What stigma of foreclosure?

From WSJ:

After Foreclosures, Home Buyers Are Back

The housing industry is slowly seeing the return of buyers like Rick LeBlanc, who lost his Michigan home to foreclosure during the financial crisis but now qualifies for a mortgage again.

Mr. LeBlanc, a 46-year-old residential-construction manager, fell behind on his $1,400 monthly mortgage payments in 2007 after suffering a 20% pay cut. He had tried to sell the property before moving to Florida for a new job. With no takers, he took on renters. But with $225,000 owed on the Highland, Mich., property, he and his wife eventually lost it to foreclosure in 2008.

In the years since, Mr. LeBlanc says he was turned down for car loans and credit cards. His credit ruined, he learned to live without debt and to pay for his family’s expenses with cash.

Then last year, with the foreclosure behind him, he found himself with a near-clean credit slate. The LeBlancs were able to purchase a four-bedroom ranch in St. Augustine Beach, Fla., after borrowing just under $300,000 with a 30-year mortgage carrying a fixed interest rate of about 4.4% from Directors Financial Group, a mortgage lender and broker.

More than five million American families lost their homes to foreclosure between 2007—the year when the crisis kicked up—through the end of last year. Foreclosures and most negative credit events stay on credit reports for up to seven years. For those who lost their homes in the early years of the crisis, credit scores are improving as the black marks drop away, improving their ability to borrow again. This could have widespread implications for the U.S. economy, including a boost in demand for mortgages in the coming years.

Fair Isaac Corp., which developed the widely used FICO credit scores, estimates that there were 910,000 consumers whose credit reports showed they had foreclosure proceedings begin on their homes between October 2007 and October 2008. Of those, some 264,400 had no evidence of the event on their credit reports by last October. That number will rise by up to 645,600 by the end of this year, according to FICO.

“The dark shadow of the foreclosure crisis is finally beginning to fade,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, a unit of Moody’s Corp. “That should be a positive for single-family housing and, by extension, for the broader economy.”

This entry was posted in Foreclosures, Housing Recovery, Risky Lending. Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to What stigma of foreclosure?

  1. Mike says:

    Good Morning New Jersey

  2. ccb223 says:

    Damn it

  3. Essex says:

    Fukc those deadbeats.

  4. D-FENS says:

    They are not economically viable.

  5. anon (the good one) says:

    we bailed out banks and protected the bonus of bankers, we should pay the 15% d/p for a new house of those who lost their house during the financial crisis

    “The dark shadow of the foreclosure crisis is finally beginning to fade,” says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, a unit of Moody’s Corp. “That should be a positive for single-family housing and, by extension, for the broader economy.”

  6. yome says:

    If this guy was able to buy another home after a foreclosure, the banks or the collection agency never went after the deficiency?

  7. Fast Eddie says:

    we bailed out banks and protected the bonus of bankers, we should pay the 15% d/p for a new house of those who lost their house during the financial crisis

    Who’s “we?” We should pay. Who is the “we” that you mention? And for those of us that worked, invested, saved and acted responsibly, what do “we” get? If “we” give a handout to those that “lost” their home, what benefit should “we” receive?

  8. D-FENS says:

    Let them both go bankrupt. For more information, See post 4.

  9. D-FENS says:

    You guys hear that the SC cop who shot the guy in the back was from Jersey originally?

  10. A Home Buyer says:

    7 – Eddie

    I thought that was pretty obvious. Your “we” receives the bill so his “we” can get the free house.

    We know you have the extra cash to spare. Stop being such a miser.

  11. grim says:

    Deficiency? Yeah right.

  12. grim says:

    Isn’t the statute of limitations of a deficiency judgement for foreclosure something like 3 months in NJ?

  13. Gulman says:

    Hey guys – Just joined this site. Been lurking for years, lots of good info on here. We have a bit of a unusual situation…

    We are in attorney review to buy a house. Originally the realtor was acting as a dual agent but the seller got uncomfortable and we now have our own realtor. While she was acting as dual agent she disclosed to me that the house is being taxed on a much smaller lot than what’s deeded. She said not to make anything of it, the town will never find out… The admin in the tax assessors office gave me what they know to be the lot dimensions which is about three times smaller than the surveyed lot.

    My attorney suggested taking this up with the tax assessor himself because we could be liable on taxes in arears if we buy the house. Anyone ever run into this before?

