Banks taking advantage of higher prices … to foreclose

From Bloomberg:

Foreclosures Jump as Banks Bet on Rising U.S. Home Prices

Home repossessions in the U.S. jumped 11 percent in May after declining for the previous five months as rising prices and limited inventory for sale across the country spurred banks to complete foreclosures.

Lenders took back 38,946 homes, up from 34,997 in April, according to Irvine, California-based data firm RealtyTrac, which tracks notices of default, auction and seizures. Thirty-three states had increases in the number of homes repossessed, RealtyTrac said in a report today.

Banks are more willing to move to the final stage of foreclosure because there is sufficient demand and prices are improving, said Eric Workman of Tinley Park, Illinois-based Mack Cos., which aggregates single-family rental homes and resells them to individuals and institutional investors. U.S. home prices advanced almost 11 percent in the year through March, the biggest 12-month gain since April 2006, according to the S&P/Case-Shiller index of values in 20 cities.

“For a very long period of time, the market in general and specifically banks were unsure of what these assets were valued at,” Workman, vice president of sales and marketing at Mack, said in a telephone interview. “With increasing stability of the economy and housing prices throughout the U.S., these banks and sellers are getting much more comfortable with the value of their properties.”

“Given the shortage of inventory and rising home prices, banks have little motivation to hold back on any foreclosures, so homeowners who have not been making payments for several months or even years without a foreclosure notice should expect to see that notice coming,” Craig King, an agent at the Reno, Nevada-based Chase International brokerage, said in RealtyTrac’s report.

The current pace of home seizures would result in more than a half million repossessions by the end of the year, compared with 671,251 in 2012, RealtyTrac said.

“However, the numbers for 2013 could be higher if the increase in May continues and lenders have a good market to unload distressed inventory,” Blomquist said.

This entry was posted in Economics, Foreclosures. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Banks taking advantage of higher prices … to foreclose

  1. grim says:

    Hear we’re in for some wicked storms and flooding today – Has anyone let NJ Transit know they should be moving all of the excess trains into position in Hoboken?

  2. Bring on the mf’ing derecho.

  3. grim says:

    I think you were the one bemoaning the death of non power assisted steering. Here is a review that goes to the other end.

    Nah, I wouldn’t go that far, it was more about a commentary about most mainstream “drive by wire” systems being numb and lacking the kind of reassuring feedback provided by mechanical systems (even power assisted ones).

    This was the case with the first mainstream “flappy paddle” transmissions, which were glorified slush box automatics with controls that were more like “suggesters” with lags measured in seconds. Only recently has the double clutch/sequential technology that was typically only found in super cars become available on high end cars. Just a few years ago you’d have to spend upwards of $150k to get a paddle shift system that could shift faster than a red-bull fueled kid in a 12 year old manual honda. These things were terrible, and unless you are talking about higher end cars, they still are terrible.

    The technology will probably get better, but the complexity of adding the lost “feedback” back to the driver is going to involve all sorts of servos and actuators (expensive and will cost a fortune to fix) is bordering on silly when you consider the amount of engineering that will go into making a DBW system “feel” like it’s got mechanical linkages.

  4. grim says:

    Most people probably don’t care at all, and the drive by wire systems are probably cheaper than their mechanical counterparts, which is likely why their is so much interest in the systems at the mainstream level.

    I’m not anti-technology, but there is something to be said for the pure mechanical simplicity of the traditional approach. That said, there are clear cases where advanced technology is providing a system that is less complex, and arguably more “pure” (whatever that completely subjective word means), electric motors being a perfect example of that.

    While I’d love to own a GT3 – I’d probably be just as happy driving around in a Subaru BRZ/Scion FR-S (Or a 260/280z).

  5. anon (the good one) says:

    @Nouriel really entertaining to watch all the hyperinflation-is-imminent fools contort in light of being so wrong for so long.

  6. anon (the good one) says:

    WSJ wrote a funny, glowing review of the Subaru BRZ

  7. Anon E. Moose says:

    Anon [5];

    Buffet says he got rich by being too soon rather than too late. Like all those people who wanted to sell in 2005, but waited, then tried to sell from 2007 – 2010… 2011… 2012… 2013… The price of hard assets can change faster than most people can reposition their holdings.

  8. Painhrtz - Disobey! says:

    Grim rather have late 90′s early 2000′s 911. Love what the new cars could do from sheer performaceb ut after driving newer sports cars with paddles just can’t make me switch from a stick for a sports car. That and they are just to nannied up what the hell is the point if you don’t feel like your in a little danger when you drive it.

