Home-loan delinquencies
dip B washington» The
percentage rate of single-family
home loans behind in payments
by at least 90 days improved
between August and
September, government-controlled
lender Freddie Mac
said Tuesday. The company
said its single-family homeloan
delinquency fell to 3.80
percent in September from
3.83 percent in August.
Denver Post staff and wire reports
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Denver Rated 5th Smartest City
Denver rated fifth-smartest
city. Denver was ranked the
fifth-smartest city in the nation
in the Daily Beast’s second
annual ranking of America’s
55 largest cities.
Denver came in behind Boston;
Hartford-New Haven,
Conn.; San Francisco-Oakland-
San Jose, Calif.; and
Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
city. Denver was ranked the
fifth-smartest city in the nation
in the Daily Beast’s second
annual ranking of America’s
55 largest cities.
Denver came in behind Boston;
Hartford-New Haven,
Conn.; San Francisco-Oakland-
San Jose, Calif.; and
Raleigh-Durham, N.C.
Quest for the Perfect Credit Score-Some consumers take every step they can to reach rare 850 mark
Chicago Tribune/CNN
September 7, 2010
A major league pitcher dreams of throwing a perfect game. High schoolers eyeing the Ivy League study furiously in hopes of earning 2400 on the SAT. Meanwhile, Chris Peplinski is pursuing his own brand of flawlessness: an 850 credit score.
The 37-year-old stay-at-home dad from Rogers, Ark., has nabbed 813 on the FICO scale, the credit scoring system most lenders use in sizing up potential borrowers.
That ranks him above more than 82 percent of Americans and comes with a big payoff: It entitles him to ultralow rates on loans, saving him tens of thousands of bucks over a lifetime.
Nevertheless, Peplinski won't be satisfied until he hits the maximum: 850. Why?
"Your credit score tells a lot about you," Peplinski said. "A high score means you're responsible and in control of your life. You're trustworthy."
To reach his goal, Peplinski voraciously reads up on every element that goes into a FICO score, checks his number every three months and tweaks his behavior to eke out every possible additional point.
Two years ago, he took out a car loan even though he and his wife, Chrissy, had the cash to buy their wheels outright. He figured that adding to his mix of credit might boost his score.
In spite of Chris' best efforts, landing an 850 may be a quixotic goal: Only about 0.5 percent of Americans manage it, FICO reports.
"The 850 score is kind of like a unicorn," said John Ulzheimer, a credit scoring expert with Credit.com who used to work for FICO. "Everybody talks about it, but nobody's seen it."
The reality is that you don't need to catch the unicorn to catch the best rates. But adopting some of the habits of members of the 800 club can help you improve your own score.
And that can translate into real money: On a $300,000, 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, the most creditworthy borrowers will pay $14,200 less than those one tier below; $25,600 less than those two tiers below.
But as for exactly how many points you'll gain or lose for, say, taking on a mortgage, being late on a bill or charging credit cards up to the max? That's proprietary information: "It's a black box," said FICO spokesman Craig Watts.
Mystery feeds obsession. Some credit score aficionados passionately debate their hypotheses on message boards like the FICO Forums at myfico.com. Others use themselves as guinea pigs to discover which moves will nudge a score up or down.
Some check their score obsessively, at least every few months, at a cost of $50 or more a year. They also fixate on their credit reports, upon which the scores are based.
Leland Lim, a 41-year-old doctor from northern California, is vigilant about scanning these for errors that might drag down his number.
"It took me three years to get a derogatory entry on one of them corrected," said Lim, who now earns an 806.
As for what makes an 800-plus score, these self-made experts basically say the same thing FICO does: Payment history is the single most important factor.
"I have this fetish about paying bills as soon as they come in the house," said Dick Husemann, 66, a retired Air Force officer from Wilmington, N.C. He and his wife, Brenda, 69, attribute their high scores, matching 818s, to never missing a credit payment.
The Husemanns also never charge more than 10 percent of their credit limit. They're not alone in that: Most score enthusiasts aim to keep a low "utilization ratio," or the amount they owe compared with the amount of credit available to them. FICO verifies that a low ratio can help your score.
With lenders routinely closing inactive accounts, Lim rotates all his credit cards into circulation.
