LOS

Apache is functioning normally

It’s vacation time, and the whole family is packed and ready to enjoy some days off — including your four-legged (or feathered or scaly) family member.

Some hotels, including those within the Marriott brand, throw you a bone by letting you bring your pets on trips. Let’s take a look at the Marriott pet policy and how it compares to other hotel chains.

Marriott’s pet policy

Marriott has a pets welcome policy stating, “We recognize that your pets are a valued part of your family, which is why we offer our guests a selection of hotels that invite you to bring your domesticated pets along for your stay within our global portfolio of brands.”

There are more than 1,500 pet-friendly Marriott hotels in the U.S. that allow stays for dogs, cats, birds and fish.

🤓Nerdy Tip

Some international properties allow pets as well, but Marriott recommends visiting the hotel’s website or contacting directly for more information regarding pets in a Marriott hotel.

Nonrefundable pet cleaning fees ranging from $20 to $250 either per night or per stay may apply. Additionally, many properties impose pet weight limits ranging from 25 pounds to 70 pounds.

Depending on the property, animals might not be allowed at the spa, pool or restaurant areas. Be sure to contact the hotel you are staying at to learn more about its specific pet policy.

To avoid ending up in the doghouse instead of a hotel room, we recommend checking an individual hotel’s pet policy carefully before booking a stay.

Pet-friendly Marriott hotels

Marriott pet-friendly brands include but are not limited to:

  • AC Hotels.

  • Delta Hotels.

  • Element by Westin.

  • Le Méridien.

  • Residence Inn.

  • TownePlace Suites.

Overall — and frustratingly — the Marriott pet policy is rather inconsistent across its brands, let alone within a single hotel brand.

For example, various Four Points locations can have widely different pet policies, even though it’s the same brand.

  • Four Points by Sheraton Chicago-O’Hare Airport: Pets are not allowed.

  • Four Points by Sheraton Los Angeles International Airport: Dogs under 40 pounds welcome; $100 nonrefundable fee per stay.

  • Four Points by Sheraton Salt Lake City Airport: Only dogs under 70 pounds are welcome; $20 nonrefundable pet fee per night plus $50 nonrefundable pet fee per stay.

Marriott service animal policy

All Marriott hotels located in the U.S. allow service animals, per the Americans with Disabilities Act. The pet cleaning fee isn’t charged in this case, which allows you to fetch a great deal on a hotel stay with an animal.

If you have a service animal and are traveling outside of the United States, you’ll have to read each property’s terms carefully. On the “Overview” page of any Marriott hotel’s website, scroll to “Accessible Hotel Features” and look for the indication that service animals are welcome.

How to find a pet-friendly Marriott property

On the Marriott website, search for a destination and travel dates as you normally would. On the results page, select the “Pets welcome” filter, and your results will automatically narrow down to only properties that allow pets.

In the Marriott app, search for the destination and travel dates. Once the search results pop up, select filters and check the “Pets welcome” box.

Once you select a pet-friendly hotel and pick a room rate, select “Choose Room Features” and check the “Bringing a pet” box. You’ll also be able to view an individual hotel pet policy, which includes the number of pets allowed and the pet fees.

How staying with pets at Marriott hotels compares to other hotel chains

When it comes to pet-friendly hotels, Marriott is near the top with a rating of 4.5 out of 5 — tied with Hilton — according to a recent NerdWallet analysis.

More than 60% of Marriott hotels accept pets. However, the average pet fee at Marriott properties is just under $100 per stay, which is above the average pet fee across all hotel chains ($81.60).

Marriott pet policy, recapped

Oftentimes, the cost of boarding an animal will have you rolling over playing dead. The comfort of being able to bring your furry, scaly or feathered friend with you for a complete family trip can turn even a midrange hotel into a five-star feeling.

Thankfully, plenty of Marriott’s brands allow pets. But policies are unpredictable across the properties, so you’ll have to read the fine print at each hotel you’re considering.

How to maximize your rewards

You want a travel credit card that prioritizes what’s important to you. Here are our picks for the best travel credit cards of 2023, including those best for:

Source: nerdwallet.com

Apache is functioning normally

Two years ago, policymakers at Los Angeles City Hall came up with a plan to dramatically increase the number of new homes that could be built in downtown L.A., part of their larger strategy for addressing the region’s rapidly rising housing costs.

The city’s planning department released DTLA 2040, a 20-year road map for growth that, if approved by the City Council, would increase downtown’s housing supply by up to 100,000 units. That’s enough to satisfy one-fifth of the need citywide, planners say.

But a key element of that plan has drawn fierce opposition from some of downtown’s lowest-wage workers, who fear that new condominiums and apartment towers will push out garment businesses. Those workers, and their allies in organized labor, succeeded last week in adding new language to the plan in the hope of securing “no net loss” of sewing factories and other fashion-related businesses.

Advertisement

Organizers with the downtown-based Garment Worker Center say those last-minute changes will protect thousands of jobs, in an industry fueled by working-class Mexican and Guatemalan immigrants.

Business leaders, on the other hand, warn the new restrictions would render as many as 12,000 residential units in the DTLA 2040 plan financially infeasible, at least for the immediate future, undercutting efforts to expand the housing supply and make headway on the region’s affordability crisis.

