View Full Version : Another episode in the housing crisis...
The guy seems to have done his homework at least... :D
http://www.khou.com/home/Stranger-moves-into-foreclosed-home-citing-little-knownTexas-law.html
Normally adverse possession takes up to 20 years to establish in many states. If he's correct he has found quite the loophole.
Still, if he maintains the home and property and is a good neighbor, he should be considered an asset to the community. Otherwise the home will dilapidate and bring the neighborhood down.
However, if the sales price goes on the books as $16, that does damage to the surrounding values.
Suwannee Tim
07-24-11, 19:22
He does not seem much loved by his neighbors.
He does not seem much loved by his neighbors.
There could be various factors at play here.
Sounds like they are upset because he found a way to get the house for near nothing. No trickery, no theft, just someone who found a seldom used law and took advantage of it.
However, if the sales price goes on the books as $16, that does damage to the surrounding values.
Good.
The 30 year mortgage and artificially inflated home values are a blight on American society.
It's a phoney baloney con game. HOAs and overly strict zoning ordnances feed into this charade as well.
Good.
The 30 year mortgage and artificially inflated home values are a blight on American society.
It's a phoney baloney con game. HOAs and overly strict zoning ordnances feed into this charade as well.
You got that right!
How is the 30yr mortgage a blight on American society?
I agree 100% about HOA's.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-25-11, 14:40
How is the 30yr mortgage a blight on American society?
I agree 100% about HOA's.
Let's just say that if instead of owning, people rented (leased) housing. The market would be a lot more liquid and elastic. With Americans being so mobile now and the downsides of home ownership brought to light, I think we'll see more and more people renting instead of buying. Sure, if you are a teacher or some other job that is stable and you aren't going to have to move, owning might make sense. But if you are like most people having to move at the whim of employment a realtor taking 5% everywhack and the risk that a house won't sell starts to look like an anchor, not a asset.
Of course there is all the fringe talk about how most of a loan is interest and how that is criminal- ironically a view of some fringe people and Sharia law.
I can agree with most of your premise. I'm in the Mortgage buisness by the way. If you plan on or have an idea that you are going to be moving within a 3-5 year period and the area you live in does not have a decent appreciation rate the renting is a better option. Being at Bragg I am constantly asking active duty soldiers if they know for sure that they are going to be here for at least 3 years or more. The reason for that is VA loans are 100% loans. 99% of the soldiers do not put money down. There is also a VA Funding Fee that VA charges. 2.15% for first time use. So as soon as a soldier closes on his/her home when you add in closing costs, realtors commissions and the funding fee they are at least 10% in the hole. So using your premise, renting is a better option.
However, if a person is going to stay put for at least 5 years then buying is the better option. Especially if you are able to put money down. There are quite a few area's in the country that are rebounding and are starting to see small amounts of appreciation. Home prices are down, not at the bottom, but down enough that with the combination of very low rates, low home prices and a 30yr mortgage people are able to purchase and qualify for more home than they could before August of 2007. That date is when the melt down started. The 30yr loan isn't a plight on this country. It actually allows people to purchase and finanace a home a a low enough payment to make it all possible. 15yr terms can be very prohibitive and would make homeownership very difficult if not impossible to a great many people. Especially for many active duty enlisted soldiers!! An E5 with a wife, 2 kids and very modest debt can easily qualify for a $150K home here with a payment less than a comparable rental unit.
Adverse possession requires the following.
The possession must be Open, Hostile, Continious and Exclusive.
Someone still owns title to that home. Either the bank or former occupant or more likely some other mortgage company ( that bought the loan when the mortgage company went out of business ).
If back taxes are owed, the county will sell the property at auction. So if all the current or prior owners just disappear the county can still take possession. At that point all they have to do is basically tell him to leave or in some fashion simultaneously occupy the property. That will end his exclusive.
Also that 3 years he mentions is really short. It's usually more like 15 or 20 but maybe not in Texas.
Basically he's betting on a long shot.
Texas is supposed to be 3 yrs. Most places are 15-20. If he finally pulls it off for $16 more power to him. Especially if he takes care of and improves the property.
The $16 won't go on the books as a sale. So it won't hurt the neighborhoods value. Appraisers pull sold comparables from the local Multiple Listing Services. The $16 I believe was the costs for filing the paperwork at the local courthouse. It's also scary that someone can come in and claim property so easily, relatively speaking, and gain ownership of it. It another article on this they also mentioned that people have gained title to land just by putting a fence on it and the actual owners not objecting. After 15or so years they gain title to the land. Scary
"If he wants the house, buy the house like everyone else had to," Lowrie said. "Get the money, buy the house."
Haha. This is pure jealousy if I've ever seen it. He already has the house! Don't hate the player hate the game, LOL!!!
If he finally pulls it off for $16 more power to him. Especially if he takes care of and improves the property.
Yeah, I can't understand why the neighbors would rather see a house sit there and rot. That single home will do no harm what so ever to property values if it sells for $16, $260, or $26,000. It's simply a non arms length transfer.
I still don't think he will pull it off though.
EDIT: Having read a bit more... this has to be some sort of stunt to drum up business.
"The man who says he's a former Marine, entrepreneur and real estate agent moved into the house a month ago, claiming "adverse possession.""
"Robinson said he wants to cash in on his technique with a seminar that outlines the rules (and risks) of adverse possession."
""Bank of America told me it has not foreclosed on the property, rather the original owner just walked away," he said. "If it does foreclose, it will exercise all of its legal rights.""
""But if I have to go, I am prepared to go," he said. "I'm here to stay, but if I have to go, I am prepared to.""
"Robinson says he wants other people to know adverse possession is not a loophole — it's the law. He's ready to use his experience to teach them all about it."
Florida has a similar law. My mom was an underwriter during the boom and is also my "secondary" realtor. I've joked that i should do the same thing!
I usually drive through some communities and look for houses with unkempt lawns and pull up prop records on the home. The crappy houses do nothing for the property values of these homes, aside from a slight drop in annual taxes!
How is the 30yr mortgage a blight on American society?
I agree 100% about HOA's.
The 30 year mortgage is just another symptom of the greedy, short-sighted, "I want it and I want it NOW!" Veruca Salt insanity that has struck the American consumer since WWII.
Translated, it means "death debt" and it puts people into a lifetime of debtor's prison that forces them to be wage slaves and imputes an incredible amount of risk and stress to their lives.
The 30 year mortgage is a relatively recent phenomenon. It motivates people to buy much more house than they ought to, and is sold to them by shysters who convince them that a home is an investment. What crap. The next person I hear say "it's better than throwing your money away on rent", I swear I will punch them in the ****ing face. Home ownership has expenses and risks that those hawking the mortgages conveniently gloss over.
A much more sensible way to do things would be to spend the first 10 years of your adult life saving up money, buying a reasonably sized house, trading up as they can afford it, or just being happy with the home they bought.
The 30 year mortgage is the Hesse/Vulcan of the housing market.
And, no, I don't give a shit about the tax deduction. It's still not enough money to justify the enormous risk and expense involved.
I However, if a person is going to stay put for at least 5 years then buying is the better option. Especially if you are able to put money down. There are quite a few area's in the country that are rebounding and are starting to see small amounts of appreciation. Home prices are down, not at the bottom, but down enough that with the combination of very low rates, low home prices and a 30yr mortgage people are able to purchase and qualify for more home than they could before August of 2007. That date is when the melt down started. The 30yr loan isn't a plight on this country. It actually allows people to purchase and finanace a home a a low enough payment to make it all possible. 15yr terms can be very prohibitive and would make homeownership very difficult if not impossible to a great many people. Especially for many active duty enlisted soldiers!! An E5 with a wife, 2 kids and very modest debt can easily qualify for a $150K home here with a payment less than a comparable rental unit.
