Save your HOME and Your Credit for Yourself, Your Family and Futrue Buying Power, Call U R Home

Call U R Home Realty 908-707-8900
We are Not Lawyers, We don't give Legal Advice, What we do is give you help and hope for a brighter future in Home ownership, Saving your current Home or perhaps selling your home in short sale and saving your credit for future buying power. We will not force you to sell your home. We will offer you several options for you to decide how you want to proceed to your next step in Life. Why only have one option if you are facing foreclosure and that step is guided only by what the bank tells you? Let U R Home help. It is FREE YES it is. FREE we do not charge you anything. What do we give you FREE help? Simple we would like future business with you, or maybe you'd recommend us to others, also we really do like to help people and keep New Jersey Strong! Give us a call and find out.

September 15, 2011


July 2012
Homebuyers in 2012 have some advantages over prospective buyers in other years: low, low interest rates & low home prices in the Central Jersey Area. Those advantages don't necessarily translate into confidence about a home purchase. Buyers are currently RENTING. 
Even though RENTAL PRICES are RISING rapidly and projected to continue. Buyers are SCARED. At U R Home we are trying to instill confidence, and show Renters that BUYING NOW IS REALLY BETTER. Even with not so perfect credit, Renters can buy & Build equity over the coming years. Call U R Home find out if you can go from RENTER TO HOMEOWNER. Some Buyers can receive great incentives such as Sellers helping with closing costs, gifted money to put on a Home & More. Call U R Home NOW, You’ll be glad you did. 


5/1 ARM 2.69%
The Heavy Betters are still cashing in on USA home sales, They are betting that Buyers won't buy now, even with prices so low that Buyers should not say no. The news/media is helping to keep money in the Big Investor's Pockets. BUYERS UNDERSTAND MOST ANY HOME THESE DAYS IS WELL WORTH BUYING,HOWEVER THE NEW/MEDIA WILL KEEP GOING TIL PRICES AND INTEREST RATES RISE... AS A REAL ESTATE SPECULATOR I CAN TELL YOU IT'S BEEN THE TIME TO BUY FOR OVER 2YRS NOW, IT WON'T LAST MUCH LONGER, ANOTHER YEAR MAYBE


If you owe $50,000 or $5,000,000 it doesn't matter we can help you sell your Home or Investment Property.

Avoid the Credit Issues you will have by letting the bank foreclose on your Home!

U R Home Realty can help. Dave Griswold is a Top Short Sale Expert in the Central Jersey Area.

Dave has successfully closed on many properties, thus saving the Home Owner credit issues, hassle, STRESS, and more.

Because you short sale your property you will remove the foreclosure from your credit. You sale will be marked SETTLED instead of FORECLOSED.

What does this mean to You?

1. You can own a Home again in a very short time.
2. You can restore your Credit.
3. You can begin your Life again.
4. You can put all the aggravation behind You.

None of the Above can be done without calling Dave Griswold

Call Today, Ask for Dave, Tell him your story, Dave can and will do all he can to help you.

Look up Dave Griswold, NJ. Learn about him and decide for yourself. Then Call 908-707-8900.

NO Foreclosure Too Big or Too small, Dave will work hard on them all! 

For Sale By Owner (FSBO) Statistics

FSBOs accounted for 10% of home sales in 2011. The typical FSBO home sold for $150,000 compared to $215,000 for agent-assisted home sales.

FSBO Methods Used to Market Home:

• Yard sign . . . . . . . . . . 44%

• Listing on Internet . . . 33%

• Friends/neighbors . . . .27%

• Open house . . . . . . . .19%

• Newspaper ad . . . . . 17%

• For-sale-by-owner Web site . .12%

Most Difficult Tasks for FSBO Sellers:

• Getting the right price . . . 12%

• Understanding and performing paperwork: 11%

• Having enough time to devote to all aspects of the sale: 6%

• Preparing/fixing up home for sale: 5%

• Selling within the planned length of time: 5%

Source: 2011 National Association of REALTORS® Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers
IT'S OFFICIAL, GOVERNMENT HAS FINALIZED AGREEMENT WITH BANKS... Government officials have finalized an agreement worth as much as $26 billion with five major banks, capping a yearlong push to settle federal and state probes of alleged foreclosure abuses by lenders. The deal represents the largest government-industry settlement since a multistate deal with the tobacco industry in 1...998. The agreement covers five banks: Ally Financial Inc., Bank of America Corp.,Citigroup Inc., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., and Wells Fargo & Co. Together, the five handle payments on 55% of all outstanding home loans, or about 27 million mortgages, according to Inside Mortgage Finance. Federal and state officials planned to announce the settlement this morning in Washington after putting the finishing touches on the deal following a marathon negotiating session that ended after midnight Thursday morning. The agreement will include at least 49 states, and officials were finalizing a separate accord with one remaining holdout, Oklahoma. The planned pact would involve around $5 billion in cash penalties, payable to borrowers, states and the federal government. That includes $1.5 billion in cash payments to borrowers who went through foreclosure between September 2008 and December 2011. Borrowers could receive $1,500 to $2,000 each, with the actual amount paid depending on the number of borrowers filing a claim. The agreement is expected to call on the banks to provide $20 billion in other aid—by cutting loan balances for tens of thousands of homeowners and by refinancing thousands of borrowers who are current on their loans but owe more than their homes are worth. Officials say the deal will help provide immediate benefits to around one million homeowners, while raising accountability for banks that work with borrowers facing foreclosure. The foreclosure process has been snarled since late 2010, after allegations that banks had serially submitted bogus mortgage documents when attempting to repossess homes from delinquent borrowers. On its own, the deal won't be a cure-all for the housing market or to the majority of borrowers at risk of foreclosure. Home prices have fallen by nearly one-third over more than five years, slashing real-estate values by $7 trillion and leaving 11 million homeowners with mortgages that are exceed their property values by $750 billion. High unemployment has frustrated round after round of federal efforts to stem foreclosures. "It is frankly a headline victory for both banks and attorneys general with a modest impact on the housing market," said Joshua Rosner, managing director of investment firm Graham Fisher & Co.

