Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

Folsom Sued Over Repeal Of Affordable Housing Ordinance


  • Please log in to reply
78 replies to this topic

#46 ducky

ducky

    untitled

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:04 AM

It is a fallacy that the poor don't work as hard as the rich. How many of us had fathers and grandfathers who struggled in poverty? Were they lazy?

Ever seen a farm worker? A roofer? Busboys, dishwashers, laborers, janitors, food processors and movers are among the hardest-working people I've ever known, yet some have the image of them kicking back waiting for handouts. Working hard isn't what gets you out of poverty. You can work hard and still get low wages.



Same here.



This is true! The Central District of Folsom can be quite affordable. A home with a $200,000 mortgage, at 5%, plus tax and insurance should cost no more than about $1400 per month. Two people earing $10 an hour could easily qualify for that. There were 25 such homes sold within the past year.

As for why more young couples aren't buying them, I think it's a combination of factors. Age, size, condition, crime, number of rentals, prestige and neighborhood appeal are among the things that come into play.

If your target is a price range of around $200K, there were 60 homes sold in Rancho, built since 2000 within the past year.

So, for the same price you'd pay for a smaller, older home in Folsom, you could get a newer, larger home in Rancho Cordova and have your kids in the same school district as Folsom.

If you do want to stay in Folsom and don't want the Central District, another $250 per month will get you into Willow Creek Estates, Cobble Ridge or Broadstone.


Steve, I've seen homes in our area go for less than $200,000 so you can have a payment even lower than what you have shown. Is the crime in the Central District really any worse than, say Natoma Station or Lexington Hills (especially Creekside area)? That's not been our experience.

#47 ducky

ducky

    untitled

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:10 AM

I'd like to take this opportunity to agree with Robert. The issue here is not whether the state law requiring affordable housing is fair, correct, necessary, etc. The issue is whether our city's actions are in compliance with the law. I frankly don't know, but, as Robert mentioned, the very fact that the inclusionary component of the housing element was put in place to settle the previous lawsuit, suggests that the city is pushing its luck and likely to end up spending a bunch of money defending its actions, all because the developers were whining again.




I would agree with this part of it. It's really not about whether we agree this is a good law or not; although I think it is worth discussing.

I also don't think it's right to say only one side of town will have affordable housing. I don't know why the city thought they wouldn't be challenged for dropping this from any building south of 50, because being legally "challenged" means it costs money to defend.

#48 supermom

supermom

    Supermom

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,225 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:13 AM

It is a fallacy that the poor don't work as hard as the rich. How many of us had fathers and grandfathers who struggled in poverty? Were they lazy?

Ever seen a farm worker? A roofer? Busboys, dishwashers, laborers, janitors, food processors and movers are among the hardest-working people I've ever known, yet some have the image of them kicking back waiting for handouts. Working hard isn't what gets you out of poverty. You can work hard and still get low wages.



Same here.



This is true! The Central District of Folsom can be quite affordable. A home with a $200,000 mortgage, at 5%, plus tax and insurance should cost no more than about $1400 per month. Two people earing $10 an hour could easily qualify for that. There were 25 such homes sold within the past year.

As for why more young couples aren't buying them, I think it's a combination of factors. Age, size, condition, crime, number of rentals, prestige and neighborhood appeal are among the things that come into play.

If your target is a price range of around $200K, there were 60 homes sold in Rancho, built since 2000 within the past year.

So, for the same price you'd pay for a smaller, older home in Folsom, you could get a newer, larger home in Rancho Cordova and have your kids in the same school district as Folsom.

If you do want to stay in Folsom and don't want the Central District, another $250 per month will get you into Willow Creek Estates, Cobble Ridge or Broadstone.

Yes, but when it is a single-income family of 3 or four--the pickings are slim.
Affordable housing becomes impossible for a single-parent who is earning $10-$12 an hour; unless alternate housing is provided.

This is where planning comes in handy, in order to balance out a community.

Condominiums, smaller houses, basic construction (no granite, crown moulding, pool, fireplace)

Reality is that the demand is there.
The developers just want big turn over of construction -- to sell price.

This is about greed.

#49 tony

tony

    Hall Of Famer

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Historic District

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:37 AM

Folsom doesn't get real fog :o. ... at least, not in comparison to zero visability Tule Fog.

Yeah, but if it's REAL cookie-cutter, you don't need REAL fog to get lost on the way home!

