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.
There is nothing wrong with wishing for costly things (like a house perfectly in tune with your HGTV personal style), but expecting it, or worse, expecting it without having to pay for it, is a bit unrealistic. When I bought my first house, my goal was just to find a house that I could live with, in my price range. It took many years for me to do the updates, and those were first and foremost taking care of previously delayed maintenance.
It's not about whether or not it's "their right" to do whatever they want with their home - of course it is. It's about peoples' expectations - at the risk of personal financial ruin.
So do it bother you if people make those changes if it is not a financial risk?
I think many first time buyers are short on cash to close.
Well, then, you save money for a few more months until you can afford to buy a house. That includes your closing costs. It ain't rocket science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear
In many markets that is what is available. Mid century houses are predominant in some areas. They are UGLY! They were UGLY when they were built and now they are even worse.
That's your opinion. Thank God not everyone shares it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by von949
People like to replace their "outdated" vehicles and clothes with the newest of the new. Homes are no different.
Actually, they are. Cars and clothing are not built to last 100 years or more. Apples and oranges.
Even the fixtures that everyone on HGTV is yammering about "changing out" (can we eliminate that phrase from the English language? It's redundant and sounds stupid) -- light fixtures, faucets, etc. -- are built to last for decades.
You don't really know if people are overextending themselves based on a TV show. When my husband and I shopped for our first house we set a budget of $275K. We could afford more, but that was our budget for that house.
No offense, but you obviously don't know how closely I worked with many first time home buyers. I would talk (with their permission - in fact, often on speaker phone) with their lender who would tell me what amount they prequalified for. This maximum amount ALWAYS pushes the envelope with finances, and nearly always depended on BOTH incomes - and was at their maximum debt to income ratio.
This is not a healthy place to be.
Quote:
So just because someone says their budget is $275 on a TV show that doesn't mean they can't afford to go a penny over that number.
I am trying really hard to be patient with your continued misunderstandings. I'm talking about REAL people making REAL financial decisions. Isn't that obvious????
Quote:
I just don't think you can tell if another person is overextended or not from the outside.
One more time - I wasn't on the outside of the deal.
So do it bother you if people make those changes if it is not a financial risk?
I always hate to see vintage items - from a chair to a home - that are in good condition defaced or destroyed. That being said - it's their house and their money (till they default on the credit card payments anyway). It's not morally wrong - any more than it's morally wrong to slap paint on a valuable antique to make it look "shabby chic."
Not that our agent asked (or was ever privy to any of our financial situation - we felt that putting all our cards on the table would not help us get the best deal), but our debt-to-income ratio would have been rendered irrelevant given our savings/investments.
Not that our agent asked (or was ever privy to any of our financial situation - we felt that putting all our cards on the table would not help us get the best deal), but our debt-to-income ratio would have been rendered irrelevant given our savings/investments.
I don't doubt that.
But I do doubt it when people don't even have a down payment and can't afford the closing costs!
Look, this wasn't an isolated scenario - I watched it happen over and over again. And after I moved and went into banking rather than real estate, I worked in the loan department and was privy to detailed personal financial information and saw the same scenario over and over again, this time with home equity loans, vehicle loans, you name it. I ran credit over and over again and had to explain to people who were literally NEVER LATE on payments that their credit score still sucked or that we couldn't lend them any money because of their debt to income ratios.
But I do doubt it when people don't even have a down payment and can't afford the closing costs!
You and I are in complete agreement when it comes to that sort of thing.
I think that people should have 20%+ down, never mind not being able to cover closing.
It is an abuse of credit to overextend yourself like that.
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.
