If you can get rid of it in a weekend, why don't you just buy a house, move your shit, and then sell that one.
Home buying thread
- Thread starter Pasteton
- Start date
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
Probably can't qualify for the $1M or so loan while carrying the other loan as well. The loan qualification shit is totally not designed for you to be owning two expensive houses.
Vinen
God is dead
- 2,783
- 490
Hah. You are likely correct. We have the 20% down but I doubt we can pre-qualify and I dont want a bridge loan.
I also dont like the risk of owning two properties. Also prevents a rushed decision.
This did lead to at least 3 arguments with my wife.
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 25,688
- 12,171
What's a short sale? Is that the $3k fee they mentioned in addition to the sales price?
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
No, a short sale is when the house is being sold for less than the owner owes the bank on it. So, the bank has to approve the sale because they will be writing down their interest in order to let the sale happen. They do this so they don't have to foreclose, pay to upkeep the house while it is re-sold, etc. A lot of times if the house isn't re-sold in a decent amount of time it'll end up becoming uninhabitable and unsellable. So short sales are "usually" better for the banks than foreclosure on houses where the house is worth less than the bank could get at a foreclosure sale.
Xarpolis
Life's a Dream
- 14,151
- 15,643
Yeah, a short sale is a last ditch effort for the bank to make some money before the house loses even more value by going into foreclosure. Think of it like this.
During a foreclosure, a bank will net around $.10 for every $1 (90% loss).
During a short sale, a bank will net around $.25 for every $1 (75% loss).
So it's less of a loss for the bank if they go through the short sale. However, banks never want to lose money, so they will drag their feet through the mud hoping that the potential buyer will just offer more than their initial offer, thus solidifying the deal.
I've heard of it taking upwards of 6 months for a bank to approve a short sale, even if you meet their asking price. It's ridiculous, but I understand. In the case of the house I listed earlier, it "may" still have a balance of $350,000. However, the owners of the house are willing to take only $300,000. I think they're still on the hook for the remaining $50,000, but not 100% sure on that one.
Actually, I should just shut up because I don't understand the process so I'm just confusing myself and whoever else is reading this.
During a foreclosure, a bank will net around $.10 for every $1 (90% loss).
During a short sale, a bank will net around $.25 for every $1 (75% loss).
So it's less of a loss for the bank if they go through the short sale. However, banks never want to lose money, so they will drag their feet through the mud hoping that the potential buyer will just offer more than their initial offer, thus solidifying the deal.
I've heard of it taking upwards of 6 months for a bank to approve a short sale, even if you meet their asking price. It's ridiculous, but I understand. In the case of the house I listed earlier, it "may" still have a balance of $350,000. However, the owners of the house are willing to take only $300,000. I think they're still on the hook for the remaining $50,000, but not 100% sure on that one.
Actually, I should just shut up because I don't understand the process so I'm just confusing myself and whoever else is reading this.
Vinen
God is dead
- 2,783
- 490
Yes. The "owners" (read: not the bank) are on the hook at some level in most cases for the difference.
Xarpolis
Life's a Dream
- 14,151
- 15,643
With that in mind, I'm not really sure why the banks have any problem with it. It "sounds" like the loan is just changing from 1 owner to the next. I'm sure there's more to it, but still, that "sounds" incredibly easy and straight forward. No idea why banks are such a pain in the ass about it.
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 25,688
- 12,171
Well, xarpolis said the bank is looking at about a 25% loss with a short sale, so clearly the original owner doesn't pay all of the difference, if they even pay any of it. So they bank's taking a loss and that's why it takes so long. I don't understand the $3k fee on the house linked if it had nothing to do with the short sale.
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
The servicers almost always waive the deficiency otherwise why would the owner cooperate with the short sale? Foreclose it and evict me, shitlords. The servicer works with them so they lose less money.
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
Those %'s are completely arbitrary it just depends on the loan amount and sale amount.
Anyone familiar with Mello-Roos and have a resource to figure out if I have to pay Mello-Roos tax on a property I purchase in California?
Vinen
God is dead
- 2,783
- 490
Hoss
Make America's Team Great Again
- 25,688
- 12,171
I just looked at his numbers again and realized how stupid they were. Losing 90% on a foreclosure? I don't think a bank would bother to foreclose for 10% of what they're owed. They'd be better off letting the people stay there and owe them forever. Maybe it's changed a lot, but when my mom was a loan officer she told me worst case on a foreclosure was the bank getting half its money back. I think typical was 75% to 80% and every once in a while they'd get 100%+, though that was very rare.
But I'm guessing the general idea was correct that they lose less on a short sale.
But I'm guessing the general idea was correct that they lose less on a short sale.
Palum
what Suineg set it to
- 23,615
- 34,165
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 24,498
- 45,439
The point is they usually release the deficiency claim as part of the short sale, otherwise the owner can tell them to fuck off and make them foreclose. So... I'm not sure which part you're not getting about that.
Vinen
God is dead
- 2,783
- 490