Real Estate Journal Online

Housing experts at CNN have determined that the best way to move a home fast – or at least relatively faster – in today’s real estate market is to underprice the property by 10 percent[1]. According to the report, it could save sellers months on the market even though the monetary losses could be painful. For example, a 10-percent-underpriced home in Somerdale, New Jersey, might sell in a few days rather than the “typical four months,” and you might even attract a crowd or start a bidding war if your home is priced lower than comparable and desirable properties in your neighborhood. Proponents of the strategy argue that sellers who go this route may save thousands in carrying costs. Critics, however, point out that thousands in profits stand to be lost as well.

Do you think that this dramatic underpricing is a good idea? Is it dramatic enough?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know how you move properties fast in the space below.

In a move to identify home owners who may have experienced improper foreclosures during 2009 and 2010, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) will require banks to review 2009 and 2010 foreclosures – if the homeowners request it. Julie Williams, OCC chief counsel, announced the move and indicated that home owners who ask for review will receive a letter that explains their rights in a Congressional hearing last week[1]. Home owners who completed a foreclosure in 2009 or 2010 or had a foreclosure in process during those years are eligible to request the review[2]. Home owners may also be notified of their rights “through local and national advertising campaigns,” said Williams.

Mortgage servicers will have to conduct the reviews via independent auditing services that will determine if home owners should be financially compensated in the event of unlawful foreclosure or “unjust” fees. At the same time, the auditors will be alert to profiles of borrowers who may be at higher risk for poor foreclosure practices, including those who may unreasonably have been denied loan modifications.

Do you think that this is a good way to deal with possible foreclosure issues? Can the banks be trusted to hire truly independent auditors?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think of this OCC ruling in the space below.

A new assessment by a Florida homeowner’s association could result in mass foreclosures by the HOA – even though many homeowners in the neighborhood own their houses outright and live on a fixed income[1]. The controversial decision by the HOA to levy a $6,000 assessment on the Inlet House Condominium owners has left many homeowners outraged and refusing to pay anything at all, even though the HOA itself maintains that the only way to deal with a rat infestation and sewage problem is to pay the fees and then – literally – use the fees to pay the piper. Residents maintain that the HOA is just trying to “force people out the door” by levying “unnecessary and unaffordable assessments.”

Whether the assessments are justified or not, they are just one example of a growing trend of HOAs in trouble. According to a survey conducted last year by the Community Association Institute, more than half of HOAs nationwide face “serious financial problems” and 65 percent of HOAs have delinquency rates higher than 5 percent (in 2005 only 19 percent had delinquencies of this measure). Rising foreclosure volumes and vacant homes are contributing to this problem, and when the HOA funds fall short, existing homeowners are left with no choice but to make up the difference. And, in some cases, if homeowners are unable to do so, the HOA board may opt to foreclose.

HOAs get a bad rap most of the time. No one really likes being told what to do with their own house – even if that is part and parcel of what they signed up for when they moved into a community with an HOA and its associated covenants. But is now really the right time to levy huge assessments and foreclose? Will that even help matters when so many neighborhoods have such high foreclosure rates anyway?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think about homeowners’ associations in the space below.

In today’s housing market, it can be hard to drag buyers’ attention away from the bargain basement prices available through REO and foreclosure home sales. Builders and developers are relying heavily on green, energy- and money-saving features to do just that – and it’s not cheap. Dan Hogan, supervisor of residential energy programs at Tucson Electric Power, explains that builders and developers hoping to compete with the falling prices of distressed homes are going to have to take on additional costs to make homes more efficient and cost-effective for homeowners[1]. “To build an energy-efficient home…you just have to put in better pieces,” he explains, adding that “better pieces” like spray foam insulation and water-saving plumbing mean more money for builders that is often difficult for homebuyers to see or understand. To combat this issue and help make the case for the higher price tag, one developer actually offers tours of a deconstructed model home that shows of “energy saving features that would otherwise be hidden by finished construction.” The argument is that newer, more energy efficient homes, while having a higher price tag, save homeowners serious money over the life of homeownership.