“Each one of those 12,000 units matters,” said Nella McOsker, chief executive of the Central City Assn., a downtown-based business group. “If we begin chipping away at [the plan] piece by piece, with these last-minute decisions that undermine the larger goals of the plan, we reduce downtown’s ability to alleviate this crisis.”

Daisy Gonzalez, campaign director at the Garment Worker Center, said L.A.’s fashion sector has been neglected for too long and deserves the type of care and attention that policymakers have devoted to the entertainment industry. Gonzalez, whose group seeks to safeguard the wages and working conditions of apparel workers, resisted the notion of housing and jobs as an either-or proposition.

When it comes to downtown, Gonzalez said, keeping workers in their homes means keeping them employed.

“Garment workers are really in need of their jobs in order to pay for housing. The two things are interconnected. We’re not trying to pit the two things against each other,” she said.

That back-and-forth reflects the city’s larger ongoing debate over how to build more housing without also triggering serious displacement. And it has focused attention on a sector of the economy overshadowed by the entertainment industry.

The City Council is scheduled to vote on the DTLA 2040 plan on Wednesday, along with a second, major growth strategy: the long-delayed update to the Hollywood Community Plan, which was blocked by a judge in 2013 and later rewritten.

Those two documents will set out the rules for developing new homes, offices, sound stages and other projects in Hollywood and downtown. Both plans have new provisions aimed at reducing displacement, boosting the production of affordable housing and extending the life of those affordable projects.

The downtown plan stretches from the Convention Center east to the Arts District and north to Chinatown. However, much of the debate in recent days has focused on the Fashion District, home to an estimated 20,000 garment jobs. The most contested terrain is a slice of the Fashion District bounded roughly by 7th Street on the north, 17th Street on the south, Crocker Street on the east and Santee Street on the west — an area city planners now call the IX3 zone.

The DTLA 2040 plan would prohibit industrial buildings in the IX3 zone from being converted into lofts or hotels. However, developers would be permitted to construct mixed-use development — buildings that have both apartments and space for “productive” uses, such as sewing factories or other types of light manufacturing.

Until recently, the proposal called for developers in the IX3 zone to provide 5,000 square feet of productive space for every 10,000 square feet of land. But last week, the Garment Worker Center — working closely with Unite Here Local 11, the politically powerful hotel workers union — persuaded a City Council committee to rewrite that provision, doubling the amount of required manufacturing space.

Those groups argued that such changes would help protect communities from “luxury commercial development.”

“Hospitality and garment workers need more affordable housing, not more development that could threaten where we live or we work,” said Juan Muñoz-Guevara, a researcher with Unite Here Local 11, at a rally last week.

Hours later, the council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee voted to double the amount of manufacturing space required in new residential projects proposed in the IX3 section of the Fashion District. The five-member panel also endorsed a provision requiring that new development projects in that area include freight elevators, loading docks and loading bays — the kind that can accommodate heavy machinery and large rolls of fabric.

Los Angeles Councilmember Curren Price, pictured in 2021, requested last-minute changes to the city’s development plan for downtown Los Angeles. Officials said those changes would make about 12,000 housing units in the plan financially “infeasible” for the immediate future.

(Francine Orr / Los Angeles Times)

Councilmember Curren Price requested the increase in required manufacturing space. Councilmember Kevin de León pushed for the inclusion of the freight elevator requirement, saying in a letter that it would “ensure efficient business operations” for garment manufacturers.

Those two changes, if approved by the council, would make about 12,000 of the planned housing units in the DTLA 2040 plan financially “infeasible” — at least for the near future, according to the city’s planning staff. Although market conditions for residential development could eventually change, the expanded elevator and manufacturing space requirements would prevent builders from achieving a “reasonable profit,” they said.

McOsker, the executive at the Central City Assn., said as many as 2,000 of the 12,000 units sought by the city in the IX3 zone would have been designated as affordable. She also argued that the DTLA 2040 plan already had safeguards to protect garment jobs, striking a balance between housing and industry.

“We don’t have any evidence that changing the [plan] saves jobs,” McOsker said. “We do know, and strongly believe, it will kill housing projects before they even begin.”

Anthony Rodriguez, executive director of the L.A. Fashion District Business Improvement District, also spoke against the changes to the downtown plan, saying they will risk the loss of residential units amid a citywide housing crisis. Manufacturing and warehouse space in the IX3 zone already has an 18% vacancy rate, which shows a lack of demand for new garment-related businesses in downtown, he said.

Price spokesperson Angelina Valencia-Dumarot said Tuesday that her boss learned only this week that some of the late changes to the DTLA 2040 plan could result in a reduction in new housing. The council member intends to seek a report on the issue while the city attorney’s office conducts its legal review of the downtown zoning plan, Valencia-Dumarot said.

“Fact is, we have anywhere between six months to a year before the plan is finalized,” she said in an email. “There is still plenty of room for the conversation to evolve.”

Gonzalez, the campaigns director for the Garment Worker Center, said she already views the downtown plan as a compromise, since council members did not agree to all of the changes requested by her group.

“We understand that housing production is extremely important,” she said. “But so are jobs. So we need to really strike a balance.”

Source: latimes.com

Apache is functioning normally

One quarter of home buyers say they’re planning to move from their current residence, with many saying the COVID-19 pandemic has convinced them to relocate to smaller towns and cities.

Redfin reported last week that its database of more than one million house hunters shows that a record 27% are looking to move to a different metro area from the one they currently reside in.