But because his charges also affect that ratio, a few months before applying for a loan he stops using the cards or pays them off before the statement is generated. That way, Lim said, "my score jumps a bit," just in time for the lender to see.
The 800 club members are also conscious of their mix of credit.
Lim got interested in the scoring process two years ago while refinancing a home-equity loan into a home-equity line of credit. Having heard that revolving debt could affect a score more than an installment loan, he studied up.
His research revealed that home-equity lines of credit are not considered revolving debt in the FICO model. (The scoring firm confirms this.) And remember that car loan Peplinski took out, even though he didn't have to? He did it because FICO favors those with a variety of credit types.
"I probably paid $100 in interest," he said. "But it was worth it because we raised our credit scores by 15 points."
September 7, 2010
A major league pitcher dreams of throwing a perfect game. High schoolers eyeing the Ivy League study furiously in hopes of earning 2400 on the SAT. Meanwhile, Chris Peplinski is pursuing his own brand of flawlessness: an 850 credit score.
The 37-year-old stay-at-home dad from Rogers, Ark., has nabbed 813 on the FICO scale, the credit scoring system most lenders use in sizing up potential borrowers.
That ranks him above more than 82 percent of Americans and comes with a big payoff: It entitles him to ultralow rates on loans, saving him tens of thousands of bucks over a lifetime.
Nevertheless, Peplinski won't be satisfied until he hits the maximum: 850. Why?
"Your credit score tells a lot about you," Peplinski said. "A high score means you're responsible and in control of your life. You're trustworthy."
To reach his goal, Peplinski voraciously reads up on every element that goes into a FICO score, checks his number every three months and tweaks his behavior to eke out every possible additional point.
Two years ago, he took out a car loan even though he and his wife, Chrissy, had the cash to buy their wheels outright. He figured that adding to his mix of credit might boost his score.
In spite of Chris' best efforts, landing an 850 may be a quixotic goal: Only about 0.5 percent of Americans manage it, FICO reports.
"The 850 score is kind of like a unicorn," said John Ulzheimer, a credit scoring expert with Credit.com who used to work for FICO. "Everybody talks about it, but nobody's seen it."
The reality is that you don't need to catch the unicorn to catch the best rates. But adopting some of the habits of members of the 800 club can help you improve your own score.
And that can translate into real money: On a $300,000, 30-year fixed-rate mortgage, the most creditworthy borrowers will pay $14,200 less than those one tier below; $25,600 less than those two tiers below.
But as for exactly how many points you'll gain or lose for, say, taking on a mortgage, being late on a bill or charging credit cards up to the max? That's proprietary information: "It's a black box," said FICO spokesman Craig Watts.
Mystery feeds obsession. Some credit score aficionados passionately debate their hypotheses on message boards like the FICO Forums at myfico.com. Others use themselves as guinea pigs to discover which moves will nudge a score up or down.
Some check their score obsessively, at least every few months, at a cost of $50 or more a year. They also fixate on their credit reports, upon which the scores are based.
Leland Lim, a 41-year-old doctor from northern California, is vigilant about scanning these for errors that might drag down his number.
"It took me three years to get a derogatory entry on one of them corrected," said Lim, who now earns an 806.
As for what makes an 800-plus score, these self-made experts basically say the same thing FICO does: Payment history is the single most important factor.
"I have this fetish about paying bills as soon as they come in the house," said Dick Husemann, 66, a retired Air Force officer from Wilmington, N.C. He and his wife, Brenda, 69, attribute their high scores, matching 818s, to never missing a credit payment.
The Husemanns also never charge more than 10 percent of their credit limit. They're not alone in that: Most score enthusiasts aim to keep a low "utilization ratio," or the amount they owe compared with the amount of credit available to them. FICO verifies that a low ratio can help your score.
With lenders routinely closing inactive accounts, Lim rotates all his credit cards into circulation.
But because his charges also affect that ratio, a few months before applying for a loan he stops using the cards or pays them off before the statement is generated. That way, Lim said, "my score jumps a bit," just in time for the lender to see.
The 800 club members are also conscious of their mix of credit.
Lim got interested in the scoring process two years ago while refinancing a home-equity loan into a home-equity line of credit. Having heard that revolving debt could affect a score more than an installment loan, he studied up.
