Gangster Government

You have to watch this video.

Many SethEstate visitors, even infrequent ones, may be somewhat surprised to see a post go live that is even remotely associated with political bias. Its not that I sit on fences to avoid alienation of either Democratic or Republican potential clientele. On the contrary, just like I strive to separate my advice from commission, I also boldly assert my major displeasure with both parties. And I trust new clients from both pools will continue to seek my advocacy, if for no other reason, then because the value I create for them outweighs disinterest in my political opinion.

In this video, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann simply kicks ass. She speaks the raw truth so extemporaneously and so beautifully that it goes beyond commanding attention, to grab hold of our most core American values.

I would think this testimony would be received as bipartisan, or nonpartisan, or transcending politics altogether… but just in case it offends anyone… good!

Since I previously had no idea who Ms Bachmann was, a quick google search yielded this: Republican Representative from Minnesota.

Go girl.

My Reply to a Great Question: "What's Wrong with FHA Financing?"

Recently, Ben Nicolas, Broker in Long Beach, CA posted a great question on Trulia, which recieved really mindful responses from a broad range of perspectives. The real estate professionals made good arguements from both sides of the issue, which is namely should or shouldn't these offers get accepted as easily as offers that contain more conventional financing. I encourage you to read the question and responses for yourself here if you like.Meantime, I am reposting my reply here, first, for the benefit of San Diego readers, and second, because, well... its my blog and I can do what I like.

I get the intent and spirit of this question, and really respect each of the answers posted. And I agree that:

-FHA gets a bad rap from the seller side of things

-It is counter-intuitive to believe (but true) that less money down may actually result in a quicker close than more money down (when MI is involved).

But I would also like to present an opinion from a totally different perspective. One that takes the question at its exact face value... and address it from the perspective of the buyer and the taxpayer.

What's wrong with FHA financing is that it is embodies the very problem that everybody now blames as being a large contributor to "the subprime mess". Really, it’s like I can just imagine the closed door meetings of bankers and lawmakers:

“You know “zero down loans” are so 2007… hey! let’s call them FHA loans… we’ll make people cough up 3.5% so it won’t have that “zero down” stigma… good deal, but if the government is going to be in on it, they have to get theirs too… right, right… we’ll just tack on 1.75% to the loan balance to keep Uncle Sam happy. “

Between the higher rate, the mortgage insurance premium, the upfront mortgage insurance fee of 1.75% (added to the loan balance, costing even more interest for the life of the loan), and the cost of borrowing more money than a conventional loan in the first place... all adds up to a lot.

On the ultra-low end, FHA sort of makes sense for buyers, since the percentages work out to be less severe. But in the $400k to $550k market segment the costs are extremely prohibitive... to the tune of $1,000 extra per month as compared to a conventional loan.

Of course, the counter argument is which is the lesser of the two evils? don't buy at all because you can't afford conventional standards? or pay a huge premium to access capital you otherwise wouldn't get?

For the right buyer, who earns a disproportionately high income compared to their asset holdings, FHA just might be the right tool. But I'm afraid many folks who are getting these loans will be a future (government subsidized) failure in a long line of subprime failures. But not before "prime" loans join "subprime" in our more imminent failure.

So my thinking is this: it probably makes sense to just not buy yet if you can't put down 20%. And with all the downward pressure on pricing we are about to experience, what's the rush anyway?

I'm not saying everyone should wait for the empirical bottom, which can only be viewed in hindsight anyway... because there is much to be said for the intrinsic value these lower-end $325k homes offer… as well as the opportunities to leverage distressed situations in the $400k to $550k market. But just because FHA is available, doesn't mean everyone should rush in to take advantage of it.

Finally, at the risk of pointing out the obvious… 20% down has been the underwriting standard for generations for a reason. And we have seen the devastation caused in part by deviating from this plan. And we are about to be collectively surprised to see how much more devastation lies ahead. Does the taxpayer need to shoulder any more risk at this point?? FHA = government insurance = taxpayer money. Sorry if this sounds cold, but as much as my income depends upon folks being able to buy homes… not everybody deserves one, and I can’t afford any more long-term effects in shouldering the burden of those who do not.

Jamie Dimon... not a fan

The following post is an exact copy of my response to the opinion of Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase & Co, which The Wall Street Journal published on June 29, 2009:

Mr. Dimon,

With as little respect as possible, I have to say this commentary is likely the most hypocritical piece of rhetoric any human has ever recorded and I can’t help but wonder whether it made even you a little sick while writing it.