#50 Steve Heard

Steve Heard

    Owner

  • Admin
  • 13,752 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:42 AM

Steve, I've seen homes in our area go for less than $200,000 so you can have a payment even lower than what you have shown. Is the crime in the Central District really any worse than, say Natoma Station or Lexington Hills (especially Creekside area)? That's not been our experience.

Yes, there have been homes for less than $200K, in fact, there are 13 homes and 24 condos in Folsom on the market for less than $200K today.

I'm not saying that there is more crime. Crime was one of the items I noted on the list of factors to consider.

Yes, but when it is a single-income family of 3 or four--the pickings are slim.
Affordable housing becomes impossible for a single-parent who is earning $10-$12 an hour; unless alternate housing is provided.

This is where planning comes in handy, in order to balance out a community.

Condominiums, smaller houses, basic construction (no granite, crown moulding, pool, fireplace)

This is about greed.


I know it is a struggle. It is for many of us even in higher priced housing.

As for it being about greed, when is it greed and when is it profit? Aren't businesses in business to make a profit. Can we tell someone how much they can sell their products for?

Steve Heard

Folsom Real Estate Specialist

EXP Realty

BRE#01368503

Owner - MyFolsom.com

916 718 9577 


#51 (The Dude)

(The Dude)
  • Visitors

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:54 AM

It is a fallacy that the poor don't work as hard as the rich. How many of us had fathers and grandfathers who struggled in poverty? Were they lazy?

Ever seen a farm worker? A roofer? Busboys, dishwashers, laborers, janitors, food processors and movers are among the hardest-working people I've ever known, yet some have the image of them kicking back waiting for handouts. Working hard isn't what gets you out of poverty. You can work hard and still get low wages.


+1000, not everyone can, or wants to be lawyers, doctors, financial advisers, geologists, etc. Plus it's very common that the more one makes, the more they spend... so in reality, both lives are similar but the wealthier spend a lot more and so they have a lot more nicer things... is that what life is all about? Having the most nice things? (house, car, boat, etc)

Who's to say which life is better then the other, often happiness can be found simply by being debt free. I'm not so certain the wealthy with all their "stuff" and mega loans are really that much better off when it comes to happiness. But then again materialistic things are all that makes some people happy...

I frankly don't know, but, as Robert mentioned, the very fact that the inclusionary component of the housing element was put in place to settle the previous lawsuit, suggests that the city is pushing its luck and likely to end up spending a bunch of money defending its actions, all because the developers were whining again.


You nailed it, and we all know how much our city council caters to developers here.

#52 ducky

ducky

    untitled

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,115 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 19 April 2011 - 09:57 AM

Yes, there have been homes for less than $200K, in fact, there are 13 homes and 24 condos in Folsom on the market for less than $200K today.

I'm not saying that there is more crime. Crime was one of the items I noted on the list of factors to consider.



I know it is a struggle. It is for many of us even in higher priced housing.

As for it being about greed, when is it greed and when is it profit? Aren't businesses in business to make a profit. Can we tell someone how much they can sell their products for?


And business adapts to the economic climate and what the consumer wants. Builders are actually starting to build smaller homes according to this article. Makes you wonder about all those people living in the McMansions feeling green because they drive a Prius.

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/26/nation/na-houses-smaller26

I've also read about a builder in another state that wanted to build 1,200 square foot homes, but the city turned him down because they were worried about their tax base(their minimum is 1,400 sq ft.)

#53 (MaxineR)

(MaxineR)
  • Visitors

Posted 19 April 2011 - 05:31 PM

I don't think it would be too wise for a couple making ten dollars per hour each to buy a $200,000 house. They'd be "House Poor".

I think this is how we got into this housing slump in the first place; people allowed to buy houses they couldn't afford.

And, those 5% interest rates are not that easy to get, unless you have perfect credit and no debt at all.

Who has that these days? ( Besides me, that is. Not bragging, just stating a fact.)
My husband and I could go buy twice the house we have now, but why would we want to? We have the house we need and want to have money for other things.

I wish budget counseling were offered to the people who apply to buy a house or car. But that would surely lose sales!

#54 Steve Heard

Steve Heard

    Owner

  • Admin
  • 13,752 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2011 - 10:05 PM

I don't think it would be too wise for a couple making ten dollars per hour each to buy a $200,000 house. They'd be "House Poor".

I think this is how we got into this housing slump in the first place; people allowed to buy houses they couldn't afford.

And, those 5% interest rates are not that easy to get, unless you have perfect credit and no debt at all.

