Luxury Lincoln Park 2-Bedroom Reduces Again: 2757 N. Lincoln
We last chattered about this 2-bedroom at 2757 N. Lincoln on the border of Lincoln Park and Lakeview in July 2011.
See our prior chatter here.
Back then, the unit was a short sale and listed at $429,000. That was 18% below the prior 2007 purchase price.
Some of you thought this would sell for around $425,000.
4 months later, the unit has been reduced to $369,000.
If you recall, the unit has upscale finishes including Wolf, Subzero, Bosch and Dacor stainless appliances.
The master bedroom has a spa bath.
There is a fireplace, crown molding, hardwood floors throughout and 2 outdoor spaces.
The unit has central air, washer/dryer in the unit and garage parking.
Why isn’t this selling?
James Roth at Conlon has the listing. See the pictures here.
Unit #302: 2 bedrooms, 2 baths, no square footage listed
- Sold in May 2007 for $520,000
- Originally listed in June 2011 for $479,000
- Reduced
- Was listed in July 2011 as a “short sale” for $429,000 (garage parking included)
- Reduced
- Currently listed at $369,000
- Assessments of $251 a month
- Taxes of $7750
- Central Air
- Washer/Dryer in the unit
- Bedroom #1: 13×12
- Bedroom #2: 14×11
Wish I was in the market for something like this. I would offer 350k for it today and would probably go up to full asking price.
FYI, your prior chatter link does not work.
Thanks chuk. I fixed it.
I don’t think anyone would have predicted the price would go this low on this property. I wonder what the bank will take?
assessments are way too low – something is fishy. Assessments for a unit like this in a building like this SHOULD be 400 -550 (depending on amenities).
By the way- I have a bunch of posts about Lakeview and Lincoln Park today mainly because I’m still dealing with site issues and my computer also crashed last night (lovely). What else can go wrong?
So- those were easy to put together. But I’ll be branching out shortly. Don’t worry Icarus, there will be some non-GZ properties coming up but maybe not until next week. I have my eye on a few things.
The unit is nice, but it suffers due to its immediate location. Living on the main strip loses its appeal after 30.
This stretch of Lincoln is a tough one for me. We looked at it when we lived at Paulina and Addison but it seemes like a hike (SEEMED, SEEMED) to the Diversey stop. I had previously been spoiled by living within a block of either an express bus or the brown line previously so I might have had a colored opinion. Ulitmately it looked like there were better deals at the time and really it ended up that condos weren’t for us.
I do wonder if the big price cut was just to fish for offers. On the other hand, I think the ask is a fair price, and if they are just using it to try and start a bidding war, it’s not going to work.
“Why isn’t this selling?”
Because this is still an overpriced 2/2.
Not even close to a deal until below $300.
SoPoCo lurker is right. There is another 2/2 short sale a little west listed for 275k in 2700 block of n ashland. Same amenities sans spa bath. Add your own spa bath for 20k and you’re still below 295k.
Now we flip the hourglasd and wait for the chaterrati to talk about much better living on lincoln is vs ashland, brau.
I like the spa bathroom and I’ll give points for the “Wolf, Subzero, Bosch and Dacor stainless appliances” but I still cannot understand how this ever went for half a million even during the boom.
I’ve been in one of the terrace units in this building… nice place, good finishes but can’t believe anyone ever would pay well over 500k for this. My guess is it sells for around 340 with parking
And comparing lincoln ave here to living on ashland is a really dumb comparison.
By the pictures and room sizes, I would peg this on the upper-end of most 2/2’s out there. Location is pretty decent, but not ideal. I think the price is getting closer to reality but prob gets a low-ball offer from the current list and moves. ~$900/month for taxes and assessments could be hurting the potential buyer pool of people looking a 2/2 that is not in a high-rise or full-amenity building.
$369k is starting to be more realistic. 3/2’s across the street have sold for the low $400ks. I think this will sell for under $350k due to no one wanting to deal with a short sale and wait months for the bank to respond.
As I said in July, it’s going to be tough for a buyer to get past the exterior and being directly on Lincoln. Empty storefronts… so depressing. Who knows what will move in there?
I say $285,000 (if they are lucky).
So much delusional pricing.
Like said parroted from his realtor, if you’re not having 10 calls, 5 showings and an offer within the first week of being listed, then you are listed too high.
This long, drawn out process of a little price reduction here, a little price reduction there, is so fracking pathetic.
