Record High Foreclosures in California: 17,408 in 2nd quarter vs 11K in first

User Forum Topic
Submitted by JWM in SD on July 24, 2007 - 3:08pm

Okay, so who still doesn't get??? I promise to be civil about it and explain it as patiently as I can.

Submitted by donaldduckmoore on July 24, 2007 - 3:24pm.

How come we don't see that many in the market?

Submitted by JWM in SD on July 24, 2007 - 4:25pm.

Give me your criteria for evidence in the market.

Submitted by Ozzie on July 24, 2007 - 4:27pm.

Those are notices of default not actual foreclosures.

The biggest jump was in counties like Merced, Riverside, etc.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on July 24, 2007 - 4:29pm.


The interesting thing is that the NOD have not hit record levels set in 96 yet which I think indicates that more Defaults are ending in foreclosures.

This could get bumpy here, better strap everything down.

Submitted by Ozzie on July 24, 2007 - 4:30pm.

oops, I was wrong. Those are foreclosures for Q2.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on July 24, 2007 - 4:50pm.


"The biggest jump was in counties like Merced, Riverside, etc."

If I am not mistaken foreclosures are at record levels in SD
and OC as well.

Submitted by PerryChase on July 24, 2007 - 4:58pm.

Humm.. interesting. Those foreclosures are soon to become inventory.

Is anyone tracking the foreclosed houses that were successfully resold? The delta would will be absolutely-must-sell inventory.

Wanna be buyers should do that for the zip-codes that the are interested in and share with us all. I ain't buying nada until at least 2009, after the 2006 loan-reset foreclosures are processed.

Submitted by POZ on July 24, 2007 - 5:11pm.


I heard the VP of a forclosure firm in SD area state that the banks were holding on to 95% of the properties they were forclosing on. I didnt catch his name or the company name as I heard it on the radio while I was driving. I know I heard that 95% part correctly, although i have no way to validate his claim it may account for the discrepency in the inventory stats.

Submitted by The-Shoveler on July 24, 2007 - 5:04pm.


The Union Tribune. “DataQuick reported on Tuesday that during the first half of 2007 San Diego County had 2,896 foreclosures compared to 445 during the first half of 2006, a 551 percent increase. Notices of default, the first step in the foreclosure process, totaled 8,314 for the first six months of 2007, compared to 3,311 in the same period last year, a 151 percent increase.”

Submitted by SD Realtor on July 24, 2007 - 5:13pm.

Perry -

The MLS search gui is crappy but it can be done. In essence the way that sdrealtor creates the short sale monitor would be the way to do it. You choose a zip code, search for sold properties and put in keywords such as REO, short, corporate owned, in the remarks or confidential remarks section. It is pretty manual. It works great for the short sale monitor as sdr does the whole county and as he says, the exact numbers are not as important as the trendlines that are used for analysis.

A much more nifty way to do it would be to have a script that parses through assessors records to capture all of the sellers. Then process that database for keyword names that are banks, lenders etc....

I would bet there are plenty of software guys who monitor this site that could generate that sort of code.

SD Realtor

Submitted by POZ on July 24, 2007 - 5:22pm.

This was on the dataquick report released today
Los Angeles......4,586....10,393...126.6%
San Diego........1,778....4,383....146.5%

here is the link:

Submitted by JWM in SD on July 24, 2007 - 5:28pm.

Ewww, SD leads the pack in percentage increase...but I guess Karevoll is lying to us because we can't evidence of in the market right Donald???

Submitted by PerryChase on July 24, 2007 - 5:53pm.

SD Realtor, how about subscribing to a service such as realty trac and record all the actual individual foreclosures and tracking them as they are a sold?

Should not be hard to do.

Maybe I'll give my niece some financial education and have her track foreclosures in Excel as a summer project.

So according to the UT, we have 2896 foreclosure in SD. I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of them haven't made it to the MLS yet.

That's does not include the short sales that sdrealtor is tracking.

Submitted by kewp on July 24, 2007 - 6:22pm.

I know I heard that 95% part correctly, although i have no way to validate his claim it may account for the discrepency in the inventory stats.

