Top Forclosure Zip Codes in Las Vegas... (North Las Vegas: foreclosures, refinancing)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The largest number of foreclosures in Las Vegas have occurred in the North Las Vegas zip code 89031 -- the 8th worst in the nation. 89131, 89148, and 89129 also ranked in the top 50.
For a list of the top 500 zip codes in the country, go to the link below.
Just a cursury scan of the list, for towns in a state where I am familar, shows something else too. There's a whole lot of marginal communities listed from that state.
I'm pretty familar with California, having been born and raised there before it got inundated with the invasion from the East, and what I see are a lot of communities with cheap housing on the list. People could no longer afford to live in more mild climate regions like the coastal regions, and therefor more desirable areas, so they went out to places like Fontana, Perris, Hesperia, Lancaster, Palmdale, Victorville, Temecula, etc., etc., etc., where they could afford a house. All they could afford were places out in the desert, and apparently they either stretched to buy a house out there or unreasonably took advantage of loans they should not have considered.
I'm also generally seeing a lack of the good areas in my cursury glance, at least in California. Any good areas are overwhelmed by the marginal areas. Even some of the zip codes listed in cities that, on the surface someone might think was a desirable place to live, are not necessarily so. One of the San Diego listed zips comes to mind. Being a native, that zip represents an area that was known as an area to avoid.
I don't know if this situation turns out to be generally true amongst the entire list. For example I'm not familar with the Las Vegas zip codes. However, my little review tells me that this banruptcy issue is most prevelant in the lower priced housing or in areas where people had to go because they were already stretched to the limit. You don't see it in areas where the housing is more expensive, at least in relation to the local market.
Although the individuals always had the obligation to decide what they were capable of handling, I wonder how much culpubility lies with the lending industry? All those liar loans (no doc/stated income) weren't made without the knowledge that people were lieing.
There's no wonder that areas populated with famlies with marginal incomes, who took adavantage of the liar loans, wouldn't hesitate to file bankruptcy and walk away from their homes. Some of them lied to begin with, bought with little to no investment, so what does walking away from their promises and money do to their integrity. The answer is nothing. They didn't have any to begin with. So, should the lenders expect anything different when they end up holding the bag? I don't think so. Perhaps institutions and people will learn a leasson and this situation won't repeat itself after everything shakes out.
Just a cursury scan of the list, for towns in a state where I am familar, shows something else too. There's a whole lot of marginal communities listed from that state.
I'm pretty familar with California, having been born and raised there before it got inundated with the invasion from the East, and what I see are a lot of communities with cheap housing on the list. People could no longer afford to live in more mild climate regions like the coastal regions, and therefor more desirable areas, so they went out to places like Fontana, Perris, Hesperia, Lancaster, Palmdale, Victorville, Temecula, etc., etc., etc., where they could afford a house. All they could afford were places out in the desert, and apparently they either stretched to buy a house out there or unreasonably took advantage of loans they should not have considered.
I'm also generally seeing a lack of the good areas in my cursury glance, at least in California. Any good areas are overwhelmed by the marginal areas. Even some of the zip codes listed in cities that, on the surface someone might think was a desirable place to live, are not necessarily so. One of the San Diego listed zips comes to mind. Being a native, that zip represents an area that was known as an area to avoid.
I don't know if this situation turns out to be generally true amongst the entire list. For example I'm not familar with the Las Vegas zip codes. However, my little review tells me that this banruptcy issue is most prevelant in the lower priced housing or in areas where people had to go because they were already stretched to the limit. You don't see it in areas where the housing is more expensive, at least in relation to the local market.
Although the individuals always had the obligation to decide what they were capable of handling, I wonder how much culpubility lies with the lending industry? All those liar loans (no doc/stated income) weren't made without the knowledge that people were lieing.
There's no wonder that areas populated with famlies with marginal incomes, who took adavantage of the liar loans, wouldn't hesitate to file bankruptcy and walk away from their homes. Some of them lied to begin with, bought with little to no investment, so what does walking away from their promises and money do to their integrity. The answer is nothing. They didn't have any to begin with. So, should the lenders expect anything different when they end up holding the bag? I don't think so. Perhaps institutions and people will learn a leasson and this situation won't repeat itself after everything shakes out.
You are simply wrong Garth. You are apparently building to some preconception. Don't...bad idea.
The areas are generally those with high numbers of homes built in 2004 through 2006. A combination of high percentage finance and builders markup made those involved vulnerable. If anything goes wrong in their lifes...maybe even simply having over-reached... there is no available out except foreclosure. Same behavior three years previous and they would now be well off or at least not in any trouble.
The areas are much more specific to the late build then to low economics. 89129 for instance is a relatively well off zip economically. It however had almost 5,000 homes built in the 2004-2006 time frame. Temecula also has no economic weakness.
There is also no particular indication of bankruptcy. One walks from the house to avoid it in fact.
Nahh Garth...sounds like you knew the answer and are simply stacking the facts to support your view.
Well, maybe I'm reaching. I'm looking at a particular area and trying to make sense of it.
In support of my conjecture, there are some particular cities with large recent construction projects and growing populations that I don't see on the list. Santa Clarita (Valencia/Saugus/Stevenson Ranch) comes to mind as one place, maybe something like Calabasas and Thousand Oaks too. Santa Clarita would be a town with a 150K+ population, so it's not too tiny to be under the radar.
