Author Archives: IrvineRenter

Irvine loan owners pose highest risk of strategic default

Borrowers with jumbo loans — most of Irvine — are most likely to strategically default a recent study shows.

Home Address … 23 TIOGA Irvine, CA 92602

Asking Price ……. $850,000

Play no games he'd say to me when the light is gone

He is right he'd say to me, we know who is wrong

So please don't make no hesitation

There will be no recreation

Jumbo said to say goodnight, he's a friend of yours

Bee Gees — Jumbo

Say goodnight to jumbo loans. The borrowers are going to default. Many jumbo loan holders have been hanging on despite the oversized payments because values have not fallen a great deal on higher priced properties. With the support from below being removed, the absence of a move-up market is causing higher priced properties to drift ever lower. This slow descent will continue, and as it does, more and more jumbo loan owners will see the futility in making huge payments and strategically default. Look out Irvine, this impacts you.

Jumbo mortgage holders pose highest risk of strategic default

A high number of jumbo mortgage owners — many located in high-cost markets hit by real estate deflation over the last several years — are stuck with persistent negative equity, a study shows.

November 13, 2011 — By Kenneth R. Harney

Reporting from Washington — Do you have a big mortgage and good credit scores but not much equity — maybe you're even underwater? Do you see little chance that your home's market value will improve a lot during the coming three to seven years?

If you answered yes to both questions — and thousands of homeowners across the country could do so — new research suggests that you are in a category that lenders need to worry about most: prime jumbo borrowers who once were thought to be among the safest bets, but who now are the most likely to opt for a strategic default and walk away from their homes.

Yes, the futility of paying will cause many to strategically default.

Remember, strategic default requires two parts, (1) the payment must exceed the cost of a comparable rental, and (2) the hope of future equity must be fleeting. If it were costing loan owners less to own than to rent, most would stay where they are. After all, they are saving money versus renting even with the lack of equity. If prices were going up, loan owners would feel their mortgage had option value as they would soon be back in-the-money as the appreciation fairies would bestow free money on them again soon.

If loan owners have neither saving versus renting, or the fantasy of future equity, they have little to keep them strategically defaulting. In those circumstances, it is in their best interest financially to do so.

In a study released Oct. 31, ratings firm Moody's said that based on its analysis of mortgage-backed bond portfolios, homeowners with jumbo mortgages now constitute “greater strategic default risk” than any other type of borrowers, including subprime.

That's because an exceptionally high number of jumbo loan owners — many located in high-cost markets hit by real estate deflation over the last several years — are stuck with persistent negative equity. More than half of the jumbos analyzed by Moody's in which owners are still making payments are underwater, or have home market values lower than their outstanding loan balances.

In addition, since most of these people grossly overpaid, they have a cost of ownership exceeding the cost of a comparable rental.

Jumbo loans are those that exceed the conventional limits of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Nationally, that ceiling is $417,000, but in high-cost areas between 2008 and Oct. 1 of this year, conventional limits ranged as high as $729,750. The maximum in those high-cost areas is now $625,500.

Meanwhile, Fair Isaac Corp., developer of the FICO credit score, says strategic defaults — in which owners can afford to keep paying their loans but see no economic rationale for doing so — continue to be a growing problem. More than 12 million mortgages are estimated to be underwater, and 30% of defaults on loans are strategic, according to Joanne M. Gaskin, FICO's predictive analytics director.

Is this really a problem? A problem for who? It's certainly a problem for banks, and it's a problem for those who don't strategically default who would benefit by it, but it's a solution for underwater loan owners, and it benefits everyone who wants more affordable housing.

Fair Isaac recently created a new type of score designed solely to spot potential strategic defaulters before they hand back the house keys. At least four of the top 10 largest lenders and servicers already are using it, contacting high-risk borrowers, offering financial solutions plus information about the costs associated with strategic walkaways.

Providing “information” on the costs of strategic default? In other words, they are bullshitting people with nonsense scare tactics to try to convince them it's not in their best interest to strategically default when in reality, it is.

The company says that its score can spot the riskiest homeowners, some of whom show telltale characteristics that make them as much as 110 times more likely to walk away than the least-risky borrowers.

Though FICO has not disclosed the specific risk combinations in the mathematical models supporting its proprietary score, the company confirms that among them are homeowners' good credit scores and payment performance on debts, low balances of outstanding revolving credit and a relatively short period of ownership of their current homes.

