PDA

View Full Version : News 'Extreme Makeover' house faces foreclosure


eazyb81
07-29-2008, 09:00 AM
Hmm, maybe there was a reason their house was in such piss poor shape to begin with. :hmmm:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080728/ap_en_tv/tv_extreme_makeover_foreclosure

'Extreme Makeover' house faces foreclosure <!-- END HEADLINE -->
<!-- BEGIN STORY BODY -->Mon Jul 28, 2:32 PM ET



More than 1,800 people showed up to help ABC's "Extreme Makeover" team demolish a family's decrepit home and replace it with a sparkling, four-bedroom mini-mansion in 2005.

Three years later, the reality TV show's most ambitious project at the time has become the latest victim of the foreclosure crisis.

After the Harper family used the two-story home as collateral for a $450,000 loan, it's set to go to auction on the steps of the Clayton County Courthouse Aug. 5. The couple did not return phone calls Monday, but told WSB-TV they received the loan for a construction business that failed.

The house was built in January 2005, after Atlanta-based Beazer Homes USA and ABC's "Extreme Makeover" demolished their old home and its faulty septic system. Within six days, construction crews and hoards of volunteers had completed work on the largest home that the television program had yet built.

The finished product was a four-bedroom house with decorative rock walls and a three-car garage that towered over ranch and split-level homes in their Clayton County neighborhood. The home's door opened into a lobby that featured four fireplaces, a solarium, a music room and a plush new office.

Materials and labor were donated for the home, which would have cost about $450,000 to build. Beazer Homes' employees and company partners also raised $250,000 in contributions for the family, including scholarships for the couple's three children and a home maintenance fund.

ABC said in a statement that it advises each family to consult a financial planner after they get their new home. "Ultimately, financial matters are personal, and we work to respect the privacy of the families," the network said.

Some of the volunteers who helped build the home were less than thrilled about the family's financial decisions.

"It's aggravating. It just makes you mad. You do that much work, and they just squander it," Lake City Mayor Willie Oswalt, who helped vault a massive beam into place in the Harper's living room, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
___
Information from: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, http://www.ajc.com

InChiefsHell
07-29-2008, 09:02 AM
Wow. What a bunch of a-holes...

BigRedChief
07-29-2008, 09:04 AM
Surprised? Not really. How many lottery winners piss away their money?

you give uneducated people a lot of money that will make bad decisions on how to spend/use the money. DUH! News at 11.

CosmicPal
07-29-2008, 09:06 AM
Surprised? Not really. How many lottery winners piss away their money?

you give uneducated people a lot of money that will make bad decisions on how to spend/use the money. DUH! News at 11.

Can I borrow five bucks from you?

markk
07-29-2008, 09:08 AM
idiots

BigRedChief
07-29-2008, 09:08 AM
Can I borrow five bucks from you?If you hadn't flipped me chit about being a Cardinals fan you'd be on easy street by now.

markk
07-29-2008, 09:09 AM
Surprised? Not really. How many lottery winners piss away their money?

i read in a book once that lottery winnings are like inheritances, 90% of them or so are totally gone in the first generation that receives them.

Deberg_1990
07-29-2008, 09:09 AM
ABC said in a statement that it advises each family to consult a financial planner after they get their new home. "Ultimately, financial matters are personal, and we work to respect the privacy of the families," the network said.



ABC should put it in the contract that these familes MUST consult with a financial consultant for the first year or two after the house is built and even hire one for them.

BigRedChief
07-29-2008, 09:11 AM
i read in a book once that lottery winnings are like inheritances, 90% of them or so are totally gone in the first generation that receives them.
Same thing with athletes. Whats the % that blow their money?

Dartgod
07-29-2008, 09:12 AM
Beazer Homes' employees and company partners also raised $250,000 in contributions for the family, including scholarships for the couple's three children and a home maintenance fund.
I suppose this is gone as well. :shake:

Iowanian
07-29-2008, 09:12 AM
I don't see much in the article that explains why they are losing the home.

I've heard for years of things like this.

One of the biggest obstacles is you're taking people with limited income and a home they can afford. They remodel, add on, expand and pimp that home, and then it becomes assessed at a much higher value and the taxes become more than they can pay.

....then again, there is the whole irresponsible with money, give a loser a million dollars and they'll piss it away and be broke again thing.

CosmicPal
07-29-2008, 09:12 AM
If you hadn't flipped me chit about being a Cardinals fan you'd be on easy street by now.

You got me mistaken for someone else. I don't care about baseball.

BigRedChief
07-29-2008, 09:12 AM
The first house that was built here in KC was sold to make money for the family to move to a new house.

