Housing Thread...5/26/09 - Case-shiller down another 2.1 percent, no bottom yet

[GTKeeper]

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: Robor
I have a coworker who purchased near the peak of the bubble. They're now about $85K upside-down on their place. I refinanced an adjustable mortgage to 30 fixed ~ 5 years ago. We took out a home equity loan on our place ~ 3 years ago. Values have dropped so far (about 50% of peak in my neighborhood) between the original mortgage and HE loan we're about $40K upside-down today.

You (the OP) can say it's a necessary adjustment and celebrate it if you want but if this downward trend continues it's only going to get worse. In our case I'm seeing little reason to continue paying into a place that's possibly many years away from having equity again. The mortgage interest gives us very little over the standard deduction on our income taxes and each year homeowners insurance (ass rape here in FL) goes up 10%+. We could probably get a lot better (newer and closer to work) place for less money in rent. Yeah, it would knock our credit down but we've got great credit now and could probably build it back up sooner than our condo has any equity.

I can see a reason for you to continue paying; the fact that you signed a document saying you agreed to repay the loan.

Yes, but that doesn't mean anything. Robor can take his keys and send them to the bank, he owes the bank NOTHING at that point. Mortages are non-recourse loans meaning the bank can't touch any of his other assets.

I see him walking out of his house as an instant 40k raise, sounds like a good deal to me.

The only way out of this mess is for the government to really step in (because the lenders won't) reduce principal on these houses by some amount so that people actually have an incentive to pay their houses off.

It means he put his name on a piece of paper pledging he would pay. To some, this may not mean much but I think it is worth something.

Not all second mortgages are non-recourse by the way. In fact, most that I know of are recourse.

Fair enough, but you are assuming that people can co-exist and just get things done based on principles and morals. This is far from the case. Its like saying communism will work because everyone will work hard.

That is not to say that Robor isn't getting a partial shaft in my hypothetical scenario. If he does walk away, his credit is ruined and good luck getting a rental place or a real place with a destroyed FICO.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: Skoorb
i got my property tax bill in the mail a month back and my house is assessed exactly where it was two years ago. Rochester NY hasn't been hit hard, but let's get real. I really ought to see what it takes to get a more meaningful assessment.

You can dispute that.

And most of the time they will not adjust it much. Most cities/counties have so many rules and make you jump through so many hoops you will either lose or they will only reduce it a small amount most of the time. My city messed up so bad last year it was all over the news when people got their assements. Even then they denied most request on face and then let people appeal before they really looked.

 

[BigDH01]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: GTKeeper

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: Robor
I have a coworker who purchased near the peak of the bubble. They're now about $85K upside-down on their place. I refinanced an adjustable mortgage to 30 fixed ~ 5 years ago. We took out a home equity loan on our place ~ 3 years ago. Values have dropped so far (about 50% of peak in my neighborhood) between the original mortgage and HE loan we're about $40K upside-down today.

You (the OP) can say it's a necessary adjustment and celebrate it if you want but if this downward trend continues it's only going to get worse. In our case I'm seeing little reason to continue paying into a place that's possibly many years away from having equity again. The mortgage interest gives us very little over the standard deduction on our income taxes and each year homeowners insurance (ass rape here in FL) goes up 10%+. We could probably get a lot better (newer and closer to work) place for less money in rent. Yeah, it would knock our credit down but we've got great credit now and could probably build it back up sooner than our condo has any equity.

I can see a reason for you to continue paying; the fact that you signed a document saying you agreed to repay the loan.

Yes, but that doesn't mean anything. Robor can take his keys and send them to the bank, he owes the bank NOTHING at that point. Mortages are non-recourse loans meaning the bank can't touch any of his other assets.

I see him walking out of his house as an instant 40k raise, sounds like a good deal to me.

The only way out of this mess is for the government to really step in (because the lenders won't) reduce principal on these houses by some amount so that people actually have an incentive to pay their houses off.

It means he put his name on a piece of paper pledging he would pay. To some, this may not mean much but I think it is worth something.

