"Our journey is not complete"Obama says

[dan991]

No it's not so much that, I would rather rent it out purchase another property and use it as an investment home over my lifetime. I'm sure it will pay the mtg, I'll recoup my loss plus cont collecting rent but my situation I have a long time horizon

But why not just dump it, buy two or three more which will add up to what you owe on the existing? Then rent two and live in one. Now you own 3 places. Finding the funding isn't that difficult because you can easily qualify to buy 3 of them and then dump yours the day after closing.

[dan991]

[dan991]

Ehhh without getting into too much detail and bore the shit out of people. I am a loan officer. I have been doing this for over 10 years. Both parties have made some serious mistakes but the bottom line is both parties are owned by Wall Street. I am no where near as smart as osme of these guys out there and I knew the shit was going to hit the fan in 2008. The loan programs got worse and worse and you knew the banks were looking to bundle and sell as much as we could put together que credit swaps derivitives etc but the interesting part was the one sided reform the dodd frank presented giving power back to the banks.

Anyhow I saw the writing on the wall and when the shit hit the fan I diversified into purchase business and reverse mortgages. While everyone was trying to squeeze out those last sub prime loans I went in a new direction. Reverse Mortgage has now become the new sub prime loan and Wall Street has just helped bankrupt FHA through the reverse mortgage program. There will be a bail out needed for FHA one day its just under whose watch and who the blame will be put on is what is interesting.

Hi Satan!!!!

[Rwy]

A second mtg ie. a home equit loan or line or credit ( which converts to a Heloan after a certain duration) can not exceed 80 percent loan to value in majority of cases.

ok you mean on a refinance

[Rwy]

Hi Satan!!!!

[ElectraMaddox]

Ehhh without getting into too much detail and bore the shit out of people. I am a loan officer. I have been doing this for over 10 years. Both parties have made some serious mistakes but the bottom line is both parties are owned by Wall Street. I am no where near as smart as osme of these guys out there and I knew the shit was going to hit the fan in 2008. The loan programs got worse and worse and you knew the banks were looking to bundle and sell as much as we could put together que credit swaps derivitives etc but the interesting part was the one sided reform the dodd frank presented giving power back to the banks.

Anyhow I saw the writing on the wall and when the shit hit the fan I diversified into purchase business and reverse mortgages. While everyone was trying to squeeze out those last sub prime loans I went in a new direction. Reverse Mortgage has now become the new sub prime loan and Wall Street has just helped bankrupt FHA through the reverse mortgage program. There will be a bail out needed for FHA one day its just under whose watch and who the blame will be put on is what is interesting.

Plus I notice now a lot of retirees are in the need of reverse mtgs. It a lot more common. I think so too, the Ginnie maes are backed and FHA has to have pmi bc it only requires 3.5 percent down. I think if there is a lot of defaults then yeah that could be hideious.

Dodd frank I believe it does the opposite how do you figure?

I'm out for night Gnight

[ElectraMaddox]

ok you mean on a refinance

Yes!

[dan991]

[frank13]

-Passed health care reform ( I think this country absolutely needs health care reform, but I opt for universal healthcare plan for everyone in the US, something like Australia has would be perfect in my opinion)
-Passed stimulus (Signed $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009 to spur economic growth amid greatest recession since the Great Depression- thanks BUSH)
- Passed Wall Street Reforme- Which is needed because I think wall street rapes the people of America daily
-Ended war in Iraq
-starting to get out of Afghanistan
-Eliminated Osama
-Turned US Auto industry around
-Recapitalized banks (In the midst of financial crisis, approved controversial Treasury Department plan to lure private capital into the country’s largest banks via “stress tests” of their balance sheets and a public-private fund to buy their “toxic” assets. Got banks back on their feet at essentially zero cost to the government.)
-Don't ask don't tell was repealed which is a huge step with social change in this country
-Toppled Moammar Gaddafi
-Told Mubarak to Go
-Reversed Bush Torture Policies
-Improved America’s Image Abroad (IMPORTANT)
-Kicked Banks Out of Federal Student Loan Program, Expanded Pell Grant Spending
-Created Race to the Top (With funds from stimulus, started $4.35 billion program of competitive grants to encourage and reward states for education reform.)
-Boosted fuel efficiency standards (I think that was smart considering one day our dependent asses will be out of oil)
- Passed mini stimulus
-He increased Department of Veteran Affairs budget, also signed new GI bill with billions of more dollars in tuition assistance to vets
- tightened sanctions on Iran
-Clean Energy!!! (began shutting down dirty power plants... this did cost jobs... and beside solar and wind energy, most ways of making energy are horribly dirty)
-Passed credit card reforms (makes credit card companies notify you before increasing rates/fees)
-Expanded National Service
-Expanded wilderness and watershed protection (I love that he did this, I am an avid outdoors person)
-Pushed federal agencies to be green leaders
-Is crafting next generation school tests because the way the US teached their kids is an absolute joke... Hence the reason why we are not even in the top 15 smartest countries
-cracked down on bad for-profit schools... A lot of thee online schools you see commercials for on TV are not even accredited by the states in which their schools are in
- Improved school nutrition
-hate crimes protection
-expanded healthcare coverage for children
-expanded stem cell research
-provided payment to wronged minority farmers