  14. Anon E. Moose says:

    SX [3];

    Fukc those deadbeats.

    Considering doing just that…

  15. grim says:

    13 – I question why your attorney would not be handling this as a matter of course. You shouldn’t be needing to decide what to do, and for sure your attorney shouldn’t be giving you direction to do something (vs doing it himself).

    Honestly, I’d spill the beans to the tax assessor, tell them the story outright, right now. It was disclosed to you, you disclose it to them. Who cares if you are screwing the current owner, c’est la vie.

    If it’s a problem, better on the table now than 3 months after you close.

    No way you would be liable for taxes in arrears, I see no precedent for that, especially considering this is an error.

    My bigger concern is the deed at this point. Are you sure you are buying what you think you are buying? I don’t care what the survey says, it’s the chain of title and previous surveys that are more important here. Current survey could be in error, maybe the last survey was in error, maybe the lot you are buying is what the assessor has on file?

  16. Juice Box says:

    re # 13 – When is the last time the town did a REVALUATION?
    They are supposed to check everything when they do.

    Find your tax map here and check it for yourself.

    http://njgin.state.nj.us/oit/gis/NJ_TaxListSearch/

  17. Xolepa says:

    Back to deadbeats:
    My wife has a friend. She is an RN and is living in a decent sized townhome in Sayreville area. Hasn’t paid her mortgage/taxes in 6 years. They have not gone after her yet. BTW, she is making good money, $56 hourly at a major hospital.

  18. Xolepa says:

    (17) No she states she has no money. She vacations several times each year.

  19. Juice Box says:

    Oh by the way the tax map is a great way too identify who is a suburban farmer.

    Check out this one, he pays only $130 a year in taxes for his prime 6.5 acre waterfront lot.

    https://www13.state.nj.us/pls/nj_public/f?p=TAXLIST:12:2903221132480033::NO::PAMS_PIN_MAP,P12_TAX_YEAR:1332_885_8.01_QFARM,2014

  20. Juice Box says:

    Media has been slamming Christie lately. Methinks he might be sitting out this election cycle.

  21. Gulman says:

    Thanks Grim and Juice Box.

    Re 15: I’ll pass this back to my attorney. I had a feeling he is being lazy. I have already contacted the tax assessor via email. Apparently he is away for spring break.

    Re 16: I don’t see where they mention revaluation on the website you linked although I could be missing it. This link is great because I can see the neighbor’s taxes. There is definitely something amiss. The land on the map is bigger and butts up to the lake where the neighbor’s properties don’t and the land is visibily smaller. The lot sizes listed don’t make sense. Also taxes are the same or more than the house in question.

  22. Anon E. Moose says:

    Juice [20];

    He may decide discretion is the better part of valor this time. But is that a cause or effect of the media coverage? The only candidate left of Lenin that the media doesn’t slam is one who is dead or one who has readily apparent flaws and therefore they believe they can soundly beat (Consider the media praise last cycle for Huntsman). The media and the left (not to be redundant) telegraph what they are afraid of by what they attack most vehemently (e.g., Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas).

    If anything, CC’s weakness is that he doesn’t appeal to enough of the Republican base to survive the primaries, especially the early ones, and build the momentum necessary to capture the nomination. Giuliani proved that you can’t just phone in the early primaries, then start your campaign in earnest when they come to your home turf in the northeast when you will have the favorite son advantage working in your favor.

  23. Sima says:

    Grim: How about a lot(property) that is correctly marked and surveyed on all town maps and homeowner surveys (including when the property was sold), but somehow when the area of the lot was calculated the town assessor was lazy?

    I know of a local property where there have been 2 town assessments/appraisals over the years and both times the assessor calculated the lot size by using the length of the lot times the front curb width of the lot which said the lot was .26 acres. But in reality the lot is pie-shaped and double the width in the back of the lot – so it is .45 acres.
    Is there a penalty or back taxes owed there?

  24. The Great Pumpkin says:

    THERE IS no denying it: Climate-change deniers are in retreat. What began as a subtle shift away from the claim that man-made global warming is not a threat to the planet has lately turned into a stampede. The latest attempt to deny denial comes from the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council, a powerful group that pushes for states to pass laws that are often drafted by industry. As my Washington Post colleagues Tom Hamburger, Joby Warrick and Chris Mooney report, ALEC is not only insisting that it doesn’t deny climate change — it’s threatening to sue those who suggest otherwise.

