Does an HOA have right to take over foreclosed properties?

Apparently it is now legal in Florida and Nevada.

What is the HOA supposed to do, just wait for the properties to sell before spending money on property maintenance?

So what about property rights of the bank or investor owner?

This is a serious issue in those complexes with a high volume of foreclosures.

Source:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704281504576327693591415736.html#articleTabs%3Darticle

References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.

Countrywide to pay $108 Million to 450,000 home owners

Based on FTC investigations and findings of excessive fees on servicing default/delinquent mortgages serviced 1/1/2005 thru 7/1/2008; incorrect figures about what they owed on their mortgages; and fees/escrow charges - vast majority will get less than $600.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/business/countrywide-to-pay-borrowers-108-million-in-settlement.html


References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.

Should the US Government allow banks to rent foreclosed homes?

Update: 7-29-2011:  Ok, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as owners of some foreclosed properties, may decide to rent them as opposed to try and sell them.  But that might just cause more cost in the long run by delaying the inevitable ale and won't make a huge dent in the wave of 4-6 million more foreclosures to come. Source: http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/pipelinepress/07282011-nike-sifma-debt.aspx

My first thought when I read the artile below is - What business is it of the US Government to say what private business should or shouldn't do?  But then I woke up from that dream and found myself in reality....

US Government probably thinks the number of distressed properties would decline, thereby reducing pressure on prices, allow real estate prices to stabilize and increase, create more tax revenues for states/local government through higher property taxes; and help the economy recover....all good stuff for governments...

But what do the banks think?  Do they want the injury/damage liability of renters living in their properties? What will be the cost of repairing or selling a property in the future that may not be of the same or higher value as it is now?  Will they want the continued monitoring/maintenance issues that may or may not be covered by the amount of rent on their property?

Bottom line:  Banks are in the business of lending money, not holding assets - they would rather take a hit to get rid of a property and loan what they get from a sale than keep it on their books as a nuisance and further liability. But as I learned in grad-school, "it all depends"... on how sweet of a deal the US Government proposes and how banks' bottom line can improve on the implementation of such an idea!

Source: http://realtybiznews.com/government-plans-to-rent-out-foreclosed-homes/9874253/

References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.

Stop Mortgage Fraud

The US Attorney General's Office is doing the right thing to pursue criminal activity in the mortgage business.

There are alot of good people and companies who work very hard in the mortgage industry, but there are some who need to be caught and disposed.

Report fraud of any kind to the Attorney General through this portal - http://www.stopfraud.gov/report.html


General US Government website to review fraud activities you need to know - http://www.stopfraud.gov/

References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.

Georgia Association of Realtors (GAR) forms - one problem I see

I wish to first thank and I appreciate GAR for creating and producing standardized real estate contract forms to use by all real estate agents. These forms make real estate transactions smoother in Georgia since all agents are familiar with the forms and contents.

However, there is one question from the Seller's Property Disclosure Statement that I've recommended to have it changed and it has not been changed that reads as follows:

"Is there presently any polybutylene plumbing, other than the primary service line, on the property?"

Now if the Seller marks this statement NO, and there is a polybutylene plumbing line that is connected from the street to the house, then is the Seller lying, even if they knew it existed?

If I were to judge from an independent person's viewpoint I would say - NO. I believe that the way this is worded, "other than the primary service line" may mean what it says in a court of law, regardless of how agents "may" interpret this statement in practice and application.

Furthermore, the Seller may not know by visually inspecting the water line since it's buried underground and the connection may terminate inside foundation wall.

I can't wait for the first lawsuit over it - maybe at that time, the language will be changed.

References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.

SAFE (Secure and Fair Enforcement Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008)

Update 9-9-2011:  SAFE is causing alot of confusion and possible complexity. Definition isn't clear of what is meant by "licening requirements" because HUD and each State Banking Department, who blame each other or not defining, can't define it clearly enough.  Source:  http://www.nhbr.com/news/931927-395/is-safe-mortgage-reform-law-squeezing-the.html

Licensing Loan Originator - ok, but seriously - Isn't this another example of the US Federal government being too little too late - again?
 
This Act started in 2008 is still going on, but is changing hands.  The Housing and Urban Development (HUD) office has just issued its final ruling/interpretation of the Act, but is going to be passing many of the decisions onto the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) --- which may never be funded if left up to the Republicans---

So will this legislation solve any problems?  Probably some, but not others, and not necessarily the right problems.  It is one piece of the puzzle, but the shape and dimensions of the puzzle keep changing.

Note:  You can see from licensing real estate agents that it has "completely cleared up any shenanigans that agents perform and their misbehavior - right?

Yes, we had unscrupulous loan originators, but if they couldn't turn and sell them to Fannie, Freddie and others at the drop of a hat, then someone else would have created and sold the same loans to the secondary market.

Maybe we should license the Federal Government and put them on notice or fine them for any misbehavior?


Source:  http://mortgage.nationwidelicensingsystem.org/SAFE/Pages/default.aspx

Source:  http://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/channels/pipelinepress/07042011-safe-act.aspx

Source:  http://mortgage.nationwidelicensingsystem.org/SAFE/NMLS%20Document%20Library/Mandates-SAFE.pdf

References to products and services are not a specific endorsement, but the user must perform their due diligence and investigate whether the product or service is right for them. I welcome any or all comments that would help others.