Short Sales: How Everybody Loses From Banks' Opposition

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Short Sales: How Everybody Loses From Banks' Opposition stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

05/12/09 11:00 PM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Short Sale Real Estate

An empty house near Art David's home is stinking up the neighborhood.

The Naples, Fla. house has sat on the market since August 2007, and it's in lousy shape. The water and electricity have been cut off, leading to dead shrubs and thriving mold, and the pool, as David puts it, would be a worthy set-piece for the remake of "The Creature From The Black Lagoon."

"It smells like a rotting pond in the summer time," said David, a real estate agent, in an interview with the Huffington Post.

The home is one of thousands that are languishing on the market and heading toward foreclosure. In many cases, the properties remain unsold because the homeowners were prevented by the banks from completing a short sale -- where the homeowner sells the property for less than the value of its mortgage. Unable to find a buyer to pay the full price, the homes remain vacant until the bank forecloses on the property.

It isn't just the homeowner who gets hurt when a house sits vacant, but rather, the entire surrounding neighborhood is impacted. In fact, a damaged bank-owned property brings down the value of its next-door neighbors by 21 percent, on average, according to a survey of real estate agents by Campbell Communications.

The effects of property damage would be mitigated if banks were more accommodating to short sales, housing experts say.

"One of the best ways to reduce the number of damaged foreclosed properties is for these properties to be sold earlier as short sales," said the survey's author, Tom Popik, in an interview with the Huffington Post. "In many cases that's less of a loss for the mortgage investor and a better situation for the homeowner."

A majority of short sales -- 77 percent -- fail, mostly due to sluggishness on the part of lenders, the survey found. This is despite the fact that losses resulting from short sales average just 19 percent, compared with average losses of 40 percent in foreclosures, according to one study.

Story continues below
advertisement

Popik's survey respondents reported average wait times of eight weeks before mortgage servicers provided "yes" or "no" answers on short sale offers. Agents said 37 percent of sales failed because the would-be buyer walked away rather than wait around -- a higher percentage than for any other reason. By contrast, asset managers waited on average just 11 days to respond to offers on foreclosed properties, according to the survey.

The Mortgage Bankers Association told the Huffington Post that mortgage servicers just aren't set up to handle the current volume of short sales. The National Association of Realtors said Tuesday that nearly half of all home sales in the first quarter were short sales or foreclosures. Popik found in his November 2008 survey that such sales accounted for 41 percent, with short sales clocking in at 12 percent of all sales.

"Short sales are one of the loss mitigation options banks use to help borrowers avoid foreclosure. Given the state of the housing market, we are seeing more now than at any time in recent memory," said MBA spokesman John Mechem in a statement. "This obviously taxes servicers who are set up to receive and process mortgage payments, not process, manage and approve home sales. When presented with a short sale offer, the servicer has to do its due diligence, both for its own purposes and on behalf of the investor or the entity that actually holds the note or owns the mortgage on the property. Many short sale offers are absurdly low, as potential buyers think they see an opportunity to get a home far below fair market value. Yet each offer must be evaluated, which clogs the pipeline and slows down the process for everyone."

The owner of the home in Art David's neighborhood tried to do a short sale. One of David's clients offered $402,000 in January 2008. It took the banks holding the first and second mortgages three months to turn it down. Now the property is listed at $345,000.

"It makes no sense whatsoever for the banks not to accept a minor loss by comparison to a significant loss down the road," David said. David reports that there are currently 1,548 short sales available out of 9,735 active listings in the Naples area. David said he thinks the government ought to provide some kind of incentive, such as a short sale credit, for lenders to do short sales. "I can't imagine what's going to happen a year from now when these 1,500 properties -- 1,200 of them go into foreclosure, not to mention the ones not even listed. And that's just one county. What's going to happen across the United States?"

HuffPost readers: Has the bank foreclosed on your home after dragging its feet on a short sale? Have you given up on a short sale after making an offer and waiting months? Email us your story at submissions+foreclosure@huffingtonpost.com


Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!


An empty house near Art David's home is stinking up the neighborhood. The Naples, Fla. house has sat on the market since August 2007, and it's in lousy shape. The water and electricity have been cut ...
An empty house near Art David's home is stinking up the neighborhood. The Naples, Fla. house has sat on the market since August 2007, and it's in lousy shape. The water and electricity have been cut ...
 
Comments
99
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
- LadyXoc I'm a Fan of LadyXoc 6 fans permalink
photo

The banks won't lose: they'll repo the houses and sell at a profit when the market recovers. We've already covered their losses - so what have they got to lose?

