<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Real Estate with CENTURY 21 Mike Bowman, Inc.</title>
	
	<link>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog</link>
	<description>CENTURY 21 Mike Bowman, Inc. Real Estate Trends and Company News for North Texas (Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex)</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 22:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/CommentsForRealEstate101" /><feedburner:info uri="commentsforrealestate101" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><item>
		<title>Comment on Website Focuses on Keller Real Estate, Homes for Sale (Keller, TX) by Mike</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/a9A7gs3kIvc/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:38:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=500#comment-22</guid>
		<description>It is difficult to predict the economic future. Through May 2011, the properties in Keller have averaged going up in value by 1% over 2010. The overall number of homes sold for the first 5 months actually went down 13% over the same period in 2010. The average days on the market are 95 days which is 2% longer than 2010. The average price is $313,960. The number of properties closed is 222 YTD. The economy in Texas and the Dallas-Fort Worth area is quite a bit stronger than most of the other states. In 2010, there were approximately 237,000 jobs created in Texas which was more than the rest of the country created for the same time period. Texans are very optimistic about our local and state economy now and in the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is difficult to predict the economic future. Through May 2011, the properties in Keller have averaged going up in value by 1% over 2010. The overall number of homes sold for the first 5 months actually went down 13% over the same period in 2010. The average days on the market are 95 days which is 2% longer than 2010. The average price is $313,960. The number of properties closed is 222 YTD. The economy in Texas and the Dallas-Fort Worth area is quite a bit stronger than most of the other states. In 2010, there were approximately 237,000 jobs created in Texas which was more than the rest of the country created for the same time period. Texans are very optimistic about our local and state economy now and in the future.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/a9A7gs3kIvc" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2011/06/keller-real-estate-homes-for-sale-keller-tx/comment-page-1#comment-22</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Mike</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/nKZ7uoDfqbw/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:30:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-13</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your email. I wish there was enough backing from the public to encourage their congressmen to look into this. It would have been a big benefit if non-qualifying assumptions would have been available since 2007. I don't believe we would have had the huge amount of foreclosures that we've experienced so far. 

Quote Moody’s Analytics: “Moody’s estimated that 2.1 million families would be foreclosed in 2011, and the Mortgage Bankers Association, the industry trade group, said that the total number threatened with losing their homes is four million.
That would bring the total number who lost or will lose their homes over the five-year period, 2007-2011, under the combined impact of financial collapse and economic slump, to a staggering nine million families. An additional 10.9 million families are “under water” on their homes, meaning that they owe more in mortgage debt than the home can be sold for in the current depressed market. Adding to the potential financial impact is the $426 billion in second mortgages on the balance sheets of just four banks: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup.”

If the 10.9 million families “under water” right now could sell their properties to a purchaser on a non-qualifying assumption at a low equity, I believe that a majority of those families could save a foreclosure and their credit and a large number of purchasers would be able to own a home instead of renting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your email. I wish there was enough backing from the public to encourage their congressmen to look into this. It would have been a big benefit if non-qualifying assumptions would have been available since 2007. I don&#8217;t believe we would have had the huge amount of foreclosures that we&#8217;ve experienced so far. </p>
<p>Quote Moody’s Analytics: “Moody’s estimated that 2.1 million families would be foreclosed in 2011, and the Mortgage Bankers Association, the industry trade group, said that the total number threatened with losing their homes is four million.<br />
That would bring the total number who lost or will lose their homes over the five-year period, 2007-2011, under the combined impact of financial collapse and economic slump, to a staggering nine million families. An additional 10.9 million families are “under water” on their homes, meaning that they owe more in mortgage debt than the home can be sold for in the current depressed market. Adding to the potential financial impact is the $426 billion in second mortgages on the balance sheets of just four banks: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup.”</p>
<p>If the 10.9 million families “under water” right now could sell their properties to a purchaser on a non-qualifying assumption at a low equity, I believe that a majority of those families could save a foreclosure and their credit and a large number of purchasers would be able to own a home instead of renting.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/nKZ7uoDfqbw" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-13</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Mike</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/IS3Tme-Rhro/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:28:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-12</guid>
		<description>My experience was that when investors purchased those properties and rented them out, they held onto them and sold them as assumable low equity purchases at a later date when the values had increased. Consumers purchased these equities when they didn't have enough cash for higher down payments for new loans or their credit scores weren't where they needed to be to qualify for a new loan. If they got in trouble where they couldn't pay the mortgage any longer they just sold it on an equity to someone else. When they know there is a cash benefit for selling the equity they were more likely to do that rather than let it go back into bankruptcy. What happened was that instead of foreclosed properties not being cared for or being sold for a lower value in the neighborhood and bringing the overall property values down, it stopped the neighboring properties from being devalued. There also were a lot less properties that went back to the government. You can also make these non-qualifying assumptions only for owner-occupants. That would solve your concern. 