And it’s not only Redfin that has noticed this trend. Last week, realtor.com released its own report showing that more than half of home searchers in the nation’s 100 largest metros are focused on homes in the suburbs of those areas. Indeed, listing views of homes in the suburbs in May dramatically exceeded those from one year ago. But the migration to the suburbs is not a new trend, as it actually began accelerating prior to the pandemic, according to realtor.com’s director of economic research Javier Vivas.

“After several months of shelter-in-place orders, the desire to have more space and the potential for more people to work remotely are likely two of the factors contributing to the popularity of the burbs,” he said.

In addition, homes in smaller towns are getting more attention too. Redfin said that page views for listings in towns with 50,000 or less residents saw traffic grow by 87% in the last year. That’s almost four-times the 22% annual increase in views of listings in cities with 1 million+ residents.

“While there has been a huge increase in the number of people looking online at homes in small towns, the long-term impact of the pandemic on people actually moving from one part of the country to another remains to be seen,” Taylor Marr, a Redfin economist, said. “People are starting to take the plunge and move away from big, expensive cities, though most of them were probably already considering a lifestyle change. The pandemic and work-from-home opportunities that come with it are accelerating migration patterns that were already in place toward relatively affordable parts of the country. But for many people, the lure of large homes in wide open spaces will be passing a dream fueled by coronavirus-induced isolation.”

The largest net outflow of Redfin searchers in April and May was in the cities of Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco, which means more people are moving out of those areas than moving into them. Moreover, Phoenix; Sacramento, Calif.; Las Vegas; and Dallas saw the highest net inflow of users in the same months. Homes in those metros also tend to be more affordable than in the coastal regions.

Mike Wheatley is the senior editor at Realty Biz News. Got a real estate related news article you wish to share, contact Mike at [email protected]
Latest posts by Mike Wheatley (see all)

Source: realtybiznews.com

Apache is functioning normally

In the days before Los Angeles’ “mansion tax” took effect, the luxury market moved at hyperspeed.

Prices were slashed, escrows were rushed and million-dollar deals were closed as panicked sellers offered exotic cars and lucrative bonuses to anyone willing to buy their properties by the end of March. It was a manic, desperate attempt at avoiding Measure ULA, a new transfer tax that levies a 4% charge on all residential and commercial real estate sales in the city above $5 million and a 5.5% charge on sales above $10 million.

On April 1, everything froze.

Sellers, now faced with paying the tax if they sold, yanked their properties off the market. Discounted prices, which were valid only if the deal was done by March, shot back up. The luxury goodies were off the table. Bye bye, Bentley.

A market slowdown was expected, but the night-and-day difference between March and April sales was unprecedented.

Advertisement

In March, when the luxury market reached the peak of its frenzy, there were 126 home and condo sales above $5 million in the city of L.A., according to the Multiple Listing Service.

This Brentwood mansion sold days before Measure ULA took effect, avoiding a tax bill of $891,000 that would’ve gone toward housing and homelessness efforts.

(Noel Kleinman)

In April, once Measure ULA took effect, there were two.

One sold in Brentwood for $5.7 million, and the other traded hands in Venice for $7.5 million. Together, they raised $528,000 for the city to use for affordable housing and homelessness prevention programs. So far, that’s it.

The slowdown makes sense. Sellers were economically incentivized to close deals before they would have to pay the tax, so most of the sales that were going to close already closed. L.A.’s luxury market won’t remain frozen forever, and deals will eventually pick back up, especially once the courts rule on two lawsuits arguing that the tax is unconstitutional. Many sellers are holding off listing while they wait for a clear ruling one way or the other.

But for a city grappling with a housing crisis, funding is needed as quickly as possible, and early signs indicate that the once-lofty projections for how much Measure ULA would raise might be much, much lower — especially for the first few months.

When Measure ULA was on the ballot in November, proponents estimated it would generate roughly $900 million a year, based on real estate sales data from 2021 to 2022.

In March, a report from the City Administrative Office lowered that number significantly, projecting $672 million in revenue from July 2023 to June 2024. The projection was a response to a real estate market that slowed dramatically because of rising interest rates.

Then in April, Mayor Karen Bass unveiled her first budget proposal, a $13.1-billion plan that included $1.3 billion to address homelessness. However, the budget projected only $150 million in revenue from Measure ULA.

The city is walking a tightrope. It needs to spend as much as possible to address housing and homelessness, but if the courts decide the measure is unconstitutional, the city will have to pay back all the money it generated from the tax. An L.A. County judge recently consolidated the two lawsuits challenging the measure into a single case, but the timeline for a ruling is unclear.

In this legal limbo, the city had to choose a budget number big enough to make an impact but small enough to pay back if necessary. The planners landed on $150 million because they felt confident that the city could make that back through federal reimbursements from organizations.

“The $150-million number takes into account the risk of losing litigation, but it’s also reflective of the urgency of the housing and homelessness situation,” said Greg Good, a senior advisor on policy and external affairs for the Los Angeles Housing Department. “This is an amount we feel comfortable that we could refund, if necessary.”

The ULA money can be spent only as it comes in, meaning that the city won’t be able to use the $150 million until the tax generates $150 million, Good said.

If luxury sales stay at the pace they are right now, that may take awhile.

“We anticipated the market slowing down. It’s logical economic behavior,” Good said. “But it’s still real estate in L.A. Eventually, transactions will get back to normal.”

