Seattle Bubble

News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Seattle Bubble - News & discussion about real estate & the housing bubble in the Seattle area.

Entries Tagged as 'honesty'

Can we talk? Full disclosure. What does it mean to you?

By S-Crow on November 14th, 2007 at 12:31 AM · 56 Comments

Tim K.jpg

I enjoy discussions here because it’s where consumers are. It is like a laboratory of information. One area that is of interest to me, in a large way, is what makes people do what they do. I’m speaking of three groups primarily: consumers and the two primary players in our business, the loan officers and agents.

2007 has been quite a year in the real estate world. Blogging and transparency has been one of the hottest focal points in the business. Because of the obvious turmoil in the real estate industry as a whole, being that the market is in correction mode and the mortgage/credit markets are stressed due to “writing down” Billions (code for losses) and continues to unfold, many industry-wide issues are at the forefront.

In lending, the recent issue of licensing (both locally and nationally) and the hot potato YSP (yield spread premium or equivalent terminology) topic has been debated heavily. Locally, loan originators have to take a competency exam and go through a background check. Agents have their exam and clock-hour classes to obtain and maintain licensing as well. But, should it stop there? Ok, fine, you say. Where are you going with this? What I’m suggesting is this: is the licensing at it’s face value all you would be satisfied with to work with a real estate professional or allied pro’s such as loan officers, title, escrow, etc…?

“Why not ask them to disclose whether they have had a bankruptcy, or foreclosure or heaven forbid, ask them to disclose their own FICO score? Do you really want people who have a history of making poor financial decisions assisting you with advice on buying, selling or refinancing? Or, is it more complicated than that and therefore is not fair?” – me, S-Crow

For example, over the course of the past four years, our small business has bumped into an opportunity or two or three to expand the business. In all the cases, we were approached by mortgage brokers or agents or both. In each circumstance we passed. Why? A bit of due dilligence revealing situations we were uncomfortable with led us to our decisions. Plus, what was the rush? Get rich, lol?!! (eyes rolling.)

I think the thing that caused the most pause for our counterparts was a question I posed to those who wanted to enter in a business capacity with our small business: “If you want to enter into a business relationship with us then reveal your entire financial lives, personal and professional and we’ll do the same.” As you can imagine, that type of transparency is what I’m after if people want to do business with me in opening other offices in a partnership. And, as you can imagine, it is quite the turn off. Someday, we’ll bump into like minded business people. So far, that hasn’t happened as people don’t want us to see the “naked” financials. You see, in escrow, you deal with money all day long, not quite like a bank, but loosely in the same framework. Therefore, you don’t want people who are in financial hardship running an escrow company or having access to trust accounts. Not a good recipe.

Escrow is highly complicated with lots of moving parts. There is a reason escrow firms follow banking hours, so to speak. There is a reason mortgage funders and escrow staff look at the clock all day long as we have to meet very tight deadlines. Because escrow is a regulated business and actually has audits from the Dept. of Financial Institutions that we have to pay for (thank you not very much), it is an arena where many of our colleagues who wish to open an escrow company find themselves wondering why they even tried. Some days we ask ourselves the same thing, but for other reasons I’ll keep to myself. :)

Anyway, back to my point(s). A few things to consider:

  • Wouldn’t you as a consumer (existing homeowners in midst of refinancing, first time buyers, etc..) having to divulge most of your financial lives to the loan officer or agent want to know that you are being represented by those parties in a fiduciary capacity? In other words, wouldn’t it be a good thing to know that they are working in your best interests?
  • This is the crux of the consumer driven push resulting in an issue Congress is meeting about. It is to get lenders & brokers to work on consumers behalf and address the hot potato issue of compensation in the form of YSP (yield spread premiums). One of the questions being asked is when or how is it appropriate to use YSP’s? For those that don’t know, YSP is a compensation mechanism that the lender/investor pays to the broker for originating the loan or loan program at a specified interest rate, or with terms such as pre-payment penalties. Generally, to trigger this additional compensation in the form of a yield spread premium (YSP), the borrower is sold an interest rate higher than would be if there were no YSP. Again, this is a general definition.

