There are no courthouse default notices, and it is unlikely for real estate investors to go knocking on the white house doors to try to purchase it as a short sale. Although a government default is not quite the same as a default on your mortgage, a government default will nonetheless have consequences in the housing market.
A U.S. default would be uncharted economic waters; there is no way to know exactly what will happen – but it will most certainly not be good. When speculating about the consequences of a government default, some talk about 1930’s Germany and 1990’s Russia; these defaults occurred for different reasons and had different outcomes.
Experts discuss a possible consequence of a government default to be an almost immediate economic recession, which could rapidly evolve into a depression. The resulting shock from a possible economic contraction would filter through the economy and would no doubt result in mass layoffs. And just like the most recent recession, mass unemployment had deleterious effects in the housing market and real estate industry resulting in waves of foreclosures and property devaluation.
Other possible outcomes of a default could be runaway inflation, sky high interest rates, and/or general economic calamity. In these scenarios, forget about a housing recovery; home buyers could find it exponentially difficult to obtain a mortgage to buy a home. Homeowners who have fixed rate mortgages should be safe from payment increases; however those with adjustable rate mortgages could possibly see interest rate increases hitting adjustment caps.
In an October 9th article, Morgan Housel wrote (“What Happens If the U.S. Defaults on Its Debt?”; fool.com); “…Those holding bad mortgage debt fared the worst in 2008, but financial pain spread throughout the entire financial system, and to areas that had nothing to do with real estate. The reason was fear. If the global financial system is built on credit, it is supported by trust. When you remove trust, people hide now and ask questions later. The system freezes. I don’t want to lend to you because you might hold something bad, or be lending to someone who is holding something bad, or be lending to someone who is lending to someone who is holding something bad. So people just wait. Credit stops flowing, and as we learned in 2008, that simply devastates the economy… But a credit crisis doesn’t need to last long to bring the house down. Lehman Brothers was well capitalized two days before it was bankrupt…”
Fear is a very powerful emotion that can be used to influence popular beliefs and behavior. As congressional budget talks have been at a standstill, talk of a government default seems to be on everyone’s mind as we approach the debt ceiling. And although we fear a government default, the distinction must be made between default and debt ceiling.
Put in a very simple way: raising the debt ceiling is akin to asking for an increase in your credit card limit. However, you don’t default just because your credit limit is not raised; you default when you fail to make payments on your debt. Even if there is no debt ceiling increase, many experts agree that a chance of a U.S. default is slim; it has been estimated that treasury revenue is much more than the amount needed for debt servicing. Regardless, the fear of a government default is enough to chill the housing market.
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.
At a recent round table meeting chaired by local real estate agents and lenders, someone asked the Realtors® to describe current market conditions. Although descriptions were given with pride and confidence, they were not different from the depictions that have been reported throughout the year; the responses seemed shallow and pedestrian.
Attendees were hoping for responses that demonstrated a grasp of the local housing market, but instead they got a media narrative that doesn’t tell the whole story. One agent eagerly provided her response saying, “there is a lack of inventory, making it difficult for buyers to find a home.” While another agent described how home sellers need to be realistic about home prices because buyers are wary of paying higher prices and continued appraisal issues.
To say that housing inventory is low is not telling the whole story. Local housing market activity during 2013, not unlike conditions reported around the country, felt like the peak market conditions of eight years ago – but for different reasons. Montgomery County’s active single family home listings through September 2013 increased about 7.7% compared to the same period in 2012, as reported by the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors® (gcaar.com). Although county single family home active listings are less than half that were recorded in 2007; consider that SFH actives are also at about the same level reported during 2005, which is considered to be the peak market.
Although the number of homes listed may be close to the same levels of the peak market, SFH closings are reported to be about 34% lower than the number reported during the same period in 2005; and SFH contract activity is about 30% lower than 2005 as well. Even though the market has seemed as if it has been the most active in recent years, SFH contract activity is slightly lower than the same period in 2009.
And although home sale prices have rebounded somewhat, average sale prices continue to be way below what they were during the market peak. It is easy for home sellers to grasp on the reports of double-digit year-over-year increases; however, sellers who expect the same return are disappointed. The year over year jump in home prices are explained by some experts as a statistical phenomenon produced by the sharp decrease in distressed home sales (e.g., foreclosures and short sales). This can be accounted for by the nominal month-over-month increases in average home sale prices through 2013.