Sellers are sitting on the sidelines in hopes that the tax will be overturned. The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn., one of the groups filing a lawsuit against the tax, published a page on its website with instructions on how to file for a refund if the suit is successful.

“Sellers are taking their properties off the market, and there are some developers who won’t buy anything in the city,” said Compass agent Sally Forster Jones. “There’s hope that it gets overturned.”

Jones handled one of the final sales before Measure ULA took effect, helping a client sell a 1930s mansion in Brentwood for $16.2 million. Because it sold before the deadline, the seller saved $891,000.

The commercial market has cooled as well, said Oron Maher of Maher Commercial Realty. He said that most sellers listing properties post-ULA will be the ones that have no choice.

“These are mom-and-pop owners of real estate. People going through death, divorce, partnership dissolutions or retirement who are forced to sell as soon as possible,” Maher said. “If you don’t need to sell in ULA, you won’t. This will be a tax on people already experiencing difficult situations.”

In the last days of March, Maher closed the sale of a 16,000-square-foot apartment building on behalf of an elderly client who chose taking a lesser price over paying the tax. At $11 million, the sale price was $1.5 million less than the asking price, but it avoided a tax bill of $605,000.

This 16,000-square-foot apartment building sold for $11 million on March 31.

(Mano Handian / Lights Camera Location)

Maher said that over the last month negotiations have become a game of hot potato, with sellers and buyers both asking the other to cover the tax.

“Buyers are saying it’s a seller’s tax, but sellers are saying they can’t sell unless the buyer can raise the price,” he said. “It’s all leading to less transactions.”

Even if the measure is upheld in court, there’s a chance sellers will find ways to skirt the tax. Shortly after the measure passed, The Times reported that wealthy sellers were already eyeing ways to avoid paying, such as breaking properties into pieces and selling them separately.

Legal resource outlet JD Supra recently published an article headlined “Nine Ideas to Avoid the Effect of Measure ULA.” Its suggestions include selling stakes in the entity that owns a property rather than the property itself, selling a house and the land it occupies separately, or taking the broker’s fee out of the sale price to get it under the tax thresholds.

City officials, meanwhile, are beefing up staff to help manage and administer the tax. The Los Angeles Housing Department is requesting six new hires to help launch ULA spending effectively, and the City Council confirmed 15 people to sit on the Citizens Oversight Committee, a volunteer group that will supervise spending and make program recommendations.

Among those named to the committee were Steve Diaz, deputy director of the L.A. Community Action Network; Deepika Sharma, a professor at USC‘s Gould School of Law; and Alan Greenlee, executive director of the Southern California Assn. of Nonprofit Housing, who worked on the United to House L.A. coalition that drafted the measure.

The group will convene for the first time in early May.

“I’m excited about the prospect of ULA,” Greenlee said. “It creates considerable and ongoing resources that the city can use not only to protect low-income residents so they can stay in their homes, but also creates certainty that there will be resources available for developers to build affordable housing.”

Good said both groups will play a crucial role — should the measure survive litigation.

“We’re in an extraordinary dual crisis with housing security and homelessness, and this measure was passed by nearly 60% of voters,” Good said. “This is a genuine opportunity to move the needle, and we’re hopeful and committed to seeing it through.”

Source: latimes.com

Apache is functioning normally

Today’s homebuyers are learning that finding a move-in ready home in a good location that they can comfortably afford is about as rare as a winning Powerball ticket.

A dire housing shortage has kept prices strong and competition fierce among buyers despite high mortgage interest rates. That’s left less than a quarter of the roughly 1.1 million home listings within financial reach of the typical American household, according to a recent joint report from the National Association of Realtors® and Realtor.com®.

The housing market is short about 320,000 listings within the price range of buyers earning the median household income of $75,000 a year. These buyers can generally afford homes up to $256,000. (Listings for single-family homes, condos, townhomes, row homes, and co-ops included only existing homes and did not encompass new construction.)

“The country has the largest shortage of homes in the price range that middle-income buyers can afford,” says NAR Senior Economist Nadia Evangelou. “That can explain why the competition is strongest for these homes.

“We hear again and again that in order to address the housing affordability issue we need to add more housing to the market,” she adds. “We need to add more homes that middle-income buyers can afford.”

Even those making $100,000 can afford only about 38.6% of the homes on the market. And those needing mortgages are faced with rates nearing 7% for 30-year fixed loans, pushing monthly mortgage payments up into the stratosphere.

The problem has worsened significantly over the past five years. In 2018, there were about 810,000 homes on the market that middle-income buyers could afford. That’s compared with nearly 263,000 in April of this year.

The affordability crunch is even worse for people of color. About two-thirds of Black Americans and 59% of Hispanic Americans have household incomes below $75,000. That’s compared with 48% of white Americans and 37% of Asian Americans.

“Our country needs to add at least two affordable homes for middle-income buyers for every home listed for upper-income buyers,” Evangelou says.

Where middle-income buyers can find the fewest affordable homes for sale

San Jose, CA

(Getty Images)

Not surprisingly, the nation’s most expensive metropolitan areas had the fewest homes priced for middle-income buyers. In the whole state of California, just 3.7% of all home listings in April were affordable for buyers earning $75,000 or less.

The issue was the most acute in Silicon Valley’s San Jose, where there was just one home listing priced for buyers earning $75,000 in the entire metropolitan area. (NAR and Realtor.com looked at the 100 largest metros for their analysis. Metros include the main city and surrounding towns, suburbs, and smaller urban areas.)

