Real estate sales were slow in West Hawaii last month, Realtor Gretchen Lambeth reported in her monthly update. View full post on Yahoo! News Search Results for real estate

Real estate firms are increasingly turning offshore to secure sales amid a drought of willing buyers in the New Zealand market.Harcourts says a six-day expo of more than $800 million worth of premier New Zealand property in Shanghai… View full post on Yahoo! News Search Results for real estate

PORTLAND, Oregon—-HFO Investment Real Estate, a commercial real estate investment firm with apartment brokers based in Portland, OR, has brokered the sale of the Twin Creeks Apartments, a 220-unit apartment complex built in phases starting in 1996 and completed in 1999. View full post on Yahoo! News Search Results for real estate

RISMEDIA, August 23, 2010—The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of the Treasury has released the August edition of the Obama Administration’s Housing Scorecard (www.hud.gov/scorecard), a comprehensive report on the nation’s housing market. In July, housing prices remained level after 30 straight months of decline, while some price predictions have improved. In addition, historic low interest rates continued to promote home affordability and refinancing options for the nation’s families. However, the market remains fragile with foreclosure starts showing a slight increase and serious delinquencies continuing to work through the pipeline.

“While there has been some stabilization in the housing market, it remains clear that we have more work ahead,” said HUD Assistant Secretary Raphael Bostic. “Through the Obama Administration’s efforts over the past 16 months, we have seen increased price stabilization and improved home affordability for prospective, qualified homebuyers. At the same time, we know that we must continue to provide support to underwater borrowers, unemployed homeowners, and to the nation’s hardest hit neighborhoods.”

The August Housing Scorecard features key data on the health of the housing market including:

• Stabilizing housing prices drive improving expectations in some regions. After 30 straight months of decline, home prices have leveled off in the past year; futures indices have shifted upward since January 2009 as signs of recovery continue, although overall housing outlook measures remain mixed.

• More than twice as many modification arrangements begun compared to foreclosure completions. More than 3.15 million modification arrangements were done from April 2009 through the end of June 2010. This includes more than 1.3 million trial Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) modifications started, over 472,000 Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loss mitigation and early delinquency interventions, and 1.4 million proprietary modifications under HOPE Now. The number of agreements offered continues to more than double foreclosure completions for the same period (1.24 million).

• More than 4.2 million families have benefited from housing counseling since April 2009. Working with a HUD-approved housing counselor can help borrowers manage debts apart from a mortgage – car payments, credit cards and personal loans, for example – and help them avoid falling into default.

• More than 37,000 homeowners received a HAMP permanent modification in July. While the pace of program entry has slowed due to upfront documentation requirements in place since June 1, this policy change streamlines the process to help more eligible homeowners convert to a permanent modification. Homeowners in permanent modifications are experiencing a median payment reduction of 36 percent, or more than $500 per month.

“HAMP, which represents just one, targeted piece of the Administration’s larger efforts on housing, has so far offered more than a million and half responsible homeowners the chance to modify their mortgages. This program has helped to stabilize a housing market that remains fragile and has redefined the modification standard for the industry – both of which are delivering real benefits to struggling homeowners in communities across the country,” said Treasury Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability Herb Allison. “Currently servicers are working through their pending modifications, and while Making Home Affordable works for a number of homeowners, many others are offered other means of avoiding foreclosure. As careful stewards of the scarce resources of the American taxpayer, we see this as prudent progress – and we will keep working to help the Americans hardest hit by this crisis.”

Data in the scorecard show that the recovery in the housing market continues to remain fragile, with some measures suggesting recovery will take place over time. For example, foreclosure starts went up slightly in July from the previous month, but remain well below July 2009 levels.

Foreclosure completions also inched upward as the volume of serious delinquencies continues to work through the pipeline.

Each month, the Housing Scorecard incorporates key housing market indicators and highlights the impact of the Administration’s unprecedented housing recovery efforts, including assistance to homeowners through the FHA and HAMP.

The Obama Administration’s complete Housing Scorecard available at: www.hud.gov/scorecard

RISMedia welcomes your comments and questions. Email realestatemagazinefeedback@rismedia.com.