    One of my friends kids has a brz stick drove it at the edge scared him a little. I think he peed himself, especially when I was drving it sideways through a turn on a dirt road. threw him the keys said it is a little too refined for my tastes, he nearly sh!t.

  9. JJ says:

    My two nieghbors got out Spring 2006 and it took them like six months to get a buyer and got like 15K less than Spring 2005 prices which took a few hours to sell. By Spring 2007 to Spring 2008 it appreared prices were holding up but in reality very few people were buying and finally the listings all got pulled after Lehman, those who sat it out relisted in 2010/2011 and near peak prices and sold at around Spring 2003 Prices

  10. joyce says:

    Fabius
    Last post from yesterday

    How can you say it’s legal when it’s blatantly unconstitutional? I’ll ask a question i’ve asked you many times in the past… Do you understand how this system of govt is supposed to work?

  11. Ottoman says:

    “How can you say it’s legal when it’s blatantly unconstitutional? I’ll ask a question i’ve asked you many times in the past… Do you understand how this system of govt is supposed to work?”

    –Nothing is unconstitutional until the Supreme Court says it is. Doesn’t matter whether you think its obvious.

  12. joyce says:

    14

    First of all you’re wrong for many reasons, one of them being that any level of court can rule something as unconstitutional.

  13. 1987 condo buyer says:

    #5…been watching Jimmy Rogers from the late 1980′s calling for stagflation, he will be right someday!

  14. Painhrtz - Disobey! says:

    Nice reading for those of you who don’t understand this whole NSA kerfuffle as a big deal and why folks like Joyce and I are aghast.

    http://reason.com/archives/2013/06/13/the-nsa-scandal-violates-the-lessons-of

  15. joyce says:

    3 Reasons the ‘Nothing to Hide’ Crowd Should Be Worried About Government Surveillance

    http://reason.com/archives/2013/06/12/three-reasons-the-nothing-to-hide-crowd

  16. Ottoman says:

    “First of all you’re wrong for many reasons, one of them being that any level of court can rule something as unconstitutional.”

    Its funny when you chastise Fabius for being ignorant on the workings of government, then respond with nonsense such as this. Clearly you have no understanding of how the various courts interact with each other.

    The federal district court says Prop 8 is unConstitutional. So why is gay marriage still banned in California? Because SCOTUS has not affirmed, denied, or refused to rule yet. When the judge stayed Arizona’s Papers Please law, why did it have to go to SCOTUS if what you say is true? A lower court can declare something unconstitutional but they are subject to the appeals process and their rulings can be stayed and reversed by a higher court.

    Oh and if a higher court declines to take a case, that’s also them weighing in on it. Seems as though you failed social studies class.

  17. Libtard in Union says:

    My Civic has manual steering. She’s real fun to parallel park with a coffee in your hand.

  18. joyce says:

    21
    Yes, I’m aware of the appeals process. Yes, rulings can be appealed. How does that contradict my statement?

    In Illinois, they passed a state law that filming police is not allowed. It went to State Supreme Court, they said it was unconstitutional. The govt did not appeal. The cops are still arresting people for that. What’s my point? The statement from Andrew Jackson, “[The judge] has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”

    Laws (if they are unconstitutional) are so from the beginning. One of the many checks and balances is that the executive branch (and all its agents) are not supposed to enforce unconstitutional laws. “But I was just following orders!” The fact that they do enforce said laws notwithstanding.

  19. joyce says:

    from Pain’s article:
    Now we know that the feds have seized the telephone records of more than 100 million Americans and the email and texting records of nearly everyone in the U.S. for a few years. They have obtained this under the laws that permit them to do so. These laws — just like the ones that let British soldiers write their own search warrants — were validly enacted, but they are profoundly unconstitutional. They are unconstitutional because they purport to change the clear and direct language in the Constitution, and Congress is not authorized to make those changes.

    These laws undermine the reasons the Constitution was written, one of which was to guarantee the freedom to exercise one’s natural rights. These laws directly contradict the core American value that our rights come from our humanity and may not be legislated away — not by a vote of Congress, not by the consensus of our neighbors, not even by agreement of all Americans but one.

  20. Essex says:

    Hmmmm car talk! Hi all. Been a bit busy lately to check-in but lurking.