Gaskin lifted the lid on the FICO black box a smidgen more. Using a variety of data — including property values, historical valuation trends along with standard FICO scores and other information in credit bureau files — the strategic default score essentially tries to get inside homeowners' heads to predict their behavior.

“We're trying to understand from the consumer's perspective,” she said. “How much have I lost on the value of my home? What is the velocity of change?”

When the answers are grim and the prospects for equity recovery are distant, the probability that the owners will plot a strategic departure — often characterized by an abrupt halt to mortgage payments while staying current on credit cards and car payments — goes up sharply.

As it should. Remember, lenders inflated this housing bubble with their shoddy lending practices. It is fair and just for them to eat the losses in the aftermath. Each borrower who does not strategically default is agreeing to pay the losses of the lender who deserves it. Strategic default is moral imperative to prevent future housing bubbles.

“Most consumers have a pretty good idea of what the market is doing” in their local neighborhoods, Gaskin said.

What they often don't know, however, are the penalties they face for walking away. These include triple-digit drops in their credit scores — which will hamper their ability to rent a house or obtain credit for years — plus the possibility that lenders will find a way to seek recovery of whatever they owe after foreclosure proceedings.

Strategic default will not hamper their ability to rent, nor will it stop them from obtaining credit for years. Lenders will give credit cards to people a day out of bankruptcy. Lenders are little better than drug pushers hanging out at the discharge door of a rehab center. They don't want the credit addicted to get away, so they make their product available when people are vulnerable.

About a dozen states, including California, restrict “deficiency” recoveries. But in most states lenders are free to pursue whatever assets they can locate, and often do so if the amount of unrecovered debt is large enough to justify the legal expenses.

Ultimately, strategic default for many owners boils down to a calculation: Are the costs, financial and otherwise, worth the relief from an albatross house and mortgage? If the Moody's study is accurate, thousands of jumbo borrowers are struggling with that calculation right now, and a lot of them are likely to bail out.

kenharney@earthlink.net

Distributed by Washington Post Writers Group.

The housing bust is over five years old now, and we still haven't found a durable bottom. Kool aid intoxication is dying, and so are the dreams of jumbo loan owners everywhere. One way or another, people will be relieved of the excessive debt burdens of the bubble years. Strategic default, short sale, foreclosure, and bankruptcy are all options we will see plenty of going forward, unless of course, they decide to forgive everyone's underwater principal balance… not going to happen.

Option ARM implosion

Now that we are five or more years into many of the bubble era Option ARMs, many are facing payment recasts where the loan converts to fully amortizing over the remaining term of the loan. When this occurs, even if interest rates are low, the payment is going to skyrocket. Many of these loan owners could never afford the property anyway, so when their payment goes way up, default becomes inevitable.

The owners of today's featured property bought at the peak with an Option ARM, and they have strategically defaulted.

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 11/04/2011

Document Type: Notice of Default

They won't be the last.

Look for more supply like this home to hit the market over the next several years as high end prices continue to show weakness.

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

This property is available for sale via the MLS.

Please contact Shevy Akason, #01836707

949.769.1599

sales@idealhomebrokers.com

Home Address … 23 TIOGA Irvine, CA 92602

Asking Price ……. $850,000

Beds: 6

Baths: 3

Sq. Ft.: 3700

$230/SF

Property Type: Residential, Single Family

Style: Two Level, Mediterranean

Year Built: 1998

Community: West Irvine

County: Orange

MLS#: S679690

Source: CRMLS

Status: Active

On Redfin: 13 days

——————————————————————————

(no description)

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

Proprietary commentary and analysis

Asking Price ……. $850,000

Purchase Price … $1,075,000

Purchase Date …. 9/23/2005

Net Gain (Loss) ………. ($276,000)

Percent Change ………. -25.7%

Annual Appreciation … -3.7%

Cost of Home Ownership

————————————————-

$850,000 ………. Asking Price

$170,000 ………. 20% Down Conventional

4.02% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$680,000 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$175,704 ………. Income Requirement

$3,254 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$737 ………. Property Tax (@1.04%)

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$177 ………. Homeowners Insurance (@ 0.25%)

$0 ………. Private Mortgage Insurance

$371 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$4,539 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$754 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$976 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment (Amortization)

$238 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$126 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$3,173 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$8,500 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$8,500 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$6,800 ………. Interest Points

$170,000 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$193,800 ………. Total Cash Costs

$48,600 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$242,400 ………. Total Savings Needed

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Larry Roberts is hosting a Las Vegas cashflow properties presentation at the offices of Intercap Lending (9401 Jeronimo, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92618) on December 7, 2011, at 6:30. Please RSVP at sales@idealhomebrokers.com.

