TOP
STORIES:
As
Many as 90% of Foreclosed Properties Held Off the Market, Estimates Suggest -
(www.aol.com) A pretty, manicured home sits six doors down
from Phil Faranda's in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y. To look at it, most passersby
would think that the tidy house is occupied by a nice family that gives it a
good amount of TLC: The lawn is mowed, the bushes trimmed, and the siding has
what looks like a fresh paint job. But Faranda knows better. The bank-owned house (pictured above) has been
vacant for 18 months, according to Faranda, a Realtor specializing in
distressed properties. Just two notices taped to a window are the only
indications that the home is unoccupied. This home is part of what's known as
the "shadow REO" inventory: repossessed homes across the country that
banks or investors often purposely keep off the market. The practice isn't a
secret, and refraining from dumping a large inventory of foreclosures on the market helps to
keep home prices from crashing. But the extent to which lenders keep their
stock of REOs -- industry parlance for "real estate owned" properties
-- off the market may be much larger than most people think. As many as 90
percent of REOs are withheld from sale, according to estimates recently
provided to AOL Real Estate by two analytics firms. It's a testament
to lenders' fears that flooding the market with foreclosed homes could wreak
havoc on their balance sheets and present a danger to the housing market as a
whole. Online foreclosure marketplace RealtyTrac recently found that just 15
percent of REOs in the Washington, D.C., area were for sale, a statistic that
is representative of nationwide numbers, the company said.
California
legislators are terrible real estate investors - (www.ochousingnews.com) State lawmakers typically
keep modest quarters near the Capitol to use when they’re in town, with help
from their tax-free expense allowance of $28,000 a year. Since state lawmakers
are term limited, and since they are supposed to be residents of their home
districts, buying a house is a speculative play on real estate values. They
could rent a house with their tax-free expense allowance and be very
comfortable. Assemblyman Tony Mendoza bought
a three-bedroom home instead, paying $463,000 for it after his 2006 election. “If
you bought property, property values would go higher,” said the Democrat, whose
main home is in Artesia. “So I figured as soon as I get there [Sacramento], I
will buy the house.“ That’s the brilliant logic this guy used when considering
a $463,000 investment? And we elected this guy to public office?
Foreclosure
Woes Of The Rich And Famous - (www.forbes.com)
Terrell Owens won’t win a
popularity contest anytime soon. One of Forbes’ Most Disliked Athletes,
the wide receiver has racked up years’ worth of bad behavior in front of fans
on the field and teammates in the locker room. Turns out he’s antagonized
mortgage lenders, too. In the past year, Owens has faced foreclosure on not
one, but five homes around the country. Owens, who parted ways with the DallasCowboys
in 2009, has defaulted on four condos in the Dallas area: two units in a swank
high rise called the Azure and two on Commerce Street.
Lobbying
for Banks, the BBA - (www.sfgate.com)
When Anthony Browne accepted the job of
Chief Executive Officer of the British Bankers’ Association in June, it had
responsibility for the world’s most important benchmark interest rate.
Following the Libor-rigging scandal it is likely to be little more than just
another lobby group. Regulators and lawmakers are weighing whether to
strip the lobby group of its role overseeing the setting of Libor, the
reference for more than $500 trillion of securities, after a worldwide probe
into at least a dozen banks showed some had tried to rig the rate. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Bank of England have both faulted the
BBA for failing to fix Libor in 2008 when the Bank for International
Settlements first raised concern that the benchmark was being manipulated.
Live-Work
Law for Artists Roils San Franciscans - (www.nytimes.com) A NINE-YEAR-OLD city law enacted to promote
development of low-cost live-work space for artists has come under attack by
opponents who say it has not only failed to meet its goal but has actually
worsened the situation faced by artists. Many of the law's initial proponents
charge that developers have taken advantage of loopholes in the law to produce
high-priced designer lofts rather than projects affordable for working artists.
''Residential builders have co-opted the legislation,'' said Sue Hestor, a land-use
lawyer who is leading the call for a moratorium on live-work development until
the law can be amended. ''They're twisting it into strictly residential
projects. These aren't artists' live-work.'' But builders say artists expected
too much from the law.
No comments:
Post a Comment