|
by: Brian.Brady on 2008-01-27 @ 12.15:08 am
Vernon and Marty Ummel bought a home in Carlsbad, for $1.2 million, in 2004. They put $900,000 down and borrowed $300,000. The Ummels moved from the Bay Area to San Diego County to be near their grown children. They hold the property in a family trust. Those facts, gleaned from public records, suggest that the Ummels are far more sophisticated than a garden-variety first-time home buyer. As we used to say in Arizona, “This ain’t their first rodeo“
Mike Little, a licensed real estate broker affiliated with RE/MAX Associates and a mortgage originator with Horizon Pacific Financial, represented the Ummels as their buyer’s agent as well as originated the loan transaction. He is being sued by the Ummels for fraud. The Ummels claim that Mr. Little deliberately withheld material information about comparable sales and did not furnish them with a copy of the appraisal report.
Marty Ummel is on a public relations tour. She touted her case on the Today Show, this morning. Ms. Ummel believes that Mr. Little should have disclosed that a competing property, closed on the exact same day as hers, sold for $100,000 less. Of course, there was no way for Mr. Little to know that; pending sales, in escrow, do not disclose terms. Those terms are disclosed AFTER the transaction has been recorded at the San Diego County Courthouse.
This case stinks, stinks to high heaven. Greg Swann does the usual excellent job explaining why our industries (real estate and mortgage origination) need to avoid the mere appearance of impropriety.
Greg states the exact reason why I refuse to engage is real estate brokerage. I never want a client to wonder if the advice I give them is in their best interest or in the best interest of the transaction. While they “dual function” agent/originator suggest the he/she “can save you a bunch of money", this case explains how their diluted expertise can cost you many more dollars than the few pennies you might save up front.
This case stinks to high heaven. The Ummels are millionaires, who use trusts as financial planning tools, and have a history of owning California real estate in high-priced areas. They know (a) California real estate is cyclical, and (b) due diligence is required prior to any investment. This is opportunism at it’s worst. Their case is frivolous.
This case stinks to high heaven…and it’s our fault. As long as we allow California real estate brokers to engage in the business that is rightfully reserved for licensed finance lenders, we’ll always be answering the question, “Was there a conflict of interest?”
PS- Read my satirical article about this case, along with the usual expert commentary, on Bloodhound Blog
Meta DataSocial Bookmarks
|
|
by: Brian.Brady on 2007-09-19 @ 9.13:31 pm
- Yogi Berra
When you're on the wrong side of 40, you possess the luxury of having seen things before. In many cases, it may be the third or fourth time you see them. The recent flurry of "responsible lending posts", here on Active Rain, is no different than the criticism levied at the banking industry in the early 90's.
The virtues of an amortized loan can be extolled like some sage nostalgic advice. The truth is that amortized loans are fantastic...if you are a perpetually poor person. Let me explain what I mean. When I say "poor", I mean undisciplined. This means that you generally can not be trusted with determining your own destiny. It means that you won't establish a side investment account to invest the difference between a fully amortizing and alternate amortization schedule. If this is an apt description of your savings and investment habits, go with a 30 year fixed rate, fully amortizing loan. Better yet, go with a 15 year, fully amortizing loan. Work really hard to accelerate the amortization on your home with bi-weekly payment programs or money merge accounts.
Expect, however, to be perpetually poor in retirement.
Meta DataSocial Bookmarks
|
"It's deja-vu..all over again."