It's "blight" not "plight". Purchasing and financing a home based on the "low enough payment" is why we are in this mess to begin with.
An E5 with a wife and 2 kids has no business purchasing a home on credit.
But that doesn't stop scum in the housing industry from preying on him, does it?
Belmont31R
07-25-11, 22:57
The 30 year mortgage is just another symptom of the greedy, short-sighted, "I want it and I want it NOW!" Veruca Salt insanity that has struck the American consumer since WWII.
Translated, it means "death debt" and it puts people into a lifetime of debtor's prison that forces them to be wage slaves and imputes an incredible amount of risk and stress to their lives.
The 30 year mortgage is a relatively recent phenomenon. It motivates people to buy much more house than they ought to, and is sold to them by shysters who convince them that a home is an investment. What crap. The next person I hear say "it's better than throwing your money away on rent", I swear I will punch them in the ****ing face. Home ownership has expenses and risks that those hawking the mortgages conveniently gloss over.
A much more sensible way to do things would be to spend the first 10 years of your adult life saving up money, buying a reasonably sized house, trading up as they can afford it, or just being happy with the home they bought.
The 30 year mortgage is the Hesse/Vulcan of the housing market.
And, no, I don't give a shit about the tax deduction. It's still not enough money to justify the enormous risk and expense involved.
The massive amount of debt is a recent activity. I don't remember much about my grandpa but I know they paid cash for everything, and stored food. They were depression era kids. This debt based economy will be our undoing. This time was close, and it appears nothing was learned. The few times Ive been into a bank in the last few years 2 out of 3 times I saw ads for ARM loans. What do the banks have to lose? The people calling the shots up there rake in millions per year, and basically have the complete financial backing of the government. 16 trillion in loans, tarp, and who knows what else they are doing. We basically have a government spending nearly 20 trillion between the bailouts, loans, stimulus, ect to prop up a false economy all revolving around debt instead of actual value in peoples hands.
I inquired about a pay per month cell phone, and they still want a credit check even without a contract. I was willing to pay full value for the phone. I spent 2 hours with them trying to figure out why a credit check was needed for a monthly pay as you go service. I firmly believe the entire credit/debt system is just a way for the banks/lenders to make money, and punish those who don't pay them large sums of money by borrowing. Just like bad credit is worse than no credit, and to get good credit you have to have a revolving balance. What a crock of shit this whole system is, and now that they know the gov is going to bail them out every time they **** up there is no limit to the shit they will pull. It seems like the pay in cash thing only stuck with a few.
The massive amount of debt is a recent activity. I don't remember much about my grandpa but I know they paid cash for everything, and stored food. They were depression era kids. This debt based economy will be our undoing. This time was close, and it appears nothing was learned. The few times Ive been into a bank in the last few years 2 out of 3 times I saw ads for ARM loans. What do the banks have to lose? The people calling the shots up there rake in millions per year, and basically have the complete financial backing of the government. 16 trillion in loans, tarp, and who knows what else they are doing. We basically have a government spending nearly 20 trillion between the bailouts, loans, stimulus, ect to prop up a false economy all revolving around debt instead of actual value in peoples hands.
I inquired about a pay per month cell phone, and they still want a credit check even without a contract. I was willing to pay full value for the phone. I spent 2 hours with them trying to figure out why a credit check was needed for a monthly pay as you go service. I firmly believe the entire credit/debt system is just a way for the banks/lenders to make money, and punish those who don't pay them large sums of money by borrowing. Just like bad credit is worse than no credit, and to get good credit you have to have a revolving balance. What a crock of shit this whole system is, and now that they know the gov is going to bail them out every time they **** up there is no limit to the shit they will pull. It seems like the pay in cash thing only stuck with a few.
A few years back, before I graduated college, I helped my mom review mortgage apps as she had a significant workload that required her to take her work home. 1 in 5 had questionable W2's submitted by a broker, she even advised against taking on a mortgage with 5 years/interest only due to the ballooning rate. She denied many loans and was overturned by superiors. After Wachovia bought out World Savings, they destroyed lending arm..changed the regs and eventually wiped out the entire sector.
Belmont31R
07-26-11, 16:30
A few years back, before I graduated college, I helped my mom review mortgage apps as she had a significant workload that required her to take her work home. 1 in 5 had questionable W2's submitted by a broker, she even advised against taking on a mortgage with 5 years/interest only due to the ballooning rate. She denied many loans and was overturned by superiors. After Wachovia bought out World Savings, they destroyed lending arm..changed the regs and eventually wiped out the entire sector.
I have a strong feeling we learned nothing from this, and no one has really paid attention to why the economy tanked. This was a long time coming, and the DOJ is still suing banks and basically forcing them to make loans against better judgement. Its not at all a free economy. The government is just as deep if not deeper into the housing economy. It wasn't lack of regulation when the regulations basically forced bad lending for a bank to be in good standing with all the rules out there, fair lending standards, ect.
Here is one the latest suits: http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/July/11-crt-880.html
There are tons more out there, too. This was just the second link on google. The DOJ has been very busy strong arming banks into making loans they don't want to, and then they get on TV and blame the banks for making risky loans.
Moose-Knuckle
07-26-11, 18:53
This thread has hit on something besides a loop hole in the housing market.
Economic climates are created; the vast majority of Americans have taken the bait.
I love how people use terms like "home owner" or "I own this automobile" when in reality they are making monthly payments, aka renting at an absorbent interest rate. By in large my fellow countrymen are financially illiterate.
Belmont31R
07-27-11, 09:54
This thread has hit on something besides a loop hole in the housing market.
Economic climates are created; the vast majority of Americans have taken the bait.
I love how people use terms like "home owner" or "I own this automobile" when in reality they are making monthly payments, aka renting at an absorbent interest rate. By in large my fellow countrymen are financially illiterate.
Ha...we elected a guy who used to sue banks to force them to make risky loans. He used to work for the people who would hold protests outside of bank offices because they weren't lending to low income people.
Now he can just use the DOJ to do it.
Unfortunately both of you are right. The DOJ is sueing and forcing banks to lend money to those that do not qualify! The mortgage industry is doing everything it can to keep the industry on the right path but when it is forced to lend to those that do not qualify it's hands are pretty much tied. You can only resist for so long.
On one hand the Govt. is pushing very stringent rulemaking and legislation and on the other hand sueing when we follow those regulations.
The 30 year mortgage is just another symptom of the greedy, short-sighted, "I want it and I want it NOW!" Veruca Salt insanity that has struck the American consumer since WWII.
Translated, it means "death debt" and it puts people into a lifetime of debtor's prison that forces them to be wage slaves and imputes an incredible amount of risk and stress to their lives.
The 30 year mortgage is a relatively recent phenomenon. It motivates people to buy much more house than they ought to, and is sold to them by shysters who convince them that a home is an investment. What crap. The next person I hear say "it's better than throwing your money away on rent", I swear I will punch them in the ****ing face. Home ownership has expenses and risks that those hawking the mortgages conveniently gloss over.
A much more sensible way to do things would be to spend the first 10 years of your adult life saving up money, buying a reasonably sized house, trading up as they can afford it, or just being happy with the home they bought.