Blair Applegate of Peter Schiff's Euro Pacific Capital, Inc. will be presentating at the offices of Intercap Lending (9401 Jeronimo, Suite 200, Irvine, CA 92618) at 7:30 on December 7, 2011. Please RSVP at sales@idealhomebrokers.com.

Banks will delay some foreclosures and evictions during the holidays

In order to prevent another public relations nightmare, lenders are holding off on some foreclosures or evictions during the holiday season.

Irvine Home Address … 134 ECHO Run Irvine, CA 92614

Resale Home Price …… $215,000

I'll be home for Christmas

You can count on me

Please have snow and mistletoe

and presents on the tree

Christmas Eve will find me

Where the love light gleams

I'll be home for Christmas

If only in my

dreams

Frank Sinatra — I'll Be Home For Christmas

Each year during the holidays, lenders are faced with the unenviable choice to allow more squatting or take away the family home at Christmas. With the bad public relations that go along with holiday foreclosures, most lenders hold off until the new year.

Banks will hold off on some holiday foreclosures

Andrew S. Ross, Chronicle Columnist

Friday, November 25, 2011

Season of sharing, take 1.

Got an e-mail from Wells Fargo responding to my column this week suggesting that banks consider a moratorium on home foreclosure activities, at least during the holiday season.

“Wells Fargo is suspending eviction actions from Nov. 23 to Nov. 25, and again from Dec. 19 to Jan. 2, 2012. We will not physically evict or conduct lockouts on the foreclosed properties in our owned portfolio during these times,” said a Wells Fargo spokeswoman.

“For loans we service for others, foreclosure-related actions may still occur, but Wells Fargo will not evict tenants during these periods.”

So Wells Fargo will foreclose, they just won't evict. I guess the people had already been there for years squatting already, what's another couple of weeks, right?

I checked with the other major banks, and with the government-run Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the nation's two largest home loan originators.

JPMorgan Chase said it “will not complete foreclosure sales or evictions from Dec. 22 through Jan. 2, though this does not apply to Fannie and Freddie loans.”

Fannie Mae said it “will be announcing a suspension of evictions for the holiday period. Details should be available next week.”

Bank of America said, “For loans we own and those we service for investors who do not provide other guidance, we have a policy and procedures to avoid foreclosure sales or displacement of homeowners or tenants around the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays. In addition to internal notifications of the policy, the contracted foreclosure attorneys and trustees have been instructed that they are not to schedule foreclosure sales, evictions or lockouts on covered loans during those periods.”

So some will foreclose but not evict, and some will not foreclose or evict. None of them said they were going to forgive the loan balance and let people keep the houses — in case anyone was holding out hope for that….

Ally Financial, which owns GMAC Mortgage, said, “Should a suspension of foreclosure activities be issued, GMAC Mortgage will follow the applicable investor requirements.”

Citigroup and Freddie Mac had not responded by Wednesday afternoon.

Blogging: www.sfgate.com/columns/bottomline. Facebook page: sfg.ly/doACKM. Tweeting: @andrewsross. E-mail: bottomline@sfchronicle.com.

My first holdover owner tenant

Whenever I buy an occupied property at auction, I always try to keep an existing occupants in place. I will renovate around people if I can get immediate cashflow from the property. You would think such an arrangement would be a no-brainer for a squatting former owner, but that generally isn't the case.

What I have found is that most people who strategically default do not wait until someone comes to evict them. Many properties I have purchased have been empty, or the occupants vacated just before I bought it at auction. Most holdover tenants are renters or unemployed former owners who have nowhere else to go.

Last month I bought a property which was occupied by the former owner. Before they quit paying, their mortgage payment was $2,200 per month. When Jacki approached them and asked if they would stay on for $1,000 per month, they didn't think we were serious. When we offered to fix up some lingering maintenance items, they asked us if they had to pay for it. They couldn't believe their good fortune that came from their foreclosure.

Now these people are very happy tenants. They didn't have to move, and their housing costs are less than half of what they were when they were making payments. Of course, they have to pay rent now, so the deal isn't as good as squatting, but this new arrangement is stable. It's a win-win as far as I can tell.

An Irvine Flop

Today's featured property was sold as REO on Halloween. In less than a month, it is on the market with a 25% markup. It certainly doesn't look like the listing agent for the REO got the best possible price for Fannie Mae.