His research revealed that home-equity lines of credit are not considered revolving debt in the FICO model. (The scoring firm confirms this.) And remember that car loan Peplinski took out, even though he didn't have to? He did it because FICO favors those with a variety of credit types.
"I probably paid $100 in interest," he said. "But it was worth it because we raised our credit scores by 15 points."
Is the mortgage interest deduction on the way out?
Yahoo News 10.25.10
ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- The federal income tax deduction for mortgage interest that I pay on my home is under attack yet again. Last year I paid $3,099 in deductible interest on the house my wife, our four cats and I live in. According to The Wall Street Journal, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform is looking at changing that in an effort to address the massive deficits that the nation is running.
An article in The Christian Science Monitor suggests that the mortgage interest deduction will reduce federal income tax revenues $131 billion in 2012. The deduction was introduced in 1913 and has been a mainstay of home ownership ever since. The Tax Foundation reports that, on 2008 returns, 26.8 percent of all filers used the deduction and the average amount deducted was $12,221.
Those amounts and percentages do vary by state. As you might expect, California is much higher than average. About 30 percent of California filers took the deduction, at an average of $18,876.
The National Commission is charged with finding ways to reduce the deficit. No one wants to raise taxes, especially on the nearly 50 percent of Americans that pay little or no federal income tax. However, that $131 billion is a lot of money. It is nearly seven times the 2011 budget for NASA. It is more than the budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Department of Labor or the Department of Education.
Home ownership peaked in the United States at a record high of 69 percent of the population. It declined to 67.4 percent by 2009. In the last 25 years, the lowest rate of home ownership was in 1988, at 63.8 percent.
In my home state of New York, in that same 25 years, the home ownership rates have ranged from a low of 50.3 percent in 1985 to a high of 55.9 percent in both 2005 and 2007. In 2009 the rate was 54.4 percent.
Home ownership is not a benefit of the wealthy. In 2005, 51 percent of the people in the lowest 25 percent of the U.S. population by income owned their own home. Some commentators might suggest that this is due to the volume of sub-prime loans. However, such loans made up less than 30 percent of all mortgage loans in the period 2004 through 2006 and less than 10 percent of all mortgages in the period 2001 through 2003.
One key data point about home ownership is age. Age 35 appears to be the age at which most Americans begin to undertake home ownership. By the time Americans retire, at age 65, just over 80 percent of us own our homes. The Census Bureau reports that in 2009, half of all homes without mortgages were owned by the elderly. One third of all owner occupied homes had no mortgage, 24.2 million out of 76.4 million total units.
The Census Bureau also shows that 8 percent of all homes were owned by people with incomes below the poverty level. Twenty-eight percent of homes were owned by families making what my family made or less in 2009.
Our deduction seems a bit paltry when compared to the national or to the California averages. We are a retired couple and our mortgage is just a few years from being paid off. That means most of the mortgage interest has already been paid. It also means that our income is much less than those folks paying $18,000 in mortgage interest.
Would removal of some or all of the mortgage interest deduction constitute a tax increase? Certainly. Around $131 billion or so.
Would it affect most Americans? Base upon the percentages who file and take the deduction, no. 73 percent of those filing income tax returns do not use it.
Would it affect some Americans disproportionately? Yes. That $3,000 deduction means a lot to my wife and I. In 2009 it was 10 percent of our gross income and in 2010 it will be closer to 20 percent. As the data shows, we are not alone.
Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction on income tax would be a financial blow to many homeowners. Reducing the federal deficit by increasing taxes on lower income homeowners may not be a choice that our elected officials will want to make.
ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- The federal income tax deduction for mortgage interest that I pay on my home is under attack yet again. Last year I paid $3,099 in deductible interest on the house my wife, our four cats and I live in. According to The Wall Street Journal, the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform is looking at changing that in an effort to address the massive deficits that the nation is running.
An article in The Christian Science Monitor suggests that the mortgage interest deduction will reduce federal income tax revenues $131 billion in 2012. The deduction was introduced in 1913 and has been a mainstay of home ownership ever since. The Tax Foundation reports that, on 2008 returns, 26.8 percent of all filers used the deduction and the average amount deducted was $12,221.
Those amounts and percentages do vary by state. As you might expect, California is much higher than average. About 30 percent of California filers took the deduction, at an average of $18,876.