And the price reductions seem to be slowing down even more lately; they’ll just hold firm in winter and NEXT spring it’ll sell at the asking price, right? I can’t take it anymore.
HD, do you think the system should be changed so that listings should simple list whatever they owe on their mortgage so we know for certain whether its a delusional chap or an unfortunate one?
You guys are the ones who are delusional and so fucking stupid!!! I am really getting sick and tired of pointing out how wrong you guys are = the world does NOT think like you – people ARE still going to buy. I am really just wasting my time on this site. You are lost causes.
Seems pretty decent. Diversey to Belmont is kinda a weird stretch of Lincoln, lots of vacancies and no telling what could move in over the years (like, Rotofugi), could be a plus or a minus. It’s much quieter than being further south on Lincoln though, at least for now. $60K is a big price drop all at once, which makes me think they are trying to create a multiple offer situation or something, but I don’t see that happening.
I think the system should be encouraged to 1) promote realistic pricing; 2) encourage so called ‘lowballs’ and 3) do what they do in Australia where you get 30 something days to look at the property and then there is a big auction and it goes to the highest bidder. The current system is failing the market and encourages unrealistic pricing and even fewer transactions.
Clio is never right about anything.
Lincoln Park condo sales are half of what they were 20+ years ago. Consider that fact along with the big increase in the number of units over the same time. We have historical low interest rates already, so what else might it take to get the market moving at anything near historic levels?
“We have historical low interest rates already, so what else might it take to get the market moving at anything near historic levels?”
Mortgage principal forgiveness for those who owe more than house is worth along with allowing them to refi at today’s rates. Not condoning it, but I would bet we will see a lot of it soon.
“The current system is failing the market and encourages unrealistic pricing and even fewer transactions.”
The current system is doing what they intend to, for better or for worse. They are trying to engineer a “soft landing” for house prices. They want to see the prices go from 400, to 375, to 350, to 300, to 250. They do not want them to go from 400 to 250 all at once. Again, I’m not saying it’s the right thing to do, just that it is very intentional.
I think it’s more than just that, it also encourages incremental increases on the way up too. And sellers quite frankly seem to be unrealistic and cant accept that the $400,000 house is now worth only $300,000 and it seems even worse for estate sales.
“And sellers quite frankly seem to be unrealistic and cant accept that the $400,000 house is now worth only $300,000 and it seems even worse for estate sales.”
And people think that when the market recovers that means we’ll see the prices and growth we did during the boom. No, it means or should mean that the market will reset to what it should be with nominal appreciation and equity gains.
yep, Obama is willing to do anything to get re-elected, even ruin the future of our country
Well, I’m not TOTALLY against it. It’s probably a loss for the taxpayer pretty much either way.
Let’s say you owe 400k on a place now worth 300k.
There is an extremely good chance that fannie or freddie own that loan. If you decide to walk away and get foreclosed on, one of those GSE’s will now own that property and sell it for 300k (or less). That is a 100k+ loss to the taxpayer.
Now, if they just forgive the principal, it is still a 100k loss, but perhaps it stops the death spiral of foreclosures begetting more foreclosures.
Unfortunately, not only does it punish the taxpayer, it now also rewards the person that made a bad choice. But if we don’t, that is a little bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face. And if they can also include a clause that you have to pay back anything over $xx if you ever sell, that will at least limit the reward for bad behavior.
Wait, so you’d rather live on Ashland? Why not go for the real deals and look along the dan ryan?
Lincoln, clark and clyborn and most of the east/west arterials may be complete traffic cluster f—s, but at least you get local shops and don’t have cars flying by at 45 MPH day and night. I guess you may be right that we are talking shades of bad rather than bad vs. good. But I would at least consider living on those streets and I would never consider living on Ashland or Western.
The assessments don’t include anything, not cable heat or water according to the listing.
We have historical low interest rates already, so what else might it take to get the market moving at anything near historic levels?
“Mortgage principal forgiveness for those who owe more than house is worth along with allowing them to refi at today’s rates. Not condoning it, but I would bet we will see a lot of it soon.”
These proposals are intended to keep people as loanowners, not facilitate sales. I guess if you are suggesting a streamlined short sale with quick and easy principal forgiveness, that would increase sales sharply. It would crash prices sharply, too.
“Now, if they just forgive the principal, it is still a 100k loss, but perhaps it stops the death spiral of foreclosures begetting more foreclosures.”