Just eyeballing the worst areas of SD with realtytrac would seem to indicate that as well. I'm getting actually seriously worried at this point, given the carnage thats present and considering we are just on the upswing of ARM resets, interest rates are climbing and job growth is hitting a wall. Now think what a recession will do. A fifty percent drop seems optimistic at this point.

So I wonder if the banks are playing some sort of game holding properties like this to try and stave of a crash, or there is some other not-obvious-to-me benefit to doing so.

Submitted by garysears on July 24, 2007 - 7:03pm.

I posted this on the wrong thread before.

Part of the UT article today quoted the guy as saying that foreclosures aren't affecting real estate prices. Well something sure is. If not yet, then look out when they do!

I just got off the phone with a Countrywide sales lady. She was pretty straightforward about some of the issues Countrywide is having in California and especially here in San Diego. She said countrywide has over 300 REO properties in San Diego county alone. I haven't checked the addresses on the REO site but I have no reason to doubt her. She said she was shocked that she found they have some $1 million plus homes on that list. I don't think anyone here would agree with the UT article that this is a subprime problem.

BTW, I looked at sales data for 3140 / 3142 Midway Drive on Point Loma / Old Town because I almost bought there in late 2003. Of 8 sales with identical 2/2 760sf plans sold in the last 2 years, the median sale price was $295K. There is one on the market right now for $230K. Another has been on the market for 150 days at $250K with no bites. They were asking around $220K in DEC '03 / Jan '04. I drove by there today and saw 4 "for sale" signs in windows but couldn't find them all on the MLS.

Submitted by Nancy_s soothsayer on July 24, 2007 - 10:38pm.

The employees and managers at the local banks who own the REO's are just as delusional as the buyers in San Diego who in recent years bought overpriced houses they could not really afford to pay for. They, as majority did, thought that San Diego houses only go up every year. Maybe they are assuming prices will go up again in Spring 2008. The fantasy river Denial runs deep in San Diego dreamland.

Submitted by savingforahouse on July 24, 2007 - 7:37pm.

Haven't posted in a while, but was thinking about how and where things are going badly. Using zip realty, I calculated a rough number of the SFRs that were listed as short sales in each of the following price ranges. Although I am uncertain whether my search area was absolutely correct, I thought it would be interesting.

the results are as follows
200-400k 366
400-650k 585
650-900k 85
>=900k 21

It will be interesting to track this over time, but it would also be good to know what the history looks like in terms of the freq. dist.



Submitted by patientrenter on July 24, 2007 - 8:58pm.

kewp, either the owners of the REOs are dumb or slow or they're lobbying frantically for a future bail-out. I'd split the probabilities about evenly.

Patient renter in OC

Submitted by SD Realtor on July 24, 2007 - 11:13pm.

Perry - That is also another way to do it. I didn't know that realty trac posted solds. As an engineer it is easier in my mind to just run a Perl script to gather data...tracking things manually is like slow death...

Are the 2896 foreclosures already REO properties? I would agree that if there are really 2896 foreclosures it would surprise me if more then 20% of them have hit the MLS.

SD Realtor

Submitted by HLS on July 24, 2007 - 11:21pm.

Can someone send this information to "Genius" George Chamberlain ? He doesn't think that the San Diego market is bad, and is encouraging people to buy now, before prices rise sharply...
He says so almost every week.

Submitted by Nancy_s soothsayer on July 24, 2007 - 11:25pm.

If I remember correctly, many private database miners purchase their data from the local governments mostly from Recorder's office or tax offices/services (example, NOD's, foreclosures, sale and loan specifics, etc.) In that case, someone - a clerk - working at the Recorder's gets to see firsthand what's really going on with the most important stats that we would all like to know about.

Submitted by sdnativeson on July 25, 2007 - 7:55am.
Submitted by Arraya on July 25, 2007 - 8:02am.

What wonderful data, thank you!

Submitted by drunkle on July 25, 2007 - 11:32am.

interesting trend there; 30% bank owned for sale in 92, 50% in 94-97... currently 30% and rising, bottom of the market to correspond with an increase to 50% reo sales?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.