The 30 year mortgage is the Hesse/Vulcan of the housing market.
And, no, I don't give a shit about the tax deduction. It's still not enough money to justify the enormous risk and expense involved.
Some people prefer being enslaved to something. It gives them a sense of drive and purpose in an otherwise empty life. That goes for property or people or pets or anything else. Like anything that drives human nature, if there's a market for that enslavement, someone's going to fill it.
It's "blight" not "plight". Purchasing and financing a home based on the "low enough payment" is why we are in this mess to begin with.
An E5 with a wife and 2 kids has no business purchasing a home on credit.
But that doesn't stop scum in the housing industry from preying on him, does it?
I said "blight" and not "plight"
Your absolutely wrong on this point as far as low down payment is concerned and the business of an E5 purchasing a home! VA loans, which require no down payment, historically are the best performing loan in the market!! Low down payment is in no means the reason why we have a housing crisis!
Your quote below is so unbelievably idiotic! In many ways it is better than throwing your money away on renting!! If you feel you must attempt to punch me in my "****ing face", as you so eloquently put it, it'll be my pleasure to show you the error of your ways.
"The 30 year mortgage is just another symptom of the greedy, short-sighted, "I want it and I want it NOW!" Veruca Salt insanity that has struck the American consumer since WWII.
Translated, it means "death debt" and it puts people into a lifetime of debtor's prison that forces them to be wage slaves and imputes an incredible amount of risk and stress to their lives.
The 30 year mortgage is a relatively recent phenomenon. It motivates people to buy much more house than they ought to, and is sold to them by shysters who convince them that a home is an investment. What crap. The next person I hear say "it's better than throwing your money away on rent", I swear I will punch them in the ****ing face. Home ownership has expenses and risks that those hawking the mortgages conveniently gloss over.
A much more sensible way to do things would be to spend the first 10 years of your adult life saving up money, buying a reasonably sized house, trading up as they can afford it, or just being happy with the home they bought.
The 30 year mortgage is the Hesse/Vulcan of the housing market.
And, no, I don't give a shit about the tax deduction. It's still not enough money to justify the enormous risk and expense involved".
The shysters in the mortgage industry are pretty much gone. Those of us that are still here are the one's who have done an honest business, working for what is in their customers best interest. I've spent the last 6 years of my 20yr career helping to shape industry wide best practices, craft legislation and shape pending legislation so that the consumer is protected and also has access to products at rates that allow them purchase a home. I'm up on the Hill at least 3-4times a year working for consumers best interest, which believe it or not is also in my industry's best interest.
The original OP's article about "robo" signing is totally against what we stand for. If I were allowed to I'd copy a link to a Servicing best practices policy we are working on that would show what the industry is doing to clear up certain abuses such as robo signing. When it is finished and published as a white paper I'll be more than happy to. The end of the month I'll be in DC along with 5 other industry leaders for a meeting with the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau discussing this same issue as well as others. I'll also be there the 4th of this month meeting with the Conference of State Bank Supervisors to discuss and help implement licensing standards across the nation. All of this is to help protect the consumer and provide access to financing needed to purchase homes.
So 120mm when you make statements as you do I take them very seriously. As a matter of fact I find them very insulting and so short sighted. Your insulting me and everything good about an industry that I have been in and helped to shape, for the better, over the last 20 years.
I said "blight" and not "plight"
Your absolutely wrong on this point as far as low down payment is concerned and the business of an E5 purchasing a home! VA loans, which require no down payment, historically are the best performing loan in the market!! Low down payment is in no means the reason why we have a housing crisis!
Your quote below is so unbelievably idiotic! In many ways it is better than throwing your money away on renting!! If you feel you must attempt to punch me in my "****ing face", as you so eloquently put it, it'll be my pleasure to show you the error of your ways.
"The 30 year mortgage is just another symptom of the greedy, short-sighted, "I want it and I want it NOW!" Veruca Salt insanity that has struck the American consumer since WWII.
Translated, it means "death debt" and it puts people into a lifetime of debtor's prison that forces them to be wage slaves and imputes an incredible amount of risk and stress to their lives.
The 30 year mortgage is a relatively recent phenomenon. It motivates people to buy much more house than they ought to, and is sold to them by shysters who convince them that a home is an investment. What crap. The next person I hear say "it's better than throwing your money away on rent", I swear I will punch them in the ****ing face. Home ownership has expenses and risks that those hawking the mortgages conveniently gloss over.
A much more sensible way to do things would be to spend the first 10 years of your adult life saving up money, buying a reasonably sized house, trading up as they can afford it, or just being happy with the home they bought.
The 30 year mortgage is the Hesse/Vulcan of the housing market.
And, no, I don't give a shit about the tax deduction. It's still not enough money to justify the enormous risk and expense involved".
The shysters in the mortgage industry are pretty much gone. Those of us that are still here are the one's who have done an honest business, working for what is in their customers best interest. I've spent the last 6 years of my 20yr career helping to shape industry wide best practices, craft legislation and shape pending legislation so that the consumer is protected and also has access to products at rates that allow them purchase a home. I'm up on the Hill at least 3-4times a year working for consumers best interest, which believe it or not is also in my industry's best interest.
The original OP's article about "robo" signing is totally against what we stand for. If I were allowed to I'd copy a link to a Servicing best practices policy we are working on that would show what the industry is doing to clear up certain abuses such as robo signing. When it is finished and published as a white paper I'll be more than happy to. The end of the month I'll be in DC along with 5 other industry leaders for a meeting with the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau discussing this same issue as well as others. I'll also be there the 4th of this month meeting with the Conference of State Bank Supervisors to discuss and help implement licensing standards across the nation. All of this is to help protect the consumer and provide access to financing needed to purchase homes.
So 120mm when you make statements as you do I take them very seriously. As a matter of fact I find them very insulting and so short sighted. Your insulting me and everything good about an industry that I have been in and helped to shape, for the better, over the last 20 years.
Bullshit.
An E5 with a wife and 2 kids, taking a 150k loan for a home he will, at the very most, live in that home for 3 years and then get transferred out. He will then be stuck trying to sell the turd, or even worse, have to rent it out.
Single dwellings perform very poorly as rental units.
"Throwing money away on rent" is what morons say who do not understand what risk is.
The problem with debating with you, is that you have drank deeply of the Kool-Aid that is real estate marketing.
The system doesn't need improvement, or overhauling, it needs banishment. Then, the housing market will go down to a sustainable level, people will spend 10 years or so saving up to buy a house, and the entire bunch of shysters and rip off shitheads will go on to other forms of organized theft.
A home is a home, first. If it appreciates in value, great. But a home as an "investment" ignores completely the risk and hidden expenses involved in buying.
BTW, in fully built markets, average rent for a single family unit is about the same or lower than the average monthly house payment. What does that tell you?
Some people prefer being enslaved to something. It gives them a sense of drive and purpose in an otherwise empty life. That goes for property or people or pets or anything else. Like anything that drives human nature, if there's a market for that enslavement, someone's going to fill it.
Yup.
They are the Bushmaster customers of the world. To make a really iffy M4C analogy.
Belmont31R
07-27-11, 22:54
Bullshit.
An E5 with a wife and 2 kids, taking a 150k loan for a home he will, at the very most, live in that home for 3 years and then get transferred out. He will then be stuck trying to sell the turd, or even worse, have to rent it out.
Single dwellings perform very poorly as rental units.
