webLOGfor.US

     If you peruse the blog you know that from time to time I jump on to Yahoo! Answers to pass around some knowledge.  I’ll say that most of what gets posted there is a load of junk.  It’s a shame because for some people who don’t know how to use the Internet or search engines real well it is their only place online to find answers.

     I once got into a heated discussion with someone on the site who gave bad information.  This woman was touting herself as a real estate expert and was giving landlord/tenant advice in absolutes with no knowledge of the area of the questioner.  Personally I think everyone who gets into landlording or real estate investment learns early on that all real estate is locally driven.  This is true in prices and this is true in landlord/tenant law.  The only absolutes you can quote about landlord tenant law are federally mandated items such as the equal housing laws, lead paint disclosures, etc.  Items such as what rights a tenant has if the landlord goes into foreclosure are all locally driven at the state and municipal level.  You cannot speak in absolutes on this unless you know the location.

     OK, off my rant about the ignorant posting as experts.  There have been a lot of questions lately about what rights a tenant has when a landlord goes into foreclosure.  A lot of the questions have to do with can the tenant stop paying rent.  My general answer is that the tenant can do whatever they want.  It’s a free country.  What can they do legally is a whole different ball game.  In most jurisdictions the legal answer is that you must continue to pay rent.  You have a legal binding contract.  You never know what the outcome of a foreclosure filing is going to be.  There are three possible situations in this:

1. Property has a short sale completed.   
   • In this scenario a lack pf payment by the tenant could cause an eviction.  If the new owner is an investor they may not want a tenant who stops paying, for any reason.
2. Landlord makes arrangement with the bank to keep the property.     
   • Again, an eviction is likely here.  The landlord isn’t going to want you in the property when you stopped paying rent.
3. Bank takes the property back.     
   • Your lease used to be voided but the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 changed all that.  Some states have stricter laws than what the federally mandated minimums require.  There is a PDF at the end of this post listing each states laws.  If the state has stricter laws than the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 then they stay in effect.   

     One sure fire thing is that if a tenant does get an eviction on their record other landlords will treat then as a pariah.  No one will want to rent to them anymore.  Play it safe and know your rights. 

     I found a listing of tenant rights by state.  Check it out, it has a lot of good information on your rights if you are a tenant facing foreclosure.   Tenant Rights in Foreclosure

     I’ll be posting on the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 and my views on it shortly.

     Interesting and timely.  That’s all I can say about this news article from WPTV in West Palm Beach Florida.  In my article last week I spoke of landlord and tenant scams.  Here is an apparent scam where 30 people were bilked by a fake landlord.  The alleged fake landlord is a former police officer.

     I’m not sure of the details of each scam but I am sure there were red flags that would have tipped off the potential tenants of what was happening. 

     Strange part is, he is being charged with submitting fake warranty claims on the properties.  I’ll bet if he just stuck to ripping off people he would have been in "business" much longer.

Article and video below.

Fake landlord suspected of scamming 30 renters
Reported by: Jesse Chavez

WEST PALM BEACH, FL — NewsChannel 5 cameras rolled when a would-be tenant confronted her alleged scammers.

Now, the suspected mastermind of a huge rental rip-off is behind bars.

The former officer is now facing 30 criminal charges.

NewsChannel 5’s Jesse Chavez was the first reporter to investigate what authorities now call one of the largest mortgage fraud schemes in Palm Beach County history.

"Who owns this property right here?" asked multi-media journalist Jesse Chavez.

"Who are you?" asked a man who claimed to be a homeowner.

"It don’t make no difference," said an associate.

"How about we just call the sheriff’s department and I’m telling you, get that camera out of my face," said another man who was confronted by us.

Our cameras were rolling two weeks ago, when a group agreed to meet a woman at a home on Wabasso and Oswego.

She had offered to give them $800 to rent it.

"Are you really the landlord then?" asked multi-media journalist Jesse Chavez.

"I own this property," said one man.