The lack of affordable homes isn’t surprising as the median price in the metro was $1.53 million in May, according to Realtor.com data, which includes new construction.

In Oxnard, CA, 0.2% of homes were affordable for middle-income buyers. It was 0.6% in San Diego, 1% in San Francisco, and 1.2% in Los Angeles.

However, residents in these more expensive areas generally make more money to keep up with the higher cost of living. The median household income in these areas is typically more than $100,000, says Evangelou.

Even in less expensive, yet still pricey areas, there was a dearth of real estate priced for middle-income buyers: just 1.2% of homes in Seattle; 1.3% of homes in Austin, TX; 2% of homes in Boise, ID, and Salt Lake City; and 2.6% of homes in Sacramento, CA.

“In these very expensive areas, especially middle-income buyers can afford to buy very few listings,” says Evangelou. “It’s very difficult.”

Where middle-income buyers can find the most homes for sale

Youngstown, OH

(Getty Images)

Buyers on a budget will find the greatest selection of affordable homes in the cheaper parts of the country, such as the Rust Belt and Deep South.

In West Virginia and Ohio, more than half of the homes for sale in April were affordable for middle-income buyers. About 59.3% and 55.6% of listings were priced right respectively in those states.

“Some of these areas have an oversupply of housing,” says Evangelou.

In the Youngstown, OH, metro, nearly three-quarters of the homes for sale, about 72%, were within reach of middle-income buyers. In May, the median home price in the metro was $162,450—about a third of the national median price tag of $441,445 in May, according to Realtor.com data.

The metro was followed by Akron, OH, at 61.4%; Toledo, OH, at 60.7%; Cleveland, at 58.6%; and Syracuse, NY, at 54.4%. Rounding out the top 10 were Scranton, PA, at 53.5%; Dayton, OH, at 53%; Pittsburgh, at 52.2%; Rochester, NY, at 51%; and Detroit, at 49.3%.

“Ongoing high housing costs and the scarcity of available homes continues to present budget challenges for many prospective buyers, and it’s likely keeping some buyers in the rental market or on the sidelines,” Realtor.com Chief Economist Danielle Hale said in a statement.

“Those who are able to overcome affordability constraints may be increasingly drawn to newly constructed homes or to the suburbs and beyond, both of which may offer buyers more realistic opportunities for homeownership.”

Source: realtor.com

Apache is functioning normally

Last year, rising mortgage interest rates chilled the previously hot Southern California housing market.

Buyers backed off, sales plunged and, for the first time in a decade, home prices underwent a sustained slide.

By one measure, prices in the six-county region fell 13% from the peak last spring.

Advertisement

That might be as low as they go.

In recent months, there have been growing signs home values may have resumed their climb, potentially dashing the hopes of first-time buyers holding out for cheaper housing in the months or years ahead.

What exactly is happening?

According to several data trackers, home prices ticked up in the last few months.

In April, the median sales price for an existing single-family house in Southern California rose 2% from a month earlier to $785,000, according to the California Assn. of Realtors. That was the third straight month prices climbed from the prior month.

Similar increases can be found in data trackers from mortgage company Black Knight and real estate brokerage Redfin.

But not all sources show prices rising across the board.

According to Zillow, the typical price in the combined six-county Southern California region continued to fall in April, but the decline was the smallest since values turned negative last year.

Why is this happening?

Essentially, buyers have been more willing than sellers to return to the market this spring.

A decline in mortgage rates from above 7% into the 6% range brought some buyers back, real estate agents say, as did a belief among buyers that rates wouldn’t fall much more if they continued to hold out.

Some agents said they’ve seen mostly first-time buyers return.

“Why pay high rent?” Ramon Sanchez, a Whittier-based agent, said. “They would rather see if they can qualify to buy.”

Jeff Tucker, an economist with Zillow, said first-time buyers may also be “bursting at the seams in their apartment” as their families grow, another reason “a lot of interested first-time buyers are not in a place where it’s easy to wait.”

At the same time, many homeowners are waiting, unwilling to list their homes and trade their sub-3% mortgages to borrow at 6%.

Since the start of the year, the total number of homes for sale in Southern California has dropped 21%, according to data from Redfin.

Despite fewer options, sales increased 34%.

“Inventory is just very low,” Tucker said. “There are enough folks who can afford prices at this height that they are still bumping into each other getting into a little competition.”

If I am looking to buy a home now, what should I know?

Well, there is a little more competition. Compared with a few months ago, open houses should be busier and there’s a greater chance you’ll need to bid against others.

Tracy Do, a Coldwell Banker agent who specializes in the highly sought-after neighborhoods of northeast L.A., said that once again, some homes are selling for more than $100,000 over asking.

In southeastern Los Angeles County, Sanchez isn’t seeing jumps as big, but the last three properties he listed had multiple offers and either sold, or are in escrow, for more than the list price.

“We got more buyers in the market than we have sellers,” Sanchez said.

Although the market is more competitive, it’s nothing like the pandemic housing boom.

In March 2022, buyers paid more than list price in 76% of home sales in Los Angeles and Orange counties, according to Zillow. Fast-forward to March 2023, that percentage was 42%.

Do said buyers — compared with early 2022 — are also more likely to get away with leaving in contingencies, or convincing the seller to pay for repairs.