The silver lining? They know the market will recover.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:48 PM on 05/12/2009
- TXfemmom I'm a Fan of TXfemmom 193 fans permalink

You really do not understand what is happening with foreclosures madam.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 05/13/2009
- Peter007 I'm a Fan of Peter007 32 fans permalink
photo

I deal with foreclosures. Banks always lose BIG with a distressed property. They never recover their money.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:13 AM on 05/13/2009

Everybody has to wake up. Everything was over valued. Period.

Wall street had inflated the values on the whole system.

It is different now. ANd will not be the same. Taxes will rise and values will lower.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 05/12/2009

Two years ago friends told me, "Ah, the value of your house has really shot up."
"No," I replied, "The Value has declined with age. The Price has shot up. But that's not real, it's a bubble."

Now prices have scaled back here to about 2004 levels.

I haven't heard it yet, but why isn't everybody after those Greedy Home-sellers who took our money and skipped town??

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:23 PM on 05/22/2009

I'm waiting now to hear about my offer on a short sale. I've already waited a few weeks now and I'm now pulling other homes. If I find one that isn't a short sale I'll put an offer in and withdrawl the short sale offer. Let it go into forecloure and then they lose more. It's just dumb thinking all around.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 PM on 05/12/2009

What are these banks going to do with all these reposessed properties? The way the obama administration and the congress are going they are going to own a lot of reposessed properties with nobody wealthy enough to occupy or be able to afford these homes especially when the spending spree obama is on causes hyper inflation and higher interest rates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:15 PM on 05/12/2009

There are many people out there that can afford and want to buy these properties- the banks's is the hold up- not the lack of people wanting to buy them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:23 PM on 05/12/2009
- mairs I'm a Fan of mairs 221 fans permalink
photo

Read the article, not just the headline.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 05/12/2009

A very pungent and discerning comment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:27 PM on 05/22/2009

As a real estate agent this issue is such a hot spot. I submitted an offer for a client on what is suppose to be a foreclosed property in January- my client held on and did not withdraw despite months and months of no response from the bank- we're suppose to close on May 29th- that's almost 6 months when a regular sale takes about 30 days to close.

Its a racket. The banks put the property on the market way under market value to encourge multiple offers and drive up the price. They gave out these mortgages knowing they would fail and are just waiting to collect on the short bet they made in the market. The people that bought these mortgages never think that there are real people behind these mortgages, real property taxes that don't get paid, real real real...not just "paper" as they call it

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 PM on 05/12/2009
- Mrtnz I'm a Fan of Mrtnz 2 fans permalink
photo

Attention, Attention.­..To all those affected by the banks refusing to deal. The real reason they refuse to deal is because they have lost track of the note. Without the mortgage note they have nothing. Call them ask them for a copy of the note. This note is the most important document. without it they have no claim against you. Call them give them 48 business hours to produce said note. Because they bundled many mortgages many banks don't know who has what. Ask for the note, Today!!!
If the bank can't produce the note the property is yours free, they have no claim it's the law!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 AM on 05/13/2009
- research I'm a Fan of research 267 fans permalink

The banks are insured with AIG and TARP.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 PM on 05/12/2009
- Openeyes I'm a Fan of Openeyes 19 fans permalink

The problem is the bundling and securitizing of these loans - they are now owned by multiple entities, some with more priority than others depending on the bundling, and they are objecting to the short sales. If banks had not been allowed to put these derivative products out into the financial markets, a great deal of the problems would not have arisen and would be easier to solve. But Wall Street was making too much money reselling these - they were the new junk bonds, and what happened to the S&Ls in the 1970s is happening to the megabanks right now, for exactly the same reasons - insufficient regulation.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:26 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

Well Said!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:42 PM on 05/12/2009

Exactly- when a logical business person looks at the situation they wonder why the mortgage holder wouldn't take what they can get- because the short sale will yield much more cash than a foreclosure.

UNLESS- it's about something else. It looks like these mortgage holders benefit in some manner to let these mortgages fail. Now that Huffpost has taken on this issue- I beg you to please uncover why the banks lets these mortgages go to foreclosure. I'll bet there is a pay off from some derivative. So- in reality- the mortgage holders aren't losing any money and end up making money when the property goes to foreclosure.