"Throwing money away on rent" is what morons say who do not understand what risk is.
The problem with debating with you, is that you have drank deeply of the Kool-Aid that is real estate marketing.
The system doesn't need improvement, or overhauling, it needs banishment. Then, the housing market will go down to a sustainable level, people will spend 10 years or so saving up to buy a house, and the entire bunch of shysters and rip off shitheads will go on to other forms of organized theft.
A home is a home, first. If it appreciates in value, great. But a home as an "investment" ignores completely the risk and hidden expenses involved in buying.
BTW, in fully built markets, average rent for a single family unit is about the same or lower than the average monthly house payment. What does that tell you?
An E5 buying a house should be otherwise independently wealthy. Ive known a couple but most are not in the financial state of mind or healthiness to buy a house unless they are single, saved up 20-30k at minimum, no other obligations, and a solid financial record.
An E5 living in barracks will rake in less than 2k a month. Not many houses out there worth buying that can be had for 20-25% monthly salary. If they live off post, and get housing funds off post housing will take up what you are given. So at most an E5 should be able to spend 400-500 a month on a mortgage. My house is sensible at around 1100/month which would take up over 50% of an E5's salary.
Ive made my own mistakes and am dealing with them. Had to relearn the lessons my ancestors learned. Im now more likely to whip out cash to pay for things than a card.
An E5 buying a house should be otherwise independently wealthy. Ive known a couple but most are not in the financial state of mind or healthiness to buy a house unless they are single, saved up 20-30k at minimum, no other obligations, and a solid financial record.
An E5 living in barracks will rake in less than 2k a month. Not many houses out there worth buying that can be had for 20-25% monthly salary. If they live off post, and get housing funds off post housing will take up what you are given. So at most an E5 should be able to spend 400-500 a month on a mortgage. My house is sensible at around 1100/month which would take up over 50% of an E5's salary.
Ive made my own mistakes and am dealing with them. Had to relearn the lessons my ancestors learned. Im now more likely to whip out cash to pay for things than a card.
I just ballparked 1800 a month, thats just under 22k a year. Is that what an E5 typically makes? not including any other stipends?
The shysters in the mortgage industry are pretty much gone.
No-no, Bank of America is still around.....;)
Belmont31R
07-27-11, 23:31
I just ballparked 1800 a month, thats just under 22k a year. Is that what an E5 typically makes? not including any other stipends?
Its depends on the duty station and whatever they have going on there.
I was an E4 in Germany, and we got COLA but our base also had mandatory DFAC deducations.
At Lewis I didn't get COLA but didn't get DFAC deductions. So I made more at Lewis than I did in Germany.
At Lewis I was making right around 850 every 1st and 15th. I imagine an E5 in the same boat would make around 900-950 ever 1st and 15th.
It was actually quite a pay raise for my going CONUS since I no longer had to pay 15 euros each way to get to the PX or club on the weekends. All we had was a shopette on post. The PX and comissary were OFF POST with bus service maybe 2X a day that took an hour to get there.
But yeah...depending on post 1800-2200 a month for an E5 is about right assuming they are single and living off post. Ours in Germany got off post housing which was 1500 EUROS a month. Of course we lived in the 2nd richest city in Germany so that was a bit above normal. All our E5's had quite the pad(s). Get 2-3 SGT's together on a 2k euro a month apartment = 650 euros a month and pocket over 1k a month difference for a freakishly nice apartment. Then you get to keep your COLA since you live off post. On post guys got 2 man barracks with shared showers between 2 rooms (4 men per shower), regular inspections and details. COLA got taken with forced DFAC fees and if you wanted a "missed meal" credit you had to fill out a form for each one. So if you didn't want to eat at the DFAC you had to fill our 3 forms a day during the week and twice on each weekend day. Yeah you can imagine how that went. I just ate $200+ a month in fees for nothing.
An E5 buying a house should be otherwise independently wealthy. Ive known a couple but most are not in the financial state of mind or healthiness to buy a house unless they are single, saved up 20-30k at minimum, no other obligations, and a solid financial record.
An E5 living in barracks will rake in less than 2k a month. Not many houses out there worth buying that can be had for 20-25% monthly salary. If they live off post, and get housing funds off post housing will take up what you are given. So at most an E5 should be able to spend 400-500 a month on a mortgage. My house is sensible at around 1100/month which would take up over 50% of an E5's salary.
Ive made my own mistakes and am dealing with them. Had to relearn the lessons my ancestors learned. Im now more likely to whip out cash to pay for things than a card.
E5 with wife and 2 kids, 4yrs in service will gross $3812.30. That's base pay, Basic Allowance for Housing and Basic Allowance for Sustenance. After SSN, State and Federal taxes he will net $3409.01 Taxes are calculated on Base Pay only. So net take home = $40908.12. Taxes were calculated as married with claiming only 2 dependents not the full 4 that he could take. This also doesn't take into account any specialty pays such as jump pay, demo pay or language pay. I have not included hazardous fire pay since it is a temporary pay allowance. If soldier is SF he will also receive an extra $375 in special duty pay. If you really want to go overboard and add all that up let's look at a new SF E5/sgt out of the Q course. to the gross of $3812.30 you could add and extra $150 for jump pay, $150 for demo pay and $375 for special duty pay. All of this is tax free except for SSN/Med. After taking out SSN/Med taxes on those pays net take home for an E5. 4yrs time in service a wife and 2 kids is $4248.37/mo or $50,980.44 a year. So if you, as an E5 married with 2 kids manage yor debt properly you can easily afford a 150,000 mortgage. A mortgage payment at todays 30yr rate of 4.25% on that loan would be $958.77. That's here at Bragg and payment also includes property taxes and Homeowners Ins.. After paying utilities, mortgage, $1000.00 in estimated monthly obligations that would leave that person with a net figure of $1338.76 for any other discretionary expenses. This is all based off of the $40K income of an everyday soldier. If it were the SF E5 example you could add an extra $839 a month to that residual income. None of this takes into account the spouse working and any income she might bring in. Yes total Debt to Income is a bit high but the housing ratio is only 24.197% of gross pay for the non SF E5. and 21.366% for the SF E5.
Belmont31R it is entirely possible for a married E5 with 2 kids to easily afford a $150K mortgage.
120mm if you will look back and see in one of my earlier posts I too was against a soldier purchasing if they were going to be here 3 yrs +/-. Doesn't make sense unless they are putting a down payment on the property. Even then it may not. As far as debating the issue and drinking heavily of the kool aide you are so vehemently against the issue you can't see past your nose to spite your face. I guess you could also say that not only do I drink it I've also helped to make it and supply it. The difference where I'm concerned is that my kool aid has been made with the consumer in mind. I always put them first. If it makes sense I'll tell them. It if doesn't I'll do the same and try to convince them to pursue other means of housing, yes even renting! As much as you might think that mortgage lenders have no risk in the transaction we actually have a tone of risk. If that loan defaults or goes into foreclosure I have to purchase the whole loan back from whoever I sold it to. Coming out of pocket for hundreds of thousands of dollars and then managing a possible foreclosure is unbelievably expensive. It's a lose/lose situation for everyone involved. Thankfully I have not had to repurchase a loan or manage a foreclosure in over 3 years. What that also means is that of the 2K to 3K loans I've done in that time none of them have gone into foreclosure or default. I must be doing something right.