It would stop that spiral. We would have instead the feedback loop of principal reductions begetting more principal reductions. How would that work in a declining market?
How bout a $100,000 to fannie/freddie bondholders instead of taxpayers? Allow the bloodletting, reorganize the banks, start fresh with newly capitalized banks that have no investment bank subsidiaries. Might be better than endless can kicking.
“These proposals are intended to keep people as loanowners, not facilitate sales.”
Not right away. But that has to be the first step in fixing the problem – keeping people in homes. A large number of buyers are “move up” buyers, and if they are underwater, they are probably never moving up. Do a principal reduction, and keep paying your mortgage for a few years and build some equity, get some price stabilization and maybe even minor price improvement, and you can eventually sell and buy something else instead of walking away.
“It would stop that spiral. We would have instead the feedback loop of principal reductions begetting more principal reductions. How would that work in a declining market?”
Not entirely sure. A foreclosure is much more tangible and has more concrete side effects than a principal reduction. Call one big “do over” now, and maybe that stops the fall.
“How would that work in a declining market?”
Part of the decline is because of the foreclosures. Stop the foreclosures and you stop the decline (at least in theory)?
Again, I’m not saying this is a great idea, but if I was a politician, it is what I would do.
“How bout a $100,000 to fannie/freddie bondholders instead of taxpayers? Allow the bloodletting, reorganize the banks, start fresh with newly capitalized banks that have no investment bank subsidiaries. Might be better than endless can kicking.”
Sure. But it will never happen. I think it is probably a waste to talk about what “should” happen, when short of a revolution, it won’t ever happen. People need to think realistically about what the options are and pick the best of the worst. Kinda like picking a president.
“People need to think realistically about what the options are and pick the best of the worst. ”
I’ll just be honest. If it helps me, I’m all for it. If it doesn’t help or even hurts than I’m all against it.
“Do a principal reduction, and keep paying your mortgage for a few years and build some equity, get some price stabilization and maybe even minor price improvement, and you can eventually sell and buy something else instead of walking away.”
You’ve already dropped your due on sale clause? Otherwise, what equity? You won’t hold office for long if you suggest anything that allows the scenario above.
There’s a tried and true method of principal reduction and eventually buying something else after walking away: foreclosure, bankruptcy, and REO sale. Any other suggestion is inefficient and will cost more in the long run. All this talk of some other solution reminds me of the “need” for MERS while the established recording system worked perfectly well. Who are these other “solutions” really meant to benefit?
“I’ll just be honest. If it helps me, I’m all for it. If it doesn’t help or even hurts than I’m all against it.”
Bingo. Those underwater on their mortgage are nowhere near the majority of all voters. Any principal forgiveness will be severely limited to the extent the govt can feed money to the banksters without pissing off too many in the majority.
“You’ve already dropped your due on sale clause?”
I wasn’t talking about due on sale. For example:
http://homeloanhelp.bankofamerica.com/en/nhrpannouncement.html
The principal reduction is going to come from pushing current homeowners to 15 year or shorter loans at lower interest rates. This way the borrowers can actually dig their way out of the negative position. The rates will be low enough to make the payment similar to that of a 30 year loan at higher rates but the benefit is the borrower actually has a reasonable chance at not being underwater. My guess is it will be a very streamlined deal. No appraisal or AVM with no LTV caps. Must still have credit, income, and assets though. Not for homeowners who clearly can’t afford the place.
The Harp 2.0 is going to push this as Fannie/Freddie will supposedly be dropping some of the loan-level price adjustments to make 15 year loans more attractive. I’ll know specifics on the 15th when they release the guidelines.
Over time, these borrowers will then be able to sell at lower prices if necessary since they won’t be underwater.
Yes, there will be unintended consequences but I can’t think of a better way to get rid of the over hang without a significant moral hazard of just out right principal forgiveness. At least with this scenario, the borrowers are actually paying the money back.
Russ,
What you describe is simply a refi. I believe they will go way beyond that.
“At least with this scenario, the borrowers are actually paying the money back.”
Hahahaha. Most are “victims” and they have no desire to pay the money back. This program will be another failure at stopping the tide. Relatively few will qualify. It will serve the banks well, though, to continue stretching out the correction while encouraging new bagholders–although decreasing in numbers–to snap up the “deals.”
I can’t stop laughing about this “solution.” Just pay it off faster, and you won’t be underwater!