Great Brick Ranch

The U R Home Family had to post this, Finally Something Free and beneficial to you and your Children

Francine A. Gargano  Attorney AT Law
20 Shawnee Drive, Suite B  Watchung, New Jersey 07069
(908) 753-2079

The Law Office of Francine A. Gargano and MassMutual are proud to announce the introduction of LifeBridgeSM, MassMutual’s free life insurance program.
Through LifeBridge, the Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (MassMutual) insures the lives of qualified working people for the benefit of their children. A 10-year term life insurance policy, with a death benefit of $50,000, is provided. If you die during the 10 years of coverage, the $50,000 is paid into a trust, administered by the MassMutual Trust Company, FSB, and used to cover educational expenses of your dependent children.
There is no cost to you or your children; MassMutual pays all of the premiums for the policy.
You are eligible to apply for LifeBridge if you are:
Between the ages of 19 and 42;
The parent or legal guardian of one or more dependent children under age 18;
A permanent, legal resident of the United States;
Currently employed – either full or part time -- with a total family income of not less than $10,000 or more than $40,000 annually;
The only member of your household who has applied for LifeBridge; and
In good health, as determined by MassMutual’s underwriting standards.
You are not eligible to apply for the program if you:
Have been diagnosed with heart disease, cancer, HIV or Type 1 Diabetes;
Currently abuse drugs or alcohol or have abused them within the last 10 years;
Are currently on probation.
If you meet all of the eligibility requirements, please contact me to get the necessary forms.
LifeBridge can help protect your hopes for your children’s future, and it is my hope that every eligible client apply for this valuable coverage. Please feel free to share this with someone you know.
Francine A. Gargano
Challenge foreclosure"It's late,& limited,borrowers who felt their homes were wrongly foreclosed upon in 2009/10, there is now recourse.An enforcement action (so-called 'consent orders') taken last April against

14 of the largest mortgage banks/servicers following the so-called 'robo-signing' scandal, the OCC is beginning a 'multi-faceted independent review of foreclosure actions.Banks, including... B.O.A, Chase, Citibank, Wells,GMAC,& EMC, will have to fund these independent reviews to evaluate, 'whether borrowers suffered financial injury through errors,misrepresentations, or deficiencies in foreclosure practices.' If they did, those borrowers get some kind of 'remediation.''The challenge is substantial, but the steps we have required the servicers to take are vitally important to resolving these issues in a way that respects the rights of those who have been harmed & helps to restore confidence in the system,' said John Walsh, O.C.C in a statement.

Citigroup to Pay Millions to Close Fraud Complaint


WASHINGTON — As the housing market began its collapse, Wall Street firms and sophisticated investors searched for ways to profit. Some of them found an easy method: Stuff a portfolio with risky mortgage-related investments, sell it to unsuspecting customers and bet against it.

Lucas Jackson/Reuters

Robert Khuzami of the S.E.C. said the bank should have been more forthcoming.

Multimedia Graphic

Tracking Financial Crisis CasesAdd to Portfolio

Credit Suisse Group AG

Citigroup Inc

Goldman Sachs Group Inc

JP Morgan Chase & Company

Citigroup on Wednesday agreed to pay $285 million to settle a civil complaint by the Securities and Exchange Commission that it had defrauded investors who bought just such a deal. The transaction involved a $1 billion portfolio of mortgage-related investments, many of which were handpicked for the portfolio by Citigroup without telling investors of its role or that it had made bets that the investments would fall in value.

In the four years since the housing market began its steady descent, securities regulators have settled only two cases related to the financial crisis for a larger sum of money. This is also the third case brought by the S.E.C. accusing a major Wall Street institution of misleading customers about who was putting together a security and about their motive. Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase & Company both settled similar cases last year.

The settlement will refund investors with interest and include a $95 million fine — a relative pittance for a giant like Citigroup. On Monday, the company reported that in the third quarter alone it earned profits of $3.8 billion on revenue of $20.8 billion. The settlement may also have trouble getting approval from Jed S. Rakoff, the federal district judge in New York who must ultimately sign off on the fine and who has taken a hard line on S.E.C. settlements.

Neither the S.E.C. nor the Justice Department would say whether the case raised questions about whether Citigroup had been involved in any criminal wrongdoing. But the case highlights a growing frustration felt by foreclosed homeowners, investors and Wall Street protesters alike that few, if any, senior banking executives have faced criminal charges for losses growing out of the financial crisis.

Citigroup has settled one case stemming from the crisis. Last year, it agreed to pay $75 million to settle federal claims that it hid from investors vast holdings of sub prime mortgage investments that were losing value during the crisis and that ultimately prompted the federal government to rescue the bank.

“The securities laws demand that investors receive more care and candor than Citigroup provided” to investors in the security, said Robert Khuzami, director of the S.E.C.’s enforcement division, referring to Wednesday’s action. “Investors were not informed that Citigroup had decided to bet against them and had helped to choose the assets that would determine who won or lost.”

The complex amalgamation of investments known as Class V Funding III produced $126 million in profits for Citigroup’s brokerage subsidiary, and another $34 million in fees for putting it together. All of that, including interest and the $95 million fine, will now be going back to the investors; the government will not receive anything.

In a statement, Citigroup noted that the S.E.C. did not charge it with “intentional or reckless misconduct.” Rather, it settled charges that its actions were negligent and misleading to investors. Despite its profits on the current deal, over all Citigroup lost tens of billions of dollars on its holdings of mortgage-related investments.

“We are pleased to put this matter behind us and are focused on contributing to the economic recovery, serving our clients and growing responsibly,” the company said in a statement. “Since the crisis, we have bolstered our financial strength, overhauled the risk management function, significantly reduced risk on the balance sheet and returned to the basics of banking.”

The S.E.C. on Wednesday also brought a case against Credit Suisse, which played a smaller role in the transaction, and against one individual at each company. But those individuals were mid level employees in each company’s investment and trading departments; no senior executives at either company were charged.

Credit Suisse, which managed the portfolio of mortgage bonds that served as collateral for the deal, agreed to pay $2.5 million, half of it in penalties, to settle the case. The company declined to comment.

Multimedia Graphic

Tracking Financial Crisis CasesAdd to Portfolio

Credit Suisse Group AG

Citigroup Inc

Goldman Sachs Group Inc

JPMorgan Chase & Company

Samir H. Bhatt, 37, a former portfolio manager at Credit Suisse, also agreed to settle, paying no fine but agreeing to a six-month suspension from association with any investment adviser.

Only Brian H. Stoker, 40, a former Citigroup employee who was primarily responsible for putting together the deal, has decided to fight the S.E.C.’s case. He left Citigroup in 2008.

“There is no basis for the S.E.C. to blame Brian Stoker for these alleged disclosure violations,” said Fraser L. Hunter Jr., a lawyer at WilmerHale who is representing Mr. Stoker. “He was not responsible for any alleged wrongdoing — he did not control or trade the position, did not prepare the disclosures and did not select the assets. We will vigorously defend this lawsuit.”