BigRedChief
07-29-2008, 09:13 AM
You got me mistaken for someone else. I don't care about baseball.
okay then sorry. Whats your paypal addy and I'll get the money right out to ya.

markk
07-29-2008, 09:14 AM
Same thing with athletes. Whats the % that blow their money?

well most athletes aren't as highly paid as arod or whomever. a football player averages 5 to 7 years, and most aren't stars so they make a total of what, 5 million over their career for an average player maybe

then they're 30 or 32 years old and don't have any skills really, spent most of their money living fast, many don't have degrees or anything. it's not hard to see why they can end up broke with a fleet of caddies sitting in the driveway.

Deberg_1990
07-29-2008, 09:15 AM
The first house that was built here in KC was sold to make money for the family to move to a new house.


Can you blame them? Pretty smart id say.

Joie
07-29-2008, 09:15 AM
I suppose this is gone as well. :shake:

Hopefully they can't touch the scholarship money.

markk
07-29-2008, 09:16 AM
I don't see much in the article that explains why they are losing the home.

I've heard for years of things like this.

One of the biggest obstacles is you're taking people with limited income and a home they can afford. They remodel, add on, expand and pimp that home, and then it becomes assessed at a much higher value and the taxes become more than they can pay.

....then again, there is the whole irresponsible with money, give a loser a million dollars and they'll piss it away and be broke again thing.

it says they put up the home as collateral on a $250,000 loan for a construction business that failed.

so yeah. they decided to get into the worst possible industry you could have gotten into the past few years and put their home up against the loan.

economic darwinism

Bweb
07-29-2008, 09:16 AM
I don't see much in the article that explains why they are losing the home.

The way I read it is that they used the house as collateral on a business loan and now can't repay the loan and the bank is taking the house as payment. :deevee:

Iowanian
07-29-2008, 09:17 AM
Missed that part.


I'd be leary of buying one of the home makeover homes.

How can ANYTHING thrown together that quickly be built in a quality manner? They have to be painting over wet drywall mud etc.

I'd like to walk through one and look for those issues. I'll wager the homes have significant problems within a relatively short period of time.

The Iowanian theory of Relativity
Short timeframe + hundreds of volunteers=good intentions, mixed results.

markk
07-29-2008, 09:18 AM
Missed that part.


I'd be leary of buying one of the home makeover homes.

How can ANYTHING thrown together that quickly be built in a quality manner? They have to be painting over wet drywall mud etc.

I'd like to walk through one and look for those issues. I'll wager the homes have significant problems within a relatively short period of time.

The Iowanian theory of Relativity
Short timeframe + hundreds of volunteers=good intentions, mixed results.

i wonder about the foundation, if they are going from zero to finished mansion in like a week

pikesome
07-29-2008, 09:19 AM
I don't see much in the article that explains why they are losing the home.

I've heard for years of things like this.

One of the biggest obstacles is you're taking people with limited income and a home they can afford. They remodel, add on, expand and pimp that home, and then it becomes assessed at a much higher value and the taxes become more than they can pay.

....then again, there is the whole irresponsible with money, give a loser a million dollars and they'll piss it away and be broke again thing.

They took out a loan using the home as collateral on a "business loan". When they couldn't pay, the bank foreclosed.

Not that it matters too much but I've seen far too many "business" loans that buy cars, computers, TVs, and other "business necessities".

Deberg_1990
07-29-2008, 09:19 AM
Missed that part.


I'd be leary of buying one of the home makeover homes.

How can ANYTHING thrown together that quickly be built in a quality manner? They have to be painting over wet drywall mud etc.

I'd like to walk through one and look for those issues. I'll wager the homes have significant problems within a relatively short period of time.

The Iowanian theory of Relativity
Short timeframe + hundreds of volunteers=good intentions, mixed results.

Yea, i always wondered than as well. Ill bet they have tons of shortcuts/tricks they dont show on TV.

Baconeater
07-29-2008, 09:20 AM
Missed that part.


I'd be leary of buying one of the home makeover homes.

How can ANYTHING thrown together that quickly be built in a quality manner? They have to be painting over wet drywall mud etc.

I'd like to walk through one and look for those issues. I'll wager the homes have significant problems within a relatively short period of time.

The Iowanian theory of Relativity
Short timeframe + hundreds of volunteers=good intentions, mixed results.

That was my first thought when I read it was built in six days. Hell it takes at least 3-4 days to finish drywall properly, and that's if you're pushing it. I smell BS.