The National Commission is charged with finding ways to reduce the deficit. No one wants to raise taxes, especially on the nearly 50 percent of Americans that pay little or no federal income tax. However, that $131 billion is a lot of money. It is nearly seven times the 2011 budget for NASA. It is more than the budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs or the Department of Labor or the Department of Education.
Home ownership peaked in the United States at a record high of 69 percent of the population. It declined to 67.4 percent by 2009. In the last 25 years, the lowest rate of home ownership was in 1988, at 63.8 percent.
In my home state of New York, in that same 25 years, the home ownership rates have ranged from a low of 50.3 percent in 1985 to a high of 55.9 percent in both 2005 and 2007. In 2009 the rate was 54.4 percent.
Home ownership is not a benefit of the wealthy. In 2005, 51 percent of the people in the lowest 25 percent of the U.S. population by income owned their own home. Some commentators might suggest that this is due to the volume of sub-prime loans. However, such loans made up less than 30 percent of all mortgage loans in the period 2004 through 2006 and less than 10 percent of all mortgages in the period 2001 through 2003.
One key data point about home ownership is age. Age 35 appears to be the age at which most Americans begin to undertake home ownership. By the time Americans retire, at age 65, just over 80 percent of us own our homes. The Census Bureau reports that in 2009, half of all homes without mortgages were owned by the elderly. One third of all owner occupied homes had no mortgage, 24.2 million out of 76.4 million total units.
The Census Bureau also shows that 8 percent of all homes were owned by people with incomes below the poverty level. Twenty-eight percent of homes were owned by families making what my family made or less in 2009.
Our deduction seems a bit paltry when compared to the national or to the California averages. We are a retired couple and our mortgage is just a few years from being paid off. That means most of the mortgage interest has already been paid. It also means that our income is much less than those folks paying $18,000 in mortgage interest.
Would removal of some or all of the mortgage interest deduction constitute a tax increase? Certainly. Around $131 billion or so.
Would it affect most Americans? Base upon the percentages who file and take the deduction, no. 73 percent of those filing income tax returns do not use it.
Would it affect some Americans disproportionately? Yes. That $3,000 deduction means a lot to my wife and I. In 2009 it was 10 percent of our gross income and in 2010 it will be closer to 20 percent. As the data shows, we are not alone.
Eliminating the mortgage interest deduction on income tax would be a financial blow to many homeowners. Reducing the federal deficit by increasing taxes on lower income homeowners may not be a choice that our elected officials will want to make.
New home sales rise 6.6 pct. after dismal summer
Denver Post 10.27.10
WASHINGTON—Sales of new homes improved last month after the worst summer in nearly five decades, but not enough to lift the struggling economy.
The Commerce Department says new home sales in September grew 6.6 percent from a month earlier to a seasonally adjusted annual sales pace of 307,000. Even with the increase, the past five months have been the worst for new home sales on records dating back to 1963.
Paul Dales, U.S. economist with Capital Economics, called the September home sales encouraging. But he said it doesn't change the fact that activity remains at extremely low levels.
"That's unlikely to change for a few years," Dales said.
Most major homebuilder stocks fell after the report's release. Toll Brothers Inc. fell nearly 1 percent.
New home sales have risen 9 percent from the bottom in May but are still down 78 percent from their peak sales pace of nearly 1.4 million homes in July 2005. A healthy sales pace is around 800,000 new homes.
Builders are competing with millions of foreclosures and other distressed properties that show no signs of abating. They are unlikely to ramp up construction until those are cleared away and demand picks up.
High unemployment, tight credit and uncertainty about home prices have kept people from buying homes. Government tax credits propelled the market earlier in the year, but those expired in April.
The September sales figures were driven by a 61 percent monthly surge in the Midwest. Sales grew about 3 percent in the South and Northeast. They fell by nearly 10 percent in the West.
The median sales price was $223,800. That was up 3.3 percent from a year earlier.
The number of unsold new homes on the market fell to 204,000, the lowest since July 1968. At the current sales pace, it would take about eight months to exhaust that supply, compared with a healthy level of about six months.
The industry is suffering the fallout of a massive building boom, in which many homes were sold to speculators. They then resold the homes, often to borrowers who took out risky loans and defaulted. Those unsustainable boom times aren't coming back.