“Any other suggestion is inefficient and will cost more in the long run”
Sure. I agree 100%. But you have to realize that politicians WILL be compelled to do “something”. And I believe it will be similar to what I said.
No, it isn’t a simple refinance. They will be refinancing under water home owners regardless of loan to value. They are reluctant to do wholesale principal reductions, so this is how they are goign to encourage reductions by changing the terms so that the borrowers are paying principal back instead of interest. A 3.5% 30 year fixed rate won’t do squat to help an underwater homeowners as the interest payments are front loaded. You might be saving $200/month but you are still going to be massively underwater in 5 years whereas if they can keep the payment similar or slightly higher but at 15 year amortization, that same homeowner would have made a serious dent in the principal and might actually have some hope they can own the home outright or at least sell it without a short sale.
Of course, the real issue is the loans not owned by Fannie Freddie. I predict Fannie/Freddie will eventually open it up those loans to at some point as well.
I just can’t see straight up reduction of principal without bankrupcty filings and other very severe penalties as the moral hazard is just to great to do it in large numbers. At least with this way, serious homeowners have a fighting chance.
Obama can’t even pass the refi plan through congress, allowing those deep underwater to take advantage of todays rates. So I think we’re stuck in a holding pattern for a year. Any talk of principal forgiveness is election pillowtalk at this point..ironically enough the exact pillowtalk McCain used in 2008.
Chuk, word on the street is that only Fannie and Freddie get to do the streamlined ReFi. when you say they’ll go beyond that do you think there will be help for those whose loans are owned by someone other than Fannie or Freddie?
That BofA program is a hoot. What happens when the 100% LTV is underwater, say, the day after the forgiveness? Time for a new program?
“No, it isn’t a simple refinance. They will be refinancing under water home owners regardless of loan to value.”
And that is probably not going to stop anyone from walking away that owes 400k on a place worth 300k. Without price appreciation (which will be very hard to have to a while), I don’t see that doing anything. Their mortgage will be paid off before that place is worth 400k again.
“Chuk, word on the street is that only Fannie and Freddie get to do the streamlined ReFi. when you say they’ll go beyond that do you think there will be help for those whose loans are owned by someone other than Fannie or Freddie?”
Maybe, but that is not what I meant. I believe they will try for streamlined refi ALONG with principal reduction.
Owe 400k at 6% on a place worth 300k?
Now you owe 300k at 4% with some clauses about if/when you would have to pay back that 100k under various scenarios.
Will this ever pass? I’m not sure anyone can get anything to pass anymore. But I bet they try.
I don’t foresee the allowing of refis at any LTV being restricted to 15yr notes. The rationale being given now is it will free up 150B in annual consumer spending. Restricting to 15yr notes will cause pmt to go up & the opposite. If anything they will be moving toward 40 yr notes like with HAMP. Any probs 5 or 10yrs down the road are another administratuon’s.
Let the market sort itself out. Any Government intervention will only extend the problem and make the end result worse. Real estate is an investment like any other investment (stock, etc.). So you overpaid, so what. Too bad. This is capitalism. People love it when they make money, but want someone too “help” them when they made a bad investment. Markets are impersonal. If you don’t like it, do not buy. The American dream is life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness, not owning a 2/2!
I think we all agree that if there were an easy fix, someone would have implemented it already. Actually, the easy fix was to leave things alone and let the market self-correct. However, politicans want to get (re)elected so they kick the can down the road to the next generation
“Let the market sort itself out. Any Government intervention will only extend the problem and make the end result worse.”
Since when did that stop them? Rest assured, whatever the correct thing to do is, the government will do the exact opposite. You can forget about the “let water find its own level” idea. It simply makes too much sense.
I know this, I am just sick of it. I would like to not be underwater on every stock I ever bought. Oh well, too bad that is not real estate, so it does not matter. Assets are assets and have a value. This is the reason the US is on the decline. Real estate is a “dream” and so it should be bailed out. What if someone bought at the top and paid cash? They are not underwater because they do not have a mortgage, so it does not matter. Utter nonsense!
I agree that that is a huge argument from the politicians, refi to free up the spending, so they would want to do 30 or 40 year mortgages. However, refi’ing at a lower rate and a 15 year term could lower the payment if it was combined with principal reduction. If you refi a 400K 30yr mortgage at 6.5% to a 300K 15yr at 4% it would drop the payment something like $300/month. Could be a decent idea for someone with the income to keep paying but way underwater and no significant assets to go after in foreclosure (hence no reason not to walk away, so the bank gets something out of it by keeping them paying). If that’s too much for the banks to give up, they could agree to split any appreciation from that point on. Seems to make sense for both parties.