Quote Moody's Analytics: "Moody’s estimated that 2.1 million families would be foreclosed in 2011, and the Mortgage Bankers Association, the industry trade group, said that the total number threatened with losing their homes is four million.
That would bring the total number who lost or will lose their homes over the five-year period, 2007-2011, under the combined impact of financial collapse and economic slump, to a staggering nine million families. An additional 10.9 million families are “under water” on their homes, meaning that they owe more in mortgage debt than the home can be sold for in the current depressed market. Adding to the potential financial impact is the $426 billion in second mortgages on the balance sheets of just four banks: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup."

If the 10.9 million families "under water" right now could sell their properties to a purchaser on a non-qualifying assumption at a low equity, I believe that a majority of those families could save a foreclosure and their credit and a large number of purchasers would be able to own a home instead of renting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My experience was that when investors purchased those properties and rented them out, they held onto them and sold them as assumable low equity purchases at a later date when the values had increased. Consumers purchased these equities when they didn&#8217;t have enough cash for higher down payments for new loans or their credit scores weren&#8217;t where they needed to be to qualify for a new loan. If they got in trouble where they couldn&#8217;t pay the mortgage any longer they just sold it on an equity to someone else. When they know there is a cash benefit for selling the equity they were more likely to do that rather than let it go back into bankruptcy. What happened was that instead of foreclosed properties not being cared for or being sold for a lower value in the neighborhood and bringing the overall property values down, it stopped the neighboring properties from being devalued. There also were a lot less properties that went back to the government. You can also make these non-qualifying assumptions only for owner-occupants. That would solve your concern. </p>
<p>Quote Moody&#8217;s Analytics: &#8220;Moody’s estimated that 2.1 million families would be foreclosed in 2011, and the Mortgage Bankers Association, the industry trade group, said that the total number threatened with losing their homes is four million.<br />
That would bring the total number who lost or will lose their homes over the five-year period, 2007-2011, under the combined impact of financial collapse and economic slump, to a staggering nine million families. An additional 10.9 million families are “under water” on their homes, meaning that they owe more in mortgage debt than the home can be sold for in the current depressed market. Adding to the potential financial impact is the $426 billion in second mortgages on the balance sheets of just four banks: Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo and Citigroup.&#8221;</p>
<p>If the 10.9 million families &#8220;under water&#8221; right now could sell their properties to a purchaser on a non-qualifying assumption at a low equity, I believe that a majority of those families could save a foreclosure and their credit and a large number of purchasers would be able to own a home instead of renting.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/IS3Tme-Rhro" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-12</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by maria gardner</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/1qmjQ0zJUNI/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>maria gardner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Jan 2011 16:32:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-11</guid>
		<description>I brought my 1st house was a non qualified assumption, and i agree that they should bring back the NAQ, that would help so many people find homes and be able to help lenders, banks, and realtor get back on there feet. It's really a shame because there so many people that want a home but can't finance though a real mortgage loan. And then there are the homeless who need help and some of those houses are just sitting there. I reall hope that they do i know a lot of people that can use the help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I brought my 1st house was a non qualified assumption, and i agree that they should bring back the NAQ, that would help so many people find homes and be able to help lenders, banks, and realtor get back on there feet. It&#8217;s really a shame because there so many people that want a home but can&#8217;t finance though a real mortgage loan. And then there are the homeless who need help and some of those houses are just sitting there. I reall hope that they do i know a lot of people that can use the help.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/1qmjQ0zJUNI" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-11</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by GB</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/ndrS-jR2JGg/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>GB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-10</guid>
		<description>A lot has changed since the 80s' though.  There are a lot more unscrupulous people who would take advantage of the situation, buy up tons of properties, milk them for whatever rental cash they could get, and then file for bankruptcy or just walk.  It doesn't fix the problem, just adds to the uncertainty of mortgage business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lot has changed since the 80s&#8217; though.  There are a lot more unscrupulous people who would take advantage of the situation, buy up tons of properties, milk them for whatever rental cash they could get, and then file for bankruptcy or just walk.  It doesn&#8217;t fix the problem, just adds to the uncertainty of mortgage business.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/ndrS-jR2JGg" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-10</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Shellie Honsinger</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/EPAjXrBIFdI/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Shellie Honsinger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:49:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-6</guid>
		<description>Amen,  I was a Realtor in the late 80's and became a Mortgage Professional shortly after that. I bought my first home at the age of 21 on a Blind Assumption in Oregon.... I am hopefull that some changes will come very soon. I would think that, Although not legal some lenders would not persur the Due on Sale Clause if the payments are being made.....Can't wait to see the changes soon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amen,  I was a Realtor in the late 80&#8217;s and became a Mortgage Professional shortly after that. I bought my first home at the age of 21 on a Blind Assumption in Oregon&#8230;. I am hopefull that some changes will come very soon. I would think that, Although not legal some lenders would not persur the Due on Sale Clause if the payments are being made&#8230;..Can&#8217;t wait to see the changes soon</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/EPAjXrBIFdI" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-6</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Dorthy Casten</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/bI3WmOuO23A/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Dorthy Casten</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:00:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-5</guid>
		<description>I am a homeowner.  However, years ago as a single mother of 3 kids I would not have qualified for a home purchase - even though I had funds for downpayment.  I was able to get into a good 3 bedroom 2 bath home in the Saginaw area because I could assume the loan.  We stayed in that house for 10 years until the kids graduated from school. 