I think he is doing a lot of things right in this country, obviously within the last 3 decades there has been a large shift and a polarization of parties. People are split now more than ever, which I think is dangerous. Politics are getting crazy. I am happy he is taking a stand on social issues in America. I love that he supports the LGBT community and equal rights for all, I like that he is trying to fix our FVCKED up healthcare system... NO ONE should have to lose everything because of medical bills... I still think he could do better when it comes to the health care system, but at least he is trying to do something. It is nearly impossible for anything to get pushed through congress or the house.

yes obama is the man in your face obama for king king obama

[frank13]

and gixxer for vice president 2016 gix obama

[dan991]

yes obama is the man in your face obama for king king obama

I agree... he saved all 18,000 employee's at GM and 12,000 at Chrysler with his auto bail outs. Who cares about the 86K that lost jobs at suppliers because GM and Chrysler stiffed them on the bill. I mean we can source our parts in China- who needs a small mirror supplier in MI anyways.....

[dan991]

and gixxer for vice president 2016 gix obama

I wouldn't go THAT far... I think you have to be at least 5 feet tall to run for President anyways....

[frank13]

over all hes not that bad im mean u could have a crazy mormon with magic underwear as President and something tells me that would have not ended well

[Rwy]

Plus I notice now a lot of retirees are in the need of reverse mtgs. It a lot more common. I think so too, the Ginnie maes are backed and FHA has to have pmi bc it only requires 3.5 percent down. I think if there is a lot of defaults then yeah that could be hideious.

Dodd frank I believe it does the opposite how do you figure?

I'm out for night Gnight

There are two types of reverse mortgage programs.

There is a fixed rate (lump sum all cash at closing which means huge neg am loss of equity) and adjustable rate(monthly tenure payment or line of credit only accruing interest on what you borrow) this keeps most equity in the program.

Before we move forward which program is the senior going to choose based on their life experience. Ok moving forward we are given a rate sheet and the YSP (which is the % the bank pays us for doing these loans) on the fixed (depending on your arrangement with the bank) is 11% and the adjustable anywhere from 4-5.5% depending on the margin that is set.

So lets say the loan for a reverse mortgage in NYC is 400K and you sold them the fixed rate you are making $44,000 for one loan. Yes you read that correctly. The same loan as an adjustable is 16,000-20,000 and thats only if they with drew everything they qualified for. Now which program do you think most loan officers are going to sell? The reason these payouts are so high is because Wall Street started to realize buying the reverse mbs are the safest and best bet on the street so they drove up the price over the past few years from 2% to 11%

Now I am in this for the long hall. I am licensed in 5 different states. State exams for each and a federal exam must be take and passed in order to work in the state. I have continuing education each year and I get bent over for licensing fees form each state. My total this year was $3000. Next year when its my office that number doubles to $6000.

Here is the really great part under Dodd Frank if you work for Chase, BOA, Citi, Wells Fargo or a credit union (basically any place you can deposit money in aka have lobbying power) you are exempt from licensing. So that means Sally the teller at chase can start selling mortgage with no experience. Now obviously the major banks are going to over see things a little but tougher since they are getting sued left and right but what about the credit unions. Do you know how many people have started selling reverse mortgages that have zero experience that work for credit unions bc they have heard about the size of the commissions?

Thus the reverse mortgage which is such a great tool is now being put under huge governmental reform bc these ****ing losers have no idea what they are doing or they let the banks fest for a bit.