Belmont31R
07-28-11, 09:00
E5 with wife and 2 kids, 4yrs in service will gross $3812.30. That's base pay, Basic Allowance for Housing and Basic Allowance for Sustenance. After SSN, State and Federal taxes he will net $3409.01 Taxes are calculated on Base Pay only. So net take home = $40908.12. Taxes were calculated as married with claiming only 2 dependents not the full 4 that he could take. This also doesn't take into account any specialty pays such as jump pay, demo pay or language pay. I have not included hazardous fire pay since it is a temporary pay allowance. If soldier is SF he will also receive an extra $375 in special duty pay. If you really want to go overboard and add all that up let's look at a new SF E5/sgt out of the Q course. to the gross of $3812.30 you could add and extra $150 for jump pay, $150 for demo pay and $375 for special duty pay. All of this is tax free except for SSN/Med. After taking out SSN/Med taxes on those pays net take home for an E5. 4yrs time in service a wife and 2 kids is $4248.37/mo or $50,980.44 a year. So if you, as an E5 married with 2 kids manage yor debt properly you can easily afford a 150,000 mortgage. A mortgage payment at todays 30yr rate of 4.25% on that loan would be $958.77. That's here at Bragg and payment also includes property taxes and Homeowners Ins.. After paying utilities, mortgage, $1000.00 in estimated monthly obligations that would leave that person with a net figure of $1338.76 for any other discretionary expenses. This is all based off of the $40K income of an everyday soldier. If it were the SF E5 example you could add an extra $839 a month to that residual income. None of this takes into account the spouse working and any income she might bring in. Yes total Debt to Income is a bit high but the housing ratio is only 24.197% of gross pay for the non SF E5. and 21.366% for the SF E5.
Belmont31R it is entirely possible for a married E5 with 2 kids to easily afford a $150K mortgage.
120mm if you will look back and see in one of my earlier posts I too was against a soldier purchasing if they were going to be here 3 yrs +/-. Doesn't make sense unless they are putting a down payment on the property. Even then it may not. As far as debating the issue and drinking heavily of the kool aide you are so vehemently against the issue you can't see past your nose to spite your face. I guess you could also say that not only do I drink it I've also helped to make it and supply it. The difference where I'm concerned is that my kool aid has been made with the consumer in mind. I always put them first. If it makes sense I'll tell them. It if doesn't I'll do the same and try to convince them to pursue other means of housing, yes even renting! As much as you might think that mortgage lenders have no risk in the transaction we actually have a tone of risk. If that loan defaults or goes into foreclosure I have to purchase the whole loan back from whoever I sold it to. Coming out of pocket for hundreds of thousands of dollars and then managing a possible foreclosure is unbelievably expensive. It's a lose/lose situation for everyone involved. Thankfully I have not had to repurchase a loan or manage a foreclosure in over 3 years. What that also means is that of the 2K to 3K loans I've done in that time none of them have gone into foreclosure or default. I must be doing something right.
Not many people are getting extra duty pay, and I was talking about single E5. If they are married, and live on post they don't get housing pay. In my experience most married people lived in some type of post housing, and they only got off post housing if there wasn't any on post housing available. Maybe its different in other branches/posts.
Belmont31R it is entirely possible for a married E5 with 2 kids to easily afford a $150K mortgage.
"easily" ??
leave that person with a net figure of $1338.76
That figure will probably drop below $1000 just for including one automobile ( gas, insurance, maintenance, property tax, etc. ).
I don't have clue what clothing, school and food costs a month for growing children but it can't be cheap.
What do they set aside for when the heat pump dies. That's going to be $2K-$5K. How about the roof? Another $5K. Internet access? $50 a month?
Anyway, when you start allowing for all the necessary things and then tack on the things that absolutely will be needed in any home they will get by, but they will not be able to afford for anything to go wrong. So I would not call it easy.
"easily" ??
That figure will probably drop below $1000 just for including one automobile ( gas, insurance, maintenance, property tax, etc. ).
I don't have clue what clothing, school and food costs a month for growing children but it can't be cheap.
What do they set aside for when the heat pump dies. That's going to be $2K-$5K. How about the roof? Another $5K. Internet access? $50 a month?
Anyway, when you start allowing for all the necessary things and then tack on the things that absolutely will be needed in any home they will get by, but they will not be able to afford for anything to go wrong. So I would not call it easy.
My calculations included vehicle costs. The other costs you mention everyone experiences. Yes there are risks and other costs. If a person is marginal then they are counceled and I always draw out a full budget for them showing them other various costs and how they could be affected. I'm not going to put someone into a loan without coming to the conclusion that I'm not hurting them. I've turned down many a loan because I didn't feel the person qualified for it. I've also lowered the loan amount that I will approve them for because of the costs involved and not feeling comfortable with what they are looking for. There are always going to be risks involved. You do your best to mitigate them for your client and yourself. At the end of the day you have to have a conscious and be able to go home with the feeling that you did good that day. There are very very few days that I do not go home knowing I've done good that day.
120mm if you will look back and see in one of my earlier posts I too was against a soldier purchasing if they were going to be here 3 yrs +/-. Doesn't make sense unless they are putting a down payment on the property. Even then it may not. As far as debating the issue and drinking heavily of the kool aide you are so vehemently against the issue you can't see past your nose to spite your face. I guess you could also say that not only do I drink it I've also helped to make it and supply it. The difference where I'm concerned is that my kool aid has been made with the consumer in mind. I always put them first. If it makes sense I'll tell them. It if doesn't I'll do the same and try to convince them to pursue other means of housing, yes even renting! As much as you might think that mortgage lenders have no risk in the transaction we actually have a tone of risk. If that loan defaults or goes into foreclosure I have to purchase the whole loan back from whoever I sold it to. Coming out of pocket for hundreds of thousands of dollars and then managing a possible foreclosure is unbelievably expensive. It's a lose/lose situation for everyone involved. Thankfully I have not had to repurchase a loan or manage a foreclosure in over 3 years. What that also means is that of the 2K to 3K loans I've done in that time none of them have gone into foreclosure or default. I must be doing something right.
I never said mortgage lenders have no risk in the transaction.
They just conveniently neglect to truly spell out the risk of home ownership. Especially the insidious and wicked 30 year mortgage.
Do I remember you saying something earlier about the 15 year mortgage having insanely high payments or something? Last time I checked, payments on 15 year mortgages are only a couple hundred bucks more a month than 30 year mortgages.
Here's the deal. How about people spend 10 years saving up for a home they can afford, and buy it with cash? Or if they have to use credit, how about the 15 year mortgage? Amazingly, there used to be something called a "starter home" that people could afford to buy in a relatively short period. And then as they saved up money, they could sell it and move up in homes. Or just be happy with the place they have.
Of course this implies that 'murricans can actually possess the self-will and discipline to buy a house they can freaking AFFORD and not get all stupid with one they cannot. And, of course, they giant screen TVs and two brand new cars also bought on credit, or they aren't "real 'murricans" now are they?
To me, someone saying they're an ethical mortgage lender is like someone saying they're an ethical crack dealer or an ethical whore. The system is so corrupt, and so burned into our nation's psyche that it is expected for people to sign their life away to a bank as soon as they are able. You realize the mortgage industry didn't even exist until after WWII, don't you?
To me, someone saying they're an ethical mortgage lender is like someone saying they're an ethical crack dealer or an ethical whore. The system is so corrupt, and so burned into our nation's psyche that it is expected for people to sign their life away to a bank as soon as they are able. You realize the mortgage industry didn't even exist until after WWII, don't you?
Comments such as this show that there is no debating the issue in any form of intelligent manner with you.