Now I am 61, have a home I need to sell but can't in SW FW because I would have to take $$ to the table to unload the house.  We are considering walking out of it so that we can move to Mansfield to be close to the kids - we need the help from them and they need the help from us.  We don't know what else to do; our house won't sell.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a homeowner.  However, years ago as a single mother of 3 kids I would not have qualified for a home purchase - even though I had funds for downpayment.  I was able to get into a good 3 bedroom 2 bath home in the Saginaw area because I could assume the loan.  We stayed in that house for 10 years until the kids graduated from school. </p>
<p>Now I am 61, have a home I need to sell but can&#8217;t in SW FW because I would have to take $$ to the table to unload the house.  We are considering walking out of it so that we can move to Mansfield to be close to the kids - we need the help from them and they need the help from us.  We don&#8217;t know what else to do; our house won&#8217;t sell.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/bI3WmOuO23A" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-5</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Deborah Kline</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/eR7Giu9xrjI/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Kline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Can we get TAR or NAR to lobby for it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can we get TAR or NAR to lobby for it?</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/eR7Giu9xrjI" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-3</feedburner:origLink></item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on How Non-Qualifying Assumptions Can Help Reduce Foreclosures by Deborah Kline</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~3/6v-Fq_XY84k/comment-page-1</link>
		<dc:creator>Deborah Kline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 15:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/?p=1#comment-2</guid>
		<description>Absolutely right! I am a Texas Real Estate Broker with 25 years selling in San Antonio.  Bringing back the NQAs is what needs to happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely right! I am a Texas Real Estate Broker with 25 years selling in San Antonio.  Bringing back the NQAs is what needs to happen.</p>
<img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/CommentsForRealEstate101/~4/6v-Fq_XY84k" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
	<feedburner:origLink>http://www.c21bowman.com/blog/2010/10/nonqualifyingassumptions/comment-page-1#comment-2</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>

