For a while now, I’ve been charting the heavy investment in a narrative of the housing market springing back to life. And if you look sideways at the data long enough, you can make that case. Jared Bernstein does a good job of that here. Indeed, we’re starting to see prices on distressed sales rising, albeit in a small way, up just 1% year-over-year. And the share of distressed sales as a percentage of the overall market are falling. Bernstein also shows some indications of a bottom, if not movement upward.
We need to look at the reason for some of these improvements in housing, which are happening at the same time as some bad indicators for the rest of the economy. I think the major thing boosting housing prices and market stability would be the reduction in the months-of-supply on the market. This has occurred over the past year. There are two factors here: shadow inventory, which consists of banks holding properties off the market; and things like this, which are pretty horrific to contemplate.
According to a report released today by the Urban Strategies Council, a nonprofit think tank, real estate investors have purchased – usually with cash – 42 percent of the 10,508 homes in Oakland that went into foreclosure between January 2007 and October 2011. Many of these investors are turning the homes into rental properties and charging rent that is significantly higher than the monthly mortgage payments many families would make if they purchased the homes.
“They are massive landlords in neighborhoods that historically have had high rates of homeownership, and very few people are aware of the investor activity that’s taking place under feet,” said Steve King, the organization’s housing and economic development coordinator.
The most prolific investor, the report said, was a company registered to Community Fund LLC, which bought 307 foreclosed homes and apartment buildings. The company is registered to Michael Marr, an Oakland real estate broker who declined to comment for this story. Community Fund paid, on average, $111,000 for a foreclosed home.
So the “stability” in the housing market comes from a new class of investor landlords buying up masses of properties on the cheap – one example in the piece shows a foreclosed borrower willing to pay $300,000 for a house than an investor took for $150,000 – and converting them into either rental units or development. I think this is really not a welcome scenario, no matter how it ameliorates the housing slump. We’re breeding a whole generation of slumlords, for one. These management companies will hold a ton of power over neighborhoods where they own a large chunk.
If homes get swept under in development, that’s arguably worse. Desley Brooks of the Oakland City Council describes it as investors “eating up our neighborhoods for profits.” It’s hard to argue with her.
In an interview, Brooks argued that families that would want to buy the foreclosed properties with conventional financing are being squeezed out by investors who can afford to pay cash. Real estate investors are “taking away the notion of buying into the American Dream,” she said.
Here’s the entire piece. I’m sure this is not limited to Oakland. In fact, the Administration is welcoming this with its REO-to-rental strategy, recruiting investors to buy up a bunch of foreclosed properties and rent them out. How this helps in the long run for the housing market – or especially the livability of communities – is hard for me to see.




13 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
My experience with high rental rates communities is that they quickly become slums. I can think of four communities within 10 miles that deteriorated as rentals rates rose. The Obama administration is criminally collusive.
It is the 21st century version of “its a wonderful life”, only in this version Potter the evil banker wins. We will all have to live in Pottersville now.
Dday at first i saw this as all bad, but now see a real opportunity.
it is difficult to get individual homeowners to make energy efficiency (and renewable energy) investments in their homes. Initial capital costs can be prohibitive and that assumes home owners are simply aware of the value life cycle costing approach to energy improvements.
Regardless, with institutional investors buying homes it may be possible to approach them to make the energy improvements. Keep in mind that the recent bloomberg stories suggested that the investors have over six billion to invest but have been hard pressed to invest two billion. And if their offered a way to increase the value of their assets while decreasing their utilities expense, then they might be interested. Of course my hope is predicated on the notion that it is the investors, not the occupants, who are paying the utilities bills.
If you agree with the concept and have any suggestions of paths to follow, I’m already chasing down this idea that started with your reporting. Thanks! Timwhite98 at yahoo
except ordinary home buyers are getting frozen out of home mkt.
Don’t get me wrong. I don’t like this. Just trying to use these lemons to make some long overdue lemonade.
Its a land grab, the equivalent of the enclosure movement of the 18th century in England and Ireland. The peasants are being run into debt and bankruptcy, foreclosed off their land and run into penury.
Actually it goes back further than that to biblical times, and it merited the curse of God on the people who practice it:
Isaiah 5:8
“Woe to you who add house to house
and join field to field
till no space is left
and you live alone in the land.”
Is anybody even asking the question of where are the people going once they are put out of their homes? People who are most likely already in financial distress, having spent all their resources. Where are they and how are they living? And their children? I think somebody should try to find out.
Chinese investors shall now enter stage left, flush with cash. Have we gotta deal for you.
It might actually be better having Chinese property owners, because I imagine they’re more likely to significantly lower the rents to compete in the market and to be content with longer-term profits.
Wasn’t this always the plan? The winner is always the one who can afford to say no. Always. The banks could afford to after the bailouts. The little guy couldn’t. Foreclose on the homeowner, throw him out, rent the property back to him, through further subsidies in the form of section 8 vouchers. Win-win. Wasn’t that always the plan? I warned my friends over 3 years ago. This is news?
This is but one phase of disaster capitalism. Government/business proposals always favor the sharks.
If the government forced the too big to fail banks to break up into smaller entities, wouldn’t the same elites still own everything?
Capitalism is consuming itself and taking no prisoners.
Plantationland USA
yes massah,es,howabout a mint julep?
Could we talk about how this screws over the pension funds, municiplaites, school districts and other investors who bought the RMBS?
If the homeowner was willing to pay $300K for the house that the speculator bought for $150K i cash. That’s a loss of not only $150K in principle to the RMBS investor, it’s also a loss of interest on $300K for the life of the loan. Since most mods are 30 or even 40 year loans, that’s hell of a lot of interest.
By persuing foreclosure, “mail inthe keys” and short sales to cash investors instead of modifications with priiple writedowns to the auction price, the RMBS investor will be cheated every time becuase of the loss of interest.
However, the servicer will make a truckload of fees.
This servicer conflcit of interest and the Trustee breach of ficuciary duty, ought to be easy for any judge to comprehend, yet….? Where are the lawsuits? Oh yaeh, the Ags “settled”.
Good on Harris for at least doing something with the resources she had left, but if she had held out, it would have been close to impossible for Schniederman to cave. W/O NY and California, there would have been no settlement.
She gave away most of her tools, I’m glad she is able to do some tinkering arouund the edges with the tools that remained, and I hope it helps somebody.
…so it would seem.
Inflate the real estate market and home prices and do plunder all around this on Wall St. and with mortgage chop and dice boiler room grifter ops. Then in 2008 along comes the Crisis that Wall St. and TBTF banks clean up with USG money shoveling done out to six trillion plus $$ and then turn around,buy up the distressed real estate,homes and multi unit apartment complexes at steep discounts. What is not to like if you are part of 1%?
Barack Obama let it happen after he picked up where G.W.Bush left off. POTUS Obama could have wreaked living hell on the one percenters. Instead he sent the hellhounds after the 99%. But lets elect Obama again because he is not as bad as Mitt Romney. That will show Barack Obama. Show him good.