    I went to a 5-speed manual tremec transmission which I love. Great linkage. Solid Chunk sound when engaged. Nothing like the fun and control a shifter like that gives.

    The only drawback? the ball of my foot / clutch foot HURTS! So my tennis show wearing days are over at least when I drive. The pedal demands a firm sole or it is brutal.

  21. Essex says:

    make that tennis “shoe” not show….

  22. Essex says:

    Oh BTW, my gut tells me that this is a good ruling….Supreme Court Rules Human Genes May Not Be Patented….! Discuss.

  23. Statler Waldorf says:

    Joe Biden hated domestic surveillance in 2006, when there was a different president…..

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/11/biden-in-2006-dont-count-me-in-on-trusting-nsa-phone-call-surveillance/

    “And, Harry, the bottom line here is: Here you have the president of the United States making a judgment that’s not reviewable by the courts, and not reviewable by the Congress, and we’re supposed to say OK, and they tell us — it’s a little bit like what would happen if the banks turned over all your checking records, without your name, but gave the checking account number and every single purchase you made and pattern of your behavior — and then you were told, ‘Don’t worry, that’s not invasion of your privacy.’ ”

    “Harry, I don’t have to listen to your phone calls to know what you’re doing,” Biden said. “If I know every single phone call you made, I’m able to determine every single person you talk to, I can get a pattern about your life that is very, very intrusive. … If it’s true that 200 million Americans’ phone calls were monitored, in terms of not listening to what they said but to whom they spoke and who spoke to them, I don’t know, the Congress should investigate this.”

    “We have — no one’s arguing whether or not you have the right to go out and tap and go and do everything you need to do to track down al Qaida. That’s not the question here. Years ago, Harry, I was one of those guys that co-sponsored the bill called FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Everyone I’ve spoken to, who’s been briefed on this matter, says that everything that they want to do to deal with al Qaida is able to be done under FISA and maybe with a small amendment to FISA. But this idea that no court will review, no Congress will know, and we’re going to trust the president and the vice president of the United States, that they’re doing the right thing, don’t count me in on that.”

  24. Anon E. Moose says:

    Lib [22];

    Even in the early 90′s a civic had a cup holder.

  25. Libtard in Union says:

    As for the storm, I don’t even think we get 2″ of rain out of it. Though, the possibilities of small tornadoes over Southern Jersey is a distinct possibility. It’s an interesting storm since it has a deep low (usually occurs much later in the year) but could have convection form as it passes through. There could be some big wind gusts and this could knock down some trees as the soil is so saturated that the roots could easily come up. I have to head down to AC after work to take advantage of a very advantageous play. If I swap a stupid kiosk and play $20 on Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday, my comp rates are multiplied as follows each day. 2x, 5x, 10x, and the grand enchilada, 20X. I play a game with a 99.6% return and the comp rate . My comp rate is .1 and my cashback (freeplay) is .08. I can convert my comp into freeplay at a rate of 1.25 comp to 1 or 80%, so technically I earn .16% back without a multiplier. So today I stand to lose 4 cents for every $100 I play. Tomorrow I make .24 for every $100. Saturday, $1.20 for every $100. Sunday, $2.80 for every $100. I won’t play more than the minimum until Sunday morning. On Sunday morning, on the $5 machine, I should earn $420 an hour. (600 hands per hour * $25 per hand = $15,000) . 15,000/100 = 150 X $2.80 = $420. Then there’s the future enticements for playing at that level such as free cruises, free trips, gift cards, etc. I just hope they don’t boot me out of the program. It does happen some times, though I haven’t heard Bally’s do it yet. Whoever said the casino has the advantage simply is not paying attention. Let’s just hope I land on the right side of the bell curve.

  26. Libtard in Union says:

    My cup holder has limited height. It’s good for maybe a 12-ounce paper cup. My favorite trick is to eat an ice-cream sundae while driving. Spoon in the stick hand of course and knees on the wheel. I’ll only do this at 25mph or less.

  27. joyce (11)-

    Gluteus’ tedious and pedantic defense of Bojangles yesterday was one of the most pitiful things I’ve ever read at this blog. And, the centerpiece of his defense was the “Bush started it” meme.

  28. Bojangles is just Bush in blackface. And now, we have proof of it.

  29. Ottoman says:

    23. Joyce-
    “Yes, I’m aware of the appeals process. Yes, rulings can be appealed. How does that contradict my statement?”