What could this flipper have done in 30 days to increase the value 25%, particularly at this time of year when demand is weak and prices are falling?

Do you think the realtor might have represented to Fannie Mae that the value was less than the true fair market value? Do you think this investment was steered toward a favored client?

Or is it possible that this flipper is merely delusional and this property is really worth only $167,500? Perhaps it a bit of both. What do you think?

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

This property is available for sale via the MLS.

Please contact Shevy Akason, #01836707

949.769.1599

sales@idealhomebrokers.com

Irvine House Address … 134 ECHO Run Irvine, CA 92614

Resale House Price …… $215,000

Beds: 1

Baths: 1

Sq. Ft.: 750

$287/SF

Property Type: Residential, Condominium

Style: One Level, Contemporary

View: Faces South

Year Built: 1980

Community: Woodbridge

County: Orange

MLS#: S680358

Source: CRMLS

On Redfin: 4 days

——————————————————————————

Must See! Great Condo in a Great Irvine Community, within the boundaries to attend Woodbridge High School. Beautiful 1 Bedroom, 1 Bath condo. Recently remodeled with major upgraded finishes. Travertine countertops in kitchen and bath, upgraded cabinets, recessed lighting in kitchen, upgraded kohler kitchen sink, designer selected paint, travertine flooring in kitchen and dining area, upgraded carpet in living room and bedroom and upgraded lighing. Woodbridge Community Associations has two lakes, pools, tennis courts and beautiful parks. All that is left is for you to move in!

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

Proprietary IHB commentary and analysis

Resale Home Price …… $215,000

House Purchase Price … $167,500

House Purchase Date …. 10/31/2011

Net Gain (Loss) ………. $34,600

Percent Change ………. 20.7%

Annual Appreciation … 340.3%

Cost of Home Ownership

————————————————-

$215,000 ………. Asking Price

$7,525 ………. 3.5% Down FHA Financing

4.02% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$207,475 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$70,979 ………. Income Requirement

$0,993 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$186 ………. Property Tax (@1.04%)

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$45 ………. Homeowners Insurance (@ 0.25%)

$239 ………. Private Mortgage Insurance

$371 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$1,834 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$154 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$298 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment (Amortization)

$11 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$47 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$1,439 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$2,150 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$2,150 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$2,075 ………. Interest Points

$7,525 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$13,900 ………. Total Cash Costs

$22,000 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$35,900 ………. Total Savings Needed

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Foreclosure settlement talks continue without California

Despite California's withdrawal from the foreclosure settlement talks, the negotiations are continuing with other states.

Irvine Home Address … 3 ABETO Irvine, CA 92620

Resale Home Price …… $699,900

As usual, I'm in a tricky predicament

Weather in my thoughts, on the roof sneaking a cigarette

Dear California, it's been nice to know ya

Tell me, will you miss me when I'm gone?

Vanessa Carlton — Dear California

California recently pulled out of the settlement talks with the major banks. Does anyone miss California?

Foreclosure Talks Push Ahead Absent California

Bank representatives and government officials are working on a broad settlement of most state and federal foreclosure-practices investigations that could move forward without the participation of California, long considered a key to any deal, people familiar with the negotiations said.

The terms of the deal remain fluid. Banks have proposed a deal excluding California that would carry a value of $18.5 billion, though the final outcome remains uncertain, people familiar with the discussion said.

Negotiators are continuing to make a push to persuade California to join a settlement valued at $25 billion among federal officials, state attorneys general and the nation's five largest mortgage servicers: Ally Financial Inc., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. The talks center on the banks' use of “robo-signing,” in which employees approved legal documents without proper review, and other questionable foreclosure practices.

The only reason the California Attorney General is not signing on is because she wants to extort more money out of the banks. The robo-signing issue was not a problem here because we don't have a judicial foreclosure system. By and large, there have been no questionable foreclosure practices. Nobody who was making their payments was foreclosed on. What we do have is a lot of squatters in shadow inventory gaming the system and hoping the California AG will bail them out with principal reduction in order to secure re-election.

The dollar value would include the value of principal write-downs, interest-rate reductions and other benefits to homeowners as well as cash penalties.

