Wall Street responded favorably and 30 year conventional fixed rate mortgages also dropped to a level below 5%.  This rate is the lowest level in over 30 years.  For homebuyers this is even more favorable news. For those of you who read my e-mails, you know that I have been stating that this current market may be the best home purchase opportuity in most of our lifetimes.  I am now taking that statement to a new and higher level. 

With the combination of extraordinary home pricing and historically low interest rates the situation for homebuyers may never be better.

Here is my first entry from Jackie Crockett, a short sale realtor:

There's another side to the foreclosure crisis: Realtors trying to save families from losing their homes. Jackie Crockett is a short sale realtor in Fairfield, CA who has seen the hard times faced by numerous families. Despite her own health problems, she considers herself lucky:

I was one of the first in our area to start listing and negotiating short sales over 3 years ago and helping various clients with loan modifications and 2nd lien write-offs. Unfortunately, the horror stories are never-ending. Plus, we work 4 or 5 times as hard, for about 1/6^th of the income. Those of us handling short sales (versus REO - bank owned properties) are really not in it in for the money, but for our community.

For every short sale listing I've had, I've submitted an average of 7 offers, with only a 50% closing ratio. That is higher than most. The average is 3 out of 10 short sale listings will foreclose before a negotiator finalizes an acceptance. I've had homes ready to close, clients ready to sign, and had the homes foreclosed out from under us. The worst part is, the home usually sells for well below the lowest offer we had submitted.

None of this makes sense. It is frustrating for us as Realtors, and heartbreaking for our clients, their families and our community. These are good people, hardworking, caught in a vicious cycle, with really no fundamental understanding of where to turn, who to talk to. When even the lenders and bankers don't know what to do, or how to proceed, what chance do "regular" homeowners stand?

The lenders and bankers treat us Realtors as if we are the enemy when all we are trying to do is stabilize our communities by keeping folks in their homes, or getting people into these homes as quickly as possible. It's worn me out mentally and physically. I am preparing for a kidney transplant - my husband is my donor - and I've put if off for almost a year now because I felt so many of my clients needed help more desperately. For all that my husband and I are facing, all the uncertainties, I know we are luckier than most and for that I feel so blessed.

Due to the nature of my business, I was in a unique position to take care of our own personal finances when my health started to deteriorate. We very easily could have been one of the statistics, losing our home due to skyrocketing hospital bills, dialysis costs, and lost income. I recently negotiated a settlement with my own 2nd lien holder who will take a very small payoff to "release" the loan. It took months of negotiating, reams of doctor's bills, hospital bills, tax statements, pay stubs, hardship letters, etc., but it was well worth it. Of course, using money from our rapidly dwindling 401 K seems to negate some of the euphoria. I've also called every credit card and set up various payment plans, and auto debit payments that earned us huge interest rate reductions for as long as we need while we're recuperating, and both back on our feet.

I could go on and on about all the pets we found locked in homes when families would leave. Neighbors would gasp and ask "how could people do that?" But some had no choice. Those losing their homes are mostly families with children, some were elderly folks on fixed incomes with no where to go. Pets ended up being the least of their problems. Needless to say, we have 5 rescued cats - we love them and hope their owners somehow know they are well and loved.

Are you facing foreclosure, or have you already lost your home? Share a story of how the housing crisis has affected you by emailing me ...Patti@PattiLyles.com

The Federal Reserve’s program will focus on reducing the amount of principal owed by those at risk of foreclosure, especially those with loan balances exceeding 125 percent of the estimated value of their property.

It is unclear how many homeowners could benefit from the program, and most individual borrowers will likely not know if their mortgages are owned by the Federal Reserve.  If eligible for a loan modification, the homeowner would work with mortgage servicer and not the government directly.

To read the full story, please click here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/27/AR2009012703501.ht

Fannie Mae established of a new National Real Estate Owned (REO) Rental Policy that will allow qualified renters in Fannie Mae-owned foreclosed properties to stay in their homes. The company currently has an eviction suspension in place through the end of January which will allow for the new policy to be fully operationalized prior to the suspension concluding.