Not all second mortgages are non-recourse by the way. In fact, most that I know of are recourse.

Fair enough, but you are assuming that people can co-exist and just get things done based on principles and morals. This is far from the case. Its like saying communism will work because everyone will work hard.

That is not to say that Robor isn't getting a partial shaft in my hypothetical scenario. If he does walk away, his credit is ruined and good luck getting a rental place or a real place with a destroyed FICO.

And we are operating purely on greed right now and look where it got us. It would be nice to have some principles, morals, and personal responsibilities back.

Does Capitalism work if everyone only concentrates on their own selfish greed? I think we've seen what excessive greed has earned us.

Listen, if Robor loses his job or has a medical emergency then I would understand his inability to pay. If he quits paying simply because the payments have become inconvenient, then I take issue. Lest we forget that his mortgage was an investment vehicle. Someone invested in Robor in both his first and second mortgages. That someone could be foreign banks, hedge funds, and my retirement fund. Robor isn't getting a 40k raise by walking away, he's walking away from an investment that people made in him. Regardless of how I feel about investment banks and hedge funds, I can't deny that retirement and pension funds of regular people have a stake in Robor doing the "right thing" and fulfilling his obligation.

Are you ok taking a hit to your retirement account so people in Robor's situation can walk away from a contract they signed because it's inconvenient?

Judging by reading other posts on this board, I would consider myself to be pretty left-leaning compared to most folks. I'm a fan of UHC and heavily progressive taxes as a means to prevent the concentration of wealth. I think higher education should be nearly free for students. However, I also believe in personal responsibility. If your education is free, you must get good grades. If you collect welfare, you must work for the community (ironically enough, Conservatives have picked up on this when it was Marx and Engels that wrote in The Communist Manifesto that everyone has an equal obligation to work). If you want free health care, you must take care of yourself. People need to take responsibility for their mortgages and pay them back even if they are inconvenient.

 

[MikeMike]

Im so glad my rents have a house bought back in 89 and they pay less than 500/mo for the pad.

 

[StageLeft]

The gov is not the solution to situations like Robor's. Where the hell will that money come from? If he wants to screw his credit, fine. That's already built in; laws are already in place to say he can do it and get dinged on credit. If it works out best for him, so be it. If he doesn't want to have a foreclosure to his name, he won't. If a bunch of people like him do it and drag property values down, it is what it is. Why would/should gov throw money at it to keep properties artificially high?

Next time around people will be less likely to run up prices, banks won't throw money at them, etc. It is a natural and necessary adjustment.

Others above me have appealed to principles and it's a valid argument on the individual level, but ultimately this whole economy is a damned game. I think we've seen that, haven't we? Screw things up, get a bailout, get some Christmas bonuses, who gives a sh*t, it's a bloodthirsty joke. The average person will be inclined toward doing the right thing but is easily swayed by the reality of the situation and if you have a $300k mortgage on a $200k loan and getting out of it is not that hard, you'll think a great deal about that.

 

[mooncancook]

These falling home prices is keeping recent home buyers like me from taking advantage of the low interest rate right now coz the loan to property value is too high. All these falling interest rate is not helping us at all. They need to increase the loan-to-property value qualification for refinancing.

 

[GTKeeper]

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Judging by reading other posts on this board, I would consider myself to be pretty left-leaning compared to most folks. I'm a fan of UHC and heavily progressive taxes as a means to prevent the concentration of wealth. I think higher education should be nearly free for students. However, I also believe in personal responsibility. If your education is free, you must get good grades. If you collect welfare, you must work for the community (ironically enough, Conservatives have picked up on this when it was Marx and Engels that wrote in The Communist Manifesto that everyone has an equal obligation to work). If you want free health care, you must take care of yourself. People need to take responsibility for their mortgages and pay them back even if they are inconvenient.

I don't disagree with you. People DO need to take responsibility. My concern is that if most people in Robor's situation walk away from their homes, then my future retirement will take a GREATER hit than if we just help them pay it off.