    Because any court below SCOTUS ruling that something is unconstitutional does not make it unconstitutional. They’ve provided an opinion on its constitutionality subject to appeal.

    “In Illinois, they passed a state law that filming police is not allowed. It went to State Supreme Court, they said it was unconstitutional.”

    State Supreme Courts are charged with ruling on the constitutionality of laws against their own state Constitution, not the US Constitution. Their interpretation of the US Constitution, should they have one, is still subject and appealable to the US Supreme Court. However, a state law thought to be unconstitutional per the US Constitution would be brought in federal court not state court.

    “Laws (if they are unconstitutional) are so from the beginning.”

    In 1986, sodomy laws were constitutional according to the US Supreme Court. In 2003, sodomy laws were unconstitutional according to the US Supreme Court. What wording in the US Constitution changed between 1986 and 2003 to reflect this?

    “One of the many checks and balances is that the executive branch (and all its agents) are not supposed to enforce unconstitutional laws.”

    They’re not unconstitutional until SCOTUS says so and the legislature and the executive branch fight it out in court (that’s another “check and balance” for ya).

  30. lib (31)-

    Wake me up when they build a car that has an Everclear dispenser.

  31. joyce says:

    34

    16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256:
    The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be In agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail. This is succinctly stated as follows:
    - The General rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it’s enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed.

  32. JJ says:

    Porsche started rustproofing their cars using modern techniques in 1976, older ones unless from out west are rust buckets.

    The best 911/s are from last 70s to early 80s. Back when you can actually drive the car. Stuff like anti-lock brakes, airbags, electric windows, heated seats, all slow down car.

    A real driver does not want anti-lock brakes as they are dangerous. They are ment for novice drivers, things such as drifting on a high powered turn you do on oval track racing, also airbags who needs that blowing up in your face.

    Caddie for instance during recession introduced a bare bones model they took away. Now you can only get them loaded. Last year made 2011. That year you could buy a stripped Caddie CTS with non leather seats, manual seats, no GPS etc. You could get a stick and the big engine. Lighter and less nonsense and rear wheel drive. That is a driving car you dont see anymore, Caddie dont even make them.

    My last real driving car was my 1976 CJ7. It was ordered with no options except the V8 Levis kit. It had manual brakes, manual non hyrdrolic three speed shift, manual steering. No AC, No Heat, No Radio, no air bags, no antilock, you could fold down windshield have no doors or roof and just tie your labbelt on and go. That baby with you shifted in fourwheel drive with a V8 and four large tires I smoked a corvette with a four wheel burnout. Cars weighing under 3,000 pounds with a V8 and four wheel drive are a deadly combination.

    I drove in a 1973 yellow porsche once pre cat convert nonsense and man that was fun to drive.

    My old 1969 plymouth years ago on Austin Blvd in Island Park where folks used to drag race when I was 19 I smoked a guy in a brand new Vette even though I gave him a ten foot head start. The cars with no options and no cat convertors jammed with big V8s back in the day could smoke a 100K car today. Once I was in a 1971 Buick GS Stage 1 with five in the car and we pinned it at 140mph. And it had 100K miles on it. Not many Buick GS Stage 1s left, they were crazy crazy fast. No much of a collector car in the 1980s and most ended up around a tree.

    Painhrtz – Disobey! says:
    June 13, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Grim rather have late 90′s early 2000′s 911. Love what the new cars could do from sheer performaceb ut after driving newer sports cars with paddles just can’t make me switch from a stick for a sports car. That and they are just to nannied up what the hell is the point if you don’t feel like your in a little danger when you drive it.

    One of my friends kids has a brz stick drove it at the edge scared him a little. I think he peed himself, especially when I was drving it sideways through a turn on a dirt road. threw him the keys said it is a little too refined for my tastes, he nearly sh!t.

  33. Anon E. Moose says:

    Sx [27];

    Yeah, yeah.. patent == big business == EEEEE-VIL, big Pharma even more so, ergo striking down DNA patents held by big pharma must be good, right?

    The court held that isolated DNA – locating which gene does what and separating it from the rest of the DNA strand, is not patentable because it is a product of nature. The booby prize for the biotech company is that the cDNA molecule, which is different than the isolated DNA segment, and a specifically constructed molecule, is patentable.