Mr. Stoker joined Citigroup at the height of the housing boom in 2005, and worked as a director on the structured product desk. His job tasks were largely behind the scenes, crunching numbers and assembling deals like Class V Funding III.
After the deal closed on Feb. 28, 2007, more than 80 percent of the portfolio was downgraded by credit ratings agencies in less than nine months. The security declared “an event of default” on Nov. 19, 2007, and investors soon lost hundreds of millions of dollars, the S.E.C. said, while Citigroup gained.

Among the losers was Ambac of New York, which insured financial instruments and was the largest investor in the deal, according to the S.E.C. Ambac’s role in the transaction was to assume the credit risk associated with a $500 million portion of the portfolio. When the value of the portfolio fell, Ambac had to make payments to those who had bet against the bonds, as Citigroup had.

In part because of losses tied to the financial crisis, Ambac filed for bankruptcy last year.

Criminal prosecutions related to the financial crisis have been few. Two former Credit Suisse brokers were sentenced to jail in their roles for misleading clients about purchases and thus inflating their sales commissions. Six executives at a mortgage company, Taylor, Bean & Whitaker, have pleaded guilty in a scheme to issue false mortgages to obtain federal mortgage money and bank bailout funds. Lee B. Farkas, a former chairman of Taylor Bean, was sentenced to 30 years in prison for his role in the case, which resulted in the demise of Colonial Bank of Montgomery, Ala.

Those crimes started long before the financial crisis. A prosecution of two former executives of Bear Stearns, the failed investment bank, ended in acquittals.

Eric Dash contributed reporting from New York.

The War fought in the American Court Systems
May 2011- Why does the Government continue to let the Banks lie,cheat and steal our Homes.
It's true, that some Americans just didn't care and let their homes go into foreclosure.
It's true, Americans were mislead by the Banking Industry
It's True, The Banks would not negotiate, however lead the Home Owners to believe they would.
It's True, Government is just talking, talking and taking up our tax dollars to supposedly fix this problem.
It's True that Foreign Banks Will own a huge part of America when this is all over.
It's True that We the People need to fight the Big Corporate Banks and Insurance Companies.
  It's True this is a Battle between American Home Owners, The Courts and the Banking Industry.
It's True that the Court System is on Both Sides of this Battle.
How can We the People win the war if the main player is sitting on both sides of our fence?
Abe Lincoln said it Best.
It's True that Americans and the Court System needs to be united in this cause NOT divided and we will win this WAR!
WASHINGTON -- One day before the federal government is scheduled to reach its debt limit, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he is ready to make a deal to raise the debt ceiling and that Congress does not have to wait until the "eleventh hour" to do so.

In an appearance on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday, Boehner conceded that Congress will need to eventually raise the debt ceiling, which currently stands at $14.29 trillion. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner wrote in a letter to Congress earlier this month that the nation will reach its debt limit on May 16, but can rely on “extraordinary measures” to prevent from defaulting on its loans until August. Geithner wrote that default by the U.S. "would have a catastrophic economic impact that would be felt by every American," and other economists have said that failing to raise the debt ceiling would have a disastrous effect on the markets.

Despite these warnings, many members of Congress have said that they will not vote for a bill that raises the debt ceiling unless it is paired with other efforts to get the nation’s deficit under control, such as major spending cuts or changes to entitlement programs. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) reiterated on Sunday that he sees the pending debt limit deadline as a “great opportunity” to talk about spending.

McConnell has said he will vote against any debt-limit deal if it does not include long-term cuts to entitlement programs such as Medicare and Medicaid.

"Rather than thinking of this as a crisis, I think of this as an opportunity to come together," he said on CNN’s “State of the Union,” adding that he would not support tax increases as part of the deal.

Boehner has also ruled out tax increases as part of a deal for grappling with the long-term deficit, despite appeals by Democrats to use revenue-increasing measures to avoid some program cuts.

On “Face the Nation,” Boehner invited President Barack Obama to join him in tackling entitlement spending, alluding to the House GOP budget that made major cuts to Medicare.

AdvertisementAdvertisement“Let’s lock arms and we'll jump out of the boat together,” Boehner said.

Boehner said last week he wants the debt-ceiling deal to include trillions of dollars in cuts, equal to the amount the debt ceiling will be raised, but he has been mum on his proposed timeline for those changes.

Still, He said it will be necessary to raise the debt limit, despite criticisms from other GOP politicians that raising the debt ceiling will enable more unnecessary spending. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, for instance, said on Sunday she opposes any increase to the debt limit, telling ABC’s “This Week” that Congress should “absolutely not” raise the ceiling.

"I think it is necessary, but I understand the doubts," Boehner said. "At some point it's clear to me that we have to raise the debt ceiling."

Criminal and Administrative Insurance Fraud Cases in the Courts
May 6, 2011
State and federal courts in New York have recently issued a number of significant decisions in cases involving allegations of insurance fraud in the criminal and administrative arenas. The results were decidedly mixed for the government.[1] However, the fact that there have been so many important cases in the courts, together with at least one new major legislative development relating to criminal insurance fraud, suggests that insurance fraud may finally be gaining the attention it deserves in New York.
Incentive Programs
In February, the Court of Appeals decided People v. Wells Fargo Insurance Services, Inc.[2] Here, the Attorney General brought a civil action against the insurance brokerage firm now known as Wells Fargo Insurance Services, Inc. The complaint contended that Wells Fargo had engaged in "repeated fraudulent or illegal acts" in violation of Executive Law Section 63(12), which permits the Attorney General to apply to the Supreme Court for an order enjoining the continuance of such actions.

Have lying mortgage bankers met their match?

