Skip to comments.California cities fill top 10 foreclosure list
Posted on 08/14/2007 8:47:33 AM PDT by HydroshockEdited on 08/28/2007 8:53:29 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The binge that many housing markets went on in the early- to mid-2000s is over, and some of the hottest markets like California are now experiencing the worst hangovers.
But other areas, especially many that recorded slower home price growth earlier this decade, have seen little increase in foreclosure rates, according to the latest data released Tuesday from RealtyTrac, the online marketer of foreclosure properties.
"While foreclosure activity has skyrocketed over the past year in many cities, particularly in California, Ohio and the Northeast," James Saccaccio, RealtyTrac's chief executive, said in a statement, "foreclosure activity seems to be subsiding in parts of Texas, South Carolina and other states."
"Still," he said, "the overall trend is toward escalating foreclosure rates, with 82 of the top 100 metro areas reporting year-over-year increases in the number of homes affected by foreclosure."
Stockton, California now leads the nation in foreclosures. Of RealtyTrac's top 10 metro areas for foreclosures, four are in Central California.
Stockton, Riverside/San Bernardino (which is it? They are two different cities; I’m assuming they mean Riverside in San Bernardino County), Bakersfield, and Sacramento ... four of the top ten. But readers may not be aware that NONE of those markets are particularly “hot” by California standards — Riverside was indeed HOT about four years ago. We pondered buying there — you could get a lot of house for not much dough and still be (more or less) in So Cal. Stockton, Bakersfield, and Sacramento are Valley towns, a whole different ballgame. Hot markets to a point, but nothing compared to the “hot” that was coastal and So. Cal. until about three years ago. Still, it’s an interesting article. I’m glad you posted it.
It also sounds like the home prices will get back to reality. Some people lost their butt speculating.
The easy credit has already dried up. It is only a matter of time before prices revert to historical norms.
Riverside is in Riverside County.
None of these areas have as much objective value as coastal California - the prices shot up later when they were seen as affordable alternatives, and are falling first as the market cools off.
When I bought my first home, the lender wanted to write me a mortgage for twice what I thought I could afford.
I did not fall for the bait but I think most people do.
“It is only a matter of time before prices revert to historical norms.”
Nonsense. Prices will not go down. They won’t even stay the same. They will continue to rise!
(This message brought to you by the free republic “There is no bubble” brigade.)
You got that right! Here in the Seattle area, our bubble “burst” - the increase is now “only” 7% per year, rather than 20%...
Land is the only thing that’s truly a finite resource, and the only resource that is REQUIRED for life. Not gold, not silver, not hog futures, not computers.
and conveniently lien stripping provisions are gone under the new bankruptcy code.
This is where an undersecured lenders loan can be bifurcated into secured and unsecured portions with the unsecured portion removed from the colateral and moved to the unsecured creditors.
This was done mostly with 125% loans (forgot about those) in hot markets.
The prices shot up for the same reasons foreclosures are up. The majority of new homes are built in these regions, and nearly every new home built in California is of the "luxury" variety (i.e. 500K and up). Of course no one can actually afford these prices so the builder financed them with so-called no income verification loans.
Everyone looked to get wealthy fast and easy.
I think most of California is going to get hammered.. for the simple reason that the average person can’t afford the average home.
I think coastal, as in literally on the water or a block away in a posh neighborhood could be surprisingly ‘sticky’. There is lots of super rich people out there in this new globalized American economy(especially in California), that make enough to pay the costs with traditional loans or even cash.
Duh!! You’re RIGHT! So which town did they mean, I wonder? Hmmm ....
Yep. I think you’re exactly right.
Nonsense. Prices will not go down.
Bunny, if Socal is thinking the way I am, he's not saying that prices will go down, but that they'll stop appreciating at the outrageously high rates they were in the recent past, at least they'll stop appreciating that way for now. They will continue to rise at a more modest rate, I think, for a couple of reasons: they represent land and homes, a finite resource; and they're located in a geographical area that is hugely DIVERSE in its economy (there is no one industry that dominates here) and one that has an incredibly nice climate. The demand for housing here is going to continue.
Those who will get "hammered" will be limited to the folks who took on loans they couldn't handle. The demand for housing in many areas of California, Southern California in particular, is going to continue to increase because:
1. There's lots of employment here in every industry you can imagine.
2. The climate is excellent.
3. There's only so much land for homes, while foreseeable demand for it is infinite.
"Average" is a relative term. "Average" people haven't been able to afford the "average" home in Southern and Coastal California for at least 15 years, yet average people are still here and thriving, and property values are at worst leveling off, and in many cases, rising "only" two to eight percent instead of 20 percent. There are more dynamics at work in real estate than meet the eye, I think.
Your idea of "coastal" as being within a block of the water is puzzling. I grew up in a home that was maybe a mile from the water, and you could see the whole bay and ocean from our windows. Believe me, it was most definitely a "coastal" piece of property. To me, a piece of property within a block or the water (posh or not) would be waterfront property. A subtle difference in terminology. "Coastal" property would be something within a mile or two of the water, I'd think. The view is not what makes something "coastal," but rather the marine climate and proximity to the sea. A marine climate is very, very distinct from non-coastal places, and its very possible (I know because I've done it) to live less than a mile from the beach and not see the ocean for months at a time, yet you never for an instant forget that you're "coastal." It's just very, very different from being inland.
Texas, Nevada, Florida and Colorado top the list.
Just my two cents, as I am a native of the California coast.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.