Distressed by Distressed Properties Law?

On June 12, the Wash­ing­ton State “Dis­tressed Prop­er­ties Law” took effect. That’s House Bill — HB 2791 If you have the time to plow through the bill, here’s the whole offi­cial mess as a PDF file. If you have a shorter atten­tion span, read the June 6 Press Release from the Wash­ing­ton Attor­ney Gen­eral.

Washington State Distressed Home Owner law

So, what’s the big deal, you ask.

Big deal because you, too, are a “Poten­tial Dis­tressed Home Owner” if you

  1. Are at risk of loss for non-payment of prop­erty taxes,
  2. in default under a mortgage,
  3. 30 days behind on mort­gage — OR
  4. believe that you could default on your mort­gage within 4 months and tell your lawyer, real estate agent, lender, mort­gage or credit coun­selor, etc.

The bill has many flaws,

such as point 4 in the list above, vague word­ing, and sweep­ing def­i­n­i­tions, but there are two major flaws worth not­ing. To be a Poten­tial Dis­tressed Home­owner you must be

  1. occu­py­ing the property,
  2. the prop­erty must be your pri­mary res­i­dence, and
  3. this prop­erty has from 1 to 4 res­i­den­tial units

Any­thing miss­ing here?

Yep, the Dis­tressed Prop­erty Law does not cover any build­ing with more than 4 units, which excludes almost every con­do­minium com­plex.

What makes this an impor­tant flaw, you ask? Well, the pur­pose of HB 2791 is to pro­tect res­i­den­tial prop­erty own­ers in Wash­ing­ton from those shady char­ac­ters who are prey­ing on the dis­tressed home owner. It is to pro­tect them from con artist who “skim equity” and “steal homes”.

Since a good num­ber of first-time-buyers buy con­dos and since some of them financed their dream with ques­tion­able mort­gages this leaves a whole lot of tar­gets for the scam artists to pur­sue.

The other major flaw

of the bill is that it does not exempt real estate agents. (In other states that passed sim­i­lar leg­is­la­tion, real estate agents are exempt,) It is not that real estate agents are nec­es­sar­ily bet­ter than the aver­age per­son, but they are already cov­ered under other leg­is­la­tion, namely RCW 18.86 which gov­erns real estate prac­tice.

The bill cre­ates a whole new pro­fes­sion: the “Dis­tressed Home Con­sul­tant.” That new label was meant to apply to legit­i­mate fore­clo­sure spe­cial­ists and scam artists. It now also applies to real estate agents. The bill does exempt oth­ers equally likely involved in real estate trans­ac­tions: lenders, mort­gage bro­kers and lawyers.

These two flaws may be major but this one beats both.

Each bill that becomes leg­is­la­tion includes a “Fis­cal Note” which states the esti­mated Fis­cal Impact of the bill — that’s the impact on the bud­get, I sup­pose. And since that bud­get is paid for by our taxes that means the fis­cal impact on you and me. Accord­ing to the math wiz­ards in Olympia, the Dis­tressed Prop­erty is esti­mated to have “No Fis­cal Impact.”

No Fis­cal Impact? Let me count the ways.

The bill has resulted in numer­ous rewrit­ten and newly printed real estate trans­ac­tion forms. It has already cre­ated and will cre­ate more con­fu­sion and waste of time for any­one involved in buy­ing and sell­ing a home. That includes all the afore­men­tioned poten­tial dis­tressed home own­ers. The worst and most costly impact of this bill will be this: Every sane real estate agent will stay miles away from any­body sus­pected of har­bor­ing thoughts of being a poten­tially dis­tressed home owner. The poten­tial lia­bil­ity to be sued is sim­ply too great. Ulti­mately, this bill may achieve the oppo­site results of what was intended: more fore­clo­sures and more bank­rupt­cies. The shady char­ac­ters meant to be deterred by this bill will find other ways to ply their trade. Most condo own­ers remain unpro­tected and should watch out.

Much has and will be writ­ten about this law.

Here’s how a real estate fore­clo­sure spe­cial­ist (now becom­ing my Dis­tressed Home Con­sul­tant col­league) views this bill. Your com­ments are welcome.

Tags: , ,

8 Responses to “Distressed by Distressed Properties Law?”

  1. I found your blog via Google while search­ing for home equity def­i­n­i­tions and your post regard­ing Dis­tressed by Dis­tressed Prop­er­ties Law? looks very inter­est­ing to me. I was impressed by your site and offer­ings. I was look­ing at some of the arti­cles and it really impressed me. All I can say is con­grat­u­la­tions on cre­at­ing this site and what took you so long? I look for­ward to returning.

  2. The bill should have been named “Let’s Increase Foreclosures”.

    With­out Real­tors and Investors to help dis­tressed sell­ers get out of their houses and loans before the auc­tion, more prop­er­ties will be going to fore­clo­sure. If there is no one to buy these homes prior to auc­tion the banks are going to end up with a lot of REOs.

    There are a lot of hon­est, sin­cere and eth­i­cal real­tors and investors that have assisted many of these home­own­ers in the past. Now there is just too much lia­bil­ity in try­ing to help someone.

  3. Layla says:

    I was really hop­ing the bill would help with the fore­clo­sure rate, but it doesn’t seem to be helping.

  4. Jeremy says:

    this prop­erty has from 1 to 4 res­i­den­tial units”

    This may not nec­es­sar­ily exclude con­dos. If the prop­erty in ques­tion is one condo in a build­ing of six, it could be argued that the prop­erty in ques­tion is only one res­i­den­tial unit.

    I bring this up because I am cur­rently in the mar­ket to pur­chase a condo and I am stear­ing clear of any poten­tially “dis­tressed home owners.”

    With such vague lan­guage I do not want to be the first case that inter­prets the leg­is­la­tures intent.

    This leg­is­la­tion is only going to increase fore­clo­sures because it is bet­ter for the buy­ers to wait for the bank to own the prop­erty before mak­ing an offer.

  5. Gerhard says:

    Thanks for the com­ment, Jeremy.

    Every­body in author­ity, includ­ing the attor­ney of the local MLS, state clearly that con­dos are (by mis­take) exempt from this law (unless there are only 4 units in a com­plex). None of the real estate agents I know is stay­ing away from con­dos but many are avoid­ing dis­tressed prop­er­ties as defined by the law. You are right about the law con­tribut­ing to the increase of foreclosures.

  6. don says:

    good descrip­tion and ellab­o­ra­tion related to prop­er­ties law.thanks

    Yours sin­cerely,
    don­nie
    http://donnieproperties.blogspot.com

  7. Gordon says:

    Hi

    I found this blog search­ing Google and I liked the article.

    I just wanted to throw my two cents on this.

    The law will totally increase fore­clo­sures; I invest in fore­clo­sures and the absolute last thing we would ever do is try and steal a home. Investors and Real­tors need a chance to get in on these pre­fore­clo­sure prop­er­ties as they will help keep homes from going to auc­tion. I have “bought” a fore­clo­sure many times where the home­own­ers could stay at home.

  8. Looks like I found another great site to add to my feed reader. Mark

Leave a Reply

Host & Author

Gerhard Ade
Ger­hard N Ade Real­tor®
Cold­well Banker Bain

Archives