So lets bring this back to my example and how FHA will be bankrupt. IN the past year 85% of all reverse mortgages have been the fixed rate. So if you take a 400k loan for a 62 year old person who lives to 92 can you imagine what the balance is going to look like? Well I will tell you. Its going to be around 2.5 million dollars. So now when that home owner dies and the reverse is due obviously there is no way the sale of the house is going to cover 2.5 million. at a 4% appreciate on the property (which is unrealistically positive) the value is said to be around 1.7 million. Now that -800,000 (and thats if the value is truly 1.6) is paid for by FHA.

Can you imagine how bankrupt FHA is going to be and who is going to bail them out?

[dan991]

over all hes not that bad im mean u could have a crazy mormon with magic underwear as President and something tells me that would have not ended well

That's 2016 or 2020 after the aliens take over.

[frank13]

who do u think would be more sympathetic towards steroids use anyways democrats or republicans

[canesfan804]

Couldn't agree more!
Health care bill is costing people with jobs more money!

And wait he is changed the secret service protection for presidents after there terms ended. Thats going to cost us MILLIONS. but he had good reason, we have had a lot of presidents killed after being in office.

Hejust changed the secret service program back to what it was. Bush was the only President that would have been affected by the initial change.

[dan991]

There are two types of reverse mortgage programs.

There is a fixed rate (lump sum all cash at closing which means huge neg am loss of equity) and adjustable rate(monthly tenure payment or line of credit only accruing interest on what you borrow) this keeps most equity in the program.

Before we move forward which program is the senior going to choose based on their life experience. Ok moving forward we are given a rate sheet and the YSP (which is the % the bank pays us for doing these loans) on the fixed (depending on your arrangement with the bank) is 11% and the adjustable anywhere from 4-5.5% depending on the margin that is set.

So lets say the loan for a reverse mortgage in NYC is 400K and you sold them the fixed rate you are making $44,000 for one loan. Yes you read that correctly. The same loan as an adjustable is 16,000-20,000 and thats only if they with drew everything they qualified for. Now which program do you think most loan officers are going to sell? The reason these payouts are so high is because Wall Street started to realize buying the reverse mbs are the safest and best bet on the street so they drove up the price over the past few years from 2% to 11%

Now I am in this for the long hall. I am licensed in 5 different states. State exams for each and a federal exam must be take and passed in order to work in the state. I have continuing education each year and I get bent over for licensing fees form each state. My total this year was $3000. Next year when its my office that number doubles to $6000.

Here is the really great part under Dodd Frank if you work for Chase, BOA, Citi, Wells Fargo or a credit union (basically any place you can deposit money in aka have lobbying power) you are exempt from licensing. So that means Sally the teller at chase can start selling mortgage with no experience. Now obviously the major banks are going to over see things a little but tougher since they are getting sued left and right but what about the credit unions. Do you know how many people have started selling reverse mortgages that have zero experience that work for credit unions bc they have heard about the size of the commissions?

Thus the reverse mortgage which is such a great tool is now being put under huge governmental reform bc these ****ing losers have no idea what they are doing or they let the banks fest for a bit.

So lets bring this back to my example and how FHA will be bankrupt. IN the past year 85% of all reverse mortgages have been the fixed rate. So if you take a 400k loan for a 62 year old person who lives to 92 can you imagine what the balance is going to look like? Well I will tell you. Its going to be around 2.5 million dollars. So now when that home owner dies and the reverse is due obviously there is no way the sale of the house is going to cover 2.5 million. at a 4% appreciate on the property (which is unrealistically positive) the value is said to be around 1.7 million. Now that -800,000 (and thats if the value is truly 1.6) is paid for by FHA.

Can you imagine how bankrupt FHA is going to be and who is going to bail them out?

The government... they have Amex Black! Hell, we bail everyone out except for our own citizens. Those stupid people just get a small 0.5% tax increase because they won't notice it anyways.... its only a few bucks per American.

[dan991]

who do u think would be more sympathetic towards steroids use anyways democrats or republicans

Doesn't matter.. its not on the radar because "there are bigger fish to fry". Its just like marijuana.

[Rwy]

My point is Wall Street runs shit.

I didnt vote for obama this year and I really dont know why. From a career persepctive under him i made more money then I know what to do with and bc of health care reform I got a 40k surgery that was once considered a pre exsisting condition paid for by insurance

[canesfan804]

Ah ha... so its a morals thing.... you don't want to be "Ms. Bad Credit" and you're willing to eat the money on your own. Unfortunately- you're the only one that is gonna pay for it.... which bring us back to accountability... because these banks that wrote these mortgages don't give two shits. Not only did they not care when they wrote them; they don't care now selling these houses for pennies on the dollar of the original mortgage or approving the short sale. They have insurance to fall back on and for the home owner; its either a cock in the ass to go with your morals or you dump it to join the bad credit crowd and find something better for less money.