There are a lot of people out there who are just sheeple being hearded around by society without real independent though or reason. These are the people that got these ridiculous loans and these are the people that bought houses in 2005/6 at the peak of this mess.

My bottom line argument is that by doing nothing, letting foreclosures continue etc. will have a greater monatery impact to society vs. changing the rules a little so that the money can be paid back.

 

[Robor]

It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Martin
IIRC, median income has grown very little since about 2001, so a return to year 2000 prices seems likely. They don't give the average house price in the article, but I'd look for prices to stabalize when they fall to about 3.something times the median household income (so around 160-170k?)

I think the cost of construction and materials, diminishing availability of land (see major metro areas) drives prices much more than median household income. I don't think a 3% year over year gain is unreasonable. Not sure where that puts prices at...

Well, people can't afford to live beyond their means, so regardless of these factors house prices cannot sustainably stay higher and if you look at broad, historical trends, you'll see that ratio stay pretty constant. Housing can change to respond to those factors (smaller or denser units if land runs out, lower quality materials if cost goes up, etc), but people won't ever be able to pay more as a percentage of their income.

You can see the bubble pretty clearly and you can also get a sense of when it will be over
http://bp2.blogger.com/_pMscxx...usePriceIncome2006.jpg

so if the median house price was $250k (I'm guessing the figure) at the end of 2006 when the ratio was 4.6, that means house prices have to fall to about $170k (the stable, historical ratio of about 3.2) before we can say this bubble is over.


Edit: here's another good graph:
http://www.torontohomes-for-sa.../4a_custpage_2578.html

If we were to plot median household incomes on that, you'll be able to see very high correlation. In fact, Canada went through some bad recessions in the early 80s and 90s and you can clearly see that reflected in the graph.

 

[BigDH01]

Originally posted by: Robor
It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

But doing what's best for you is hurting those from whom you borrowed (including normal people's retirement accounts).

Does it not mean anything to you that you signed your name to a contract where you pledged to pay the mortgage? Was it unclear in some way? Were you guaranteed appreciation? You're making a purely selfish decision with no regard for those people that have invested in you and trusted you when you signed your name.

Granted, I'm not bothered greatly by the thought of you taking money from Thain or some other corrupt banker but many retirement and pension accounts are tied to mortgages. You're not just walking away with their investment, you're walking away with average middle-class worker investments. You're putting food in your mouth by taking it from their's.

By the way, when did people start thinking of their homes solely as investment vehicles? Do you not receive some benefit by living in this home? Did you ever think of it as just a home when you purchased it?

 

[smokeyjoe]

Originally posted by: irwincur
How do you propose the government picks and chooses who should benefit from this. I will be pissed that people in CA stand to get a lot more than someone say in the Midwest. It is not my fault that some moron bought a $1 million dollar house on a 50K salary.

There is some personal responsbility to be had here. It is not the governments job to read the terms of your loan. Hell, even if they did, they would have said go for it. The thinking over the last 30 years has been that home ownership is good, no matter what the cost is.

It wouldn't be an easy thing to determine, a lot would have to be done case by case.. but if our government can throw billions at failing banks it seems sensible they can throw some thousands at homeowners, you know, it's own citizens it proclaims will eventually benefit from the bailout.

And yes, there has been a lack of personal responsibility among some homeowners. There has also been a lack of responsibility by the banks who approved these loans and are now failing, yet they get the money to hoard :disgust:.. but I think I may be off topic

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Robor
It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

Seen as an investment it purely comes down to numbers, really, just like buying stock, it sinks, and you sell it. It will kill your credit but who knows the impact of that. I suspect that it's not worth $40k to do it, though.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: Robor
It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

But doing what's best for you is hurting those from whom you borrowed (including normal people's retirement accounts).

Does it not mean anything to you that you signed your name to a contract where you pledged to pay the mortgage? Was it unclear in some way? Were you guaranteed appreciation? You're making a purely selfish decision with no regard for those people that have invested in you and trusted you when you signed your name.