View full post on RISMedia » Home Buying 101

The real estate market may still be in the dumps, but don’t tell that to the growing number of aspiring brokers. View full post on Yahoo! News Search Results for real estate

RISMEDIA, August 17, 2010—A new study released by Bankrate, Inc. reveals that the costs associated with buying a home may are on the rise. Bankrate’s 2010 Closing Costs Survey reveals that the average origination and title fees on a $200,000 mortgage this year totaled $3,741, up from $2,732 in 2009. The full results of the study can be seen here: http://www.bankrate.com/finance/mortgages/2010-closing-costs/.

In the study’s geographical breakdown, New York leads the nation at an average fee of $5,623, with Texas, Utah, San Francisco, and Los Angeles rounding out the top five. Arkansas is the least expensive area with an average fee of $3,007, replacing Nevada, now number 34, at the bottom of the list.

One of the reasons for such a dramatic rise in the average estimated closing costs across the nation has to do with new regulations implemented in January of this year. When providing a potential borrower a Good Faith Estimate (GFE) of costs, regulations now require lenders to provide a Title and Closing Fee estimate within 10 percent of what the final cost will be; in previous years, estimates could fall lower on the spectrum without penalty for the lender.

“The big rise in average closing costs may scare some homebuyers, but it’s important to keep things in perspective,” said Greg McBride, CFA, senior financial analyst for Bankrate.com. “Increased regulation on lenders’ GFEs means more accurate estimates and less expenses popping up for consumers on the back end.”

For this study, Bankrate surveyed one area in 49 states, two areas in California (Los Angeles and San Francisco) and the District of Columbia. Researchers picked a ZIP code in some of the largest cities in each state and requested information on the closing costs for at $200,000 loan. They requested fees on a 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage for a borrower with a 20 percent down payment and good credit to buy a single-family house. Bankrate’s survey includes lenders’ origination fees and title and settlement fees, and not taxes or prepaid items.

To see the full results visit http://www.bankrate.com/finance/mortgages/2010-closing-costs/ or for more information, visit Bankrate.com.

RISMedia welcomes your comments and questions. Email realestatemagazinefeedback@rismedia.com.

View full post on RISMedia » Home Buying 101

RISMEDIA, August, 18, 2010—(MCT)—With sweeping financial reform legislation enacted, the White House and Congress now must focus on fixing the mess created by the failed housing finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It’s a complex challenge with high stakes for taxpayers and the struggling real estate market.

On Tuesday, key administration officials conferred with about 200 industry executives, affordable housing advocates and other experts about the role the government should play in the nation’s housing finance system. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner asserted that federal involvement still was needed, but he promised “fundamental change.”

“It is not tenable to leave in place the system we have today,” he said, adding that Fannie and Freddie will change dramatically when they emerge from government control.

Pressure is growing to remake or replace the mortgage leviathans, which were seized by the government in September 2008 after huge losses from subprime mortgages put them on the brink of bankruptcy. The bailout has cost U.S taxpayers nearly $150 billion. But lawmakers must tread carefully to keep from further damaging a housing market that Fannie and Freddie almost solely are supporting. The two companies, along with the Federal Housing Administration, collectively guarantee more than 90 percent of all new U.S. home loans.

“Nobody wants to mess up the mortgage market,” said Douglas Elliott, an economics fellow at the Brookings Institution think tank. “And any transition with Fannie and Freddie is going to be fraught with some risk.”

Tuesday’s event came as the second anniversary of the government seizure of the firms approached, a bailout that left taxpayers as 80 percent owners. The administration faces a January deadline, added by lawmakers to the financial reform legislation, to make recommendations to end the expensive federal conservatorship of the firms.

Congress plans to ratchet up its involvement as well, with House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., saying his committee will begin hearings when members return next month.

That’s not fast enough for many Republicans, signaling another bitter partisan reform fight. They have been pushing the administration for more than a year to address the mounting losses at Fannie and Freddie by getting the government out of the housing finance business.

“It is past time to rid the American taxpayer of the liabilities of these financial institutions once and for all,” Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., said Tuesday as he blasted the Obama administration for continuing the bailouts of Fannie and Freddie begun under President George W. Bush.

But the Obama administration has been moving slowly for fear of further harming the housing market. There was fresh evidence of problems Tuesday as Southern California home sales plunged 21.4 percent in July compared with a year earlier, according to research firm MDA DataQuick of San Diego.

“It’s much more important to get this issue right than to do it fast,” said Michael Berman, chairman-elect of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

Shaun Donovan, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, said the stakes were high not just for the financial system but also for average Americans because of the major investment in their homes.

Donovan said the federal government’s involvement in the housing market needed to be reduced. And Geithner said there was a strong case for a “carefully designed” government mortgage guarantee in the future, a point echoed by panelists at the conference.

There also appeared to be consensus among the participants that any government guarantee needed to be explicit, not murky and implicit like the guarantee that stood behind Fannie and Freddie as private, government-sponsored enterprises before they were seized.

William Gross, managing director of bond fund giant Pimco, said government guarantees were crucial to the housing market, helping keep mortgage rates low.

But there still is major debate about how to structure such a guarantee and what size mortgages it should cover.

“The challenge is to make sure that any government guarantee is priced to cover the risk of losses, and structured to minimize taxpayer exposure,” Geithner said.

Fannie and Freddie were created by Congress and later turned into private, government-sponsored enterprises mandated to expand homeownership with requirements to purchase a set amount of loans made to low- and moderate-income borrowers.

Fannie and Freddie combined hold the credit risk on about $5 trillion in mortgages, and losses from loans made during the housing boom have continued to mount. The Treasury Department has pledged it will cover an unlimited amount of losses through 2012. As of June 30, the department had pumped $144.9 billion into the two companies.

Federal officials have stressed that the losses came from loans purchased before the government seizure and said standards at Fannie and Freddie have tightened significantly since then. And as the housing market has stabilized, the losses at Fannie and Freddie have lessened. Fannie lost $1.2 billion in the second quarter, down from $11.5 billion in the first quarter. Freddie lost $4.7 billion in the second quarter, down from $6.7 billion in the first quarter.

Still, the losses meant the two firms would need an additional $3.3 billion from the Treasury Department, bringing their bailout cost to $148.2 billion.

(c) 2010, Los Angeles Times.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

RISMedia welcomes your comments and questions. Email realestatemagazinefeedback@rismedia.com.

View full post on RISMedia » Home Buying 101

RISMEDIA, August 20, 2010—(MCT)—Facing new penalties if they lowball estimates of upfront mortgage costs, lenders and brokers appear to be coming clean about how much borrowers will pay. As a result, the so-called good-faith estimates that mortgage providers must give to prospective customers show closing costs soaring 36 percent this year, interest-rate tracker Bankrate.com said in a report this week.

The main reason for the increase, according to Bankrate: Lenders are giving more accurate estimates because they now must pay to cover the difference if they underestimate the costs, according to Bankrate.

In other words, the good-faith estimates are, well, being made in better faith.

Before Jan. 1, there was no penalty for giving bad estimates, so lenders battling for mortgage business had more of an incentive to give lowball quotes.

Lenders told Bankrate that actual closing costs rose modestly this year, in part because regulators and loan buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are requiring mortgage firms to do far more fact-checking than during the boom years.

Consumer advocates say the report demonstrates how lenders took advantage of lax regulation during the housing boom by often keeping borrowers in the dark about costs until they were faced with nasty surprises when their loans closed.

“Why is transparency such a challenge for them?” said Alan Fisher, executive director of the California Reinvestment Coalition.

According to Bankrate’s survey, which obtained online good-faith estimates for loans of $200,000, estimates of closing costs charged directly by lenders are up 23 percent from a year ago. Estimated charges for third parties such as appraisers and title insurers soared 47 percent.

California was among the highest-priced states in the survey.

The only states with higher fees than California were New York, with costs averaging $5,623, followed by Texas at $4,708 and Utah at $4,605.

