With mortgage delinquency rates that have historically “hovered between 1.5 percent and 2 percent” for those who are seriously-delinquent (overdue by 60 days or more), over the past year the seriously-delinquent rate for the San Francisco MSA has increased from 7.07 percent to 7.97 percent according to a TransUnion report.
The national serious-delinquency rate currently stands at 6.67 percent versus 10.45 percent in California. San Francisco county weighs in at 4.49 percent versus 13.12 percent in Solana and 3.98 percent in Marin.
∙ Mortgage delinquency rates edge up in Bay Area [SFGate]
so 8% of mortgage holders aren’t bothering to … you know … actually pay their obligations. To interpret this as a problem would be … you know … just a theory without any proof.
I think I need to see evidence that there even IS a mortgage on each of those 8% before I believe that nonpayment is a problem.
If you can’t show me signed copies of all of the mortgages, then I intend to stick my head in the sand and refuse to believe it.
Lol Diemos. Yes, that this number is going UP and not down is not very comforting. More and more people seem to be realizing that you can just stop paying and no one is going to do anything about it for a long time.
And just a few short years ago experts were saying that people never stop paying their mortgages….
curmudgeon wrote:
Yes. And that was because a few short years ago, mortgage brokers and real estate agents were running around saying that “real estate never goes down” in price.
“And just a few short years ago experts were saying that people never stop paying their mortgages…”
That actually was accurate until the bankruptcy reform legislation a few years ago. Now it is nearly impossible to shed consumer debt unless you are truly SOL, but it is not that difficult at all to avoid mortgage debt without even having to go through the bankruptcy process. So people pay their credit cards but don’t pay their mortgage lender — not a difficult decision at all when you are underwater anyway.
Interesting dichotomy between posts and numbers considering San Francisco’s numbers are low by every reasonable comparison whether local, state, or national.
anon…are San Francisco’s numbers low in comparison to history? It is the specter of “only” 6.7 percent of mortgage holders not paying their mortgages that is reason for concern, I would think. It hardly matters that we’re “better” than national or state averages….
Are these times high in comparison to history? SF is at 4.49, not 6.7. Where does that 4.9 stand in comparison to history? That’s what I’d like to know.
[Editor’s Note: Once again, serious-delinquency rates have historically “hovered between 1.5 percent and 2 percent.”]
What experts said that people don’t stop paying their mortgages? It has always been rare for people to hold onto underwater properties. The extent of delay on the part of banks cleaning up the mess is new, at least for this country, but in general this has all happened before and it will probably all happen again.
Are these times high in comparison to history?
yes. I don’t have the raw data from this particular data series, but 4.49% is very high from a historical standpoint. the various news feeds peg the “usual” seriously delinquent rate at 1.5 to 2%, although it’s not clear if that’s for SF county or Bay Area.
the delinquency rates this recession are worse than any in generations. Far worse than the 2002 recession, and significantly worse than the early 1990’s recession as well.
here’s the national (not SF proper) data for 30 day (not 60 day) delinquencies.
SF’s data correlates well to national data
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/delallsa.htm.
==========
this news has positive and negative aspects.
1) severely delinquent mortgages are persistently high. This is bad. one would have hoped that all the programs and bailouts over the last year would have improved the number more from last year.
2) severely delinquent mortgages are down slightly from last year. although not down much, at least it’s not larger. this is good.
[Editor’s Note: Once again, serious-delinquency rates have historically “hovered between 1.5 percent and 2 percent.”]
Yes I read that in the SFGate piece. It’s vague as to where and that’s the question. Nationally? LocallY? What?
Sorry I had the SF number wrong..was typing fast and not paying attention. But the basic issue still stands…if it’s significantly higher than historical averages, it’s a problem.
What does MSA stand for?
Metropolitan __ Area? As in, “San Francisco metropolitan area (the counties of San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin and San Mateo)”
Metropolitan Statistical Area…it’s a US Census term.
There’s also such thing as a CSA: Combined Statistical Area. San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland CSA includes San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont MSA (5 counties) and San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara MSA (Santa Clara/San Benito) as components. It’s an 11 county measure that also includes Vallejo-Fairfield MSA (western Solano), Santa Cruz-Watsonville MSA (Santa Cruz), Napa MSA (Napa), and Santa Rosa-Petaluma MSA (Sonoma). When people say “the Bay Area,” they usually exclude Santa Cruz Co and San Benito Co, but the Census Bureau includes them in their broadest measure.
and that’s largely because the 9 counties (excluding Santa Cruz and San Benito) are those counties that make up our regional governance structure: the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). These two organizations, especially latter, are powerful conduits for both funding and policy.