Posted by Colin Barr

May 4, 2011 6:28 am
How fitting that when Wall Street finally takes a hit after years of mortgage malpractice, the stick is called the False Claims Act.
If there is one thing that's never in short supply in banking circles, after all, it is false claims. Internet stocks are good as gold! House prices never fall! Derivatives make the financial system safer!
A club the banks may have no choice but to join
Those particular false claims aren't the ones that have Wall Street looking down the barrel of a $1 billion-plus government civil suit, mind you. Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney who sued Deutsche Bank (DB) Tuesday, is going after the bank's alleged practice of making federally insured mortgage loans without actually checking, as it repeatedly claimed, on annoying details like whether the borrowers actually had jobs or incomes or bank accounts that would allow them to repay.
In short, the feds have finally figured out a way to go after the banks for wholesale, systematic lying – a practice they have often been accused of but rarely held accountable for since the financial meltdown.
Bharara's secret is the federal False Claims Act – a law that was originally passed in 1863 to keep suppliers from ripping off the Union Army but lately has been turned mostly on greed-ridden health care companies like Pfizer (PFE), Tenet (THC) and Medco (MHS) as they bilked Medicare. The government has collected $27 billion in False Claims Act recoveries since the law was strengthened two decades ago.
Bharara's insight is that just as giant health care companies illicitly fattened themselves up at the Medicare trough, the banks wrongfully enriched themselves by stuffing taxpayer-backed mortgage insurers such as the Federal Housing Administration* with loans they should have known would go bad. Why, he seems to be alone in asking, should we be taking that lying down?
Because the False Claims Act gives the government the right to sue for triple damages and to apply penalties for each instance of fraud -- as many as 39,000 in this case -- and because the government has been backing so much of the mortgage market, the feds at long last may have found a bit of leverage over the over leveraged crowd.
"We're not talking about billing the government for $4,000 hammers here," says Anthony Michael Sabino, who teaches business at St. John's University in New York. "These allegations go to something systemic at the heart of the housing market."
Needless to say, Deutsche takes issue with this unflattering portrait of a rampaging Teutonic Ninja lender (no income, job or assets). It points out that a lot of the bad loans were made years ago, before it owned the subsidiary that made them, and clucks that regulators had their chance then to rein in any excesses. It calls the charges "unreasonable and unfair," and says it plans to defend itself vigorously (is there any other way?).
And it's true enough that the government has yet to prevail in this case, let alone sue any of the other mega banks. So it's premature to say it will send chills down the spines of the gambling with other people's money crowd.
But the revelations of the past year, from Abacus to robosigning, made one thing clear: All the banks -- from JPMorgan (JPM) and Goldman Sachs (GS) on down -- have been playing the same corner-cutting game. And federal prosecutors, who have been rightly criticized for their failure to bring a single crisis-related criminal case against an executive anyone has heard of, must be eager to rattle some Wall Street cages. So it is hardly a stretch to assume similar cases are on the way.
"This is a warning shot across the bow of mortgage lenders past, present and future," said Ed Pinto, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington and a longtime student of the FHA. "It's encouraging they're doing this, to remind the lenders someone is watching."
The suit alleges that Deutsche and its MortgageIT unit chased profits at taxpayer expense for a decade. They made 39,000 loans on which the government has so far paid out $386 million in insurance claims, the suit said – in addition to $888 million of mortgages that have defaulted but on which the government hasn't had to pay out.
Because the False Claims Act calls for treble damages, plus per-occurrence penalties of as much as $11,000, Deutsche clearly faces at least $1 billion in damages and could be looking at as much as $2 billion.
There is, of course, the question of whether even a judgment of that size would discourage Wall Street from playing fast and loose next time round.
"You have two options in False Claims Act cases," says David Feuerstein, a litigation partner at Herrick Feinstein in New York. "The fact that they took the civil option rather than the criminal one may allow you to make some assumptions about the strength of their case."
But let's not get ahead of ourselves. As the chart at right shows, the government has figured out how to bring in a couple billion dollars a year on False Claims Act litigation. Every little bit helps nowadays, in the age of the idiotic debt ceiling debate, and if nothing else it's good there is a prospect of turning Wall Street upside down and giving it a good shake.
Turnabout is fair play, after all.
Initially I mistakenly referred to the FHA as the Federal Housing Authority, leading one reader to say, in essence, Get the names right this time.
Also on Feds take a whack at Deutsche Bank ,Is Fannie bailing out the banks?
BofA's unfunny foreclosure tricks
Banks Ordered to Reimbursh Wrongly Foreclosed Homeowners
by Tavis J. Hampton - 15 April 2011
The U.S. federal government has ordered 16 of the largest lending institutions to pay back those customers who did not get proper foreclosures. Among those on the list are Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo, the four largest banks in America.
This is the governments latest jab at mortgage lenders designed to bring about retribution for their past sins, but like the others, it is by no means a knockout punch. The joint report issued by the Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and Office of Thrift Supervision, indicated that the three regulators would review the foreclosure audits and would levy fines in the future.
The lenders have 45 days to hire an auditor and reimburse the borrowers for any errors or other missteps during the foreclosure process. The report did not specify a minimum or maximum amount to be reimbursed.
As with many of the other perceived wrist slaps on financial institutions, House Democrats were not at all impressed with the “lenient” order, and they would prefer lenders be forced to go through more steps before they can even start the foreclosure process. Their new legislation will address that concern.
Since 2007, lenders have foreclosed on approximately 5 million homes, and lenders like Ally Financial (formerly GMAC) said they did not find any customers going through foreclosure who were not in “serious default” of their loans. To that end, this latest order may be little more than a small bandage on a very large wound in the housing market.
One Response to “Banks Ordered to Reimbursh Wrongly Foreclosed Homeowners”
Donna says:
April 16, 2011 at 7:48 pm
Wells Fargo not only did robo-signing but also I have proof that Wells Fargo committed mortgage fraud and defrauded homeowners and wrongfully foreclosed home based on its fraudulent mortgage loan.
Here is my story:
Wells Fargo originated us a fraudulent mortgage loan in 2005.

Wells Fargo’s fraudulent appraisal valued our home for $718,000.

Wells Fargo’s review appraisal valued our home for $475,000.

Wells Fargo promised to rescind its fraudulent mortgage loan and help us to recover all of our financial losses, if we prove that Wells Fargo made us a fraudulent mortgage loan based on inflated appraisal in 2006.
Nevada Attorney General’s Office suspended the appraiser’s license for committing appraisal fraud on our home in 2008.
Wells Fargo later on refused to carry out its promise to rescind its fraudulent mortgage loan. NRS205.372 states that committing mortgage fraud is a Category C felony, if proven, it also entitles us to rescind Wells Fargo’s fraudulent loan.
We put $151,000 down payment. Between 2005 and 2009 we paid Wells Fargo around $350,000.
On June 15, 2010, Wells Fargo still foreclosed our home, knowing that it is a Category C felony to make a mortgage loan and foreclose our home based on a fraudulent appraisal.
Now, after it committed loan origination fraud and wrongful foreclosure, Wells Fargo is falsifying IRS 1099-A forms to write off its fraudulent mortgage loan which it has already sold to a pool of investors.
You can find all facts on our website.

Wells Fargo has repeatedly demonstrated to us that it has built up a business model based on fraud. Will Wells Fargo do the right thing by admitting its fraud and compensating us for our financial losses this time?