Home sale absorption rate through 2013 has been similar to that of 2012, considered to be the housing market bottom. Absorption rate measures the pace of home sales by comparing monthly sales to the same month’s listings. This similar pace may indicate that the increased activity during 2013 may not be due to “pent up demand,” which has been a popular narrative by economists; but rather it may signify the underlying strengths in the marketplace.
That being said, the housing market is co-dependent on overall economic conditions. As mortgage interest rates have slowly risen, we have seen a resiliency in the market as home sales have remained stable. And as some economists are talking about the possibility of the double digit interest rates in the future, it appears as if a slow and deliberate increase has not yet deterred home buyers.
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.
After much speculation, mortgage interest rates appear to be on the move. Even with rising interest rates, rates are still relatively low. Some economists expect that when the Fed’s Quantitative Easing program begins tapering, mortgage interest rates may jump due to financial market volatility.
Many fear that rising interest rates could derail the recovering housing market. In an August 19th news release (realtor.org), Chief NAR economist Lawrence Yun stated that although the pace of home sales are at its highest since February 2007, the market could be experiencing a “temporary peak” due to home buyers’ seeking to close deals before interest rates rise significantly. Looking ahead, Dr. Yun expects that rising interest rates and limited inventory could create an imbalanced market due to inconsistent home sales.
Home sale prices also have been rising, prompting bidding wars, as the median home sale price was reported by NAR to have maintained nine consecutive months of double digit year over year increases. However, Dr. Yun stated, “Limited inventory in some areas means multiple bidding remains a factor; 17 percent of all homes sold above the asking price in August, although 63 percent sold below list price.”
This week’s release of July’s S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index (spindices.com) also revealed that home sale prices were still holding onto the double digit annual rate of gain over 2012 levels, as the 10 city and 20 city composites posted about a 12% year over year increase for July. However, it is pointed out that home price are still “far below their peak levels.”
The sharp increases in home sale prices sparked fears of another housing bubble. But price gains only increased about 2% from June to July. Monthly price gains have lessened, and the gradual slowdown of home price gains may indicate that home prices may be peaking. Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices, David M. Blitzer, stated, “Following the increase in mortgage rates beginning last May, applications for mortgages have dropped, suggesting that rising interest rates are affecting housing. The Fed’s announcement last week that QE3 bond buying will continue for the time being may have only a limited, though favorable, impact on housing.”
The rapid increase in home prices has affected potential appreciation for many home owners who waited to sell their homes. And the increased inventory provided additional housing stock for eager home buyers. Given the recent increases in home sale prices, the expectation of an uncertain real estate market may not be welcome news by home buyers and sellers.
But home price increases have not only helped the housing market, but the economy as a whole. CoreLogic (corelogic.com) reported that the housing sector contributed about 17% to GDP growth during the first quarter of 2013. However, CoreLogic predicts that increasing mortgage rates will directly affect the housing market, and indirectly affect the overall economy: Single family housing starts (new homes) are thought to be declining because of increasing mortgage rates; and CoreLogic estimates that long term GDP growth to be about 1.75%.
It remains to be seen if modest increases in mortgage interest rates have been beneficial to stave off another housing bubble. However, given that the indicators and experts point to a housing recovery peak; increasing mortgage interest rates could suggest caution for the housing market.
Original located at https://dankrell.com/blog/2013/09/26/rising-interest-rates-a-help-and-hindrance-to-recovering-housing-market-2/
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Five years ago this week Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy and almost immediately initiated the financial crisis. What followed in the wake of the Lehman Brothers collapse was a domino effect of financial sector failures which resulted in: a number of bailouts and government takeovers of failing entities; finger pointing and blame for the foreclosure and financial crises; and a number of laws to address the issues that are thought to have contributed to the crisis.
In retrospect, the financial crisis may have been circuitously the result of the foreclosure crisis, which was entering its second year. At the end of 2006, the real estate market was already seeing a major shift from the record breaking seller’s market, to a market that saw inventory climb to record highs. At that time I wrote about how nationwide foreclosures had increased 27%, and how economists were expecting existing home sales to continue at the same levels into 200, which was to initiate a housing recovery.
By the spring of 2007, the experts’ opinion of a short lived foreclosure crisis was not to be realized; and the blame game for the foreclosure crisis was in full swing. Trying to make sense of the foreclosure crisis, almost daily media reports of inflated appraisals and misrepresentation of mortgage terms were popular. At that time there was no way to pinpoint one source for the crisis. While the foreclosure crisis was in full swing, we did not have the perspective to understand all the participants and components that contributed to the resulting Great Recession.