And everything the MBA tells you is BS. This short sale situation is going on for more than a year- HIRE PEOPLE TO HANDLE THEM! Even if it's a contractor- HIRE PEOPLE!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:58 PM on 05/12/2009
- triplbee I'm a Fan of triplbee 25 fans permalink

I think you're giving too much credit to the security holders (the mortgages are owned by multiple investors). In some cases even figuring out who owns the mortgage is very complicated, and when this sleuthing is in the hands of an undereducated, unmotivated bank employee, the whole process gets stalled.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:46 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

Explain how changing rules and increasing depositors insurance, allowing risky speculation, and increasing legally allowed loan rates is deregulation? That's still regulation, it's just a rule change.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:32 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

I am the buyers Agent in a short sale which is schedule to close on May 20 in Florida. It took approximately 2 months from the day the offer was submitted for the bank to send the approval letter to the buyer. This short sale situation was very tricky because it involves 2 banks instead of the usual one. The first bank will get ALL of their money back but Chase bank will have a short fall. They will be getting back only $20,000.00 out of the $80,000.00­. Owed to them. If this property was allowed to go into full blown foreclosure Chase would get ZERO cash and the other bank would have a short fall between 30K to 60K. Contrary to some of the comments post, the property owner has to PROVE hard ship, that they have NO money, financially strap, have No assets and have No way to pay back the loan before the bank would even consider a short sale. A short sale is always better for the community than a full foreclosure.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:22 PM on 05/12/2009

It's a good thing - but the banks do not manage them well. My realtor was buying a short sale - with 2 banks - they were almost about to close - and the second bank decided they wanted more money. And in all the delay, the market had dropped enough that it was unlikely even the original amount of money would have been something the appraiser would approve.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:47 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

YES, you are right the banks manage these things very poorly. The second bank or the bank sitting in the second mortgage position, in these situation, is some what powerless. The bank in second position stand to loose 100% if the property goes into actual foreclosure. The bank in first position has priority which means that debt must be paid in full and what ever is left over goes’ to payoff the second mortgage lean. Because of the weak position of the second bank, you the buyer can even negotiate with the second bank to cover some or all of your closing cost or pay your title insurance etc. Just like you say the market had dropped enough that it was unlikely even the original amount of money would have been something the appraiser would approve. This put you in an even stronger position. BEST OF LUCK!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:59 AM on 05/17/2009

The way you make it sound the homeowner has to be virtually penniless? Broke? "Homeless"? Your words are a perfect argument for why cram down should become the law of the land WITH a sunset provision a few years out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:26 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

HAHAHA! NO, NO. If you see some of these “HARDSHIP” Letters sent to the bank requesting a Short Sale, tears would run from your eyes. ACCORDING to the bank guidelines, regarding the approval of a shot sale, THE Bank MUST PROVE (Verify) that the home owner has NO way in which to repay the loan. YES, it Does Sound Penniless To Me, however, what the bank must establish is whatever assets, income or lack there of must be incapable of paying the monthly payments over time which is required to pay off the loan. I just did a short sale in which the owners is basically penniless. They had to move in with their kids to survive.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:35 PM on 05/17/2009

Gee Gerry, do you mean you favor aborting good faith contracts [agreements] just like breaking a treaty?

Let the State do that and one day they'll Cram Down your own Savings Bond, or the bonds that are in your pension fund, or the child support agreement that the kid next door to you is relies on. Or your Social Security account.

Oh, guess that's ok after all. The new administration in DC just did that didn't they?

CRAMMED. The senior bondholders of Chrysler -- crammed so the UAW could get 38% ownership when Chrysler comes out of bankruptcy next week.

CRAMMED The CEO of General Motors. Even before bankruptcy.

Keep your eyes peeled, they're a-comin'.

Bob

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:05 PM on 05/22/2009

I live in San Bernardino, CA and have been looking to purchase a home since February. I have offers on two short sale listings (they both were turned in last month) and have heard nothing. Every new listing that arises seems to be short sales. Not only am I frustrated over this, but my agent is too. Short sales damage business for real estate agents since lenders take too long to approve/reject offers.
The downside (even more) is when owners try to sell their homes outright, their emotional ties to the property shine through in the amount they ask for. For instance: two homes on one street right next door to one another in my neighborhood. One is still owned by the tenants, it is a 2 bed, 1 bath home on about 7,900 square feet of lot. They are wanting $189,000. The house next door (just as cute as first) is 2 bed, 2 bath (bigger house) and on 9,200 square feet of land. The bank (short sale) is asking $89,500. See the difference? Almost all short sales in this town are being listed in the $80k-130k range, but private owners are asking sometimes $100k more than those of their vacant neighbors. Very, very frustrating! How can this be a buyers' market, when I, as a buyer, am qualified and ready and can't get diddly?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:14 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

