Another edition from my guest blogger Gary Lundeen a short sale attorney in our area. Today in my 'inbox' came a hilarious request from Bank of America to Gary. In short, it was a 'tell us how we're doing survey'. Really? The form is not big enough for what Gary has to tell them! The form is not wide enough to fill in all of what really needs to be said to them!
Here's another Short Sale Letter that Gary has written trying to get the much needed word out on Short Sale Reform.
I've come across an interesting article pointing out that the big banks (let's call them 'da Banksters) have no 'financial' benefit to Short Sale or Loan Modifications of any kind. It's an interesting read but a little complicated. Follow the money (or making of it) in this story 'The Servicing Fraud Settlement'.
There has also been recent 'blog chatter' about banks already being in the real estate business through the Short Sale Process. I'm not so sure as of yet but I do know that behind the scenes they are 'manipulating' every real estate transaction that's either a Short Sale or Foreclosure. This is an interesting perspective from Judy Chapman, 'The Banking Monopoly wants to get in the Real Estate Business'.
The Lundeen Plan
Let's have Colonel Sanders watch that hen house!
6 comments • Lyn Sims - Schaumburg Homes • May 21 2011 09:34AMComments
Participate
Post © 2009 Lyn Sims - Schaumburg Homes (Schaumburg Real Estate - Northwest Suburbs - RE/MAX Suburban). Design © 2009 ActiveRain Corp.
Logos and service marks owned by copyright holder.
Problem is that appraisers are often from out of the area - and wrong. Better to get three appraisals and take the averages. And since the bank has more to lose and the Seller has no money, the bank should pay for the appraisal, tell everyone their bottom line and what they will allow as payment to second lienholders. They need to include foreclosure/REO and short sales. And, where the market is declining 0.3% a month, the appraisal gets outdated, so they need to update every 90 days if it does not sell. They should have a schedule of acceptable fees to give everyone involved in the deal a fair payment.
In the same vein as Daniel, the problem is that appraisers are people, just like buyers, and their likes and dislikes enter in to their evaluation whether they want them to or not, just likes buyers are turned on or off by a color or a smell or the sound of a bus stopping in front. Things that the appraiser might miss. The real value is what a buyer can and will pay for it, and the more the process is regulated, the less likely we are to arrive at true value.
HAHAHAHA! Lyn, I loved this post as well as your intro! It's good to see an attorney with a sense of humor along with an ability to articulate the real problems that we are facing in just about every case. Great job!
Best line Lyn..."I fear that Congress is getting its real estate information from a Fannie mae/Freddie mac ventriloquist..." Sad but true. His sense of humor is brilliant. Oh wait...throw in this one as well: "Unless someone has planned a credit amnesty day..." (suggested read)
David: It's true, soon there won't be anyone left with a good credit score for one reason or another. Thanks.
Russell: Gary thanks you I'm sure.
Glenn: Agreed, but we need a number to go forward for any progress to happen. Likes and dislikes are subjective but that isn't anything new.
Daniel: Good suggestion but I'm sure one might say overkill. It's from an appraisers perspective which might be the fairest way to go about valuation but it would obviously be 3 times as costly. Just another reason to complain instead of coming up with a solution to a fair market value. Great input.
Funny, all of a sudden I'm in the mood for fried chicken . . . and about your post, I'm so glad you're keeping us up-tp-date with Gary's writing. He's a unique individual for keeping this up. It's not a unique situation to your area however. Great voice!!