"Renters in foreclosed properties have often been a casualty of the foreclosure crisis the country is facing," said Michael Williams, chief operating officer of Fannie Mae. "This policy will allow qualified renters to remain in Fannie Mae-owned properties should they choose to do so, mitigate the disruption of personal lives that foreclosures can cause, and help bring a measure of stability to communities impacted by high foreclosure rates."

The new policy applies to renters occupying foreclosed properties at the time Fannie Mae acquires the property. Renters occupying any type of single-family property will be eligible including residents of two- to four-unit properties, condos, co-ops, single-family detached homes and manufactured housing. Eligible renters will be offered a new month-to-month lease with Fannie Mae or financial assistance for their transition to new housing should they choose to vacate the property. The properties must meet state laws and local code requirements for a rental property.

While the company markets the properties for sale, Fannie Mae will manage the properties through a real estate broker or a property management company. The company will not require security deposits to be posted in connection with this program.

Renters in the foreclosed properties will be asked to pay market rate rent under the new leases. Rates may be determined by reviewing local comparable rents, conducting a neighborhood survey, or through other relevant indicators. Rates will also be subject to any legal rent control restrictions. The company will review each instance where the market rate may require a tenant to pay additional rent and will work to reach an equitable resolution.

On behalf of the company, property managers are contacting renters in Fannie Mae-owned foreclosed properties to notify them of their options.

On July 8, 2008, California signed into law SB 1137 as urgency legislation, effective immediately. The new law

1. (1) establishes detailed procedures as part of the foreclosure process requiring lenders to contact homeowners in default on their mortgages to assess the homeowner's financial situation and explore options for avoiding foreclosure;
2. (2) requires a purchaser to maintain under the building codes vacant residential property purchased at a foreclosure sale and authorizes local governmental entities to impose civil fines and penalties for violations of up to $1000 per day; and
3. (3) gives a tenant or subtenant, in possession of a rental housing unit at the time the property is sold in foreclosure, 60 days instead of 30 days to vacate the unit.

Note, the legislature declared that this act was necessary for "the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety" of California communities, citing the underlying policy of the law to "stabilize and protect the state and local economies and housing market." Although most provisions are effective immediately, some provisions become operative 60 days after the effective date of the law (i.e., 60 days after July 8, 2008). Nearly all provisions sunset by January 1, 2013.

A California law that requires mortgage lenders to give customers 30 days notice before filing a default, appears to have only postponed the problems of financially troubled homeowners rather than resolved them.

 Between November and December, California saw a 122 percent surge in default notices that begin the foreclosure process, following a three-month decline, RealtyTrac reported Wednesday.

It was hoped that the law, which took effect in September, would provide time for the lender and homeowner to find an alternative to foreclosure.

Riverside County saw notices of default plunge by more than half in September, stay low for three months and then jump 126 percent to 4,729 in December. San Bernardino County saw the number of default notices increase 92 percent between November and December to 4,247, after falling as low as 1,500 in September.

"Clearly, the foreclosure prevention programs implemented to date have not had any real success in slowing down this foreclosure tsunami. And the recent California law, much like its predecessors in Massachusetts and Maryland, appears to have done little more than delay the inevitable foreclosure proceedings for thousands of homeowners," said RealtyTrac Chief Executive James J. Saccacio in a prepared statement.

Life in the Balance

The only way foreclosure modifications will work, several economists said, is if lenders agree to lower mortgage balances. They said that is the only way to help those who used creative financing to buy houses they actually could not afford over the life of the mortgage.

Lisa Jarman, a counselor with the Fair Housing Council of Riverside County, said there are modification programs that can lower mortgage balances and interest rates and extend a loan to 40 years, which combined can lower monthly mortgage payments. But she said most of her clients have too much debt or too little income to qualify.

Dependency

An Inland Empire economist, John Husing, said he favors proposed federal legislation to allow U.S. bankruptcy judges to lower the balances on mortgages of homeowners who seek to reorganize their debts in bankruptcy.