NOT to knock your agent, but is he or she writing the offers to protect you in first position? Are you giving full price to the bank or you offer 9K to 12K off what the bank is asking. If you are offering below the bank’s offering price you need to be protected in first position otherwise you will be in the BACK-UP line. Part of the problem is also communication on the path of the listing agent who sends a bunch of offers to the bank which causes confusion and most buyers never receive a word back. I am currently 7 for seven approved offers in the short sale arena in Florida.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:39 PM on 05/12/2009

Short sales are generally worth less than an inhabited home. When you've got a person who is short on money for long enough to either go for a short sale, or a foreclosure - lots of deferred maintenance is what you'll find inside. Sometimes stuff that is extremely expensive.

Why not get a foreclosed home? They run like a normal sale. Unless your short sale is approved, any price listed is just pure speculation - you don't know what the bank will accept, and it varies from day to day.

It's a great buyers market - I just bought one - but that doesn't make houses worthless.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:45 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

On second though, why haven't the banks rented the home back to the buyer while up for sale. It'd sure keep homes from being destroyed by the forces of time and theives.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:10 PM on 05/12/2009

The buyer? or the current owner? Either way the bank isn't going to do that for legal reasons. They can't even handle the real estate sale of the deal- I'd hate to think what would happen if they try to be a landlord.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:51 PM on 05/12/2009
photo

I'm not understanding why banks wouldn't take a short sale and the original owner be held responsible for the difference between the sale price and what's still owed. Unless the bank's already bundled their "iffy" home loans and can't move the sale on.

Maybe i just don't understand as much as I think I do.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:08 PM on 05/12/2009

The owner can't be held responsible because they have no collateral for secure a loan for the difference. They are already in hardship and on the verge of bankruptcy -so they can't take a new loan.

And yes- the banks have already bundled these loan into something else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:27 PM on 05/12/2009
- tango2 I'm a Fan of tango2 2 fans permalink

The bank not longer holds the mortgage, the original mortgage was sold to investor over seas
so the banks can't do no moves.

And this is a problem from government's bailouts, If it would be such money feeding to banks, by now all those would be re-sold at lower price, and the real estate market functioning normal.

In short: The government don't want prices go down, and Banks are taking the opportunity by recovering their loses with our money.

As simple as that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 PM on 05/12/2009
- Mrtnz I'm a Fan of Mrtnz 2 fans permalink
photo

Attention, Attention.­..To all those affected by the banks refusing to deal. The real reason they refuse to deal is because they have lost track of the note. Without the mortgage note they have nothing. Call them ask them for a copy of the note. This note is the most important document. without it they have no claim against you. Call them give them 48 business hours to produce said note. Because they bundled many mortgages many banks don't know who has what. Ask for the note, Today!!!
If the bank can't produce the note the property is yours free, they have no claim it's the law!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:54 AM on 05/13/2009

Why should the banks sell short? This way they got the TARP funds (courtesy of the Taxpayer) AND they get the real estate. Over time the prices will recover and the banks will get more money from the property sale (I doubt they will repay the Taxpayer). This is the biggest heist in history. Those CEO's deserve their bonuses - they are geniuses.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:04 PM on 05/12/2009

Why can't any of the people that Obama hired to prop up the economy see that the key to this economic collaspe is real estate values. If the stimulus money had been paid on behalf of struggling homeowners to the banks and loan servicers.­..real estate values would have been maintained, millions of people would not be homeless, and more than likely unemployment figures would not be approaching double digits. Any economist worth their weight know that money never effectively flows down. Instead of pouring money into Wall Steert and the banks, the very institutions that created this economic tsunami, those funds would have bolstered home values while at the same time provided cash flow to the banks who made sub-prime loans.
To answer the author's closing rhetorical question: The United States will inherit a new underclass of citizens stripped of their credit, homes and often unable to obtain a new or better job because their credit has been ruined.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:57 PM on 05/12/2009

So in the end there will be vacant homes all over the place and homeless families camped out all over the place.....­........ma­ybe the squatters should begin doing their thing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:48 PM on 05/12/2009
- fictioneer I'm a Fan of fictioneer 19 fans permalink
photo

Yes, well, if the banks had any sense, we wouldn't be where we are, would we? Shut them down and move on, or nationalize them and force the sense into them. Because this is insane.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:48 PM on 05/12/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect