ReportWire

Tag: homeowner

  • California man says bear refuses to leave home

    [ad_1]

    Though the state of California has certain squatters rights, it’s doubtful they apply to the many black bears roaming Los Angeles County — and according to a man in Altadena, one of them decided to move into his crawlspace and has refused to leave for several months.Now, he’s accusing the California Department of Fish and Wildlife of leaving him to deal with the enormous creature on his own, and plans to sue, KTLA-TV reported Sunday.According to 63-year-old Ken Johnson, the bear moved in just before Thanksgiving, and has wreaked havoc on his property ever since, the outlet said. “I can hear the plastic being shredded underneath, and one of the cameras picked it up just bulldozing through it. It’s a mess under there,” Johnson told the outlet. At first, CDFW set a bear trap near the crawl space, but allegedly abandoned further plans to help after accidentally capturing the wrong bear, KTLA said. Just when biologists started using air horns to force the bear out — and appeared to make some progress — they were ordered to cease operations, Johnson told the publication. “I felt very defeated. I just dropped. Now what? It’s all up to me, and I’m supposed to watch my phone when he comes out in the middle of the night? Or sleep in the kitchen and listen for him every night?” Ever since LA County was ravaged by the Eaton Fire in January, several bears have taken residence in evacuated homes, the Associated Press previously reported, including an enormous bear that had been lounging by a man’s pool and bringing food back into the crawl space at night. Though temperatures in Southern California are too warm for most bears to hibernate, they’re known to shack up below people’s homes for shelter. In January, a CDFW team spent nearly a full day removing a 525-pound bear from another home in Altadena, the department said in a previous social media post. After capturing it with a trap, officials tagged it and released it into the wild. “In the foothills of bear country, it’s important to close crawl spaces with bear-proof material in advance of winter months to discourage bears from denning and damaging property,” CDFW wrote on social media following the incident.“Despite very limited staff, CDFW biologists have been in constant communication with this homeowner since this bear was reported entering his unsecured crawlspace in November,” department representatives told SFGATE in a statement Monday.“We remain committed to helping this homeowner and have never indicated otherwise,” they continued, adding that they’ve set up traps and cameras and attempted to haze the bear from the property.“CDFW has and will continue to engage with the homeowner to advise on hazing methodologies and the critical need to close the crawlspace, monitor cameras, and offer support to help ensure the bear leaves the crawlspace and finds more suitable habitat,” they said.But, according to Johnson, it’s still unclear when his unwanted roommate will vacate. After one of the cameras on his property captured an image of a broken pipe, he turned off his gas, he told the outlet. As a result, he hasn’t taken a hot shower since around Christmas Eve. “I’m just exhausted from the whole thing,” he said.“I get my mind off it for a little bit, and then suddenly I get flooded back with, oh that’s right, I can’t take a hot shower. I’ve got to monitor the situation all the time,” Johnson said.

    Though the state of California has certain squatters rights, it’s doubtful they apply to the many black bears roaming Los Angeles County — and according to a man in Altadena, one of them decided to move into his crawlspace and has refused to leave for several months.

    Now, he’s accusing the California Department of Fish and Wildlife of leaving him to deal with the enormous creature on his own, and plans to sue, KTLA-TV reported Sunday.

    According to 63-year-old Ken Johnson, the bear moved in just before Thanksgiving, and has wreaked havoc on his property ever since, the outlet said. “I can hear the plastic being shredded underneath, and one of the cameras picked it up just bulldozing through it. It’s a mess under there,” Johnson told the outlet.

    At first, CDFW set a bear trap near the crawl space, but allegedly abandoned further plans to help after accidentally capturing the wrong bear, KTLA said. Just when biologists started using air horns to force the bear out — and appeared to make some progress — they were ordered to cease operations, Johnson told the publication.

    “I felt very defeated. I just dropped. Now what? It’s all up to me, and I’m supposed to watch my phone when he comes out in the middle of the night? Or sleep in the kitchen and listen for him every night?”

    Ever since LA County was ravaged by the Eaton Fire in January, several bears have taken residence in evacuated homes, the Associated Press previously reported, including an enormous bear that had been lounging by a man’s pool and bringing food back into the crawl space at night. Though temperatures in Southern California are too warm for most bears to hibernate, they’re known to shack up below people’s homes for shelter. In January, a CDFW team spent nearly a full day removing a 525-pound bear from another home in Altadena, the department said in a previous social media post. After capturing it with a trap, officials tagged it and released it into the wild.

    “In the foothills of bear country, it’s important to close crawl spaces with bear-proof material in advance of winter months to discourage bears from denning and damaging property,” CDFW wrote on social media following the incident.

    “Despite very limited staff, CDFW biologists have been in constant communication with this homeowner since this bear was reported entering his unsecured crawlspace in November,” department representatives told SFGATE in a statement Monday.

    “We remain committed to helping this homeowner and have never indicated otherwise,” they continued, adding that they’ve set up traps and cameras and attempted to haze the bear from the property.

    “CDFW has and will continue to engage with the homeowner to advise on hazing methodologies and the critical need to close the crawlspace, monitor cameras, and offer support to help ensure the bear leaves the crawlspace and finds more suitable habitat,” they said.

    But, according to Johnson, it’s still unclear when his unwanted roommate will vacate. After one of the cameras on his property captured an image of a broken pipe, he turned off his gas, he told the outlet. As a result, he hasn’t taken a hot shower since around Christmas Eve.

    “I’m just exhausted from the whole thing,” he said.

    “I get my mind off it for a little bit, and then suddenly I get flooded back with, oh that’s right, I can’t take a hot shower. I’ve got to monitor the situation all the time,” Johnson said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Despite Fed rate cuts, mortgage rates could still rise. Here’s why

    [ad_1]

    Mortgage rates are the interest you pay to borrow money for *** home. Higher rates mean higher monthly payments because of accrued interest, which costs you more over the life of *** loan. The Federal Reserve set short-term interest rates, which influence how much you owe for things like credit cards and car loans. But according to experts, mortgage rates do not follow the Fed. Instead they follow the 10-year Treasury, which has to do with US government bonds. Right now, the bond market is nervous about inflation. So even with the Fed’s recent Rate cut in December, mortgage rates didn’t budge. Our get the Facts data team dug into the numbers to show us how mortgages have changed over the last decade. Rates remain high, hovering an average of 6% this year, the lowest rates have been in the last decade and came during the COVID pandemic when they bottomed out at 2.65% in January of 2021. But mortgage rates have hovered around 3 to 4% until the start of 2022 when they surpassed 5% and haven’t dropped. Below 6% since September 2022, and these high rates can be painful when buying *** home. Our get the facts data team found the most expensive mortgages were in places like Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Marin Counties, all in California. But Nantucket County in Massachusetts tops the list, with mortgages averaging nearly $10,000 in 2025. The least expensive are mostly in the South or Midwest, like Todd County, South Dakota or Stewart County, Georgia. Where an average mortgage is over $300. If you’re trying to buy *** home, experts tell our data team there are 3 barriers right now, those high mortgage rates, high home prices, and buyers just not wanting to buy *** house right now due to other levels of uncertainty. If you’re curious with how your monthly mortgage rate has changed, our get the Facts data team created *** tool on our website. You just plug in your county, and it calculates how much more or less you’re paying compared to 10 years ago. Reporting in Washington, I’m Amy Lou.

    Despite Fed rate cuts, mortgage rates could still rise. Here’s why

    The Federal Reserve cut interest rates by 25 basis points at its final meeting of 2025, but the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage remained high at 6.22%.

    Updated: 5:28 AM PST Dec 31, 2025

    Editorial Standards

    The Federal Reserve cut interest rates by 25 basis points at its final meeting of 2025, but an expert says it may not translate into lower mortgage rates. Susan Wachter, a professor of real estate at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, said mortgage rates take their metric cue from the 10-year Treasury.”The two rates are disconnected. The only time the two rates move together is if we’re moving towards a recession,” Wachter said. Mortgage rates are the interest you pay to borrow money to buy a home. Higher mortgage rates raise monthly payments because more interest accrues on the principal mortgage each month.The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.22% as of Dec. 11, 2025. That is below the year-to-date average of 6.62%, but Wachter said rates remain high.”Just a matter of four years ago, mortgage rates were 3 or 4%, so this has a big impact on the overall economy, and we cannot, unfortunately, rely on the Federal Reserve’s action to solve this affordability problem,” Wachter said. National Association of Realtors data, analyzed by the Get the Facts Data Team, shows that monthly principal and interest mortgage payments in the United States have nearly doubled in the last 10 years.See how much your monthly mortgage has changed with our calculator.On average, the monthly cost of owning a home in counties across the United States was $1,424 in 2025, compared with $712 in 2015. That number doesn’t include costs like property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, homeowners association fees and other fees. Nantucket County in Massachusetts saw the monthly cost of owning a home more than double, reaching $9,797 in 2025 compared to $4,691 in 2015. The island, located about 30 miles south of Cape Cod, has a median home listing price of $5.2 million, according to Realtor.com.In California, mortgage rates rose by an average of 89% over the last 10 years. The highest mortgage rates in the state are found in Marin, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.What is driving up mortgage costs?According to Wachter, homebuyers face three barriers: high mortgage rates, high housing prices and a buyer strike.High mortgage rates stem in part from large U.S. budget deficits caused by government borrowing during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, housing prices have risen and many buyers have pulled back. “Buyers are uncertain about their future job prospects, overall economy prospects — even stock market prospects. That uncertainty is keeping buyers on the sidelines, which is why housing prices, even though they’re near all-time highs, are not increasing anymore,” said Wachter.Aside from increasing mortgage costs, the housing market is also seeing a surge in delistings.”The homeowners who are selling are disappointed because their prices are falling, so they’re taking their homes off the inventory. We see that happening more than ever recently,” Wachter said.A recent report from Realtor.com shows that about 6% of listings have been removed from the market by sellers each month since June. That is the highest national delisting rate reported by Realtor.com since it began tracking this metric in 2022. PHNjcmlwdCB0eXBlPSJ0ZXh0L2phdmFzY3JpcHQiPiFmdW5jdGlvbigpeyJ1c2Ugc3RyaWN0Ijt3aW5kb3cuYWRkRXZlbnRMaXN0ZW5lcigibWVzc2FnZSIsKGZ1bmN0aW9uKGUpe2lmKHZvaWQgMCE9PWUuZGF0YVsiZGF0YXdyYXBwZXItaGVpZ2h0Il0pe3ZhciB0PWRvY3VtZW50LnF1ZXJ5U2VsZWN0b3JBbGwoImlmcmFtZSIpO2Zvcih2YXIgYSBpbiBlLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdKWZvcih2YXIgcj0wO3I8dC5sZW5ndGg7cisrKXtpZih0W3JdLmNvbnRlbnRXaW5kb3c9PT1lLnNvdXJjZSl0W3JdLnN0eWxlLmhlaWdodD1lLmRhdGFbImRhdGF3cmFwcGVyLWhlaWdodCJdW2FdKyJweCJ9fX0pKX0oKTs8L3NjcmlwdD4K

    The Federal Reserve cut interest rates by 25 basis points at its final meeting of 2025, but an expert says it may not translate into lower mortgage rates.

