Mail Boxes are being broken into along Ashton Club Dr area. All 6 letters I placed in my mail box were stolen. All mail boxes covers were left open along the their route of steeling mail. Becky Wolf E-Mail me and said she found one of the checks I place inside the envelope. She said she did not hear of anybody breaking into mail boxes. Who in Hell is going to tell her Joe Hunter? I am quite sure this will not be posted in the L A Times.
Lynne Clawson found the check as she was walking her dog on Dunmore Dr. She left me a message on my phone so I call her back. I told her we should let Joe Hunter know so he could notify the residents about what is going on. She shouted at me and said I should call the police and why are you picking on Joe Hunter? Why are people like this, he is the community director and he should let the residents know what is going on in here. He does get paid a lot of money for what? You know and I know he will not tell the residents, that's why I call him Do Nothing Joe Hunter.
On my way out that morning I stop by the security office and told them what was going on in here and he told me there was no way he could get hold of the other security officer on the golf cart. These guys are a big joke, make no bones about it, they are useless.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
TRADERS
You people that are still going to the Lake Ashton grill that is run by the developer and all profits go in his pocket, also you people that play Golf are also traders. The developer has walked away from all 13 home owners that have Chinese drywall and has not reply to none of them and here you are helping him put money in his pocket by playing golf and buying yearly memberships. SHAME ON YOU Perhaps you don't give a damn about the owners who have Chinese drywall. Your acting just like the developer, you don't give a damn. You are all traders.
Default: The Next Big Thing In Real Estate
Feb.03, 2010 in Education, News
You heard it here first:
By the end of this year, “strategic default” will be a familiar media buzzword describing the next phase of the foreclosure crisis.
In a strategic default, mortgage borrowers who owe more than their house is worth, but who can afford their loan payment, decide it is simply smarter to stop paying. In 2009, 500,000 foreclosures, or roughly a quarter of all foreclosures, were strategic, meaning their was no financial hardship other than the homeowner was underwater. Currently there are about 16 million households with negative equity, and about 10 million of those are underwater by 20% of the value or more. The strategic foreclosures we saw in 2009 were just the tip of the iceberg. If just a small fraction of those underwater homeowners choose to strategically default, the effects will be tremendous.
strategic defaults
The Business Case for a Strategic Default
Let’s look at a typical scenario of a fictional Mr. Fish, an underwater homeowner who should consider a strategic default. He bought his home between 2004 and 2007, and lives somewhere like California, Florida, Nevada, or Arizona, where property values are down more 50% from their peak. He paid a full, bubble-inflated price for something that is now on clearance for half off, and he’s stuck paying the inflated price for 30 years. Should he move down the street for half price, or bend over and honor his mortgage contract?
In round numbers:
* $500,000 purchase price
* $400,000 loan balance
* $300,000 current market value
At 2.5% appreciation, it would take Mr. Fish 21 years to “break even” and re-coup his initial down payment. So much for the idea of a “starter home.” That 100 grand down is the definition of a sunk cost: it’s gone and shouldn’t be a factor in his decision. Plus, assuming any appreciation at all in the near term is foolishly optimistic, given the number of upcoming strategic defaults that will flood the foreclosure market.
Options
His monthly carrying costs are around $2800, including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, and any applicable homeowner’s association dues. He could rent a similar place for $1800 a month, and pocket the difference. This also rules out keeping the property as a rental, unless Mr. Fish wants to take a $1000 bath every month. He could also buy that similar place down the street, and end up paying about $1800 a month too. But in that case, he’d have to come up with another $60k down.
Breach of Contract
A mortgage is a contract between the homeowner/borrower and the bank. If the borrower breaches the contract by not making his monthly payment, the bank seizes the house. It’s written into the contract: the property is the collateral. Unfortunately for the bank, the house isn’t quite worth what they hoped it would be. Too bad so sad.
The laws may be different elsewhere, but in consumer-friendly states like California, that’s where it ends; the bank can’t come after any of Mr. Fish’s personal assets to settle the debt. If he’s lucky, he might get to live in the house rent-free for several months while the bank and the county finalize the foreclosure proceedings.
Reasons to Stay
There are three reasons Mr. Fish might feel compelled to stay in this house:
* Wanting to get back his down payment.
* Wanting to preserve his good credit score.
* Wanting to take the moral high road and honor his commitment.
Let me examine these reasons individually, and explain why they’re not good ones. First, as we learned above, it could take Mr. Fish 21 years to recoup his down payment. If he invested the $1000 savings each month he’d realize from walking away, and earned just 5% interest, he’d have nearly $450,000 at the end of the 21 years. If he just stuffed it under the mattress, he’d have $250,000. Yes, it’s painful to walk away from your $100,000, but at this point, it is simply irrational not to.
It’s true, a strategic default will hurt Mr. Fish’s credit. In most cases, the foreclosure will cost him 100-140 points on his credit score, and will stay on there for 3-7 years. Is it worth it? It’s just a number, and $1000 a month is a pretty steep price to pay to just for the sake of preserving a number.