As far as the mortgage industry is concerned you are showing your ignorance once again. Mortgages have been in existance since the mid 1800's here in the US. The National Banking Act of 1864 helped to standardize the practice and provide greater oversight for lending. 1893 Iowa Loan and Trust Company began issuing bonds backing mortgages. These were the first Mortgage Backed Securities, although in a very primitive form. Throughout the later 1800's and early 1900's mortgages grew in complexity. By the early 1900's they were mainly based on variable rates, short terms and had high down payments. They were also refinanced quite frequently, sometimes as often as every year. During the Depression the FHA was formed,1934 to be exact. Fannie Mae was formed in 1938. Fannie's charter was to provide liquidity to a market decimated by the Depression. Fannie also standardized loan products and underwriting guidelines assiciated with those particlular products. The G.I. Bill, post WWII, helped to create the VA mortgage which still gives active duty and veterans access to low cost low down payment loans. The creation of the VA mortgage was originally a 95% 30yr Mortgage. In 1968 Ginnie Mae was created to help provide uniformity to the mortgage market and to help securitize FHA and VA loans. 1970 Freddie Mac was formed also with the purpose of securitizing mortgages.
So the mortgage industry has a history greatly predating WWII here in the US.
@ Watrdawg,
Ok, I didn't realize you had included auto expense because that has become a huge expense with the prices of cars and gas.
Also I am not questioning your ethics. I actually believe in home ownership.
Unfortunately, I believe our world has changed so much that what has worked if applied properly may no longer continue to do so.
These are facts of lives that did not use to exist.....
1. cost of living
2. divorce rate
3. dynamic job market
Number 2 alone.... 50% of every home bought will be a financially compromised due to divorce. If it's a 2nd marriage, then 70%.
Generally these people loose big, not always, so maybe just say 25% of all home purchases will be bad investments for that reason alone.
Relocation - this is tied to jobs which have become highly dynamic. No one ever counted on the steel mill or tobacco factory ever ending so if you had a job there you were set. That is all out the window. The employment dynamic has changed.
I believe we will see a whole new dynamic based closer to what 120mm suggests. Perhaps not that stark, but I see people being way more cautious.
We have gone from.....
"Come on down!!" I'll lend you 115%
to
"You need to be very financially secure and we will try to get you into this loan that is less than what you are asking for"
to
"Hello, I would like to borrow 25% of the value of my home, what is the best you have to offer"
IOW, then lending industry will go the way of the Insurance industry, shop online type deal. It will take a while.
I may be over influenced but I sit at my desk every day and for the past several years the bottom line boils down to.... ok, you have lost this much, this guy lost that much, they are loosing X, the smiths are loosing Y. It makes no difference who they are. Young professional, blue collar, VIP/CEO. The only difference is the numbers. From tens of thousands to over a million on a single home.
I have a file on my desk right now. Paid $240K in '08. replaced roof, Heat Pump, remodeled baths, painted. for sale now for $204K and they will not get that. Then knock off 6% for Realtor fees. ... and these are young kids maybe 30's at best. So they have probably spent $20K a year. They could rented a much nicer home in a much nicer neighborhood for that. Or rented that one and put money in savings. That is a historically very active neighborhood with excellent schools and support services
People are not to going to continue to take these risks in housing. At least I don't believe they will. When the occasional person gets burned, that's one thing. When everyone that tries to play gets burned that's another.
Again, I'm sure you do a very good job and mortgages absolutely are a good thing. I just think there will be a new mentality about home ownership in the coming years with people either buying less or saving more before hand. In fact I already see it happening. I have people tell me about it that have no ties to the industry. There is a very poor view of home ownership by a whole lot of people out there. I wouldn't say it's Enron bad, but there are lots of "wish we hadn't" people around.
tb-av,
Unfortunately a lot of what you are saying is very true. I would also have to say that what is going on right now is part of a very cyclical period in real estate. A good example of that is what happened during the S&L crisis in the early 80's. Also again during the mid to late 80's in the oil area's of Texas. There were homes in Texas that originally sold in the $400L to $600K range that foreclosed and later sold in the low $200K range. Then come the early 90's and later those same homes began to appreciate and more than recouped their value.
Has the industry always been fault free. Not by any means. We have been able to rid our industry of the scum that have given us a bad name. One person that I'm definitely glad is gone is Angelo Mozzilo of Countrywide. To this day I can understand why he wasn't buried beneath the jail. What he did to bring all of this about makes Enron look like a ride in the park!!
True, I have never seen a cycle like this though. I've been in it since 1984. This is the worst I have ever seen and because of world changes and out political state, I don't see it a s cycle.
Sort of like the Japan Tsunami may have been part of cyclic behavior but the result of that particular one is going to be totally different from all prior cyclic activity.
We have been able to rid our industry of the scum that have given us a bad name.
If you add the word "some" I'll agree.
Let me ask you a question.... this is not directed at you by the way.... but you probably have an accurate handle on it.
You are mortgage broker I believe?..... Before Dodd/Frank you were able to hire appraisers. You are ethical lender and therefore hired ethical competent appraisers.
Now after Dodd/Frank, which is supposed to regulate and protect the industry you basically have to order your appraisals blind. You take who they assign.
So here is my question.... Do you ever get the same few competent ethical appraisers you used to get? Do you get incompetent appraisers? Do you actually see a wide random selection of say a different appraiser each time?
Actually I'm a Mortgage Lender not a Broker. I can still pick my own appraisers. However, because of the Housing Valuation Code of Conduct we have to have a rotating list of appraisers. We also have one person assigning appraisers to every loan. That person does not have a financial tie to any loans in process. Being from a relatively small town and living here since 1968 you get to know most everyone. The appraisers in our area are pretty good. The HVCC is what came about in the compromise between Andrew Cuomo, when he was the AG for NY, and Fannie Mae. This happened in 2008 or 2009 I believe. Since that time it has become part of VA/FHA Fannie Freddie and USDA underwriting guidelines. The purpose was to insure appraiser independence and to try to stem instances of pressure on appraisers to meet value. Over all it has done a good job. One of the unintended consequences is that out of town Appraisal Management Companies were being hired to do appraisals in area's they did not know. The AMC's would hire any appraiser to work for them and pay them half of what was usually charged for that area. They would pocket the rest. The appraisers they hired to work for them were usually very inexperienced and had little knowledge of the market area. So it was difficult to get a valid appraisal. This happened all over the country. It not only affected Brokers but everyone.
We do mostly VA mortgages. VA has an automated assignment system that picks the appraiser for us. As stated earlier thankfully we know most of the appraisers and they do a very good job. With FHA, USDA and Conventional loans we chose the appraisers ourselves. We develop our own approved appraiser list and rotate off of that list. If an appraiser does shoddy work for us he/she is dropped from the list. Although being dropped would mean that the appraiser has to regularly to subpar work. We all have bad days to 1 bad appraisal does not ban an appraiser.
