Posts Tagged ‘Florida real estate’

Oppenheim Looks at 2011 and beyond: Foreclosure Crisis, #OccupyWallStreet and Real Estate

Tuesday, December 27th, 2011

With 2011 winding down, foreclosure attorney Roy Oppenheim made a return visit to “The Mind of Money” to share his thoughts on the year that was with host Douglas Lodmell.

Just as Oppenheim anticipated, this year we’ve seen how big this foreclosure mess really is. There were numerous investigations, and a self-imposed moratorium on foreclosures during parts of 2011, resulting in a massive backlog of cases.

It was ludicrous, as Bank of America officials first said, that they would only need 60 days to review their inventory of files.

“It took them virtually a year to figure out that they were doing were just not kosher and had to stop,” Oppenheim explained.

There were several huge financial settlements offered to the banks over their illegitimate foreclosure practices, but the majority just did not stick.  Judges told them the settlements were unacceptable and did not go far enough. With various attorneys general and the IRS among the agencies getting involved, these cases are nowhere close to settled.

“The banks literally got their hand not just caught in the cookie jar, but the lid was slammed on it, and everyone got to see the hand just hanging there,” said Oppenheim.

2011 is leaving us with a still unstable market, so people are looking for tangible investments, Oppenheim continued, and with the dollar still weak, Florida real estate is not a bad deal. When you add the fact that there is an excess of distressed properties, prices are not expected to rise anytime soon. he said.

Now every year there is an X-Factor, and this year it was Occupy Wall Street. It was a movement no one really saw coming, and despite some right-wingers attempts to limit Occupy as a fringe movement, Oppenheim said, there is no question the message of Occupy has resonated with middle America.

Why?

It brought to the forefront two huge truths. One being that there is a huge economic inequality between the so called ‘1%’ and the rest of us.

The 2nd is that the veil has been lifted on how intertwined the government, the big banks and the Federal Reserve have become.

“The banks have grown so big and so large that the government itself is afraid to really, truly regulate it, because you really can’t tell where the government starts, where the federal reserve ends, its a really ugly sight.”

Anyone looking for an example need look no further that the 7.7 trillion dollars the Fed loaned to the largest banks — at essentially 0 percent! And what did the banks do with those assets?

Well its not only what they did, Oppenheim said, but what they DIDN’T do.

“They didn’t lend it to mainstream America, which would have seemed like they were going to do to help reverse this deflationary cycle.”

Instead it only led to more profits,which “came off the backs of you and me” to pay themselves bonuses and to help elect officials that were sympathetic to the banks, and not the average Joe.

Some politicians have floated the notion that corporations are people, but then, Oppenheim asks, how do you arrest a corporation and hold them accountable?

He concedes that it’s possible that individuals within these companies may not have committed a crime, but it’s clear that some companies as a whole did.

“I don’t buy into the notion that a crime wasn’t committed,” Oppenheim said, “We have not advanced our legal system sufficiently to deal with these very complex financial crimes.”

While foreclosures may have slowed down in 2011 he expects them to pick up in the new year.

“There’s this new wave, It’s not going to be as large, but it’s going to be a continuous stream coming through.”

Then there is what he calls zombie foreclosures,  which had been dismissed, but not permanently. Oppenheim would not be surprised to see them spring up in 2012.

“So far we haven’t seen them come back, but the banks have the right to bring them again,” he said.

If that happens, he fears the system would once again become bogged down with an overload of foreclosure paperwork, that will go through at a much slower pace.

The truth is, if banks brought all foreclosures to market right now it would crash the market, Oppenheim said, and the banks would become insolvent.

So what does Oppenheim predict for the real estate market in 2012? While he knows he can’t predict the future, Oppenheim says to expect the unexpected.

“I see that they’ll be something that we completely don’t anticipate,” Oppenheim said, “I’m not sure what it’s going to be.”

Coming up in our next blog, we’’ll review our top 10 stories for 2011.  Happy Holidays!

Florida Deficiency Judgments FAQs . . . By Popular Demand

Wednesday, September 7th, 2011

Oppenheim Law’s most popular videos and blog posts are on the topic of deficiency judgements. So, by popular demand, we will continue to provide news and insight on this topic.

Understanding deficiencies and the Florida rules which pertain to them are key to avoid getting a deficiency judgment.

What is a Deficiency?

The unpaid mortgage debt associated with a residence is a deficiency.  A bank can foreclose and force a judicial sale of a home if the mortgage borrower fails to pay the associated mortgage debt.  The deficiency is the difference between the proceeds from the sale and the remaining mortgage loan balance. A deficiency can also result from a short sale, which is an alternative to foreclosure.

What are the Florida ‘Rules’ on Deficiencies?

The rules pertaining to deficiencies differ from state to state. A deficiency judgment is when the bank is granted a court order against the borrower to collect on the deficiency amount. In Florida, if the bank is successful in obtaining a deficiency judgment, it will be recorded in the public records and collectable for up to twenty years.  Until the remaining debt is paid, the bank can garnish your wages, bank accounts, and even collect against your estate after you die.

However in other states, all a bank can do is foreclose on your house. Although your credit score will be lowered, in these states they can’t come after you for the deficiency.

If you live in Florida or any state where assets can be seized, it’s crucial to get ahead of the situation. So what should you do?