Some people have moral qualms with strategic defaults, including President Obama (who obviously wants to encourage stability and stop the bleeding on the foreclosure crisis, but has yet to come up with a program that addresses strategic defaulters). Is it immoral to foreclose, even when you can afford the payments? Is it immoral to buy groceries at Trader Joe’s, even when you can afford the ones at Whole Foods? Others have asked what kind of example a strategic default sets for Mr. Fish’s children. I think it sets a great example in that it shows them the power of rational behavior. Mr. Fish’s tax dollars have bailed out his adjustable-rate neighbors and even the bank that holds his mortgage, yet he’s got nothing to show for it. Again, the mortgage is a legal contract with the penalties for breach explicitly spelled out. There’s nothing moral or immoral about it; he’s not stealing anything, not killing anyone, not polluting the river. It’s just business.
What will you do with your extra $1000 a month? Take a trip? Start a business? Change the world?
Five Things to Do Before You Strategically Default
1. Contact the bank and explain your situation. Explain how they could prevent the strategic default by renegotiating your loan principal balance, and how a foreclosure will certainly cost them more money in the long run. They probably won’t do anything, but at least you’ll be able to say you tried.
2. Consult a real estate attorney in your state to make sure the bank can’t come after your personal assets.
3. If you have a co-borrower, try and remove them from the mortgage. This might cost a little bit of money, since it will basically be a new loan application for just one person. But if you’re successful, the mortgage will show “closed” on your co-borrower’s credit so their credit score remains undamaged by the strategic default.
4. If you have a co-borrower, try and remove their name from the title. Just an extra step of precaution to try and preserve their good name.
5. If you plan on making any big purchases in the near future (car, boat, another house…), finalize the deal before you default.
And then stop paying. It tastes like freedom!
You heard it here first:
By the end of this year, “strategic default” will be a familiar media buzzword describing the next phase of the foreclosure crisis.
In a strategic default, mortgage borrowers who owe more than their house is worth, but who can afford their loan payment, decide it is simply smarter to stop paying. In 2009, 500,000 foreclosures, or roughly a quarter of all foreclosures, were strategic, meaning their was no financial hardship other than the homeowner was underwater. Currently there are about 16 million households with negative equity, and about 10 million of those are underwater by 20% of the value or more. The strategic foreclosures we saw in 2009 were just the tip of the iceberg. If just a small fraction of those underwater homeowners choose to strategically default, the effects will be tremendous.
strategic defaults
The Business Case for a Strategic Default
Let’s look at a typical scenario of a fictional Mr. Fish, an underwater homeowner who should consider a strategic default. He bought his home between 2004 and 2007, and lives somewhere like California, Florida, Nevada, or Arizona, where property values are down more 50% from their peak. He paid a full, bubble-inflated price for something that is now on clearance for half off, and he’s stuck paying the inflated price for 30 years. Should he move down the street for half price, or bend over and honor his mortgage contract?
In round numbers:
* $500,000 purchase price
* $400,000 loan balance
* $300,000 current market value
At 2.5% appreciation, it would take Mr. Fish 21 years to “break even” and re-coup his initial down payment. So much for the idea of a “starter home.” That 100 grand down is the definition of a sunk cost: it’s gone and shouldn’t be a factor in his decision. Plus, assuming any appreciation at all in the near term is foolishly optimistic, given the number of upcoming strategic defaults that will flood the foreclosure market.
Options
His monthly carrying costs are around $2800, including principal, interest, taxes, insurance, and any applicable homeowner’s association dues. He could rent a similar place for $1800 a month, and pocket the difference. This also rules out keeping the property as a rental, unless Mr. Fish wants to take a $1000 bath every month. He could also buy that similar place down the street, and end up paying about $1800 a month too. But in that case, he’d have to come up with another $60k down.
Breach of Contract
A mortgage is a contract between the homeowner/borrower and the bank. If the borrower breaches the contract by not making his monthly payment, the bank seizes the house. It’s written into the contract: the property is the collateral. Unfortunately for the bank, the house isn’t quite worth what they hoped it would be. Too bad so sad.
The laws may be different elsewhere, but in consumer-friendly states like California, that’s where it ends; the bank can’t come after any of Mr. Fish’s personal assets to settle the debt. If he’s lucky, he might get to live in the house rent-free for several months while the bank and the county finalize the foreclosure proceedings.
Reasons to Stay
There are three reasons Mr. Fish might feel compelled to stay in this house:
* Wanting to get back his down payment.
* Wanting to preserve his good credit score.
* Wanting to take the moral high road and honor his commitment.
Let me examine these reasons individually, and explain why they’re not good ones. First, as we learned above, it could take Mr. Fish 21 years to recoup his down payment. If he invested the $1000 savings each month he’d realize from walking away, and earned just 5% interest, he’d have nearly $450,000 at the end of the 21 years. If he just stuffed it under the mattress, he’d have $250,000. Yes, it’s painful to walk away from your $100,000, but at this point, it is simply irrational not to.
