Administration officials to unveil plan to address housing crisis. But details may be lacking.
By Tami Luhby, CNNMoney.com senior writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner is expected to announce Tuesday the Obama administration's long-awaited plans to address the foreclosure crisis.
But how much detail he'll reveal remains to be seen.
This much we know -- the Obama administration wants to set aside between $50 billion and $100 billion to address the foreclosure crisis. Loan modifications are expected to be a central part of the plan.
The administration's plan to attack the foreclosure crisis should come as part of its proposal for using the $350 billion remaining in the financial industry bailout package. Obama's officials have said for weeks that they will devote more resources to helping homeowners than their predecessor.
Washington insiders, however, say that Geithner may merely announce an overall framework for foreclosures, but won't get into specifics. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan told CNN Saturday that the plan's details would be unveiled "in coming weeks."
Finding a foreclosure fix is daunting, experts said. It eluded the Bush administration, which preferred to try to entice mortgage services to voluntarily modify loans without committing government funds.
Obama faces similar hurdles.
"It's been a real challenge," said Scott Talbott, senior vice president for government affairs for the Financial Services Roundtable. "To come up with a widespread approach is very difficult."
Potential plans
Obama's plan may expand onthe Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.'s streamlined loan modification program, which serves as a model for workouts being conducted by several banks and by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
The FDIC's program, which is underway at failed lender IndyMac, calls for making monthly payments more affordable by reducing interest rates, lengthening loan terms or deferring principal. Servicers aim to reduce payments to no more than 31% of a borrower's monthly income. So far, more than 10,000 delinquent loans have been modified, and offers have been made to another 20,000 borrowers.
Larry Summers, director of Obama's National Economic Council, has said that banks that receive bailout funds will be required to implement foreclosure prevention programs.
The Obama administration is expected to put some money behind the modification efforts. It's likely any modification plan will come with incentives for servicers and with some type of backstop in case the borrower defaults again. FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair unveiled a $24.4 billion plan in November that offered servicers $1,000 and provided a guarantee to cover 50% of any losses in case of redefault. The proposal, which she estimates will help 1.5 million people avoid foreclosure, has gone nowhere so far.
Officials may also expand the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which the federal government took over in September. Two months later, the mortgage finance companies announced a plan to help delinquent borrowers by reworking their mortgages.
The Bush administration had hoped the agencies' efforts would set a national standard for loan modifications. But the plan, which reduces payments to no more than 38% of a borrower's monthly income, is viewed as falling short because most of the troubled loans fall outside the purview of Fannie and Freddie.
Under the stimulus plan current under debate in the Senate, congressional lawmakers would require the president to develop a loan modification plan.
"Stemming the tide of foreclosures, which are at the heart of this economic crisis, must be one of our top priorities," said Senator Chris Dodd, D-Conn., in a statement late Friday night after the Senate approved his amendment to the stimulus plan that would require the Treasury Department to spend at least $50 billion in funds from the bank bailout on a loan modification program.
"By providing the Treasury with the authority and funds to design and implement a loan modification program, we can help nearly 2 million families nationwide...avoid losing their home," Dodd added.
A major problem confronting the Obama administration, however, is what to do with the rising number of foreclosures stemming from unemployment. Loan modifications don't work for these borrowers.
The only viable solution for these delinquent homeowners is to get the economy moving again so they can get jobs, experts said.
Along those lines, Shaun Donovan, the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, said in an interview on CNN Saturday morning that creating jobs was the top way to address the foreclosure problem.
"What is really driving the foreclosure crisis right now is that people are losing their jobs. And so job number one is to pass a recovery bill that will add three to four million jobs in this country," Donovan said.
Beyond bailout
To be sure, the administration's efforts will go beyond the bailout package. Already, it's likely the massive stimulus package will contain measures to spur homebuying, including a $15,000 tax credit for those purchasing a home. On deck is controversial legislation to allow bankruptcy judges to modify loans on primary residences.
Congressional Democrats are also looking to revamp the troubled Hope for Homeowners program, which was designed to refinance struggling borrowers into government-backed Federal Housing Administration loans. Few borrowers have signed up for the program, in part because of its high fees. Lawmakers hope to make it more attractive by easing the terms and providing incentives for servicers to participate.
In his statement late Friday, Dodd said his amendment would reform the program by reducing the upfront and annual premiums for borrowers, lowering the percentage of future equity that homeowners must share with the government and adding incentive payments to servicers.
Whatever the administration chooses to do, it should implement it quickly, experts said. Foreclosures continue to rise, with a new one started every 13 seconds, according to the Center for Responsible Lending.
"Every minute they delay someone is going to lose their home," said Kathleen Day, the center's spokeswoman. "The government has waited too long to act." To top of page
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Stimulus: What's next
Here's how the Senate bill differs from the House version -- and a preview of where the debate could heat up.
By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In the coming days, a compromise version of the economic recovery plan is likely to pass the Senate with a handful of Republican votes.
But a final bill is still a ways off.
If the Senate passes the bill, leaders will need to then negotiate the final bill with the House, which passed a different version nearly two weeks ago.
Senate Democrats can't pass a stimulus package without at least a few Republicans signing on -- unlike, the House Democrats, who passed their version without a single Republican vote. That means the Senate bill will dominate the House-Senate negotiations.
The aim of the plan's proponents: Final votes in both chambers before Congress begins its Presidents Day recess on Friday.
The House and Senate bills are identical in many ways. But there are some key differences in the area of tax breaks, spending measures and direct benefits to people hurt by the recession. Those differences offer a preview of the issues that could arise this week.
Tax breaks
Make Work Pay Credit: The Senate bill would narrow President Obama's signature tax provision. The full credit ($500 per worker or $1,000 per couple) would be paid to people making $70,000 or less ($140,000 per dual-earner couple). Under the House bill, those making $75,000 or less ($150,000 or less for couples) would qualify.
Break for higher income families: The Senate version includes a one-year provision to protect middle- and upper-middle-income families from having to pay the Alternative Minimum tax. The AMT was intended primarily for high-income taxpayers but has in recent years threatened to engulf those lower down the income scale. The House bill has no such provision.
Credit for car buyers: The Senate voted for an amendment that would let those who buy a car in 2009 deduct the interest they pay on their car loan as well as the sales tax charged in the purchase. The House bill doesn't include this provision.