When to Hire a Foreclosure Defense Attorney?

To avoid the possibility of getting a deficiency judgment, before deciding to walk away from your home, hiring a good foreclosure defense attorney is necessary. Do not simply avoid the bank notices as they come. There are many settlement options available and the last thing you want is to be subjected to the indignity of being enslaved to a debt for up to twenty years after you lose your home.

What Happens if you have a Deficiency?

South Florida Law Blog’s Roy Oppenheim believes if you are facing foreclosure a short-sale, is one such option. Loan modifications or structured foreclosures are other choices that can help you avoid a deficiency judgement.  In the event your bank decides to obtain a deficiency judgment against you, Oppenheim says there are ways to protect yourself from the bank’s attacks.

Deficiency Judgments and Bad Credit Scores

Many strategic default options carry the possibility of lowering your credit score, however, a bad credit score, while certainly not desirable, will have less of an impact on important life events than a deficiency judgment.  The outcome we seek is to make sure that your important events, whether be it a wedding, having kids, or sending them off to college, are not impacted. Your life should not come to a screeching halt because of a potential deficiency judgment, and nearly all of Oppenheim Law’s clients have been able to keep living their lives, provided they came to us early enough in the process.

If you have any specific questions on Florida deficiency judgments, feel free to leave a comment and we will do our best to link you into a future post.

 

Rumor Mill: Truth on New Real Estate “Sales Tax”

Sunday, August 7th, 2011

 

Rumors are spreading about a new tax on real estate that is part of President Obama’s healthcare law.

The new tax, which has been dubbed a real estate “sales tax,” has a lot of misinformation out about it. For example, many blogs such as the Spokesman Review accuse the new law of imposing a 3.8% tax on the sale of all real estate. Email chains such as the one quoted in the Attack Machine blog claim that the tax will affect all real estate transactions, like “that’s $3,800 on a $100,000 home.”

Such claims are untrue.

In the old days, all real estate transactions were subject to the capital gains tax, a tax on income from investments. President Clinton introduced an exemption to the tax for primary residences with a profit of $500,000. Now, profits under $500,000 for couples and $250,000 for individuals are exempt from the tax, currently at 15%. The new tax adds an additional 3.8% surtax to those transactions that exceed the exemption. Additionally, you must make at least $250,000 if married or $200,000 if single to even have the surtax affect you. The surtax only comes into force in 2013, so it doesn’t affect people for several years.

The National Association of Realtors has provided several examples to help clear up the difficulties. The following is one of them.

“A couple filing jointly with an income of $325,000 make $525,000 when they sell their primary residence. If the profit on the home is less than the $500,000 threshold ($250,000 for single taxpayers), none of gain would be subject to the surtax. But since the taxable gain is $25,000 above the $500,000 threshold, it is added to couple’s income, bringing it to $350,000. That’s $100,000 above the $250,000 limit for couples filing jointly. But the $25,000 taxable gain on the sale of the property is the lesser amount in this case, so the extra tax that would be due in this case would be $950, or 3.8% of $25,000.” 

So there you have it. The new surtax only affects people who make $200,000 or couples who make $250,000 and who make profits of at least $250,000 or $500,000 respectively on their houses. In the current market, not too many people fall under that category and the tax isn’t even in force yet.

Oppenheim Law says that there is nothing to get too excited about.

Oppenheim Law Poll Reveals Homeownership Still the American Dream

Wednesday, August 3rd, 2011

Is homeowners​hip still an important part of the American dream? That’s what Oppenheim Law set to find out in the latest social media-driven poll on its Facebook fan page.

The results leaned toward favoring home ownership as part of the classic U.S. lifestyle.  But there could be new rules for the American Dream in the future.

Jody Cohen believes home ownership is indeed still the American dream despite the state of the economy. “The dynamics have changed somewhat,” she says, “but people are very creative when they need to be. I know I have.”

As Alan Schneider sees it, home ownership is keeping the economy afloat. In an interesting perspective on strategic defaults, he figures people who are living in homes they own—and who aren’t paying their mortgage, taxes and insurance—have plenty of available cash to spend. In other words, government policies are allowing people to milk the system and stay in their homes free for extended periods of time, as well as cash in on welfare, unemployment, Section 8 housing, food stamps, Medicaid, and so on.

“Heck, I’m thinking of laying myself off and collecting all of these benefits. Too bad since my divorce I have been renting from people that don’t have mortgages on their properties that are in foreclosure,” Schneider says sarcastically. “I could have been living rent free and saving up lots of money to buy a nice foreclosed property at one-third of its previous price …”

Ronald Louis has a slightly different view: home ownership is an important part of life everywhere—not just in America. The American Dream, he says, is freedom and equal justice, not the material things consumers covet.

“When the Clinton and Bush administrations promoted home ownership as part of the American Dream, that got us into trouble, didn’t it?” Louis asks. “The opportunity to save enough money to purchase a home safely needed to be provided, not just cheap, unsafe loans to people who really weren’t qualified—including many middle class people. As a lawyer (and educator), we should be focusing on the ‘American Dream’ theme of your question, in order to learn from our recent mistakes.”

 

 


Bad Behavior has blocked 1529 access attempts in the last 7 days.