We've heard so many stories about Attorney's refusing cases because their too difficult, time consuming or not easy enough for them. We have a few stories we personally know and some from Internet or media sources we will update. We think that by having a PRO SE  added to this blog will add to the one's already out and give more HOPE to those in need of Attorney's and Attorneys who simply say NO to Court.
  We will be adding a whole pro se page if we get enough responses to  this. We welcome your stories. Please send them to      Privacy will be respected.

click on above link, Man in Florida wins his house in foreclosure

By Sheree R. Curry Posted Apr 12th 2011 10:
A New Jersey couple fought a lender's foreclosure proceedings and ended up being able to keep their home. George Elghossain and his wife, Mona, successfully defended against a mortgage loan services that tried to foreclose on their 4-bedroom home. The April 4 court decision set a precedent for other homeowners in the state who now should be able to cite this case for having their own foreclosures dismissed.
servers of North Brunswick, N.J., a real estate broker who raised four children in the bi-level home, pictured left, used his industry knowledge to fight his case in court without a lawyer after he noticed that the servicer of the loan that sent him the notice of intent to foreclose was not the lender that owned his loan.

"When I got the foreclosure complaint I found out the people suing me was not the people I had been paying. Now I had issues with am I paying the right party, and paying the right bank," Elghossain told AOL Real Estate. "So naturally I didn't continue payments, even though I could've made the payment."

By New Jersey state law, the homeowner is suppose to be notified of various items, including the name of the lender that owns the loan and its contact information.

In its paperwork, loan servers Bank of America failed to include the names of the lender and the lender's representative in its notice of intent to foreclose, See photos of homes for sale in your area and across the country on AOL Real Estatethus violating New Jersey's Fair Foreclosure Act, which was enacted in 1995 and has been updated several times.
"The Fair Foreclosure Act is clear, unambiguous, and readily comprehensibly (especially to a sophisticated lender)," according to the opinion written by Judge Glenn Berman of Middlesex County.
Bank of America wanted the judge to expand the meaning of who is a lender so that it would include any "mortgage lender, mortgage investor or mortgage loan server that owns ... or is authorized to negotiate the terms of the homeowner's mortgage." Berman said the bank's argument "is misplaced."
Elghossain purchased the home in 1985 and with his wife and refinanced it in 2004 with a local bank called New Millenium Bank for $260,000 at a 6.25 percent interest rate for 30 years. Zillow currently estimates that the home is worth about $295,000, down from a peak of about $485,000 in 2008.
About a month after Elghossain refinanced, New Millenium sold the loan to Countrywide Document Custody Services, which shortly transferred it to Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Countrywide sold it to the Bank of New York, but maintained a servicing agreement, which was recorded on December 7, 2006. When Countrywide was purchased by Bank of America, BofA became the server, but Bank of New York remained the holder of the mortgage.
Bank of New York was one of 24 lenders to file 200 or more foreclosure actions in New Jersey in 2010, reported the New Jersey Law Journal.
"Homeowners in New Jersey don't contest their foreclosures, and they should," said the 50-something-year-old Elghossain. "With all the forgery and fraud, people should contest their foreclosures. That's my advice. If they can't do it themselves, they should consult an attorney to make sure the lenders have complied with the rules."
Elghossain, who was last with Weichert Realty before becoming his own broker with GME Realty, says the financial downturn in the industry took its toll on his business. In November 2009, he missed a payment on his mortgage and he received the intent to foreclose about 30 days later.
"Before Bank of America filed its lawsuit, I wrote them a certified letter saying I'd like to start making my payments again. Instead of taking that with open arms, they never responded and they filed for foreclosure."
Although the family, with two kids still living at home, are still holding on to the property, Bank of America still has the right to come back and serve the Elghossains with a proper notice of intent to foreclose.
For others facing similarly situations, Elghossain repeats, "Fight your foreclosures. New Jersey law gives you a lot of protection. People say the courts are biased, but that's not my experience." And to buyers of foreclosures, this former real estate instructor says, "Make sure the bank has the right title, or else you'll be facing previous homeowners who find out they still have rights to the title."

April 15th mortgage rates are as follows:

30-year fixed from 4.250% (4.735 APR)

5/1 ARM from 3.000% (3.015 APR)

15-year fixed from 3.500% (3.739 APR)

Rates above are for A+ credit,income and assets

If your credit is below 740 interest rates will increase please be aware of this.

With Today's Market Buying a Home has never been more affordable both in Home Prices and in Interest Rates.  Prices are holding steady in the Central Jersey Area which translates into a rise in the very near future. Foreclosures and Short Sales are and have been experiencing all the issues that you'll see below this does not reflect those homes NOT in foreclosure or short sale.

                                    The Downfall of 2003 to 2009

This Blog is in response to a few reporters/bloggers and the like, saying that it’s the home- owners fault that they are in foreclosure and the courts shouldn’t worry about missing loan documents, false assignments and the paper work list goes on. Here is what I have to say. Please read and if you agree, please pass it on. It’s my hope that America will be aware of the damage Banks, Mortgage Companies, Mortgage Servicers, MERS/Insurance Companies and other Big Corporations, or as they said in the old Days “Money Changers” are doing to greatly participate in creating one of the most major downfalls of the USA.

Of course the homeowner has been hurt. I will agree that not every homeowner has suffered, some have just milked the system much like any mortgage server or Mortgage Company has done. NO difference.

Lost paperwork is an easy remedy. For example when a foreclosure is eminent, the Banks, as I’ll refer to them, are supposed to file with the courts for foreclosure to begin the process. At that time the Banks are to have all their paperwork ready. If they were doing legitimate, legal business why do they not have the NOTE in hand? If the Banks are ready, they have paperwork to begin to foreclose. If it’s discovered that the note missing, shouldn’t they then file for missing NOTE? It is easily understandable that things get lost as many of those who believe it’s the homeowners fault has said, passport, drivers license, etc there is no difference between a NOTE and a drivers license. What do we do, we go and file for a new one. What would happen if we lost our drivers license and was stopped by the police. We would get a TICKET, pay a fine or more depending on the circumstances. Now we say to the courts, Your Honor I have a drivers license I just can’t prove it with PAPERWORK, and the Judge says GUILTY, pay a fine, pay for a new license and come back to court and prove it. OK prove it but the courts will have already made you pay a fine i.e.: money damages.

After becoming somewhat educated over the last few years in big corporate business, high finance, insurance and foreclosures, I have a HUGE QUESTION. Why don’t the banks prior to or within a week, even two weeks after a foreclosure suit on the homeowner, file for a missing NOTE if their missing it? Why wait 9 or 12 months and say to the courts we can’t find it? Is the court supposed to say that’s OK? Guess what America some courts do say that’s OK and proceed to foreclose on your home.

WHY for example does Wells Fargo start a foreclosure and three to five weeks later the same property Wells Fargo is starting foreclosure on will have an update with a new Name usually as I’ve read “ HSBC AS TRUSTEE FOR WELLS FARGO, NA”? The banks will take up the Courts time, add stress to the homeowner, and collect service fees from the Investors during this process. WHY? Money and Control.