Home-buyer credit: The Senate bill would double the size of an existing temporary home buyer credit to $15,000. It would also allow all home buyers to claim it and remove the requirement under current law that the credit be paid back. The House bill also removes the repayment requirement but leaves the credit maximum at $7,500 and would offer it only to first-time buyers.
Child care credit: Both the Senate and House would expand the eligibility provisions of the child care tax credit, so that lower income families could claim more of it. But the Senate expansion is smaller.
Direct spending
Education funding: The compromise Senate bill allocates $39 billion to a fiscal stabilization fund that states would use in great part to help fund public colleges and universities. That is well below the $79 billion allocated by the House.
The Senate version also provides less funding for Head Start and teacher quality programs, as well as education efforts for the disadvantaged. It would also eliminate funding in the House bill for K-12 construction and higher education facilities.
Health wellness and flu prevention: The Senate bill excludes money allocated by the House for a prevention and wellness program as well as for pandemic flu research.
Green government vehicles: The Senate version offers $300 million to purchase fuel-efficient government vehicles. That's half the amount allocated by the House bill.
Direct lifeline benefits
Subsidy for health insurance for those laid off: Both the Senate and House bills include provisions to help jobless workers pay for health insurance if they choose to stay on their ex-employer's plan. The Senate, however, offers less of a subsidy -- 50% for 12 months -- than the House, which calls for a 65% subsidy over 12 months.
Tax break on unemployment benefits: The Senate bill, unlike the House version, would make the first $2,400 of unemployment benefits tax free. Both the Senate and House bills extend the time that jobless workers can collect benefits.
Overall price tag
The Senate's bipartisan compromise aimed to reduce the package's overall price tag and remove elements that critics argued did not belong in a stimulus bill.
The House-passed version was estimated to increase the deficit by $820 billion over 10 years. The version initially considered by the Senate cost $885 billion, but grew to more than $900 billion after amendments were passed last week.
Now lawmakers and others estimate that the cost of the revised package, including the bipartisan compromise, is between $820 billion and $827 billion, the same or higher than the House package.
But those are unofficial estimates. The final word on the official taxpayer cost of the Senate bill belongs to the Congressional Budget Office and the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Their evaluations will likely be released early this week.
By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In the coming days, a compromise version of the economic recovery plan is likely to pass the Senate with a handful of Republican votes.
But a final bill is still a ways off.
If the Senate passes the bill, leaders will need to then negotiate the final bill with the House, which passed a different version nearly two weeks ago.
Senate Democrats can't pass a stimulus package without at least a few Republicans signing on -- unlike, the House Democrats, who passed their version without a single Republican vote. That means the Senate bill will dominate the House-Senate negotiations.
The aim of the plan's proponents: Final votes in both chambers before Congress begins its Presidents Day recess on Friday.
The House and Senate bills are identical in many ways. But there are some key differences in the area of tax breaks, spending measures and direct benefits to people hurt by the recession. Those differences offer a preview of the issues that could arise this week.
Tax breaks
Make Work Pay Credit: The Senate bill would narrow President Obama's signature tax provision. The full credit ($500 per worker or $1,000 per couple) would be paid to people making $70,000 or less ($140,000 per dual-earner couple). Under the House bill, those making $75,000 or less ($150,000 or less for couples) would qualify.
Break for higher income families: The Senate version includes a one-year provision to protect middle- and upper-middle-income families from having to pay the Alternative Minimum tax. The AMT was intended primarily for high-income taxpayers but has in recent years threatened to engulf those lower down the income scale. The House bill has no such provision.
Credit for car buyers: The Senate voted for an amendment that would let those who buy a car in 2009 deduct the interest they pay on their car loan as well as the sales tax charged in the purchase. The House bill doesn't include this provision.
Home-buyer credit: The Senate bill would double the size of an existing temporary home buyer credit to $15,000. It would also allow all home buyers to claim it and remove the requirement under current law that the credit be paid back. The House bill also removes the repayment requirement but leaves the credit maximum at $7,500 and would offer it only to first-time buyers.
Child care credit: Both the Senate and House would expand the eligibility provisions of the child care tax credit, so that lower income families could claim more of it. But the Senate expansion is smaller.
Direct spending
Education funding: The compromise Senate bill allocates $39 billion to a fiscal stabilization fund that states would use in great part to help fund public colleges and universities. That is well below the $79 billion allocated by the House.
The Senate version also provides less funding for Head Start and teacher quality programs, as well as education efforts for the disadvantaged. It would also eliminate funding in the House bill for K-12 construction and higher education facilities.
Health wellness and flu prevention: The Senate bill excludes money allocated by the House for a prevention and wellness program as well as for pandemic flu research.
Green government vehicles: The Senate version offers $300 million to purchase fuel-efficient government vehicles. That's half the amount allocated by the House bill.
Direct lifeline benefits
Subsidy for health insurance for those laid off: Both the Senate and House bills include provisions to help jobless workers pay for health insurance if they choose to stay on their ex-employer's plan. The Senate, however, offers less of a subsidy -- 50% for 12 months -- than the House, which calls for a 65% subsidy over 12 months.
Tax break on unemployment benefits: The Senate bill, unlike the House version, would make the first $2,400 of unemployment benefits tax free. Both the Senate and House bills extend the time that jobless workers can collect benefits.
Overall price tag
The Senate's bipartisan compromise aimed to reduce the package's overall price tag and remove elements that critics argued did not belong in a stimulus bill.
The House-passed version was estimated to increase the deficit by $820 billion over 10 years. The version initially considered by the Senate cost $885 billion, but grew to more than $900 billion after amendments were passed last week.
Now lawmakers and others estimate that the cost of the revised package, including the bipartisan compromise, is between $820 billion and $827 billion, the same or higher than the House package.
But those are unofficial estimates. The final word on the official taxpayer cost of the Senate bill belongs to the Congressional Budget Office and the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. Their evaluations will likely be released early this week.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Senate OKs $15,000 tax break for homebuyers
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate voted Wednesday night to give a tax break of up to $15,000 to homebuyers in hopes of revitalizing the housing industry, a victory for Republicans eager to leave their mark on a mammoth economic stimulus bill at the heart of President Obama's recovery plan.
The tax break was approved without dissent and came on a day in which Obama pushed back pointedly against Republican critics of the legislation even as he reached across party lines to consider a reduction in the spending it contains.
"Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the essential," Obama said as Senate Republicans stepped up their criticism of the bill's spending and pressed for additional tax cuts and relief for homeowners. He warned that failure to act quickly "will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession."
Democratic leaders have pledged to have legislation ready for Obama's signature by the end of next week.
While they concede privately they will have to accept some spending reductions along the way, conservative Republicans failed in their initial attempts to force deep cuts in the bill.
On another contentious issue, the Senate softened a labor-backed provision requiring that only U.S.-made iron or steel used in construction projects paid for in the bill. A move by Sen. John McCain to delete the so-called Buy American requirement failed, 31-65.
But with Obama voicing concern about the provision, the requirement was changed to specify that U.S. international trade agreements not to be violated.
Democrats also preserved a key priority for Obama, a break of up to $1,000 for couples who pay payroll taxes but whose earnings are so low they do not pay income tax.
Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., who advanced the homebuyers tax break, said it was intended to help revive the housing industry, which has virtually collapsed in the wake of a credit crisis that began last fall.
The proposal would allow a tax credit of 10% of the value of new or existing residences, up to a $15,000 limit. Current law provides for a $7,500 tax break but only for first-time homebuyers.
Isakson's office said the proposal would cost the government an estimated $19 billion.
Democrats readily agreed to the proposal, although it may be changed or even deleted as the stimulus measure makes its way through Congress over the next 10 days or so.
Other GOP attempts to change the measure went down to defeat. The most sweeping of them, by Sen. Jim DeMint failed on a mostly party-line vote of 36-61. It would have replaced the White House-backed legislation with a series of tax cuts on personal and business income and capital gains at the same time it made cuts passed during the Bush administration permanent.
"This bill needs to be cut down," Republican Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor. He cited $524 million for a State Department program that he said envisions creating 388 jobs. "That comes to $1.35 million per job," he added.
After days of absorbing rhetorical attacks, Obama and Senate Democrats mounted a counteroffensive against Republicans who say tax cuts alone can cure the economy.
Obama said the criticisms he has heard "echo the very same failed economic theories that led us into this crisis in the first place, the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems."
"I reject those theories and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," said the president, who was elected with an Electoral College landslide last fall and enjoys high public approval ratings at the outset of his term.
Obama did not mention any Republicans by name, and most have signaled their support for varying amounts of new spending.
Even so, the president repeated his retort word for word in late afternoon, yet softened the partisan impact of his comments by meeting at the White House with senators often willing to cross party lines.
His first visitor was Sen. Olympia Snowe a moderate Republican lawmaker. Later he met with Sens. Susan Collins and Ben Nelson.
"I gave him a list of provisions" for possible deletion from the bill, Collins told reporters outside the White House. Among them were $8 billion to upgrade facilities and information technology at the State Department and funds for combatting a possible outbreak of pandemic flu and promoting cyber-security. The latter two items, she said, are "near and dear to her," but belong in routine legislation and not an economic stimulus measure.
Collins and Nelson have been working on a list of possible spending cuts totaling roughly $50 billion, although they have yet to make details public.
The tax break was approved without dissent and came on a day in which Obama pushed back pointedly against Republican critics of the legislation even as he reached across party lines to consider a reduction in the spending it contains.
"Let's not make the perfect the enemy of the essential," Obama said as Senate Republicans stepped up their criticism of the bill's spending and pressed for additional tax cuts and relief for homeowners. He warned that failure to act quickly "will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession."
Democratic leaders have pledged to have legislation ready for Obama's signature by the end of next week.
While they concede privately they will have to accept some spending reductions along the way, conservative Republicans failed in their initial attempts to force deep cuts in the bill.
On another contentious issue, the Senate softened a labor-backed provision requiring that only U.S.-made iron or steel used in construction projects paid for in the bill. A move by Sen. John McCain to delete the so-called Buy American requirement failed, 31-65.
But with Obama voicing concern about the provision, the requirement was changed to specify that U.S. international trade agreements not to be violated.
Democrats also preserved a key priority for Obama, a break of up to $1,000 for couples who pay payroll taxes but whose earnings are so low they do not pay income tax.
Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga., who advanced the homebuyers tax break, said it was intended to help revive the housing industry, which has virtually collapsed in the wake of a credit crisis that began last fall.
The proposal would allow a tax credit of 10% of the value of new or existing residences, up to a $15,000 limit. Current law provides for a $7,500 tax break but only for first-time homebuyers.
Isakson's office said the proposal would cost the government an estimated $19 billion.
Democrats readily agreed to the proposal, although it may be changed or even deleted as the stimulus measure makes its way through Congress over the next 10 days or so.
Other GOP attempts to change the measure went down to defeat. The most sweeping of them, by Sen. Jim DeMint failed on a mostly party-line vote of 36-61. It would have replaced the White House-backed legislation with a series of tax cuts on personal and business income and capital gains at the same time it made cuts passed during the Bush administration permanent.
"This bill needs to be cut down," Republican Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on the Senate floor. He cited $524 million for a State Department program that he said envisions creating 388 jobs. "That comes to $1.35 million per job," he added.
After days of absorbing rhetorical attacks, Obama and Senate Democrats mounted a counteroffensive against Republicans who say tax cuts alone can cure the economy.
Obama said the criticisms he has heard "echo the very same failed economic theories that led us into this crisis in the first place, the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems."
"I reject those theories and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change," said the president, who was elected with an Electoral College landslide last fall and enjoys high public approval ratings at the outset of his term.
Obama did not mention any Republicans by name, and most have signaled their support for varying amounts of new spending.
Even so, the president repeated his retort word for word in late afternoon, yet softened the partisan impact of his comments by meeting at the White House with senators often willing to cross party lines.
His first visitor was Sen. Olympia Snowe a moderate Republican lawmaker. Later he met with Sens. Susan Collins and Ben Nelson.
"I gave him a list of provisions" for possible deletion from the bill, Collins told reporters outside the White House. Among them were $8 billion to upgrade facilities and information technology at the State Department and funds for combatting a possible outbreak of pandemic flu and promoting cyber-security. The latter two items, she said, are "near and dear to her," but belong in routine legislation and not an economic stimulus measure.
Collins and Nelson have been working on a list of possible spending cuts totaling roughly $50 billion, although they have yet to make details public.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
The new rules of mortgage lending
Shopping for a home loan? Things have changed - here's what you need to consider.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- If you're shopping for a mortgage these days, it's a whole new world out there.