    Susan Wachter, a professor of real estate at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, said mortgage rates take their metric cue from the 10-year Treasury.

    “The two rates are disconnected. The only time the two rates move together is if we’re moving towards a recession,” Wachter said.

    Mortgage rates are the interest you pay to borrow money to buy a home. Higher mortgage rates raise monthly payments because more interest accrues on the principal mortgage each month.

    The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.22% as of Dec. 11, 2025. That is below the year-to-date average of 6.62%, but Wachter said rates remain high.

    “Just a matter of four years ago, mortgage rates were 3 or 4%, so this has a big impact on the overall economy, and we cannot, unfortunately, rely on the Federal Reserve’s action to solve this affordability problem,” Wachter said.

    National Association of Realtors data, analyzed by the Get the Facts Data Team, shows that monthly principal and interest mortgage payments in the United States have nearly doubled in the last 10 years.

    See how much your monthly mortgage has changed with our calculator.

    On average, the monthly cost of owning a home in counties across the United States was $1,424 in 2025, compared with $712 in 2015. That number doesn’t include costs like property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, homeowners association fees and other fees.

    Nantucket County in Massachusetts saw the monthly cost of owning a home more than double, reaching $9,797 in 2025 compared to $4,691 in 2015. The island, located about 30 miles south of Cape Cod, has a median home listing price of $5.2 million, according to Realtor.com.

    In California, mortgage rates rose by an average of 89% over the last 10 years. The highest mortgage rates in the state are found in Marin, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties.

    What is driving up mortgage costs?

    According to Wachter, homebuyers face three barriers: high mortgage rates, high housing prices and a buyer strike.

    High mortgage rates stem in part from large U.S. budget deficits caused by government borrowing during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, housing prices have risen and many buyers have pulled back.

    “Buyers are uncertain about their future job prospects, overall economy prospects — even stock market prospects. That uncertainty is keeping buyers on the sidelines, which is why housing prices, even though they’re near all-time highs, are not increasing anymore,” said Wachter.

    Aside from increasing mortgage costs, the housing market is also seeing a surge in delistings.

    “The homeowners who are selling are disappointed because their prices are falling, so they’re taking their homes off the inventory. We see that happening more than ever recently,” Wachter said.

    A recent report from Realtor.com shows that about 6% of listings have been removed from the market by sellers each month since June. That is the highest national delisting rate reported by Realtor.com since it began tracking this metric in 2022.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Couple escapes house fire in Orange County

    [ad_1]

    Firefighters in Orange County are investigating the cause of a house fire that forced a couple and another adult to evacuate their home early Tuesday morning.A neighbor captured video of the intense flames and alarms blaring through the neighborhood. “I was asleep, and then my wife came running in, says, told me to get up,” said Ricky Shrock, one of the homeowners.Another neighbor, Brian Arrington, described the scene, saying, “We saw flames probably 15 to 20 feet in the air. We were worried about maybe embers flying over and hitting our roof.”Inside the burning home on Corbett Road were three adults. “When I opened the door, was nothing but smoke. We had to get out of the house,” Shrock said.Even after firefighters arrived, flames continued to shoot through one part of the roof. The homeowners, Ricky and Pepper Shrock, suspect the fire started in the garage but are unsure of the exact cause. “I could smell something. And I thought it was the heater at first, and then I looked around the room and it was a little foggy,” Pepper Shrock said.In the daylight, the damage was evident, with a boat outside the garage and the family’s Christmas canes still lining the driveway. The side of the home showed a stark contrast where black charred marks met the wall’s white paint.”Thirty years in this neighborhood. Thank God we had some good neighbors that brought us jackets and robes because we didn’t have anything,” Pepper Shrock said. Neighbors surrounded the couple, offering blankets in the cold as they watched firefighters work through their home and belongings.As she tried to process the events, Pepper, a fourth-grade teacher, expressed her concern, saying, “My only concern is I don’t want to freak out my students.”Now, just before school resumes, the family is left to pick up the pieces of their longtime home.

    Firefighters in Orange County are investigating the cause of a house fire that forced a couple and another adult to evacuate their home early Tuesday morning.

    A neighbor captured video of the intense flames and alarms blaring through the neighborhood.

    “I was asleep, and then my wife came running in, says, told me to get up,” said Ricky Shrock, one of the homeowners.

    Another neighbor, Brian Arrington, described the scene, saying, “We saw flames probably 15 to 20 feet in the air. We were worried about maybe embers flying over and hitting our roof.”

    Inside the burning home on Corbett Road were three adults.

    “When I opened the door, was nothing but smoke. We had to get out of the house,” Shrock said.

    Even after firefighters arrived, flames continued to shoot through one part of the roof. The homeowners, Ricky and Pepper Shrock, suspect the fire started in the garage but are unsure of the exact cause.

    “I could smell something. And I thought it was the heater at first, and then I looked around the room and it was a little foggy,” Pepper Shrock said.

    In the daylight, the damage was evident, with a boat outside the garage and the family’s Christmas canes still lining the driveway. The side of the home showed a stark contrast where black charred marks met the wall’s white paint.

    “Thirty years in this neighborhood. Thank God we had some good neighbors that brought us jackets and robes because we didn’t have anything,” Pepper Shrock said.

    Neighbors surrounded the couple, offering blankets in the cold as they watched firefighters work through their home and belongings.

    As she tried to process the events, Pepper, a fourth-grade teacher, expressed her concern, saying, “My only concern is I don’t want to freak out my students.”

    Now, just before school resumes, the family is left to pick up the pieces of their longtime home.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Builders launch portal to make fire rebuilds faster and more affordable

    [ad_1]

    People who lost homes in the Palisades and Eaton fires can now go online to pick vetted residential templates that could save them money and be ready as early as next year.

    Builders Alliance, a nonprofit organization formed in response to the fires, on Friday launched a portal that offers survivors a selection of homes, filtered by lot size, price range and other preferences.

    “We’re trying to create an ‘easy’ button for homeowners,” said Lew Horne, the chairman of Project Recovery, a group of academics and real estate industry experts who had created a road map for recovery.

    Construction crews work on rebuilding a home and properties after the federal cleanup in Altadena on Sept. 10.

    (Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

    Project Recovery’s March report — which was compiled by professors in the real estate graduate schools at USC and UCLA, along with the Los Angeles chapter of the Urban Land Institute, a real estate nonprofit education and research institute — said an alliance of builders could work together for economies of scale to speed up reconstruction and make it more affordable and predictable.

    The web portal is the latest stop on the report’s road map. It makes it easy for those who lost their homes to pick templates and receive competing bids from builders who have been vetted by Project Recovery.

    “We’re keeping a close eye” on the builders, Horne said. “Buyers are going to have a quality home at a quality price in a time frame they can count on.”

    Horne is head of the Los Angeles chapter of the Urban Land Institute and president of real estate brokerage CBRE for Southern California. Other leaders of Project Recovery include Stuart Gabriel, director of the UCLA Ziman Center for Real Estate, and Richard Green, director of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate.

    Homeowners using the portal can match their address to home choices that include pre-designed turnkey residences at costs equal to or below average insurance proceeds, Horne said. Owners can also choose more custom builds.

    The new Builders Alliance consists of 10 licensed homebuilders, ranging in size from small boutique firms to larger companies such as Richmond American Homes and Brookfield Residential.

    Brookfield built more than 200 homes in the La Vina gated community in Altadena, 52 of which burned down, Chief Executive Adrian Foley said.

    “Obviously, we were devastated by all of the loss that’s taken place here,” he said. “We wanted to lean in and do anything we could to help out.”

    Foley said the consortium was devised to get large and small builders working together to “procure the right material costs and procure plans and specifications that would be appealing to the end user so we could collaborate to beat down costs, be more efficient, and hopefully drive a higher percentage of rebuilding.”

    The consortium expects to complete some homes by the third quarter of 2026.

    The foundation of the Builders Alliance portal is a digital representation that maps every residential parcel in the Palisades and Eaton fire areas. It uses AI technology and is powered by Canibuild, which provides site-planning software for the residential construction industry.

    The portal’s map is trained on local zoning regulations and pairs each lot with extensive menus of designs and costs. Property owners enter their address and can filter options by preferences such as square footage, bedrooms, bathrooms and price.

    [ad_2]

    Roger Vincent

    Source link

  • Locals are leaving, permits are few. Malibu is suffering a post-fire identity crisis

    [ad_1]

    Wood frames are rising from the ashes of burned-out lots in Pacific Palisades, signaling the start of a new era for the fire-torn community. But down the road in Malibu, the scene is bleak.

    Cars wind through a gauntlet of traffic cones and caution tape. Sweeping ocean views are sullied by hollow shells of graffiti-tagged homes and miles of chain-link fencing.

    Nearly a year after the Palisades fire, one of Southern California’s most iconic communities is frozen in place.

    In Altadena and Pacific Palisades, the two communities hit hardest by the January fires, there are rebuilding permits aplenty. The city of L.A., which is handling most permits in the Palisades, has issued 801 — around 43% of the total applications received, according to data from the state’s rebuilding dashboard. L.A. County, which is handling most permits in Altadena, has issued 577 — around 26% of the total applications received.

    So far, Malibu has issued four — about 2% of the total applications received.

    “It’s depressing,” said Abe Roy, Malibu resident and professional builder.

    In May, Roy was appointed as the city’s first Rebuild Ambassador, a volunteer role created to find solutions to administrative obstacles and speed up the rebuild. He publicly resigned last month, citing frustrations with the slow permitting process.

    “If this current pace continues, rebuilding will take way longer than a decade,” he said.

    A view of cleared lots and sparse construction after the Palisades fire in the Sunset Mesa neighborhood of eastern Malibu.

    (Allen J. Schaben/Los Angeles Times)

    A buyer’s market

    In contrast to other California communities, where sprawl and expansion led to skyrocketing populations over the last few decades, Malibu has long embraced “slow growth.” Fewer live there now than when the city was incorporated 34 years ago.

    But after roughly 720 Malibu homes burned in the Palisades fire, burned-out lots are sitting empty. Locals are worried that the city may never get fully back on its feet, and property values will suffer. And in a place like Malibu — one of the most expensive markets in the country, where a 10% price drop can mean millions of dollars lost — property values are king.

    Of the 160 lots listed this year that are still on the market, 47 have received a price cut.

    In the Big Rock neighborhood, a burned lot listed for $1.65 million in September, but that price has already been lowered twice. On Las Flores Beach, an oceanfront parcel hit the market for $3 million in April, but with no takers, relisted for $1.95 million in October.

    Roughly 75 lots have sold in Malibu since the fire. But as more homeowners decide to sell instead of rebuild, sales are slowing down — and a buyer’s market is emerging.