The assessments are fair for a building like this… I would think $300 would be about right.
Agreed. Ashland is not the same. I think this place will fetch $350-$360K.
Bottom line is, that principal is going to get “reduced” one way or another. You have 400k owed that is never going to be paid in full. Give the homeowner the benefit of that reduction now, and if you are lucky, he will pay you back the other 300k he owes. Or foreclose and pay the carrying/legal costs, selling costs, upkeep, etc, and sell it to an investor for 275k and another 50k in costs for a 225k net. You the taxpayer are losing even more on the deal now.
“This way the borrowers can actually dig their way out of the negative position.”
Transferring cash to pay down a liability is a neutral balance sheet transaction. It benefits the payer 0. It does benefit the banks though… That is whose underwater position you are lessening.
“This long, drawn out process of a little price reduction here, a little price reduction there, is so fracking pathetic. ”
For a laugh check out the pricing history on MLS #: 07620560. Methinks the paint might dry a little faster after the HOA is turned over next year and those assessments likely go up. Still nice place though.
maybe I am getting too old – but I truly believe less is more – the other website was just fine (actually, much better) – also, the font is so small, it is hard to read. Oh well, less posts from me is probably for the best…..
There is too much white (blank space). It makes the site less readable IMO.
Chuk: The problem with the cram down is that EVERYONE will want one. Why I should keep paying if my neighbor is getting a cram down? Heck, I already hear from people in the burbs who are 50% underwater and want to stop paying on their mortgages even though they can afford to pay the monthly payment. They tell me they don’t see the “point” in paying $2000 a month when they can just walk away and then get a rental for much less (like $1000 a month.) They tell me it will be 20 years before they even break even.
This is the same phenomena that is happening all over the really hard hit markets like Phoenix and Las Vegas. I’m surprised it is now creeping in here in Illinois. So- if you offer the cram down- everyone in, say, 10 E. Ontario or 33 W. Ontario will want one. Every single owner in there. They are probably ALL underwater. Who pays for that then? The moral hazard is just too great.
“Actually, the easy fix was to leave things alone and let the market self-correct. However, politicans want to get (re)elected so they kick the can down the road to the next generation”
I always thought this myself yet many disagreed with me. We’ve lost years working towards an eventual bottom in the housing market and subsequent economic recovery by wasting trillions in government spending.
Remember that ol’ tax credit? How did that turn out?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-great-26-billion-real-estate-swindle-2011-11-08
It turned out great if you lived in Honolulu (but if you lived in Honolulu you were probably doing pretty well before the 8k credit).
So our policy makers pissed away $30B that could’ve been used more wisely than encouraging people to buy homes that were almost sure to fall in value, maybe even rebuilding potholes on roads or rebuilding a bridge or something tangible! Our government supported a policy swindling people into taking a short term gain of 8k for a long-term much larger loss. There was an article in the WSJ today about FHA possibly being in the red up to $26B, we’ll that money was just pissed away on a tax credit people bought plasma TVs, ipads & vacations with.
Every politician who voted for this measure, which was a wealth transfer to the banksters, should be voted out of office. At least the current strategy of allowing refis at any LTV I think is far less egregious.
Policy makers don’t want to let the market bottom on it’s own though. It never got as crazy here but there are areas where it was much crazier and a government rapid withdrawl from financing support would devastate them. As someone who has followed doctorhousingbubble blog infrequently for a few years I can imagine why. Also many policy makers are personally vested significantly in RE as an asset class. Look at our treasury secretary Timmy Turbotax Geitner (was he ever able to sell his $1.6MM house?–he might be personally concerned with the value of that one).
Most emergency measures put in place in 2008 expire at the end of 2012. As long as those expire allowing any LTV for to refi for residential property owners I don’t think is as big of a deal. No more FDIC backed bank or corporate debt and no more tax credits are the most important things. Sink or swim–no more bailouts. Though I am a bit worried the “temporary” measures enacted towards the end of 2008 will be extended. Hey a permanent HAMP sounds great if I ever need a principal reduction or just want to squat for a few years!