I ask tough questions of those wanting to do business with me in a partnership and sometimes the answers received either by my own investigation or their disclosure reveals information that helps me make an informed decision.

So, all that mumbling to say this: will you interview the professionals that are assisting you in your real estate endeavors? Do you have it in you to ask the tough questions? Can you imagine the fallout if, say, a 700 FICO score, was the low end benchmark to qualify for licensing as an agent, loan officer or other professionals involved in your transaction? Now that would have some teeth!

How’s that for a softball pitch to our industry!

→ 56 CommentsCategories: Opinion
Tags: , , , ,

Bubble Link Roundup

By The Tim on April 10th, 2007 at 2:24 PM · 41 Comments

There have been a lot of real estate articles in the local dead tree outlets the last few days. It’s time for another link roundup before I get too far behind and forget to mention some of them.

First up, it’s Mark Trahant of the P-I with yet another thoughtful, well-reasoned take on Seattle’s housing market.

What if housing prices decline by 20 percent? That would solve Seattle’s affordability problem, right? Most folks would say this is impossible. The data from last week show that house prices keep increasing no matter what. Our boom continues, just slower and steadier. But both our region and our country have boom and bust cycles as predictable as weather. It’s as much of our history as innovation, military might or baseball. One minute we’re panning gold, the next we’re trying to recoup our investment in those nifty machines that pluck gold dust from stream beds.

Just think about what those higher credit standards will require: A significant down payment, good credit and, in Seattle, a high income.

More than likely, what it will really mean is that the supply of homes will grow — and prices, sooner or later, will fall.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, we have the Seattle Times encouraging first-time homebuyers to “learn the fine art of compromise.”

Rolf Johnson and Kerrie Cooley had different jobs, different priorities and different resources, but on their brave hunt for a $250,000 home in the Seattle area they both learned it came down to what they were willing to give up.

Cooley let go of any notion of buying a house or living in downtown Seattle to find the modern, two-bedroom condo she wanted.

Johnson spent more than a year, bumped up his budget and moved farther from work to find the house, property and studio space he craved.

Compromise is definitely the name of the house-hunting game in the Seattle area, especially for first-time buyers who often can’t come close to the $450,000 or so that it costs for a typical single-family house in Seattle and are looking more realistically at prices around $250,000.

Also worth noting is a pair of articles from the P-I and Times reporting on the recent blatherings of Senator Patty Murray. From the P-I:

The lack of affordable housing in Seattle and other places is a “silent epidemic,” U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., told representatives of housing agencies, developers, labor and environmental groups Friday.

“We all need to work together, whatever hats we wear, to start to address this crisis,” Murray, who chairs the Transportation and housing and urban development subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said during a housing forum at Seattle’s Opportunity Place.

Some at Friday’s forum want more federal money, while others support incentives or requirements aimed at local developers. Cities and counties need to allow more homes through zoning, some said.

Here’s what the Times had to say about it:

U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., who was visiting Seattle on Friday during a congressional recess, convened the roundtable with representatives of housing agencies, business, Sound Transit, the Puget Sound Educational Service District and social-service agencies to see what she can do at the federal level to help people with low and moderate incomes find affordable housing.

Adrienne Quinn, director of Seattle’s Office of Housing, said a recent study by her office reveals that 51 percent of Seattle workers do not live in the city. Households earning between $60,000 and $100,000 a year are the least likely to live within the city limits, she said.

“People are able to buy someplace, but not in the city of Seattle,” Quinn said.

As we all know, you’re less of a person if you rent, so it makes sense that Ms. Murray et. al. would focus only on buying homes when stating that Seattle is in the midst of a “silent epidemic” when it comes to “affordable housing.”

Lastly, here’s the latest paid advertisement masquerading as an opinion piece from a “guest columnist.” Steve Francks just so happens to be the CEO of the Washington Realtors. His editorial is quite transparently nothing more than the latest volley in the Washington Realtors’ It’s A Priority campaign.

Transportation experts are tearing their hair out trying to figure out how to fix Puget Sound gridlock. But if they really want to improve transportation, they should focus on housing.