When you suggest that regulation is welcome, do you mean before or after you increase minimum payments on your most loyal cardholding customer base by 2.5 times overnight?

Or was that what you meant about being careful not to regulate too far?

When you talk about how good it is to increase liquidity, did I somehow miss where you voluntarily explain just how many toxic assets are being hidden via mark-to-market accounting practices?

Are you the slightest bit concerned about the size of your glass mansion, when you cast stones at those “who extended absurdly low introductory ‘teaser’ rates”?

At least those “lightly regulated brokers” made people sign blatant disclosures that clearly explained their terms… before selling their loans back to your sorry (self).

When you talk about earning back the trust of the American consumer, do you so quickly forget the aggressiveness with which your solicited consumers with misleading, if not false, solicitations for “life of loan” terms, that you now call back at an unreasonable pace to trigger usurious rate hikes on the resulting defaults.

Do you plan to earn back the trust of the consumer by taking bailout money, which results in tax increases that will likely hit these same consumers the hardest… and then have the audacity to squeeze your most loyal producers in a desperate attempt to make up for your mistakes?

As you irresponsibly push a good portion of these roughly 850,000 consumers to financial bankruptcy… do you contemplate your own moral bankruptcy?

Mr. Dimon, you may be the biggest hypocrite ever to step foot on this planet.

-Seth Chalnick

Latest Move by Chase Contradicts Testimony

Chase Bank is delivering a huge blow to its most creditworthy (i.e. least irresponsible) subset of credit card holding customers by changing repayment terms in an unethical fashion. This action also stands in direct contrast to Chase’s official testimony (to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs) about providing “opt out” options when making policy changes.

Resisting the urge to hit people already down by asking why it is they racked up debt in the first place, consider asking these questions first:

• Were they paying it back?
• Can they prove a history of timely payments?
• Can they demonstrate a track record of over overpaying to reduce the principal?

If the answers come as a resounding yes to each question shouted by ~850,000 consumers in unison, then consider asking why Chase Bank should rock this boat?

Chase determined that “the total number of (these) customers (are) relatively low, but the balances that these customers carry amount to billions of unsecured debt”.

Great job Chase… way to solve the case!

Currently ~850,000 people who have been making timely repayments and overpayments for years have received notices that their minimum payments are being increased from 2% to 5%.

This may not seem like much, but to a consumer or small business owner struggling to pay off a $30k balance… the $600 monthly payment just increased to $1,500…

And a $60k balance with a $1,200 monthly payment just increased to $3,000.

Chase heavily solicited these consumers, and aggregated many more by buying up competing lenders too. They posted record earnings while lending out money at 3.99%. Then the realization hit home that they mismanaged the rest of their portfolio. Then they took bailout money resulting in tax increases that will likely hit these same consumers the hardest. Now they turn on their most loyal producers in a desperate attempt to make up losses.

Chase is effectively calling back loans they made to folks who paid a premium to receive favorable terms (similar to buying down the rate of a mortgage by paying a point), via balance transfer fees, and by the opportunity cost of forgoing a zero percent introductory rate for as many as 12 months.

The intention is clear:

Accelerate repayment of balances that were misleadingly, if not falsely, solicited as “life of loan” terms, and trigger usurious rate hikes on the resulting defaults.

Unlike bailouts for banks, car companies, and loan modifications, etc., there is not a single web message posted from any consumer affected by this, who did not communicate their history of unwavering determination to pay back their obligation.

Meantime, as an auto-reply to complaints filed by California-based consumers, Senator Barbara Boxer dismisses the matter as solved, by relating how she was “proud to work for passage of H.R.627, the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act”. Her insipid self-congratulation is especially ironic, because it is this very legislation that has pushed companies like Chase to redistribute their usurious practices from non-performers onto those consumers who still have credit profiles left to defend.

So now the credit card industry officially joins healthcare, mortgage, and taxation as the most recent failed attempt to subsidize losses… you know… the new standard: squeeze the few producers still standing to shoulder the burden of the ever-growing masses who do not.

This straw may be the one to break many of the 850,000 backs, which in turn, will create a further drain on the system.

So at the next cocktail party, when someone launches into the whole “problem today with the welfare-disability-loan-modification-unemployment-benefit-receiving-populous” discourse… consider mustering your most sarcastic reply… that it officially does not pay to produce.