Granted, I'm not bothered greatly by the thought of you taking money from Thain or some other corrupt banker but many retirement and pension accounts are tied to mortgages. You're not just walking away with their investment, you're walking away with average middle-class worker investments. You're putting food in your mouth by taking it from their's.

By the way, when did people start thinking of their homes solely as investment vehicles? Do you not receive some benefit by living in this home? Did you ever think of it as just a home when you purchased it?

For starters, I haven't done anything and don't have plans to at the moment. I've simply kicked the idea around in my head every time I talk to my neighbor and hear about another of our units up for sale for 2/3 of what we owe. My biggest issue is I'm living in what is 100% *the banks* house and with values in our neighborhood will continue to be for a *long* time. I dread the thought of a major repair. It would be like fixing the landlords apartment.

As far as the contract goes, I didn't read it 'cover to cover' but it was explained during the closing. As long as I pay my bill every month I get to continue living there. If I don't they kick me out and sell it to someone who will. Pretty simple really. And no, I don't have any loyalty or sympathy toward the bank/lenders. Call me selfish if you want but if the tables were turned and I was in dire financial situation do you think they'd have pity on me? History says no.

Homes have almost always been considered a safe investment and double as a tax break and a place to live.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Robor
It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

Seen as an investment it purely comes down to numbers, really, just like buying stock, it sinks, and you sell it. It will kill your credit but who knows the impact of that. I suspect that it's not worth $40k to do it, though.

Yeah, I understand that part and that's why we've been and probably will continue to 'ride it out'. I really hate being locked in here until the market turns around *a lot* though. :-/

 

[Slew Foot]

Still waiting for any meaningful reductions in places people actually want to live in in northern CA.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: Robor
I have a coworker who purchased near the peak of the bubble. They're now about $85K upside-down on their place. I refinanced an adjustable mortgage to 30 fixed ~ 5 years ago. We took out a home equity loan on our place ~ 3 years ago. Values have dropped so far (about 50% of peak in my neighborhood) between the original mortgage and HE loan we're about $40K upside-down today.

You (the OP) can say it's a necessary adjustment and celebrate it if you want but if this downward trend continues it's only going to get worse. In our case I'm seeing little reason to continue paying into a place that's possibly many years away from having equity again. The mortgage interest gives us very little over the standard deduction on our income taxes and each year homeowners insurance (ass rape here in FL) goes up 10%+. We could probably get a lot better (newer and closer to work) place for less money in rent. Yeah, it would knock our credit down but we've got great credit now and could probably build it back up sooner than our condo has any equity.

How much was the HEL? What did you use it for?

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Robor

Originally posted by: BigDH01

Originally posted by: Robor
It's been noted I purchased as an investment and in doing so borrowed from those who invested in me. Of course that's true. That said, what is my motivation to continue paying into what amounts to a failed investment? Morality? Yeah, I see the point but in this economy I put our financial situation above the opinion of others. Credit? Definitely. We've both got great credit and would prefer to keep it that way. FWIW, this is not a matter of our mortgage being 'inconvenient'. No one likes to pay a mortgage but as long as we're both healthy and employed we can afford our mortgage. My question is, if we're not going to see a return anytime soon should we continue doing so just so we can 'do the right thing'? As far as I'm concerned our first responsibility is to our family and doing what's best for us.

But doing what's best for you is hurting those from whom you borrowed (including normal people's retirement accounts).

Does it not mean anything to you that you signed your name to a contract where you pledged to pay the mortgage? Was it unclear in some way? Were you guaranteed appreciation? You're making a purely selfish decision with no regard for those people that have invested in you and trusted you when you signed your name.

Granted, I'm not bothered greatly by the thought of you taking money from Thain or some other corrupt banker but many retirement and pension accounts are tied to mortgages. You're not just walking away with their investment, you're walking away with average middle-class worker investments. You're putting food in your mouth by taking it from their's.

