Foreclosures are surging

Everywhere but California! It seems I was wrong about the newest foreclosure moritorium that took effect in June. I did not think it would have much effect because most lenders appeared to be exempt since they already had mortgage workout plans in place. But I've noticed another drop off in new REO's hitting the market. The numbers had just started picking up again in May and now it seems they've dropped off a cliff.

Other bubble cities are seeing foreclosures surging again. Phenix saw foreclosures jump nearly 40% from May to June. In Las Vegas the increase from May to June was a whopping 54%! Even the "it's different here" places saw an increase. Seattle foreclosures jumped 37% from May to June.

I haven't seen the number for the IE but my guess it that we dropped from May to June due to the newest meddling by the state. So instead of the lenders getting the homes on the market during the peak season, it looks like they will be backed up 3 months to the fall. That's not going to help the banks get the most for the properties..


If you think the foreclosure crisis is behind us I suggest you log on to one of the many foreclosure sites (like realtytrac or foreclosure.com) and take a look at what is coming. This image is a small part of Eastvale in Corona. It's about 1/4 of the Eastvale area and you an see just how many foreclosures are in the pipeline. The yellow dots are homes that are waiting for the trustee sale. The orange dots are pre-foreclosures and the green ones are bank owned. Most of the bank owned are probably already in escrow, because there's not a lot of REO's listed in the area. But those yellow dots will soon turn green and most of those orange dots will go yellow...then green too.

foreclosures, better for the banks too!

WASHINGTON - Government initiatives to stem the country's mounting foreclosures are hampered because banks and other lenders in many cases have more financial incentive to let borrowers lose their homes than to work out settlements, some economists have concluded.

Policymakers often say it's a good deal for lenders to cut borrowers a break on mortgage payments to keep them in their homes. But, according to researchers and industry experts, foreclosing can be more profitable.

The problem is that modifying mortgages is profitable to banks for only one set of distressed borrowers, while lenders are actually dealing with three very different types. Modification makes economic sense for a bank or other lender only if the borrower can't sustain payments without it yet will be able to keep up with new, more modest terms.

A second set are those who are likely to fall behind on their payments again even after receiving a modified loan and are likely to lose their homes one way or another. Lenders don't want to help these borrowers because waiting to foreclose can be costly.

Finally, there are those delinquent borrowers who can somehow, even at great sacrifice, catch up without a modification. Lenders have little financial incentive to help them.

Analysis downbeat on modifications
A study released last month by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston was downbeat on the prospects for widespread modifications. The analysis, which looked at the performance of loans in 2007 and 2008, found that lenders lowered the monthly payments of only 3 percent of delinquent borrowers, those who had missed at least two payments. Lenders tried to avoid modifying the loans of borrowers who could "self-cure," or catch up on their payments without help, and those who would fall behind again even after receiving help, the study found.

"If the presence of self-cure risk and redefault risk do make renegotiation less appealing to investors, the number of easily 'preventable' foreclosures may be far smaller than many commentators believe," the report said.

Nearly a third of the borrowers who miss two payments are able to self-cure without help from their lender, according to the Boston Fed study. Separately, Moody's Economy.com, a research firm, estimated that about a fifth of those who miss three payments will self-cure.

Lenders also worry that borrowers may re-default even after receiving a loan modification. This only delays foreclosure, which can be costly to the lender because housing prices are falling throughout the country and the home's condition may deteriorate if the owner isn't maintaining it. In some cases, lenders lose twice as much foreclosing on a home as they did two years ago, said Laurie Goodman, senior managing director at Amherst Securities.

...................

The failure of the modification programs isn't really news to us. We know the modification programs are just to extend the defaults over a long enough period so that the banks can absorb the losses. But this brings up the interesting point that doing so almost ensures the banks will lose even more in the long run. Of course if we assume that the majority of the price declines are behind us then the banks may not see any additional losses by foreclosing 2 years from now versus foreclosing today.


New home sales up 11%


Wow, that sounds like encouraging news for the economy, doesn't it? Up 11% from May to June. The media is trumpeting this horn but is the tune really all it's cracked up to be?

Of course it's not. This June was better than May but why compare it to May? There's always a difference from month to month. Could be the number of days could be that there are always more sales in June due to the summer bounce. When comparing sales numbers, year over year is a more accurate measure of the health of the market. So how did those new home sales stack up against last June? Down 21%! There's the real headline, "New home sales fall 21%".

Oh and I might have forgotten the best part of this sales spin. There's little mention of the fact that the median price of those new homes fell a whopping 13% in ONE MONTH! May median was $219k and the June median fell to $206k. It's little surprise when you factor in the buyer incentives, especially here in the west. Buy a new home in Cali and you can get $18k in credits. With FHA offering 3.5% DPs and the government giving up to $18k in credits it certainly makes new homes more attractive. You also don't have to fight the mob trying to get the REO's.

Home builders are still having a hard time competing with the prices of foreclosures and REO's. It's simply too expensive to build a new home and get the price in line with the REO's. Part of the reason is the McMansion syndrome. Now days everyone thinks they need a 3000 s/f home. Well it's costs a lot to build a home that size. If the builders want to compete they will need to start building to a price point that is competitive. Many of the builders are saddled with expensive parcels of land. Unless they write the value down, or default on them they might never be able to put an affordable house on that land. I'm sure over the next few years builders will start to downsize the homes they are building. It happened in the early 90's and I see it happening again. KB in Perris started building smaller homes. Putle dropped the price at Stellan ridge $100k....or did they. Well actually what they did was add 2 new smaller models. The price of the other homes didn't really change.

I'de really like to see new homes selling again. That would really go a long way to pull us out of this economic quagmire. But the unfortunate truth is that new home sales are the lowest they've been since the early 80's. It's nothing price can't fix though!

Here's a shorty a few readers might be interested in


7438 Jola Dr is an older home in the Hawarden Hills area of Riverside. This is pretty much the best area in Riverside. This house has been on and off the market for darn near two years. Its a 4 bedroon 2.75 bath home that is listed as being 3443 sq/ft, sitting on a half acre lot. The home is old and there are no pictures of the interior. The outside looks nice and it has obviously been updated. I thinks it's safe to assume the inside is decent. Last month they dropped the price to $399k (short sale). This is the first sub $400k listing in the area. I'm a little surprised this is still on the market after more than a month. Maybe I missed it and it went pending and fell through, I dunno know. I only saw it tonight. I would think if this is half way decent it would sell fairly quickly at that price.

At this price it's back to it's sale price in 2001 ($400k). Which is where most of my charts say prices should be. This might be a decent deal if it could be picked up for the asking price.