Testimony to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission in 2010 included descriptions of the CDO (collateralized debt obligation) market. Financial brokers packaged mortgages into CDOs and sold them worldwide; the returns for these CDOs were so good that the demand was seemingly insatiable. As the demand for CDOs increased, the number of mortgages that were needed also increased. To meet the increasing demand of mortgage production, the temptation to bend the rules and lend to almost anyone seemed to be at the heart of this piece to the crisis; and many of those mortgages were subsequently foreclosed. The fraud seemed to reach in other areas too, including financial rating agencies that graded subprime CDOs as “AAA” to make them more appealing.
To improve accountability and transparency in the financial system, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and to end “too big to fail,” the landmark Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was enacted. The broad and wide sweeping Dodd-Frank legislation created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the idea of the Qualified Residential Mortgage. Although the legislation has been widely acclaimed; there are many who remain critical of the legislation, saying that the markets could be set up for the next crisis.
Only in retrospect we can begin to understand the complexity of the dynamics which brought about the almost collapse of the financial sector through the mortgage markets. And while there have been a number of hearings, books, working papers, and dissertations about the causes and effects of the foreclosure and financial crises, we still seek to condense complex issues into a digestible statement. If a movie is produced about the financial crisis, the slugline might be: “Financial crisis that was a result of fraud that took advantage of a hot real estate market and easy money.”
Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.
Understanding representation in a real estate transaction can sometimes be tricky. You might think, after all, “If I work with a real estate agent, they represent me.” Not so fast; understanding whom real estate agents represent can be confusing in some situations, most notable is the concept of dual agency.
Maryland, like many other jurisdictions around the country, allows for dual agency. “The possibility of dual agency,” as described on the Maryland Real Estate Commission website (www.dllr.state.md.us/license/mrec/mrecrep.shtml), “…arises when the buyer’s agent and the seller’s agent both work for the same real estate company, and the buyer is interested in property listed by that company. The real estate broker or the broker’s designee, is called the “dual agent.” Dual agents do not act exclusively in the interests of either the seller or buyer, and therefore cannot give undivided loyalty to either party. There may be a conflict of interest because the interests of the seller and buyer may be different or adverse” [emphasis added].
Dual agency has been widely debated since its inception. And as the industry rapidly transforms, the issue is likely to continue to be a hot topic; for example, as real estate teams have become more prevalent in the marketplace, many argue that the potential for conflicts of interest in dual agency transactions becomes increasingly significant.
In his February 2010 Agbeat.com article (February 16, 2010; The Age Old Dual Agency in Real Estate Debate), Patrick Flynn states that although dual agency is legal in many jurisdictions, “…dual Agency is the ultimate no win scenario. Even if all parties agree in writing (and if you explained the likely pitfalls and risks to both parties…they never would agree) you simply cannot perform your prescribed duties…”
He continues to say that although there is potential for damage and irreparable harm to those involved in a dual agency transaction, most of these transactions close “without a hitch;” and the agent’s attention moves from common sense and integrity to the “little devil” on their shoulder that tells them, “Look at all the money you made!”
Recent research, investigating whether dual agency transactions are a result of agent incentives (e.g., money) or efficiency, suggests that the issue deserves further investigation to understand (among other things) the effects of dual agency, potential for conflicts, and to determine if buyers and sellers are poorly informed. Regardless, Brastow & Waller conclude in their 2013 study (Dual agency representation: Incentive conflicts or efficiencies? The Journal of Real Estate Research, 35(2), 199-222) that dual agency is more likely to occur at the beginning and end of a listing contract. When a dual agency sale occurs at the beginning of a listing, they conclude that it is a result of agent incentive and results in an efficient quick sale. However, when a dual agency sale occurs at the end of a listing contract it is usually due to agent incentive (e.g., avoiding loss of sale) and the home is more likely to sell for less.
Locally, the Maryland Real Estate Commission requires that real estate licensees, who are assisting you, provide disclosures describing agency relationships (including dual agency) “at the time of the first scheduled face to face contact with you.” Your agent can assist you in understanding dual agency, when it occurs, the potential issues of dual agency, as well as what should happen if you decide to not agree to dual agency.