Pricing is also lower.

According to the California Realtors, though April’s median in the combined six-county Southern California region was up $15,000 from March, it was $52,000, or 6.2%, below April 2022 levels.

In Los Angeles County, the median was 8% less than a year earlier and 17% lower than when prices topped out in the county last September.

In Orange County, April prices were 8% from that county’s peak; in the Inland Empire, 5% below the peak; in Ventura County, 7% below the peak; and in San Diego County 5% below the peak.

Will home prices drop further?

What ultimately happens will be influenced by a variety of factors including the direction of mortgage interest rates and whether the economy enters a recession.

But Tucker, the Zillow economist, said the most likely scenario is home prices rise from here on out, because high mortgage rates should keep many homeowners from listing their homes.

Jordan Levine, chief economist with the California Assn. of Realtors, also predicts rising prices, but like Tucker at a more modest level than during the pandemic.

Levine said still-high mortgage rates and a slowing economy are likely to damp demand enough to keep prices from soaring.

Other experts stressed that values could again turn negative.

“Home prices are still well out in front of what underlying incomes today would support at today’s interest rate levels,” said Andy Walden, vice president of research at Black Knight. “There is still potential price risk out there.”

Source: latimes.com

Apache is functioning normally

It’s time to talk about silly mortgage products!

So I was driving out in Los Angeles today, listening to ESPN radio or some other sports station, when a mortgage ad came on the air.

It was for “Crestline Funding’s MyFi,” which allows mortgagors to choose their own loan term.

When I got home I did a quick search on Google, but didn’t see anything about it, so I don’t know the exact guidelines, or even if it’s spelled that way. Or if it’s offered outside California.

But they did mention a few details on air. Essentially, they let you choose any mortgage term you’d like, ranging from five to 40 years, instead of being confined to the typical 15- or 30-year term.

MyFi and the Quicken YOURgage

  • Some mortgage lenders let you pick your own mortgage term
  • Instead of simply offering a standard 30- or 15-year fixed
  • This can be beneficial if you have a specific goal in mind
  • Or want to save even more money on your mortgage

For the record, I did come across a similar product offered by Quicken Loans known as the “YOURgage.”

It’s an unfortunate name to say the least, but apparently the same idea as the MyFi, though you can only choose a term between eight and 30 years.

Simply put, if you don’t want a standard 30- or 15-year loan term, you can ask them to refinance your mortgage into an 18-year fixed or a 24-year fixed loan. Or anything else in between.

Presumably this will save you money because the interest rate should be slightly lower if you take a shorter term.

For example, a 15-year fixed will always price lower than a 30-year fixed. In fact, 15-year fixed mortgage rates are about 0.75% cheaper than 30-year rates at the moment.

(30-year fixed vs. 15-year fixed)

So if you choose a 13-year fixed, you may be able to save a little bit more money than if you went with a 15-year fixed.

Even if the interest rate isn’t discounted, you’ll also save money with a shorter loan term as less interest will be paid over a shorter amount of time.

However, the monthly mortgage payment will be higher if the loan term has a shorter duration, so there are some drawbacks as well.

Shorter Term Mortgages Can Save You Big Money

  • The shorter the loan repayment period
  • The less interest you’ll pay over the life of the loan (all else being equal)
  • So if you can manage to pay your home loan off in a shorter amount of time
  • You have the potential to save a lot of money

That got confusing, so let’s sum it up real quick.

Shorter mortgage term = lower mortgage rate.
Shorter mortgage term = faster amortization.
Shorter mortgage term = less interest paid.

As you can see, there are two benefits to going with a shorter-term mortgage. You can often snag a lower interest rate, and you pay less because the loan amortizes faster.

So it’s a double reward. But is it really necessary to pick a loan term in between the standard stuff that’s offered?

Why Choose Your Own Mortgage Term?

  • To match your unique budget
  • Or to meet a specific time goal like retirement
  • To avoid extending your mortgage term when refinancing
  • And to simply stay on course if you wish to pay off your mortgage in full

Well, Quicken’s argument for its YOURgage is that you can choose a term based on your budget, or a term that matches up perfectly with specific life events.

For example, if you plan to retire at a certain age, you can set the mortgage term to finish right as you’re retiring.

Or you can pick a certain term that comes with a mortgage payment that works seamlessly with your budget.

And if you’re refinancing but don’t want to “reset your mortgage,” you can choose a term that keeps the combined term at the standard 30 years.

So if you’ve had your existing mortgage for seven years, you can refinance into a 23-year fixed.

The big question remains whether the savings justify the unconventional loan term. How much will going with a 13-year fixed vs. a 15-year fixed really save you?

And are these lenders your best option? If mortgage rates are cheaper with another lender, you don’t need to pick a funky term to save money.

Additionally, you can set your own payment schedule manually and make larger payments to pay off your loan in a certain period of time if need be.

Simply pay X amount more each month toward principal to pay off your mortgage by Y date. It’s pretty straightforward.

In other words, you may be better off shopping around and gathering more mortgage quotes to obtain the lowest rate rather than worrying about term.

Read more: How to pay off your mortgage early.

Source: thetruthaboutmortgage.com

Apache is functioning normally

Approximately 60% of commissioned mortgage professionals claim to be living paycheck to paycheck because of delays in payment in the midst of lower origination volume, a survey from payroll technology company Everee found.