Who has that these days? ( Besides me, that is. Not bragging, just stating a fact.)
My husband and I could go buy twice the house we have now, but why would we want to? We have the house we need and want to have money for other things.

I wish budget counseling were offered to the people who apply to buy a house or car. But that would surely lose sales!

I must politely and very strongly disagree. 'House poor' can mean different things to different people, but I think most might define it as spending so much on your house payment, there isn't much discretionary income left over. I think that describes many people, whether they are renters, first time buyers, or those who have been paying a mortgage for years. Didn't you recently suggest that I tighten my belt. As I said then, belt-tightening is a good idea for everyone.

Thinking back, when my wife and I bought our home, we were house poor. We had sheets on windows, a patio set as our dining table, and no furniture at all in the living room. It was a struggle. I even lost my job a couple of weeks after buying the place. We'll celebrate our 10th anniversary here on June 15. I don't recommend being house poor, but many of us have gone through it and survived.

You are making erroneous assumptions, however, in your other statements. As someone who is in the industry and who works with lenders and buyers every day, I have a different perspective. Remember that each and every deal is different, but these generalities generally apply.

Lenders use what is known as DTI, or debt-to-income ratio in determining how much one can afford. Ideally, that number would be below 29%, but FHA and VA go as high as 41% and I've seen some people get approved at 45 or even 50% DTI. I wouldn't recommend going that high, but I know people who are doing just fine with relatively high debt to income.

Using the example of the couple making $10 each per hour, they'd gross $3466 per month. At 29%, they'd be at $1005 per month. At 41%, they'd qualify for a payment of $1421 per.

If they took out a loan for $200,000, at 5%, their P&I (principal and interest) payment would be $1074.

As for difficulty in getting it, you are incorrect in assuming that it is not that easy. In fact, rates were actually below 5% for both FHA and conventional loans today, hovering around 4.875%, but let's round up.
You don't have to have perfect credit or be debt-free to get good interest rates, but even if those were requirements, would you believe there a people out there, lots of them, who are in just that situation? I have clients who've actually been saving money and paying their bills on time, who are now ready to buy. I sold a house recently to a single mom who finally got her kids out on their own, and on her income of about $40K, was able to buy a very nice home for $186,000. Her credit wasn't perfect, but she did it, and she's never been happier.

Anyway, back to our couple: For a $200,000 home, figure on about $210 per month for taxes, and perhaps $50 to $60 per month on insurance (let's use $60). So, tax and insurance equals $270, add in the $1074 P&I payment, and their total monthly housing expense would be $1344, or a DTI of 38%.

Can they 'afford' it? According to the guidelines, yes. Will they be comfortable with that payment? That's up to them. Do they currently save their discretionary income or spend it?

Now, if they are buying a home at $200,000, they'll need a downpayment. If they are putting down 20% (yes, some do have that kind of money!), their payment drops to $1117 per month, a 32% DTI.

If not putting down 20%, they'll have mortgage insurance, which can add a couple hundred dollars a month to their payment, so they'd have to buy a home of say, $175,000 or less to still qualify and yes, there are homes, not many, but some selling for $175K or less, many more in Rancho, Orangevale, Cameron Park and other areas.

As for budget counseling, I know there are FHA approved counseling programs, but am not sure if they are required. I do recommend that anyone taking on a home purchase get both legal and tax advice before proceeding.

Now, I'm not a tax or legal expert (I have to make that disclaimer to avoid the appearance of giving tax advice), but to my understanding, there are tax benefits to home ownership, such as deductions for property taxes and for interest paid to lenders which reduce the home owner's tax burden, making home ownership even more beneficial.

Back to affordability, I went on Craigslist, which has taken over from newspaper classified ads as the number one source for rental information. I looked up 3 bedroom rental in Folsom. The CHEAPEST was $1445 per month.

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/search/apa?query=%22folsom+ca%22&srchType=A&minAsk=&maxAsk=&bedrooms=3

This is another factor in the surge of first-timers. They can now buy for about what it costs to rent, plus they own the place and get the tax breaks, too.

Home ownership is not for everyone, but it is a benefit to many, and homes are more affordable than ever right now.

I give people the same advice I give my own children.

Steve Heard

Folsom Real Estate Specialist

EXP Realty

BRE#01368503

Owner - MyFolsom.com

916 718 9577 


#55 caligirlz

caligirlz

    Living Legend

  • Moderator
  • 3,163 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 19 April 2011 - 10:25 PM

'House poor' can mean different things to different people, but I think most might define it as spending so much on your house payment, there isn't much discretionary income left over.

