Foreclosure Starts Up Nearly 20% In California

Despite foreclosure inventories, foreclosure sales drop

Discovery Bay, CA, March 15, 2010 - ForeclosureRadar (www.foreclosureradar.com), the only website that tracks every California foreclosure and provides daily auction updates, issued its monthly California Foreclosure Report for for February 2010. After reaching the lowest level in a year last month, Notice of Defaults, the start of the foreclosure process, increased by 19.7 percent in February. The number of properties scheduled for foreclosure sale remained near record levels, yet foreclosure sales, either Back to Bank or Sold to 3rd Parties, dropped by 11.9 percent total.

"The disconnect between delinquencies, and foreclosure sales continues to widen," says Sean O'Toole, Founder and CEO of ForeclosureRadar.com. "While efforts to slow foreclosures are clearly working, it remains unclear that anything has yet addressed the core problem of excess household mortgage debt."

Foreclosure Filings

Notice of Default

Prior Month Prior Year
19.69% -37.74%

Notice of Trustee Sale

Prior Month Prior Year
3.58% 33.33%

After four consecutive months of decline, Notice of Default filings bounced up by 19.7 percent to 31,004 filings. Filings of Notices of Trustee Sale, which sets the date and time of the foreclosure auction, increased slightly as well, rising 3.6 percent to 28,195 filings.

1002 Foreclosure Filings
8-Sep 8-Oct 8-Nov 8-Dec 9-Jan 9-Feb 9-Mar 9-Apr 9-May 9-Jun 9-Jul 9-Aug 9-Sep 9-Oct 9-Nov 9-Dec 10-Jan 10-Feb
16746 17361 21857 43974 40580 49799 58623 47337 42203 47093 47530 37063 38175 36534 30478 27200 25904 31004
19674 26402 28468 28449 24890 21147 34559 31556 43355 30711 40757 34224 33112 38558 28170 28475 27220 28195

Foreclosure Outcomes

Back to Bank (REO)

Prior Month Prior Year
-14.34% -27.67%

Cancellations

Prior Month Prior Year
0.88% 98.974%

Sold to 3rd Party

Prior Month Prior Year
-2.72% 184.83%

Foreclosure sales are the last step in the foreclosure process and result in the property being transferred from the homeowner either back to the bank, or to a 3rd party, typically an investor. Foreclosure sales decreased 11.9 percent in February, with the portion going Back to Bank dropping by 14.3 percent and the portion to 3rd Parties dropping by 2.7 percent. Despite our prediction that we may see a wave of Cancellations as the Administration pushed to make trial loan modification permanent, Cancellations remained flat, likely indicating that the Home Affordable Modification Program conversion drive is failing.

1002 Foreclosure Outcomes
8-Sep 8-Oct 8-Nov 8-Dec 9-Jan 9-Feb 9-Mar 9-Apr 9-May 9-Jun 9-Jul 9-Aug 9-Sep 9-Oct 9-Nov 9-Dec 10-Jan 10-Feb
22112 13296 15267 15608 14533 16419 9201 12145 15864 19713 14632 14367 13155 16018 14165 12471 13943 11943
6368 11281 8302 6445 6717 6904 6352 6707 7162 8674 10818 10004 8660 8757 10487 13287 13859 13737
1076 825 952 833 893 1266 1094 1653 2305 2694 2691 3285 3411 3960 3683 2629 3707 3606

Foreclosure Inventories

Preforeclosure

Prior Month Prior Year
-8.01% -11.99%

Scheduled for Sale

Prior Month Prior Year
-0.49% 126.34%

Bank Owned (REO)

Prior Month Prior Year
1.15% -32.43%

Despite the increase in Notice of Default filings in February, our estimated number of properties in Preforeclosure dropped 8.0 percent due to the relatively high number of Notice of Trustee Sale filings. Properties exiting the foreclosure process nearly matched the number of new Notice of Trustee Sale filings, leaving the number of properties Scheduled for Sale in February flat compared to January. Year-over-year, the increase in properties Scheduled for Sale is a dramatic 126.3 percent, as more and more homeowners have found themselves on the brink of foreclosure. Banks continue to resell their Bank Owned (REO) property in a timely manner, with their inventories also flat from January to February.

1002 Foreclosure Inventories
8-Sep 8-Oct 8-Nov 8-Dec 9-Jan 9-Feb 9-Mar 9-Apr 9-May 9-Jun 9-Jul 9-Aug 9-Sep 9-Oct 9-Nov 9-Dec 10-Jan 10-Feb
122266 114067 96534 112078 130550 159215 179412 185603 174243 186060 175283 171841 169860 154905 157288 146941 152322 140126
59226 59695 64237 67841 69374 64177 82390 92002 111824 113141 124874 131300 140382 149456 151573 147570 145977 145260
156804 148814 147090 141176 137331 135488 122901 112792 107762 106139 100206 98829 95479 93926 93595 89119 90510 91550

Foreclosure Discounting

1002 Foreclosure Discounting

The courthouse steps remain highly competitive with discounts to market value dropping from 17.5 percent in January to 15.2 percent in February. Despite fewer foreclosure sales overall in February, as well as smaller discounts due to competitive bidding, 3rd party investors purchased more foreclosures, at 23.2 percent, than at any other time since we began tracking trustee sales in September 2006.


Foreclosure Timeframes

Time to Foreclosure

Prior Month Prior Year
-2.24% 13.17%

Time to Resell - Bank

Prior Month Prior Year
0.00% 0.45%

Time to Resell - 3rd

Prior Month Prior Year
0.67% -19.45%

While the Time to Foreclose appears to have leveled off, the Time to Resell has increased in recent months. It is not unusual for home sales to slow in the winter months, which would naturally impact Time to Resell. This will be an important metric to track as we move into the Spring selling season as further increases could indicate housing market weakness.

1002 Foreclosure Timeframes
8-Sep 8-Oct 8-Nov 8-Dec 9-Jan 9-Feb 9-Mar 9-Apr 9-May 9-Jun 9-Jul 9-Aug 9-Sep 9-Oct 9-Nov 9-Dec 10-Jan 10-Feb
150 169 163 165 192 198 176 171 180 173 187 185 191 195 198 222 229 224
190 192 195 206 218 223 231 234 240 244 238 228 220 219 220 224 224 224
192 171 178 187 193 186 214 196 183 168 146 147 141 131 133 141 149 150

Foreclosure Activity By County

  Notice of Default Notice of Trustee Sale Back to Bank (REO) Sold to
3rd Party
1002 Foreclosure Activity By County

Comments

I've been peering through the numbers you list for foreclosure activity by county, and there seems to be some inconsistencies. For example, in the March 2010 report, February 2009 NODs in San Mateo County are listed at 406. In contrast, the March 2009 report indicates that Feb 2009 NODs in San Mateo County were 222. Similarly, the numbers for Trustee sales for the same date are inconsistent between reports. Did you change the definitions of each category in between these pollings? Have you changed sources? The inconsistencies make me wonder how useful the existing numbers are, or whether they will simply be mysteriously revised away later....

http://www.foreclosureradar.com/foreclosure-report/average-negative-equi...

Thanks in advance for the clarification!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options