Thursday, July 16, 2009

Mid Year 2009 Foreclosure Market Report

1.9 MILLION FORECLOSURE FILINGS REPORTED ON MORE THAN

1.5 MILLION U.S. PROPERTIES IN FIRST HALF OF 2009



U.S. Foreclosure Activity Up 11 Percent in Q2 to Highest Quarterly Total on Record

June Marks Fourth Straight Month with More Than 300,000 Properties with Filings



IRVINE, Calif. – July 16, 2009 – RealtyTrac® (www.realtytrac.com), the leading online marketplace for foreclosure properties, today released its Midyear 2009 U.S. Foreclosure Market Report, which shows a total of 1,905,723 foreclosure filings — default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions — were reported on 1,528,364 U.S. properties in the first six months of 2009, a 9 percent increase in total properties from the previous six months and a nearly 15 percent increase in total properties from the first six months of 2008. The report also shows that 1.19 percent of all U.S. housing units (one in 84) received at least one foreclosure filing in the first half of the year.

Foreclosure filings were reported on 336,173 U.S. properties in June, the fourth straight monthly total exceeding 300,000 and helping to boost the second quarter total to the highest quarterly total since RealtyTrac began issuing its report in the first quarter of 2005. Foreclosure filings were reported on 889,829 U.S. properties in the second quarter, an increase of nearly 11 percent from the previous quarter and a 20 percent increase from the second quarter of 2008.

“In spite of the industry-wide moratorium earlier this year, along with local, state and national legislative action and increased levels of loan modification activity, foreclosure activity continues to increase to record levels,” noted James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac. “Unemployment-related foreclosures account for much of this increased activity, and the high number of borrowers who find themselves owing more on their mortgages than their homes’ are now worth represent a potentially significant future risk. Stemming the tide of foreclosures is a critical component to stabilizing the housing market, so it is imperative that the lending industry and the government work in tandem to find new approaches to address this issue.”

Nevada, Arizona, Florida post top state foreclosure rates

More than 6 percent of Nevada housing units (one in 16) received at least one foreclosure filing in the first half of 2009, giving it the nation’s highest foreclosure rate during the six-month period. A total of 68,708 Nevada properties received a foreclosure filing from January to June, an increase of 23 percent from the previous six months and an increase of 61 percent from the first half of 2008.

Arizona registered the nation’s second highest state foreclosure rate in the first half of 2009, with 3.37 percent of its housing units (one in 30) receiving at least one foreclosure filing, and Florida registered the nation’s third highest state foreclosure rate, with 3.08 percent of its housing units (one in 33) receiving at least one foreclosure filing.

Other states with foreclosure rates ranking among the nation’s 10 highest were California (2.94 percent), Utah (1.46 percent), Georgia (1.42 percent), Michigan (1.34 percent), Illinois (1.31 percent), Idaho (1.26 percent) and Colorado (1.25 percent).

California, Florida, Arizona post highest foreclosure totals

A total of 391,611 California properties received a foreclosure filing in the first half of 2009, the nation’s highest total and 2.94 percent of the state’s housing units (one in 34) — the nation’s fourth highest state foreclosure rate. California foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased nearly 14 percent from the previous six months and increased nearly 15 percent from the first half of 2008.

With 268,064 properties receiving a foreclosure filing in the first six months of 2009, Florida documented the second highest state total. Florida foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased 7 percent from the previous six months and was up nearly 42 percent from the first half of 2008.

Arizona’s 89,799 properties receiving a foreclosure filing in the first six months of 2009 was the third highest state total. Arizona foreclosure activity in the first half of 2009 increased 13 percent from the previous six months and was up nearly 55 percent from the first half of 2008.

Other states with totals among the 10 highest in the country were Illinois (68,932), Nevada (68,708), Michigan (60,786), Ohio (58,937), Georgia (56,391), Texas (49,144) and Virginia (28,368).

Report methodology

The RealtyTrac U.S. Foreclosure Market Report provides a count of the total number of properties with at least one foreclosure filing reported during the first half of the year at the state and national level. Data is also available at the individual county level. Data is collected from more than 2,200 counties nationwide, and those counties account for more than 90 percent of the U.S. population. RealtyTrac’s report incorporates documents filed in all three phases of foreclosure: Default — Notice of Default (NOD) and Lis Pendens (LIS); Auction — Notice of Trustee Sale and Notice of Foreclosure Sale (NTS and NFS); and Real Estate Owned, or REO properties (that have been foreclosed on and repurchased by a bank). If more than one foreclosure document is filed against a property during six-month period, only the most recent filing is counted in the report.

U.S. Foreclosure Market Data by State – Jan to Jun 2009















Disclaimer:This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author. It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any NASD broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities.

The Fed Under Fire

The Federal Reserve is one of the most powerful and secretive institutions in Washington, long considered beyond the reach of lawmakers. But now, as details emerge of how the Fed secretly doled out...




Disclaimer:This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author. It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any NASD broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

Investors Beware

Recent reports of price appreciation are comparing apples and oranges. We are extremely concerned that policy makers, banking and real estate industry executives, investors and others will use misleading home price data to conclude that home prices have stabilized. They have not.

These same influencers used this data in 2006 and 2007 to make decisions, many of which have proven to be poor decisions. It was a tough lesson, and hopefully one that won't be repeated.

This is a complex issue. Here is why:

Reported home prices and home price indices rely on a small sample of transactions that represent far less than 1% of the owned homes in an area. The rise of subprime-related loans in 2004, and the subsequent foreclosures since then, has skewed the price data significantly. There are many issues associated with the price data, including heavy discounts on distress sales. Because the bulk of the transactions since 2004 have also been in lower-priced neighborhoods, the following has resulted:

Recently reported median prices have been lower than the true value of the median home in the market, resulting in reported prices today that are far less than the value of the median home in an area.

Case-Shiller and other indices have been misinterpreted. They reported a higher percentage appreciation than occurred on most homes in 2006, and more price depreciation than has occurred on most homes since that time because their sample size is based on what has been transacting. Transactions have predominantly been limited to homes in lower-priced neighborhoods. The Case-Shiller and Zillow tiered price indices show this clearly, but this granular detail is usually too much for most news articles.

Today, we are seeing the mix of transactions shifting back to the typical neighborhood. That mix shift is causing the median price to increase when, in fact, there is no real price appreciation going on. Our analysis of 390 metro areas across the country shows that the percentage of markets reporting a month-over-month increase in the median price has jumped to 39% from 22% two months earlier. What is really happening is that people are now comparing the price on a 3-bedroom home in a typical neighborhood to the price on a 3-bedroom home in a poor neighborhood - because that's what was selling several months ago.

We also believe that Case-Shiller and others could report an overcorrection because the low-end price correction has slowed, but the high-end price correction is accelerating. If the high end grabs a large percentage of the transactions, the indices could over-report the price correction because of double counting this phenomenon.

Depending on the decision you are trying to make, there are solutions to understanding the right pricing methodology to use. This includes some relatively new tools and indices. Before you make an important decision, be sure that you understand the facts behind the pricing measures you are using.

Source: John Burns Real Estate Consulting


Disclaimer:This is a personal web site, reflecting the opinions of its author. It is not a production of my employer, and it is unaffiliated with any NASD broker/dealer. Statements on this site do not represent the views or policies of anyone other than myself. The information on this site is provided for discussion purposes only, and are not investing recommendations. Under no circumstances does this information represent a recommendation to buy or sell securities.