Lots of housing was built in each of those communities in the year range you describe, especially for Santa Clarita. They were very fast growing. However, it appears that they're different in some way. Truely, I wonder what would keep them off the list since they were no different from a construction rate standpoint. There has to be something going on, other than the years when the housing was built, to keep them off the list.
If it's the cost of housing, that could be one difference that has kept these towns off the list. They're not as inexpensive as the other Calif towns on the bankruptcy list. They are generally not considered entry-level communities. Although they may not be s desirable as something like Malibu, La Jolla, or Palos Verdes, they're certainly not like the previously mentioned towns on the bankruptcy list. How might that come into play?
It always seems to being me back to the marginal incomes and experience of the general population that sought out the current high bankruptcy areas. They couldn't afford something in a more desirable areas so they went elswhere where things were cheap. They stretched to get into a home, were romanced by the lending institutions with ridiculous loan formats, and then they bought into the plans because they had no experience or knowledge to warn them that it was a bad idea.
With a few years under their belt, but still without a pot to you-know-what in, and maybe without a family culture of personal and economic responsibility, I can see them contributing to the high bankruptcy and foreclosure rates. It's any easy way out of a situation when they don't have the long-term patience to wait out a cyclical housing market or the understanding that a home is not a short term investment. It's also a way to implement the blame game if they learned they made a poor loan decision. It's not unreasonable to believe that, in their minds, their plight is the fault of everyone else instead of themselves, so they shouldn't have to pay.
The only answer that I can suggest, is that towns like Santa Clarita were too expensive for people who generally haven't already obtained their own pot to you-know-what in. The population that could buy in such towns have something to lose if they file bankruptcy, have learned the concept of personal and economic responsibility, and may have developed the financial aptitude to use lending programs wisely, even if they did go the route of the liar-loans. Something like a bankruptcy would truely be considered a far last resort by such people instead of an easy way out. Otherwise, I can't imagine why such towns would be so different since the building factor was not dissimilar.
I wish I could discuss this issue intelligently as it relates to a Las Vegas or Nevada market, but I can't. I'm just that not as familar with the neighborhoods, zip codes, and nice vs. bad areas. However, I can't see things being too different as long as there is a similar dichotomy bewteen nice vs. bad areas and since I think people are the same, and react the same as their economic counterparts, no matter where we are in the country. Perhaps there would be some way to replace the Calif towns I listed with Nevada or Las Vegas area names with the right knowledge.
It's simply a business decision; personal integrity has nothing to do with it. It is foolish to stick with a money losing asset. The risk of default is built into the cost of the loan. That's why the bank charges points. As house prices deflate, more and more "homeowners", especially those with interest only loans, will walk away, and rightfully so.
Personal Integrity has everything to do with it. Even business activites have a concept of business ethics, if they are an ethical business. In the case of the homeowners, they promised to do something (pay the house payments) if somebody else were to lend them money. They agreed to the terms. There was no "'if and only if' the price goes up" involved in the transaction. By walking away solely because the price went down shows a lack of integrity. It is wrong. It is unethical.
Lots of people today will disagree that it is a wrong thing to do. That's the problem. There has been a erosion of integrity. It says that a man's word is worth nothing and his signature is worth just as little, still nothing.
Overall, but not in particular, the people walking away from their loans and filing bankruptcy in many of these areas are not doing so because of a loss of a job and a true inability to pay due to a change in circumstances. Unemployment rates have not changed significantly overall to show that it has been a factor. People still have their jobs. Again, this is a general statement and not a particular statement about a particular situation. So, many people are simply walking away without regard to their word. It's a lack of integrity, a character flaw.
It all comes down to right and wrong. They don't exist any more, at least in this context. It is reflective of a general decline in society's ethics. Another way to think of it is that it has become wrong to think of, or consider others' actions as, right and wrong. IMO that is both sad and dangerous.
The problem is that it ends up costing the rest of us, both in terms of dollars and social issues. Those people who do stand by their words and agreements end up covering the costs for those that fail to stand by their words and agreements. The banks just pass it on to the next loan through junk fees, higher loan rates, lower savings rates, or whatever they can get away with.
In my view, those people who, without any cause other than their house declined in price, decided to give the house back and file bankruptcy to get out from under the debt, are economic criminals in addition to people with character flaws. They are adversely affecting their neighbors and nation. It is wrong in my belief and it is something for which they should be held accountable . . . until the bill is paid in full or they are pushing up daisies.
I agree, personal integrity is dead in today's society, but the same people you think should pay for these loans no matter how expensive they have become are the same people who helped build all that sudden unprecedented wealth in your property to begin with. It's a double-edged sword I guess. I can, like most people here, name countless examples of people who did ignorant things like refinancing, buying multiple homes, or buying the biggest most expensive home they could, all using those wonderful ARM loans. They wanted to believe, and were told, that property here was going to go through the roof and continue on and on forever because afterall so many people are moving here each month and homes are still relatively cheap when compared to (fill in the blank), and whatever other line of b.s. they were looking to believe from the sharks feeding of their ignorance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