Dartgod
07-29-2008, 09:25 AM
it says they put up the home as collateral on a $250,000 loan for a construction business that failed.
Not quite.
After the Harper family used the two-story home as collateral for a $450,000 loan
I don't get why they give a family, who probably is on a limited income, such a big, expensive house. Why is it necessary to build a 4,000 sq. ft., 1/2 million dollar crib, when they could most likely survive quite well in a $200,000 or less smaller home? It's like they are setting them up to fail all for television ratings.

StcChief
07-29-2008, 09:26 AM
That was my first thought when I read it was built in six days. Hell it takes at least 3-4 days to finish drywall properly, and that's if you're pushing it. I smell BS.
as in any project... throwing bodies at it to shorten time window = bad news

eazyb81
07-29-2008, 09:26 AM
They took out a loan using the home as collateral on a "business loan". When they couldn't pay, the bank foreclosed.

Not that it matters too much but I've seen far too many "business" loans that buy cars, computers, TVs, and other "business necessities".

My thoughts exactly. I'm not in the industry, but it's hard for me to believe that they would lose 100% of a $450,000 loan if they funneled it all into the business.

For anyone on here that owns a similar business or is in the construction industry, does this sound plausible to you? Wouldn't the majority of their expenses be on equipment and tools, which would still have value if the business was unsuccessful? I don't see how you could blow $450,000 on starting a construction business and have nothing to show for it.

Frosty
07-29-2008, 09:37 AM
I don't get why they give a family, who probably is on a limited income, such a big, expensive house. Why is it necessary to build a 4,000 sq. ft., 1/2 million dollar crib, when they could most likely survive quite well in a $200,000 or less smaller home? It's like they are setting them up to fail all for television ratings.

I stopped watching the show, primarily for that reason. In the first season of the show, they remodeled existing homes and they were much more modest. Then they went to building these ridiculous mansions in ghettos and trailer parks. It seemed extremely wasteful.

I also got tired of the "sob stories" for the families. More and more of them didn't make sense and it was hard to feel sorry for the families.

Rain Man
07-29-2008, 09:37 AM
Wow. How do I get on this show? I'm coarse and unrefined, and I could use the money.


I bet it's not hard to blow through $450,000 on a construction company, especially if you're not experienced at managing a business. If you buy some (fast-depreciating) equipment and hire a dozen people, and you don't get work, you're writing five-digit checks every month.

blueballs
07-29-2008, 09:38 AM
that money could have bought a lot of mothers with dead beat dads
a nice mobile home more fitting for their income levels
of course this old trailer park wouldn't draw the ratings

-maybe families of enlisted men injured or lost in the war
would have been a better example of someone to help

mesmith31
07-29-2008, 09:54 AM
When the house was built in 2005, very few people had a crystal ball to predict the coming subprime collapse that would take down the housing market. They may have thought that they were being financially prudent by taking dead equity at 3-5% apprectiation and investing it in a viable enterprise which was yielding for most builders 7-25% ROI. In terms of how they blew through the money. In addition to the start up cost for inventory which could easily have gone over $100k.
The could then have built say 10 spec homes $450k which the bank lent 80% LTV or $360k. They go over budget 5% on each home or $180k which comes out of pocket. Then they are sitting on 3.8-4mill in inventory with payments at 6% construction at about 18-20k a month, and the market bottoms out.
$450k is easy to lose.

Rain Man
07-29-2008, 09:56 AM
When the house was built in 2005, very few people had a crystal ball to predict the coming subprime collapse that would take down the housing market. They may have thought that they were being financially prudent by taking dead equity at 3-5% apprectiation and investing it in a viable enterprise which was yielding for most builders 7-25% ROI. In terms of how they blew through the money. In addition to the start up cost for inventory which could easily have gone over $100k.
The could then have built say 10 spec homes $450k which the bank lent 80% LTV or $360k. They go over budget 5% on each home or $180k which comes out of pocket. Then they are sitting on 3.8-4mill in inventory with payments at 6% construction at about 18-20k a month, and the market bottoms out.
$450k is easy to lose.

And they may have bought a TV with it, too.

mesmith31
07-29-2008, 10:10 AM
There are all kinds of stories about shiesty things that have gone on in the mortgage/ real estate business these last couple years. One I uncovered was a guy up here in Des Moines (Mohammed something) He had been buying houses for $10-15k in the hood selling them a week later to people also with similar sounding names for $115k 2 weeks later. Then 6 months would pass and the house would be up for auction. I started to notice this patern in 2002-03 and thought it was fishy. Then it turns out we was in bed with a mortgage broker and they were pulling out millions and sending the money back to Iraq to fund the Taliban.