Its called CHARACTER Dan which by the way you are talking to a female I doubt you have any.

[dan991]

Its called CHARACTER Dan which by the way you are talking to a female I doubt you have any.

Like I said.... your "character" is gonna give you an over priced place to live that you're stuck with and a big fat cock in your ass.

[frank13]

[canesfan804]

At the end of the day I will be able to say I did my best to do what is right. I have been blessed over the last 12-13 years to do alright in buying and selling my homes but I wasnt looking to get rich off the other guy. I do believe in reap what you sow.

[canesfan804]

He's a retired Chiropractor..... he has money. What he's not is stupid. He's 50 years old and he's not making anything anymore other than social security or whatever. The more money you have- the cheaper you get. Just because he lives in a $600K home doesn't mean that its relative because he's a cheap skate. Again- I don't blame him a bit and I'd do the same thing.

So hes a retired Chiropractor and has no retirement? Or is that what whatever is? Also drawing SS at 50 huh.... I thought you couldnt draw until 60 on SS and thats with a hell of a penalty.

[dan991]

At the end of the day I will be able to say I did my best to do what is right. I have been blessed over the last 12-13 years to do alright in buying and selling my homes but I wasnt looking to get rich off the other guy. I do believe in reap what you sow.

Congrats to you and your under water house? We won't be alive to reap anything at this pace. At the end of the day you're dead and your kids won't want your house because its not worth the debt.

[dan991]

So hes a retired Chiropractor and has no retirement? Or is that what whatever is? Also drawing SS at 50 huh.... I thought you couldnt draw until 60 on SS and thats with a hell of a penalty.

I don't know what he has for retirement. Dude is retired and loaded. He has half a million in cars in the garage; doubt he's worried about social security regardless of when he gets it.

[dan991]

and yes I'd guess that he bought a $300k car because he saved $300K by dumping his last house, lol

[gixxerboy1]

He doesn't wanna refi- he wants a reduction in balance to the current market price, lol. His condo was built in 1970 something... he'll never see $110K on it again. He's paying a $110K mortgage on a place worth $30K not by his doing. Its even a conventional fixed FHA. His neighbors short selling and foreclosures are the ones that caused the price in his building to go to crap.

So the bank should eat it? How come its ok to buy a for a house as an investment when everyone thought it was going to worth double in 5 years. Now they are lossing money on it and want help out of it. Just buyers greed to. They bought it deal with it.

You complain about the bank bail outs but its ok for people to just walk away from their debts?

[gixxerboy1]

Why? I'll tell you what my co-worker is doing. He stopped paying his mortgage last month. He's putting his mortgage payments aside to pay cash for the unit down the hall and not have a mortgage payment at all. Why would he refinance his for $110K when he can just not pay his and get the same thing accross the hall and pay cash?

Because they banks have 10 years to come after you for the balance on ur mortgage after ur foreclosure

[Rwy]

Because they banks have 10 years to come after you for the balance on ur mortgage after ur foreclosure

or they can 1099 you the difference as added income

[dan991]

Because they banks have 10 years to come after you for the balance on ur mortgage after ur foreclosure

no... not when there is PMI

[dan991]

or they can 1099 you the difference as added income

Even if that happened; its a 25% tax rate on the deficit which is a lot less than the amount owed.

[dan991]

So the bank should eat it? How come its ok to buy a for a house as an investment when everyone thought it was going to worth double in 5 years. Now they are lossing money on it and want help out of it. Just buyers greed to. They bought it deal with it.

You complain about the bank bail outs but its ok for people to just walk away from their debts?

It wasn't an investment; its his home. The home owner should eat it because the banks don't care that they are selling foreclosures/short sales for pennies on the dollar? Its the banks that are driving prices on homes down. They don't care if they sell a house for 1/10th of the mortgage balance owed because they file an insurance claim on the difference and the bank loses nothing. In turn- it drives prices on comparable homes in the area down the toilet. Why would someone ever buy your house for $100K when they can get the house across the street for $15K? You're damn right- the bank should eat it... but they aren't... they file insurance claims to recover their losses. Regardless- the bank is sticking it to the home owner every single time. Even if you don't dump your house- you're still getting fvcked by the banks. Keep it and YOU have to wait 10 years to find out if you can ever recoup what you have into your home... not the bank.

