A random idea for the housing market - Page 2

**Saul Good** · 08-04-2011, 03:17 PM

I was reading yet another article today about how abandoned, foreclosed houses are creating a burden on municipalities. These houses fall into disrepair, and they attract crime. I was trying to think of a solution, and the first thing to come to mind was this:

Could we force the banks to sell the houses within a certain amount of time (one year or so, maybe) following the foreclosure? If they fail to do so, the local government is allowed to auction off the property, collect a fee, and give the rest to the banks.

This would generate revenue for the municipality, clean up the neighborhoods a bit, and help ease the housing glut (albeit by dropping home prices way down).

The banks would take a hit, but I'm not worried about banks that created a lot of this mess in the first place.

Thoughts?

ChiefsCountry · 08-05-2011, 09:28 AM

As a real estate agent this is a horrible idea. The biggest problem with foreclosures are the banks themselves. They are the ones who have ****ed up to begin with for the most part. Alot of the houses on the foreclosure market are there bc of the bank's stupidity in giving the loan. Not based on the people's income to pay off the loan but on the properties themselves. Lot of stupid ass ideas that never should have been given in the first place. Then when you try to sell a foreclosed home, its an even bigger cluster ****. And of course Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae homes are even bigger pain in the asses.

**Dave Lane** · 08-05-2011, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I was reading yet another article today about how abandoned, foreclosed houses are creating a burden on municipalities. These houses fall into disrepair, and they attract crime. I was trying to think of a solution, and the first thing to come to mind was this:

Could we force the banks to sell the houses within a certain amount of time (one year or so, maybe) following the foreclosure? If they fail to do so, the local government is allowed to auction off the property, collect a fee, and give the rest to the banks.

This would generate revenue for the municipality, clean up the neighborhoods a bit, and help ease the housing glut (albeit by dropping home prices way down).

The banks would take a hit, but I'm not worried about banks that created a lot of this mess in the first place.

Thoughts?

The banks are desperate to sell these off its just that in most cases there are no buyers.

Brock · 08-05-2011, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

The banks are desperate to sell these off its just that in most cases there are no buyers.

Then their prices must be too high.

**Saul Good** · 08-05-2011, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

As a real estate agent this is a horrible idea. The biggest problem with foreclosures are the banks themselves. They are the ones who have ****ed up to begin with for the most part. Alot of the houses on the foreclosure market are there bc of the bank's stupidity in giving the loan. Not based on the people's income to pay off the loan but on the properties themselves. Lot of stupid ass ideas that never should have been given in the first place. Then when you try to sell a foreclosed home, its an even bigger cluster ****. And of course Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae homes are even bigger pain in the asses.

I don't follow. These would be bank-owned houses. This would force the banks to either clean up these messes in a timely manner or have it done for them with a charge associated.

**Saul Good** · 08-05-2011, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Lane

The banks are desperate to sell these off its just that in most cases there are no buyers.

If I can't sell a $20 bill for $50, that doesn't mean that nobody wants a $20 bill.

King_Chief_Fan · 08-05-2011, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

As a real estate agent this is a horrible idea. The biggest problem with foreclosures are the banks themselves. They are the ones who have ****ed up to begin with for the most part. Alot of the houses on the foreclosure market are there bc of the bank's stupidity in giving the loan. Not based on the people's income to pay off the loan but on the properties themselves. Lot of stupid ass ideas that never should have been given in the first place. Then when you try to sell a foreclosed home, its an even bigger cluster ****. And of course Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae homes are even bigger pain in the asses.

not a rebuttal to your comments or the original post....curiosity about how the real estate is doing in the ozark lakes area

Taco John · 08-05-2011, 11:11 AM

This is an awful idea that would demolish the value of homes wherever it was done.

ChiefsCountry · 08-05-2011, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

not a rebuttal to your comments or the original post....curiosity about how the real estate is doing in the ozark lakes area

On the water sales are decent - July was actually a pretty good month, off the water horrible.

**Saul Good** · 08-05-2011, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

This is an awful idea that would demolish the value of homes wherever it was done.

How so?

Taco John · 08-05-2011, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

I don't follow. These would be bank-owned houses. This would force the banks to either clean up these messes in a timely manner or have it done for them with a charge associated.

Who owns the property? The banks or the government? If the government says "sell these, or we will sell them for you," then the government is saying that they own the property - the banks are just leasing it from them.

Why would anyone buy a home from a bank if they knew the government would undercut their price in a pennies on the dollar auction? Why would anybody buy the guy's house on Maple Street for market value if they knew they could get a similar home on 117th at a fraction of the price?

King_Chief_Fan · 08-05-2011, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

On the water sales are decent - July was actually a pretty good month, off the water horrible.

any good buys or have the lakefronts held thier value?

**Saul Good** · 08-05-2011, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Who owns the property? The banks or the government? If the government says "sell these, or we will sell them for you," then the government is saying that they own the property - the banks are just leasing it from them.

Why would anyone buy a home from a bank if they knew the government would undercut their price in a pennies on the dollar auction? Why would anybody buy the guy's house on Maple Street for market value if they knew they could get a similar home on 117th at a fraction of the price?

There are some flaws in your reasoning here.

1. Houses are auctioned regularly. It doesn't crush neighboring home prices, and they don't go for pennies on the dollar.

2. The banks would get the proceeds, so its not like the government would act as owners. If they can force people to pay property taxes, they can force a sale.

Here's a question, though. Are banks required to pay the taxes after foreclosing?

ChiefsCountry · 08-05-2011, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

any good buys or have the lakefronts held thier value?

Lakefront has actually held in value. A few good buys but far and between.

08-04-2011, 03:17 PM
Saul Good Quit your bullshit Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Bored of winning Casino cash: $10052799	A random idea for the housing market I was reading yet another article today about how abandoned, foreclosed houses are creating a burden on municipalities. These houses fall into disrepair, and they attract crime. I was trying to think of a solution, and the first thing to come to mind was this: Could we force the banks to sell the houses within a certain amount of time (one year or so, maybe) following the foreclosure? If they fail to do so, the local government is allowed to auction off the property, collect a fee, and give the rest to the banks. This would generate revenue for the municipality, clean up the neighborhoods a bit, and help ease the housing glut (albeit by dropping home prices way down). The banks would take a hit, but I'm not worried about banks that created a lot of this mess in the first place. Thoughts?
Posts: 41,870

08-05-2011, 09:28 AM	#16
ChiefsCountry The Insider Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Lake of the Ozarks Casino cash: $2338752	As a real estate agent this is a horrible idea. The biggest problem with foreclosures are the banks themselves. They are the ones who have **ed up to begin with for the most part. Alot of the houses on the foreclosure market are there bc of the bank's stupidity in giving the loan. Not based on the people's income to pay off the loan but on the properties themselves. Lot of stupid ass ideas that never should have been given in the first place. Then when you try to sell a foreclosed home, its an even bigger cluster **. And of course Freddy Mac and Fannie Mae homes are even bigger pain in the asses.
Posts: 49,590

08-05-2011, 11:11 AM	#22
Taco John Sapere Aude Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $3507937	This is an awful idea that would demolish the value of homes wherever it was done. __________________ Ehyeh asher ehyeh. Donger's Razor: "The most establishment-friendly explanation that gives leftist and neocon politicians the most amount of cover is the only possible explanation, even when gaping holes and leaps of logic are required to get there."
Posts: 77,978