Because the region is so dependent on housing, the flood of foreclosures must stop before the Inland economy can start to recover, Husing said. "If you don't get a solution to this problem the recession will continue for multiple years," he said.

RealtyTrac's year-end report for 2008 illustrates homeowners' difficulty coping with falling home values and adjustable-rate mortgages that have reset to monthly payments they can no longer afford. Unable to refinance or sell their homes, homeowners are increasingly losing them.

Foreclosure activity more than doubled in Riverside and San Bernardino counties in 2008 compared to a year earlier. Several economists and analysts predict the pain will continue through 2009 because of a worsening economy.

"Rising unemployment is going to be the major catalyst for continued foreclosures in 2009," said Greg McBride, senior financial analyst with Bankrate.com.

Definition: A Home Sale Contingency is where a purchaser has a home that they need to sell first before they can buy a home. Oftentimes these offers are written as "Under Contract with Kickout." I will explain the Kickout part later.

Buyer needed to sell his place first. My initial reaction was "heck no." If you approach a seller that hasn't been able to sell their place in 100 days, you are effectively telling them, "I know you haven't been able to sell your place, but I want you to accept this contract and wait for me to sell MY place." I would think they would laugh out loud.

But then I decided to look closer into the facts and perhaps it isn't so crazy. What if these buyers haven’t had their home on the market? They would only put their house on the market “If they found just the right one” Mmmmmm

So as I pondered it, though a contingency like this is very rare these days. Crazy? Maybe, maybe not. If done creatively, I think one might be able to push one through in this Wild West marketplace. Everything else is unprecedented-Who Knows it could happen!

Pros for Home Sale Contingency BUYERS:

1. Less risk for the buyer. Their alternative has been to: a) Own two homes at once or  b) sell your place first and run out and buy a place while you are selling your place. (people usually do the "b" option, but there is a major problem if you don't like much that is out there for sale)

Cons for Home Sale Contingency BUYERS:

1. You don't get as good of a price. Sellers care about price AND terms. Similar to the carfax commercial where they illustrate with a balloon how dealers either inflate the trade in, or the new purchase. If you have bad terms, they will hold out for more money. I prefer to write CLEAN offers and be more aggressive on the price.
2. Most contingencies are written with a KICK OUT. This means that if another offer comes in, you will have 3 days to remove your contingency, or they KICK you out to the curb. So, if you listed your house for sale and are halfway through that process and a KICK OUT situation comes up, you bare some significant risk. Do you lose your contract to buy or drop the contingency and risk not selling your house? (there are some creative solutions to fill the gaps in time including Options to extend etc)
3. Your contract can help light a fire under another buyer to finally bid on the house you have under contract, therefore you get Curbed.

Pros for Home Sale Contingency SELLERs:

1. If you are getting no offers, and your house is unique and hard to sell (near a highway or odd style), and meanwhile an offer comes in with a Home Sale Contingency but the agent can prove it will sell fast... heck what is another 30 days?

Cons for sellers:

1. The obvious. You pull your house off the market, nobody sees it and the buyer never gets around to selling their place. Or worse yet, the buyer changes their mind and they have a HUGE way to back out.

How best to do one for buyers:

1. Prove to the listing agent and seller that your house will sell FAST (as in 1-2 weeks). Show them comps, show them the track record of the agent. Even consider LOSING $20,000-$30,000 by “Under-Pricing” your house to sell fast (something I don't recommend, but something to think about if you can make up that savings on the purchase, also think of it as an insurance fee and cost of making your $100,000 lower offer on your purchase look better). (I hope that wasn't confusing)
2. See if you can do one without any Kickout. A smart listing agent will say no, but you never know.
3. Try to make the provisions as long as possible. But the more you ask them to wait, the higher a price they are going to expect.