It’s true, a strategic default will hurt Mr. Fish’s credit. In most cases, the foreclosure will cost him 100-140 points on his credit score, and will stay on there for 3-7 years. Is it worth it? It’s just a number, and $1000 a month is a pretty steep price to pay to just for the sake of preserving a number.
Some people have moral qualms with strategic defaults, including President Obama (who obviously wants to encourage stability and stop the bleeding on the foreclosure crisis, but has yet to come up with a program that addresses strategic defaulters). Is it immoral to foreclose, even when you can afford the payments? Is it immoral to buy groceries at Trader Joe’s, even when you can afford the ones at Whole Foods? Others have asked what kind of example a strategic default sets for Mr. Fish’s children. I think it sets a great example in that it shows them the power of rational behavior. Mr. Fish’s tax dollars have bailed out his adjustable-rate neighbors and even the bank that holds his mortgage, yet he’s got nothing to show for it. Again, the mortgage is a legal contract with the penalties for breach explicitly spelled out. There’s nothing moral or immoral about it; he’s not stealing anything, not killing anyone, not polluting the river. It’s just business.
What will you do with your extra $1000 a month? Take a trip? Start a business? Change the world?
Five Things to Do Before You Strategically Default
1. Contact the bank and explain your situation. Explain how they could prevent the strategic default by renegotiating your loan principal balance, and how a foreclosure will certainly cost them more money in the long run. They probably won’t do anything, but at least you’ll be able to say you tried.
2. Consult a real estate attorney in your state to make sure the bank can’t come after your personal assets.
3. If you have a co-borrower, try and remove them from the mortgage. This might cost a little bit of money, since it will basically be a new loan application for just one person. But if you’re successful, the mortgage will show “closed” on your co-borrower’s credit so their credit score remains undamaged by the strategic default.
4. If you have a co-borrower, try and remove their name from the title. Just an extra step of precaution to try and preserve their good name.
5. If you plan on making any big purchases in the near future (car, boat, another house…), finalize the deal before you default.
And then stop paying. It tastes like freedom!
Reverse foreclosure could put more responsibility on banks
Posted: Jan 26, 2010 5:43 PM EST
COLLIER COUNTY: A new court ruling has major implications for local communities, hit hard by rising foreclosure rates. It would force banks to pay association fees on homes they take possession of, instead of making neighbors pick up the tab.
The condo association at South Bay Plantation in East Naples can't afford to fix many of the problems it's facing – issues like a broken fountain, trees that aren't trimmed and a parking lot that needs to be repaved.
A whopping 180 of the 240 units in the community are in foreclosure. That means, for the most part, the association isn't collecting fees on them.
Now, the 60 homeowners who've stayed in their homes are left picking up the slack.
"They come to me crying. People come to me crying," said Joe Sheehan, President of South Bay Plantation. "We've got units in here that were foreclosed on four years ago, technically. But they're still in the original owner's name. So we're missing four years of condo fees from that and the bank has no liability."
But a recent decision in a Miami district court could change all that. Through the ruling, the Miami law firm - Association Law Group - established a legal solution called reverse foreclosure.
The reverse foreclosure speeds up the entire process, giving the bank immediate ownership and responsibility.
If they want to keep them, fine. But they need to pay the association dues," said Sheehan.
While the number of foreclosed units in South Bay Plantation community is extreme, the situation isn't unique for Southwest Florida.
The decision is expected to set a precedent and force banks to pay association fees without the red tape.
South Bay expects to be the first Southwest Florida association to test the process in court.
Sheehan says he hopes the case will be a protégé for many others.
"This will kind of reverse the situation. We'll put the banks in the backseat for a change," he said.
COLLIER COUNTY: A new court ruling has major implications for local communities, hit hard by rising foreclosure rates. It would force banks to pay association fees on homes they take possession of, instead of making neighbors pick up the tab.
The condo association at South Bay Plantation in East Naples can't afford to fix many of the problems it's facing – issues like a broken fountain, trees that aren't trimmed and a parking lot that needs to be repaved.
A whopping 180 of the 240 units in the community are in foreclosure. That means, for the most part, the association isn't collecting fees on them.
Now, the 60 homeowners who've stayed in their homes are left picking up the slack.
"They come to me crying. People come to me crying," said Joe Sheehan, President of South Bay Plantation. "We've got units in here that were foreclosed on four years ago, technically. But they're still in the original owner's name. So we're missing four years of condo fees from that and the bank has no liability."
But a recent decision in a Miami district court could change all that. Through the ruling, the Miami law firm - Association Law Group - established a legal solution called reverse foreclosure.
The reverse foreclosure speeds up the entire process, giving the bank immediate ownership and responsibility.
If they want to keep them, fine. But they need to pay the association dues," said Sheehan.
While the number of foreclosed units in South Bay Plantation community is extreme, the situation isn't unique for Southwest Florida.
The decision is expected to set a precedent and force banks to pay association fees without the red tape.
South Bay expects to be the first Southwest Florida association to test the process in court.
Sheehan says he hopes the case will be a protégé for many others.
"This will kind of reverse the situation. We'll put the banks in the backseat for a change," he said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)