    The group, which suffered the highly visible defection of Google because of its global-warming stance and an exodus of other top corporate members, sent letters to Common Cause and the League of Conservation Voters instructing them to “remove all false or misleading material” alleging that ALEC questions global-warming theory.

    The problem for ALEC is that as recently as 2013, it was still reaffirming “model legislation” calling on states to consider “legitimate and scientifically defensible alternative hypotheses” to the “mainstream scientific positions” on climate. The proposed legislation stated that there is “a great deal of scientific uncertainty” about the matter and suggested that states treat possible beneficial effects of carbon “in an evenhanded manner.”

    The turnabout at ALEC follows an about-face at the Heartland Institute, a libertarian outfit that embraces a description of it as “the world’s most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.”

    But on Christmas Eve, Justin Haskins, a blogger and editor at Heartland, penned an article for the conservative journal Human Events declaring: “The real debate is not whether man is, in some way, contributing to climate change; it’s true that the science is settled on that point in favor of the alarmists.”

    Extreme position

    Haskins called it “a rather extreme position to say that we ought to allow dangerous pollutants to destroy the only planet we know of that can completely sustain human life,” and he suggested work on “technologies that can reduce CO2 emissions without destroying whole economies.”

    To be sure, this is a tactical retreat, and you shouldn’t expect conservative groups to start lining up in favor of a carbon tax. Rather, they’re resorting to more defensible arguments that don’t make them sound like flat-earthers. My Post colleagues quoted energy lobbyist Scott Segal saying that “the science issue just isn’t as salient as it once was.” Instead, Segal talks about the cost and viability of proposed regulations.

    It’s likely no coincidence that the shift is occurring as the Obama administration approaches a June target to finalize rules on power-plant emissions. Those who oppose regulation are wise to abandon a position that holds little public appeal; a healthy majority of Americans accepts that global warming is real, and a New York Times poll earlier this year found that even half of Republicans support government action to address it.

    More and more conservative officeholders are embracing the “I am not a scientist” agnosticism on climate change rather than skepticism. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, House Speaker John Boehner and potential presidential candidates Bobby Jindal and Marco Rubio have adopted this response, and Rubio has joined Mitt Romney and Chuck Grassley in embracing the less assailable position that U.S. efforts to restrict carbon are pointless without similar efforts across the globe.

    Certainly, figures such as Senate Environment Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (who calls man-made warming a “hoax”) and presidential candidate Ted Cruz (who fancies himself a modern-day Galileo opposing the “global-warming alarmists”) are not about to change. But as corporations abandon the untenable position of denial, ideologues will be forced to do the same.

    Conflict of interest

    Southern Co., an operator of coal-fired power plants, decided to drop funding for a Smithsonian scientist who challenged climate-change theory but failed to disclose that his work was funded by fossil-fuel interests. ALEC’s declining skepticism also comes as even oil companies such as Occidental Petroleum and BP quit the group.

    At ALEC’s December meeting, a climate-change contrarian got applause for declaring in his presentation that “carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is a benefit. It is the very elixir of life.”

    For politicians and climate-denial groups, the elixir of life is money. Now that corporations are becoming reluctant to bankroll crazy theories, the surrender of climate-change deniers will follow.

    Dana Milbank writes for The Washington Post.

    http://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-guest-writers/climate-change-deniers-in-retreat-1.1304531

  25. The Great Pumpkin says:

    These are the people that should be lined up and shot. If everyone acted like them, there would be no society to speak of. What a deadbeat. Prob brags about getting over on the system to people not realizing that these people want to smash her face in. My taxes are higher because you are not paying bitch!!

    Xolepa says:
    April 9, 2015 at 10:20 am
    Back to deadbeats:
    My wife has a friend. She is an RN and is living in a decent sized townhome in Sayreville area. Hasn’t paid her mortgage/taxes in 6 years. They have not gone after her yet. BTW, she is making good money, $56 hourly at a major hospital.

  26. anon (the good one) says:

    also, you will see a huge line of limousines in front of the welfare office with people picking up their checks. i saw it on the drudge report

    Xolepa says:
    April 9, 2015 at 10:21 am
    (17) No she states she has no money. She vacations several times each year.