Tips for sellers considering taking a Home Sale Contingency:

1. Pretty much the same as above but in reverse. Also KEEP MARKETING the house. The MLS makes you put it under contract and few agents will touch it, but don't forget Craigslist and Open Houses. It is easier to get an offer when you have a standing offer. People love to offer on homes with others that are interested.
2. Make sure you have the ability to Kick Out the contract and take another contract. Keep the # of days to as short a number as possible. Maybe charge a daily fee for an extension.

And whatever you do, don't have the agent that is listing the place you like, become the listing agent for YOUR house. Wow, that would be a nightmare. No matter what "deal" he offers you. You would never know who he is working for and you could lose far more money and sanity than saved in lower commissions.

By Patti Lyles 

By Patti Lyles, Tuesday, January 20, 2009.

Why must tenant pay to recarpet whole house?

Thursday, January 17, 2008

Question: My husband and I, along with our two small children and one dog, recently moved out of a townhome that we lived in for 2 1/2 years. The property manager is telling us that due to the use of a store-bought steam vacuum cleaner to clean up where the dog had an accident, the carpet in the entire house has to be replaced. He said it will cost us within the vicinity of $1,400-$1,800. We put down $600 for a deposit and $400 for the pet deposit. Is he able to do this?

Landlord attorney James McKinley replies:

You are responsible for any damage done to the rental property by your pets, guests, children or yourself. In most cases, a security deposit can be used for three things: to remedy defaults in payment of rent; cleaning; and to repair damages beyond normal wear and tear.

Even if not legally required in your area, it would have been helpful if your landlord did a pre-move-out inspection with you. At that time, you could have been given a list of any cleaning or repairs necessary in order for your security deposit to be returned. Assuming you were notified that the pet damage had to be remedied, you were well within your rights to use any type of carpet cleaner to attempt to remedy the situation. I do not see how a store-bought steam cleaner could make the situation any worse. If you could not properly clean the carpet, the manager could have the carpet professionally cleaned, and deduct those cleaning costs from your security deposit. If your dog caused so much damage that the carpet could not be cleaned, you would be responsible for the replacement cost of the carpet.

However, your landlord should prorate the cost of deduction for the replacement carpet, based on the age of the carpet. In other words, if carpet in a rental unit should last 10 years, and the carpet was 2 1/2 years old, your landlord should deduct only 75 percent of the cost of the replacement carpet from your security deposit, and mail you an accounting and receipts as legally required after you vacated the rental unit. That said, it is probably unreasonable for the landlord to charge for replacing carpet in the entire house.

Tenant attorney Steven Kellman replies:

In my experience, carpets in rentals generally have a useful life of 10 years in normal use. Changing them after only 2 1/2 years is very unusual. You should not assume the carpets were new when you moved in. While many landlords may not agree with this logic, I would suggest you propose a more modest charge to the owner and I will give you some ideas on negotiating strategy. Since you were there 2 1/2 years, you could prorate the cost of replacement at one-tenth of the cost per year by adding the prior years of carpet life to the time you lived there.

For example, if the carpet was 3 1/2 years old when you moved in, added to your 2 1/2 years makes it 6 years old. This means your responsibility would be limited to the balance of carpet life (four years) or only 40 percent of the replacement cost. It may have been 10 years old when you moved in, meaning the carpet used up its life when you first began living there. If it was in "overtime" (i.e. past 10 years), then it essentially had no value left and you would not be responsible for any damages whether caused by normal use or not. Therefore, it becomes important to know when that carpet was installed.

Using a store-bought carpet cleaner should pose no problem except that you must take care to extract the water those machines put down. They are called "steam" cleaners, but they generally do not use real steam and have been known to cause damage if used improperly. They use warm water to clean, which, if not extracted, can cause damage or mold. The deposits you gave to the landlord can be used for cleaning and damages, including replacing a damaged carpet. If you do not agree with the landlord's assessment of the carpet, you can have a carpet cleaning professional take a look at the situation. Many times, they can clean a carpet the landlord believes is ruined.

the landlord has met their habitability standards.