Banks own so many properties in Chicago that the town has asked the banks to level the homes as the Banks own whole streets. I ask, who is hurt by all of this and who is making all the money, and WHO is owning America one foreclosure at a time?

There are so many more homeowners, and I use the word Owner lightly because they bought into “the American Dream”, which once existed in this Great Nation. They believed the Mortgage rep. They believed the Lawyer, the Bank Representative, or Title Company who were supposed to explain the paperwork they were signing at closing. From the average to the highly educated person, they believed that what they signed was what they had been told WAS. They or “We the People” were wrong. They never received the Truth in Lending, They didn’t understand fees, costs, insurances etc. They never saw through the mountain of paperwork they had to sign. Hidden in the mountain was papers that were NOT as it was when they applied for the mortgage or on original mortgage documents that were signed. The only things heard at the closing table was “don’t bother reading it, it’s all standard, or it’s just like a car loan,” or the rushing at the table to hurry up.

The homeowner put their heart, soul and hard earned money into their future home. They work on their homes usually improve the property, new paint, or new floors, kitchens etc. They the homeowner puts in TIME, MONEY AND PART OF THEIR LIFE. What is that worth? The Banks put out their blogs, or interviews on TV, they advertise that it’s not Them it’s the home- owner that can’t make the payments, it’s the homeowner’s fault, it’s the homeowner that should leave. It’s the homeowner that will have to pay for many years to come, with back debt, stress, overtime at their job, with loss of their credit so they can’t even apply for new credit cards because they the homeowner is punished and fined for not keeping up the payments. Who makes out in all this mess? The BANKS, THE SERVERS OF THE LOAN that’s who.

Here is just a few examples of what a homeowner loses against what the Banks and Server win:

Loss of Homeowner                   Win of Banks/Servers

Initial down payment                                                                    Money

Up front fees                                                                                Money

Home Improvements                                                                   Future Money

Interest payments                                                                         Money

Mortgage Payments                                                                     Money

Until the homeowner stops

Stress/trying to modify                                                                  Money

The loan to keep home

Loss of life enjoyment                                                Gained home equals Money
Loss of credit, Loss
Of home and lost Money

Likely will still owe
Thousands and Thousands                                                  Future Money
Of dollars to the bank

as a note: Some Judges have said the words to a Home Owner your not getting a free house?

At this point the homeowner will be very lucky if they can find a rental that will accept them with their now destroyed credit. The EX-Homeowner will be considered lucky if the banks don’t put a judgment on them for whatever the remainder of the original mortgage is owing after foreclosure or short sale. The EX-Homeowner now faces years and years rebuilding their credit or of having any hope of owning a home again.

As of 2010 The Good News for Buyers is this is a Buyers Market with Homes sales prices way down and low interest it is without a doubt Buying Time.

This is one of the best blogs on information about Wells Fargo and the Pain of dealing with them!
March 28th 2011 Major Win for HOMEOWNER!

30-year fixed from 4.250% (4.678 APR)
5/1 ARM from 2.625% (2.952 APR)

15-year fixed from 3.625% (3.903 APR)


STAFF WRITER New Jersey News
The median price for an existing single-family home in the area that in­cludes Monmouth and Ocean counties rose 7 per­cent in the fourth quarter of 2010, the National Asso­ciation of Realtors said Thursday.
The median price for a house that sold in Mon­mouth, Ocean, Middlesex and Somerset counties rose to $350,600, up from $327,700, the figure in the fourth quarter of 2009. For the year, the median price rose to $345,400, up from $331,900 in 2009, a 4 percent rise.
The price in Essex, Hunterdon, Morris and Union counties rose 6.7 percent to $364,100. For the year, the median price rose to $379,200, up 3.4 percent.
The median price means that half the homes sold for more and the other half for less.
The number of home sales, including condomin­iums and single-family homes, hit hard by the ex­piration of the homebuy­ers’ tax credit early in 2010, fell 27.1 percent in the fourth quarter over the previous year, the NAR said.
While higher than 2009 prices, the median home sale price in New Jersey weakened in the second half of the year, particu­larly in the fourth quarter, after earlier gains from the tax credit and mortgage availability, said econo­mist James Hughes, dean of the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers University in New Bruns­wick.
“At best we could say (the overall market) stabi­lized,” Hughes said.
“It is certainly better than what happened in ’08 and ’09,” he said. “We went from really the great weak­ening in ’08 and ’09 to re­ally the great stabilization in 2010.” But, he cautioned, “There are still fears of a double dip out there in prices.” Jeffrey G. Otteau, presi­dent of Otteau Valuation Group in East Brunswick, said the momentum of the federal homebuyers’ tax credit carried the state’s home sales prices, despite the slowdown in transac­tions, to a 1 percent me­dian sales price gain for the year.
But the possibility of an­other price decline is on the horizon.
“This slight increase in home prices in 2010 is not likely to continue this year, into 2011, and what we’re likely to see this year are some modest de­clines in prices, some­where up to as much as 5 percent,” Otteau said. “There is no longer any momentum from the ex­pired tax credits and the foreclosure problem is still worsening.” At the same time, job creation in New Jersey is behind the rest of the coun­try.
“We are still losing jobs. The rest of the country is gaining jobs, and that means that housing de­mand will continue to be weak in 2011,” Otteau said.
While the market is at or very near the bottom, Ot­teau said he doesn’t see “the housing market really start to look something like normal with increas­ing sales and just overall better conditions” until 2012.
Otteau’s median sale price figures, which in­cludes new homes, give a sense of what is happening in New Jersey’s counties. In Monmouth County, the median sale price in the fourth quarter rose 2 per­cent to $343,596, while it re­mained relatively flat in Ocean County at $217,768, the firm said.
The median sales price in Somerset County reached $358,000 in the fourth quarter, up 7 per­cent, and jumped 11 per­cent in Hunterdon County to $367,500, according to Otteau Valuation Group statistics. Middlesex County and Union County saw a 2 percent drop in the fourth quarter to a median sales price of $275,170 and $310,000 respectively, the firm said.
Morris County saw the median sales price rise to $397,490, up 5 percent, the firm said.
New Jersey is starting to see signs of a recovery be­cause the total number of resales in 2010 were only 5,000 below the 2009 figure, said Jarrod C. Grasso, chief executive officer of the New Jersey Associa­tion of Realtors. The me­dian prices released by the NAR throughout the Gar­den State showed year over year growth in the fourth quarter.
“This is encouraging news for local housing markets as it shows strength in New Jersey property values,”
“Buyers are coming into the market, negotiations are happening,”
HSBC Holdings PLC has suspended all foreclosure actions in the United States, according to the company’s annual regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

HSBC says it decided to temporarily halt foreclosure proceedings after examinations by federal regulators uncovered what the company described as “deficiencies” in its handling of legal paperwork related to foreclosure cases.