Back to affordability, I went on Craigslist, which has taken over from newspaper classified ads as the number one source for rental information. I looked up 3 bedroom rental in Folsom. The CHEAPEST was $1445 per month. This is another factor in the surge of first-timers. They can now buy for about what it costs to rent, plus they own the place and get the tax breaks, too.


Hi Steve! :P

I agree with your definition of house poor. It's important to be able to 1) afford all living expenses, and 2) have enough left over that one can have a little fun, instead of only being a slave to the house payment.

Thanks for the debt-to-income ratio 101 lesson.

IMO, I would never use Craigslist as my number one source for rental info...but just a reference point. I find most of the prices for rentals to be unrealistic. They are always higher than the norm. There are much better on-line resources.

#56 M.E.G.

M.E.G.

    All Star

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 485 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 20 April 2011 - 06:25 AM

Yes, I too am seeing a lot of first time buyers, that are buying homes that have mortgages about the same as their apartment rent. Then when you had on the tax benefits, they are actually a better off.

M.E.G.

Mechelle Reasoner (formerly Gooch)

Movin'...So You Can!

Morris Williams Realty

Call or txt: 916 955-8698,

Email me

Read my blog, search for homes, find out more about Folsom at FolsomCorner.com


#57 tony

tony

    Hall Of Famer

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Historic District

Posted 20 April 2011 - 09:25 AM

Hi Steve! :P

I agree with your definition of house poor. It's important to be able to 1) afford all living expenses, and 2) have enough left over that one can have a little fun, instead of only being a slave to the house payment.

Thanks for the debt-to-income ratio 101 lesson.

IMO, I would never use Craigslist as my number one source for rental info...but just a reference point. I find most of the prices for rentals to be unrealistic. They are always higher than the norm. There are much better on-line resources.

I'm with Steve on the Craig's list question. We rented our old house last year after buying a new one. We checked prices on similar homes in Folsom on Craig's list, priced ours near the lower middle of the range, and had no trouble getting it using only a Craig's list listing. Our neighbors, who also rented their house, but through an agent, said that the real estate companies are mostly using Craig's list anyway.

#58 folsom500

folsom500

    Folsom Gardner

  • Moderator
  • 6,562 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Folsom

Posted 20 April 2011 - 09:38 AM

IMO, I would never use Craigslist as my number one source for rental info...but just a reference point. I find most of the prices for rentals to be unrealistic. They are always higher than the norm. There are much better on-line resources.


Sorry for the side track but your comment peaked my interest as my Daughter is looking for a rental house. What OTHER on-line resources can she use besides Craig's list ?

Another great  day in the adventure of exploration and sight.

 

 

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has"
-Margaret Mead-


#59 (MaxineR)

(MaxineR)
  • Visitors

Posted 20 April 2011 - 12:40 PM

I must politely and very strongly disagree. 'House poor' can mean different things to different people, but I think most might define it as spending so much on your house payment, there isn't much discretionary income left over. I think that describes many people, whether they are renters, first time buyers, or those who have been paying a mortgage for years. Didn't you recently suggest that I tighten my belt. As I said then, belt-tightening is a good idea for everyone.

Thinking back, when my wife and I bought our home, we were house poor. We had sheets on windows, a patio set as our dining table, and no furniture at all in the living room. It was a struggle. I even lost my job a couple of weeks after buying the place. We'll celebrate our 10th anniversary here on June 15. I don't recommend being house poor, but many of us have gone through it and survived.

You are making erroneous assumptions, however, in your other statements. As someone who is in the industry and who works with lenders and buyers every day, I have a different perspective. Remember that each and every deal is different, but these generalities generally apply.

Lenders use what is known as DTI, or debt-to-income ratio in determining how much one can afford. Ideally, that number would be below 29%, but FHA and VA go as high as 41% and I've seen some people get approved at 45 or even 50% DTI. I wouldn't recommend going that high, but I know people who are doing just fine with relatively high debt to income.

Using the example of the couple making $10 each per hour, they'd gross $3466 per month. At 29%, they'd be at $1005 per month. At 41%, they'd qualify for a payment of $1421 per.

If they took out a loan for $200,000, at 5%, their P&I (principal and interest) payment would be $1074.