San Lorenzo Valley roof algae issues are at a all time high

Applying 3-ingredient solution preferred to high-pressure wash

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Q: We have a house that was built in 1979, in a neighborhood of other houses all built around the same time. Our house has a gray composition shingle roof that has developed large dark stains in many areas. Other homes in the neighborhood with gray or charcoal roofs also have it, but the ones with light-colored roofs don't. Is it algae? If so, would zinc strips help? --Shirley L., via e-mail

A: It's very likely that the staining is indeed some form of algae growth, I drove around Boulder Creek adn took several photos. I contacted the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association to confirm that this is their opinion as well.

As to how to deal with it, their recommendation is as follows: "Algae discolorations are difficult to remove from roofing surfaces, but may be lightened by applying a solution of chlorine bleach, trisodium phosphate (TSP) and water. Solutions for these ingredients may vary between shingle manufacturers and depend on the amount of discoloration. Solutions range from one cup TSP, one gallon bleach and five gallons of water, to one cup TSP and 2.5 gallons each of bleach and water.

"First, gently disperse this solution on the roofing surface. Use normal precautions for handling bleach. Be sure to apply it carefully to avoid damage to other parts of the building and its surrounding landscape. Avoid scrubbing the surface, as this friction may loosen and remove granules. If possible, always work from a ladder and/or walkboards to avoid direct contact with the roof surface. Observe all possible safety precautions when working on or near the roof. Finally, rinse the solution from the roof by gently spraying the surface with water. Be warned that this solution's application and rinse process will make the roof surface slippery and potentially hazardous to walk on during treatment.

"High-pressure washing systems for algae removal should not be used. The effectiveness of such cleaning techniques are only temporary, and discoloration will likely recur."

Opinion varies somewhat on the effectiveness of zinc strips, which release small amounts of zinc oxide onto the roof whenever it rains. At best, the zinc strips will help inhibit additional algae buildup, but will not prevent or kill it.

If you'd like to give them a try, first follow the recommended cleaning outlined above. Then, after the roof is completely dry, apply the zinc strips at the top of the roof, just under the ridge shingles, leaving about two inches of the metal exposed to the weather.

A: When you're in a very slow market with plenty of competing homes for sale, you have to differentiate your house from the other houses on the market. One way to do that is to offer a cash bonus to the agent who brings the buyer. Another way is to offer to pay some or all of the closing costs for the buyer.

There are other ways to market your property and make it seem better and different than your competitors. It sounds like your agent has assessed the local real estate marketplace and found that your property isn't as competitive as it should be. Paying the closing costs is one way to boost your profile. But I suggest you might also want to offer a cash bonus to the buyer's agent. That, at least, will ensure that every eligible buyer sees your property.

Now, let's talk about your agent's job. You hired your agent because you supposedly felt that he or she knew more about the real estate market than you did and would put in the time and effort necessary to get it sold.

But you have to help out your agent by pricing your house competitively. Your agent is supposed to get you the "best price" -- but that's the best price in a particular neighborhood at a given point in time.

Right now, we're in the worst seller's market in more than a decade. In fact, some industry observers believe we're in the worst housing market since the 1940s. If you want to sell, you'll have to drop your price or offer up some bonus to the buyer. That's where the closing costs come in.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

 

Q: I bought a house several months ago. The sellers didn't mention the tremendous amount of noise that the neighbor makes.

Almost every Sunday, the neighbor next door (it's a duplex, so we share a wall) screams while watching sports, and not just when his team makes a touchdown or a home run either -- it's constant screaming every couple of minutes for the entire game.

After the game, he blasts Pink Floyd's "Money" really loud, and keeps screaming the "Woo-woo" part long after the song is over. I've asked him to keep it quiet, especially because I work rotating shifts and sometimes need Sunday afternoon to sleep. His answer was to scream louder. Since our last conversation, I've noticed trash thrown in my yard.

I contacted the local code-enforcement officer, who said that the law covers only noise from animals, car stereos or construction. So, technically, the neighbor isn't breaking the law, although I still think my right to peace and quiet and a decent amount of sleep should outweigh his right to make noise.