By the way, when did people start thinking of their homes solely as investment vehicles? Do you not receive some benefit by living in this home? Did you ever think of it as just a home when you purchased it?

For starters, I haven't done anything and don't have plans to at the moment. I've simply kicked the idea around in my head every time I talk to my neighbor and hear about another of our units up for sale for 2/3 of what we owe. My biggest issue is I'm living in what is 100% *the banks* house and with values in our neighborhood will continue to be for a *long* time. I dread the thought of a major repair. It would be like fixing the landlords apartment.

As far as the contract goes, I didn't read it 'cover to cover' but it was explained during the closing. As long as I pay my bill every month I get to continue living there. If I don't they kick me out and sell it to someone who will. Pretty simple really. And no, I don't have any loyalty or sympathy toward the bank/lenders. Call me selfish if you want but if the tables were turned and I was in dire financial situation do you think they'd have pity on me? History says no.

Homes have almost always been considered a safe investment and double as a tax break and a place to live.

I am sympathetic. If you rent an apartment and stop paying rent, you get kicked out and credit dinged. In a way the mortgage is similar for you. You owe more than it's worth. Truly, unequivocally, the bank owns it. If you stay there, you take the brunt of what turned out to be a terrible investment. If you leave, the bank takes it. The more I think about it, the more I'd be inclined to play by the legal rules that both parties knew up front (specifically, you pay and stay there or you don't pay and get foreclosed) and do what's best for you. You screwed up by buying an overpriced house and the bank screwed up by lending the money to you. Since it's not possible to share that blame (unless you can get one of the gov-sponsored bank capitulation deals), one of you has to take it fully.

 

[sactoking]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Still waiting for any meaningful reductions in places people actually want to live in in northern CA.

The house I grew up in in NCAL is now listed as a foreclosure for <50% of what my parents got when they sold in 2005 (and also <50% of the balance owed on the loan in 2007 when it went to auction). That's a pretty meaningful reduction.

If you're waiting for prices in the Haight to drop >50%, it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Naustica

Originally posted by: Robor
I have a coworker who purchased near the peak of the bubble. They're now about $85K upside-down on their place. I refinanced an adjustable mortgage to 30 fixed ~ 5 years ago. We took out a home equity loan on our place ~ 3 years ago. Values have dropped so far (about 50% of peak in my neighborhood) between the original mortgage and HE loan we're about $40K upside-down today.

You (the OP) can say it's a necessary adjustment and celebrate it if you want but if this downward trend continues it's only going to get worse. In our case I'm seeing little reason to continue paying into a place that's possibly many years away from having equity again. The mortgage interest gives us very little over the standard deduction on our income taxes and each year homeowners insurance (ass rape here in FL) goes up 10%+. We could probably get a lot better (newer and closer to work) place for less money in rent. Yeah, it would knock our credit down but we've got great credit now and could probably build it back up sooner than our condo has any equity.

How much was the HEL? What did you use it for?

IIRC the HEL was about $30K minus fees and most of it went into tile, a new roof, and a new A/C, and paying off CC debt I'd been carrying since the divorce. I didn't know it at the time but I made a huge mistake with my car and dumped $4K to fix everything that's wrong'. It did not end there (see sig).

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I'm blameless here. In hindsight I should have got a roommate after getting divorced to share expenses, gone out less with friends, not upgraded my computer so often, sold the unreliable car, and more recently done the bare minimum in home repairs and no improvements.

 

[imported_K3N]

As most well informed people know now, Iceland recently experienced a financial crisis where their currency was devalued by over 30%, their unemployment rate soared through the roof, and most of the savings of the Icelandic people disappeared. All of this as a result of the country's Banks getting involved with 60 billion dollars in bank derivatives (3 times the countries the country's GDP of 20 billion dollars). Iceland is or was once, one of the most prosperous countries in the world with a nominal GDP per capita of $64000.

Rightfully so, the brave Icelandic people protested with riots and now the corrupt government of Iceland has been toppled. Hopefully now the Icelandic people can get a government that puts the best interest of theirs at heart, not the bloodsucking international bankers like George Soros and Hank Paulson.

