With the FASB’s plan on revising and/or limiting mark-to-market accounting rules coming early-April, we will also see increased freedom for markets to sort through the pricing issues that have been preventing any solution to getting these illiquid assets off bank balance sheets so they can extend new credit to businesses and consumers. … Conforming ($200,000 – $417,000) – 1 POINT 30 Year: 4.625% (5.09% APR) FHA 30 Year: 5.0% (5.21% APR) 15 Year: 4.625% (4.75% APR) 5/1 ARM: 4.875% (5.09% APR) Super-Conforming ($417,001 to $625,500 cap by county) – 1 POINT 30 Year: 5.125% (5.2% APR) FHA 30 Year: 5.0% (5.21% APR) Jumbo ($625,500 – $3,500,000) – 1 POINT 30 Year: 6.625 % (6.83% APR) 10/1 ARM: 6.25% (6.39% APR) 5/1 ARM: 5.375 % (5.52% APR) Scenarios assume full doc pricing on purchase or rate/term refi (but not cash-out refi) loans for borrower with 720 FICO score or greater, at least 20% equity (unless FHA), and 6-12 months reserves left over after close (retirement assets counted at 70% of value for reserves).
Archive for March, 2009
Hotsheet Statistics for the Past 2-Weeks: SF Houses, Condos & TICs
For some reason, perhaps just an anomaly, REO sales activity dropped dramatically from the previous 2-week period.
Hotsheet Statistics for the Past 2-Weeks: SF Houses, Condos & TICs (compared to the previous 2-week period) New Listings: 382 – up from 331 Back-on-Market: 56 – stable Price Reductions: 282 – up a tad (at a very high level) Went Contingent: 129 – down from 147 Contingent REO: 7 – down from 14 Went Pending: 129 – down from 149 Pending REO: 14 – down from 23 Sold: 124 – down from 135 Sold REO: 15 – down from 23 Expired/Withdrawn: 138 – down from 153 (REO = bank owned)
Online SF Resources
Everything Within Walking Distance of Your Home Chronicle List of Top 100 Bay Area Restaurants Chronicle Map of Top 100 Bay Area Restaurants Chronicle Top 20 Wines Under $40 San Francisco Biking Resources Bay Area Hiking Trails San Francisco Parks & Recreation The Museums of San Francisco Civic Information & News by Neighborhood Guide to 25 Distinctive SF Neighborhoods Remodeling Cost vs. Value Analysis for SF Bay Area Public Transport Bay Area Trip Planner & Traffic Conditions San Francisco Recycling Resources Chronicle Foreclosure Database by Zip Code Disaster Preparedness Information & Resources San Francisco Crime Maps
CA Tax Credit for New-Home Purchases
Qualified buyer: A taxpayer who purchases a single-family residence, whether detached or attached, that has never been occupied, that is purchased to be the principal residence of the taxpayer for a minimum of two years, and that is eligible for the homeowner’s exemption under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 218. Qualified Principal Residence/New Home: ( Updated ) A qualified principal residence means a single-family residence, whether detached or attached, that has never been occupied and is purchased to be the principal residence of the taxpayer for a minimum of two years and is eligible for the property tax homeowner’s exemption.
MLS Statistics for the last two weeks, 2/20/09 – 3/06/09
Comparing the past 2 weeks with the 2-week period, 1/30 – 2/13/09: The number of new listings coming on the market declined by 20% The number accepting offers (going contingent sale) increased by 35% Closed sales went up 75% Properties coming back on market (i.e. deals falling through) fell by 8% The number of price reductions—already at very high rates—increased by 18% Expired and withdrawn listings are relatively stable 26% of house sales were bank-owned properties (REO); 10% of condo sales were REOs PARAGON MLS Statistics for the last two weeks, 2/20/09 – 3/06/09 Districts 1-10 (All SF)
… Comparing the past 2 weeks with the 2-week period, 1/30 – 2/13/09: The number of new listings coming on the market declined by 20% The number accepting offers (going contingent sale) increased by 35% Closed sales went up 75% Properties coming back on market (i.e. deals falling through) fell by 8% The number of price reductions—already at very high rates—increased by 18% Expired and withdrawn listings are relatively stable 26% of house sales were bank-owned properties (REO); 10% of condo sales were REOs
The City must be made into ‘No-Foreclosure Zone’
It’s important to remember the catalyst for today’s foreclosures: the implosion of an overextended, overfinanced housing market. In the years leading up to 2007, certain mortgage lenders participated in a virtual orgy of exploitative lending, taking advantage of many of our most vulnerable citizens by packaging unsustainable loans for the profit of banking institutions. It was a formula founded on excess that could have been anticipated as financially unsound.
The real and emotional costs to foreclosed homeowners are often immeasurable. But the financial impact is something we can, and should, determine. By understanding the cost on our communities we can institute preventative measures based on the value lost that will create a strong deterrent to a repeat of today’s crisis in the long term and a much needed recovery of lost revenue in the short term.
There have been a handful of attempts to evaluate the financial impact of foreclosures, most notably by Temple University, and in the city of Chicago, which is in the second year of a major campaign to prevent and reduce home foreclosures.
The Temple University report notes, “The nationwide municipal cost of foreclosures could easily top the $1 billion mark — money that is annually being diverted from meeting other pressing urban needs.”
Costs associated with foreclosures are widespread: loss of tax revenues and decreased property values; increased crime and vandalism; increased policing; accelerated rates of unemployment and homelessness; increased demand for social services; and myriad costs associated with managing the process itself.