As for difficulty in getting it, you are incorrect in assuming that it is not that easy. In fact, rates were actually below 5% for both FHA and conventional loans today, hovering around 4.875%, but let's round up.
You don't have to have perfect credit or be debt-free to get good interest rates, but even if those were requirements, would you believe there a people out there, lots of them, who are in just that situation? I have clients who've actually been saving money and paying their bills on time, who are now ready to buy. I sold a house recently to a single mom who finally got her kids out on their own, and on her income of about $40K, was able to buy a very nice home for $186,000. Her credit wasn't perfect, but she did it, and she's never been happier.

Anyway, back to our couple: For a $200,000 home, figure on about $210 per month for taxes, and perhaps $50 to $60 per month on insurance (let's use $60). So, tax and insurance equals $270, add in the $1074 P&I payment, and their total monthly housing expense would be $1344, or a DTI of 38%.

Can they 'afford' it? According to the guidelines, yes. Will they be comfortable with that payment? That's up to them. Do they currently save their discretionary income or spend it?

Now, if they are buying a home at $200,000, they'll need a downpayment. If they are putting down 20% (yes, some do have that kind of money!), their payment drops to $1117 per month, a 32% DTI.

If not putting down 20%, they'll have mortgage insurance, which can add a couple hundred dollars a month to their payment, so they'd have to buy a home of say, $175,000 or less to still qualify and yes, there are homes, not many, but some selling for $175K or less, many more in Rancho, Orangevale, Cameron Park and other areas.

As for budget counseling, I know there are FHA approved counseling programs, but am not sure if they are required. I do recommend that anyone taking on a home purchase get both legal and tax advice before proceeding.

Now, I'm not a tax or legal expert (I have to make that disclaimer to avoid the appearance of giving tax advice), but to my understanding, there are tax benefits to home ownership, such as deductions for property taxes and for interest paid to lenders which reduce the home owner's tax burden, making home ownership even more beneficial.

Back to affordability, I went on Craigslist, which has taken over from newspaper classified ads as the number one source for rental information. I looked up 3 bedroom rental in Folsom. The CHEAPEST was $1445 per month.

http://sacramento.craigslist.org/search/apa?query=%22folsom+ca%22&srchType=A&minAsk=&maxAsk=&bedrooms=3

This is another factor in the surge of first-timers. They can now buy for about what it costs to rent, plus they own the place and get the tax breaks, too.

Home ownership is not for everyone, but it is a benefit to many, and homes are more affordable than ever right now.

I give people the same advice I give my own children.




Then you should tell your kids to NOT listen to agents tell them they can afford a house when in their hearts, they know they can't.

Steve, we all had our first real estate experience buying our first home. I have bought and sold six in my life time. You are a very educated real estate agent but, how many houses have you actually bought? How many kinds of mortgages have you personally had?

Are you saying your struggles with buying your first home here in Folsom, as a person who survived or as a person who planned poorly for that purchase? No offense intended, but it does sound like you weren't really ready to afford a house.

I don't mean to sound nasty, but one shouldn't have to squeeze into home ownership, placing sheets at the window and using a patio set for dining inside the house. That sort of picture sounds to me like you bit off more than you could chew.

Sure, lots of folks do that and then lots of folks get caught with too much debt later, because they had to charge every pair of drapes, every stick of furniture and everything in between. That means they COULD NOT save any money because there was none to save! Then when they got laid off and had to live on unemployment, which didn't give them enough money to pay for their house payments, they lost their home.

I'll just say what has already been said a few times here. I'm not happy that now my house has gone down in value after so many bought houses they really couldn't afford, and if I wanted to sell now, it wouldn't be a very good investment return for me.

I'm happy you and your family managed to hold on to your house and I bet it was hard, indeed. But many people wouldn't go to the lengths you probably did to do that. Too many can't seem to give up the dining out, the new clothes, the cable TV service, the vacations or the high priced things they grew used to before they bought a house.

I've made every mistake in the book through my home purchases...bought FHA, VA, conventional and ARM mortgages. And although I'm not a real estate expert, I know a little something about buying homes.

Back in the day, FHA would NOT allow more than 25% of your gross income to go to a house payment. I know, because I bought my first house back then.....and yes, I'm over 55. I bought my first house when I was twenty, on an FHA 235.

I don't mean to be disrespectful, because it's not you I have a problem with. It's the guide lines that FHA sets for people wanting to buy a house and then when they get foreclosed on, everybody who owns a house pays for it with lower real estate values.

I got caught in the last housing slump having to sell my house to relocate for my job. I had owned it ten years and paid $20,000 to get into it, and THAT was with an ARM mortgage! Ten years later and invested money in upgrades, I sold it for $152,000 and barely broke even.