HSBC is headquartered in London and is Europe’s largest bank. It operates in the United States as HSBC Finance and HSBC Bank USA, both of which were subject to the official investigations involving mortgage servicing practices and foreclosure processing.

HSBC says it received cease-and-desist letters from both the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) which outlined problems in the company’s processing, preparation, and signing of affidavits and other documents supporting foreclosures, and in HSBC’s management of third-party law firms retained to carry out foreclosures.

“Management is reviewing foreclosures where judgment has not yet been entered and will correct deficient documentation and re-file affidavits where necessary,” HSBC said in its annual report. “We have suspended foreclosures until such time as we have substantially addressed noted deficiencies in our processes.”

HSBC said it is currently in discussions with the Federal Reserve and the OCC regarding the terms of the cease and desist orders, which prescribe actions to address the deficiencies noted in the joint examination, and the company expects consent orders to be finalized soon.

In addition, HSBC said it could face fines and civil money penalties imposed by the regulators and federal agencies.

HSBC is among 14 major servicers subject to the regulatory probe that could face sanctions and fines for faulty foreclosure procedures. Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo have also disclosed in regulatory filings that they could face similar enforcement actions.

March 11,2011

The Banks and We the People! Or the Scorpion and the Frog!

 In this short and simple Aesop's fable, a scorpion, who couldn't swim, asked a frog to carry him across the river on her back. The frog hesitated, saying, "I'm afraid you will attack me." But the scorpion pointed out that it wouldn't be in his interest to do that, because, if the frog died in the water, he would drown. So she consented.

As they were half way across the water, the scorpion suddenly whipped up his tail and stung the frog hard. As the poison spread through the frog and she began to sink, she whispered, "Why? Why did you do that, when now we must both die?"
"Because," the scorpion replied sadly, "it's in my nature to sting. I'm sorry." As he spoke, they both disappeared beneath the water. The moral of the fable is that we can't overcome our nature, even if it works against our interest.
You see the real story is just like this fable only The Scorpion is the Banks and the Frog is We The People.
Banks main purpose is to generate profits for themselves, regardless of the outcome for anyone or anything else. 
March 2,2011
How the middle class became the underclass

The age old Question: Why buy a Home now?

Here's some reasons why you Shouldn't buy a home.

1.Maybe you don't have job security
2.Maybe you think that the Housing Market will continue to drop
3.Maybe you think you're credit isn't good enough
4.Maybe you think you don't have enough money saved to put down on a home.
5.Maybe you can't see the value in buying a home or investment property

Now for the flip side, Why you SHOULD buy a HOME

1. Job Security is something that few people have, since you still have to live somewhere, pay rent to  someone one. Why not buy a home?
Did you know it's a lot easier to be thrown out of a rental than it is to be removed from you home for being late on your monthly payment.

2. The housing market has dropped, the interest rate has dropped.

3. Credit scores are ever changing, ever present and part of our life. Your credit score need not be any higher than a 530 for an FHA Loan. Of course there is loop holes, but for most buyers with a score at or above 530 they can buy. Good score is 640

4. Don't have enough money to buy a home. In many cases all you need is what you'd need if you were renting and yes maybe a bit extra but for so many you may only need a few thousand to be on your way to home owner ship.

NOW, If it's your first house it's usually called a starter home, meaning it's probably not your dream home, or maybe it needs some work. Or still yet if your starting over because of a previous foreclosure or loss of income etc. Then it's still your first house like a chance to do life over again!
Take advantage of your new life and stop handing your hard earned money over to someone else for their future, And start investing in your own.

Call U R Home Realty for the insight into Home Ownership!

5. Did you know that if you don't have enough of a down payment for your home, a family member can gift you money as your down payment?

6. Did you know that you can ask for the Seller to help pay your closing costs?
We specialize in the area of helping those who are starting over, or people with low credit scores,low on cash, or those who are in foreclosure.
We can help, really we can.
Give Dave or Lisa a Call at U R Home let us help you into your future!
U R Home Realty L.L.C.
The little Company with the BIG Results!
PH: (908) 707-8900
Fax: (908) 707-8917
Dave Griswold/ Lisa Payne Brokers/Owners
Dreams are Made Here!
Wesite Information:

From our website you can CHAT NOW with a live Broker/Realtor who has experience,knowledge and is available at more anytime. If our chat is down, it will return, sometimes it because we're switching Broker/Realtor, sometimes it's because all of our Agents are busy and once in while it's just because.
Our Website also offers easy to find properties simply go to our featured listings and shop for a home,investment property or rental. If you find what your looking for simply click to email Lisa and she will respond usually between a few minutes to a few hours.
NJ Real Estate by U R Home Realty

Buyers and Sellers don't be fooled by some web sites or blogs giving you the value of your property or properties that you may want to buy.

So many web pages can't determine what each and every property has that makes it different from the average property.
We went to investigate this after hearing that a property we have for sale was overpriced as said to us by a caller.
Zillow, Trulia and so many others though they are a pillar of information, often times do not do property owners justice. Average priced home in Manville was in the area of $248,000 so our caller said how can you ask so much for a home that should be in the mid $200's our reply was that for whatever reason the websites averages were town wide and did not factor in that the home we had listed was a 3 family that was a little over 2yrs old.  Now the average reader of such sites goes by what they read. We say take values on properties lightly until you have spoken with an Experienced Broker or Realtor, and if that doesn't ease you mind you can go further and get an independent Appraisal Company to inspect the property for real value.
We hope this helps, U R Home

Biggest Move so far to HELP the American Homeowner!

How the Foreclosure Settlement Could Affect You

By Teke Wiggin

Marking the conclusion of the largest joint state-federal settlement in history, the National Association of Attorneys General announced today that the nation's five largest mortgage servicers -- Bank of America Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Wells Fargo & Company, Citigroup, Inc., and Ally Financial -- have agreed to pay a $25 billion judgment to settle an investigation into illegal foreclosures.

Government agencies launched the investigation in response to revelations that, in the wake of the housing bust, banks had mishandled foreclosure paperwork and illegally foreclosed on homes. The deal could provide some relief to close to 2 million homeowners, The New York Times reports. And though by no means a panacea to the nation's housing woes, the settlement may give the beleaguered market a nudge in the right direction, experts say.