  27. The Great Pumpkin says:

    Fair share, huh? It will take him 132 years at this current rate to pay what I payed in taxes for this year (17,200). Not even including my other property taxes. What a joke. Can’t tax the ultra rich, they are taxed too much says no one. When people scream that the millionaires are leaving this state due to high taxes, do they count these people in their analysis? Why would this guy ever leave this state? What other state will he pay 130 dollars on 6.5 acre prime waterfront lot?

    Juice Box says:
    April 9, 2015 at 10:23 am
    Oh by the way the tax map is a great way too identify who is a suburban farmer.

    Check out this one, he pays only $130 a year in taxes for his prime 6.5 acre waterfront lot.

    https://www13.state.nj.us/pls/nj_public/f?p=TAXLIST:12:2903221132480033::NO::PAMS_PIN_MAP,P12_TAX_YEAR:1332_885_8.01_QFARM,2014

  28. Juice Box says:

    re: #27 – Drive by the lot some time. There are cows grazing on it.

  29. Juice Box says:

    Plumpkin – His house in on the 8.5 acre lot adjacent. He pays $195,176.00 in taxes on that one.

    Yes I am picking on John Bongiovi the gentleman rocker suburban farmer from New Jersey.

  30. Libturd at home says:

    “we bailed out banks and protected the bonus of bankers, we should pay the 15% d/p for a new house of those who lost their house during the financial crisis”

    Who was in charge when these banks were bailed out? Baa. Just shut the F up Anon.

  31. Juice Box says:

    re #30 – re: Bank Bailouts.

    The victor gets to write the history.

    The Courage to Act:
    by Ben S. Bernanke (Author)

    In 2006, Ben S. Bernanke was appointed chair of the Federal Reserve, capping a meteoric trajectory from a rural South Carolina childhood to professorships at Stanford and Princeton, to public service in Washington’s halls of power. There would be no time to celebrate, however-the burst of the housing bubble in 2007 set off a domino effect that would bring the global financial system to the brink of meltdown. In The Courage to Act, Bernanke pulls back the curtain on his efforts to prevent a mass economic failure, working with two U.S. presidents and using every Fed capability, no matter how arcane, to keep the U.S. economy afloat. His experiences during the initial crisis and the Great Recession that followed give readers an unequaled perspective on the American economy since 2006, and his narrative will reveal for the first time how the creativity and decisiveness of a few key leaders (HIMSELF) prevented an economic collapse of unimaginable scale.

    http://www.amazon.com/Courage-Act-Memoir-Crisis-Aftermath/dp/039324721X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1428595294&sr=1-1&keywords=by+ben+s.+bernanke+courage

  32. D-FENS says:

    This message has been brought to you by the Ready for Hillary 2016 PAC.

    Juice Box says:

    April 9, 2015 at 10:40 am

    Media has been slamming Christie lately. Methinks he might be sitting out this election cycle.

  33. D-FENS says:

    Michael, can you change your handle to the magic blumpkin? I like that better.

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=blumpkin

  34. Libturd at home says:

    Anon,

    If your wife (I’m making a major assumption here that you’re married) cheated on you repeatedly and it was publicly known, would you stick with her? If you said yes, I would find you incredibly weak. This is what the Dems are foolishly asking their base to do in nominating Hilary in the primaries. It is exactly why I think the Dems will lose if she is nominated. Read this over and over again. Eventually it might make some sense to you, but I doubt it. Personally, I wouldn’t want someone with that type of weakness making tough decisions for one of the worlds superpowers. The fact that she rode the coattails of her husband and has zero accomplishments accept a failure to pass healthcare reform just adds to her unelectability. Pretty much, the only thing she is riding on is her husband’s last name. And that couldn’t help Gore. Why would it help Hilary? The Dem’s would be smart to run nearly anyone besides Hilary. But who said Dems were smart?

  35. Juice Box says:

    Hilary – is Teflon nothing sticks.

    You think the whole Cablegate would have brought her down. There is barely a reference to it in her Wikipedia profile, she turned pretty much every diplomat into a spy when she ran the State Dept.

  36. anon (the good one) says:

    @Thooorin:

    “Nah, mate. Clinton said he didn’t even have sex with that woman.”

  37. Libturd at home says:

    Are you referring to Hilary or Bill Anon?