    “Supply is exceeding demand, and lots are selling anywhere from a 20 to 60% discount,” Roy said. “That’s a premonition for a freefall.”

    Roy said the overwhelming majority of residents want to stay and simply replace the home they have. But as applications get kicked back for corrections, and the rebuilding timeline turns from months to years, many are getting discouraged and choosing to sell.

    “Remodeling a kitchen or bathroom is onerous for most people. But building a house from the ground up is almost impossible,” Roy said. “After a while, you raise your hand and say, ‘I don’t know how long I can be on this treadmill.’”

    Real estate agent Daniel Milstein is currently listing a 3.25-acre lot on a promontory in Carbon Canyon that once held a Mediterranean mansion formerly owned by record producer David Foster. Before the fire, it was listed for $35 million.

    After it burned, the lot returned to market at $16 million. But with the slowing market, Milstein is planning to trim the price down to $12 million.

    “The property is worth a lot more, but the nuances of building here and the limited permits issued have led to a setback in the market,” he said. “The value will be higher down the road, but there’s a discount for buyers right now.”

    Milstein added that the buyer pool is limited to people who can afford to park their money for a while — three years, six years, maybe more. For those hoping to build a house right away, Malibu isn’t an option.

    But Milstein said that’s by design.

    “Malibu is stringent on permits. But that’s where the value is,” Milstein said. “It’s exclusive. And those that understand that value will be very happy with their property values down the road.”

    In the meantime, locals who lost homes are stuck in limbo.

    Permit trouble

    The choice of whether to sell or stay has been well-documented over the last year, with homeowners in Altadena and Pacific Palisades speaking out about their decision-making process.

    But Malibu locals — permit-less and facing rebuild timelines significantly longer than their fellow rebuilding communities — are a bit more circumspect. The Times reached out to over a dozen homeowners with lots on the market, but none wanted to publicly participate in the story.

    One homeowner, who requested anonymity for fear of retribution from neighbors or the city, called the past few months “a nightmare.”

    “I have friends a few miles east in Pacific Palisades who are starting to build already. I submitted my applications in the spring, the same time as them, but it still hasn’t gotten approved,” said the homeowner, whose Malibu home burned down in January.

    The homeowner planned to rebuild the same house that was there before, but their application was sent back because the plans didn’t comply with FEMA’s updated flood elevation standards, which require many rebuilt oceanfront homes to sit higher above the sand.

    It’s a snag that several have run into over the past year. One local, whose house survived but sustained smoke damage, told Fox 11 that he may be forced to demolish the property in order to comply with the heightened elevation standards.

    Comedian and podcaster Adam Carolla has emerged as a face of the frustration building in Malibu, vlogging about the bleak state of the city. He claims that Malibu is emphasizing the wrong things in its requirements for rebuilding.

    Carolla visited a construction site on the beach that was installing 30 caissons six stories deep into the ground. Between the caissons, the seawall and retaining wall, the crew estimated it would cost $2 million to $3 million to install the foundation.

    “It’s totally unnecessary. The former structure that was there lasted 75 years, and the tide didn’t get it, the fire did,” Carolla said. “If telephone poles sunk into the soil worked for 75 years, why do we need to build Hitler’s bunker under the sand?”

    Carolla said it’s a symptom of the larger trend across L.A. that he regularly complains about: regulations and over-engineering bogging development down to the point where no one can afford to build.

    Real estate agent Jason Ventress said the strict rules are limiting the buyer pool for his latest listing, a $12.5-million burned lot spanning half an acre on the ocean.

    “The city is bogged down by confusion and interpretations of newly implemented laws that are being contested,” Ventress said.

    In addition to the FEMA height requirements, he pointed to Malibu’s new septic standards, which requires rebuilders to replace existing septic systems with onsite wastewater treatment systems, which can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to install.

    Ventress, a fire victim himself dealing with a daunting rebuild, credited the Malibu Rebuild Center as a helpful resource to locals who lost their homes. Opened in March, it serves as a one-stop shop for both homeowners and contractors to ask questions and get help submitting applications.

    Yolanda Bundy, who runs the center under her role as Community Development Director, said of the 720 families impacted by the fire, 585 have visited.

    Bundy said it’s a necessary resource, since building in Malibu — a land of eroding cliffs and rising sea levels — is trickier than building in the flat lots found in Altadena and parts of the Palisades. She said 50% of burned homes were on the water, and 30% were on steep slopes.

    “These homes require septic systems, sea walls, retaining walls and complex foundations. Those come with restrictions,” Bundy said.

    Acknowledging the slow pace of permits, Bundy’s team has launched a handful of strategies aimed at streamlining the approval process, highlighting the changes at an Oct. 15 City Council meeting.

    According to Bundy, one of the biggest reasons for applications getting bogged down is architectural plans missing necessary notes and numbers. So the city created templates that architects can use to avoid corrections.

    The city also trimmed the 12-step application intake procedure down to six steps and beefed up its staff, hiring a case manager to serve as a bridge between staff and homeowners.

    Despite only four building permits being issued, Bundy said the collective rebuild is further along than the number suggests. Applications have to pass through two phases: the planning and entitlement phase, and the building and safety review phase. Bundy said half of the roughly 160 applications have passed through planning, but are still waiting to get through the building phase.

    “It’s an oversimplification to say that we’re not making any progress compared to L.A.,” Bundy said. “Families are frustrated, but I want every family to know we’re doing our best to get them home.”

    Lost identity

    As rebuilds get costlier, locals are getting concerned that by the time Malibu eventually gets back on its feet, it won’t feel the same. Lifelong residences will be replaced by Airbnbs, development groups and deep-pocketed foreign buyers with enough time and money to navigate the laborious permit process.

    Two brothers from New Zealand bought up $65 million worth of burned-out lots on the beach this year. Ventress said he’s fielding interest from a Canadian development group and a Miami hedge fund for his oceanfront listing.

    Milstein said he’s noticed a surge in interest from Europe, Canada and Asia, and roughly a third of his inquiries this year have come from international networks such as private banks and wealth managers.

    “There’s fear that Malibu’s identity will change, and that might fuel folks to move as well,” Roy said. “It might not be the Malibu we loved for years, where the bartender knows your drink and you see your neighbors at the local restaurants.”

    But Roy said the city should welcome all buyers, international or not. He spoke with the New Zealand duo and said he supports their vision of adding housing.

    “People selling lots are in dire straits. They don’t care whether offers come from international buyers or not,” he said. “As long as those people are believing in the future of Malibu and willing to invest.”

    Voices across Malibu say the only solution is issuing permits quicker so fire victims want to come back.

    “Malibu is a way of life. Most of us are doing our darndest to maintain that way of life,” Ventress said. Seconds later, while driving down Pacific Coast Highway, he passed a naked man walking down the beach.

    “He’s got a metal detector or something…no wait, it’s a golf club!” he exclaimed over the phone. “Right now, it’s the wild, wild west out here.”

    [ad_2]

    Jack Flemming

    Source link

  • Fort Lauderdale homeowner survives being stabbed in his sleep. Cops cuff burglar

    [ad_1]

    A Fort Lauderdale homeowner was stabbed in his sleep, fought off the intruder and chased him until police K-9s and a sheriff’s helicopter tracked and arrested the suspect.

    A Fort Lauderdale homeowner was stabbed in his sleep, fought off the intruder and chased him until police K-9s and a sheriff’s helicopter tracked and arrested the suspect.

    MH

    A Fort Lauderdale homeowner was sleeping peacefully early Monday morning when he was suddenly awakened by a man stabbing him repeatedly. After an adrenaline-fueled scuffle, he fought the intruder off, who was later hunted down by police.

    Around 4:30 a.m., the unidentified homeowner was sleeping in his house in the 600 block of Northeast Eight Avenue. He awoke to Joseph Defex, 31, striking him several times with a “sharp object,” Fort Lauderdale police said.

    Defex then ran from the house, but the homeowner gave chase and fought the man in an effort to restrain him until police arrived. However, when the victim saw Defex still had a “sharp object” in his hand, he let him go.

    Fort Lauderdale police K-9s and a Broward Sheriff’s Office helicopter tracked Defex down, police said. He was arrested and charged with burglary with assault or battery and giving a false name to law enforcement.

    The homeowner was rushed to the hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

    Devoun Cetoute

    Miami Herald

    Miami Herald Cops and Breaking News Reporter Devoun Cetoute covers a plethora of Florida topics, from breaking news to crime patterns. He was on the breaking news team that won a Pulitzer Prize in 2022. He’s a graduate of the University of Florida, born and raised in Miami-Dade. Theme parks, movies and cars are on his mind in and out of the office.

    [ad_2]

    Devoun Cetoute

    Source link

  • ‘Real Housewives’ star, husband charged in Maryland with fraudulently reporting burglary, theft

    [ad_1]

    A “Real Housewives” star and her husband were arrested in Maryland on allegations they lied about a burglary, according to the Carroll County Sheriff’s Office.Wendy and Edward Osefo were arrested on Thursday, the sheriff said in a statement.Wendy Osefo, 40, was indicted on seven counts of insurance fraud, eight counts of conspiracy insurance fraud, and one count of false statement to a police officer, according to court documents obtained by sister station WBAL-TV 11 News. She has been one of the main cast members of “The Real Housewives of Potomac” since joining the show in 2020.Edward Osefo, 41, was indicted on nine counts of insurance fraud, eight counts of conspiracy to commit insurance fraud and one count of false statement to a police officer, the court documents show.Burglary, theft report in 2024 leads to investigationThe sheriff’s office said deputies were called on April 7, 2024, to the couple’s house in Finksburg for a reported burglary and theft.Authorities said the homeowners told deputies that they returned from vacation in Jamaica to find their home broken into and numerous items had been stolen.According to the court document, the couple told a deputy that “they found their bedroom and both closets to be ransacked, and several designer handbags and jewelry had been stolen.”The couple reported approximately 80 items of jewelry, luxury goods, clothing and shoes were stolen, worth a total of more than $200,000, the sheriff’s office said.The court document says the Osefos’ alarm system was activated while the couple was on vacation and that it detected no motion inside the house while they were away.What investigators say happened sinceThe court document says the Osefos filed three insurance claims for the alleged losses suffered while they were away.The sheriff’s office said detectives found that more than $20,000 of the items that were reported stolen were actually returned to the store where they were purchased for a full refund.The court document states: “Edward Osefo gave recorded statements to two of the insurance companies regarding a list of stolen items he provided. He was asked whether any of the items on the list had been returned, which he denied. He was asked if he had other insurance, but failed to disclose to Homesite and Jewelers that he was also making a claim with Travelers Insurance.”After the burglary was reported, investigators said Wendy Osefo’s Instagram account showed photos of her wearing a diamond anniversary band on her left finger before the burglary.”This ring was reported stolen in the burglary. Then, after the reported burglary, on April 27, 2024, Wendy Osefo is wearing the same ring on her left finger,” the court document states.Court document: Investigators obtain email between coupleThe court documents detail an email the deputies obtained in which Edward Osefo is accused of sending a list of reportedly stolen items to Wendy Osefo.”The email asked if there were ‘additional high-value items we can add to this inventory listing (i.e., Chanel shoes, etc.)? I’m trying to get the total to exceed $423,000, which is our policy maximum,’” the court document states.At the time of their arrests, deputies executed a search and seizure warrant in the house and found at least 15 items that appear to be the same ones claimed stolen during the alleged burglary, according to the court document.The sheriff’s office said evidence was presented to a grand jury on Thursday that led to the couple’s arrests. They were both taken to Carroll County Central Booking, from which they posted bail, which was set at $50,000 each, and were released on Friday.The sheriff’s office has planned a 3 p.m. update that will be streamed on their Facebook page.

