News   Jul 04, 2024
 346     1 
News   Jul 04, 2024
 397     0 
News   Jul 03, 2024
 953     0 

Falling home prices put some buyers 'under water'

cdr108

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
4,724
Reaction score
59
http://www.yourhome.ca/homes/article/535090

Falling home prices put some buyers 'under water'November 15, 2008
Trish Crawford

The day Adele moved into her $192,000 townhouse in Brampton in May, she was "under water."

That's because she had a 100 per cent mortgage – not a penny for a down payment – and a 40-year amortization that had to be insured. In the end, she owed $199,000 for the three-bedroom house.

Under water.

Negative equity.

These terms strike fear in the hearts of homeowners who have been merrily calculating their net worth based on rising housing prices in Toronto and the GTA.

Housing prices have plunged in Vancouver, Calgary and Saskatoon in the wake of huge increases of 30 and 40 per cent. As the bubble bursts, tales abound of houses not being worth their mortgages.

Most Toronto residents facing this possibility are those who bought during the past two years of peak prices and with very little money down, or what's called "very little skin in the game."

Adele isn't worried, though.

With monthly payments of $582, she sees herself as ahead of the game as the family of four had been paying $800 a month for a basement apartment. The possibility of a housing slump – the Toronto Real Estate Board reported a 10 per cent drop in average house prices for October – doesn't alarm her.

What's important to her is that the kids have their own rooms, a yard to play in and a family-oriented neighbourhood.

"I have no problem at all. Ten, 20 years down the road, when the kids grow up, we'll be fine," says the 41-year-old homemaker married to a construction worker. "For me, it doesn't matter if it goes down, I have my home. It's not upsetting because I'm prepared to stay."

Toronto doesn't need a real estate bust for some homeowners to be in negative equity territory. Many who bought houses under an 18-month no-money-down mortgage experiment in Canada owed more than their houses were worth the day they closed the deal.

That program was killed by the federal government on Oct. 15 but other high-ratio mortgages, with as little as 5 per cent down, mean there are a lot of people who are only a squeak away from being under water.

A.H. bought his first house in June after plunking down a 5 per cent deposit on a $179,000 condo in Scarborough and owes the bank $175,000 because of added charges. The 32-year-old, who works in the service sector, is aware he may have little equity in his 675-square-foot, one-bedroom unit but says, "Hopefully, down the road, it will be a good investment."

He's planning to take a part-time job so he can lower his mortgage total when it comes up for renewal in five years.

"My ultimate goal is to be here five years or so," he says. "I tell people I'm 95 per cent happy. It's a foot in the door."

His $740 monthly payments are cheaper than any rent he would pay for a similar space. And, he's happy that he got an affordable place in a nice neighbourhood. "I didn't want to live in the ghetto," he says.

Those who bought at the top of the market with little money down and no equity should just sit still, says Ann Pope of Assured Mortgage.

"You cannot be selling at this point," she says.

Mortgage broker John Cocomile says the current situation is fraught for those who bought with no money down. The concept "is fine and dandy until the market goes soft."

You're in no position to weather downturns in the economy because you can't sell your house for cash, he points out.

"What if you lose your job?"

Therefore, negative equity isn't a today problem so much as one that looms down the road should the economy or the housing industry falter.

In Ontario, unlike the United States, owners are on the hook for any loss on the mortgage, points out Cocomile of GreedyMortgage.com.

While it's unknown how many new homeowners are in negative equity territory, the numbers are significant.

By the time the federal government pulled the plug on 100 per cent mortgages, they were accounting for 20 per cent of the loan applications to lender MCAP, says Ron Swift, president of MCAP Service Corporation. The good news is that the majority of those would have still qualified under the new, improved 5 per cent down and 35-year term rules, he says.

"We needed to have some sense that people had some skin in the game," he says.

But the bad news is that 5 per cent isn't really that much better. All it takes is a 5 per cent downturn in the market to wipe you out, Swift points out. "We get no real equity when all is said and done. Hopefully, people will take the longer view."

First-time buyer Amanda Wakely, 32, says her new 2,200-square-foot house in Whitby has three bedrooms and a yard big enough for a family one day.

"We like to put down our roots. We didn't want to outgrow it in three or four years."