Here are the major points in the deal:

Principal Reduction

Servicers must pay $17 billion to homeowners in the form of principal reduction and other foreclosure relief mechanisms. Since servicers may actually benefit from modifying many of the loans (modification often reduces the risk of default), they will not receive 100 cents on the dollar in credit for many of the principal reductions. As a result, the $17 billion could translate into an estimated $32 billion in relief, the National Association of Attorneys General says. Servicers must pay the $17 billion within three years or face cash penalties.

Refinancing for Underwater Homeowners

Servicers will commit $3 billion to refinance underwater mortgages. A homeowner is underwater if he owes more on a mortgage than his home is worth.

Limited Eligibility for Principal Reduction and Refinancing

The relief conduits outlined above -- surely to the frustration of many homeowners -- mostly apply to bank-owned loans. Only 20 percent of mortgages fall into this category. The rest of loans in the country are mostly owned by investors, and by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who buy mortgages from lenders. Some experts, like Jack Guttentag of The Mortgage Professor website, argue that this is unfair because it's up to banks to make the choice to own mortgages that they originate or to sell them to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Homeowners have no say. The Federal Housing Finance Agency, which overseas Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, has repeatedly stated that it will not allow principal reductions on any mortgages guaranteed by the two mortgage giants. The agency says mass principal reductions would cost the government-sponsored companies $100 billion.

$2,000 for Foreclosed-On Borrowers

Servicers will pay about $2,000 to homeowners who lost their homes to foreclosure during the period from Jan. 1, 2008, to Dec. 31, 2011. The payment is not reserved strictly for borrowers who were illegally booted from their homes. All homeowners who were foreclosed on by the five banks are eligible for the cash award. In total, servicers will fork over $5 billion to states and the federal government to fund the payments. To receive the payment, borrowers must complete an application and undergo a screening process. Borrowers do not forfeit their right to sue servicers by taking the payment.

New Protections

Homeowners will receive new protections, some crafted specifically to guard against improper foreclosure. Banks must now offer a single point of contact for borrowers and adhere to new review and processing requirements. The protections prohibit banks from negotiating a loan modification while simultaneously pursuing a foreclosure.

Limited Immunity From Lawsuits

Borrowers may still sue banks for the same improprieties that sparked the investigation. The settlement only grants banks immunity from prosecution by the government for foreclosure abuses. The settlement does not release the banks from claims relating to mortgage-backed securities -- marking a win for several state attorneys general who feared that the deal would let banks off the hook for other improprieties committed in recent years.


An independent monitor will enforce the terms of the agreement. Joseph A. Smith, Jr., who formerly served as the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks, will fill the position. The monitor may enforce the agreement in court and impose penalties on lenders who stray from its terms, according to the Center for Responsible Lending.

Note: Under a different enforcement action, homeowners who believe they lost homes to improper foreclosure may seek redress by requesting a review of their case. If the assessment determines the borrower suffered "financial injury," CNNMoney reports, the borrower could receive compensation.


N.J Self Help Guide for Saving your HOME

click link below or copy and paste into your browser

Many Sellers have said when we've asked them to lower the price of their property, I'm not going to give my house away. Unfortunately many Sellers bought in the higher priced market or refinanced, got equity lines etc, and need or want to sell their homes or investment property. How do you show or convince your Sellers to lower their price to a more marketable amount?

The question above was Asked by U R Home Realty, Below are some answers written by other Realtors in the USA


Debbie Rose Agent Livingston, NJ///JR - do you also have : "I'm in no rush", "I don't have to sell" ......on your list, too? "I'm in no rush"...."Good, because at the price your are suggesting Mr Seller, you won't be selling anytime soon". (of course, this is said with a smile, so as not to come across snide).

I don't have to sell...."Then why are you?"...and add - ."You're fortunate you don't HAVE to sell, so perhaps we should wait until you feel a stronger desire to sell rather then waste time at an unrealistic price".....(again, it's not snide - its honest!).


J R Agent New York, NY When a seller tells me one of those pat answers I whip out my "top 10 list" of things sellers tell me. (I also show them my top 10 list of things buyers tell me, so it doesn't look like I'm making fun of them). Things like "I'm not giving my house away" "But I owe" "But I need" "But my next house costs" "But the neighbor sold for". And of course I'm now adding Debbie's "Let them make me an offer." :)

Then I assure them that I have no knowledge of anyone who has "given" their house away to a complete stranger.


Johanna Wiseman Agent Somerset County, NJ You simply can't allow a seller to delude themselves into thinking this phrase has any truth or usefulness. As an agent who represents both sellers and buyers, I have heard this many times. I have ten years experience in real estate, and my partner has over 20 (in addition to being a second-generation real estate broker.) So I will quote the response we always use when this phrase appears: Giving away means FREE. NO ONE is asking you to give away your home. A price or an offer is nothing more than a number you need to consider, even if you ultimately decide not to negotiate or change your position. You have our permission to use this line or tailor it to your needs! Good luck, it's tough right now but when the going gets know the rest of the story!


Jenet Levy Agent Greenwich Village, New York

It always comes down to showing the comps - active and sold, and use reasoning and respect in presenting the facts. Facts have a way of speaking for themselves.


Jeanne Feenick Agent Warren, NJ Ah, what a common refrain! I come prepared with an analysis that proves that homes sell within a fairly narrow band to asking price WHEN the asking price hits the property's "strike price". It is eerily consistent, across markets and price points. Every brokerage and every office has a portfolio of real examples that can be drawn on - the facts tell the story. I like to make it very visual - sit down and go over real cases. Sprinkle in the examples of the sellers who "get it' and price correctly early on those are the ones that net more, NOT less, than those that don't.

Let the facts speak, bring the data and present it, the market will deliver the message.


Agent Mount Arlington, NJ If you already have the listing, you can set them up to receive automatic emails detailing the online activity from Trulia and other websites. When they can see with their own eyes the that they are getting a lot of interest but no showings or no offers, that should help. Of course a CMA or even a BPO, which is what the banks use as opinions of value, may also help. My best advice would be to qualify them at the time you are discussing listing the property and if they want to price it too high, walk away. Why should you waste your time, effort and money on an unsaleable listing?

That is what I did earlier this year, I took a listing that was way over priced because it was a referral from someone I felt obligated to. I told the owner when we took the listing where his price needed to be, but he wouldn't listen. I have diligently marketed the property, we have reduced the price twice and we are finally at least close to where the price needs to be but still a little too high. At least now we are getting showings. But the property has fallen further into disrepair so I am no longer convinced it is worth what it was 9 months ago. Lesson learned, just say no! Do yourself a favor, learn from my mistake!