There are just too many people trying to drive between home and their jobs each day. There isn’t enough tax money in the world to pave our way out of this problem, especially with our population growing by a million each decade.

Instead of trying to deal with the symptoms, I suggest we address the cause: too few affordable home choices near where people work. That’s something that we can fix — with a little help from the Legislature.

Home prices throughout our state continue to rise month after month. Wages, however, do not. The result is a huge gap between typical home prices and what typical families can afford. The Center for Real Estate Research at Washington State University, which tracks the gap with its “Housing Affordability Index,” shows home affordability in Washington at a 15-year low. The gap is particularly wide for first-time home buyers, who, according to the index, could afford the local median-price standard only if they were living in Benton or Adams counties.

What’s a middle-wage family to do? Hit the highway and drive to find an acceptable home you can afford. Between 2000 and 2005, 67,000 people moved from King County to Pierce County. Another 14,720 Pierce residents moved south to Thurston County during the same period.

If I can make some time in the next week or so, I’d like to write essentially a counter-point editorial of my own in response to Mr. Francks’ drivel.

So what other recent local real estate articles have I missed?

(Mark Trahant, Seattle P-I, 04.06.2007)
(Heather Rae Darval, Seattle Times, 04.07.2007)
(Aubrey Cohen, Seattle P-I, 04.06.2007)
(Stuart Eskenazi, Seattle Times, 04.07.2007)
(Steve Francks, Seattle Times, 04.10.2007)

→ 41 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Who Should You Believe?

By The Tim on February 28th, 2007 at 1:15 PM · 29 Comments

The post you are about to read is true. The names have been change to protect the… Well, mainly because I don’t want to start a blog war. For this same reason, I have not provided links to the posts I mention. They are available for verification upon private request.

By now, most sensible people know that the proclamations of national real estate sales spokespersons should be given little to no weight. The most visible example of course is NAR “Economist” David Lereah, who consistently spews positive predictions, despite market realities to the contrary.

Of course, “all real estate is local,” right? So David Lereah’s national predictions are fairly meaningless to us anyway. To get a feel for the local market, most people are inclined to turn to their friendly neighborhood real estate salesperson. However, is the friendly neighborhood real estate salesperson any more likely to be open, honest, and/or correct about what is happening in the local housing market, and where it is headed? Let’s take a look at a few recent examples.

As January drew to a close, area Realtor “Marzipan” stated of the local housing market that inventory had “shrunk over the last month” and that supply was “tighter, not in excess of the demand.” When the data for January became available from the NWMLS, it turned out that (King County res + condo) inventory actually rose 11.7%, with 3,744 new homes coming on the market (supply) and just 2,492 pending sales (demand). Keep in mind that as a member of the NWMLS, Marzipan has access to the data before it is published to the general public. Why she chose to make a verifiably false statement about inventory and demand is anyone’s guess.

In another recent episode, real estate agent “Homestar” reprinted a verifiably false headline from the Seattle Times, and used it as the subject of an entire post. Referring to October – December of last year, the headline claimed that “Housing sales fall in 40 states; but not in Northwest.” In reality, year-over-year sales declined 8-12% in the last three months of 2006 over the entire region covered by the NWMLS, continuing a trend that began in November 2005.

When called out on his inaccurate assertion, Homestar did not step up to correct the error. In fact, he appeared to ignore the issue all together. However, another local real estate salesperson, “Carol” readily stepped up in an apparent attempt to defend Homestar. Her tactic was to mount personal attacks and divert the discussion to home sales price, which she continued to harp on despite repeated attempts to point out the simple fact that the headline was in error. Carol utterly refused to acknowledge that the headline claim about sales was demonstrably false.

These are just a few of the most recent examples. Anyone who cares to spend some time reading the archives of the near-innumerable local real estate sales blogs is sure to find many other instances of verifiably false data being presented as fact to an unwitting public. In my experience, local real estate “professionals” are no more reliable than national PR talking heads when it comes to providing honest, accurate assessments of the present housing market.

If they can’t even manage to honestly convey things that have already happened, why should we believe their predictions of what is going to happen? In my opinion, we shouldn’t.

→ 29 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized
Tags: , ,