She and her husband, Chris, 31, put 5 per cent down on the $315,000 house in March. They were approved to borrow more money, she says, but they opted to stay in an affordable range.

In spite of the rumblings in the real estate market, Wakely is calm about her purchase.

"We feel quite good about where we are. In the long term, real estate is safe."

Artists Tom Melissis and Lea Creswell are eagerly awaiting the Dec. 1 closing on the Upper Beach house they are buying for $335,000 with 5 per cent down.

Creswell has been following the market closely for the past year and she noticed a general cooling. They were in two unsuccessful bidding wars before they bought their house for less than asking price Theirs was the only offer.

"The market came to a standstill," says Creswell, 35, a choreographer who runs a dance school. If prices should fall, "it wouldn't upset me," says Creswell, because she thinks they got a good deal and they plan to stay for a long time.

She credits Melissis, 50, an actor, with holding her back from some pretty emotional decisions early in the game. Melissis recalls a cottage with gingerbread, but no basement, that looked like a "Hansel and Gretel" house.

Now he's pretty solid about the house they are getting, come what may with prices.

"If it started to plummet, I wouldn't feel as bad as those who got in a year ago," he says. "I'd just accept it. It's like buying hockey equipment and finding it on sale a year later.

"I'm going to stay here the rest of my life."

Dee Diaz, 35, put 25 per cent down on her condo townhouse in Bloor West Village in December and says she feels has peace of mind now, no matter what happens.

"I think I bought smart for what we may be facing in the market," she says of the 1,000-square-foot, two-level condo for $259,900. "At the end of the day, it's still the smartest investment. I think I'll be making money moving forward. I strongly believe that."

The single woman, who works in the non-profit sector, has continued to check out prices in her development and believes the value has remained.

For most people, buying a house is the single biggest financial decision they will ever make, says Royal LePage, Johnston and Daniel vice-president Dianne Usher. "It is the cornerstone of their financial portfolio."

Because of that, most buy cautiously and with the view it is a long-term commitment, she says.

Caution is the watchword for first-time buyers such as charity fundraiser Alison Portt, who has decided to buy next year, out of town and with more money down.

She and her husband, who works for an audio-visual company, have decided to make a 20 per cent down payment and stay within a $300,000 price range.

Although they could borrow much more and live in the city, Portt doesn't want to be so close to the edge financially.

"We are not prepared to overpay," says Portt.

"We want a house we can afford and that can grow with us."


By the numbers

What happens when the real estate market softens? For someone who put no money down on a $300,000 house with a 40-year amortization rate, the mortgage would be $311,100.

-$11,100

Amount of negative equity from Day 1.

-26,000

Amount of negative equity if house values drop 5 per cent.

-$41,100

Amount of negative equity if house values drop 10 per cent.

For someone who put 5 per cent down on a $300,000 house with a 35-year amortization rate, the mortgage would be $293,977, including CMHC premium.

-$8,977

Amount of negative equity if house values drop 5 per cent.

-$23,977

Amount of negative equity if house values drop 10 per cent.
 
This was in the comments section and the numbers don't add up !

Numbers Don't Add Up
Am I missing something here but how do you get monthly payments of $584 on a mortgage of $199,000. A quick check using a mortgage calculator tells you that a $199,000 mortgage on a 40 year amortization period with an interest rate of 5% calculates into monthly payments of about $952. To get your monthly payments down to the $584 level you would need to have an interest rate on your mortgage below 2%. I'd like to know where Adele was able to find a mortgage with such a low interest rate. It would seem more reasonable to me if the $584 dollars were semi-monthly payments instead of monthly payments.

Posted By Dan1980 at 11:47 AM Saturday, November 15 2008
 
I always get a good chuckle at people who bash 40 year mortgages... because normally they just don't understand them.

The papers love to sensationalize things... making stupid points like OMG if you took 40 years to pay your mortgage you would end up paying $10000000000 on a $300,000 house!!! OMG PANIC!!!

In reality, I don't think anyone in their right mind who took out a 40 year mortgage had any intention of taking 40 years to pay it off.

Take myself for example. I graduated and got a decent job. Of course I was just starting out, and my salary was not particularly high. However I DID know that it would rise considerably as I got more experience. I also knew that housing prices were going up.

I could have been a sucker and bought a tiny place and taken a 25 year amortization. But I wasn't a sucker.

