prop 13 is not the same as its sell job.

My point was that the whole “poor granny” was an effective advertising tool.

I don’t support it.

Even though it was and is good for property prices, it means that california has some of the lowest per pupil spending in the US (when adjusted for cost of living). In unadjusted dollars, we have a New York cost of living and a Nebraska or Georgia school spending budget.

For me its somewhat personal.
My wife is a teacher who regularly has classes of 40 students (80% of whom have english as their second language).

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]
Good point, but Prop 13 protection can be passed on to wealthy heirs and protect wealthy corporations that survive in perpetuity. You can transfer the share of the corporation (and thus ownership of property) but keep the Prop 13 benefits. [/quote]

The reality of Prop 13 is not the same as its sell job.

My point was that the whole “poor granny” was an effective advertising tool.

I don’t support it.

Even though it was and is good for property prices, it means that california has some of the lowest per pupil spending in the US (when adjusted for cost of living). In unadjusted dollars, we have a New York cost of living and a Nebraska or Georgia school spending budget.

For me its somewhat personal.
My wife is a teacher who regularly has classes of 40 students (80% of whom have english as their second language).

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]
Good point, but Prop 13 protection can be passed on to wealthy heirs and protect wealthy corporations that survive in perpetuity. You can transfer the share of the corporation (and thus ownership of property) but keep the Prop 13 benefits. [/quote]

The reality of Prop 13 is not the same as its sell job.

My point was that the whole “poor granny” was an effective advertising tool.

I don’t support it.

Even though it was and is good for property prices, it means that california has some of the lowest per pupil spending in the US (when adjusted for cost of living). In unadjusted dollars, we have a New York cost of living and a Nebraska or Georgia school spending budget.

For me its somewhat personal.
My wife is a teacher who regularly has classes of 40 students (80% of whom have english as their second language).

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]
Good point, but Prop 13 protection can be passed on to wealthy heirs and protect wealthy corporations that survive in perpetuity. You can transfer the share of the corporation (and thus ownership of property) but keep the Prop 13 benefits. [/quote]

The reality of Prop 13 is not the same as its sell job.

My point was that the whole “poor granny” was an effective advertising tool.

I don’t support it.

Even though it was and is good for property prices, it means that california has some of the lowest per pupil spending in the US (when adjusted for cost of living). In unadjusted dollars, we have a New York cost of living and a Nebraska or Georgia school spending budget.

For me its somewhat personal.
My wife is a teacher who regularly has classes of 40 students (80% of whom have english as their second language).

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]
Good point, but Prop 13 protection can be passed on to wealthy heirs and protect wealthy corporations that survive in perpetuity. You can transfer the share of the corporation (and thus ownership of property) but keep the Prop 13 benefits. [/quote]

The reality of Prop 13 is not the same as its sell job.

My point was that the whole “poor granny” was an effective advertising tool.

I don’t support it.

Even though it was and is good for property prices, it means that california has some of the lowest per pupil spending in the US (when adjusted for cost of living). In unadjusted dollars, we have a New York cost of living and a Nebraska or Georgia school spending budget.

For me its somewhat personal.
My wife is a teacher who regularly has classes of 40 students (80% of whom have english as their second language).

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]I don’t see how taxing wealth (property) is regressive.

Under the current CA system of property taxes, someone living in a million dollar house in La Jolla (with the income to match and money and property passed down several generations) could be paying less than someone who just bought a new tract house in El Cajon. That’s pretty regressive to me.

BTW, the CA system suits me just fine.[/quote]

Typically, taxation based on net worth (especially when that is disproportionately expressed as property value) over income level, is viewed as regressive.

The prototype polemic example is the old widow on ssi who only has the house she always lived in. That was the primary rhetorical referent when prop 13 was passed.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]I don’t see how taxing wealth (property) is regressive.

Under the current CA system of property taxes, someone living in a million dollar house in La Jolla (with the income to match and money and property passed down several generations) could be paying less than someone who just bought a new tract house in El Cajon. That’s pretty regressive to me.

BTW, the CA system suits me just fine.[/quote]

Typically, taxation based on net worth (especially when that is disproportionately expressed as property value) over income level, is viewed as regressive.

The prototype polemic example is the old widow on ssi who only has the house she always lived in. That was the primary rhetorical referent when prop 13 was passed.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=briansd1]I don’t see how taxing wealth (property) is regressive.

Under the current CA system of property taxes, someone living in a million dollar house in La Jolla (with the income to match and money and property passed down several generations) could be paying less than someone who just bought a new tract house in El Cajon. That’s pretty regressive to me.

BTW, the CA system suits me just fine.[/quote]

Typically, taxation based on net worth (especially when that is disproportionately expressed as property value) over income level, is viewed as regressive.

The prototype polemic example is the old widow on ssi who only has the house she always lived in. That was the primary rhetorical referent when prop 13 was passed.

[Author]

Posts