[gixxerboy1]

It wasn't an investment; its his home. The home owner should eat it because the banks don't care that they are selling foreclosures/short sales for pennies on the dollar? Its the banks that are driving prices on homes down. They don't care if they sell a house for 1/10th of the mortgage balance owed because they file an insurance claim on the difference and the bank loses nothing. In turn- it drives prices on comparable homes in the area down the toilet. Why would someone ever buy your house for $100K when they can get the house across the street for $15K? You're damn right- the bank should eat it... but they aren't... they file insurance claims to recover their losses. Regardless- the bank is sticking it to the home owner every single time. Even if you don't dump your house- you're still getting fvcked by the banks. Keep it and YOU have to wait 10 years to find out if you can ever recoup what you have into your home... not the bank.

yes the home owner should eat it. They agree to buy that house for that dollar amount. The house didnt change its still the same size, still the same age. They got what they bought.

So if a house loses value and is under water the home owner should be able to walk away because they didnt get what they bargained for. So if i sell you a house and the value doubled in 5 years should i be able to come back and say well i didnt know the house was going to be worth more now so i want more money for the house i sold you years ago.

[gixxerboy1]

It wasn't an investment; its his home. The home owner should eat it because the banks don't care that they are selling foreclosures/short sales for pennies on the dollar? Its the banks that are driving prices on homes down. They don't care if they sell a house for 1/10th of the mortgage balance owed because they file an insurance claim on the difference and the bank loses nothing. In turn- it drives prices on comparable homes in the area down the toilet. Why would someone ever buy your house for $100K when they can get the house across the street for $15K? You're damn right- the bank should eat it... but they aren't... they file insurance claims to recover their losses. Regardless- the bank is sticking it to the home owner every single time. Even if you don't dump your house- you're still getting fvcked by the banks. Keep it and YOU have to wait 10 years to find out if you can ever recoup what you have into your home... not the bank.

ok so the insurance company should eat it then? It's BS. The person agreed to buy the house for that amount. The people are the ones not living up to their end. If they made the payments on the mortgages THEY agreed to, then there wouldnt have been the foreclosure mess and alot of other problems. Yes the banks had a huge hand in it. But in the end nobody made these people buy the house.

[dan991]

Gixx... The banks are the ones that created the problem, and are compounding the problem today with short sales/foreclosure fire sales. No home owner could take a loan that did not exist. THE BANKS CREATED THE LOAN PROGRAMS. Home owners took what was offered and if you notice; all the banks had the same loans. Home owners played the banks game that THEY created.

Furthermore- the banks are the ones causing the significant plummet in the market value of homes. They are selling foreclosures at pennies on the dollar just to get rid of them and not have to deal with maintaining an empty house; as well as approving short sales. Yes, home owners agreed to buy a house that had a specific value. Now, when that value significantly drops because of someone else's influence why is it the home owners responsibility to eat the deficit? Who in their right mind would sign up for that? Yes, the insurance company should eat it because you as the home owner are the one paying the premium to the insurance company; not the bank. Its called PMI (PRIVATE mortgage insurance).

You don't make any logical sense in your argument with this one. You're essentially saying that its okay that banks are doing what they are doing to home owners and every home owner should eat shit without the banks even being held accountable. Name ONE thing that our government has done to hold banks accountable? Nothing- Obama wrote them a check and saved them from going under. The federal government insures the banks. How does any of that help the home owner. To date; the only thing banks have done is issue an 800 number for a home owner help line where you have a bunch of trained people answering the phone following a protocol and a script both which were written by attorneys.

What needs to happen is people need to start suing the banks one by one... but not enough to cause a class action because then nobody wins but the lawyers. Most people can't do that though because they can't afford the legal fee's associated with that kind of battle and banks have in house attorney's. So- again the home owner can't win.

[warmouth]

Gixx cant stay away from the political threads! lol. You should be titled "ARs Political Advisor".

Look, for me, I hate that the country decided to re elect Obama. I despise it a matter of fact. But THE PEOPLE chose this and that is what we are stuck with. Would Romney have been better? Doesnt seem that way, but who knows? I voted for him to see if he would be. Obama had 4 years to prove his salt, he didnt. The first term was "Change", the second "Forward". Seems fishy that "change" wasnt done and it just moved "forward".

