Posted on 04/11/2011 6:21:42 PM PDT by raybbr
Banks, other lenders and mortgage servicers do a better job of maintaining repossessed homes in predominantly white neighborhood than they do in African-American and Latino neighborhoods, according to a new report Monday that included Hartford and New Haven counties.
The report, released by the National Fair Housing Alliance, could form the basis for an industry lawsuit by the alliance.
The report didn't name lenders or servicers who were chronic offenders because the investigation is ongoing, and the alliance hopes the release of the report will call attention to the problem and spur changes.
The alliance and three of its member organizations, including the Connecticut Fair Housing Center, examined 624 bank-owned properties in Hartford and New Haven counties, Washington D.C.'s suburbs, Dayton, Ohio and Richmond, Va.
In Connecticut, researchers visited 100 foreclosed homes in such municipalities as Hartford, Bloomfield and Manchester, after choosing predominantly white, African-American and Latino neighborhoods that had comparable levels of income. The properties were then scored out of a possible total of 100, based on exterior appearance and curb appeal.
In Hartford and New Haven, repossessed properties in white neighborhoods scored 89 points, properties in African-American neighborhoods scored 78 and Latino neighborhoods, 66.
(Excerpt) Read more at ctnow.com ...
“Yep. Why are blacks and Latinos allowed to have neighborhoods? Are they racist?”
Of course they are! We should be able to have “White” neighborhoods, no questions asked. Yeah, that’ll happen.
...and that crime rates are the same across all neighborhoods.
I remember once reading an article about racist evil landlords not making sure smoke detectors had batteries in minority apartments because they wanted poor minorities to burn to death.
At least, that’s what I got from the article. The last line had some twaddle about how druggies in those apartment were stealing the batteries out as fast as the landlords could put them in, or destroying wired in ones.
Always on the last line.
How long would a well maintained home stay that way in a minority neighborhood? Why waste the expense of improving property that was probably destroyed by the former owners before they left?
Well, what would those properties have scored when they were bought? I can look at my town and see that for equally paired professional welfare recipients of each race, the housing would consistantly score lower for blacks and latinos than for whites.
Do whites pay more attention to their property’s appearance? not always, but in the majority of incidents, they do. One ride through the communities will testify of that fact - if you dare ride through them....
The gubmint's been doing that now for years... the projects got their facelifts paid for by the taxpayer and the new tenants hocked anything of value for a fix...
TGFPP ~ Thank Goodness for Plastic Piping!
Okay, Harry...today I want you to take your crew over to the new foreclosure downtown and paint the fence...you know, the one between that crack house and the place that was torched last month.
Your comment is certainly valid. In particular, if one’s income is lower, then one may have less money to maintain said property. So the property is not as well taken care of when the foreclosure happens.
Common sense tells me that the plumbing, hardware, walls, and lighting would be intact and not vandalized at a higher rate in some neighborhoods than in other, ahem, hoods.
Either way: White people bad.
It makes more sense if you say it like a caveman and give it no critical thought, kinda like "FIRE BAD!"
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.