"No, we’re property managers," said the woman.

"No, I own it," replied the man. "I could do what I choose to do with it."

It turns out, the group works for former West Palm Beach police officer, Carl Heflin.

None of them own the house in question or any others involved in the alleged scheme.

Heflin was arrested this morning and charged with submitting 20 fake warranty deed forms claiming he owned homes in the Westgate and Belvedere areas of West Palm Beach.

"All the properties are in some sort of foreclosure," said Detective Michael Antinoro of the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office. "Some of the people are still trying to work it out to pay the payments and some of people just walked away from the property. They’re still technically owned by the person."

Leslie Walker is one of the renters looking for justice.

After paying rent, she even moved into this home before the real owner called the sheriff’s office and had her removed.

"It’s not right, what he’s done," said alleged victim Leslie Walker. "He’s hurt a lot of people and he doesn’t care. He didn’t care what he did."

Walker says she’s now homeless, broke and embarrassed about what happened.

"I’m snake bitten by it, the whole thing. Shocked, angry, victimized is what I am," said Walker.

Heflin is charged with 30 counts of fraud, burglary and grand theft.

Detectives have not charge his associates, but that may change in light of what we caught on camera.

"Listen carefully, back the hell up with your cameras and move on," said the man who claimed to own the house.

"Well if you’ve got nothing to hide, then what’s the problem?" replied multi-media journalist Jesse Chavez.

"This is mine and if you don’t like it, that’s too bad," said the man.

Detectives say the investigation is not complete and others may be charged in the future.

Get the latest Flash Player to see this player.

I read this article  in the Wall Street journal a couple days ago and it spurred me to a half post I have written that I have never finished.  I’ve had the inclination to post about why i feel that your home is not an investment for a long time.  I’ve procrastinated on it.  Who knows, I may still kick the dust off the half written article and post it at a later date.

I read the article then saw Shaun over at Shaun’s Real Estate Adventures  wrote about it.  I added my comment to it and am waiting for it to get moderated.  I am definitely in the minority in my thinking over there that you home is a bad investment.  Actually, I feel your home isn’t an investment at all.  Real Estate is a good investment.  Home, that’s where the heart it.  It has nothing to do with investments.  Anyway, the article quote is below.

There’s the usual talk about what the latest Case-Shiller house price data mean for the next short term move in the real estate market. Has housing bottomed? If not, has the rate of decline slowed? And when will we see an upturn?

Human nature likes the short term. Which is why so little attention is paid to something that is probably more important, if less urgent: What the latest data show about the long-term of the real estate market.

And it’s startling.

We have just been through the biggest boom in real estate in American history. The subsequent bust surely hasn’t finished.

Dropping home prices are only one of the factors that keep the annual returns on homes low.

Yet look at the numbers. Since 1987, when the Case-Shiller index of 10 major cities begins, it’s risen from an index value of 63 to 151. Annual return: Just 4.1% a year. During that period, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, consumer prices rose by 3% a year. Net result: Home prices produced a real return of just 1.15% a year over inflation over that time.

Critics may point out that the analysis is unfair — after all, it starts counting near the peak of the 1980s housing boom. Fair enough. Look at the performance since, say, early 1994, when home prices were near a historic trough. Surely someone who bought then has made a bundle.

Not necessarily. Since then the ten-city index has risen from a value of 76 to 151. Annual return: 4.7%. Inflation over that period: 2.5%. That’s still only a real return of 2.2% a year above inflation.

You can often do better on long-term inflation protected government bonds.

And real estate often costs 2% or more a year in property taxes, condo fees, maintenance, insurance and the like.

Conventional wisdom long held that home ownership was a route to wealth, and the imputed rent — in other words, the right to live in your home — was just part of the value you got from it. Under that widespread view, the recent housing bust was simply a temporary, though deep, pothole.

Yet for very many people, even over the past 15 or 20 years, the imputed rent may have been all, or nearly all, the real value they actually got from their home.

