Country Wide

[AAbsolute]

Not sure how you put the blame on them. They have no clue what the bank will take. Most of the time the number you see is based off of a number that was established and slowly brought down until and offer shows. It really is quite interesting. A pain but quite a game. The process has some many different variables that it is really hard to explain the entire process over a thread. I have taken many classes on it and still learning every day. If you would like to learn more over a cup of coffee, give me a call and I would enjoy explaining what I have learned.

BTW, sometimes the number is the correct number that the bank will take because the process has already exposed itself and BPO has been obtained.

If I am the owner it would be my responsibility to list my home for a price I could sell it for. What does the bank have to do with that responsibility. This sounds a little to Liberal or Social for my liking.

So what you are saying is there are Realtors who list property for a price that might be acceptable or might be bait?

 

[SHELLY]

Tonight on some money show on CNBC they had that old RE flake Barbara Corcoran :roll:

First she advised a fireman, an underwater "investulator" with 4 rental properties, to "hang on to the properties" and search for an investor (by advertising on Craig's List ) to help bail him out. This poor sod was losing a couple thousand a month--I noticed she didn't jump in and offer to be "that" investor (I was hoping the guy would have asked her on the air--it would have been worth the price of admission )

She then redeemed herself by advising folks not to chase after short sells since the process is lengthy and complicated--she recommended waiting for properties to fall into foreclosure--cutting out the distressed owner middleman--and just simply dealing with the bank.

.

 

[Smiling JOe]

If I am the owner it would be my responsibility to list my home for a price I could sell it for. What does the bank have to do with that responsibility. This sounds a little to Liberal or Social for my liking.

So what you are saying is there are Realtors who list property for a price that might be acceptable or might be bait?

AAbsolute. If you. as a seller, cannot pay the difference between the selling price and the amount owed, at the closing table, how do you think that the lender doesn't have a say? They will want their money, and the property is the collateral.

I won't say that that a sales agent would bait someone, but I will say that many are trying to price the property appropriately. You can search listings for the cheapest house for sale in 32459 zipcode and find a house which last sold for around $4million, which is now listed as a short-sale with information suggesting that the offer price start at $10,001. That technically isn't a violation of the MLS, because the MLS cannot regulate the prices. However, there may be a case of Ethics violation, if anyone wanted to push the issue. The agent doesn't not reside in NW FL, and suggest that all offers be presented directly to the seller.

 

[Smiling JOe]

...She then redeemed herself by advising folks not to chase after short sells since the process is lengthy and complicated--she recommended waiting for properties to fall into foreclosure--cutting out the distressed owner middleman--and just simply dealing with the bank.

.

I'm not sure why the bank thinks the seller is the middle man in the short -sales. Usually, the seller is more than willing to take a reduced price, and they make their decision very quickly whether to accept an offer or not. If there is a middle man, it is really the lender, who will soon be the new owner, and may have just as much red tape.

 

[SHELLY]

I'm not sure why the bank thinks the seller is the middle man in the short -sales. Usually, the seller is more than willing to take a reduced price, and they make their decision very quickly whether to accept an offer or not. If there is a middle man, it is really the lender, who will soon be the new owner, and may have just as much red tape.

I thought it a tad odd too--but in your comment above you still note that the seller "might" not accept an offer (Babs didn't give examples--*will you?). If there is even a chance that the owner would have reason to reject any offer, then they are an obstacle a buyer can just as well do without.

(*I'm guessing one reason might be a "perceived" super low ball bid that the owner fears will halt the progress of unloading the property as the offer makes its way through the system.)

 

[Bobby J]

I'm not sure why the bank thinks the seller is the middle man in the short -sales. Usually, the seller is more than willing to take a reduced price, and they make their decision very quickly whether to accept an offer or not. If there is a middle man, it is really the lender, who will soon be the new owner, and may have just as much red tape.

Once bank owned, they call an agent to list and now the game begins. In a short sale you have the seller and buyer working together to get the bank to sell the home. Once the bank owns the property you are back to more game playing that is different for every bank. This is sooooo much funn!

 

[Bobby J]

If I am the owner it would be my responsibility to list my home for a price I could sell it for. What does the bank have to do with that responsibility. This sounds a little to Liberal or Social for my liking.

So what you are saying is there are Realtors who list property for a price that might be acceptable or might be bait?

How does this relate to being liberal or social for ones liking?

 

[AAbsolute]

It seems the system is slowing shifting responsibility from the owner who created the transaction over to the bank as the responsible party who in turn will be shifting responsibility to a government bail out.

I know the path is not that clear, but I see and hear a lot of grown ups looking to shift responsibility.

 

[Miss Critter]

In a short sale, the seller is getting nothing. He's selling for less than he owes the bank. There's no profit in it for him whatsoever. The reason sellers try for short sales versus letting the property fall into foreclosure is to try to salvage their credit. On average, short sales reduced credit scores by about 100 points, foreclosures by about 200. That was before most lenders required you to be delinquent before even discussing the possibility of a short sale with you.

And Shelly, funny how Ms. Corcoran advised the buyer to wait for the foreclosure. A week or two ago, she advised an upside down seller on The Today Show to pursue a short sale with his lender. The woman is a complete flake. How she garnered the "expert" moniker is beyond me.

 

[mikeyboy]

I am thinking seriously about becoming a beach property owner again (I sold my condo in late 2004). My agent has advised me against short sales, saying they are a waste of time.
This thread seems to support his premise. Why would I wait 6 or 7 months to find out if my offer has been accepted when there appears to be an abundance of reasonably priced non short sale properties on the market? Especially if in the case of short sales "low ball offers are a waste of time".
It seems to me you could find a much better deal from someone who needs to sell and bought before all the craziness.

mikeyboy