Barky, successor of the the 43rd tenant of the white house, George Dubya Bush, has now proposed a ridiculous "stimulus package" that will attempt to bail out the 1.5 quadrillion (yes that's 1,500 trillion dollars) in bank derivatives. This is roughly over 90 times the GDP of the United States. Yet instead of Americans going out and protesting these bloodsucking bankers, they still choose to just sit back and expect the chosen one, Obama, puppet of finance capitalism, to fix all their problems for them.

Recently a top Russian professor, predicted that the U.S. could soon get itself involved in a civil war and eventually disintegrate into atleast 6 different nations. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8-0QtCaTg

Top trending analyst, Gerald Celente, who envisioned the dissolution of the Soviet Union, predicts the U.S. to erupt into full scale food riots by around 2009-2013. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaWZWyBSBB0

Pastor Lindsay Williams, the man who informed the world on July 2008, that oil would go below $50 a barrel by mid November 2008, also tells us how the low price of Oil will play a big role in devaluing the US dollar.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...k3ntegra.blogspot.com/

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I am sympathetic. If you rent an apartment and stop paying rent, you get kicked out and credit dinged. In a way the mortgage is similar for you. You owe more than it's worth. Truly, unequivocally, the bank owns it. If you stay there, you take the brunt of what turned out to be a terrible investment. If you leave, the bank takes it. The more I think about it, the more I'd be inclined to play by the legal rules that both parties knew up front (specifically, you pay and stay there or you don't pay and get foreclosed) and do what's best for you. You screwed up by buying an overpriced house and the bank screwed up by lending the money to you. Since it's not possible to share that blame (unless you can get one of the gov-sponsored bank capitulation deals), one of you has to take it fully.

In all fairness I knew what I was signing just as much as the bank lending to me. I refi'ed to get a fixed rate and my budget on track and spent too much money on repairs/upgrades with the HEL. Either we suck it up and wait a while for the turnaround or do the dick move and screw our credit for a while. We'll probably stick it out - I'm too much of a procrastinator to actually do anything!

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: K3N

There's a padded room somewhere waiting for you.

 

[Theb]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Home prices fall at record pace

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- An index of home prices in 20 major metropolitan areas fell at a record annual pace in November, to levels not seen since 2004, according to a report released Tuesday.

The S&P Case-Shiller Home Price Index, a sampling of 20 cities from across the nation, fell a record 18.2% over the 12 months ended Nov. 30. That brought the index to its lowest point since February 2004. From its peak in mid-2006, the index has plunged a whopping 25.1%.

A necessary decline...many people being pinched that don't deserve it - put 20% down, lost their job, have to move...

eff all those waitress/construction worker husband and wife combos who bought McMansions with interest only loans.

Here is the actual press release with graphs

Hard to say if we're nearing a bottom or just in free-fall. Overall we're back to 04 levels, but are we going to return to 02? 1999? 1987?

So looking at the graph with my untrained eyes it seems like 2010 might be the best time to buy? That will give homes another year to depreciate and the bottom will be further out so I'll still have a very strong negotiating position.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: sactoking

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Still waiting for any meaningful reductions in places people actually want to live in in northern CA.

The house I grew up in in NCAL is now listed as a foreclosure for <50% of what my parents got when they sold in 2005 (and also <50% of the balance owed on the loan in 2007 when it went to auction). That's a pretty meaningful reduction.

If you're waiting for prices in the Haight to drop >50%, it ain't gonna happen.

Because pot smoking hippies have millions of dollars to spend on studio flats? Ive lived in SF for 5 years, wont make that mistake again.

 

[piasabird]

Officer I dont know how the fire started. We just ran like rats. Good thing I had the insurance paid up and I moved all my belongings our of the house first.

There have been lots of cases that cabinets and marble counter tops and all kinds of fixtures have been scavenged to pay debts in some houses. Too bad that none of my stuff is worth selling.