Tuesday, March 22, 2011

The ARM is back: Should you bite?

Image Courtesy of Quickenloans.com
Saw this on MSN Money and though it provided really good advice to Buyer's considering the use of an ARM. 

Full disclosure here, I have an ARM on an investment property and it has been a really great thing for me.  I am not loosing my property to the bank, my interest rate didn't increase, and I don't feel trapped and can't sleep from worry.  And I think I would do it again, their I said it!

Of course ARM's are not for the faint at heart and do not provide the sense of security that many get from a 30 year fixed mortgage

Adjustable-rate mortgages are rising in popularity again. Lenders say they have learned from their mistakes of the past decade, but have borrowers?


By doubleace on Mon, Mar 21, 2011 11:36 AM


This post comes from Lynn Mucken at MSN Money.

Adjustable-rate mortgages are making a comeback. It's official; after all, the news appeared in The New York Times.

You remember ARMs, don't you? They were the sweet sirens of the last couple of decades, luring Americans into the homebuying or refinance market with low initial interest rates and unspoken but hinted-at guarantees that nothing could go wrong.

Of course, things did go wrong -- terribly so -- when the real estate market imploded in 2006. ARMs weren't solely to blame for the real estate pyramid scheme whose collapse still haunts our struggling economy, but they did their part.

Now ARMs are back -- up to 10% of all mortgages issued, double last year but still far from the 70% in 1994. So the questions once again are: Are they safe? Are they right for you? The answers are: Maybe, and maybe.

An adjustable-rate mortgage is a relatively simple lending device: The borrower gets the money to buy or refinance a home at a lower interest rate than is available through the traditional 30-year mortgage. That means lower house payments that you can afford now. Somewhere up the road -- six months, five years, seven years, whatever is specified in the contract -- the interest rate begins to adjust up or down according to a set formula based on interest-rate indexes.

It usually goes up -- inflation is almost always with us -- but in theory the borrower's income and home value have at least kept stride, so you can make the bigger payments or sell the house. The alleged safety net is that, if you are like most Americans, you will have sold your home and moved long before the higher interest kicks in, or you can easily slip into a less-volatile 30-year loan.

Unfortunately, it didn't work like that in 2006 and the unhappy years that followed. Too many loans had been granted to people -- the infamous subprime borrowers -- who bought too much house, were overextended even by the opening monthly payment or fell for lending gimmicks that allowed them to pay a "minimum" amount that actually increased their debt on the home. It's an old credit card trick, but when it is used on a $500,000 loan instead of an $800 bill, it is deadly.

Such people lost their homes, which helped collapse the housing market, which in turn destroyed the home value of even prime borrowers, who had no trouble paying their mortgage but couldn't sell their home because they owed more than it was worth on the market.

Lenders say that won't happen again.

They insist they won't lend to questionable borrowers. "An adjustable now is basically a prime product," Michael Moskowitz, the president of Equity Now, told The New York Times.

In addition, they say that the six-month rate change and high interest caps have mostly been replaced by relatively staid 5/1 or 7/1 ARMs (five or seven years at the initial interest rate, followed by annual changes in interest) with a maximum eventual cap 6 percentage points above the initial rate.

The savings available through ARMs are undeniable. Sean Bowler, a loan officer at DRB Mortgage, told the Times that someone borrowing $500,000 with a 5/1 ARM at 3.5% would save $42,507 in the first five years, before it adjusts, compared with a 30-year fixed-rate loan of 5.25%. A 7/1 ARM at 4.125% would save $38,330 over the first seven years.

So, should you go for an ARM?

Yes, bring it on.

•If you have a large down payment that virtually ensures that you will still have equity in the home when the ARM begins to adjust upward.
•If you are reasonably sure you will be selling the home before the interest rate starts climbing. This works especially well if you are 60 and plan to retire, and move, at 65.
•If you have enough in savings to weather a reversal in the market. You don't have to plan for 2006-09 type of debacle, but be cautious.
•If you are in a secure job with reliable expectations of salary increases.

Nope, not for me.

•If this is the home of your dreams, the neighborhood is perfect, and you want your babies to grow up here.
•If the payments are a stretch now, and the prospects of better income are shaky.
•If you're the anxious type. Worrying for five or seven years about what might happen is not healthy.
•If your marriage isn't solid. It's hard to buy a house on one income.
In all cases, shop carefully. Compare ARMs with conventional 30-year loans. Check out the fees. Always do the math. Get advice from a trusted friend or relative who understands numbers. Be aware that there are big differences between dreams and reality: Dreams go poof. Bad loans seem to stick around forever.