Dodd/Frank was/is supposed to regulate the industy and put in place the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau. The rule makeing process that Dodd/Frank has mandated is going on now. There are over 600 rules that have to be developed and put in place over the next couple of years. The intent of D/F is good but the cumbersomness of the bill is going to make it very difficult to complete. Another major intent was to creat a system where "Too Big to Fail" would not come about again. Well D/F has done jsut the opposite. It has created a sysem where Wells Fargo, BofA, Chase and Citi are doing close to 70% of all loans in the market. Wells and BofA usually cary between 50 and 55% of the market. I wonder what ever happened to "Too Big to Fail". D/F is a huge mess. I'm not a fan of Barney Frank at all. In a meeting with him and his staff before D/F was anywhere complete he told us he was going to do his best to legislate us out of business. This iscoming from a man whose "partner" worked for Fannie Mae in a fiarly high up position. Talk about a conflict of interest!! Chris Dodd was part of the Friends of Angelo loan program. Angelo Mozillo from Countrywide that is. With Dood protecting you that is probably why he was not prosecuted like he should have been! Boy did I go off on a tangent.
D/F has not hurt us with having good appraisers to work with. HVCC did hurt everyone, homeowners included!
When isaid earlier that we have been able to rid our industry of the scum that hurt it, of course that is an ongoing process. We are heatedly pursuing those that are the scum and doing everything possible to get rid of them. National licensing, which also requires back ground checks, credit report checks, mandatory licensing and continuing education requirements are all part of that. A big part is also minimum net worth requirements for the licensed company. There are also bond requirements that both loan officers and company's must maintain. Each state is different with those requirements but it has come to that only the most sound, financially and ethically, companies can operate now. As any industry there are those black spots that are still there. It's an ongoing process to get rid of them!!
Yes, and that is what I meant by "some" of the bad guys being run out of the business.
Dodd/Frank is a giant mess. Typical DC politics.
With regard to you being a Lender.... AMCs and such..... again, not directed at you......
But imagine this scenario...... "We also have one person assigning appraisers to every loan."
You know that in any company, that "one person" can be swayed, hints dropped, etc... My point is that any lender and even Brokers have found a way around the system when they need it.
AMCs and big banks were not necessarily using bad appraisers or even incompetent appraisers. A well trained appraiser can use valid appraisal principals and appraise any property anywhere. It's not rocket science, it's basic data. So this partial myth gets spread that the Lender needs control of the appraisal process. This justifies the "one person" down the hall that handles all this. Again, I believe you are honest and your "one guy" is honest, but not everyone is and it's not all the fault of AMCs.
Yes, AMC's are a huge problem though. Some of the largest will not even allow me on their list at any price.... Why? Because just like you say, they are selecting by price alone, lying to the public, and pocketing the money. They have their system down. They have their team.
Look at the new HUD 1 statement. The appraisal fee is hidden in with other charges to facilitate this. Yet it's being offered to public as new, safe and transparent.
So there is still so much corruption ( and potential being built in ) and things being hidden from the public that it's laughable.
I've been an appraiser for 28 years. You can put me in any state, any town, with any residential property and I can appraise it. Obviously if it's really complex it will be harder for me but my report will be thorough, understandable and very similar to a competent honest local appraiser. So this whole locational competence thing is a farce. It's perpetuated by lenders that want to pick their own appraisers and by appraisers that don't want more competition.... and of course by AMC's that use selection by price.
Also on behalf of the good AMCs. Some do now, and have for as long as I can remember, pay "going rate" fees, have no problem getting appraisers higher fees for complex properties, have knowledgeable competent appraiser reviewers and generally are very easy to work with for all parties involved for the additional services they provide along with the appraisal. In fact I have been on national conference calls where the AMC says...the client doesn't care what you charge if it's reasonable they just need to know the real story. the bottom line needs to be as dead on as possible.
So when you roll all this up into a ball. I still think things are in somewhat dire straits and the public still senses this and will proceed with caution. You are in a somewhat unique situation with the Military aspect though.
Oh and I meant to say that deal of rent vs buy. There can be a lot of mental frustration in renting. So that too is where being able to finance has huge benefits as well. But again, like 120mm, I think there is a lot still being hidden from the public, a lot of lender control, a lot of appraiser control, just basically a lot of "who's doing what, who's getting paid for what, and how much is all this is really going to cost"
There is no need for it to be that way. We started an Appraiser Selection Portal here in VA. Criteria to be on the list. I think it was a minimum of 10 -15 years experience, designation from Appraisal Institute, highest form of license available, no blacklist involvement, Fees that were mid-range of most often charged, basically high quality appraisers that --any-- lender could trust in. Went over like a lead balloon.....
The public doesn't know that though. They know the story about the appraiser from out of town and think that fee on the HUD 1 is what they paid him to walk around their house for 15 minutes.
I definitely can see what you are saying about 1 person assigning the appraisers. My mother and I own the company. Our staff is comprised of 17 people. Average time span that our staff has been employed with us is almost 12 years. We have very little turn over. The person who manages our appraisal assignments has been with us for 26 years. She actually started with my mother in a property management company that she owned. She's about as close as a sister to me as can be. However, one thing we absolutely don't tolerate is anything tht would adversely affect our company. Reputation is everything to us. We work as a team and one bad apple will be clipped from the tree ASAP. I've even fired 2 women for gossiping about another staff member.
A good appraiser is as important to the process and any other piece of the puzzle. I like your idea about an Appraiser Selection Portal. Sounds a lot like VA's system. I wish FHA would go back to the same system they had similar to VA's. I underwrite close to a 1000 appraisals a year. We are licensed in 11 different states. I'm also licensed in those states as a Loan Officer. I depend upon the Appraiser to give me a clear picture of the property and a good "Opinion of Value". I know the markets we lend in in NC very well. The other states not so much. What I know comes through the appraisers eyes and his/her report. That is one of the reasons I prefer not to work through an AMC. I would rather get to know 4-5 appraisers in what ever market area and develop a good working relationship. that way when I'm underwriting that appraisal and have any questions I can easily hope on the phone and talk about them. Emails are fine sometimes but with phone calls you learn a lot more.
By the way I hate the new HUD-1 also. Our new Good Faith Estimates were meant to make it easier for the consumer to understand the costs. It's 3 pages and does nothing to explain what the costs are. Too much is lumped together, like the appraisal fees, and it is more confusing for consumers. The old 1 page GFE was very clear to understand. Now the CFPB is looking to combine both the GFE and the Truth in Lending statements. So far prototypes are just marginally better than the 2 forms we have now.
tb-av a couple of times you have used the phrase or something similar, " not directed at you". No need for that. This has been a good conversation about difficult topic. I've thoroughly enjoyed our discussion. I'm licensed in Virginia also. We do work there off and on. Shoot me a PM with you info and maybe we can use you if we ever are working in your area.
tb-av a couple of times you have used the phrase or something similar, " not directed at you". No need for that. This has been a good conversation about difficult topic. I've thoroughly enjoyed our discussion. I'm licensed in Virginia also. We do work there off and on.
I agree, good conversation and difficult topic. Thanks, I just wanted to be clear I'm not talking about open and honest businesses as I know there many. One of my clients uses your similar scenario for the most part but it's a corporate deal.
Shoot me a PM with you info and maybe we can use you if we ever are working in your area.
Thank you, I will do that. Hey if you ever hear of anyone that wants me to relocate to the Outer Banks and work for them, let me know :D
Comments such as this show that there is no debating the issue in any form of intelligent manner with you.