"There have been a huge number of changes over the past few years in mortgage borrowing," said Gibran Nicholas, founder of the CMPS Institute, which trains and certifies mortgage advisors.
Of course, many of the subprime loans that helped fuel the housing boom - those that didn't require borrowers to show any proof of income, or that let homeowners make minimum payments - are are simply no longer available.
But even buyers looking for a traditional mortgage are now faced with different factors to consider.
Here is what you need to know:
Paying up-front points. Borrowers can pay points - one-time, up-front fees - in order to reduce their mortgage's interest rate over the life of the loan. One point represents 1% of the mortgage value.
But they often assume that they should never pay points, according to Alan Rosenbaum, founder of mortgage broker Guardhill Financial. That's a mistake, in his opinion.
When interest rates were high, paying points didn't make sense because borrowers were very likely to refinance after rates dropped. They wouldn't hold their original loans long enough to recoup their up-front costs.
But now borrowers can get a lot more bang for their buck. The old rule of thumb was that paying one point at closing could lower their mortgage's interest rate by a quarter percentage point or so.
"Today the spread is worth a half point to a full point on the rate," said Rosenbaum.
It means paying $2,000 on a $200,000 mortgage at closing can shave as much as a whole percentage point off the loan's interest rate, changing a 6% loan to 5%.
That would save $126 a month, and pay for itself in 16 months. Even if the rate were only lowered to 5.5%, that would still save $64 a month, paying for itself in 32 months.
Still, not everyone is convinced. Rosenbaum recently had a client who chose a 15-year fixed rate loan at 5.875% with zero up-front points on a $800,000 loan, instead of paying a point to get a 5.375% loan.
Had the borrower chosen to pay that point, he would have recouped that cost in about three years, and then gone on to save more than $200 a month for the remaining 12 years of the loan.
Of course, there are caveats. Buyers who are planning to refinance or sell within a few years shouldn't pay points, since the strategy simply doesn't pay in the short term.
Making more than the minimum down payment. If you can afford to put 25%, 30% or more down, should you do it?
Most lenders require a minimum down payment of 20%; anything less and borrowers will need to obtain private mortgage insurance.
And if a buyer could afford to put more than 20% down, it was generally assumed that they should.
The traditional thinking was, "If you have the capital to commit, why not?" said Keith Gumbinger of mortgage research firm HSH Associates. "It will give you a smaller balance to pay off. But now, in light of declining home markets, not everyone would agree with that."
High down payments can be wiped out in severely declining markets.
Nicholas said he knows of a couple in Arizona who put a whopping $400,000 down on a million dollar house a couple of years ago. That gave them, they thought, a nice home equity cushion should they run into financial trouble.
"But prices are down so much, the couple still fell underwater," he said. "It would have been better to conserve that cash in case home prices continue to decline."
Locking in the mortgage rate. Many borrowers choose not to lock in when rates are falling, as they have been, since they assume that the deals will only get better.
But that's often a mistake.
"We almost always recommend that if you have the numbers that make your deal work, then lock it in," said Gumbinger.
His reason: Interest rates tend to jump up much faster than they inch down, meaning that buyers are much more likely to get stuck with a higher mortgage rate than they are to get lower one because they waited.
Besides, locking in at the currently very affordable rates can give borrowers peace of mind, which is no small matter when you're trying to buy a house.
"You'll sleep better at night," said Gumbinger.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- If you're shopping for a mortgage these days, it's a whole new world out there.
"There have been a huge number of changes over the past few years in mortgage borrowing," said Gibran Nicholas, founder of the CMPS Institute, which trains and certifies mortgage advisors.
Of course, many of the subprime loans that helped fuel the housing boom - those that didn't require borrowers to show any proof of income, or that let homeowners make minimum payments - are are simply no longer available.
But even buyers looking for a traditional mortgage are now faced with different factors to consider.
Here is what you need to know:
Paying up-front points. Borrowers can pay points - one-time, up-front fees - in order to reduce their mortgage's interest rate over the life of the loan. One point represents 1% of the mortgage value.
But they often assume that they should never pay points, according to Alan Rosenbaum, founder of mortgage broker Guardhill Financial. That's a mistake, in his opinion.
When interest rates were high, paying points didn't make sense because borrowers were very likely to refinance after rates dropped. They wouldn't hold their original loans long enough to recoup their up-front costs.
But now borrowers can get a lot more bang for their buck. The old rule of thumb was that paying one point at closing could lower their mortgage's interest rate by a quarter percentage point or so.
"Today the spread is worth a half point to a full point on the rate," said Rosenbaum.
It means paying $2,000 on a $200,000 mortgage at closing can shave as much as a whole percentage point off the loan's interest rate, changing a 6% loan to 5%.
That would save $126 a month, and pay for itself in 16 months. Even if the rate were only lowered to 5.5%, that would still save $64 a month, paying for itself in 32 months.
Still, not everyone is convinced. Rosenbaum recently had a client who chose a 15-year fixed rate loan at 5.875% with zero up-front points on a $800,000 loan, instead of paying a point to get a 5.375% loan.
Had the borrower chosen to pay that point, he would have recouped that cost in about three years, and then gone on to save more than $200 a month for the remaining 12 years of the loan.
Of course, there are caveats. Buyers who are planning to refinance or sell within a few years shouldn't pay points, since the strategy simply doesn't pay in the short term.
Making more than the minimum down payment. If you can afford to put 25%, 30% or more down, should you do it?
Most lenders require a minimum down payment of 20%; anything less and borrowers will need to obtain private mortgage insurance.
And if a buyer could afford to put more than 20% down, it was generally assumed that they should.
The traditional thinking was, "If you have the capital to commit, why not?" said Keith Gumbinger of mortgage research firm HSH Associates. "It will give you a smaller balance to pay off. But now, in light of declining home markets, not everyone would agree with that."
High down payments can be wiped out in severely declining markets.
Nicholas said he knows of a couple in Arizona who put a whopping $400,000 down on a million dollar house a couple of years ago. That gave them, they thought, a nice home equity cushion should they run into financial trouble.
"But prices are down so much, the couple still fell underwater," he said. "It would have been better to conserve that cash in case home prices continue to decline."