So I'm a little short with those people who say a couple can afford a house when the fact is, those are according to guidelines which are far too lenient and too focused on the mortgage companies making money.

Having experienced buying more of a house when I could afford once, I snickered at the real estate agent that told me my husband and I could afford twice the house we were looking at purchasing. My remark to her was that WE would be the ones to decide what we could afford and what we couldn't.

Now we have enough saved in the bank to buy another house, CASH. We could not have done that by listening to her bad advice. And the house we now live in that cost $182,000 with upgrades, could have sold for over $400,000 in 2005.

We are wanting to retire before we get too old to enjoy traveling, but now that the prices of homes has dropped so greatly, I'll probably have to work another ten years in order to get past this housing slump.

End of rant.....moving on.

#60 Steve Heard

Steve Heard

    Owner

  • Admin
  • 13,752 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 April 2011 - 02:27 PM

Steve, we all had our first real estate experience buying our first home. I have bought and sold six in my life time. You are a very educated real estate agent but, how many houses have you actually bought? How many kinds of mortgages have you personally had?

Nothing teaches like experience. While I've only bought one home, I've sold and/or financed a lot more, over 100. This is an ever changing market with ever changing rule, so some of the homes I sold as recently as last year were sold with different rules than those I'm selling today. As a real estate professional, I have to keep on top of the market to the best of my ability.

Are you saying your struggles with buying your first home here in Folsom, as a person who survived or as a person who planned poorly for that purchase? No offense intended, but it does sound like you weren't really ready to afford a house.

Let's see, I had a 6 figure income as President of a corporate travel management company, enough for a down payment and a nice nest egg for retirement. I followed my dad's advice, and my Realtor's advice and my own common sense in not splurging on fancy furnishings, but to keep money in reserve for unexpected challenges.

The unexpected challenges came quickly as airlines went to zero commission, the internet was taking away business, and our dotcom customers were imploding left and right. Less than 3 months later, the terror attacks of 9/11 happened.

Not only wasn't there any money in travel at that time, but no one was traveling anyway.

The fact that I had NOT splurged on furnishings and had saved my dough is what enabled me to make my mortgage payments while I figured out how I was going to be able to support my family and keep my house.

So, you be the judge. Poor planner or survivor?


I don't mean to sound nasty, but one shouldn't have to squeeze into home ownership, placing sheets at the window and using a patio set for dining inside the house. That sort of picture sounds to me like you bit off more than you could chew.

Sure, lots of folks do that and then lots of folks get caught with too much debt later, because they had to charge every pair of drapes, every stick of furniture and everything in between. That means they COULD NOT save any money because there was none to save! Then when they got laid off and had to live on unemployment, which didn't give them enough money to pay for their house payments, they lost their home.

I am happy to share my story because I know it has happened to others and history can repeat itself. Discipline and sacrifice enable us to save for our future, start and keep businesses, and buy and keep our homes, or even pay our rent if we don't want to own a home.

Yes, lots of folks get caught up with too much debt, but no one was forced to charge drapes and furniture. I know a couple who bought a big expensive house back in 04. I went to visit, and they had just charged up leather couches, new dining set, big screen tv and believe it or not, a pool table. They wanted all new stuff for their new house. No sheets on the windows or patio sets in the dining room for them. Discipline and sacrifice were not part of their plan

I'm no genius, but I wasn't in a hurry to buy furniture and drapes. The house was more important. About 2 years later that couple was having a moving sale, as they had lost their home.

I've still got mine.


I'm happy you and your family managed to hold on to your house and I bet it was hard, indeed. But many people wouldn't go to the lengths you probably did to do that. Too many can't seem to give up the dining out, the new clothes, the cable TV service, the vacations or the high priced things they grew used to before they bought a house.

Thanks. I know. I see it all the time.

So I'm a little short with those people who say a couple can afford a house when the fact is, those are according to guidelines which are far too lenient and too focused on the mortgage companies making money.

I understand your frustration. I too have lower property values do to the market crash. Don't confuse guidelines with greed. The guidelines are based on the numbers. There's a debt-to-income ratio where it is proven that defaults are highly likely. The lending guidelines are designed to keep borrowers below that line while enabling them to buy homes and yes, to enable lenders (and by default realtors, painters, furniture companies and nearly everybody else) to stay in business.


Steve Heard

Folsom Real Estate Specialist

EXP Realty

BRE#01368503

Owner - MyFolsom.com

916 718 9577 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users