    A “Real Housewives” star and her husband were arrested in Maryland on allegations they lied about a burglary, according to the Carroll County Sheriff’s Office.

    Wendy and Edward Osefo were arrested on Thursday, the sheriff said in a statement.

    Wendy Osefo, 40, was indicted on seven counts of insurance fraud, eight counts of conspiracy insurance fraud, and one count of false statement to a police officer, according to court documents obtained by sister station WBAL-TV 11 News. She has been one of the main cast members of “The Real Housewives of Potomac” since joining the show in 2020.

    Edward Osefo, 41, was indicted on nine counts of insurance fraud, eight counts of conspiracy to commit insurance fraud and one count of false statement to a police officer, the court documents show.

    Burglary, theft report in 2024 leads to investigation

    The sheriff’s office said deputies were called on April 7, 2024, to the couple’s house in Finksburg for a reported burglary and theft.

    Authorities said the homeowners told deputies that they returned from vacation in Jamaica to find their home broken into and numerous items had been stolen.

    According to the court document, the couple told a deputy that “they found their bedroom and both closets to be ransacked, and several designer handbags and jewelry had been stolen.”

    The couple reported approximately 80 items of jewelry, luxury goods, clothing and shoes were stolen, worth a total of more than $200,000, the sheriff’s office said.

    The court document says the Osefos’ alarm system was activated while the couple was on vacation and that it detected no motion inside the house while they were away.

    What investigators say happened since

    The court document says the Osefos filed three insurance claims for the alleged losses suffered while they were away.

    The sheriff’s office said detectives found that more than $20,000 of the items that were reported stolen were actually returned to the store where they were purchased for a full refund.

    The court document states: “Edward Osefo gave recorded statements to two of the insurance companies regarding a list of stolen items he provided. He was asked whether any of the items on the list had been returned, which he denied. He was asked if he had other insurance, but failed to disclose to Homesite and Jewelers that he was also making a claim with Travelers Insurance.”

    After the burglary was reported, investigators said Wendy Osefo’s Instagram account showed photos of her wearing a diamond anniversary band on her left finger before the burglary.

    “This ring was reported stolen in the burglary. Then, after the reported burglary, on April 27, 2024, Wendy Osefo is wearing the same ring on her left finger,” the court document states.

    Court document: Investigators obtain email between couple

    The court documents detail an email the deputies obtained in which Edward Osefo is accused of sending a list of reportedly stolen items to Wendy Osefo.

    “The email asked if there were ‘additional high-value items we can add to this inventory listing (i.e., Chanel shoes, etc.)? I’m trying to get the total to exceed $423,000, which is our policy maximum,’” the court document states.

    At the time of their arrests, deputies executed a search and seizure warrant in the house and found at least 15 items that appear to be the same ones claimed stolen during the alleged burglary, according to the court document.

    The sheriff’s office said evidence was presented to a grand jury on Thursday that led to the couple’s arrests. They were both taken to Carroll County Central Booking, from which they posted bail, which was set at $50,000 each, and were released on Friday.

    The sheriff’s office has planned a 3 p.m. update that will be streamed on their Facebook page.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Gardener issues warning after making expensive misstep in front yard: ‘Honestly my biggest mistake as a homeowner’

    [ad_1]

    One homeowner thought she had made the right choice after researching mulch options for her yard. But three years later, she says that decision left her with weeds, scattered rubber, and a yard full of regret.

    In a recent TikTok, Maddie (@maddieandnugget) explained how she settled on rubber mulch for her landscaping needs just a few years ago. Despite being the type to “research to no end before making a decision,” this choice turned out to be a costly misstep.

    “It gets everywhere,” she said in the video. “It embeds into my grass — and, of course, it’s rubber so it’s not going to go anywhere. When you mow, it bounces. There is rubber all over my yard now.”

    Not only has the rubber spread across her lawn, but the so-called weed barrier hasn’t even worked as intended. Maddie said she’s seen weeds grow through the rubber mulch since “week one.”

    “This was an expensive mistake,” she said. “This is going to be a very exhausting mistake to clean up. I’m not even 100% sure how to dispose of this.”

    She added: “Honestly, my biggest mistake as a homeowner to date.”

    Rubber mulch is often marketed as a durable, low-maintenance landscaping option — but it comes with serious environmental drawbacks. Often made from recycled tires, rubber mulch may seem like an eco-friendly reuse at first glance. But these rubber chips contain heavy metals, microplastics, and toxic chemicals that can leach into soil and waterways as the material breaks down.

    Beyond pollution concerns, rubber mulch also falls short in performance. An article by the University of Illinois Extension notes that it’s less effective at controlling weeds than organic mulches, and can even hinder the growth of nearby plants and trees. It’s also highly flammable and notoriously difficult to extinguish if it catches fire.

    Unlike organic mulches that decompose and enrich the soil, rubber mulch contributes no nutrients. Instead, it absorbs and radiates heat, which stresses plants and disrupts soil chemistry. Over time, rubber mulch chips can fragment into microplastics, creating long-lasting pollution that harms local ecosystems and biodiversity.

    Maddie isn’t the only one frustrated by rubber mulch. Her video resonated with other homeowners who had faced the same issues, with many chiming in to share their own long-term struggles. For some, the cleanup has stretched on for years.

    What’s the hardest thing about taking care of your yard?

    Mowing the lawn

    Controlling weeds

    Keeping pests at bay

    I don’t have a yard

    Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.

    “I’m still cleaning up rubber mulch from a previous homeowner, and I bought this home in 2017,” one commenter wrote.

    Others echoed Maddie’s complaints about how messy and harmful the material can be.

    “Hate that stuff,” another commenter wrote. “Gets everywhere and poisons plants.”

    Determined not to make the same mistake again, Maddie said she’s “committed to doing it right this time.” She plans to switch to conventional wood mulch — a much better option for both her yard and the environment.

    Organic mulch is hugely beneficial to any garden, helping regulate soil temperature and retain moisture. As it decomposes, wood mulch also enriches your dirt by releasing micronutrients that support healthy, nutrient-dense soil.

    “There’s no benefits to rubber mulch,” Maddie said at the end of her video. “Get the regular stuff. Please.”

    Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don’t miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man shot by Spanaway homeowner has been identified by the medical examiner

    [ad_1]

    A man who was fatally shot by a homeowner in Spanaway has been identified by the Pierce County Medical Examiner’s Office.

    Russell Terry II, 36 of Tacoma, died Sunday from a gunshot wound to the neck, according to a news release from the medical examiner. His manner of death was deemed a homicide.

    The 51-year-old homeowner called 911 Sunday saying he had shot an intruder, The News Tribune reported. Deputies were dispatched at about 1:45 a.m. to the 16000 block of 13th Avenue Court East, where they found a 36-year-old man wounded on a back porch. Efforts to revive him were unsuccesful, and he died at the scene, The News Tribune reported.

    “Prior to the shooting, the suspect was seen on multiple homeowners’ cameras walking around people’s homes,” the Sheriff’s Office wrote in a post to its blotter. The post also noted that the results of a preliminary investigation suggest the homeowner acted in self-defense.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Detectives say that shooting in Pierce County home was a case of self-defense

    [ad_1]

    A Pierce County man is dead after a homeowner said he was trying to break into his house.

    The deadly shooting happened at a home on 13th Avenue Court East in Spanaway just before 2 a.m. on Sunday.

    Pierce County Sheriff’s deputies say the homeowner called 911, saying someone was banging at his back door, trying to break in.

    “Deputies arrived within minutes in the neighborhood,” said Deputy Carly Cappetto.

    When they arrived, the found a 36-year-old male on the back porch that had been shot.

    They tried to save his life, but he succumbed to his injuries.

    The man’s mother identified him as Russell Terry, a father of five.

    He was living with his grandmother, who had moved to the neighborhood nearly 30 years ago.

    Terry was a plumber who relatives say was “deeply loved.”

    Relatives also said the two men knew each other, that their children had played together.

    Investigators say it looks like a case of self-defense.

    Neighbor Ameer Hall said he heard the gunshots.

    Hall says that most loud popping noises here were often fireworks.

    In fact, he thought that it was fireworks this time too.

    “It sounded like a gun,” Hall said. “But I didn’t believe it. I’m like ‘not in this neighborhood.’”

    Neighbors said that Terry was caught on their Ring camera just moments before the shooting, banging on their doors, too.

    Deputy Cappetto says there is surveillance video that also supports the homeowner’s accounts of what happened that morning.

    The homeowner wasn’t arrested.

    Cappetto says detectives don’t believe what the homeowner did is a crime.

    “So, at this time, we are not looking at arresting the homeowner,” she said. “And this is being investigated as a case of self-defense.”

    The Pierce County Prosecutor’s Office will decide whether to file charges against the homeowner.

    We tried to reach out to speak with the homeowner, but he declined to talk.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Marilyn Monroe’s L.A. home escapes demolition — again

    [ad_1]

    For the second time in two years, Marilyn Monroe’s Brentwood home has been saved from destruction.

    Last summer, the Spanish Colonial-style hacienda was saved by the L.A. City Council, which voted unanimously to designate the house as a historic cultural monument, halting its impending demolition. This time around, it was rescued by an L.A. Superior Court judge, who rejected a legal challenge from the homeowners claiming the city’s landmark designation violated their right to raze the residence.

    Judge James C. Chalfant upheld the City Council’s decision — and the home’s monument status — in a brief filed Tuesday.

    It could be the final chapter to a years-long saga with plenty of Hollywood twists and turns. On one side are the homeowners, Brinah Milstein and Roy Bank, who are fighting for the right to tear the property down. On the other are legions of historians, Angelenos and Monroe fans, who claim the 1920s haunt, where the actor died in 1962, is an indelible piece of celebrity history.

    The feud stirred up a larger conversation on what exactly is worth protecting in Southern California, a region loaded with architectural marvels and Old Hollywood haunts swirling with celebrity legend and gossip.

    Fans claim the house, located on 5th Helena Drive, is too iconic to be torn down. Monroe bought it for $75,000 in 1962 and died there six months later, the only home she ever owned by herself. The phrase “Cursum Perficio” — Latin for “The journey ends here” — was adorned in tile on the front porch, adding to the property’s lore.

    An aerial view of the house where Marilyn Monroe died in Brentwood.