Locking in the mortgage rate. Many borrowers choose not to lock in when rates are falling, as they have been, since they assume that the deals will only get better.
But that's often a mistake.
"We almost always recommend that if you have the numbers that make your deal work, then lock it in," said Gumbinger.
His reason: Interest rates tend to jump up much faster than they inch down, meaning that buyers are much more likely to get stuck with a higher mortgage rate than they are to get lower one because they waited.
Besides, locking in at the currently very affordable rates can give borrowers peace of mind, which is no small matter when you're trying to buy a house.
"You'll sleep better at night," said Gumbinger.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Distressed dominate home sales
Repossessed homes and short sales make up a large percentage of sales in many real estate markets.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Real estate values around the nation have collapsed, and sales of foreclosed and "underwater" homes now dominate many housing markets, according to a report released Tuesday.
The report, from Zillow.com, a real estate Web site, revealed that with foreclosures soaring, nearly 20% of the nation's home sales in 2008 were of bank-repossessed properties. Another 11% were short sales, in which homeowners owed more in mortgage debt than their homes were worth.
Madera, Calif., had the highest percentage of these distressed sales: 54.6% of all transactions there were foreclosed homes, and another 3.4% were short sales.
In Merced, Calif., 53.4% of sales were foreclosures and 4.8% were short sales. In nearby Stockton, 51.1% were foreclosures and 5.4% were short sales.
"As more markets turn down and markets that were already down go deeper, the pace at which value is being erased from the U.S. housing stock is rapidly increasing," said Stan Humphries, Zillow's vice president in charge of data and analytics.
"More value [was] wiped out in the fourth quarter of 2008 than was eliminated in all of 2007," Humphries said.
About $3.3 trillion in home equity was erased in 2008, with $1.4 trillion of that wipeout coming in the fourth quarter alone, according to Humphries. More than $6 trillion in value has been lost since the market peaked in 2005.
Those equity losses have put many homeowners underwater, where they're extremely vulnerable to foreclosure. These owners can't tap home equity for the cash they need to pay bills when they run into rough financial patches, and they often find it impossible to refinance - lenders will not loan more than the property is worth.
In the United States, 17.6% of all homes are now underwater, according to Zillow, as are 41.2% of all mortgages for homes bought in the past five years.
The worst-hit cities are in the once-booming Sun Belt. In Las Vegas, 61.4% of all homes are underwater.
Because so many homes are worth less than their mortgage balances, an increasing number have to be sold short. But short sale transactions can take a long time to complete, because lenders have been having trouble keeping up with the flood of requests.
"The speed of short sales is a function of the resources being allocated to them by lenders, and those resources are being stretched to the limit," Humphries said.
That means lenders may not act on approving short sales for months. The deals cannot go forward without their approval, because the banks must agree to forgive the difference between what they're owed and what the sale brings in.
As the time it takes to arrange short sales lengthens, they become harder to complete.
Time and money wasted
One example of how price declines can doom a short sale occurred recently in Phoenix. Curtis Johnson, a real estate broker there, worked with a health care worker whose hours were being cut and who could no longer afford her mortgage. She fell behind and decided to sell.
Johnson was able to find a buyer willing to pay $183,000, and got an approval form the lender. The owner confidently moved out, got a new place and started a new life. But the lender folded and the mortgage went to a new servicer, who took six weeks to approve the deal.
"Unfortunately, the buyers who were approved were no longer interested because the real estate market had dropped significantly," Johnson said. "They wrote a new offer, considerably lower then the first, and it was time to start over."
Two more offers eventually fell through before a new buyer was found and the owner's bank approved the price, this time at $163,000. On the day of that closing, however, the parties discovered that the buyer's lender had run out of funds and dropped out of the deal. The home went to foreclosure auction before another sale could be arranged.
The house is now on the market for $139,900.
"[The house is] listed for less than what would have been received had the bank been willing to work with us, and still has not yet sold," Johnson said.
Distressed sales like that depress the market for all homeowners. Regular sellers in cities dominated by foreclosures have to adjust their prices downward to compete.
The percentage of homes sold for less than what their owners originally paid has leaped up in the past couple of years. In the United States as a whole, 34.6% of the sales made in 2008 were done at a loss. In Merced, 71.6% of all sales last year were for less than the seller paid. Stockton, Modesto and Las Vegas all had in excess of 68% of all homes being sold at a loss.
Foreclosures beget more foreclosures by adding inventory to the market, which depresses prices, which increases foreclosures, according to Humphries.
"The vicious cycle continues," he said. To top of page
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Real estate values around the nation have collapsed, and sales of foreclosed and "underwater" homes now dominate many housing markets, according to a report released Tuesday.
The report, from Zillow.com, a real estate Web site, revealed that with foreclosures soaring, nearly 20% of the nation's home sales in 2008 were of bank-repossessed properties. Another 11% were short sales, in which homeowners owed more in mortgage debt than their homes were worth.
Madera, Calif., had the highest percentage of these distressed sales: 54.6% of all transactions there were foreclosed homes, and another 3.4% were short sales.
In Merced, Calif., 53.4% of sales were foreclosures and 4.8% were short sales. In nearby Stockton, 51.1% were foreclosures and 5.4% were short sales.
"As more markets turn down and markets that were already down go deeper, the pace at which value is being erased from the U.S. housing stock is rapidly increasing," said Stan Humphries, Zillow's vice president in charge of data and analytics.
"More value [was] wiped out in the fourth quarter of 2008 than was eliminated in all of 2007," Humphries said.
About $3.3 trillion in home equity was erased in 2008, with $1.4 trillion of that wipeout coming in the fourth quarter alone, according to Humphries. More than $6 trillion in value has been lost since the market peaked in 2005.
Those equity losses have put many homeowners underwater, where they're extremely vulnerable to foreclosure. These owners can't tap home equity for the cash they need to pay bills when they run into rough financial patches, and they often find it impossible to refinance - lenders will not loan more than the property is worth.
In the United States, 17.6% of all homes are now underwater, according to Zillow, as are 41.2% of all mortgages for homes bought in the past five years.
The worst-hit cities are in the once-booming Sun Belt. In Las Vegas, 61.4% of all homes are underwater.
Because so many homes are worth less than their mortgage balances, an increasing number have to be sold short. But short sale transactions can take a long time to complete, because lenders have been having trouble keeping up with the flood of requests.