Yes, it’s only recent data. And it’s only ten cities. But there’s some reason to suspect these numbers may, if anything, flatter real estate performance. After all, it’s hard to look at the data and figure the bust is now over. And if they fall further, those long-term return figures will fall too.

Prices weren’t just down 19% over the past year. They fell 2% just between February and March. And it’s not the worst-hit markets that worry me the most — Phoenix is down 53% from its peak, Miami 47%. That smells of capitulation. It’s the other markets. New York and Boston are only down 20%. Denver’s only down 14%.

Overall the ten- and 20-city Case-Shiller indices are merely back to mid-2003 levels. After the biggest boom and bust on record, history suggests things don’t stop getting worse until they’ve gotten a lot worse than that.

Once upon a time, in a place overrun with monkeys, a man appeared and announced to the villagers that he would buy monkeys for $10 each.

The villagers, seeing that there were many monkeys around, went out to the forest, and started catching them.

The man bought thousands at $10 and as supply started to diminish, they became harder to catch, so the villagers stopped their effort.

The man then announced that he would now pay $20 for each one. This renewed the efforts of the villagers and they started catching monkeys again. But soon the supply diminished even further and they were ever harder to catch, so people started going back to their farms and forgot about monkey catching.

The man increased his price to $25 each and the supply of monkeys became so sparse that it was an effort to even see a monkey, much less catch one.

The man now announced that he would buy monkeys for $50! However, since he had to go to the city on some business, his assistant would now buy on his behalf.

While the man was away the assistant told the villagers, "Look at all these monkeys in the big cage that the man has bought. I will sell them to you at $35 each and when the man returns from the city, you can sell them to him for $50 each."

The villagers rounded up all their savings and bought all the monkeys.

They never saw the man nor his assistant again, and once again there were monkeys everywhere.

Now you have a better understanding of how the stock market works

I received an interesting note in with my BoA credit card statement today.  Bank of America has seen fit to change my interest rate from a fixed 10.99% to a variable APR.  Interestingly they have seen fit to tie me to the highest level of Prime from the last quarter plus 20.99%.  From their current standards that puts the new interest rate at 25.99%.  I have the option to write to them to refuse the new terms and can keep the current rate to pay off the balance as long as I don't use the card.

A note about why I have this card.  About 14 months ago I received an unsolicited offer from Bank of America offering me a 0% interest rate for 6 months then a fixed rate of 10.99% thereafter.  I figured what the heck.  I'll use it to consolidate  my cards that have balances on them.  The 0% rate added to the fixed rate of 10.99% seemed attractive enough to kick it off.  I went ahead and consolidated the cards to BoA.

In the past 14 months I paid down the debt and never used the card at all.  After all it was solely for debt consolidation and not for use.  I swore off credit card usage around 2 years ago after using them a lot for some home renovation.  

I will say I was surprised to see a rate increase.  I consider myself savvy enough to know when to expect one.  Late payments on any credit card, not just with BoA, can trigger a rate increase.  Going over your limit on any card can do the same as can a change in your credit score.  There hasn't been any real change in my credit score over the timeframe except a slight lowering which I attributed to the fact that I consolidated by debts to one card and was near the maximum credit limit.   

After receiving the notice of the change in APR I looked around on the Internet for any explanation.  I found it.  Apparently BOA has had some serious setbacks.  First, they are losing money from their mortgage business.  In addition their default rate in the Credit Card business is rising.  Raising rates on current customers helps them in two areas.   

The first is that it helps bring more money in for their bottom line.  The more than doubling of an interest rate to 25.99% would more than double the interest payments on the money I have outstanding.  that is, if I planned on accepting the rate hike.  I don't.

The second is that it prevents people from charging more if they do accept the new rate.  This means they are maximizing the reward for the risk.  Those people will be using the Bank of America credit card and paying the higher interest rate.

Here is a link to the article about this happening to others starting in Feb.