Market Outlook, July 2009

Back in March I began helping a client execute a search for homes under $325k in the Carlsbad, Oceanside, and Vista areas. We had 20% down, plenty of reserves, solid credit, and great income. We ultimately negotiated the successful purchase of a great home that fit their goals and budget… but not before viewing literally 150+ homes, spread across a 25 mile radius, and making 10+ offers on different properties before our bid was finally accepted after three months of aggressive searching. In one case we were outbid even after offering 20% above list price.

Talk about a seller’s market.

Largely based on this type of anecdotal evidence, there is a sentiment brewing on the street that “the real estate market” may have reached a bottom. Also sprouting up lately are bullish media driven statistics like this one:

“The pace of decline in residential real estate slowed in April… Furthermore, (nearly all) metro areas… recorded an improvement in monthly returns over March”

But here’s the thing...

In my last post, entitled “Here’s a Statistic I dare you to challenge”, I conclusively present how our local MLS database reflects an artificial short supply of inventory in this hottest selling, low-end market segment.

Furthermore…

• 73% of all sales this year have been under $400k
• 11% were from $401k to $500k
• 11% were from $501k to $700k
• 8% were over $700k

So while this market bottom sentiment is based more on wishful thinking than fundamentals, at least its thought process is understandable. However, folks who point to this type of statistic as some sort of a bottom are being misleading at best and ridiculous at worst. To take a low-end-specific, ultra-short-term statistic grossly out of context to self promote a lame argument that the overall “market" has bottomed is preposterous.

Not only are these types of statistics misleading because they make it seem like “declining at a slower rate” is a good thing… or because one month does not establish any real trend… or because they apply exclusively to the lowest end of the pricing spectrum… but they are deceptive too, since they do not reflect a functional free market.

It’s a seller’s market alright… but only because roughly three quarters of the inventory is being artificially held back. While the supbrime re-set waves are behind us, the problem has not been fully digested. So far, 25% of all US mortgage holders are upside down. This number is just gaining traction.

Many good folks have been working extra jobs to pay their mortgage on time, creating no room for excuses. They have been pleading for loan modification aide. But the aide has been going to the wrong subset of consumers… the ones who have already missed payments and therefore have no credit profile left to defend. Aside from sending the wrong message to the folks still hanging in there… it is pretty safe to say this insipid plan is failing, since over 50% have already re-defaulted!

Even as we lick our subprime wounds, a new time bomb is imminent… and its impact looks to be three times the magnitude. The big thing people are missing is this: its more than just taboo terms like ‘Option Arm’ and ‘Alt-A’ that need to be baked into the market… the very best “A-Paper Prime 800 FICO Fully Documented Income Loans” that were written during the last five years... should also be placed in the same category as “subprime”. We do not have a socio-demographic problem. We never did. It has always been a math thing.

Leverage up = fun.

De-leverage down = not so fun.

If the measly little subprime crisis brought the financial world to its knees, what will happen when the real hammer drops?Let’s see how many “good credit risks” hold onto their homes when they’re upside down by $200k.The idea of a bottom is nothing short of preposterous.

Bottom line:

If you own a $700k to $10m home, and realistically expect to hold onto it for the next 10 to 12 years, then you’ll probably make out very well with anticipated inflation and demographic explosion. However, if you think you will be selling anytime between now and the next four or five years… I would seriously think about an immediate, aggressive price drop… before your neighbors do. Prospective buyers of this segment are better off waiting to lower their cost basis regardless of their cash position.

Prospective sellers in the $500k-$700k market should recognize how quickly this market is deteriorating. Cut your losses as quickly as you can. On the buy side, this market really needs to be approached with caution. If you are financing a lot of your purchase then proceed on a case by case basis. A minimum down payment of 20% is strongly recommended because FHA pricing and/or mortgage insurance fees are cost prohibitive using this high of a loan amount. This market is deteriorating rapidly so good deals are starting to sprout up… but there is a good amount of downward pricing pressure expected. Rates are anyone’s guess, but if they stay low there is no hurry to buy right away. If they start ticking up, you may want to consider how your monthly payment will go up even as prices come down. If you are paying all or mostly in cash, then time is on your side.

In the $350k and below market segment, prospective sellers who still have equity are actually in a great position to sell but the appraised value will limit the price they can obtain. Buyers in this segment can’t go too wrong. There is a lot of demand for these homes. It is possible that an inevitable flood of inventory can outpace demand, but even prices drop substantially, the intrinsic value at $325k exceeds the risk of downward pricing pressure… even substantial pressure.

