"4 weeks and then all hell breaks loose"

[RobertLarsen_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

 

[25inIrvine_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

Kinda a rookie question, but do you have to physically go there or is there a website for this?

 

[LoudRoar_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

Kinda a rookie question, but do you have to physically go there or is there a website for this?

You can go to thissite to see the doc exists.

To see the actual document, you can go to santa ana or to el toro exit right next to circuit city. That office you can search up to 1982. Must have a name or doc number, no parcel numbers allowed. It is primitive. If someone could download and index and make a cool website with the recorder office then THAT would be a great site.

Something def is up with Redfin. Someone who didn't like Redfin found a way to skim down the inventory. Probably on a secondary database not mls, or maybe reo's immediately turned over to property trust/management company. Clearly they wanted to limit supply so hell wouldn't break lose, and they have succeed so far.

Another site (i find better for areas outside oc/california) is Windermere. Some of it is extremely outdated, but it's decent.

 

[graphrix_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

Kinda a rookie question, but do you have to physically go there or is there a website for this?

County records does indeed show that doc# 2008-00527222 was a grant deed.

Here is the thing though. Robert excluded data of nine properties because they were "preforeclosure" or "scheduled for the auction" or "not on title as bank owned"... well, I offered to cross reference them, because I know that I can. So there you have 9 properties he excluded. Now then I found 15, 16 if you include the expired property, so some have changed hands, but still some are still are REO (about 10). So that means anywhere from 15-20 properties that are still REO that he excluded. Not a whole lot, but when we are talking about 70 or so properties in AV on the MLS that are REO, it makes a big difference, and that it is a margin of error above 15%.

So here is my olive branch... we all have access to different data sources, and instead of whipping out our %^*&'s to see whose is bigger, why don't we work together to see what the true story is? Seriously, there are just too many data sources out there for everyone to be right. I bet we will meet somewhere in the middle. This why it pisses my off that we do not have access to the MLS, because if we did, we wouldn't even have this thread. Not that title cos. are going to be cheap, access to data is only going to get worse for us all.

 

[LoudRoar_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

*edit* now i see it, 2008. duh. that county rec office website is the cutting edge of internet technology.

 

[graphrix_IHB]

Just to make sure this property is in OC? Doc number should have 8 digits, i believe.

See above. :cheese:

 

[no_vaseline_IHB]

You are growing on me. I'll consider it.

As I've told a couple of moderators (and now you):

I just want the truth. In order to get there, I need to have cites to confirm it's not a mirage. I'm a big boy and can handle it one way or another. This is why I'm pressing you for cites I can make independently.

If you are right, I'll be a bitter renter for the rest of my SoCal resedency (and gladly so). If you are wrong, well, the world doesn't end so well for lots of folks.

The truth of sunshine is a great disinfectant. Sorry for the spelling. Too much scotch tonight.

 

[no_vaseline_IHB]

After reading the last several posts, I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea - I'm not trying to make peace. I just want to know what the real deal is (as always).

(hic) hand me another drink wouldya?

 

[LoudRoar_IHB]

Well maybe just for you kids, we can create a thread entitled "Schoolyard Antics" and move it to the Water Cooler section. Then you boys can go slap each other around all you want over there while keeping the conversation on topic here for the adults. Perhaps that would suit everyone well.

I dunno... every time I try to stay on topic... I get accused of crossing some imaginary jackal-line.

Lucky for geo and RobLar... they have someone to save them from the horrible taunts of the Internets.

Back to the juice:

1. Pre-shadow, shadow, me and my shadow... whatever... I can't imagine in this economy that all the distressed properties as a result of the bubble bursting, job losses and stricter guidelines are all out there and accounted for. The numbers just don't make sense (but then again... I don't understand well).

2. Does everyone understand there are reasons why banks would hold onto properties even if they say they are not? PM CapWorks, Graph or awgee for the 3-part lesson.

3. Loan mods are ineffective. Just like $8000 tax credit. Sheesh... that's less than double Cash for Clunkers and even $150k Tustin condos cost 6 times a new car... keep throwing my pennies in the ocean and hope to make a wave.

4. This thread is 4 weeks out and nothing so far. Maybe geo, RobLar and NewSkip are right and we should go out there and buy while we can.

RobLar? Really? Do I have to put one of these ™ after my name?

LoudRoar™

 

[no_vaseline_IHB]

Yes, that's very impressive. You have graduated out of passive-aggressive into aggressive. (I like that better, it is so much more honorable.)

There is no graduating. I find passive/agressive types to be pukes. If you met me, you'd understand why inert/agressive suits me fine. I find slight of hand types to be pukes too, but you have potential to redeem yourself.

 

[RobertLarsen_IHB]

The most obvious answer is it never closed and the MLS is wrong. I'm not saying it's the only answer........