Was the seller required to include the noise in the disclosure? Is there any action I can take against either the seller or the neighbor?

A: I'm getting sleepy just reading your letter.

While the seller could have disclosed the neighbor issue, most seller disclosure laws might not cover this specific issue. You could argue that the seller should have disclosed that there is a problem with noise transmission between the units, but you really will need to talk to an attorney in your area to determine whether you have a seller disclosure issue.

Of course, it's possible that your seller was never home on Sunday to watch sports, or that he and your neighbor were good friends who cheered through the games together.

Do you have a homeowners association? The HOA may have rules about noise that your neighbor may be violating. You may have some other options under your municipal laws that you can discuss with an attorney in your area.

What else can you do? You can put up some soundproofing between your wall and your neighbors that will dampen the noise and allow you to get some sleep. That may be pricey, but it might help your neighbor's voice fade into the background. There are companies that specialize in noise issues and can help you reduce the amount of noise that comes from the neighbor's apartment.

But ultimately, you may have to sell your home. If you can't fix the problem and the neighbor refuses to keep the noise level down, you can sue your neighbor to get a quiet night's rest. You can also consider moving to a new place where you don't share walls with anyone else.

Subsequently, the buyers decided to hire their own home inspector, just to make sure that the seller's inspectors hadn't missed anything. The buyer's home inspector made a more thorough examination of the property, which revealed that the property had serious drainage problems.

Based on the new information, the buyers asked the seller to lower the purchase price by the amount of the repair estimate. The seller stood by his inspector's opinion and refused to concede anything. The deal fell apart.

Be aware that if the buyers in the above scenario had purchased the property in its "as is" condition and without an inspection contingency, they could have risked losing their deposit if they withdrew from the purchase without the seller's agreement. Contracts differ regarding methods for dispute resolution and who is entitled to the deposit when a purchase transaction falls apart.

Also, some states don't have seller disclosure laws. However, the trend nationally is moving in the direction of requiring sellers to disclose known defects, as is the case in California. Local custom usually dictates whether or not sellers have inspections done before marketing their homes.

In cases where inspectors disagree, it's usually best to try to reach an acceptable middle ground rather than let the deal fall apart. Otherwise, both parties are back at square one: the seller looking for a new buyer and the buyer searching for a new home to buy.

HOUSE HUNTING TIP: One way of solving such problems is to hire a third inspector to look at the property. In this case, it's best to find someone who can give an accurate and unbiased opinion. A contractor who's looking for work may have difficulty being objective.

Even if two inspectors agree there's a problem with a property, the recommended remedies may vary significantly. This can affect the cost of repairs. In the case of a home sold in nearby Piedmont, one inspector thought the roof was on its last legs. Another believed that it could be repaired to extend the life of the roof a few years. The buyer wanted a new roof. The seller was willing to pay for repairs.

They reached a compromise when the seller agreed to credit half the cost of a new roof to the buyer at closing. This seemed fair since the buyer knew when he went into contract to buy the home that the roof wasn't new.

Even when inspectors are in complete agreement about the severity of a problem and what needs to be done to fix it, estimates to complete the repairs can vary widely. The busiest and best contractors are often the most expensive. Buyers are inclined to ask for the most expensive bid, while sellers usually want to pay as little as possible.

A compromise can often be reached if the seller is willing to credit the buyer an amount based on one of the lower bids. The buyer can then have the work done after closing, using whomever he wants to do the work. He can even make up the difference in cost and use a more expensive contractor.

THE CLOSING: Just make sure that all bids obtained to resolve inspection issues are from reputable contractors.

Friday, October 19, 2007

Patti Lyles http://www.FeltonProperty.com 

Q: My neighbor recently extended a retaining wall for a driveway and encroached upon our property by a distance of 12 inches by 9 feet. We had our property surveyed three weeks after the construction and discovered this.

Our neighbor proposes that we settle the problem by providing him with an easement for this use. What would be the implications in this for us?