A 84.4% share of respondents, who held a variety of roles besides loan officers, felt getting paid faster would enable them to manage their personal finances more effectively.

“When you look at wage growth compared to inflation, real earnings have been down for the past 26 straight months, and that has its impact on employees,” said Ron Ross, president of Everee, in an interview.

Ross added the findings that 60% are living paycheck to paycheck was a surprise, but noted that mortgage industry workers are not immune to the pressure others are feeling, where nearly three out of four are dealing with a personal financial crunch between pay periods.

Bill Corbet, partner and managing director lending strategy at BlackFin Group, agreed with this sentiment.

“This is certainly exasperated by the lag between their sale and closing, which triggers the standard (delayed) pay cycles,” Corbet said in a statement. “Faster pay cycles clearly help the loan officer but the customer may also benefit in that the LO is not pushing to close just to meet a cut-off date for getting paid.”

Because home sales transactions are taking longer, mortgage workers on commission are getting paid at a less frequent pace.

“So once that deal closes, they want their commission within a day versus having to wait another two weeks, sometimes even upwards of 45-plus days,” added Dana Gagnon, Everee’s chief marketing officer. “It’s not really acceptable anymore.”

And while the Federal Open Market Committee did not hike rates at its June meeting, it left the door open for future upward movement, creating more uncertainty for the housing market, Ross said.

“So if you’re a mortgage professional, you’re having to start to think, is this going to get worse, should I be thinking about staying in the profession and if I’m going to stay in the profession, what would it take me to stick around?” Ross said. “We’re seeing them appreciate more predictability and quicker payments when they’re owed that money.”

While more than half responded that they were not planning on leaving the mortgage industry in the next 12 months, 32% answered the question in the affirmative and 15% said they didn’t know.

For those considering dropping out of the business, 56% stated the uncertainty of the market affects their decision on whether to stay or go.

The fundamental problem is that the mortgage industry still has too many loan officers chasing fewer opportunities, said Jim Cameron, senior partner at Stratmor Group, in an interview.

“Our data over the years has shown that the bottom quintile of loan officers have a turnover of roughly 100%,” Cameron said. “So basically, the bottom dwellers rotate out every year.”

But with volume dropping by half year-over-year, more of that group is likely to consider a change, and that is shown in the response to the stay or go question, he said.

The declining number of transactions has resulted in a 48% decline in commissions, Stratmor’s data found.

Over eight in 10 of respondents to the Everee survey, 82%, claimed they would remain at their current lender long-term if they were paid commissions within 24 hours. However, more than 60% stated they had to wait at least two weeks to get paid, with 22.3% claiming it took a month and 11.5% reported it was even longer.

However, loan officer compensation in particular has long been a hot button topic in the mortgage industry, with a panel at last October’s Mortgage Bankers Association annual convention warning against having overly creative arrangements for pay.

On the other hand, with all the turmoil, especially with mass layoffs and company closures, employees have been suing to recoup allegedly unpaid wages.

In choosing a place to work, the commission rate was No. 1 among the factors respondents were asked to rate, which was no surprise given their desire for predictability and the size of their earnings, said Gagnon.

The next two were having flexible working hours and offering flexible work locations.

“Like with the rest of the American workforce, there’s that push to return to office and mortgage professionals are in that same boat,” Gagnon said. However, “they still want the flexibility that they were afforded during the pandemic.”

Fourth was company leadership, followed by speed of commission payments, the consistency of business and company culture.

In the bottom two positions on the list were health and retirement benefits.

Everee surveyed 314 mortgage workers compensated on a commission basis during May. Managers made up 35% of the sample, with 27% being LOs, 18% loan processors, 8% underwriters and 12% holding some other role. Just over half of the respondents have been in the mortgage business for five years or longer.

Source: nationalmortgagenews.com

Apache is functioning normally

With mortgage rates currently at 7.04%, many first-time homebuyers – typically millennials –  will be forced to continue to rent. 

But the U.S. housing market is not a monolith, so today we’re going to look at some markets where affordability is within the normal renter’s reach. 

In a study published this week, First American economist Ksenia Potapov analyzed the share of homes that are affordable to the median renter in any given market. She defined an affordable market as one in which the median renter can afford 50% or more of the homes for sale based on the renter’s household income, the prevailing 30-year mortgage rate, and the assumption that one-third of pre-tax income is used for a mortgage with a 5% down payment.

Here’s what she found:

There are only four markets in the U.S. in which the median renter in that market could afford half or more of the homes – Buffalo (59%), Pittsburgh (56%), Detroit (54%) and Cleveland (54%). 

Meanwhile, the least affordable markets were Los Angeles (1%), San Diego (2%), San Francisco (2%), Salt Lake City (4%), and San Jose, Calif. (4%). The California cities are stalwarts on lists such as these, but Salt Lake City — which attracted tech workers during the pandemic — is a new entrant.  

“Pre-pandemic, Salt Lake City was an affordable market that fell in the middle of the pack out of the top 50 U.S. markets,” Potapov wrote. “However, rapid house price appreciation during the pandemic dragged Salt Lake City near the bottom of the affordability list. In the fourth quarter of 2019, the median renter could afford 69% of the homes for sale in Salt Lake City. Now, the median renter can only afford 4% of homes.”

According to data from Altos Research, the median home price listed in Salt Lake City last week climbed to $785,000, up from about $540,000 in the fourth quarter of 2019. 