And one last thought: If the loan sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Despite ARMs' spotty history, almost nothing has been done to prevent bad things from happening again. Bad people will always be around.

Friday, March 18, 2011

Did your condo just get harder to sell?

If you have a condo for sale today you need to be aware of the financing difficulties present for all potential Buyers ...

New rules make condos harder to sell



Litigation over safety, construction issues can impede financing

By Steve Bergsman
Inman News™

March 18, 2011

Attorney Richard Vetstein told me this story: A client was going to buy a unit in a condominium development and thought he had it all wrapped up; he had an agreement in hand, deposit down and was two days away from closing.

Then he got a call from his lender, who said there were issues. "Issues?" the client asked. Essentially, his lender said there was active litigation involving the condominium building, and the loan would not be approved by underwriters.

Vetstein, of the eponymous Vetstein Law Group in Framingham, Mass., has done a considerable amount of legal work in the always colorful condominium world. Of the client in the story, he said, "Luckily, I was able to negotiate his deposit back, but he lost the deal, and since he had sold his prior residence, for awhile he was living in a motel. It just ruined his life for a couple of months."

The episode didn't make the seller of the condo unit any happier, either. Buyers these days are extremely hard to come by.

So what happened?

Recent changes to the Fannie Mae Selling Guide, including some alterations that went into effect March 1, make that afternoon leisure time on your personal veranda with the ice tea in your tumbler and a Robert Patterson paperback in your hand more chilling than comforting.

Condo watchdogs generally are focusing on two changes that could affect your pocketbook, either as a homeowner or home seller. The first has to do with newly converted, non-gut rehabilitation condo projects, while the second, which affected Vetstein's client, has to do with the collateral damage of an ongoing litigation.

Fannie Mae now declares mortgage loans in progress on a condo involved in any type of litigation, other than minor litigation (i.e., disputes over rights of quiet enjoyment), ineligible for delivery, said Orest Tomaselli, CEO of White Plains, N.Y.-based National Condo Advisors LLC.

"There are different types of litigation, from slip-and-fall cases to structural issues, so Fannie split it all up and any project where the HOA is named as a party defending litigation that relates to safety, structure (or) soundness of functional use (is) ineligible," Tomaselli said. "These projects will not be able to enjoy Fannie Mae project approval nor the financing that results from it."

The Fannie Mae guidelines read: "Any project (condo, co-op, or planned unit development) for which the homeowners association or co-op corporation is named as a party to pending litigation, or for which the project sponsor or developer is named as a party to pending litigation that relates to safety, structural soundness, habitability or functional use of the project, remains ineligible."

What this means is, if your neighbor has some personal beef with the homeowners association or developer because his plumbing doesn't work or the front door of the building has a bad lock and sues, well, that can affect you because a potential buyer can not get a Fannie Mae loan. Sure, the buyer can go to a bank and get a different loan, but that would just be more expensive.

What happened with Vetstein's client was that a crazy, litigious unit owner was suing the condo association and prior builder for minor leaks.

"It was something that really should have been resolved by the trustees, builder or even insurer," Vetstein explained. "It didn't involve a lot of money, but the lawsuit was out there, pending and not resolved. There was no waiver because the litigation fell within these parameters of structural soundness and safety. Fannie Mae said, 'Sorry, there's no gray area here.' "

The changes present a conundrum for HOAs. It's not uncommon in cold-weather states to experience poorly worked roofs resulting in water penetration of condominium units. Condo owners get upset, the HOA gets upset, and everyone wants to sue the builder or roofer. Unfortunately, this triggers a Fannie Mae issue.

"There is nothing the condo association can do about someone suing over defective conditions, but it certainly does have control over who they sue," Vetstein said. "The HOA needs to know a lawsuit will have a ripple effect."

The other problem for condo owners is specifically for those who live in developments that essentially have been converted from rentals into ownership units, or as Fannie Mae officially labels them, newly converted, non-gut-rehabilitation condo projects.

Those developments have to go through a Project Eligibility Review Service, or PERS.

The Fannie Mae Selling Guide updates read: "Many buildings are converted to condominiums without the replacement of major components resulting in eventual increased costs to unit owners for maintenance and major repairs. In order to mitigate the additional risk that newly converted, non-gut-rehabilitation projects pose, all newly converted, non-gut-rehabilitation condo projects must be submitted to PERS for review and approval."