But negotiators now are discussing how to structure an agreement if California remains on the sidelines. Until recently, it seemed unlikely that a settlement would be possible without the participation of California Attorney General Kamala D. Harris. She left the discussions in late September, calling the deal then on the table inadequate. The state accounted for 13.1% of all mortgages outstanding at the end of September and 10.8% of all loans in foreclosure, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

“Our position remains the same. We are focused on securing maximum relief and lasting reform for California homeowners,” said Shum Preston, a representative for Ms. Harris.

Her position is the same. She is still posturing for more extortion money.

Attorneys general in several other states, including Delaware, Massachusetts, Nevada and New York, also have raised questions about the potential settlement.

Participants on both sides are eager to reach a resolution after months of discussion. Administration officials have viewed the foreclosure settlement as a chance to break the foreclosure logjam, increase the number of reductions in loan principal and provide other assistance to homeowners. Banks, meanwhile, would like to reassure investors and put questions related to foreclosure practices behind them.

It's the banks who desperately want to make this deal to limit their future liability. They are right that investors will not buy banking stocks while there is a giant black hole eating everything on their balance sheet.

Any deal would require banks to use a portion of the penalties to modify mortgages by writing down loan balances, among other actions. In exchange, banks would be released from legal claims tied to servicing delinquent mortgages as well as certain mortgage-origination practices. Government officials still would be able to move forward with other legal claims, including those stemming from the packaging of loans into securities.

The discussions have turned in recent days to crafting a formula to determine how any settlement is scaled depending on which states opt out of the deal. Officials have discussed limiting the amount of loans that could be written down or refinanced in states that don't join the settlement, people familiar with the matter said, in order to provide a stronger incentive for states to join. States that don't join the settlement wouldn't receive any of the funds that will go directly to the states, nor will borrowers in those states receive cash payments for which they might otherwise be eligible, these people said. If California doesn't sign on, the state would lose billions of dollars in potential benefits, the people said.

Nice try, but California will extort even more money out of the banks with a separate agreement. It's wishful thinking to believe they can limit California's recovery from the banks if California refuses to participate in the deal.

The participation of California isn't the only item still on the negotiating table. The two sides still must agree on the choice of a monitor, who will be charged with ensuring that banks comply with the settlement, people familiar with the discussions said.

Following the departure of Ms. Harris from the talks, the price tag of a settlement rose by at least $5 billion and negotiators came up with a plan to help certain “underwater” borrowers, those who owe more on their mortgage than their home is worth, to get refinancing assistance.

California has more than two million underwater borrowers, more than any other state, according to CoreLogic.

That's a lot of houses. How many of them will survive to have equity again? Not many, I imagine.

The refinancing plan will remain in the deal even if California doesn't because it is attractive to other states that have seen large home-price declines, the people said.

Ms. Harris has come under pressure from labor and progressive groups seeking to extract greater penalties from banks for alleged mortgage-related wrongdoing.

Now we see the real reason she pulled out of the talks. The extreme left who want to give away free houses to loan owners are pressuring her. The extreme left is wrong on this issue. Is fiscal responsibility completely out of favor on the left?

Last week, her office issued subpoenas to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-controlled mortgage companies, according to people familiar with the matter.

The subpoenas asked the firms to provide responses to about 50 different inquiries, according to these people, including demographic information about borrowers who have missed payments and who have received loan modifications, among other items.

The state also requested information on foreclosed properties owned by the firms, including any evidence of unpaid taxes or drug abuse on vacant properties.

If she really wanted to do something useful, she could request information on unpaid HOA dues by the banks. HOAs are getting killed by lenders who don't foreclose because when they finally get around to it, the HOA lien gets wiped out. Many HOAs are grossly underfunded.

Representatives of Fannie, Freddie, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which regulates the firms, declined to comment.

Ms. Harris has a limited ability to bring legal claims related to originations and servicing practices if she decides not to agree to the foreclosure deal, people familiar with the negotiations said.

How can she be bound by an agreement she doesn't sign? Her failing to sign the agreement does not limit her in any way.

The statute for filing cases related to loan originations is four years in California, meaning any legal action could cover mortgages originated only in 2007 and after. California allows foreclosures to proceed through a nonjudicial process, limiting the state's ability to argue that banks lied to the courts, these people said.

Separately, the Office of Comptroller of the Currency on Tuesday released a broad summary of the actions financial firms have taken this year to overhaul foreclosure practices. Bank regulators also posted copies of the agreements between banks and thrifts and the consulting firms, which include Clayton Services LLC, Ernst & Young LLP, PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP and Promontory Financial Group LLC, that have been hired to review millions of foreclosure files for potential defects.

