What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

  1. Thanks 4:45.

    The times article is interesting and harrowing. I have been a big proponent on these boards about NOT going through a mortgage broker, getting EVERYTHING in writing and getting a couple balls rolling for mortgage options. Too many conflicts of interest with brokers and a wasted application fee with a lender is a small price when you’re talking about hundreds of thousands (or millions) of dollars.

    Early in my home hunt, I saw several Developer’s Group properties and similar alarm bells were going off (was it one of their properties I’m thinking of that had the C of O problems?).

    I agree about homebuying courses being recommended. I can’t say I have attended any, but I definitely did a LOT of reading about mortgages beforehand and went on a VERY trusted recommendation for our lawyer.

    I don’t want to come across as attacking the mom, but I do think that to a certain extent this exemplifies the overly litigious sentiment in this country. I don’t doubt that United Homes deserves the suit, but (without knowing more about the case) but suing Credit Suisse Boston sounds suspiciously like they’re just suing the people with the most money.

  2. mr. cynical, got it. I mentioned the $1400/mth (not brktwo). You’re right, alarm bells were ringing and red flags were popping up all over the place when I went to look at the United Homes properties. I knew that I was being taken on so many levels. Some warning indices were tangible (higher than usual market price, unusually overly-friendly staff, aggressive marketing tactics, etc.). Other clues were based on gut instinct. I tend to be risk averse, so I ended up walking away from having any dealings with them. Incidentally, they marketed all over bed-stuy (billboards, advertising on the side of buildings, etc). And as brktwo suggested, I also thought for a quick second that they were a government agency (‘United’ Homes) or at least a nationwide, reputable one.
    I still defend the bed-stuy mom because I think she was on the take from the start and she never had much of a chance to protect her interests. Part of it is knowledge about the home-buying process. But there’s also a sense of resignation that sets in at a certain point within the home-buying process. Lawyers tell you that you’re locked in the deal; you’ve already invested hard-earned, scarce cash that runs the risk of being forfeited if you walk away, etc.
    I’ve had to fire lawyers on more than one occassion and it always feel as if you’re not only in a pickle but also back to square one. Some people probably aren’t even aware that they can and should get their own lawyer. So, having a second lawyer call you on the phone might not seem like an anomaly. Or it might just be resignation and hope that the new one will be better than the last one.
    I agree with CHP that home-buying courses should be strongly recommended, if not required for first time buyers.
    Also, check out this new article in the nytimes:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/01/business/yourmoney/01nova.html?pagewanted=1