    (Mel Bouzad / Getty Images)

    The homeowners claim it has been remodeled so many times over the years, with 14 different owners and over a dozen renovation permits issued over the last 60 years, that it bears no resemblance to its former self. Some Brentwood locals consider it a nuisance, since fans and tour buses flock to the address for pictures, even though the only thing visible from the street is the privacy wall.

    “There is not a single piece of the house that includes any physical evidence that Ms. Monroe ever spent a day at the house, not a piece of furniture, not a paint chip, not a carpet, nothing,” Milstein and Bank claimed in their lawsuit.

    Milstein, a wealthy real estate heiress, and Bank, a reality TV producer with credits including “The Apprentice” and “Survivor,” bought the home for $8.35 million in 2023 with plans to tear it down. They own the property next door and hoped to expand their estate.

    The pair obtained demolition permits from the Department of Building and Safety, but once their plans became public, an outcry erupted.

    Councilmember Traci Park, who represents L.A.’s 11th council district where the home is located, said she received hundreds of calls and emails urging her to protect it. In September 2023, she held a press conference dressed as Monroe — bright red lipstick, bobbing blond hair — urging the City Council to declare it a landmark.

    The Los Angeles Cultural Heritage Commission started the landmark application process in January 2024, barring the owners from destroying the house in the meantime. A few weeks later, Milstein pleaded her case to the commission.

    “We have watched it go unmaintained and unkept. We purchased the property because it is within feet of ours. And it is not a historic cultural monument,” she said at the time.

    The couple sued the city a few months later, accusing them of unconstitutional actions and “backdoor machinations” in trying to preserve a house that doesn’t qualify as a historic cultural monument. Judge Chalfant denied the claim, calling it an “ill-disguised motion to win so they can demolish the home.”

    Milstein and Bank, who have previously offered to move the home so they can expand their own estate without destroying Monroe’s, could appeal the judge’s decision.

    [ad_2]

    Jack Flemming

    Source link

  • Renting vs. buying: Which is the better option? – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    The traditional argument holds: While buying a home can build long-term equity and stability, renting can provide flexibility and fewer upfront costs. But as home ownership becomes a far-fetched dream for many young Canadians, can renting for life be a viable option?

    Alex Avery, author of The Wealthy Renter, thinks so. “It’s different for every person, and each individual’s needs change over time, but I’m still a firm believer that renting is a great option,” he said.

    Despite rental prices having soared since publishing his book in 2016, Avery says renting is still cheaper and carries less risk than buying. “People compare mortgage payments to monthly rental rates, but mortgage payments don’t begin to cover the full costs of home ownership,” he said. These costs can include notary fees, realtor commissions and region-specific taxes when purchasing the property as well as ongoing costs such as mortgage interest, property taxes, insurance, and various maintenance and repair expenses. 

    Avery was inspired to write his book during what he calls was a “speculative bubble” in the housing market at the time that he said created a perception of home ownership as an “easy out for savings,” especially in urban centres like Toronto and Vancouver. “[Young Canadians] were being pressured to buy a condo when the math never made any sense,” he said. 

    Should you rent and invest the difference?

    Vancouver realtor Owen Bigland’s calculations paint a different picture however. With average monthly rent for a one-bedroom unit in his city now hovering around $2,800, a lifetime renter could spend at least $1.3 million by the time they’re 65 (not accounting for rent increases or inflation), according to Bigland. “And you’ll have zero to show for it. Where’s the savings here?” he questioned.

    Photo of Owen Bigland by Natalia Anja Photography / The Canadian Press

    Even if monthly rent was cheaper than a mortgage payment, Bigland said many Canadians will likely spend any savings rather than invest it and grow their wealth.

    “A lot of Canadians don’t have the discipline to save as much as they should,” said Sebastien Betermier, an associate professor at McGill University who studies Canadian household spending. 

    With rents making up at least a third of household expenditures, and homes making up 70% to 80% of home owners’ wealth portfolios, Betermier says both renters and home owners alike are exposing themselves to big risks.

    Article Continues Below Advertisement


    Recent data from a survey by the Healthcare of Ontario Pension Plan and Abacus Data suggests the same. More than a third of Canadians report having less than $5,000 in savings, and those who own a home are increasingly relying on their home equity to fund their retirement.

    The advantages of home ownership

    Bigland preaches home ownership for this very reason. He encourages chipping away at your mortgage and building equity so you can benefit from any price appreciation in the future. “The only real cash shelter we get in Canada is the principal residence exemption,” he said. 

    Put another way, “you’re essentially renting [the home] from yourself,” said Betermier. He adds that your home can act as collateral should you need to borrow against it someday. Most mortgages from big banks typically include a built-in home equity line of credit (HELOC) at a favourable rate, according to Bigland. “It’s accessible money without selling your home.”

    Avery, however, doesn’t buy this argument. “It presupposes that housing is a safer investment than other investments,” he said. “There are many places where house prices have gone down, where employment prospects change over time.”

    You’re 2 minutes away from getting the best mortgage rates.

    Answer a few quick questions to get a personalized quote, whether you’re buying, renewing or refinancing.

    Investment alternatives if you’re not buying real estate

    As an alternative to relying on your home as an investment, Avery suggests putting your money into an RRSP, TFSA, and the FHSA, which doesn’t necessarily need to go toward a home purchase. “You can learn about index ETFs too. There’s a lot of different ways to invest your money,” he said.

    Avery, who’s gone the home ownership route himself, doesn’t think buying is a bad decision, but warns against it if you’re banking on it as an investment tool. “That’s conflating two different objectives,” he said. “One is to house yourself, and the other is to generate wealth.”

    But Bigland, who’s also written a book on real estate and stock investing, says you should be doing both. He agrees renting can make sense in some situations like if you’re anticipating a change in jobs, but you should consider buying if you can commit to a location for eight to 10 years.

    He suggests first-time buyers start with older buildings close to public transit often sitting on valuable pieces of land. “You’ll probably have a developer [buy] in 10 or 15 years, and that might be your exit strategy, he said. “Even if you’re a blue-collar guy, if you can get $40,000 down, maybe even forgo the car for a little while, you can do it.”

    [ad_2]

    The Canadian Press

    Source link

  • Price-gouging charges slowly mount after the fires, but some say it’s not enough

    [ad_1]

    California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta accused real estate agent Iman Shaghyan this week of increasing the price of a Beverly Hills rental by more than 30% in the days after the Jan. 7 fires. It’s the fourth charge Bonta has filed since price-gouging rules went into effect that prohibit rent hikes of more than 10% after a natural disaster.

    “Profiting off Californians’ pain through price gouging is illegal and I will not stand for it,” Bonta said in a news release.

    In the weeks after the fires, city officials vowed to crack down on violators as thousands of complaints poured in, with some organizers even compiling spreadsheets documenting the skyrocketing rents. Bonta enlisted teams of lawyers to evaluate complaints, and his office has primarily targeted real estate agents.

    But some critics claim that government officials aren’t doing enough to address the rampant price gouging that appeared across the region in the wake of the fires, saying that the charges filed represent only a small fraction of the complaints submitted to the city and state.

    “More needs to be done,” said Chelsea Kirk, co-founder of the activist organization the Rent Brigade. “It’s been de-prioritized, and all discourse from elected officials and the press around rent gouging has ended.”

    Kirk’s organization checks Zillow for examples of price gouging and said there are currently more than 10,000 active listings that qualify. Her team submits weekly reports to government officials but said transparency is a problem since no one knows exactly what is being investigated.

    As a result, her team worked with L.A. City Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez to draft a motion that, if passed, would require L.A. City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto to produce monthly reports detailing the total number of price-gouging complaints received, response times and enforcement actions. The motion has been introduced but not yet placed on the agenda.

    “There’s an utter lack of urgency,” Kirk said.

    In addition to Shaghyan, Bonta filed charges in January against La Cañada Flintridge agent Mike Kobeissi and Glendale agent Lar Sevan Chouljian. In February, he charged Hermosa Beach agent Willie Baronet-Israel as well as Edward Kushins, the landlord of the property.

    All of the cases are active. If convicted, the maximum penalty for the misdemeanor is a year in prison and a fine of $10,000.

    In addition to the charges, state Department of Justice officials said they have sent out more than 750 warning letters to hotels and landlords accused of price gouging. The department also is investigating fraud, scams and low-ball offers on burned properties.

    Bonta is investigating on behalf of the state and Feldstein Soto is filing lawsuits on behalf of the city. So far, she’s been targeting more than just real estate agents.

    In February, Feldstein Soto’s office sued rental giant Blueground, citing more than 10 cases of price gouging. In one instance, Blueground allegedly jacked up the rent of a downtown L.A. apartment by 56% on Jan. 7, the day of the fires.

    In March, Feldstein Soto’s office sued a group of homeowners and companies for $62 million, citing not only price-gouging violations but also violations of the city’s short-term rental ordinance, which places restrictions on rentals such as Airbnbs. The group of defendants included four homeowners and five limited liability companies: Akiva Nourollah, Micah Hiller, Haim Amran Zrihen, Rachel Florence Saadat, Hiller Hospitality, Hiller Hospitality Group, 1070 Bedford, Red Rock and Coastal Charm.

    The Times reached out to all the individuals charged with price gouging or short-term rental violations — except for Zrihen and Saadat, whose contact information could not be located — and did not receive any on-the-record responses.

    In the first few weeks after the fire, Feldstein Soto’s office issued more than 250 cease-and-desist letters to owners, landlords and property management groups based on price-gouging tips.

    The price-gouging rules are set to expire July 1.

    [ad_2]

    Jack Flemming

    Source link

  • With fires burning again, is California becoming uninsurable?

    With fires burning again, is California becoming uninsurable?

    [ad_1]

    Thursday marks the beginning of summer, but early wildfires have already scorched the outskirts of L.A. and the Bay Area. Many California homeowners find themselves more vulnerable than ever as major insurers abandon areas threatened by climate change-fueled fires. Gov. Gavin Newsom and state Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara have responded with efforts to ease regulations and boost coverage.

    Insurance industry representative Rex Frazier argues that state leaders have the right idea: Burdensome regulations are making a difficult situation worse. But consumer advocate Jamie Court contends that the state needs to take a harder line by requiring coverage of homeowners who meet fire protection standards.

    California’s sclerotic insurance bureaucracy isn’t helping anyone

    By Rex Frazier

    As the leader of an association of homeowners’ insurers, I frequently hear from anxious Californians who are losing their coverage and wondering whether the situation will get better. My answer is that I am not one of those who believes California is facing an uninsurable future. The problems we face are difficult but solvable.

    The insurance challenges the state is facing today have roots in the past. While the giant wildfires of 2017 and 2018 had a huge impact, requiring insurers to pay claims equivalent to more than 20 years of profits, the state’s insurance problems predate the fires. California’s failure to update the old rules governing insurance rates have long prevented insurers from preparing for a hotter, drier future.