"The speed of short sales is a function of the resources being allocated to them by lenders, and those resources are being stretched to the limit," Humphries said.
That means lenders may not act on approving short sales for months. The deals cannot go forward without their approval, because the banks must agree to forgive the difference between what they're owed and what the sale brings in.
As the time it takes to arrange short sales lengthens, they become harder to complete.
Time and money wasted
One example of how price declines can doom a short sale occurred recently in Phoenix. Curtis Johnson, a real estate broker there, worked with a health care worker whose hours were being cut and who could no longer afford her mortgage. She fell behind and decided to sell.
Johnson was able to find a buyer willing to pay $183,000, and got an approval form the lender. The owner confidently moved out, got a new place and started a new life. But the lender folded and the mortgage went to a new servicer, who took six weeks to approve the deal.
"Unfortunately, the buyers who were approved were no longer interested because the real estate market had dropped significantly," Johnson said. "They wrote a new offer, considerably lower then the first, and it was time to start over."
Two more offers eventually fell through before a new buyer was found and the owner's bank approved the price, this time at $163,000. On the day of that closing, however, the parties discovered that the buyer's lender had run out of funds and dropped out of the deal. The home went to foreclosure auction before another sale could be arranged.
The house is now on the market for $139,900.
"[The house is] listed for less than what would have been received had the bank been willing to work with us, and still has not yet sold," Johnson said.
Distressed sales like that depress the market for all homeowners. Regular sellers in cities dominated by foreclosures have to adjust their prices downward to compete.
The percentage of homes sold for less than what their owners originally paid has leaped up in the past couple of years. In the United States as a whole, 34.6% of the sales made in 2008 were done at a loss. In Merced, 71.6% of all sales last year were for less than the seller paid. Stockton, Modesto and Las Vegas all had in excess of 68% of all homes being sold at a loss.
Foreclosures beget more foreclosures by adding inventory to the market, which depresses prices, which increases foreclosures, according to Humphries.
"The vicious cycle continues," he said. To top of page
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Realtor® Recommendations Make Headway in House
The U.S. House of Representatives has taken a significant step toward economic recovery in passing H.R. 1, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
“On behalf of NAR and its 1.2 million members, I’d like to thank Chairman Frank, D-Mass., Chairman Rangel, D-N.Y., and the House of Representatives for passing legislation that will help create market stability,” said National Association of Realtors® President Charles McMillan. “However, our work is far from finished and much more needs to be done in the coming days and weeks.”
Late last year, NAR presented Congress with its core principles for stabilizing the housing market to launch an economic recovery. In the current legislation, NAR strongly supports the provisions to reinstate the 2008 FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan limit increases through 2009. NAR also strongly supports eliminating the repayment requirement on the first-time home buyer tax credit. “This is critical to stimulating home sales and shrinking the housing inventory, which will in turn help stabilize home values,” McMillan said.
Although Realtors® support these provisions, a number of enhancements are needed to make them more effective. In a letter sent to Congress earlier this week, NAR encouraged Congress to make the loan limit increases permanent so that secure, affordable, safe financing is available for American families regardless of where they live. NAR is also pressing to expand the tax credit to all home buyers and extend the expiration date to December 31, 2009.
Other provisions in the bill will help communities across the country, including the expansion of the tax-exempt housing bonds, increased funding for rural housing loan programs, additional funding for neighborhood stabilization activities, more grants for low-income housing construction and rehabilitation, and energy efficiency incentives for housing.
“We think this bill is a great first step in helping our economy on the road to recovery. It is also important that Congress and the new administration refocus the use of Troubled Asset Relief Program dollars to add liquidity to the mortgage market and make mortgage loans and other loans more available to America’s working families,” said McMillan.
NAR will continue to emphasize the need for a mortgage interest-rate buydown and improved foreclosure mitigation programs as key components to improved stability in the housing market. NAR is also asking Congress to concentrate efforts on strengthening the commercial real estate market to protect the nation’s economy.
“Real estate has always led this nation out of economic downturns,” McMillan said. “A renewed, revitalized and robust housing market is essential to generating commerce and helping families build wealth and stability. We are eager to see this happen and look forward to working with the Obama administration and Congress to quickly implement H.R. 1 and enact other stimulus efforts for residential and commercial markets.”
“On behalf of NAR and its 1.2 million members, I’d like to thank Chairman Frank, D-Mass., Chairman Rangel, D-N.Y., and the House of Representatives for passing legislation that will help create market stability,” said National Association of Realtors® President Charles McMillan. “However, our work is far from finished and much more needs to be done in the coming days and weeks.”
Late last year, NAR presented Congress with its core principles for stabilizing the housing market to launch an economic recovery. In the current legislation, NAR strongly supports the provisions to reinstate the 2008 FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loan limit increases through 2009. NAR also strongly supports eliminating the repayment requirement on the first-time home buyer tax credit. “This is critical to stimulating home sales and shrinking the housing inventory, which will in turn help stabilize home values,” McMillan said.
Although Realtors® support these provisions, a number of enhancements are needed to make them more effective. In a letter sent to Congress earlier this week, NAR encouraged Congress to make the loan limit increases permanent so that secure, affordable, safe financing is available for American families regardless of where they live. NAR is also pressing to expand the tax credit to all home buyers and extend the expiration date to December 31, 2009.
Other provisions in the bill will help communities across the country, including the expansion of the tax-exempt housing bonds, increased funding for rural housing loan programs, additional funding for neighborhood stabilization activities, more grants for low-income housing construction and rehabilitation, and energy efficiency incentives for housing.
“We think this bill is a great first step in helping our economy on the road to recovery. It is also important that Congress and the new administration refocus the use of Troubled Asset Relief Program dollars to add liquidity to the mortgage market and make mortgage loans and other loans more available to America’s working families,” said McMillan.
NAR will continue to emphasize the need for a mortgage interest-rate buydown and improved foreclosure mitigation programs as key components to improved stability in the housing market. NAR is also asking Congress to concentrate efforts on strengthening the commercial real estate market to protect the nation’s economy.
“Real estate has always led this nation out of economic downturns,” McMillan said. “A renewed, revitalized and robust housing market is essential to generating commerce and helping families build wealth and stability. We are eager to see this happen and look forward to working with the Obama administration and Congress to quickly implement H.R. 1 and enact other stimulus efforts for residential and commercial markets.”
