Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 51 to 56 of 56
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Eburg
    Posts
    13,243
    Quote Originally Posted by TahoeJ View Post
    You're both right IMO. I will add that in California, at least in certain counties, first time home buyers were only required to have 5 - 10% for down payment, without PMI.
    Right. But that was both ephemeral and unprecedented. It was not normal. Normal was requiring a buyer to come to the table with a 20% to 30% down payment.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Jack Tone Road
    Posts
    12,741
    Quote Originally Posted by chatton18 View Post
    Have you tried going to a local bank to get a loan, they tend to have different lending practices than the big bank cookie cutter forms and will take time to get to know you and your situation - the old relationship banking model.
    Except that newer federal regulations aimed at big banks are destroying this model. My father-in-law's a small-town banker, home mortgages and farm equipment loans, and they haven't had a bad loan in decades because he knows everyone in that town, knows their business and their business prospects, and knows whether they're reliable or not. But that stuff goes out the window when the OCC applies the same rules to little Commercial Savings Bank as it does to Citi. It's a big deal to him because it's not like they can just switch the focus of their business and start lending only to high net worth individuals or large businesses with large cash reserves- those people and businesses don't exist in that town of 6,000.

    He's been bitching about this for a few years but the NYT recently ran an article about it and the flight of community banks to state regulators: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/bu...pagewanted=all

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    I already made my point. I saw it. Most 2nds were going to people overstating their income. That's fraud. Yeah, I know that by 2004 and 2005 there were institutional buyers for sliced and diced bundled loans who were betting on the absurd notion that US single family residences would outpace inflation into perpetuity. But that was not normal. I'm pretty sure that banks were not making 90% LTV 2nds between WWII and the mid-1980's. The banks wrote those loans only because they could sell the paper to the bigger fool.


    Second mortgages were an embarrassment to my parents generation, best taken as a last resort. My generation, the Boomers, threw that attitude in the trash can in the early ninties, and are now resorting to reverse mortgages to survive.

    30% of "homeowners" over 65 are carrying a loan in that house. One third!

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    19,067
    It always scares the shit out of me, in social conversations, when older people ask me about getting a Reverse Mtg to help meet their living expenses. Inside I am like "WTF???", as I think you need a free and clear home at retirement, but on the outside I just dodge the conversation saying I don't know much about Reverse Mtgs
    The sad reality is, most people live beyond their means. Especially in high cost areas. At some point it is tough to sell your $250k condo in San Diego and move to the snow in a home for $50k, to have some cash in the bank and a free and clear home, so most everyone does what they can to extend the dream. Lucky the OP is young, doing well and in a good spot. I see examples of exactly the opposite everyday and it makes me grateful for what I have.
    Quote Originally Posted by leroy jenkins View Post
    I think you'd have an easier time understanding people if you remembered that 80% of them are fucking morons.
    That is why I like dogs, more than most people.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Truckee & Nor Cal
    Posts
    15,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Steve View Post
    Right. But that was both ephemeral and unprecedented. It was not normal. Normal was requiring a buyer to come to the table with a 20% to 30% down payment.
    And in hindsight totally fucking insane, right? I remember at the time, I think it was 2005 or 2006, when they first announced this, being pissed because it seemed like a real estate pricing correction was finally going to happen, and by opening up the market to more potential "qualified" buyers they prevented it.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Looking down
    Posts
    50,491
    Quote Originally Posted by liv2ski View Post
    It always scares the shit out of me, in social conversations, when older people ask me about getting a Reverse Mtg to help meet their living expenses. Inside I am like "WTF???", as I think you need a free and clear home at retirement, but on the outside I just dodge the conversation saying I don't know much about Reverse Mtgs
    The sad reality is, most people live beyond their means. Especially in high cost areas. At some point it is tough to sell your $250k condo in San Diego and move to the snow in a home for $50k, to have some cash in the bank and a free and clear home, so most everyone does what they can to extend the dream. Lucky the OP is young, doing well and in a good spot. I see examples of exactly the opposite everyday and it makes me grateful for what I have.

    It's an act of desperation. It's all many have in the form of any kind of tangible asset. Read this: http://baselinescenario.com/2012/05/...urity-matters/ Sad, huh? About half of the older people out there really really need SS to live on. SS! You know, basically jackshit.

    Don't grow up to be like them.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •