Washoe County foreclosure-related recordings – November 2012

Share this:

The number of Notices of Sale filed in Washoe County in November increased slightly; however all other foreclosure-related metrics slid for the month.
We thank our friends at Ticor Title for providing the data and commentary below. Click on the chart to enlarge…


Commentary from November’s report:

Notice of Default (NOD) filings decreased in November.  The Notice of Sales increased a bit and Trustee Deeds decreased.  With the steady Notice of Default filings, it is hoped by many that the Homeowners who are facing foreclosure take advantage of the short sale option.  The new single family residential REO (Bank Owned) listings decreased in November.   As mentioned in prior comments, inventory in Nevada is down considerably and the real estate community is concerned about the lack of inventory available in the 1st and 2nd Quarter.  Sales are strong but inventory continues to shrink.  According to some numbers provided to me, new listings on MLS has decreased again, and the concern about the 1st quarter is becoming a reality.  One thing that could definitely assist the real estate community and our inventory would be the extension of the Mortgage Debt Forgiveness Act, but we have not yet heard if this will be extended or not and its possible we may not hear until after the first of the year.  

Related post: Washoe County foreclosure-related recordings – October 2012

About Guy Johnson

I am a licensed Nevada REALTOR® living and working in Reno, Nevada. Give me a call at 775-722-4011. My team and I will be happy to assist you with your real estate needs.
This entry was posted in Foreclosures and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Washoe County foreclosure-related recordings – November 2012

  1. Maximus says:

    What concerns me is that so many owners are underwater and “paralyzed” in the sense they have to wait for the bank to approve short sale or foreclose (properly), that essentially the banks are running the market. This means they can choose to foreclose at a slower rate, but based on other reports I read the rate of foreclosure isn’t the only issue, the fact that they are sitting on properties already foreclosed is a major issue limiting supply and extending out the decline (even though the short term prices are up). With non existent supply, we are seeing the “top of the bottom”, meaning there isn’t much more that can be done (against the market forces) to raise prices. FHA, which is facilitating leverage, is having to increase the monthly payments to balance out its defaults, so all the long term mounting price pressure is downward.

  2. Rental Dude says:

    This chart is great. It completely visualizes the now highly artificial market that began with the great AB 284 cliff of ’11. The pros and cons of doing business in an artificial vs free market are arguable, but I’m having fun with it. And hoping to outcompete others who can’t deal with the weirdness!

  3. I am curious to find out what blog platform you have been working with? I’m having some minor security problems with my latest site and I would like to find something more safeguarded. Do you have any recommendations?

  4. Guy Johnson says:

    Illinois land for sale,
    I use WordPress for this blog’s platform; currently running the latest version 3.4.2. I also use Akismet to block spam. Feel free to contact me off-blog if you have other questions.
    Thanks,
    Guy

  5. Mark M says:

    >> And hoping to outcompete others who can’t deal with the weirdness!

    Hi Rental Dude:

    Can you explain it? Give us some more details.

    Mark

  6. Derrick says:

    Clearly this market has bounced back WAY too soon. It reminds me of when a stock is OVER bought and thus due for a correction. I have also realized this first hand by having offers on my house that are $20-$30k over what I paid in January of 2010.

    Meanwhile the rentals continue to bump along and imo generous 9% cap rates. btw, their market value is also higher than I paid less than 2 years ago.

  7. Derrick says:

    The funny part is that my home isn’t even listed for sale on the MLS. All the offers and interest has been directly from Zillow.com and the “make me move” price I posted.

  8. GratefulD_420 says:

    Folks in the housing market should get ready for changes….

    If no outside forces change (Congress or State) change the rules… the bubble is built. The bursting is already set with increasing NOD’s (banks finally able to comply with AB 284) and the lagging NOS’s and TD’s coming. This will greatly swing the inventory for investors appetite who are “ALL IN.”

    If AB 284 is modified as sounding ever likely, this will only increase the NOD action and inventory.

    If we hit the fiscal cliff… 90% of all short sales will fall out. Imagine that! Which short sale home owners will have cash to pay taxes on ($100k’s) debt forgiveness? How fast will the banks react, especially if AB284 is modified to make it easier? How much inventory in REO form will be available within the next 6 to 9 months?

    In summary, I think this fast and furious bubble is about to run out.

  9. Derrick says:

    grateful dead

    I still have considerable powder dry in the even of a pullback and more inventory. :)

  10. Lurker says:

    AB284 requires banks to prove ownership before booting someone out of their house. Not sure why that’s remotely controversial.

  11. GratefulD_420 says:

    … I stand corrected on my above comment. I now understand that the debt forgiveness act, even if left to expire this year, is still in effect through 2014.

    To Lurker….AB284 is simply a problem since it has far over reached it’s stated intention of stopping illicit or incorrect foreclosures. You have to be extremely biased not to understand why folks are not happy with government intervention of a “free” market. I know if you were on the other side of such manipulation you would surely then understand.

  12. lurker says:

    Deadhead,
    You state, “AB284 is simply a problem since it has far over reached it’s stated intention of stopping illicit or incorrect foreclosures.”

    Prove it.

    Fact is, banks are catching up with the law, and are now pushing foreclosures after properly demonstrating that they actually own the place.

    Why do you think it’s good that they didn’t have to do that prior to AB284? Why do you not think it’s a good idea they have to do so now?

    Instead of the standard “govt intervention of a free market” dribble, try to make a cohesive argument as to how this law improperly interferes with the free market? You have not done so to date.

    I have never been foreclosed upon, and am in the market for an investment property, so I guess you can say that I AM on the other side of such “manipulation”, yet I still prefer the banks lawfully show title before booting a homeowner from their house.

  13. Sully says:

    Regarding AB284, this is probably the best article I’ve read that explains the problem. It’s doing the job as intended, however the unintended consequences are preventing a “real” recovery in the Nevada housing market. It appears it will be tweaked in the coming legislature but not repealed.

    http://www.lvbusinesspress.com/articles/2012/10/22/news/iq_57161188.txt

  14. It’s hard to find experienced people for this subject, but you seem like you know what you’re talking about!
    Thanks

  15. GratefulD_420 says:

    @ Lurker,

    I’ll take your bait for a moment.. but will not spend hours trying to support the obvious.

    For “proof” please look no further than the Ticor graph posted by Guy. August 2011 had 5,350 foreclosures and October 2011 had 80. Do you purport that the additional 5,000 or so foreclosures that were occurring per month were actually fraudulent actions of the banks against good customers paying their mortgages on time? We know this is not true and therefore the newly introduced law is indeed over-reaching in its’ intent.

    As much as I like the little guy and our rights, I cannot endorse burning the “man” at costs to other folks. As stated previously I have nothing against folks that had to stop paying the mortgage because of life changes or choose not to pay the mortgage when it became clear the bank over valued it and they over paid for the asset. That is a simple financial decision to a financial obligation and contract. Stop paying and return the asset (foreclosure).

    What I do have a problem with is folks that signed a contract, broke the contract (by not paying the agreed mortgage) and now want to stay or live in the asset without paying.

    The law most definitely interferes with a “free market” since it in itself has created a new pricing bubble by stalling and stopping foreclosures (return of the rightful owners’ asset).

    Maybe you can deal with the topic better with a more laymen’s scenario:

    Say you sold some dude an expensive car… and decided to finance him. Six months later the government offer car incentives and the market drops like a rock. The car owner decides he doesn’t want to pay, stops paying and keeps driving the car. Due to a new law change (not in effect when you made the paperwork) changes the title process. Unfortunately, your professional title company that you used didn’t create all the documents necessary to meet the new law (cause it didn’t exist when they made it). Now your left to file motions and do new paperwork waiting for the courts on new cases while dude drives around in your car. How’s that feel?

    Let me guess…. you have never been foreclosed on because… AB284? You are in the market for investment housing because… you need a new house when the bill is amended? – just kidding on the last part bro. couldn’t help it though.

  16. Pingback: Washoe County foreclosure-related recordings – December 2012 | Reno Real Estate Blog

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>