    California’s laws are a national outlier. The rules for projecting wildfire losses, a crucial aspect of calculating insurance rates, are a case in point. California is the only state in the country that requires property insurers to project future wildfire losses based on average wildfire losses over the last 20 years, regardless of where they plan to do business. Every other state allows insurers to base their rates on where they intend to sell insurance, taking into account the degree of fire risk to the properties they plan to insure.

    California is also a national outlier on rate approval in that it’s a “prior approval” state. That means an insurer must receive approval from the California Department of Insurance before it may increase or decrease rates.

    While California law promises a 60-day approval period, it often takes six months or more to get permission to change rates. At times of high inflation, slow approvals require insurers to leave the highest-risk areas or face financial ruin.

    A less visible but nevertheless critical issue is the financial well-being of the FAIR Plan, a pool of insurers providing last-resort coverage. The FAIR plan is growing well beyond its ability to pay claims for large fires. And if it runs out of money, it will charge insurers, as members of the pool, a fee in addition to claims from their own customers for the same fire. If that fee gets large enough, it could devastate insurers. We must address this.

    Fortunately, Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara has recognized the need to fix these problems. His Sustainable Insurance Strategy would update California’s rate regulations and approval process while requiring insurers to make commitments to cover high-risk areas. The proposal is far from perfect, but we look forward to working with all the interested parties to increase insurance availability and restore the health of the market.

    While state regulations and processes can be changed, we remain vulnerable to forces that are beyond our control. Inflation makes repairing and rebuilding homes much more expensive, driving up rates. Longer dry seasons increase the chances of devastating fires, having the same effect in the short term. We need a system that acknowledges these realities.

    But raising rates is not a long-term solution. Reducing them over time will require consensus on how to handle combustible fuels near valuable property.

    That will take a lot of time and effort. California homeowners’ insurers are ready to do our part to secure an insurable future for the state.

    Rex Frazier is the president of the Personal Insurance Federation of California.

    Newsom needs to look out for homeowners, not insurance companies

    By Jamie Court

    Home insurance companies have put Californians in a bind by refusing to sell new policies or renew many customers, leaving them with few coverage options. That has driven more homeowners into the high-cost, low-benefit FAIR Plan, a pool of insurers required to provide last-resort coverage.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom recently announced legislation to allow insurance companies to hike rates more quickly in an effort to woo them back to the state. While that will certainly leave Californians paying higher rates, it’s not likely to get more people covered.

    Insurance companies are refusing to write new policies despite substantial recent rate hikes — an average of 20% for State Farm and 37% for Farmers, for example. What has them spooked is greater exposure through the FAIR Plan, which increasingly covers expensive homes in wildfire-prone areas. Insurers are on the hook for FAIR Plan claims, and their exposure increases with market participation, so they limit their participation.

    Only freeing people from the FAIR Plan will solve this. The most practical way to do that is to require insurers to cover people who harden their homes against fire. We have mandatory health and auto insurance, so why shouldn’t we have it for homes that meet standards?

    Hardening is expensive enough that most homeowners are unlikely to do it without guaranteed coverage. Mandating insurance is therefore the best way to mitigate wildfire risks.

    Mitigation efforts are already working, with major claim events dwindling in recent years. Moreover, insurers recovered billions from the utilities responsible for major fire losses in 2017 and 2018.

    The current crisis was precipitated not so much by wildfires as by investment losses and rising construction costs. Insurers responded by tightening underwriting and raising rates.

    Insurance companies got their hikes, but they refuse to write new business here until they get more. Unfortunately, Newsom and Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara are ready to give them what they want.

    Last week, Lara proposed regulations attempting to address the crisis. Echoing a legislative proposal that failed last year, they would allow companies to raise rates based on black-box climate models. Florida tried a similar approach, and its rates are now about double California’s. Florida’s insurer of last resort covers 20% of its homeowners, roughly five times the share in California.

    The proposed regulations purport to require insurers to increase sales to homeowners in “distressed areas” by 5%. However, they would not require them to charge prices consumers can afford. The requirement to cover these areas could also be waived if an insurer shows it’s “taking reasonable steps to fulfill its insurer commitment.” And the plan gives companies two years to comply but lets them start charging all policyholders higher rates immediately.

    Newsom cheered the proposal, essentially arguing that California’s insurance rates are too damn low. He didn’t mention that California insurers’ profits have generally outpaced the national average over the last 20 years.

    Newsom’s latest legislative proposal would limit public participation in rate-setting by cutting out so-called intervenors such as Consumer Watchdog, which can challenge unnecessary increases and has saved consumers more than $6 billion over 22 years.

    Throwing more money at insurers won’t end the crisis; requiring them to cover responsible homeowners will.

    Jamie Court is the president of the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Man fatally shoots bear cub near Lake Tahoe, angering residents

    Man fatally shoots bear cub near Lake Tahoe, angering residents

    [ad_1]

    The recent killing of a young black bear by a homeowner near Lake Tahoe has infuriated residents, including neighbors who dispute the man’s story.

    The fatal shooting happened around 1:30 p.m. on Memorial Day in an unincorporated neighborhood of El Dorado County, about 2 miles south of Lake Tahoe Airport.

    Steve Gonzalez, a spokesman for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, said the man told investigators he was in his living room with his dog when a bear entered the home.

    “He tried getting up and scaring off the bear by yelling at it and waving his arm, but the bear was acting in a menacing fashion,” Gonzalez said. “So, he retrieved his rifle that was nearby and shot the bear twice.”

    A California Fish and Wildlife warden investigated the shooting of the young bear, and no charges were filed.

    (Bogdan Yamkovenko)

    He said the wounded bear ran off and climbed up a tree — but fell to the ground because of its injuries.

    “The man approached the bear, saw that it was suffering and humanely euthanized it,” Gonzalez said. The man was not injured.

    Gonzalez said a Fish and Wildlife warden investigated the shooting, and no charges were filed.

    But the killing of the young bear has angered some residents, including Ann Bryant, director of the Bear League, a nonprofit based in the Lake Tahoe Basin.

    She said two members of the league were sent to the neighborhood to document what had occurred after receiving a call from a distraught neighbor who had witnessed the shooting.

    Bryant said the team members learned from the neighbors that the bear was never completely inside the house and that the homeowner had previously shot another bear.

    She said team members attempted to speak to the warden but were mostly ignored. The shooting happened, she noted, at a time of year when young bears are parting from their mothers and learning to live on their own.

    When she learned that the warden concluded that the shooting was self-defense and sought no criminal charges, she was livid.

    “They believe him rather than all the neighbors who saw it and who know him and who have heard his discussions about how he feels about bears and know about the other killing,” she said. “It’s disappointing the department of wildlife would just turn a blind eye.”

    Gonzalez said he did not know whether the homeowner had been involved in other bear shootings.

    A neighbor who witnessed the shooting, Bogdan Yamkovenko, 43, said the small bear had spent most of the day in the neighborhood. He said it was about 1:30 p.m. when he noticed the bear come down from a tree he was napping on.

    At the time, Yamkovenko was standing in the rear upstairs deck of his home when he noticed the little bear standing by his neighbor’s back door. He said he tried to make noises using his barbecue grill but the bear did not react.

    Shortly after, he saw the bear poke his head inside the neighbor’s home, suggesting that the door was left halfway open or opened all the way.

    “He inched his way in, getting further and further inside, but he never went all the way in,” he said. “You always saw a part of the bear.”

    He then saw the bear step back, turn around, run off and climb up the tree he had been napping on earlier.

    “That’s when I heard the first shot,” he said.

    Yamkovenko ran down to his neighbor’s house, hoping to get him to stop shooting. As he made his way around his neighbor’s house, he heard a second shot.

    When Yamkovenko reached his neighbor, he told him to stop shooting and that the Fish and Wildlife Department would take care of the bear.

    “He said: ‘Nah, I need to put it out of its misery.’”

    Yamkovenko said all three gunshots he heard happened outside, but when the warden came to speak to him, he was told that the neighbor said he had fired four times.

    The warden “told us something didn’t add up about the neighbor’s story because the neighbor kept saying there were four shots and that he shot the bear inside the house,” Yamkovenko said.

    When he learned that the case was closed, Yamkovenko called the warden, furious. He said the warden has not returned his call.

    Gonzalez said he had heard claims about the bear not being inside the house but defended the warden’s findings.

    “He’s a trained officer, a state police officer and has taken an oath to uphold his duties,” Gonzalez said of the warden. “And you know, people who work for Fish and Wildlife are dedicated to preserving wildlife for future generations.

    “I trust him. We trust him, we have a lot of confidence in him,” he added. “He went out there to personally investigate it and found what the homeowner was saying was true and decided there was no need to go further than this.”

    Bryant said she will continue to look into the matter until there is justice for the bear.

    [ad_2]

    Ruben Vives

    Source link

  • Gov. Newsom seeks faster review of insurance rate hikes. What to know

    Gov. Newsom seeks faster review of insurance rate hikes. What to know

    [ad_1]

    With insurers continuing to pull back from the California’s homeowners’ market, Gov. Gavin Newsom wants to speed up the process by which the companies have their requests for rate hikes reviewed.

    The governor said Friday that he is backing a bill that would require the Department of Insurance to complete reviews of proposed premium increases within 60 days to halt any more exits from the market. Here’s what to know:

    What exactly did the governor say?

    Newsom said that immediate steps need to be taken to stabilize the market, which has seen insurers not renew existing policyholders, stop writing new policies or pull out of the market entirely — sending many homeowners to the insurer of last resort, the state’s FAIR Plan, which is now on the hook for more than $300 billion in payouts. Newsom said he was “deeply mindful” of the burdens placed on the plan.

    The governor said he had considered issuing an executive order, but instead is proposing a bill that would require the Insurance Department to speed up its review process of premium rate-hike requests.

    “We need to stabilize this market. We need to send the right signals. We need to move,” he said.

    Isn’t there already an insurance reform package being hashed out in Sacramento?

    Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara is holding hearings on his Sustainable Insurance Strategy, a set of comprehensive regulations intended to stabilize rates and make it more attractive for insurers to write homeowners policies, especially in wildfire areas such as hillsides and canyons.

    However, these regulations won’t become law until the end of the year — a deadline sought by the governor, assuming it can be met.

    “It should not take this long for emergency regulations,” Newsom said. “We can’t wait until December.”

    How would this bill fit into the larger set of reforms?

    Lara has reached a grand bargain with the insurance industry to make the market more attractive, though details are still being worked out.

    The plan would allow insurers to include the cost of reinsurance they buy to protect themselves from large fires and other catastrophes into premium costs. It also would allow them to set rates using sophisticated algorithms to predict the risk and cost of future fires, rather than just base them on past events. It’s unclear how an insurer’s application for an expedited rate approval this year would fit into the proposed reforms.

    Has Lara reacted to the governor’s proposal?

    The commissioner tweeted Friday that his department has taken “significant steps forward” to implement his planned reforms but more needs to be done — and that his department is working with the governor and the Legislature “on critical budget language that keeps us on track to get the job done.”

    What do consumer groups have to say?

    Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, said he didn’t understand the proposal, worrying that it would be a “rubber stamp” on proposed rate increases.

    He noted that Proposition 103, the landmark 1988 initiative that gives the insurance commissioner authority to review rate hikes, already mandates that they are conducted within 60 days except in certain circumstances. Those circumstances include requests for rate increases exceeding 7% for homeowners insurance, which allow consumers to seek a hearing, or the commissioner’s own decision to conduct a hearing.

    What is the insurance industry’s reaction

    Rex Frazier, president of the Personal Insurance Federation of California, a trade group of property and casualty insurers, said despite the promise of 60-day rate reviews under Proposition 103, they are taking longer. He said the Insurance Department will often request that insurers waive their rights to a speedy decision or face an administrative hearing, which can lead to extensive delays. However, Frazier withheld comment on the governor’s proposal until the draft language is released.

    What are the next steps?

    Newsom’s office will release the draft bill, which will be carried by a member of the Legislature and be included in the process for adopting the state budget, which the Legislature must approve by June 15. Newsom made his remarks Friday in outlining plans for a revised $288-billion budget, which calls for a series of cutbacks to close a nearly $45-billion shortfall.

    [ad_2]

    Laurence Darmiento

    Source link

  • Upscale Westside L.A. neighborhoods hit hard by State Farm home insurance cancellations

    Upscale Westside L.A. neighborhoods hit hard by State Farm home insurance cancellations

    [ad_1]

    Thousands of Californians who won’t see their home insurance renewed by State Farm this summer are homeowners in Los Angeles County, with some upscale Westside neighborhoods hit hard, according to the insurer’s recent filings with the Department of Insurance.

    A majority of the insurer’s customers in neighborhoods in West Los Angeles as well as in or near the Santa Monica Mountains including Bel-Air, Pacific Palisades and Woodland Hills are going to lose their coverage.

    The State Farm move affects some of the county’s toniest neighborhoods — adding another layer of expense and financial risk for homeowners in areas that were already costly and imperiled by wildfires. Older homeowners and those with comparatively lower incomes who bought when housing was much cheaper could be hard hit.

    Last month, State Farm — the largest home insurance provider in California — said it would drop 72,000 property policies across the state amid a home insurance crisis. Of those, about 30,000 are home insurance policies.

    Denise Hardin, president of State Farm, explained the company’s decision in a March 20 letter to Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, stating that rate hikes that were recently approved by the Department of Insurance amid high inflation would be insufficient to restore the company’s financial strength.

    “We must now take action to reduce our overall exposure to be more commensurate with the capital on hand to cover such exposure, as most insurers in California have already done,” she wrote. “We have been reluctant to take this step, recognizing how difficult it will be for impacted policyholders, in addition to our independent contractor agents who are small business owners and employers in their local California communities.

    “A financial failure of [State Farm] will detrimentally impact the entire market,” Hardin added, “an outcome we are all trying to avoid.”

    The letter also included several pages of ZIP Codes and the number of homeowners who would lose their coverage this summer.

    In Pacific Palisades, according to the letter, 69.4% of the 2,342 policyholders — or about 1,600 — will lose coverage. In Brentwood, 61.5% of State Farm’s 2,114 customers there will lose their policies, or about 1,300 non-renewals.

    Of the 1,805 policyholders in Woodland Hills, 60% — or about 1,090 — won’t be renewed, while in Bel-Air, 67% of 987 customers, about 660 customers, will be affected,

    Orinda in Contra Costa County and Los Gatos in Santa Clara County also will see a high number of policyholders lose coverage.

    As part of its assessment, the insurer looked at communities in areas prone to wildfires as well as those at risk of fires following an earthquake, which included communities such as Beverly Hills and Westwood.

    Thelma Waxman, president of the Brentwood Homeowners Assn., whose 1,200 members own about 4,000 properties, said it had been a stressful time for members, and for residents living near high-risk fire zones.

    Losing State Farm coverage “is the No. 1 topic of discussion” among association members, she said. “Everybody is nervous.”

    Last year, the association created its first California Fire Safety Council and worked closely with My Safe L.A., a nonprofit providing fire and safety education, as well as the Los Angeles Fire Department in an attempt to reduce fire risks in the area.

    Waxman said the formation of the safety council was partly in response to insurance companies dropping policyholders in the state.

    “At first we thought we could get a discount,” she said, “but then it became about trying to keep our policies.”

    Waxman said she’d been urging residents who will lose their home insurance with State Farm to start shopping now for a new home insurance policy as it’s difficult to find insurers writing policies in the state.

    State Farm said those losing their policies would be notified between July 3 and Aug. 20.

    State Assemblywoman Jacqui Irwin (D-Thousand Oaks), whose district includes many of the affected neighborhoods, expressed concern but hoped that the state could end the crisis by altering regulations to encourage insurers to “return to the business of writing policies for Californians and their properties.”

    Insurance companies have cited high inflation, catastrophe exposure, the cost of reinsurance (a type of insurance for insurance companies) and the limitations posed by decades-old insurance regulations as reasons for scaling back policies in the state.

    Left with no other choice, a number of Californians have turned to the FAIR Plan as a last resort. Funded by the insurers doing business in California, the Fair Access to Insurance Requirement plan provides more limited coverage as a fallback for property owners unable to find conventional policies they can afford.

    But the enrollment surge is putting a financial strain on the state insurer as it faces a potential loss of $311 billion, up from $50 billion in 2018.

    State officials said the FAIR Plan had a surplus of $200 million and was at risk of insolvency should a catastrophic event occur.

    Lara has proposed a set of new rules that would allow insurers to raise rates to cover reinsurance costs and projected losses from catastrophic fires, but also require that they provide coverage for more homes in California’s canyons and hills.

    The proposals, which aim to move people off the FAIR Plan and slow the increase in premiums, have won support from insurance industry trade groups and some consumer groups, although some consumer advocates, such as Consumer Watchdog, have criticized the proposed rules.

    In the letter to Lara, Hardin said State Farm would continue to cooperate with the state in finding a resolution to the home insurance crisis.

    “We are acutely aware of the political challenges that the actions needed to improve [State Farm’s] financial position pose to broader reform efforts,” she wrote. “Please know that we have an ongoing desire and commitment to collaborate with you and your staff, as well as the Governor’s office, to achieve these reforms as quickly as possible.”

    [ad_2]

    Ruben Vives

    Source link

  • Need help with missed mortgage payments in California? Apply soon: Money is running out

    Need help with missed mortgage payments in California? Apply soon: Money is running out

    [ad_1]

    Did a pandemic-related financial crunch leave you with mortgage troubles? The state may be able to help, but not for much longer.

    The California Mortgage Relief Program offers up to $80,000 to low- and moderate-income homeowners hurt financially by the pandemic who missed mortgage payments, deferred some monthly installments or have overdue property taxes. Having awarded more than $823 million of its $1-billion budget, however, the program could run out of money in a couple of months, state officials say.

    So far, the program has helped more than 33,500 homeowners across the state, most of whom have incomes at or below their county’s median. The aid isn’t a loan, but a payment made on the borrowers’ behalf to clear their mortgage or property-tax debt so they can keep their home.

    “When you look at who received those funds, it’s been a real success,” said Rebecca Franklin, president of the California Housing Finance Agency’s Homeowner Relief Corporation. By using about 75% of the funds to help families earning no more than their county’s median income, and 55% of the money in communities that are historically disadvantaged, “we really were successful at getting the money to those populations who really were hit harder by the pandemic,” she said.

    “We weren’t trying to help everybody. We were trying to focus the funds on those who needed it the most” — and the ones who couldn’t afford to become homeowners again if they were foreclosed on, considering the state’s current housing market, Franklin said.

    The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act put almost $10 billion into a Homeowners Assistance Fund to help prevent low- and moderate-income Americans suffering pandemic-related financial hardships from losing their homes. California was one of the first states to use HAF dollars to launch a mortgage relief program, said Stacey Tutt, homeowner assistance fund coordinator and senior staff attorney at the National Housing Law Project.

    During the Great Recession, Tutt said, distressed homeowners often avoided foreclosures through loan modifications. But during the pandemic, rising interest rates and property values left many homeowners unable to obtain modifications that reduced their monthly payments.

    The Homeowners Assistance Fund was “essential to keeping people in their homes,” she said, adding, “I can’t imagine what our housing market would look like right now without these HAF dollars getting out the door.”

    “As someone who has watched HAF be implemented across the country … I do think California did an amazing job,” Tutt said. Not only was California one of the first states to mortgage relief dollars out to homeowners, she said, it also expanded the program to more types of relief as needs evolved.

    State assistance is available to qualified homeowners who’ve missed at least two mortgage payments by Feb. 1 and are still in arrears, or who’ve missed at least one property tax payment by Feb. 1. Various restrictions apply, but the main ones are that aid is available only for owner-occupied homes and that an applicant’s total household income must be no more than 150% of the area median income. In Los Angeles County, that’s $132,450 for an individual and $189,150 for a family of four.

    Even if you do not qualify for a grant — your mortgage may be too large, for example — the state program has provided grants to legal service organizations and housing counselors to help you navigate your way to a solution, Franklin and Tutt said.

    Here are more details on who’s eligible for a grant, how to apply and what’s covered.

    Who qualifies for relief?

    Under federal law, households earning up to 150% of the median income in their county who suffered a pandemic-related financial hardship are eligible for up to $80,000 in relief. The limit rises as the number of people in your household increases; to find the limit for your household, consult the calculator on the program’s website.

    The program defines a financial hardship as either reduced income or increased living expenses stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. According to its website, qualifying expenses include “medical expenses, more people living in the household or costs for utility services.”

    There are a few more limitations, however:

    • The home in question must be your principal residence.
    • You may own only one property, although it may have up to four units on it.
    • Your mortgage may not be more than $80,000 in arrears. The program can’t make partial payments on your debt.
    • If you’ve already paid off your mortgage or tax debt, you can’t recoup that money by applying for state aid.
    • You will not qualify if your mortgage is a “jumbo” loan bigger than the limits set by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
    • You can’t obtain the state’s help if you have more than enough cash and assets (other than retirement savings) to cover your mortgage or tax debt yourself.
    • Your mortgage servicer must be participating in the program.

    What kinds of help are available?

    The program will cover past-due mortgage payments and property tax debt for eligible households, but it doesn’t stop there. Funds also can be used for:

    A second shot of relief. The mortgage relief program was originally seen as one-time-only assistance. Now, however, California homeowners who’ve already received help can apply for more if they have missed more payments and remain eligible. No household may collect more than $80,000 over the course of the program.

    Reverse mortgages. Homeowners with reverse mortgages can apply for help with missed property tax or home insurance payments.

    Partial claim second mortgages and deferrals. This applies to certain borrowers who fell behind on loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration, the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the Department of Veterans Affairs. Rather than demanding larger payments to cover the past-due amount, the agencies encouraged lenders to split off the past-due portion into a second, interest-free mortgage called a partial claim. That way, a borrower could stay current by paying just their usual monthly payment.