A good way to measure intrinsic value is by using my market bottom triangulation principal.

A good way to determine your budget is by using my awesome housing payment calculator.

A good way to get immediate, personalized, meaningful advice is by contacting an agent committed to customer service excellence.

Here’s a statistic I dare you to challenge!

Sellable listings in the San Diego MLS represent only 25% of the distressed loans out there.

This short sentence gets right to the point, but admittedly contains some open-ended terms that vary widely by interpretation. By narrowing down the definitions of these terms, and by getting our arms around their underlying sentiment, we will shed light on some significant implications, unlock some “aha” observations, and stimulate a whole lot of thought… not so much about where things stand in today’s real estate market… but about the types of questions we should be asking.

To squeeze the underlying juice out of this powerful statistic, here’s what we will do:

• We will break down each term to arrive at a lowest common denominator.
  
• We will explore where this statistic did NOT come from.
  
• We will discover where this statistic WAS found.
  
• We will re-triangulate the findings.
  
• We will resist the urge to make fun of folks who think we are at a “real estate bottom”… by focusing instead on a golden opportunity being missed by government over-regulation and by the (in)action of individuals whose incentives are not aligned with a plan for a broader economic recovery.
  
• Then we will invite you come back again soon… to poke fun at folks who think we are at a “real estate bottom”.

Breakin’ it down:

Let’s deconstruct this statistic by defining it’s parts:

• By “sellable listings” I mean mostly lower-end, mostly non-short sale. I hereby estimate 83% of active homes on MLS as “sellable”. If you care to know why, click here. If you clicked, and you still don’t like it, write your own blog.
  
• (The main reason higher-end homes are mostly un-sellable, is because there is virtually no marketplace for their financing. The main reason short-sales are mostly un-sellable, is because bank managers have incentives to make their banks money… not lose money… and so they are reluctant to approve losses).
  
• By “MLS” I mean the “Multiple Listing Service”, which agents use as the industry standard, and by which the vast majority of all US homes are sold.
  
• By “distressed loans” I mean any mortgage whereby the consumer missed two monthly payments in a row and who has not yet paid it back.
  
• By “out there”, I mean not on the MLS …yet.

Here’s where I did NOT get this statistic:

It did not come from the media, public records, the California Association of Realtors, or even omnipresent Google. Its not that I didn’t try… but rather that they all pretty much conclude that this statistic is virtually unknowable.

Not being a conspiracy theorist, I felt a bit paranoid at first suspecting the government and banks to be “in on it”… obfuscating the truth and all that. Then I settled on a far more satisfactory conclusion, which is namely, to not give these institutions that much credit… they’re not that smart.

Seriously though, there are some legitimate reasons why these entities can’t quantify the amount of what some insiders and bloggers are starting to refer to as “shadow inventory”.

In a brief interview with the President and CEO of the California Bankers Association… who actually does come across as one of the smarter people I know… Mr. Rodney Brown, explained that the term “shadow inventory” would imply that there is an actual inventory out there, i.e. a pipeline of bank owned properties that the banks are unable or unwilling to sell. He was quick to point out how banks are in the business of earning money on loans… not holding onto nonperforming assets or renting via property management. When banks take back inventory (from consumers who are in default), they place it on the MLS in short order.

OK, point well taken… however, maybe we should tweak the definition of “shadow inventory”… or better yet, as I have done with this statistic’s phraseology… just lump this mystery “inventory” into “distressed loans out there that have not found their way onto the MLS… yet”.

The thing is, people have short memories… 12 to 18 months ago, we had a record surplus of (bank owned, foreclosure, REO, short-sale, traditionally owned) properties flooding the market, especially on the lower-end.

So, what the heck?

Why are we agents… the ones still standing after staving off economic ruin… by powering through a 12 to 18 month period of unprecedented industry challenges, stalled transactions, massive lower-end price declines, inane legislation, and mass peer exodus, etc… why are we agents, who have now seemingly willed from the ether, a fresh batch of first-time home buyers to work with… some of which who actually have 20% to put down… why are we having to show each client literally 100+ properties, and make dozens of offers, while bidding 20% over list price, before we can get one to go to escrow??

Are all the problems solved? Did we hit a bottom while nobody was looking? Is it truly a seller’s market?