Phobia
07-29-2008, 11:05 AM
My thoughts exactly. I'm not in the industry, but it's hard for me to believe that they would lose 100% of a $450,000 loan if they funneled it all into the business.

For anyone on here that owns a similar business or is in the construction industry, does this sound plausible to you? Wouldn't the majority of their expenses be on equipment and tools, which would still have value if the business was unsuccessful? I don't see how you could blow $450,000 on starting a construction business and have nothing to show for it.

It doesn't to me. I've had my construction company for roughly 8 years and didn't take one loan along the way. Of course I started really small and worked my way into more tools and equipment. It's taken a lot of time and energy. It would have been a whole lot easier to start with $450k but then I wouldn't have learned so many incredibly valuable lessons along the way. When the hurt is coming out of your own wallet one learns really, really quickly.

Guru
07-29-2008, 02:10 PM
Man, this group comes in and wipes out the biggest debt you have and this is how you repay them? Epic fail.

mikey23545
07-29-2008, 03:08 PM
Gee, I wonder if there is a lesson in this for all those who worship the welfare state....

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-29-2008, 03:15 PM
Gee, I wonder if there is a lesson in this for all those who worship the welfare state....

Actually, I always found that show despicable. Yes, the people were very unfortunate, but none of the people needed all of the shit that companies threw in there. Rather than using the show as a cheap ploy for advertising, if the people involved really wanted to do good, they could have built 4 or 5 homes for needy families that were perfectly sound, albeit humble, rather than one ostentatious McMansion in a two hour commercial sob story.

It's just another case of poorly allocated priorities, putting PR above actually making a difference.

And BRC and blueballs (wtf?) are both right. FWIW, 60% of NBA players are broke 5 years after they retire.

I can't even imagine how that's possible, but it is.

InChiefsHell
07-29-2008, 03:18 PM
There are all kinds of stories about shiesty things that have gone on in the mortgage/ real estate business these last couple years. One I uncovered was a guy up here in Des Moines (Mohammed something) He had been buying houses for $10-15k in the hood selling them a week later to people also with similar sounding names for $115k 2 weeks later. Then 6 months would pass and the house would be up for auction. I started to notice this patern in 2002-03 and thought it was fishy. Then it turns out we was in bed with a mortgage broker and they were pulling out millions and sending the money back to Iraq to fund the Taliban.

Are you sure? I'd have to see a link to that story...

...the Taliban was and is operating out of Afghanistan, by the way. Just sayin'...

Demonpenz
07-29-2008, 03:18 PM
I always get pissed at show as well. They could have 3 or 4 simple houses built instead of the stupidly big one

chasedude
07-29-2008, 03:23 PM
My whole misconceptions about the show are completely out the window now. I thought all these houses were PAID FOR? How much does ABC make from all the advertisements on the show?

I thought most of the shows are based on those with financial hardships due to accidents or illness.

"Here, let me tear down the house you can't pay for now so we'll build you a bigger one so you'll be so deep in debt you be working from the grave." :rolleyes:

pikesome
07-29-2008, 03:24 PM
My whole misconceptions about the show are completely out the window now. I thought all these houses were PAID FOR? How much does ABC make from all the advertisements on the show?

I thought most of the shows are based on those with financial hardships due to accidents or illness.

"Here, let me tear down the house you can't pay for now so we'll build you a bigger one so you'll be so deep in debt you be working from the grave." :rollseyes:

They took out a loan using the house as collateral. It was paid for. Then the bank gave them a loan they couldn't/didn't pay.

Ari Chi3fs
07-29-2008, 04:26 PM
'Extreme Makeover' house faces foreclosure

Mon Jul 28, 11:32 AM PDT <body.content> </body.content>More than 1,800 people showed up to help ABC's "Extreme Makeover" team demolish a family's decrepit home and replace it with a sparkling, four-bedroom mini-mansion in 2005.


Three years later, the reality TV show's most ambitious project at the time has become the latest victim of the foreclosure crisis.


After the Harper family used the two-story home as collateral for a $450,000 loan, it's set to go to auction on the steps of the Clayton County Courthouse Aug. 5. The couple did not return phone calls Monday, but told WSB-TV they received the loan for a construction business that failed.



The house was built in January 2005, after Atlanta-based Beazer Homes USA and ABC's "Extreme Makeover" demolished their old home and its faulty septic system. Within six days, construction crews and hoards of volunteers had completed work on the largest home that the television program had yet built.


The finished product was a four-bedroom house with decorative rock walls and a three-car garage that towered over ranch and split-level homes in their Clayton County neighborhood. The home's door opened into a lobby that featured four fireplaces, a solarium, a music room and a plush new office.