Bob: It’s hard to believe but there are already bills in both the house and the Senate to bring back the higher loan limits on FHA. It has already passed the senate.
Here’s the info from NAR which is lobbying night and day to get this re-extended.
“Recently, the Senate voted 60-38 to approve an amendment to restore higher limits on FHA backed home loans. NAR leadership and Government Affairs have been working tirelessly to press Congress to restore the former caps by arguing that lower limits will further harm the housing market. You can still take action to contact the House below.”
I can’t believe that ANY republican in the House would ever vote to bring this back when they supposedly want to get rid of Fannie and Freddie and all government backing of housing. But I will probably be proven wrong.
The crying over this issue is just amazing. Truly. Here’s more:
U.S. Rep. Gary Ackerman, D-Bayside, said Queens residents are being forced to seek expensive, privately-funded mortgages following the expiration of conforming mortgage loan limits on Sept. 30.
The congressman and 131 other members of Congress recently sent a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, R-OH, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, that asked for their support in reinstating the expired loan limits during the upcoming House-Senate conference committee on appropriations.
“Middle class homeowners are struggling through the most difficult economic times since the Great Depression,” said Ackerman, who is a senior member of the House’s Financial Services Committee. “If a large portion of the housing market is forced to fend for itself, the result will be disastrous for homeowners throughout Queens and all across the country.”
The congressman said Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration would be able to guarantee mortgages up to $729,750 in more expensive areas, such as Queens and the other four boroughs, if the loan limits are restored.
http://bayside.patch.com/articles/ackerman-calls-for-restoration-of-mortgage-loan-limits-03b897de
Are you guys surprised about any of this ? Really?!!! Did you really think these policies were going to go through and prices would continue to fall? Seriously, you guys are complete and total morons. This is why the poor stay poor and renters stay renters.
Yes- prices continue to fall Clio.
““If a large portion of the housing market is forced to fend for itself, the result will be disastrous for homeowners throughout Queens and all across the country.””
Except congressman Ackerman is lying through his teeth. I read somewhere only ~$60B total in loans will be affected. Oh boo-hoo someone with a 700k mortgage in Queens is screwed. No-one forced them to take out a 700k mortgage with 25k down.
It really only affects the coasts. I read it is just 8 states. Why don’t they wait and see what the horror of the lower limits will do before they rush to extend it?
There are pretty strong lobbyists on both sides. The mortgage industry actually does NOT want this to pass as they’ll make more money if the limits are lower.
clio: everyone that voted for it in the senate were Democrats.
So long as the Republicans stay firm and don’t vote for it it won’t happen. This may shape up to be the ultimate “class warfare” between the higher cost & tax coastal states and the “flyover” states. Illinois will be excepted given BHO is the hometown guy.
If BHO wins next year I do worry about the composition of congress–we definitely don’t need a repeat of his free reign that ended only a year ago. Let’s hope he doesn’t win.
To this day I can’t figure out why Fannie & Freddie increased their conforming loan limits from $240,000 in 1999 to $417,000 in 2006. What justified such an increase in only seven years? Why are we so reluctant to let the market correct and adjust government programs designed to assist low income people own homes to the new market realities?
The days of people voting themselves money are going to end one day.
By the way- has anyone else noticed that a ton of properties have suddenly gone off the market?
They haven’t sold. They’ve just been pulled. And these are properties all over the city- some that we have chattered about in Old Irving Park and Portage Park (to give 2 examples.) It’s not unusual for people to pull their properties during the holidays. Also- with the market as bad as it is- it also makes sense to come back on “fresh” for the spring.
But I am seeing it with the mansion type houses all the way down to the 2-bedroom condos.
Then I say let the mortgage industry “make more money” if it’s a side affect of lowering FHA limits to reflect new pricing realities.
Nobody in their right mind believes buying a 700k house is low income. Nor even a 425k house in Chicago. Our government shouldn’t be putting taxpayer dollars on the line to assist people at those levels.
Nor even 500k houses on the coast or 365k houses in Chicago. Let the limits go lower.
and down south… Inflation last month up half a percent. Home prices slowing, only up 1.6 percent.
Bob, while I don’t want to argue with the numbers in the marketwatch article, I don’t think its as bad as “swindling people into taking a short term gain of 8k for a long-term much larger loss.”.
IIRC, the credit was meant to get people out there buying and it did, but mostly only those who were probably going to buy anyway, credit or not. So technically the tax credit offset an even bigger loss for them.