It’s hard to say in today’s market whether that argument will be persuasive enough to convince qualified homebuyers who have their pick of properties on the cheap to go green. Do you think green development is the key to recovery in the new-construction sector?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think about green building and the housing recovery in the space below.

While real estate investors often get the short end of the stick when it comes to getting blamed for today’s economic conditions, even the federal government acknowledges that the market simply won’t recover without those investors. As a result, there are myriad tax credits out there to “lure” real estate investors into community development projects, just as one called the New Markets Tax Credit that provides double-digit tax returns (in some cases) to investors who put their money in “underserved property sectors and underserved geographic locations” – meaning poorer, urban areas in most cases[1]. And although many of these credits have been around literally for decades, they are now being promoted more heavily than ever in order to encourage investors to enter the “revitalization” game.

And unlike the homebuyer tax credits, which many analysts argue actually hurt the housing market in the long run, these tax credits make it advantageous for investors to develop and even hold properties in many hard-hit areas of the country. Do you think that these types of tax credits are good for the real estate market, or should the government just stay out of housing?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think about government participation in the housing market – in any form or fashion – in the space below.

“When you feel well-made hardware, you know it,” says Perry Finkelman, owner of a new NYC development on East 24^th street. And Finkelman believes that his building’s custom hardware – he own custom line, in fact – will not only make his building stand out but help his sales as well[1]. The development, called One48, has 55 units with studio condos starting around $400,000. Finkelman was able to create “an unusually harmonious design” for the units thanks to his custom brand faucets, fixtures and doorknobs, which are silver, modern and very elaborate.

Interestingly, this fixation on fixtures appears to be part of a growing trend. Office building owners and developers are increasingly likely to design their own fixtures rather than going with the latest styles at Home Depot. Some developers are even limiting availability on their custom brands so that the practical or ornate designs are only available if you buy in their developments. And the fixtures add major value to the property as well. Some designers currently employed by developers may charge thousands for a faucet or door knob.

Do you think that this type of opulence and expense has a place in today’s real estate market? Is this wishful thinking or an innovative way to stand out from a crowd?

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think about these crazy-expensive bathroom fixtures in the space below. How would you feel about paying five- or ten-thousand extra for exclusive hardware in your home?

Hipoteczny kredyt to kredyt przydzielony na opłacenie inwestycji w nieruchomości, chroniony hipoteką na nieruchomości stanowiącej własności pożyczkobiorcy.

Cechą wyróżniającą tę formę pożyczki jest właśnie wpis rejestrujący w księdze wieczystej obciążenie mieszkania, umożliwiający kredytodawcy zaspokojenie swych roszczeń w razie odmowy spłacania pożyczki przez dłużnika w drodze sprzedaży mieszkania nawet wtedy, gdy posiadłość zmieni właściciela.

Hipoteczny kredyt zaplanowany jest przede wszystkim na zaspokojenie potrzeb lokalowych w drodze nabytku lub remontu mieszkania, adaptacji lokali użytkowych na cele mieszkaniowe, subwencji związanej ze zmianą domu lub mieszkania, a dodatkowo dopełnienie udziału budowlanego w spółdzielni mieszkaniowej.

Louis Gendason, John Incadela, Marcos Echaverria and Kimberly Mackey worked together to obtain $2.5 million in reverse mortgage loans from Genworth Financial over a period of two years. Sounds like they were helping a lot of seniors stay in their homes, right? Not in this case. The four are charged with pocketing nearly a million in illegal loan proceeds and failing to pay off the existing loans with the monies, according to U.S. attorney Wilfredo Ferrer[1]. Now, the homeowners are fighting foreclosure while the four conspirators attempt to fend off charges for theft and conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

And it gets more complicated: After seniors filled out applications for reverse mortgages, Incandela and Echeverria inclated the properties’ worth to give the impression of equity before staging a short sale. They falsified everything from closing documents to loan applications and pocketed excess funds anywhere possible. For example, in one instance a property worth $31,000 was inflated to $275,000. Each defendant faces up to 30 years in prison.

Thank you for reading REJournalOnline!

Let us know what you think of this fraud in the space below.