As far as the mortgage industry is concerned you are showing your ignorance once again. Mortgages have been in existance since the mid 1800's here in the US. The National Banking Act of 1864 helped to standardize the practice and provide greater oversight for lending. 1893 Iowa Loan and Trust Company began issuing bonds backing mortgages. These were the first Mortgage Backed Securities, although in a very primitive form. Throughout the later 1800's and early 1900's mortgages grew in complexity. By the early 1900's they were mainly based on variable rates, short terms and had high down payments. They were also refinanced quite frequently, sometimes as often as every year. During the Depression the FHA was formed,1934 to be exact. Fannie Mae was formed in 1938. Fannie's charter was to provide liquidity to a market decimated by the Depression. Fannie also standardized loan products and underwriting guidelines assiciated with those particlular products. The G.I. Bill, post WWII, helped to create the VA mortgage which still gives active duty and veterans access to low cost low down payment loans. The creation of the VA mortgage was originally a 95% 30yr Mortgage. In 1968 Ginnie Mae was created to help provide uniformity to the mortgage market and to help securitize FHA and VA loans. 1970 Freddie Mac was formed also with the purpose of securitizing mortgages.
So the mortgage industry has a history greatly predating WWII here in the US.
So, still flinging bullshit?
Mortgages are actually medieval, historically. Prior to 1950s in America, 30 year mortgages were as rare as hen's teeth. I'm talking single percentage of all homes. Now, all of a sudden, they are expected.
You've posted nothing that either addresses my points directly, but lots and lots of bullshit and even tried to market your services.
You are typical, imo.
You are a "true believer" and cannot be deterred in your fanaticism. Hopefully others will be able to see through the tremendous volume of bullshit that you and others throw around about becoming slaves to a house.
So, still flinging bullshit?
I think you need to ask yourself the very same question.
Mortgages are actually medieval, historically. Prior to 1950s in America, 30 year mortgages were as rare as hen's teeth. I'm talking single percentage of all homes. Now, all of a sudden, they are expected.
While this may be true, it's not what you said initially. Why not just admit you misstated fact?
You've posted nothing that either addresses my points directly, but lots and lots of bullshit and even tried to market your services.
Really...and what texts were you reading? I think you're confusing the writings from your favorite "How To Wage War With Others On The Internet While Making Them Feel Bad About Themselves " book with what Watrdawg wrote. He seemed to explain his point rather well and failed to endorse unethical lending practices. And to offer another work is not marketing services, you over eager to be insulting little fella you.
You are typical, imo.
You are a "true believer" and cannot be deterred in your fanaticism. Hopefully others will be able to see through the tremendous volume of bullshit that you and others throw around about becoming slaves to a house.
Goodness..."true believer"...and also "fanaticism"...oh my. :eek: The man undoubtedly reeks of pure evil.
Yes, he is surely bent on the destruction of all America. Thankfully you called him on it and got him to rethink his purpose in life.
By the way, paying cash for a home is surely ideal. But to blindly assume that everyone should be able to save $150,000-$200,000 in ten years to buy a home, especially today, is beyond short-sighted. If you are able to do so, I'd say you were also likely already a slave to your future home while in the decade long process.
I am pretty sure the entire state of Texas was claimed under Adverse Possession. What is the BFD?
I am not a lawyer but I have the internet!
http://www.lawchek.com/resources/forms/que/advposs.htm
In Texas, it is 3-25 years depending on the case.
I say good on him. Whatever happened to American pioneer spirit? Looks like suburban squatting to me.
What?! A black man in America can't get ahead using a time honored legal process? No, of course, instead of taking some land and working using his own labor, he should be all laid up in hood and shit collecting public assistance.
Clearly it is time to play The Race Card Game! Where are the Justice Brothers when you need them?
<snipped a bunch of passive aggressive bullshit>By the way, paying cash for a home is surely ideal. But to blindly assume that everyone should be able to save $150,000-$200,000 in ten years to buy a home, especially today, is beyond short-sighted. If you are able to do so, I'd say you were also likely already a slave to your future home while in the decade long process.
Where did I say $150 to $200k? In my opinion, if you cannot afford to save up to buy a starter home in 10 years, you have no business owning your home, or you are looking at homes you cannot afford.
First, the problem is, everyone thinks they "deserve" an expensive home. Even just starting off. What's wrong with buying a home you can afford? And not buying the flat screen TV, and the new cars, and the new furniture?
Second, the hyperinflation of home values is a function of the homebuyers' addiction to the 30 year mortgage. If you took away the long term credit, home prices would plummet. And the affordable starter home would return.
I think you'd also see the return of safer low income neighborhoods, due to a return to stability of home owners. Currently, so-called "affordable" housing is pretty much in the ghetto.
Of course, 'murricans are still going to be stupid spoiled brats who want everything right now, so I am just fantasizing. If this hurts your feelings, man up and move on.
Of course, 'murricans are still going to be stupid spoiled brats who want everything right now, so I am just fantasizing. If this hurts your feelings, man up and move on.
It seems as though everyone who disagrees with your stiflingly negative viewpoints are without question either "stupid spoiled brats" or much the like. What a tired theme to witness over and over. I mean really it's just flat out disturbing.
It seems as though everyone who disagrees with your stiflingly negative viewpoints are without question either "stupid spoiled brats" or much the like. What a tired theme to witness over and over. I mean really it's just flat out disturbing.
You had something to add?
Seriously, the preponderance of your comments on M4C are chiding others and their behavior.
On the subject, imo, the housing crisis was bought and paid for by foolish people, thinking they can get more home than they can really afford, using the 30 year mortgage as a vehicle.
If I come off as harsh, it's an attention getting device. The evil that is the 30 year mortgage has become such a pervasive evil that people now consider it to be normal, and almost "unAmerican" and strange if you do not have one. It seems that if you don't get in peoples' faces about it, they give you a "Lassie look" and move on.
30 year mortgages were nearly unheard of until the 1950s. Seriously.
30 year mortgages hyperinflate home values, and make true home ownership artifically high.
30 year mortgages allow unprecedented mobility, which allows people to abandon low priced housing neighborhoods, which effectively turns those places into "crime zones". So nice neighborhoods eventually become a matter of high home prices, which creates a low-income criminal class. The death of the "honest poor" is perhaps the worst aspect of the 30 year mortgage.
All this tends to piss me off, when someone I consider to be roughly equal to a pimp or a drug dealer starts talking about the joys of the 30 year morgage. And then expects to be treated as a stalwart pillar of society.
Forgive me if I am capable of extended logic. In the words of Adrian Monk, "It's a blessing and a curse".
120mm, sometimes you just have look on the bright side....
One day, a very rich tourist is on a driving holiday and – passing through a small town – realises he is feeling very tired. He therefore stops at the town’s only hotel, lays a $100 note on the desk and tells the hotel owner he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs in order to select the one in which he wants to spend the night.
The owner presents the man with a pass key to all the rooms, but as soon as the visitor has walked upstairs, he roars into action.
Grabbing the $100 note he runs next door to the butcher to pay his long standing debt.
The butcher gladly accepts the 4100 note and runs down the street to repay his debt to the pig farmer.
The pig farmer takes the $100 note and heads off to pay his bill at the Farmers co-op, the supplier of his feed and fuel.
The guy at the Farmers co-op takes the $100 note and runs to pay his drinks bill at the local pub.
The pub owner, who has been facing hard times, slips the money to the local prostitute because she has been giving him “services” on credit.
The prostitute rushes to the hotel and pays off her room bill with the $100 note to the delighted hotel owner.
The hotel proprietor places the $100 note back on the counter so the rich tourist will not suspect anything.
At that moment, the tourist comes down the stairs, picks up the $100 note, states that the rooms are not satisfactory, pockets the money and leaves town.
No one produced anything.
No one earned anything.
However, the whole town is now out of debt and looking forward to the future with a lot more optimism.
Bravo. Very nice story.
And appropriate.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.