Though not as severe as the rest of the country, San Francisco has not escaped the foreclosure epidemic, and has not avoided the costs and impacts associated with it. But we must learn from this loss and move forward with greater policy and stronger protections.
This is why I am proposing a “nexus” study to determine the exact cost of home foreclosures to our community — and with those results, to levy a fee on predatory banks and lenders for each foreclosure.
This “foreclosure fee” would be based on a study (required for municipal fee increases) to determine the cost to San Francisco taxpayers for the foreclosure process. It would help recoup the financial impact of foreclosures, encourage the refinancing of loans and create a disincentive for banks and lenders to issue predatory loans in the future. It would determine the financial impact of foreclosures and transfer their costs away from our communities and onto the banks and lenders. It would discourage banks from issuing bad loans and levy a cost for evicting people from their homes.
Out of great crisis comes great opportunity. Today, we must be willing to be bold and think big — something San Francisco has never been afraid to do. Creating a “foreclosure fee” would be the first step toward transforming our city into a “No-Foreclosure Zone”; keeping San Franciscans in their homes; protecting the quality of our neighborhoods; saving money in difficult economic times; and deterring the practice of predatory lending in our great city.
Phil Ting is the assessor-recorder for the city and county of San Francisco.
—————
Paid for by Phil Ting for Assessor. FPPC ID# 1278393.
-->
Recent studies show that the municipal costs alone of a home foreclosure range from $6,937 to $30,000. These are costs we pay, either in higher taxes or in reduced city services. That’s why it is time to take a close look at a local “foreclosure fee” to be paid by banks and lending institutions to help us recoup the costs being transferred to taxpayers as a result of predatory lending, outright fraud and years of financial negligence on the part of lending institutions.
When a house is foreclosed and abandoned, it sets off a spiral of negative consequences. Families often lose their life savings, but the cost goes beyond personal. Neighbors see home values decline. Tax revenues fall along with home values. Vandalism and other crimes go up in the most affected neighborhoods. And in the end, we all pay for foreclosures.
It’s important to remember the catalyst for today’s foreclosures: the implosion of an overextended, overfinanced housing market. In the years leading up to 2007, certain mortgage lenders participated in a virtual orgy of exploitative lending, taking advantage of many of our most vulnerable citizens by packaging unsustainable loans for the profit of banking institutions. It was a formula founded on excess that could have been anticipated as financially unsound.
The real and emotional costs to foreclosed homeowners are often immeasurable. But the financial impact is something we can, and should, determine. By understanding the cost on our communities we can institute preventative measures based on the value lost that will create a strong deterrent to a repeat of today’s crisis in the long term and a much needed recovery of lost revenue in the short term.
There have been a handful of attempts to evaluate the financial impact of foreclosures, most notably by Temple University, and in the city of Chicago, which is in the second year of a major campaign to prevent and reduce home foreclosures.
The Temple University report notes, “The nationwide municipal cost of foreclosures could easily top the $1 billion mark — money that is annually being diverted from meeting other pressing urban needs.”
Costs associated with foreclosures are widespread: loss of tax revenues and decreased property values; increased crime and vandalism; increased policing; accelerated rates of unemployment and homelessness; increased demand for social services; and myriad costs associated with managing the process itself.
Though not as severe as the rest of the country, San Francisco has not escaped the foreclosure epidemic, and has not avoided the costs and impacts associated with it. But we must learn from this loss and move forward with greater policy and stronger protections.
This is why I am proposing a “nexus” study to determine the exact cost of home foreclosures to our community — and with those results, to levy a fee on predatory banks and lenders for each foreclosure.
This “foreclosure fee” would be based on a study (required for municipal fee increases) to determine the cost to San Francisco taxpayers for the foreclosure process. It would help recoup the financial impact of foreclosures, encourage the refinancing of loans and create a disincentive for banks and lenders to issue predatory loans in the future. It would determine the financial impact of foreclosures and transfer their costs away from our communities and onto the banks and lenders. It would discourage banks from issuing bad loans and levy a cost for evicting people from their homes.
Out of great crisis comes great opportunity. Today, we must be willing to be bold and think big — something San Francisco has never been afraid to do. Creating a “foreclosure fee” would be the first step toward transforming our city into a “No-Foreclosure Zone”; keeping San Franciscans in their homes; protecting the quality of our neighborhoods; saving money in difficult economic times; and deterring the practice of predatory lending in our great city.
Phil Ting is the assessor-recorder for the city and county of San Francisco.
—————
Paid for by Phil Ting for Assessor. FPPC ID# 1278393.
PDT vs PST: Time to change your clocks
The Uniform Time Act of 1966 provided the basic framework for alternating between daylight saving time and standard time, which we now observe in the United States. … The current system of beginning DST at 2 AM on the first Sunday in April and ending it at 2 AM on the last Sunday in October was not standardized until 1986.
Property Lists: Foreclosed, Bank-Owned and Auction
The links below show properties in all stages of the foreclosure process and those that are bank-owned or up for auction.
…FORECLOSURE is the legal process in which a bank or lender sells or repossesses a parcel of real property after the owner has failed to comply with an agreement between the lender and borrower.
Paragon March 2009 Newsletter – Extended Version
In this edition:
Foreclosure Sales in San Francisco
Upper-End Home Market Wilts
New Condo Developments Reduce Prices
Regarding Statistics
Average Dollar per Square Foot in Selected Bay Area Zip Codes
Sales Price to List Price
Financing Conditions & Tax Credits
