bubbleinfo.com

"This came into play on the Arthur deal, and as a result, we don't have a winner yet"

So much for that all cash offer. Guess your client is trying to get the extra $10K, despite the plot complications.

Just like every other seller.

I predicted the response too.

"There isn't $10,000 in damage, is there? We can always get the repairs done"

I stopped her cold. "We? there's no 'we' here, you mean I can go get repairs done, on my dime, with no reimbursement".

I feel another 10-20 hours of work coming on this deal....

My response to this new rule is "duh", seems pretty common sense to me, these geniuses are showing up a little bit late to the game.

better late than never

Why do they even care the banks are going to get bailed out either way. Might as well fund anything and everything. Taxpayers are the ones holding the bag.

Beyond the very appropriate rage at Republican socialism (when is the last time the US Government offered to buy preferred shares in ANY company?), how much will this bill do, really, beyond wasting huge amounts of money? This is what I want to know: How will the housing bill change things? Is WAMU going to be saved? Will Wachovia become profitable? Please let me know your thoughts.

Jim - just go fix the window and counter top.

Privatize the gain. Socialize the loss.

Jim, being on the forefront of dealing with the current slow-moving REO machine, don't you think the new housing bill is going to grind things to a halt? If lenders are already slow to deal with ordinary short sales and REOs, now they have a regulatory nightmare to comply with.

This actually sucks for some people (like myself).

I've got a 2/1 that I've owned for ~5 years. I've got approximately 30% equity in it. I'm now married with a baby on the way and have been planning on buying a bigger family home in the next year or two with the plan of legitimately renting out the 2/1 (its a perfect rental - cute and small in a good neighborhood). Cash flow would be slightly negative after maintenance, vacancy, etc, but we have a relatively high household income and don't see a problem with that.

This 30% equity requirement could prove to be a painful roadblock for us if prices keep declining as everyone expects. I wonder if there is anyway around it (corporation, LLC, something along those lines)

jay_cee, as I understand it, this may not apply to you if you do not intend to use the rental income as part of your income to apply loan (since you stated that you have a relatively high household income).
The new rule coming into effect on 8/1/2008 is that the borrower must have at least 30% equity in the house, a copy of the rental agreement and proof that the security deposit has been deposited into the borrowers account in able to use the 75% income.
If the borrower can't meet all 3 requirements the lenders have to count both payments against the borrower.

"relatively high" is very relative term in San Diego...

What are the current "loan-to-income" ratio guidelines?

If keeping the rental property would mean getting less of a "house we plan to retire in", then I'm more inclined to sell the rental so that its mortgage payment won't be held against us when buying the new house.

So Countrywide is implementing rules that BofA is not... That'll be shortlived as the latter is now the former.

jay cee,

The current Countrywide guidelines are more strict too. They won't allow a rental agreement to offset the other mortgage payment - you have to qualify using both property's PITI.

Supposedly the Fannie version is easier - we'll see next week - maybe temecula guy above has the coreect version.

First Cramer, now Kudlow:

Media reports painted a pessimistic picture of today’s release on existing home sales, which fell 15 percent from a year ago and recorded higher inventories. But inside the report was an awful lot of very good new news, which appear to be pointing to a bottom in the housing problem; in fact, maybe the tiniest beginnings of a recovery.

For example, the median existing home price has increased four consecutive months and is up 10 percent since February. Yes, it’s down 6 percent over the past year. But the monthly numbers show a gradual rebound. Actually, this median home price is $215,000 in June, compared to $196,000 last winter.

And there’s more. One of the hardest hit regions is the West, including California, Arizona, and Nevada. The other two bad states are Florida and Michigan. However, existing home sales in the western region are up four straight months, and are 17 percent above the low in October. At the same time, prices in the West have increased three straight months.

Jim,

Never fails. When the year over year hurts, use the month over month... note to self, only works March to September.

Chuck Ponzi

while sales may be picking up, prices in CA continue to decline at an increasing pace, month/month

what definition of bottom are we using?

I would imagine that in realtorspeak, the number of commission-producing sales define "the market" rather than prices.

They are looking at nationwide stats. The price increase may actually be happening somewhere (then again, could be seasonally normal), but either way it has nothing to do with San Diego. From what I see, prices have held steady through the spring, and are now continuing to decline.