    The partial claim second mortgage could be ignored until the house was sold, the mortgage was refinanced or the first mortgage was paid off, at which point the partial claim would have to be paid in full. In the meantime, it’s a real debt that affects the borrower’s ability to obtain credit.

    Similarly, some lenders offered deferrals that bundled the missed payments into a sum that was tacked on to the end of the loan. Borrowers wouldn’t face higher monthly payments, but they would have to pay off the deferred amount (a “balloon payment”) when they refinanced, sold their house or reached the end of their loan.

    The mortgage relief program offers up to $80,000 to pay all or part of a COVID-related partial claim or deferral received during or after January 2020.

    How do you apply?

    Applications are available only online at camortgagerelief.org. For help filling one out, you can call the program’s contact center at (888) 840-2594, where assistance is available in English and Spanish.

    If you don’t have access to the internet or a computer, you can ask a housing counselor to assist you. For help finding a counselor certified by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, call (800) 569-4287. You may also get help from the company servicing your mortgage.

    The online application process starts with questions to determine your eligibility. If you meet the state’s criteria, you can complete an application for funds. Here’s where you will need some paperwork to establish how much you earn and how much you owe.

    According to the program’s website, among the documents you will need to provide are a mortgage statement, bank statements, utility bills and records that show the income earned by every adult in your household, such as pay stubs, tax returns or a statement of unemployment benefits. If you don’t have access to a digital scanner, you can take pictures of your documents with your phone and upload the images.

    You’ll also need to provide a California ID or a Social Security number.

    The site provides links to the application in English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and Tagalog.

    Who has received aid?

    According to statistics kept by the program, about three-fourths of the money has been used to help households at or below the area median income. In fact, half of the funding has gone to families whose incomes are no more than 30% of the area median, which in L.A. County would be about $26,500 for a single person or $37,830 for a family of four.

    About 52% of the aid has gone to Latino and Black Californians, who together make up about 29% of the state’s homeowners.

    The money will be awarded on a first-come, first-served basis, with two important caveats: According to the California Housing Finance Agency, 60% of the aid must go to households making no more than the area median income, and 40% must go to “socially disadvantaged homeowners.” Those are residents of the neighborhoods most at risk of foreclosure, based on the Owner Vulnerability Index developed by UCLA’s Center for Neighborhood Knowledge.

    [ad_2]

    Jon Healey

    Source link

  • L.A. County settles PACE loan lawsuits; affected homeowners to receive millions

    L.A. County settles PACE loan lawsuits; affected homeowners to receive millions

    [ad_1]

    Los Angeles County has agreed to a $12-million settlement to resolve allegations that its home improvement lending program wrecked the finances of many borrowers and left them vulnerable to foreclosure.

    The settlement, granted preliminary approval Monday by an L.A. County Superior Court judge, comes six years after some homeowners sued the county in twin suits alleging that local officials knew, or should have known, the program would harm vulnerable homeowners and then looked the other way as problems piled up.

    The county did not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement and continued to deny the allegations. It said it settled to avoid further litigation costs.

    “Without this, I think people would stand to get absolutely nothing,” said Stephanie Carroll, an attorney with Public Counsel, which along with Bet Tzedek and Hogan Lovells represented homeowners in the two lawsuits. “Now they stand to get some compensation for what happened to them.”

    Launched in 2015, the county’s Property Assessed Clean Energy, or PACE, program had the stated goal of enabling homeowners to finance energy- and water-efficient home improvements, including solar panels and low-flow toilets.

    The program, a public-private partnership, was overseen by the county but largely operated and funded by private finance companies, which in turn relied on home improvement contractors to sign up borrowers.

    Other PACE programs have been set up across the country. The loans require government approval because they are repaid as a line item on a homeowner’s property tax bill.

    PACE programs, including L.A. County’s, have been dogged by allegations that consumers — particularly elderly and non-English-speaking homeowners — didn’t understand what they were getting into and couldn’t afford their loans, which, if unpaid, could lead to foreclosure.

    Initially, lenders handed out loans based on the amount of equity a homeowner had in their property and didn’t consider the borrower‘s income to determine if they could repay the loan.

    Contractors who signed borrowers up for the loans have been accused of misleading consumers on how they would work.

    It wasn’t until 2018, following passage of state reform legislation, that lenders in California had to conduct an ability-to-repay analysis based on income.

    Still, complaints from homeowners continued, including that home improvement contractors charged inflated costs and forged their signatures to get the loans processed.

    In 2020, L.A. County shut down its program in part, it said, because it could not be sure there were sufficient protections for consumers.

    PACE companies say the vast majority of their customers come away happy and that foreclosures are rare. Some firms have blamed new California consumer protection rules for knocking out too many qualified candidates.

    The settlement, preliminarily approved Monday, resolves two lawsuits filed against the county and two of its private lender partners, Renew Financial and Renovate America. The suits allege that the parties committed financial elder abuse and that the private lenders encouraged predatory lending by not considering a consumer’s ability to repay while telling contractors how much of a loan a consumer qualified for based on their home equity.

    Like the county, Renew Financial continued to deny allegations as part of the settlement. Renovate America has since gone out of business, but previously said it found “no merit” in the allegations.

    Under the terms of the settlement, the county will pay $9 million, while Renew Financial will pay $3 million. The amount for attorney and administrative fees will be capped at $2 million, with the rest going to homeowners.

    Consumers can receive money if they took out a Renew Financial or Renovate America loan through the county program from March 1, 2015, to March 31, 2018.

    The county partnered with a third lender as part of the program, PACE Funding Group, which was not a party to the suits and homeowners with those loans are not entitled to relief.

    Homeowners who are eligible will receive extra compensation if their PACE loans caused very large debt burdens. In addition, those with big debt burdens who at the time of origination were 65 and older or had limited English proficiency will receive even more money.

    “For those people who particularly were kind of victimized … I think it will be very significant,” said Michael Maddigan, an attorney with Hogan Lovells.

    Though L.A. County no longer offers a PACE program, PACE loans remain available to many county residents because their cities —including Los Angeles — allow PACE financing through statewide programs.

    Homeowners who took out loans through those programs are not part of the settlement and not entitled to relief — even if their loan came from Renew Financial or Renovate America.

    Eligible homeowners will receive written notification of the settlement by mail.

    L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis said that the county remains committed to servicing PACE loans taken out under its program before it closed, as well as improving protections for those consumers.

    “The settlement demonstrates that commitment and our support for homeowners who sought to improve the energy and water efficiency of their homes under the program,” Solis said in a statement.

    For Zenia Ocana, the prospect of help is welcome news.

    In 2016, Ocana and her husband Juan decided to get solar panels on their North Hollywood home and ended up with a Renew Financial loan through the county’s program that left them with no residual income to live on, according to a complaint in one of the settling suits.

    In an interview, Ocana, 54, said the contractor who signed them up for the loan told them the solar panels would be paid for by the government and cost her family nothing.

    The Ocanas received no documents in Spanish from Renew Financial even though they don’t understand complex documents in English and were charged nearly three times the normal rate for solar panels, the lawsuit alleged.

    To afford the nearly $4,500 in annual loan payments, Ocana said she and her husband have cut back on food, relied on help from family and delayed other bills.

    The settlement, Ocana said, provides her hope that “we can be free of this nightmare.”

    [ad_2]

    Andrew Khouri

    Source link

  • Opinion: Inflation isn’t the real problem for the U.S. economy. The housing shortage is

    Opinion: Inflation isn’t the real problem for the U.S. economy. The housing shortage is

    [ad_1]

    Recently released government data hammered home what we have known for at least a year: A national housing shortage, not broad-based price increases, is driving inflation.

    Inflation over the past year was 3.1% — far less than in 2021 but still high enough for the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates elevated. However, unlike the inflation we saw soon after the onset of the pandemic, the more recent bout was overwhelmingly driven by the rising cost of what the Consumer Price Index classifies as “shelter” — including rent actually paid and the estimated rent that could be charged for owner-occupied homes.

    Since the start of last year, most prices have risen very slowly or not at all. The price of goods — the tangible things we buy — remained essentially the same, rising just 0.1%. Food inflation, a source of post-pandemic pain for many households, was less than 3%. And other categories of prices actually fell: Household energy prices are down 2.4%, and the price of cars has fallen just over 1%. All told, for everything other than housing, inflation was just 1.5% — low enough that if housing prices had grown at historical rates, the Fed could have declared victory.

    But housing costs have not grown at historical rates: The two-year price increase came in hotter than at any point in the past four decades. This lopsided picture tells us a lot about who is most affected by inflation and how it should be addressed.

    The outsize role of shelter inflation means that homeowners and renters whose leases haven’t changed are experiencing inflation very differently from those who were more exposed to rising housing costs. Indeed, rising housing costs are a double-edged sword, increasing the wealth of homeowners even as they punish many renters. Since the beginning of 2022, housing wealth has added over $2 trillion to homeowners’ balance sheets.

    This trend has important implications across generations. People under 35, with a homeownership rate roughly half that of those of retirement age, are much more likely to suffer from rising housing costs while also missing out on the resulting wealth boom. Retirees, with rising housing wealth and protection from inflation through Social Security and Medicare, are more likely to fare better.

    The remedy for housing-fueled inflation is also different from standard responses to broad-based price growth. One might have expected the Fed’s interest rate hikes — which caused mortgage rates to rise with unprecedented speed — to slow down housing prices. But while prospective homebuyers did pull back from the market, residential listings were in free fall during the pandemic and have yet to recover. That means would-be buyers face tight inventories and higher prices.

    The only effective long-term answer is of course to build and rehabilitate more housing — a lot more. America’s housing crisis is a big problem that requires an equally big solution, with various estimates putting the nationwide shortfall between 1.5 million and 5.5 million units.

    Legislation passed by the House in 2022 would have made meaningful progress by allocating around $40 billion to supply-boosting programs such as the Housing Trust Fund, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and HOME Investment Partnerships Program block grants. Unfortunately, the bill fell short in the Senate and is effectively dead until at least the next Congress.

    In the absence of major legislation in Washington, state and federal policymakers have been increasingly focused on incremental responses to the shortfall. The Biden administration recently announced a series of reforms — including grants for low-income seniors and funds to help rehabilitate manufactured homes — that will add tens of thousands of new homes to the market. An array of bills passed in Sacramento in recent years will help expedite new housing in California, where the shortfall of about 1 million units is nearly three times the next-largest state housing deficit. But the data show we still need to do much more to ease and encourage building to tame shelter costs.

    Fed Chair Jerome Powell and the Federal Open Market Committee have made it clear that they will do whatever it takes to fight inflation. That’s an admirable and responsible position. But Congress has yet to help by addressing our national housing shortfall. If it had, pandemic-era inflation might already be behind us.

    Ben Harris is the vice president and director of the Economic Studies Program at the Brookings Institution and was a longtime economic advisor to President Biden.

    [ad_2]

    Ben Harris

    Source link