Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Austin's Guaranty Bank demolishing new homes in California
keyetv.com ^ | May 6, 2009 | Greg Watson

Posted on 05/07/2009 8:53:17 AM PDT by bgill

An Austin bank is tearing down new homes in California and outraging some neighbors there.

Guaranty Bank says knocking the homes down is cheaper than finishing them, making some wonder if it could happen here.

In all, 16 homes are being demolished. The bank says it was forced to foreclose when the builder defaulted on the loan.

(Excerpt) Read more at keyetv.com ...


TOPICS: US: California; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: banks; forclosure
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
Another group of homes is facing the bulldozer as well. These homes were almost completed so there's no reason why they couldn't have been sold as is other than the city was fining the bank daily.

More details at - http://www.youtube.com/user/visionvictory

1 posted on 05/07/2009 8:53:17 AM PDT by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: bgill
See these beautiful homes being destroyed here.
2 posted on 05/07/2009 9:05:00 AM PDT by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill

Bank’s houses. They can do what they want with them.


3 posted on 05/07/2009 9:11:02 AM PDT by mgc1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill

part of the Greenies’ global dream....return suburban acreage to it’s pristine pre-human condition, and herd all of the sheeple into urban “sustainable communities”


4 posted on 05/07/2009 9:12:15 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bgill

sold to whom? there appears to have been no buyers for these
faux chateaux...


5 posted on 05/07/2009 9:12:45 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mgc1122
Bank’s houses. They can do what they want with them.

Regardless of who owns them, this is insane...

6 posted on 05/07/2009 9:31:27 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

“part of the Greenies’ global dream....return suburban acreage to it’s pristine pre-human condition, and herd all of the sheeple into urban ‘sustainable communities’”

This is the result of bad business decisions and stupid policy. This has absolutely nothing to do with “green” communities. What you see happening is precisely what SHOULD happen. They overbuilt. They had good reason at the time. Everything was moving up. Now it’s not, so taking down worthless homes that will become fire hazards or havens for squatters and rats is an excellent idea. Nothing to do with “Greenies”.


7 posted on 05/07/2009 9:39:16 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagliine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
so taking down worthless homes that will become fire hazards or havens for squatters and rats is an excellent idea

Oh sure....The banksters that own these homes are so very concerned with the safety of the neighborhood. lol...

8 posted on 05/07/2009 9:49:33 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

A check of the local property tax rates for improved vs. unimproved land will tell the true tale. It’s cheaper to knock them down now and carry the land until it pays to rebuild.


9 posted on 05/07/2009 9:57:23 AM PDT by AustinBill (consequence is what makes our choices real)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

“Oh sure....The banksters that own these homes are so very concerned with the safety of the neighborhood. lol...”

The bankers are concerned with getting the results of their stupid decisions off the books. The community (city/county/state) has to deal with “the safety of the neighborhood”. It’s a win-win.

I live in an area (in CA) that built out beyond it’s borders anticipating ever increasing revenues. The building (hundreds of homes) just stopped. We are not dealing with this yet, but there is already a glut of older homes, closer into town, so we will have to deal with it soon.

Are you suggesting that we simply act as if they don’t exist?


10 posted on 05/07/2009 9:59:24 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagliine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
Now it’s not, so taking down worthless homes

By the way, lets set the record straight here. These home were not worthless.

Tens of millions of people would have paid to live in those homes, but not paid what the banksters wanted.

I am trying to imagine the poor working slobs that have lost everything, pensions, home, investments, everything, and then watching these banksters just destroy perfectly good, brand new homes.

The problem was, the banksters are used to big profits. Instead of just selling them for what they could get, they just destroyed brand new homes.

This is utter madness.

11 posted on 05/07/2009 10:04:53 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210

You suggested or implied the banksters did this to make the neighborhood safer.

That had absolutely nothing to do with their decision. zip, nada.


12 posted on 05/07/2009 10:07:11 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: bgill

I don’t get it...why not sell them as is with a huge discount?


13 posted on 05/07/2009 10:10:14 AM PDT by tflabo (Truth or Tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tflabo

I’ll tell ya why. Because these stinking banksters are beyond greedy. These people are down right evil.


14 posted on 05/07/2009 10:12:09 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

“Tens of millions...”

OK now you’re just gettin’ hot. If you think I have an affinity for “banksters” think again. I am much closer to the founders on this issue than most “conservatives”. They saw the potential for corruption in MEN not institutions. Limbaugh type conservatives believe all business is sacrosanct. Liberals believe the same about the government (as long as they control it).

Banks, like any business, are subject to corruption. They screwed a lot of people and we’re left trying to figure out how to deal with their stupidity.

The video attached to this thread shows, the narrator says, a model home. (It actually looks like it could be just down the road a piece.) There are no other homes around it. It was partially finished. In our community, there are several areas like you see in that video. They are not going to be finished. The builder has abandoned them, the bank wants them off the books. Tear them down.

The banks don’t set home prices. They simply finance them. The “banksters” are dumping properties at under market value to a whole new group of speculators. More along the lines of the 80’s and 90’s. Buy an undervalued property, fix it up, rent or resell it. Flipping a home in weeks is not gonna happen again any time soon.

THESE homes, in the video, are overbuilds. They are incomplete. They were not going to be bought by a “poor working slob”. The guy you’re referring to IS going to be able to buy a home at a “reasonable” price simply because there is such a glut. Prices are still going down in many areas. Back to the price that they would have at before the wild speculation of the last 5 years or so.

If banks go under, so be it. Some other lender will take up the slack. Credit unions for one.


15 posted on 05/07/2009 10:30:19 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagliine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
If you think I have an affinity for “banksters” think again.

What made ya think that? lol....

You said the homes were worthless. You're wrong.

I think the banksters are greedy and evil bastards. If you have a different opinion, that's fine.

16 posted on 05/07/2009 10:34:53 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
And you also suggested or implied the banksters did this to make the neighborhood safer.

That had absolutely zip, nada to do with this insanity.

And you know it.

17 posted on 05/07/2009 10:36:47 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dragnet2

“That had absolutely nothing to do with their decision. zip, nada.”

I was referring to a comment by Buckeye McFrog who seemed to be suggesting that tearing down this home was part of an environmentalist conspiracy. I didn’t mean to imply that bankers were interested in other human beings, just that some of these homes (in my area at least) are going to have to come down. We have plenty of other, fully completed, older homes (some only a few years old) in our city that you or any Freeper is welcome to take a look at. We are a very conservative community a couple of hours from the liberal coast and would love to have you. (It’s still CA, however.)


18 posted on 05/07/2009 10:40:12 AM PDT by Leonard210 (Tagline? We don't need no stinkin' tagliine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bgill

At least they won’t have to deal with the Acorn squatters.


19 posted on 05/07/2009 10:41:14 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leonard210
I didn’t mean to imply that bankers were interested in other human beings

That's a relief...For a minute there we were all rolling on the floor laughing at the idea.

20 posted on 05/07/2009 10:49:46 AM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson