< Back to Front Page Text size +

Foreclosures mostly affect renters?

Posted by Binyamin Appelbaum May 8, 2008 11:23 AM

It is quite plausible that the majority of people who have lost homes to foreclosure in Massachusetts since January 2007 were renters rather than owners. That's my conclusion after reading a new research note from the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

The note finds that multi-family buildings comprise 34 percent of residential properties actually or nearly foreclosed in Massachusetts since January 2007, based on data from Warren Group. It then uses a conservative methodology to estimate that those multi-family buildings contain at least 58 percent of the total affected units.

"Actually foreclosed" means repossessed by the lender. "Nearly foreclosed" means scheduled for auction. I wish they'd focused solely on the first category. It ain't over til it's over. But there's plenty of other research supporting the basic point.

Now, some multi-family units are owner-occupied: Think of a triple-decker where the owners live on one floor and rent the other two. If you assume that every foreclosed two- or three-family building had at least one unit occupied by the owner, then rental units make up at least 38 percent of all units affected by foreclosure.

To get above half, you need to assume that 60 percent of the foreclosed multi-family buildings had no unit occupied by the owner. That is, the entire building was owned by an absentee landlord. I have absolutely no data on this point. There is none available to my knowledge. But the math doesn't seem at all implausible to me.

How about you?


Enjoyed this post? Get blog updates delivered to your reader. Click here.

3 comments so far...
  1. makes sense that multi families would be the leading edge of the foreclosure wave - they are often more speculative, and investor driven. Thus owners are more likely to walk away when they become money losers, unlike where the actually live.

    And owner occupants of multifaimily housing tend to have less assets than single family homeowners - often they depend on income from renters to pay their mortgage.

    It will move to foreclosures in wealthier areas of course, as todays article showing foreclosures are dramatically up in wealthy areas shows.

    I'd love to see a blog post on that, as I think the conversation could be interesting.

    By the way, kudos to Binyamin for the way this blog is currently going. It IS interesting - generally its the only thing in the Globe I read. Much improved under his hands

    Posted by charles May 8, 08 02:40 PM
  1. For the owner occupied units, I am surprised because I would expect that having income from paying tenants (more = better) would cushion the impact of rising ARM interest rates (which with the recent fed moves should be more affordable as they now readjust). .............Unless the 2nd or 3rd unit is a nonpaying family member or the multifamily is in an undesireable rental area or some of the multifamily units are in need of repair and are not habitable or the owner was never financially qualified or able to assume the cost of ownership....

    Posted by GB May 8, 08 03:32 PM
  1. This is more of a technical point than anything else but you say:

    "Actually foreclosed" means repossessed by the lender. "Nearly foreclosed" means scheduled for auction.

    and this is not exactly correct. Although it is very common for a lender to "buy back" a property at the foreclosure auction, it is not the rule. While large lenders and clearing house type law firms tend to take back most properties at auction, local and regional lenders, and better attorneys, look at individual assets and very often sell them to third parties at the foreclosure auction.

    So "Actually foreclosed" means that the foreclosure process is complete and a sale has taken place which may mean a sale back to the lender (reposession) or may mean a sale to a third party.

    As someone who specializes in this (I'm a broker and an auctioneer) I can tell you that from what I've seen multifamily prices were artificially inflated by condo conversions (or condo conversion dreams) sales prices were not driven by fundamentals (like how much rent a property could get), many of these properties are investment properties (only) so they are easier to walk away from and this is on top of ARM resets etc. and so to GB I would say your logic makes sense but unfortunately prices were illogical for quite a while and for these reasons multifamilies are taking the brunt of default.

    Posted by Brecht Palombo May 27, 08 05:36 PM
add your comment
Required
Required (will not be published)

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

About boston real estate now
Globe staff writer Binyamin Appelbaum posts news, numbers, opinions, trends, and anything else you need to know about housing.
Rona Fischman is a buyer's agent who provides a look at the local housing scene, from basements to attics.
archives