Being an industry insider… having executed both loans and real estate transactions for many years… having witnessed the stock market’s total dislocation from reality leading up to the subprime collapse… seeing how the stock market is still, perhaps, even more dislocated from reality… understanding that we’ve had no let up on defaults of loans since last year when we’ve had record surplus of distressed sales… I really started to wonder… where the hell is all this inventory? Did it go to the place where lost socks and faxes end up?

Where this statistic WAS found:

Shortly after I became a full-fledged broker, after serving for a while as a (half-fledged?) agent, I was somewhat surprised to quickly realize there was only one major difference behind the role that came along with the new title: there is no higher up authority to go to when you have questions… so you learn to trust yourself.

Now I’m just one guy… and when your own smarter than average father-in-law who routinely teaches you a thing or two, about a thing or two… looks at you sideways when you make such a bold assertion, its easy to second guess your thinking.

So I asked another insider colleague… who’s gut feeling not only confirmed my most aggressive projection, but was even more aggressive in his own projection… and so I asked another insider… and then another… each of which backed up my gut feeling within a small variance. It was then that I realized there was some juice to this.

In all, I asked 20 seasoned, professional, industry insiders, including loan officers, mortgage bankers, REALTORS, escrow officers, title representatives, real estate investors, and a former banker turned options trader.

The most conservative projection was that the MLS represents only 50% of the distressed loans out there.

Scientific? Controlled? Foolproof? Maybe not… but who to trust? Fickle media? Self-interested institutions? Politically motivated bureaucrats? California Association of Realtors, who just yesterday discovered a “computer error” responsible for drastically overstating home sales by more than 13 times? Or foot soldiers who eat, sleep, and breathe this business who have their fingers squarely on the pulse on the real life market?

25% was the average assessment. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Re-triangulation:

"This voice speaks San Diego"

In some great articles written by Kelly Bennett, Staff Writer for Voice of San Diego.org, I link with permission to these telling San Diego statistics:

• “This March, the 90-day delinquency rate shot up 2.6 percent from March last year… but the rate of home loans going into foreclosure was… up just 0.3 percent over the year. That means there were more loans falling delinquent than received official notice of default -- indicating a bottleneck and a potential flood of foreclosures to come.”
  
• “This March, 25 percent of the county's Alt-A loans were at least 60 days delinquent… (and) 38.5 percent of the active subprime loans… were at least 60 days delinquent.”
  
• In April, 5.74 percent of outstanding mortgages were at least 90 days late on payments… but only 1.5% of homeowners (received “Notices of Default”).”

“Google’s not too shabby after all”

The act of writing this post itself helped to adjust my Google thinking cap… and guess what happened after I dialed in my keywords using phrases like “how will the foreclosure moratorium effect shadow inventory”?

• In a recent study, RealtyTrac compared its database of bank-repossessed homes to MLS listings of for-sale homes in four states, including California. It found a significant disparity - only 30 percent of the foreclosures were listed for sale in the Multiple Listing Service. The remainder is known in the industry as "shadow inventory."

How could this be?

“Government gets its peanut butter all over the banks’ chocolate”

• In one way or another, there has been some form of a foreclosure moratorium in effect for the last 18 or so months. This means, banks with some exceptions, have been disallowed from foreclosing on non-performing loans.
  
• Fannie and Freddy issued moratoriums.
  
• Banks issued some voluntary moratoriums… perhaps attempting to cut losses while getting some, rather than no payback… perhaps reluctant to drive the real estate market down further… perhaps to create demand, by limiting supply… or perhaps because they’re in no hurry to report more defaults to shareholders.

“Creation of even more irresponsible lending standards”

• Ever heard of “stated income”? This was when borrowers (over)stated income and assets to obtain loan approval. Want to know how loan modifications work? Borrowers (under)state their income and assets to determine a “fair” payment.

“Lowering standards” works especially well in conjunction with the “peanut-butter-chocolate theory”

• Don’t allow banks to foreclose on consumers unless they offer loan modifications to folks who have demonstrated that they need help… by missing their mortgage payments.
  
• We’ll just assume that the people who have been working three jobs to make their payments come hell or high water are less deserving than the folks who have missed their payments.
  
• Never mind that the folks who have missed their payments will default again the first chance they get. Don’t take my word for it? Did you know over half of the modifications already granted… are in default again?

“Fuzzy math shenanigans”

• Whew, good thing banking stocks rebounded recently… why bother adding up those tedious mortgage lates… is there really any rush to alert the shareholders and drive down stock prices?
  