Monday, February 2, 2009
Snag a great deal on a short sale
Short sales - where a lender agrees to take less than it's owed on a mortgage - are rising sharply. Here's how you can profit.
By Joe Light, Money Magazine staff reporter
(Money Magazine) -- When Brian Gavitt, a physician, and his wife Gayleen, a stay-at-home mom, started to eye homes in Sacramento last winter, they knew they were looking in the hardest-hit areas of the housing bust. So the couple, who were relocating from Lansing, figured they could land a fantastic bargain in no time at all.
The part about the bargain turned out to be true. The Gavitts bought a five-bedroom house in the upscale Natomas Park neighborhood ("Even now, you don't see FOR SALE signs up anywhere," says Gayleen.) And it was a steal at $300,000, a full $200,000 less than they would have paid just two years ago.
The amount of time it took to land the deal was another story. It was more than six months from when the Gavitts first saw their dream home to the moment they held the keys in their hands. The reason: The home they bought was a short sale.
Not along ago, few people had even heard of a short sale, which occurs when the bank agrees to discount the loan balance for a seller who owes more on his mortgage than the home is currently worth.
If you're in the market for a home today, you're almost guaranteed to be looking at some short sales. Nationwide, 14% of homeowners are currently underwater on their mortgages, calculates real estate website Zillow.com. And in many areas, it's far more: In the Gavitts' zip code, for example, over half of homeowners would owe more than their home is worth if they sold today, calculates Dee Schwindt, the Gavitts' realtor.
The good news is that short sellers are likely to still be living in the home and some may even be current on their payments. That means these aren't the run-down, distressed properties that you often find among foreclosures; in fact, there's a good chance that some of the most deluxe homes for sale in your market are underwater.
Before you get too excited about buying a short sale, know that they generally aren't, well, short. For the sale to go through, the seller's lender must approve the price and agree to take the shortfall as a loss. That extra step can cause the process to drag on three times as long as a normal home sale.
But as the Gavitts discovered, the hassles can be well worth it. Some buyers and realtors don't want to deal with short sales, leaving many choice homes with very few bidders. So if you're willing to brave the intricacies of the process, you'll be far more likely to land the home you always wanted. The key to snagging a good deal is knowing how to avoid the land mines.
Know what you're getting into. In a short sale, you are dealing with several parties: the sellers, their agent and the sellers' lender. That's why a short sale can take anywhere between two and six months to execute, compared with about 30 days for a typical sale. Though many banks are willing to take a loss on a mortgage in a short sale if it means avoiding an even bigger loss in a foreclosure, with so many owners trying to unload properties, the lender's negotiators are flooded with short-sale offers. So if you're moving or selling another property, keep in mind that you'll likely need to budget for a few months' worth of rental payments so you have somewhere to live in the interim.
Find the right pro. Lenders often make realtors who work on short sales take a hit on their commission, so some brokers may be loath to show you the listings. But don't even think about going solo. These deals take a lot of work and persistence, says Loni Parmelly, author of Success in Short Sales. Before you sign up with an agent, ask him how many short sales he's closed. If he hasn't done at least two, find someone more experienced.
Weed out candidates. In most cities, home listings will indicate in the description whether the property is a short sale. Ideally, you want to knock off ones that come with extra complexities. If possible, pass on any home that has more than one lien against it; having to negotiate loans with two lenders can greatly increase the amount of time it takes to complete the deal. Also avoid homes where the seller has other offers. That's because if another offer is pending, the seller's agent isn't likely to even submit yours for approval until the first one is rejected, meaning you'll have to wait for another negotiation to play out before you even get a chance.
Set the right price. The first step is to have your agent submit your offer to the seller. Don't just rely on the current list price to come up with your initial bid, says Bill Richardson, a district sales manager for the Keyes Co. Realtors in Boca Raton, Fla. The seller's agent may have far underpriced it in hopes of attracting buyers, but the bank likely won't accept a lowball offer. Ask your agent to determine the home's fair market value by searching comparable sales in the area, with an emphasis on other short sales and foreclosures (or get a rough estimate yourself at zillow.com). If the fair market value is lower than the list price, set your offer 10% lower than that.
At this point, you'll also want to get pre-approval for a mortgage; many banks won't even consider your offer if you don't have one, says Schwindt.
Protect yourself. Next, the seller's agent will submit your offer to the seller's lender. At this point, you'll be asked to sign a sales contract. See if the lender will agree to pick up all closing costs as part of the contract, says author Parmelly. Also ask your realtor to specify that you won't do an appraisal or inspection of the property until the offer is approved. That way you won't have to shell out hundreds of dollars until you know you realistically have a good chance of getting the home.
Finally, though most lenders will require you to make some kind of deposit along with the contract, don't put down more than $3,000 before your bid is accepted. That will give you room to put offers on other homes or even to pull out of the sale if it drags on for too long.
Be a pain in the neck. After your offer is submitted to the lender, you're likely to hear nothing for weeks, if not months. This is no time to relax. Call your agent at least once a week, and make sure the seller's agent is contacting the bank's negotiator nearly every day.
"These negotiators may have 400 files on their desk. They'll want to get rid of the squeaky wheels," says Parmelly, who worked as a loan negotiator for lenders for 16 years. To help the seller's realtor in her negotiations with the lender, it's a good idea to have your agent show her which comparable homes you used to arrive at your number.
If the clock keeps ticking and you're reaching the end of your rope, try playing hardball. After months, the lender the Gavitts negotiated with was still dragging its feet and their pre-approved loan rate was about to expire. "We said, 'We need an answer by Friday or we walk,' " Gayleen says. The bank responded by week's end.
Keep your eye on the market. When the bank finally sends its counter-offer, use it as a guideline rather than an ultimatum. Most of the time, the lender's number is based on its own research, that of a local realtor it hires and the outstanding loan balance. Usually its goal is to sell for at least 90% of the home's value, says Amy Bohutinsky, a spokes-person for Zillow.com.
The lender's offer may not be what you'd hoped for, but don't despair: You have a chance to counter. If the market has been flat since your initial bid, try for 5% to 10% less than the bank's number. If the market has been sinking rapidly, however, you may be able to prove that the home's value has shrunk further and offer even less. Once you have the lender's ear, the new offer should take less time to process.