A: The issue you face is quite common. Frequently, neighbors do not know the exact location of their lot lines. Other times, contractors doing work for the homeowners fail to follow the property lines when making improvements to homes.

The most common problem between neighbors has to do with the installation of fences. Depending on the configuration of the lots, bushes, trees, other obstacles and the location of the home on each lot, neighbors frequently pick a line that usually ends up on one neighbor’s side of the property by a couple of inches to a couple of feet.

If your neighbor had come to you to ask whether he could install the retaining wall on part of your property, would you have agreed? If you would have been fine with his request, you have nothing to lose with giving him the easement. If you would have objected, you now have a decision to make.

The easement your neighbor requests will give them the right to keep the retaining wall on your property without your ability to have them remove it in the future. If you’re planning to sell your home, the easement would also make sure that your buyer couldn’t require your neighbor to remove the wall.

If you go the easement route, you need to make sure that there are provisions in the agreement that state that the neighbor is required to maintain the wall and pay all costs associated with the wall. You could have a provision in the document that would require your neighbor to remove the wall in the future if it needs replacement.

A real estate attorney named Earnest Fox in Santa Cruz can assist you in the drafting of the easement agreement. Your neighbor should pay all of the expenses having to do with preparing the easement agreement and having the document recorded.

One issue that you have to consider is the impact the wall has on your property. If the impact is not noticeable, there may have been no harm done by your neighbor. If your lot is narrow and the impact of the wall is large, and having the wall could alter the value of your property, you’ll need to decide how to proceed with your neighbor.

Now, let’s look at the other side. Assuming that you would not have allowed your neighbor to build the retaining wall on your property, even if your neighbor had good reasons to do it that way, you can now require the neighbor to remove the wall from your property or request that he pay you a lump sum for the privilege of having the wall on your property.

You can even structure the easement agreement to have your neighbor pay you an annual fee to keep the wall on your property. If he innocently built the wall on your property, you have him in a rough spot. It’s probably would not be very neighborly of you to demand payment from him or to have him remove the wall, particularly if it does not impact your home, but you might have the right to do it.

You have to decide what you want to do. If your neighbor made an innocent mistake, and you charge him for the easement or make him take down the retaining wall, he could be a less-than-friendly neighbor for many years to come.

On the other hand, if your neighbor just decided to build the wall and didn’t even consider whether he would be on your property, and you’re not all that neighborly to begin with, you may make a different decision.

For more information on your legal rights or to draft the easement agreement, consult a real estate attorney like Earnest J. Fox of Santa Cruz

Can you give me some reasons why we should either wait or sell immediately? My own feeling is that the taxes for this property are going to be very high once my father's "grandfathered" tax rate lapses.

A: First, I'd like to offer my condolences on the loss of your father.

Although I'm sure you and your sisters are missing your dad, I can't think of any reason why you wouldn't want to put your dad's house on the market now--when vacation homes are selling like hotcakes. The carrying costs (taxes and maintenance) on a house that expensive could be costly, especially if none of you are near enough to use it regularly and make sure that small problems don't turn into big issues.

I think the advice your sister is remembering refers to individuals who have experienced a huge trauma, like the death of a spouse or partner. In those cases, if the individual can afford to wait, it is a good idea to let a year go by while he or she adapts to the new circumstances of a new life.

In your case, you won't gain anything by waiting a year to sell this property. You have inherited the property at the current market value (which may even be able to be adjusted to whatever price you sell it for this spring). That means you would pay no capital gains tax on your inheritance when you sell.

And after the expense of selling it (broker's commission, transfer taxes, etc.), you would each pocket a significant amount of cash.

I think that you should sell now, especially since interest rates might rise significantly in the next year, which could dampen interest in an expensive vacation property. But it doesn't really matter what I think.

You and your siblings need to talk this out so everyone is comfortable with the plan. If you're having trouble agreeing, ask an estate attorney to mediate.

Q: I tried to sell a house for the appraised price and was unable to sell at that price. I understand that property will not sell when it is priced too high but the offers I received were $15,000 to $18,000 less than the appraisal just done 5 months ago.