Jake from State Farm to California: Drop dead! 

California markets like the ones listed above already face a number of challenges, but news over the weekend could make it even more challenging for buyers. Last week we talked about the cost of flood insurance going up by over 200% for some homeowners in the Southeast as both the federal government and private insurers determine how to price the soaring cost of climate risk, or abandon insuring them altogether. 

Well, State Farm last week announced that it would halt home insurance sales in California. State Farm is the nation’s largest car and home insurer by premium volume. The insurance giant said it “made this decision due to historic increases in construction costs outpacing inflation, rapidly growing catastrophe exposure, and a challenging reinsurance market.” Existing home-insurance policyholders won’t be affected, though this is clearly not a positive development for the state. 

You might remember that a year ago, AIG notified 9,000 wealthy clients that it wouldn’t renew home insurance policies in California. The change was part of a plan by AIG to stop selling home policies in California through a unit regulated by the state’s insurance department. Policyholders were instead directed to another unit, where policies could cost three-to-five times higher than what clients paid under the old plan, with less-generous coverage to boot. 

California has experienced record wildfires in the past six years. The state experienced eight of the largest fires in U.S. history and three of the top five deadliest fires.

I am not sure if we should even get into the reconstruction costs in California, which are so high they are almost beyond belief. 

What does this all mean for Californians? For starters, I expect that other insurance companies are going to follow suit and availability is going to be a serious problem for homeowners and prove a problem for buyers and sellers alike. As is true in Florida, California has an insurer of last resort — FAIR Plan — for wildfires, but homeowners will still need significant wrap-around coverage. The premiums are quite high under FAIR, too and they cover the dwelling at actual cash value versus replacement cost value. 

Cali LOs and agents: Have you had any deals held up because of home insurance issues? Let me know at [email protected]

In our weekly DataDigest newsletter, HW Media Managing Editor James Kleimann breaks down the biggest stories in housing through a data lens. Sign up here! Have a subject in mind? Email him at [email protected]

Source: housingwire.com

Apache is functioning normally

You may have seen the videos on TikTok promising something that sounds too good to be true: Free cash from the state of California to help you buy your first home. The good news is, that program actually exists! The bad news is, it’s already out of money.

The California Housing Finance Agency launched the California Dream for All Shared Appreciation loan program two weeks ago, offering qualified first-time buyers up to 20% of the purchase price of a house or condominium. The help was available only to households whose earnings were below CalHFA’s income limit, which is $180,000 in Los Angeles County and $235,000 in Orange County.

State lawmakers had set aside $500 million for the program as part of the 2022-23 budget. But a looming fiscal shortfall led Gov. Gavin Newsom to propose a 40% cut, so when CalHFA launched the program late last month, it was allocated only $300 million and expected to assist about 2,300 home buyers.

Advertisement

On Friday, the CalHFA website announced that all the funds “have been reserved.” If you’re not already in the pipeline for a loan, you’re out of luck — at least for now.

More funds will be available to the program at some point, said Kathy Phillips, CalHFA’s director of communications. “However, we cannot predict whether that will be in the coming months with an additional allocation [from the state budget], or in the coming years as repayments of these original loans come back to be recycled to help additional households,” Phillips said.

She emphasized, “The program was designed to recycle [money for loans]; however, that will not begin until these loans are repaid.”

To be alerted when the program starts up again, sign up for CalHFA updates on the agency’s website.

How it works

The program was unusual in terms of both its structure and the type of loan issued.

The loan, which can be used for a down payment and closing costs, is structured as a second mortgage, which means it isn’t repaid month by month. Nor does it accrue interest the way an ordinary loan does. Instead, when the mortgage is refinanced or the house is sold again, the borrower pays back the original amount of the loan plus 20% of the increase in the home’s value.

If the home is ultimately sold for the same amount it was purchased for or less, the buyer won’t need to pay the additional 20%.

With this type of loan, the effective interest rate is equal to the average annual increase in the home’s value. That’s been about 5% in California over the long term, but the increase varies widely on a year-to-year basis, according to the CalHFA.

“For example, in 2008, real estate values plunged by 35%,” the agency stated. “Conversely, real estate values spiked nearly 40% between 2020 and 2021.”

There is a cap on the amount of the appreciation owed. No matter how much the home increases in value, the borrower will need to pay at most 2.5 times the original loan amount.

To receive a loan, borrowers must complete a home buyer education and counseling course (there are options for online and in-person classes on the CalHFA site) and a free online course specifically for shared appreciation loans.

The other unusual feature is that the program is designed to replenish itself. The loans are “revolving,” which means that when a borrower repays the loan, the money can be loaned again to a new borrower.

CalHFA doesn’t make the loans directly; instead, they are made through private lenders authorized by the state.

Jon Healey, senior editor for the Utility Journalism Team, contributed to this report.

About The Times Utility Journalism Team

This article is from The Times’ Utility Journalism Team. Our mission is to be essential to the lives of Southern Californians by publishing information that solves problems, answers questions and helps with decision making. We serve audiences in and around Los Angeles — including current Times subscribers and diverse communities that haven’t historically had their needs met by our coverage.

How can we be useful to you and your community? Email utility (at) latimes.com or one of our journalists: Matt Ballinger, Jon Healey, Ada Tseng, Jessica Roy and Karen Garcia.

Source: latimes.com