I understand the US is on the fast track to hell if somethign isnt done, but everyone has the same rights here in the US, and the majority wanted Obama back. Nothing we can do now. If you believe in destiny (what I call faith), then everything will eventually work out for the best. I sure hope it does. The huge government we have now is totally unneeded and it is taking away from peoples rights. It is like the seatbelt laws they just passed here in my state a couple of years ago. I have had more seat belt tickets since it was passed, but I refuse to wear them. The government has NO right to tell me what I can and cant to to myself that literally will cause no harm to anyone else. It is my choice. Sure, they have to go over the "stats" as to why we should wear them and the percentage of lives saved due to wearing them. The fact is, I can come up with "stats" for my point of view.

Same things are now happening with guncontrol. This is where the line has got to be drawn BY THE PEOPLE. The government is starting to forget they are working for us. They are now switching it to what we can to for them and their agendas. What many people fail to realize is that the 2nd amendment wasnt to protect oneself from each other. It was put there to protect us from a tyrannical government. But what would happen if a lawman came to my house, on my property, proceeded to invade my house to take my guns, and I shot them? I would be inprisoned for the rest of my life. This is not meant to get on the gun laws, I am just stating a personal feeling. I know it has been said they cant take our guns, but it is becoming apparent they are movingin that direction. I cant even go buy .22 rounds ANYWHERE just to go plinking or small game hunting. I cant find any ammo for any of my rifles period. IF I actually do find rounds for my handguns, I can only purchase 2 boxes of any particular caliber per week! That is nuts.

The gun controls they are proposing should only apply to those who are too young, mental illness within the household, problem children, any signs of psycosis within the household, or a felon. This would knock gun violence down alot, but of course wouldnt solve the problem. Criminals will always have guns, wether honest people do or dont. It will just make it alot easier for the criminals to act out crime knowing the majority of people arent "packing". The latest school shooting was the perfecttime for Obama andhis staff to try and get their agenda on gun control in motion. He has always hada problem with guns. This was just a rant. As far as who isinoffice or who is not, I just dont want to become reliant on the government, as so many are these days. I have a story to share when I get the time to post it, and I will do it here on this thread. It is just a personal experience of a person I know very well being reliant onthe governent to the extent of "selling his soul" and giving up his rights in order to keep government hand outs coming.

*EDIT* So far I have only read the first page. If I spoke out of line or context, I apologize.

[warmouth]

Wait, I got off topic it looks like. Anyways, it was just my rant.
To the topic at hand. I think that the banks "dumping" these houses in decent neihborhoods are the cause for homes in the area to drop in value. I think that is what Dan is eluding too, not the homeowners who filed for bankruptcy or foreclosure.
It is funny to me, but my in laws live ina very upscale subdivision, where the homes were selling for 4-750K ten years ago, and the couple of houses that are now in forclosure and sold for a fraction of the original cost, has got every house in that subdivision at the rock bottom prices (as far as home value). My inlaws live in a house that was "valued" at 550K a few years ago, now it is at 280K, which is appauling. It is because the banks just dumping those forclosures and it is hurting the rest of the people who live their because their house inno longer an investment worth relying on.

Even though many of you guys see those prices as low for a house, that is huge for where I live.

[dan991]

Wait, I got off topic it looks like. Anyways, it was just my rant.
To the topic at hand. I think that the banks "dumping" these houses in decent neihborhoods are the cause for homes in the area to drop in value. I think that is what Dan is eluding too, not the homeowners who filed for bankruptcy or foreclosure.
It is funny to me, but my in laws live ina very upscale subdivision, where the homes were selling for 4-750K ten years ago, and the couple of houses that are now in forclosure and sold for a fraction of the original cost, has got every house in that subdivision at the rock bottom prices (as far as home value). My inlaws live in a house that was "valued" at 550K a few years ago, now it is at 280K, which is appauling. It is because the banks just dumping those forclosures and it is hurting the rest of the people who live their because their house inno longer an investment worth relying on.

Even though many of you guys see those prices as low for a house, that is huge for where I live.

So in my opinion, your in-laws should dump their 550K house and buy one across the street for 280K and THE BANK should eat the difference because they are the one that caused the value of the 550K house to plummet. If the banks started writing home owners checks for the deficit they caused with all these fire sale foreclosures and short sales; house prices would go back up. Its the banks having the fire sales, and the only people getting burned are the home owners that still keep their home and pay their mortgage.