Read more: New home sales rise 6.6 pct. after dismal summer - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_16446361?source=rss#ixzz13ZyNFi16
WASHINGTON—Sales of new homes improved last month after the worst summer in nearly five decades, but not enough to lift the struggling economy.
The Commerce Department says new home sales in September grew 6.6 percent from a month earlier to a seasonally adjusted annual sales pace of 307,000. Even with the increase, the past five months have been the worst for new home sales on records dating back to 1963.
Paul Dales, U.S. economist with Capital Economics, called the September home sales encouraging. But he said it doesn't change the fact that activity remains at extremely low levels.
"That's unlikely to change for a few years," Dales said.
Most major homebuilder stocks fell after the report's release. Toll Brothers Inc. fell nearly 1 percent.
New home sales have risen 9 percent from the bottom in May but are still down 78 percent from their peak sales pace of nearly 1.4 million homes in July 2005. A healthy sales pace is around 800,000 new homes.
Builders are competing with millions of foreclosures and other distressed properties that show no signs of abating. They are unlikely to ramp up construction until those are cleared away and demand picks up.
High unemployment, tight credit and uncertainty about home prices have kept people from buying homes. Government tax credits propelled the market earlier in the year, but those expired in April.
The September sales figures were driven by a 61 percent monthly surge in the Midwest. Sales grew about 3 percent in the South and Northeast. They fell by nearly 10 percent in the West.
The median sales price was $223,800. That was up 3.3 percent from a year earlier.
The number of unsold new homes on the market fell to 204,000, the lowest since July 1968. At the current sales pace, it would take about eight months to exhaust that supply, compared with a healthy level of about six months.
The industry is suffering the fallout of a massive building boom, in which many homes were sold to speculators. They then resold the homes, often to borrowers who took out risky loans and defaulted. Those unsustainable boom times aren't coming back.
Read more: New home sales rise 6.6 pct. after dismal summer - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_16446361?source=rss#ixzz13ZyNFi16
Fidelity will require warranties on all REO sales
Bank of America already on board
By Inman News, Monday, October 25, 2010.
Inman News
The nation's largest title insurer, Fidelity National Financial, will require warranties from all lenders beginning Nov. 1 limiting the company's liability in "robo-signing" disputes before it will insure title on real estate owned (REO) properties.
Fidelity had previously reached an agreement with Bank of America to provide representations that all foreclosure documentation and procedures associated with a property comply with state law and local practices, and that the lender will indemnify Fidelity against any losses that are the result of the bank's failure to comply with those laws and practices.
By Inman News, Monday, October 25, 2010.
Inman News
The nation's largest title insurer, Fidelity National Financial, will require warranties from all lenders beginning Nov. 1 limiting the company's liability in "robo-signing" disputes before it will insure title on real estate owned (REO) properties.
Fidelity had previously reached an agreement with Bank of America to provide representations that all foreclosure documentation and procedures associated with a property comply with state law and local practices, and that the lender will indemnify Fidelity against any losses that are the result of the bank's failure to comply with those laws and practices.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Denver ranks fifth in best U.S. cities to trick-or-treat
A new analysis ranks Denver as the fifth- best U.S. city for trick-or-treating.
Zillow Blog, a website that commonly analyzes real estate data, has turned around and used the same data to find the best places to trick-or-treat based on where children will get the most candy while having to walk less without safety concerns.
The first city, according to the rankings, was Seattle, followed by San Francisco, Portland, Ore., and San Jose, Calif. Eleven of the 20 best cities named are found in the West.
The Denver Post
For other national cities go to:
http://www.zillow.com/blog/zillow-ranks-20-best-cities-to-trick-or-treat/2010/10/18/
Zillow Blog, a website that commonly analyzes real estate data, has turned around and used the same data to find the best places to trick-or-treat based on where children will get the most candy while having to walk less without safety concerns.
The first city, according to the rankings, was Seattle, followed by San Francisco, Portland, Ore., and San Jose, Calif. Eleven of the 20 best cities named are found in the West.
The Denver Post
For other national cities go to:
http://www.zillow.com/blog/zillow-ranks-20-best-cities-to-trick-or-treat/2010/10/18/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