    There’s a joke about two brothers visiting a lawyer. They sit in in the lawyer’s office, every wall lined with shelves and every shelf filled with books. As the brothers leave, one says to the other “He’s not so smart. All the answers are in those books.” The other replies “Yeah, but he knows which one to look in to find it.” So what good is it to say that the DNA molecule exists in nature when the useful contribution was finding and isolating the portion of a much greater whole that was of particular interest? You want DNA? You’ve got all you could ever need literally at your fingertips. What are you going to do with it?

    The best thing about today’s Myriad opinion is that it says what it has to say in a few relatively intelligible pages. Kudos to Thomas’ clerks.

  34. Fabius Maximus says:

    #32 Clot
    This was the most pitiful thing ever written on this blog. http://njrereport.com/index.php/2011/10/23/few-takers-for-flooded-jersey-homes/#comment-485439

    I keep for getting how some people here give GWB a pass for his years in office.

  35. Juice Box says:

    Coworker just sold his place via my realtor, my recommendation etc. House listed one day no MLS and they are now under contract full asking price. Should I at least hit up my realtor up for a bottle of the good stuff? Should I expect a thank you from my realtor? That is two full boat commissions in only a few short months. Repeat business is cheap but only if you take care of your customers.

    What does it take to cut myself in on this action? I could have gotten what 2% for just a 75 hour course and pass a multiple choice test?

    I can see why Grim has two or three careers and will be renting out his basement to illegal aliens. I might as well start another career after all of the time I have spent here on this blog I can probably sell a few houses ever year, and figure out how to illegally rent out my basement to some guest workers that will fix up my place for under $35k.

  36. raging bull jj says:

    I thought you got your house below market which ment the realtor lost some commission selling to you rather than someone full price. So now you did that person a solid.

    Juice Box says:
    June 13, 2013 at 4:05 pm
    Coworker just sold his place via my realtor, my recommendation etc. House listed one day no MLS and they are now under contract full asking price. Should I at least hit up my realtor up for a bottle of the good stuff? Should I expect a thank you from my realtor? That is two full boat commissions in only a few short months. Repeat business is cheap but only if you take care of your customers.

    What does it take to cut myself in on this action? I could have gotten what 2% for just a 75 hour course and pass a multiple choice test?

    I can see why Grim has two or three careers and will be renting out his basement to illegal aliens. I might as well start another career after all of the time I have spent here on this blog I can probably sell a few houses ever year, and figure out how to illegally rent out my basement to some guest workers that will fix up my place for under $35k.

  37. joyce says:

    If anyone is doing that (giving him a pass), then they are as wrong as you. Why can’t we call them both criminals? Stop projecting; it is you who is giving someone a pass right now.

    42.Fabius Maximus says:
    June 13, 2013 at 3:49 pm
    #32 Clot
    This was the most pitiful thing ever written on this blog. http://njrereport.com/index.php/2011/10/23/few-takers-for-flooded-jersey-homes/#comment-485439

    I keep for getting how some people here give GWB a pass for his years in office.

  38. gluteus (37)-

    Deflect and straw man. You should really develop an actual defense for your half-baked ideas.

    I think you can go through my non-footballing posts from the Bush years and see that I certainly cut him no slack.

    Still hate the Arse Wanker, though.

  39. And Bojangles is still GWB in blackface.

  40. chicagofinance says:

    really great……I wonder what % were drunk?

    Brian says:
    June 13, 2013 at 3:44 pm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itMdLTd1l4E

  41. AG says:

    New FEMA flood maps coming out. Those that gambled on revised V zones win.

    Those that bet against the shore lose.

    That being said. It all end in tears. Bail out = bail in. If you have a bank account then you are an unsecured creditor to that bank. When was the last time you checked your banks balance sheet? Mark to market? LMAO. You need to be a forensic accountant to figure that crap out.

    I told you they will be coming for your retirement accounts. They will be in the form of forced debt purchases. Consider yourself lucky if they dont take your liquid assets right out of your bank account and give you shares instead.

    Maybe the CIA should keep a closer eye on this blog aye?

    By the way. Shoulder Fired.

  42. chicagofinance says:

    WSJ Opinion……

    Some of the reaction to the NSA story is said to be generational. The young are said not to fear losing privacy, because they never knew it. The middle-aged, who grew up in peace and have families, want safety first, whatever it takes, even excess. Lately for wisdom I’ve been looking to the old. Go to somebody who’s 75 and ask, “So if it turns out the U.S. government is really spying on American citizens and tracking everything they do, is that OK with you?” They’ll likely say no, that’s not what we do in America.