Skippy is not going to like those apples

Document number: 527222

Maybe it went back to the bank? I'm a little confused by it as well. Because title shows the 11/10/2008 purchase, but as of 4/15/2009 JPM owns the property again. And to top, a loan was recorded on the property on 7/30/2009 by Bank of America. To know for 100% certainty, I would need to contact title. But there was definitely a purchase on 11/10/2008. Is it so hard to believe redfin is wrong?

Redfin isn't wrong - I cited another source with identical data. They usually pick up title changes in days. Is the county backed up? Was it never recorded? ???!!!!???

Once again, the document number is 527222. You can go to the county recorder and look it up if you'd like. I am actually looking at the proof it was recorded.

Kinda a rookie question, but do you have to physically go there or is there a website for this?

County records does indeed show that doc# 2008-00527222 was a grant deed.

Here is the thing though. Robert excluded data of nine properties because they were "preforeclosure" or "scheduled for the auction" or "not on title as bank owned"... well, I offered to cross reference them, because I know that I can. So there you have 9 properties he excluded. Now then I found 15, 16 if you include the expired property, so some have changed hands, but still some are still are REO (about 10). So that means anywhere from 15-20 properties that are still REO that he excluded. Not a whole lot, but when we are talking about 70 or so properties in AV on the MLS that are REO, it makes a big difference, and that it is a margin of error above 15%.

So here is my olive branch... we all have access to different data sources, and instead of whipping out our %^*&'s to see whose is bigger, why don't we work together to see what the true story is? Seriously, there are just too many data sources out there for everyone to be right. I bet we will meet somewhere in the middle. This why it pisses my off that we do not have access to the MLS, because if we did, we wouldn't even have this thread. Not that title cos. are going to be cheap, access to data is only going to get worse for us all.

Haha sorry, Graphrix, didn't mean to be ignoring you.

 

[RobertLarsen_IHB]

Who was it again that I can contact to change my screen name?...

 

[usctrojanman29_IHB]

Who was it again that I can contact to change my screen name?...

Zovall or IrvineRenter.

 

[graphrix_IHB]

Who was it again that I can contact to change my screen name?...

It is zovall, but all your posts will stay, so we will know it is still you. Don't even think about creating a new account... You will have to search for pandagate to find out why that is a bad idea. You should stick with your name, it's cool, we all know who you are now.

I will get to those addresses later, and thanks for getting back to me on it.

 

[trrenter_IHB]

I had to do this.

 

[RobertLarsen_IHB]

Who was it again that I can contact to change my screen name?...

It is zovall, but all your posts will stay, so we will know it is still you. Don't even think about creating a new account... You will have to search for pandagate to find out why that is a bad idea. You should stick with your name, it's cool, we all know who you are now.

I will get to those addresses later, and thanks for getting back to me on it.

Good, I don't want my posts to go away, and I don't want to create a new account. If he can change it, cool, if not, okay. I'll make sure everyone still knows who I am.

 

[irvine_home_owner_IHB]

Like i said before, I think that there will be an increase in foreclosure from this point, but it will not be the flood that so many have predicted.

So all those NOD filings will evaporate or get geo-loanmodded?

I'm still trying to understand how people who couldn't afford the loans in the first place will be able to afford those loans now unless:

1. The rate is 0%

2. The term is 100 years.

3. The balance is reduced by over 50%.

3. The loan mod comes with a job.

Seriously, how do you qualify for 31 DTI if you are out of job? Unless these "alternate" loan mods have 100 DTI guidelines.

And I would say that we are relatively up-to-date with the existing REO inventory, and there is no huge backlog, except for the 1-3 month old foreclosures still in the pipeline.

Is this your opinion? Maybe I'm reading the wrong articles because I read that there is backlog which banks attribute to sheer volume, the moratorium, getting loan mod programs set (which should have been done a while ago) or lack of manpower. I'm sure there are other non-motivators in play here but you guys don't seem too convinced.

I have a question (since I don't understand well):

All those NTS properties, what list do they show up on when they get postponed or go back to the bank or even get sold to a bidder? There seems to be a lot of postponing going on... do you classify those as shadow inventory?

 

[NewportSkipper_IHB]

1. The rate is 0%

2. The term is 100 years.

3. The balance is reduced by over 50%.

3. The loan mod comes with a job.

Damn, can you be any more of a drama queen?

 

[irvine_home_owner_IHB]

Damn, can you be any more of a drama queen?

Someone save me... I'm getting taunted by a jackal.

Do you have anything of value to add to this discussion? Would you care to attempt to answer my question? Or do you still feel the need to prove your internet machismo by insulting others?

Sling away... but the question still remains... where are all these NODs going to go because loan mods are NOT the answer.

 

[EvaLSeraphim_IHB]

Damn, can you be any more of a drama queen?

Someone save me... I'm getting taunted by a jackal.

Well, there is always the "Ignore" button, and fewer better uses exist around here, IMO.