• Right, and while we’re keeping share prices from dropping like an empty can of soda, how about we 86 that pesky mark-to-market accounting practice to “free up” our reserve requirements!
  
• Yeah… and “zero down loans” are so 2007… let’s call them FHA loans… we’ll make people cough up 3.5% so it won’t have that “zero down” stigma… good deal, but if the government is going to be in on it, they have to get theirs too… right, right… we’ll just tack on 1.75% to the loan balance to keep Uncle Sam happy.

“In marble lobbies we trust”

• Banks have no obligation to report statistics on loan defaults.
  
• Banks have no obligation to report statistics on loan modification requests.

“Working the system”

• Some folks seem to stave off the foreclosure man by making partial payments or pressing the right levers or I don’t know how but they are still in “their” homes.

And not factored into my homegrown statistic… “the mother lode of shadow inventory”

• Consumers who are 30 days late.
  
• Consumers who are current but can’t hold on for long.
  
• Per Bloomberg, nearly 25 percent of ALL mortgage holders are upside down.

The golden opportunity being missed:

The purpose of taking this poll, posting its results, and researching its guts out, was not to sarcastically attack the banks and government for perpetuating an already bad situation. The purpose is to call attention to a golden opportunity being missed.

While all this havoc was being wreaked upon our economy, a new freshman crop of first-time home buyers came online while nobody was looking. With good credit, a stable job, and 20% down from savings or from a little help from the ‘rents… the under $325k market is actually the one segment that does make sense to buy right now.

The rates are still low. People can qualify. More importantly, people can afford it. The post write-off payment is on par with rental prices. The sales prices have already taken a serious beating, and even planning for the worst… if the downward trend continues, future monthly payment savings will likely be offset by higher rates. There’s also that tax credit thing nobody really knows how to explain or whether it will be around long enough as advertised, but hey, it can only help too. In short… it makes sense.

And in this one and only market segment where it does makes sense to buy… the government is doing its darnedest to artificially limit supply.

This stance creates a head fake to higher-end markets that the tide has turned, which will irresponsibly cause more consumers to be caught off guard. It also sends a message to the hardest working class of consumers we have, who have not made room for any excuses, that it pays to quit.

We have a chance here to stop subsidizing more of what we don’t want. We likely have enough pent up demand to replace non-performing borrowers with performing ones. And if the demand on deck does not prove to be sufficient… then now is the time to find out. It is so important that we firm up a bottom to this madness in advance of the high-end displacement yet to come. A low end line in the sand is desperately needed to create a last chance foothold from which to draw a bridge when the high-end drops off the precipice. I say take the hit now while we still can:

• Remove the moratoriums.
  
• Set up an REO conservatory to rent to foreclosure displaced consumers.
  
• Enforce banks to report defaults and non-performing loans to shareholders.
  
• Let the market take care of itself.
  
• Adjust incentives for bank managers to execute short sales (rather than pretend).
  
• Recognize that new home purchases will stimulate the economy.
  
• Understand that nobody “deserves a home”.
  
• Stand up for the contracts that underpin our social fabric.

Invitation:

All ya’ all real estate junkies are cordially invited to revisit SethEstate in the next few days… to find out why we are so not even close to a high-end “real estate bottom”.

Mr. Jones is a Punk

In this WSJ article the author writes, "But after four years of struggling to pay his own mortgage, Mr. Jones says he has no equity to show for it. He may end up walking away from his home...

I would offer up a thought here... Mr. Jones is a punk and I resent his sorry, tough-get-going I-guess-I'll-quite since life isn't giving me what I'm entitled to guts.

I would also like to put on record the next short-sale seller who gives me an attitude for showing up at "their" home after I call in advance for an appointment per MLS instructions, whose instructions by the way, are nearly always more elaborate than the instructions of other comparable re-sellers who are also trying to sell their home the traditional way.

If you happen to be a short-sale seller, I harbor no judgment against you. I don't blame you for your situation and don't question why you aren't working four jobs to somehow make it work. But if you are going to break your agreement, and ask for a hand out, which is exactly what every short-sale seller is asking for, then for Pete's sake, try to dig down deep and help us help you... or at least get the hell out of the way.

By the way, I also posted this entry on Trulia's website, which enjoys huge consumer traffic specific to real estate. The post stimulated quite a bit of discussion, so for anyone interested, I invite you to review the thread.