Instead, I took at 40 year mortgage, and found the place I wanted (and can see myself living in for a long time). Since I took the 40 year amortization, I was actually approved for the mortgage on this larger and more expensive place.

Now here I am a few years later, and as I predicted, the price on my unit has risen considerably. I would say I have around 30% equity already built up between appreciation and payments. On top of that, my salary has also gone up as I expected, and I'm able to make additional payments on my mortgage, putting me in line to pay it off in around 15-20 years.

Now imagine if I had listened to all the fools (and articles like this one) who pointlessly bashed 40 year mortgages? I would have been stuck with a crappy place I didn't want. Actually there wasn't a single person who thought it was a good idea. Everyone simply dismissed the idea immediately, telling me how much extra interest I would be paying. Fools...

In fact, even if I COULD afford a 25 year amortization on my place, WHY would I take it? I can just take the 40 year amortization and make additional pre-payments against the principal to make it equal to a 25 year amortization. That way I have the flexibility of lowering my payments if times become rough.

Moral of the story is... most people simply do not understand the purpose of 40 year mortgages.
 
I always get a good chuckle at people who bash 40 year mortgages... because normally they just don't understand them.

The papers love to sensationalize things... making stupid points like OMG if you took 40 years to pay your mortgage you would end up paying $10000000000 on a $300,000 house!!! OMG PANIC!!!

In reality, I don't think anyone in their right mind who took out a 40 year mortgage had any intention of taking 40 years to pay it off.

Take myself for example. I graduated and got a decent job. Of course I was just starting out, and my salary was not particularly high. However I DID know that it would rise considerably as I got more experience. I also knew that housing prices were going up.

I could have been a sucker and bought a tiny place and taken a 25 year amortization. But I wasn't a sucker.

Instead, I took at 40 year mortgage, and found the place I wanted (and can see myself living in for a long time). Since I took the 40 year amortization, I was actually approved for the mortgage on this larger and more expensive place.

Now here I am a few years later, and as I predicted, the price on my unit has risen considerably. I would say I have around 30% equity already built up between appreciation and payments. On top of that, my salary has also gone up as I expected, and I'm able to make additional payments on my mortgage, putting me in line to pay it off in around 15-20 years.

Now imagine if I had listened to all the fools (and articles like this one) who pointlessly bashed 40 year mortgages? I would have been stuck with a crappy place I didn't want. Actually there wasn't a single person who thought it was a good idea. Everyone simply dismissed the idea immediately, telling me how much extra interest I would be paying. Fools...

In fact, even if I COULD afford a 25 year amortization on my place, WHY would I take it? I can just take the 40 year amortization and make additional pre-payments against the principal to make it equal to a 25 year amortization. That way I have the flexibility of lowering my payments if times become rough.

Moral of the story is... most people simply do not understand the purpose of 40 year mortgages.


gei, you may be the exception to the rule than the norm.
You are being fiscally responsible and planning to top off payments, etc. but plenty are not.

Those who did 0% down + 40 year mortgages WILL be the ones in trouble because they will not have any equity, and the bank/mortgage broker will not refinance them more $$$ than the property is worth in the coming 5 years.

When looking any % equity 'built up' you should be using the difference between the original mortgage value and the outstanding mortgage value because the monthly payments didn't affect the principal much, and any appreciation in the past 2 years can be gone as quickly as they came.

A 30% increase is negated by a 23% decrease.
 
Last edited:
yep, working in underwriting for the past 2 years, Gei would not be a normal 40 year AM mortagagor. I've rejected many applications that didn't fall in line with the ratios to having to approve them once they change it to 40 year amortizations. i would say at least 90% of these 40 year AM mortgagors choose 40 years out of necessity rather than as an option.
 
I always get a good chuckle at people who bash 40 year mortgages... because normally they just don't understand them.

The papers love to sensationalize things... making stupid points like OMG if you took 40 years to pay your mortgage you would end up paying $10000000000 on a $300,000 house!!! OMG PANIC!!!

In reality, I don't think anyone in their right mind who took out a 40 year mortgage had any intention of taking 40 years to pay it off.

Take myself for example. I graduated and got a decent job. Of course I was just starting out, and my salary was not particularly high. However I DID know that it would rise considerably as I got more experience. I also knew that housing prices were going up.

I could have been a sucker and bought a tiny place and taken a 25 year amortization. But I wasn't a sucker.

Instead, I took at 40 year mortgage, and found the place I wanted (and can see myself living in for a long time). Since I took the 40 year amortization, I was actually approved for the mortgage on this larger and more expensive place.

Now here I am a few years later, and as I predicted, the price on my unit has risen considerably. I would say I have around 30% equity already built up between appreciation and payments. On top of that, my salary has also gone up as I expected, and I'm able to make additional payments on my mortgage, putting me in line to pay it off in around 15-20 years.

Now imagine if I had listened to all the fools (and articles like this one) who pointlessly bashed 40 year mortgages? I would have been stuck with a crappy place I didn't want. Actually there wasn't a single person who thought it was a good idea. Everyone simply dismissed the idea immediately, telling me how much extra interest I would be paying. Fools...

In fact, even if I COULD afford a 25 year amortization on my place, WHY would I take it? I can just take the 40 year amortization and make additional pre-payments against the principal to make it equal to a 25 year amortization. That way I have the flexibility of lowering my payments if times become rough.

Moral of the story is... most people simply do not understand the purpose of 40 year mortgages.

The purpose of 40 y mortgages was to attract the marginal on the edge buyers so as they get a shot of the "dream" of home ownership. And if they are marginal, unlikely that they'll be accelerating payments any time soon.

As I recall gei, you were bragging about the profits you made on your property but by the sounds of it, you haven't made a cent since you still hold the asset (ie. you don't book profits until the money is in your account). If you are indeed a long term buyer and willing to ride out the cycle, don't mind paying off negative equity and have a rock solid recession proof job with 0 chance of downsizing.....why do you even care enough to check these doom and gloom postings ??
 
I always get a good chuckle at people who bash 40 year mortgages... because normally they just don't understand them.

The papers love to sensationalize things... making stupid points like OMG if you took 40 years to pay your mortgage you would end up paying $10000000000 on a $300,000 house!!! OMG PANIC!!!

In reality, I don't think anyone in their right mind who took out a 40 year mortgage had any intention of taking 40 years to pay it off.

Take myself for example. I graduated and got a decent job. Of course I was just starting out, and my salary was not particularly high. However I DID know that it would rise considerably as I got more experience. I also knew that housing prices were going up.

I could have been a sucker and bought a tiny place and taken a 25 year amortization. But I wasn't a sucker.

Instead, I took at 40 year mortgage, and found the place I wanted (and can see myself living in for a long time). Since I took the 40 year amortization, I was actually approved for the mortgage on this larger and more expensive place.

Now here I am a few years later, and as I predicted, the price on my unit has risen considerably. I would say I have around 30% equity already built up between appreciation and payments. On top of that, my salary has also gone up as I expected, and I'm able to make additional payments on my mortgage, putting me in line to pay it off in around 15-20 years.

Now imagine if I had listened to all the fools (and articles like this one) who pointlessly bashed 40 year mortgages? I would have been stuck with a crappy place I didn't want. Actually there wasn't a single person who thought it was a good idea. Everyone simply dismissed the idea immediately, telling me how much extra interest I would be paying. Fools...

In fact, even if I COULD afford a 25 year amortization on my place, WHY would I take it? I can just take the 40 year amortization and make additional pre-payments against the principal to make it equal to a 25 year amortization. That way I have the flexibility of lowering my payments if times become rough.

Moral of the story is... most people simply do not understand the purpose of 40 year mortgages.

There is an old saying my mother used to say.
"If you want to make God smile, tell him your plans for the future."

Reading this post does make one a little uncomfortable. Its like the ant riding a leaf down a raging flood swollen river claiming "I'm the captain of my ship!"

However, having said that, I somewhat agree with what Gei did.
When you are young, getting into real estate is like a passenger getting into my car. There are 4 rules. Get in, hold on, shut up and pray. Gei gets 2 out of 4 right.
There is little point in bragging to the world about how much money you made. As long as that mortgage REMAINS a long term mortgage the only real financial appreciaton is in hoping the market stays higher than what you paid. The deal with the Devil here is that only a very very miniscule percentage of the payment you make every single relentless month is going to the principle of the money you owe. In Gei's whole lifetime, the only real profit he will ever make on his home is when he sells it and severely downsizes (and keeps the difference AFTER realtor's fees and legal) or moves back in with good old Mom and Dad. Even then this logic only works if you ignore what he put out over the years paying the monthy interest. Everyone has to pay to live somewhere, whether it be an interest payment or rent payment.