  38. Thomas says:

    24-Pumps

    First the libs railed against “global cooling”, then they made an about face and said we must fight “global warming”, then they decided to cover all bets and fight against “climate change”. What’s next? How about, “we must fight against entropy”!

  39. Liquor Luge says:

    Gary (7)-

    I’ve been saying it here for years: only idiots pay their mortgage.

  40. Liquor Luge says:

    Anyone who runs for president is a fcuktard.

    Pure and simple.

    That is all.

  41. Libturd at home says:

    Clot…I am dominating my FPL made up of a bunch of UK retards. Who would you captain? Kane at home against Aston Villa or Hazard away at Queer Park Rangers?

  42. Essex says:

    40. Gubmint work, decent pension, free lodging and yet everyone since Eisenhower has been a loser.

  43. Marilyn says:

    #3 Essex, I could not have said it better!!!

  44. Marilyn says:

    #16 Juice Box, wow what a cool find!!!

  45. Juice Box says:

    re# 45 – just don’t use it for your property tax appeal. They will only take comp sales, not “my neighbors all pay XX why is mine more” does not work.

  46. FKA 2010 Buyer says:

    The 15 highest-paying companies in America

    Turns out the average employee at the No. 1 company, New York-based law firm Skadden Arps, rakes in over $180,00 a year. That’s nearly four times what the average American earns.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/highest-paying-companies-in-america-2015-4#ixzz3WqY0Bji5

  47. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    grim – I think that is/was correct. I think my bank in the late 80’s came after me 1 or 2 weeks too late and it just took one letter from a lawyer to make them stop.

    Isn’t the statute of limitations of a deficiency judgement for foreclosure something like 3 months in NJ?

  48. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    [47] FKA – So why work at McDonald’s or Starbucks when you could work there?

    Turns out the average employee at the No. 1 company, New York-based law firm Skadden Arps, rakes in over $180,00 a year. That’s nearly four times what the average American earns.

  49. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    [17] X – I don’t know how widespread this is, but this is de rigueur in Morris County, that’s why I bring it up frequently. Just like the original bubble, no one seems to acknowledge that it’s true. Remember back when RealtyTrac actually showed you the houses that were going under? Well, all of a sudden those mortgages are now 6+ years delinquent and they don’t show up anywhere in anybody’s data anymore. The mortgages are still bad, but everyone has just pretended the problem away.

    Back to deadbeats:
    My wife has a friend. She is an RN and is living in a decent sized townhome in Sayreville area. Hasn’t paid her mortgage/taxes in 6 years. They have not gone after her yet. BTW, she is making good money, $56 hourly at a major hospital.

  50. The Original NJ ExPat says:

    Maybe her pants suits, while covering her ample ankles, are infused with Teflon. Alternatively, maybe she is consistently positioned behind the Spooge lines. No blue dresses in her freezer;-)

    Hilary – is Teflon nothing sticks.

  51. yome says:

    She got a free and clear deeded house? Statute of limitation to foreclose in NJ is 6 years.

    Back to deadbeats:
    My wife has a friend. She is an RN and is living in a decent sized townhome in Sayreville area. Hasn’t paid her mortgage/taxes in 6 years. They have not gone after her yet. BTW, she is making good money, $56 hourly at a major hospital.

  52. Comrade Nom Deplume, the loan snark says:

    [47] fKa,

    And let’s not forget the traditional Thursday lunch for attorneys. And we aren’t talking burgers and dogs here.

  53. Liquor Luge says:

    Stu (41)-

    Hazard. He can break that back 4. Sherwood will have Villa pumped to break Kane’s ankles. Villa in good form too.

  54. Liquor Luge says:

    Hell on earth is watching bad Canadian chefs compete in marathon reruns of Chopped Canada.

    Truffle oil combined with maple syrup should have to be registered as a WMD.

  55. dili optim says:

    Throughout this grand pattern of things you actually get a B- with regard to effort. Where you misplaced everybody ended up being on all the particulars. As they say, details make or break the argument.. And that couldn’t be more correct right here. Having said that, permit me reveal to you what did give good results. Your writing is actually really persuasive and this is most likely why I am making the effort to comment. I do not make it a regular habit of doing that. Second, even though I can notice a jumps in reasoning you come up with, I am definitely not certain of just how you appear to unite the points that help to make the actual final result. For now I will yield to your point but hope in the future you actually link your dots much better.

Comments are closed.