The problem is the cost to the HOA. Fannie Mae charges $1,200 for the review, plus $30 for every unit in the buildings, said Tomaselli. So, if you're looking at 200-unit building, that's $7,200 that has to paid out.

In addition, the newly converted non-guts have to undergo a reserve study to determine over a 30-year period of time what the repair costs are going to be in regard to such items as elevators, roofs, mechanical and structural systems, and the exterior.

"The current guidelines require that only 10 percent of the budget be set aside for reserve. Once the reserve study is done, an accurate number is given on what the reserve should be -- and those numbers can be tremendous," Tomaselli said.

The main goal of a reserve study is accuracy. "This guideline requiring reserve studies for new non-gut-rehab condominiums will ensure accurate reserve funding enforcement that will eliminate special assessments in most cases," said Tomaselli.

It's not a bad thing for Fannie Mae because it is making sure homeowners are protected -- but for developments, increased maintenance can loom large.

Steve Bergsman is a freelance writer in Arizona and author of several books. His latest book, "After the Fall: Opportunities and Strategies for Real Estate Investing in the Coming Decade," has been ranked as a top-selling real estate investment book for the Amazon Kindle e-reader.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

Sales Remain Stable, Foreclosur​es Continue to Impact Prices


RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE SALES STABLE, FORECLOSURES CONTINUE TO IMPACT PRICES

CHARLESTON, SC—(March 10, 2011) According to preliminary data released by the Charleston Trident Association of REALTORS® (CTAR) 557 homes sold at a median price of $163,500 in February. Preliminary figures for February 2010 showed 509 homes sold at a median price of $179,900—revised data for February 2010 reflects 561 sales at a median price of $180,000.

The most active price range in February was $160,000-$179,999. Last February, the most active range was $200,000-249,999, when many homeowners were taking advantage of move-up opportunities provided by the homebuyer tax credit.

"As we forecasted, prices have softened in the early months of this year as a result of the foreclosure inventory. Over the next 12 months or so, we’ll continue to work our way through this inventory and see prices begin to move forward" said 2011 CTAR President Rob Woodul.

According to figures released by RealtyTrac, more than 250,000 properties received at least one foreclosure-related notice in February, down 14% from January and down 27% from the same month last year. While the number of homes across the country receiving a foreclosure-related notice has fallen to a 36-month low, it’s likely an artificial dip as many lenders have significantly slowed their foreclosure processes due to increased scrutiny over how lenders are handling the repossessions.

RealtyTrac data currently shows an estimated 23,406 foreclosed homes in South Carolina and an average sale price of $111,503 for foreclosed homes statewide.

Woodul cites job growth and overall economic stability as the necessary catalysts for people to jump back into the real estate market. "It's not a question of demand for housing; it's a question of confidence and capability. As they should, people need to feel secure in their job and financial situation before making what will likely be the largest purchase of their lives" said Woodul.

Nationally, unemployment has declined to a nearly 2-year low of 8.9% but South Carolina's jobless rate still remains ahead of that curve, at 10.5%. The Charleston region saw a considerable improvement in its jobless rate, falling to 8.4 % from 9%.
"We will not see a true recovery of the housing market until we have steady and solid job growth" said Woodul.

There were 8,470 homes listed as actively for sale with the Charleston Trident Multiple Listing Service as of February 28, 2011.

BERKELEY COUNTY
Preliminary figures show that 141 homes sold in Berkeley County at a median price of $137,000 in February.

Click here for a full report on Berkeley County.

CHARLESTON COUNTY
Preliminary figures show that 277 properties changed hands in Charleston County in February, at a median price of $195,900.

Click here for a full report on Charleston County.

DORCHESTER COUNTY
Preliminary figures show that 122 homes sold at a median price of $145,000 in Dorchester County in February.

Click here for a full report on Dorchester County.

With approximately 3,500 members, CTAR’s mission is to promote the highest standards of professionalism, ethics, education and technology, and to ensure that its members are the primary source for real estate services in the South Carolina Lowcountry. Only those who are members of the Association of REALTORS® and its parent organizations are called REALTORS®. To learn more, visit www.CharlestonRealtors.com.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

REALTORS Ask Governor To Intervene

Charleston Trident Association of REALTORS ask Governor Nikki Haley to step-up and solve the rail dispute in Park Circle located in North Charleston, SC.