Leave you all with this to contemplate..
How many cocky bragging Americans do you suppose there are today who bought into the real estate market a few years ago in the same manner as Gei did?
Whatever happened to those ants?
 
This summer when we camped with friends there was one guy with a family who said he bought a house in Newmarket for 320K. He wowed a lot of folks as they knew that he was a forklift driver and his wife worked in a store getting 9 bucks an hour. Well, he said, he got 20K credit line ( he didn't say at what % rate) but he said it was just to give 5% downpayment. I told him right away that decision was foolish. He acknoledged it was risky but he took a gamble. To make this story short I found out that his wife is without a job now and he actually is on the lookout as coffee distribution company where he works is not making any profit for a while now and he might be thrown to get some oxygen any time as well. He already said that he would leave a house at least mentally he is ready to do so. So here is another side of the coin as a nice adition to this article.
 
I just tried playing around with amortization calculator. I think people must be nuts to amortize for 25 years. Do they actually think it'll pay off? I did a test assuming 500k borrowed. Amortized at 25 years with 6.5% interest and the total amount of interest was 504k :eek: The person would end up paying over double the amount of the original price at the end.
 
Can some one do a quick calculation for me.I have a $200,000 30 year old mortgage.If I put a extra %15 lump sum payment per year every year and do a weekly payment plan with current interest rates %5, how long would I take to pay off the mortgage?.I figure 8 years max.Is that about right?.
 
It would have to be less than that, since 15% * 8 = 120%, and that's not counting the monthly payments. I think you'd be done after about 5 years.
 
It would have to be less than that, since 15% * 8 = 120%, and that's not counting the monthly payments. I think you'd be done after about 5 years.

thanks Bob...glad I figure too high...For sure I can put a extra $15000 per year.Weekly payments...I probably try to increase the weekly payment amount by %10 also.Any other suggestions you can think off by paying down the mortgage faster?...Im going to use the equity of the property to invest also,I know this melt down wont last for ever and from people I know in the industry they expect a strong bounce in the market by mid 2009.A lot of areas been over sold but thankfully the GTA markets are stable especially in the condo sector.
 
thanks Bob...glad I figure too high...For sure I can put a extra $15000 per year.Weekly payments...I probably try to increase the weekly payment amount by %10 also.Any other suggestions you can think off by paying down the mortgage faster?...Im going to use the equity of the property to invest also,I know this melt down wont last for ever and from people I know in the industry they expect a strong bounce in the market by mid 2009.A lot of areas been over sold but thankfully the GTA markets are stable especially in the condo sector.

are these industry people re agents?

recovery by mid 2009...condo market stable. we are no where close to the us markets but things are going to get worse before they get better this one's going to be a long one. credit is not going to loosen by mid 2009. good idea to pay down debt though.
 
are these industry people re agents?

recovery by mid 2009...condo market stable. we are no where close to the us markets but things are going to get worse before they get better this one's going to be a long one. credit is not going to loosen by mid 2009. good idea to pay down debt though.


yes agents...they specialize in condos only though which has not been greatly affected yet by the downturn.My condo project the condos are %98 sold and the prices hasnt come down one cent infact has increased %5 since mid summer.The dog suites though that are left the sales office is offering better financing options and small deposit plus they are offering upgrades like stainless appliances or granite tops.No price decrease though.
 
Shortening mortgage Period

apart from the previously made pointers about 15% prepayment per year and the biweekly payment option;
there is also a simple acceleration of amortization each anniversary date.
ie> when you take 40 at year 39 shorten it to 38,
The payment is adjusted slightly but in a span of 5 years you will have taken off 10 years of amortization.

This comes from conversations with my previous mortgage lenders that told me that amortization is a calculation for them that has nothing to do wil altering mortgage terms.

The other point I wanted to make was about affordability.
When my father bought in High Park in 1953 the price was 16,000 and he looked at the house from the outside. The Owners never let them in.

His wage at that time was at 2000 per year.

Makes one think about who was better off if we compare values at 8 times annual wage a purchase price.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top