—Alan Zibel and Maya Jackson Randall contributed to this article.

Write to Ruth Simon at ruth.simon@wsj.com and Nick Timiraos at nick.timiraos@wsj.com

I am torn on this issue.

I want to see the banks pay a very heavy price for inflating the housing bubble, but I don't want to see them get punished for their proper foreclosure practices.

I want to see the banks lose a lot of money, but I don't want to see these losses occur because some politician wanted to buy some votes by giving free money to a loan owner.

The punishments being inflicted on the banks are warranted, but not for the reasons being given. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Half a million dollar Ponzis

My data source for today's featured property doesn't tell me exactly when the previous owners bought the house, but the assesed value is $280,838 which suggests they paid about $265,000, probably sometime in the 1990s.

My records pick up with a $438,750 first mortgage on 3/21/2003. By this time, the owners were committed Ponzis.

Over the next four years, they proceeded to borrow and refinance many times culminating in a $744,000 Option ARM on 7/31/2007. The also managed a $29,900 HELOC on 10/11/2007.

They racked up $773,900 debt on a house they paid less than $300,000 for.

They quit paying, and got to squat for at least 15 months.

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 09/09/2010

Document Type: Notice of Sale

Foreclosure Record

Recording Date: 06/07/2010

Document Type: Notice of Default

I'm out of unique ways to describe this behavior. I hope they enjoyed the money because they will likely never live that well again.

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

This property is available for sale via the MLS.

Please contact Shevy Akason, #01836707

949.769.1599

sales@idealhomebrokers.com

Irvine House Address … 3 ABETO Irvine, CA 92620

Resale House Price …… $699,900

Beds: 5

Baths: 3

Sq. Ft.: 2864

$244/SF

Property Type: Residential, Single Family

Style: Two Level, Traditional

Year Built: 1978

Community: Westpark

County: Orange

MLS#: P803969

Source: CRMLS

Status: Active

On Redfin: 2 days

——————————————————————————

FANTASTIC BUY ON THIS SPACIOUS 5 BEDROOM 3 BATH EXECUTIVE HOME WITH TILE ROOF LOCATED IN AN INTERIOR TRACT LOCATION VALUE PRICED FOR QUICK SALE! TILE ROOF, FORMAL LIVING ROOM, DINING ROOM, SEPARATE FAMILY ROOM WITH FIREPLACE AND WETBAR, ONE BEDROOM AND BATH DOWNSTAIRS, SPACIOUS MASTER SUITE, HUGE BONUS ROOM UPSTAIRS, BRIGHT KITCHEN WITH GRANITE COUNTERTOPS, SPARKILING POOL AND SPA, FORCED AIR HEATING AND CENTRAL AIR CONDITIONING. FRESH INTERIOR TWO TONE PAINT AND NEW CARPET. SUPER MOTIVATED SELLER. SUBMIT!!!

——————————————————————————————————————————————-

Proprietary IHB commentary and analysis

Resale Home Price …… $699,900

House Purchase Price … $664,114

House Purchase Date …. 6/24/2011

Net Gain (Loss) ………. ($6,208)

Percent Change ………. -0.9%

Annual Appreciation … 10.5%

Cost of Home Ownership

————————————————-

$699,900 ………. Asking Price

$139,980 ………. 20% Down Conventional

4.02% …………… Mortgage Interest Rate

$559,920 ………. 30-Year Mortgage

$136,606 ………. Income Requirement

$2,680 ………. Monthly Mortgage Payment

$607 ………. Property Tax (@1.04%)

$0 ………. Special Taxes and Levies (Mello Roos)

$146 ………. Homeowners Insurance (@ 0.25%)

$0 ………. Private Mortgage Insurance

$97 ………. Homeowners Association Fees

============================================

$3,529 ………. Monthly Cash Outlays

-$434 ………. Tax Savings (% of Interest and Property Tax)

-$804 ………. Equity Hidden in Payment (Amortization)

$196 ………. Lost Income to Down Payment (net of taxes)

$107 ………. Maintenance and Replacement Reserves

============================================

$2,594 ………. Monthly Cost of Ownership

Cash Acquisition Demands

——————————————————————————

$6,999 ………. Furnishing and Move In @1%

$6,999 ………. Closing Costs @1%

$5,599 ………. Interest Points

$139,980 ………. Down Payment

============================================

$159,577 ………. Total Cash Costs

$39,700 ………… Emergency Cash Reserves

============================================

$199,277 ………. Total Savings Needed

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-