Materials and labor were donated for the home, which would have cost about $450,000 to build. Beazer Homes' employees and company partners also raised $250,000 in contributions for the family, including scholarships for the couple's three children and a home maintenance fund.


ABC said in a statement that it advises each family to consult a financial planner after they get their new home. "Ultimately, financial matters are personal, and we work to respect the privacy of the families," the network said.


Some of the volunteers who helped build the home were less than thrilled about the family's financial decisions.


"It's aggravating. It just makes you mad. You do that much work, and they just squander it," Lake City Mayor Willie Oswalt, who helped vault a massive beam into place in the Harper's living room, told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Phobia
07-29-2008, 04:26 PM
The show is horrible. A pathetic display of American excesses. Besides, it gives consumers the impression that if a home can be built in a week then a kitchen remodel should be done in a couple days.

blueballs
07-29-2008, 04:27 PM
I'll take 15 down for $100 Alex

Ari Chi3fs
07-29-2008, 04:27 PM
hahaha.. Ari Chi3fs FTW!

Crashride
07-29-2008, 04:29 PM
GIVE ME AN R!

Bill Parcells
07-29-2008, 04:29 PM
R_E_P_O_S_T

Ari Chi3fs
07-29-2008, 04:31 PM
FAIL! OF EPIC PROPORTIONS!!!111elevenmumblemumble

Bill Parcells
07-29-2008, 04:32 PM
FAIL! OF EPIC PROPORTIONS!!!111elevenmumblemumble


http://theprudentindian.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/egg-on-face1.jpg

Phobia
07-29-2008, 04:32 PM
Wow. What a complete shame. Who would have thought?

Ari was much better when he was Rick-Rolling.

kstater
07-29-2008, 04:33 PM
The show is horrible. A pathetic display of American excesses. Besides, it gives consumers the impression that if a home can be built in a week then a kitchen remodel should be done in a couple days.

What, you don't have 1000 employees? Slacker.

Ari Chi3fs
07-29-2008, 04:34 PM
worst thing is, is that I have been here a couple times today, and still hadn't noticed it. hahah.

I think Ill go back to Rick Rolling, good idea.

kstater
07-29-2008, 04:34 PM
Wow. What a complete shame. Who would have thought?

Ari was much better when he was Rick-Rolling.

Don't get him started again.:cuss:

kstater
07-29-2008, 04:35 PM
Ari was much better when he was Rick-Rolling.

:banghead:

Guru
07-29-2008, 04:38 PM
Actually, I always found that show despicable. Yes, the people were very unfortunate, but none of the people needed all of the shit that companies threw in there. Rather than using the show as a cheap ploy for advertising, if the people involved really wanted to do good, they could have built 4 or 5 homes for needy families that were perfectly sound, albeit humble, rather than one ostentatious McMansion in a two hour commercial sob story.

It's just another case of poorly allocated priorities, putting PR above actually making a difference.

And BRC and blueballs (wtf?) are both right. FWIW, 60% of NBA players are broke 5 years after they retire.

I can't even imagine how that's possible, but it is.
That is exactly why I hate the show. Whatever happened to live within your means. Well, by building a house with more than they need....

I understand the ones they build around a child with excessive health needs but some of these families only need a home and nothing else. it doesn't need to be fancy.

Ari Chi3fs
07-29-2008, 04:40 PM
So I found a video of their 4 bedroom house. Looks pretty nice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdMj10s6nYw

CrazyPhuD
07-29-2008, 04:48 PM
give a man a fish......

Jenson71
07-29-2008, 04:48 PM
Actually, I always found that show despicable. Yes, the people were very unfortunate, but none of the people needed all of the shit that companies threw in there. Rather than using the show as a cheap ploy for advertising, if the people involved really wanted to do good, they could have built 4 or 5 homes for needy families that were perfectly sound, albeit humble, rather than one ostentatious McMansion in a two hour commercial sob story.

Now there's an idea. There should be some sort of charity/organization that does that.

Baconeater
07-29-2008, 04:57 PM
Now there's an idea. There should be some sort of charity/organization that doest that.

Now we're getting somewhere, we just need to come up with a catchy name for it, something like "Habitat for Humanity".

BigMeatballDave
07-29-2008, 05:00 PM
Stupid. They deserve to lose the house.

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-29-2008, 05:03 PM
Now there's an idea. There should be some sort of charity/organization that does that.

Yeah, but the real question is does the leader of that organization have a good "Q" factor, and does he hock Craftsman tools well??

If not, nothing else really matters.