Despite all the legwork and wait, the Gavitts are thrilled with their new home. "I'm glad people are turned off by short sales," says Brian. "It just means more choices for the rest of us."
By Joe Light, Money Magazine staff reporter
(Money Magazine) -- When Brian Gavitt, a physician, and his wife Gayleen, a stay-at-home mom, started to eye homes in Sacramento last winter, they knew they were looking in the hardest-hit areas of the housing bust. So the couple, who were relocating from Lansing, figured they could land a fantastic bargain in no time at all.
The part about the bargain turned out to be true. The Gavitts bought a five-bedroom house in the upscale Natomas Park neighborhood ("Even now, you don't see FOR SALE signs up anywhere," says Gayleen.) And it was a steal at $300,000, a full $200,000 less than they would have paid just two years ago.
The amount of time it took to land the deal was another story. It was more than six months from when the Gavitts first saw their dream home to the moment they held the keys in their hands. The reason: The home they bought was a short sale.
Not along ago, few people had even heard of a short sale, which occurs when the bank agrees to discount the loan balance for a seller who owes more on his mortgage than the home is currently worth.
If you're in the market for a home today, you're almost guaranteed to be looking at some short sales. Nationwide, 14% of homeowners are currently underwater on their mortgages, calculates real estate website Zillow.com. And in many areas, it's far more: In the Gavitts' zip code, for example, over half of homeowners would owe more than their home is worth if they sold today, calculates Dee Schwindt, the Gavitts' realtor.
The good news is that short sellers are likely to still be living in the home and some may even be current on their payments. That means these aren't the run-down, distressed properties that you often find among foreclosures; in fact, there's a good chance that some of the most deluxe homes for sale in your market are underwater.
Before you get too excited about buying a short sale, know that they generally aren't, well, short. For the sale to go through, the seller's lender must approve the price and agree to take the shortfall as a loss. That extra step can cause the process to drag on three times as long as a normal home sale.
But as the Gavitts discovered, the hassles can be well worth it. Some buyers and realtors don't want to deal with short sales, leaving many choice homes with very few bidders. So if you're willing to brave the intricacies of the process, you'll be far more likely to land the home you always wanted. The key to snagging a good deal is knowing how to avoid the land mines.
Know what you're getting into. In a short sale, you are dealing with several parties: the sellers, their agent and the sellers' lender. That's why a short sale can take anywhere between two and six months to execute, compared with about 30 days for a typical sale. Though many banks are willing to take a loss on a mortgage in a short sale if it means avoiding an even bigger loss in a foreclosure, with so many owners trying to unload properties, the lender's negotiators are flooded with short-sale offers. So if you're moving or selling another property, keep in mind that you'll likely need to budget for a few months' worth of rental payments so you have somewhere to live in the interim.
Find the right pro. Lenders often make realtors who work on short sales take a hit on their commission, so some brokers may be loath to show you the listings. But don't even think about going solo. These deals take a lot of work and persistence, says Loni Parmelly, author of Success in Short Sales. Before you sign up with an agent, ask him how many short sales he's closed. If he hasn't done at least two, find someone more experienced.
Weed out candidates. In most cities, home listings will indicate in the description whether the property is a short sale. Ideally, you want to knock off ones that come with extra complexities. If possible, pass on any home that has more than one lien against it; having to negotiate loans with two lenders can greatly increase the amount of time it takes to complete the deal. Also avoid homes where the seller has other offers. That's because if another offer is pending, the seller's agent isn't likely to even submit yours for approval until the first one is rejected, meaning you'll have to wait for another negotiation to play out before you even get a chance.
Set the right price. The first step is to have your agent submit your offer to the seller. Don't just rely on the current list price to come up with your initial bid, says Bill Richardson, a district sales manager for the Keyes Co. Realtors in Boca Raton, Fla. The seller's agent may have far underpriced it in hopes of attracting buyers, but the bank likely won't accept a lowball offer. Ask your agent to determine the home's fair market value by searching comparable sales in the area, with an emphasis on other short sales and foreclosures (or get a rough estimate yourself at zillow.com). If the fair market value is lower than the list price, set your offer 10% lower than that.
At this point, you'll also want to get pre-approval for a mortgage; many banks won't even consider your offer if you don't have one, says Schwindt.
Protect yourself. Next, the seller's agent will submit your offer to the seller's lender. At this point, you'll be asked to sign a sales contract. See if the lender will agree to pick up all closing costs as part of the contract, says author Parmelly. Also ask your realtor to specify that you won't do an appraisal or inspection of the property until the offer is approved. That way you won't have to shell out hundreds of dollars until you know you realistically have a good chance of getting the home.
Finally, though most lenders will require you to make some kind of deposit along with the contract, don't put down more than $3,000 before your bid is accepted. That will give you room to put offers on other homes or even to pull out of the sale if it drags on for too long.
Be a pain in the neck. After your offer is submitted to the lender, you're likely to hear nothing for weeks, if not months. This is no time to relax. Call your agent at least once a week, and make sure the seller's agent is contacting the bank's negotiator nearly every day.
"These negotiators may have 400 files on their desk. They'll want to get rid of the squeaky wheels," says Parmelly, who worked as a loan negotiator for lenders for 16 years. To help the seller's realtor in her negotiations with the lender, it's a good idea to have your agent show her which comparable homes you used to arrive at your number.
If the clock keeps ticking and you're reaching the end of your rope, try playing hardball. After months, the lender the Gavitts negotiated with was still dragging its feet and their pre-approved loan rate was about to expire. "We said, 'We need an answer by Friday or we walk,' " Gayleen says. The bank responded by week's end.
Keep your eye on the market. When the bank finally sends its counter-offer, use it as a guideline rather than an ultimatum. Most of the time, the lender's number is based on its own research, that of a local realtor it hires and the outstanding loan balance. Usually its goal is to sell for at least 90% of the home's value, says Amy Bohutinsky, a spokes-person for Zillow.com.
The lender's offer may not be what you'd hoped for, but don't despair: You have a chance to counter. If the market has been flat since your initial bid, try for 5% to 10% less than the bank's number. If the market has been sinking rapidly, however, you may be able to prove that the home's value has shrunk further and offer even less. Once you have the lender's ear, the new offer should take less time to process.
Despite all the legwork and wait, the Gavitts are thrilled with their new home. "I'm glad people are turned off by short sales," says Brian. "It just means more choices for the rest of us."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