I was under the impression that if I advertised the property for the appraised price, it would move quickly. I told one real estate agent when she made me an offer from a client that I was going to have the house appraised again and that I would provide the appraised price to the potential buyer so he could adjust his bid.

The agent didn't go for that at all. Can you give me some suggestions as to what I did wrong? When I couldn't sell the house, I finally rented it.

A: I think you made a few basic mistakes. First, the appraised value is not necessarily the same thing as the market value.

The appraised value of the home is what an appraiser thinks the home is worth based on the sales of other similar homes in the area. The market value is what someone will actually pay for the house.

 In your case, either because of the condition or location of the home, the market is telling you that your home isn't worth what the appraiser thinks it should be worth--it's worth $15,000 to $18,000 less.

Getting a new appraisal doesn't change what someone will pay for the home. You'd be better off buying some cans of white paint and repainting the interior of the property. Or securing a REALTOR to counsel you and market the home at the right price. Then, you might get more money for it.

Renting the house is fine. Eventually, prices will rise in your neighborhood and you'll get your price, but not today or the rest of this year. And only you can decide if waiting for prices to rise in order to get the extra $15,000 to $18,000 is worthwhile.

Interest-only loan option works well in seller's market

Monday, September 24, 2007

 Most home buyers are resistant to selling their current home before they already have another one tied up. This means buying before selling, which carries an element of risk.

One way to approach such a move, if market conditions permit, is to make an offer on the new home that is contingent upon the sale of your current home. This way, you don't put cash down on the new place until you have your equity out of the home you're selling.

Although you avoid the risk of owning two homes, you also may have to offer an over-market price to entice the seller into accepting your less-than-certain offer. There is also the risk of losing the house to another buyer who can close without having his or her home sold. Usually sellers who accept a contingent sale offer want a release clause in the contract.

A release clause allows the seller to continue marketing the property until the contingent-sale buyers remove their sale contingency. If the seller accepts another offer in backup position, he notifies the first buyers that they need to remove their sale contingency within the time period specified in the contract (often 72 hours), and show that they are financially able to perform, or they risk losing the property to the backup buyer.

Another drawback of the contingent-sale approach is that it doesn't work in all markets. In a balanced or slower market where listings are not selling quickly, a contingent sale offer stands a chance of being accepted. But in a seller's market, where inventory is low, contingent-sale offers are rarely accepted.

In a strong market, you'll need to step forward with an offer that is not contingent on another property selling. You will also need to provide financial verification that you don't need to sell in order to generate the cash you need to close.

HOUSE HUNTING TIP: A 30-year fixed-rate mortgage with an interest-only payment option can provide a reasonable option for well-qualified buyers. With this sort of mortgage, you have the option to pay only interest each month for the first 15 years of the loan. After that point, payments are amortized to pay off the loan in full over the remaining life of the loan. This can result in a huge jump in monthly payment. But, you should have no intention of letting this happen.

Let's say you're buying a $700,000 home and have enough cash for a 20 percent down payment without selling your home. But, you'll have to take out a mortgage for $560,000, which is a bigger mortgage than you want.

However, you will have only a $560,000 loan balance until your existing home sells. At that point you take proceeds from the sale of the old place and pay down the mortgage on the new home to a more comfortable amount.

During the interest-only period of the loan, you pay interest only on the remaining loan balance. So, when you pay down the principal, you'll lower your monthly payment. At the end of the 15-year, interest-only, pay-option period, the loan is amortized over the remaining 15 years. Your payments won't jump significantly as long as you diligently pay down the principal during the first 15 years. Make sure that the terms of your mortgage permit principal pay-downs at any time without penalty.

Another benefit of this type of interim financing is that it's long-term financing. You don't have to worry about paying off a loan earlier than you might be able to if your home takes longer to sell. And, during the time you own two homes, you can make a lower interest-only payment rather than a higher fully amortized payment.

THE CLOSING: This helps with your cash flow.