Arkansas was the least expensive state, with costs averaging $3,007.

The most expensive component of closing costs was a title search and insurance to protect the lender from the possibility that title is not held free and clear.

These title costs averaged just $1,011 in Arkansas and $1,141 in North Carolina but set Los Angeles borrowers back an average of $2,391 and San Franciscans an average $3,181, Bankrate said.

The increase in estimates of closing costs stems from regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

(c) 2010, Los Angeles Times.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

RISMedia welcomes your comments and questions. Email realestatemagazinefeedback@rismedia.com.

View full post on RISMedia » Home Buying 101

Investors Real Estate Trust said Wednesday it has access to a new $60 million line of credit that it plans to use to pay down more expensive debt and acquire properties. View full post on Yahoo! News Search Results for real estate

RISMEDIA, August 19, 2010—(MCT)—As director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard, Nicolas Retsinas has had a front-row seat for the real estate market’s dramatic boom and bust. After 12 years at the center, Retsinas left the director’s job to teach housing finance at Harvard Business School. He spoke recently with New Jersey’s The Record about why buyers got mortgages they couldn’t afford, and why real estate matters so much.

Were you surprised by the magnitude of the housing bust and how long it has lasted?
Nicolas Retsinas: Yes, by the severity of the housing bust but even more so, how credit just seized up.

When do you see any kind of loosening-up of the credit markets?
NR: I would suspect we’re likely to see the same dominance of the government at least through the balance of this year. One of the big issues facing public policymakers is what to do with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. If we want to attract private capital, not only from this country but also global capital, some part of that credit risk has to be borne by the government.

One of the biggest factors in the bust was that credit standards got too easy. Buyers who weren’t qualified got mortgages. Do you have any ideas about why this happened?
NR: In part, people were granted mortgages not on their ability to repay the mortgage, because it was clear that wasn’t going to happen. But there was an expectation that even if they couldn’t pay, the future increase in the value of the property would end up being the collateral for that loan. For a long time, that was a formula that worked. But we reached a point where even with these exotic—what turned out to be toxic—mortgage terms, they just weren’t affordable.

What has been the biggest human cost of the housing bust?
NR: The biggest human cost is the millions of people who have lost their homes. One can look back coldly and say, “Well, maybe a lot of them shouldn’t have bought a home in the first place.” But a lot of people lost their homes the old-fashioned way: they lost their jobs.

Who has benefited from the bust?
NR: Beside the investors who played with different sorts of financial products, I think the key winners probably have been first-time home buyers, who have maybe longed to buy a house but could not afford to. Now we’ve essentially transferred wealth from existing homeowners to new homeowners.

Some observers have been disappointed by the number of homeowners helped by the federal loan modification program.
NR: In defense of the government, when they designed this program 18 months ago, they based it on a premise that the principal problem in the housing market was egregious mortgage terms. And if those mortgage terms could be reset and recalibrated to more typical mortgage terms and could be afforded, through subsidy or whatever means, by the borrower, that would stem the hemorrhage of the defaulted loans and foreclosures.

As we moved into 2009, the problem was less about the subprime loans and more the traditional reason why people have problems making ends meet—which is that they lost their jobs. If you modify the loan so that your monthly payments are only 31% of your income, and your income is zero, that’s probably not going to work. The problem outran the solution.

Will home-price appreciation return anytime soon?
NR: The next couple of months will be an interesting test because we’ve had the withdrawal of the home buyer tax credit. I think we’re likely to have a sort of trawl-along-the-bottom type of recovery, a little bit lumpy for a year or so.

Congress is looking at new financial regulations. What effect are these likely to have on mortgages?
NR: I think it’ll make it more difficult to go back to the Wild, Wild West. There will be a new consumer financial agency, and I think that will be more likely to look at some of these (mortgage) products. I think that’s going to be critical. RE

(c) 2010, North Jersey Media Group Inc.

RISMedia welcomes your comments and questions. Email realestatemagazinefeedback@rismedia.com.

View full post on RISMedia » Home Buying 101