This article first appeared on Minyanville.

The only question that really matters in the housing market right now is the following: Does the recent strengthening in sales data signal an imminent bottom, or are we smack in the middle of a dead-cat bounce?

The answer, of course, is complicated. And as I’ve discussed in the past, the concept of a “bottom” in the housing market is meaningless, as stabilization and eventual recovery will happen on a localized, market-by-market basis.

Nevertheless, there are some key factors to watch that will provide clues as to how long this rally’s legs really are, and what could trigger a reversion in the miserable state of the market we’ve become accustomed to over the past 4 years. Here are, in my mind, the top 3 “tells” to watch when it comes to the direction of the housing over the next 6-12 months:

1. Jobs

In the words of HousingWire’s Paul Jackson, “If housing is central to recovery, and jobs are central to housing, and jobs aren’t doing very well — what’s the real forecast for housing?”

Despite jobs data that appears to have stopped getting worse, the employment outlook in the US remains dismal. Government-backed loans through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), Fannie Mae (FNM), and Freddie Mac (FRE) dominate the mortgage market right now, all of which have strict requirements for job stability. This means that even if companies start hiring again, recently laid-off workers will still have a hard time qualifying for a mortgage.

Furthermore, even though layoffs have slowed, the majority of firings that occurred in the past year haven’t yet resulted in mortgage delinquency. As struggling homeowners gradually succumb to the pressures of losing a job, default and eventual foreclosure can occur many months after the layoff itself. We’re yet to see any material improvement in default data, especially in high end markets.

2. The FHA

The FHA offers taxpayer-backed insurance for mortgages that are underwritten to their specific guidelines. Originally intended to provide home loans for low-income borrowers by requiring minimal down payments and overlooking blemished credit records, by the end of 2008, FHA loans accounted for almost 40% of all new loans — up from less than 5% at the beginning of 2007, according to data compiled by Lender Processing Services (LPS).

In distressed markets, where ongoing foreclosure moratoria are keeping bank-owned homes off the market to artificially limit supply, FHA borrowers make up the vast majority of buyers. This has helped the likes of Wells Fargo (WFC), Bank of America (BAC), and Citigroup (C) unload foreclosures at higher prices, but it has prolonged the eventual recovery as banks slowly bleed out distressed homes into the market.

To help alleviate the housing crisis, Washington upped FHA limits so that in some areas, buyers can get an FHA loan for as much as $719,000. This widening of FHA’s lending criteria has helped buoy many mid-tier markets, as borrowers can now buy $500,000 or $600,000 homes with a paltry 3% down. (Just ask Toll Brothers (TOL) if the FHA helped boost sales in the past 6 months.)

If the FHA tightens its guidelines or lowers its loan limits, look out below, as a huge source of liquidity for the housing market will evaporate.

3. November 30, 2009

This November, the $8,000 first-time homebuyer tax credit expires. If I were a betting man (which I’m not), I’d wager if the market stumbles even slightly between now and the end of the year, a new tax credit will be issued in some form. (They may extend it regardless of how the market performs.) Even if the credit is extended, many first-time homebuyers are already scrambling to make purchases while they can still get a check from Uncle Sam.

To wit, check out the advertisement currently running on ZipRealty, a popular online real estate brokerage:

Circle November 30 with a big red pen, because first-time buyers now account for fully one-third of purchase transactions according to the National Association of Realtors. If this demand dries up, sales could resume their downward spiral.

The bottom line is this: The outlook for housing is murky, at best.

Low-end markets are benefiting from government support on both the supply side (foreclosure moratoria) and demand side (tax credits, FHA) of the equation. Meanwhile, high-end markets — as defaults on prime mortgages keep rising and the job market remains lousy — are seeing steep home-price declines.

Anyone touting housing’s so-called “bottom” is likely trying to sell you something — namely, a house.

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Appraisers just can’t get it right.

During the housing boom, mortgage brokers, real-estate agents, and even borrowers sought out appraisals supporting the highest possible home price. Appraisers, fearful of losing business, inflated their valuation findings, which exacerbated the run-up in home prices.

Now, after nearly 4 years of home-price declines, appraisers are getting it wrong again — but in the other direction.

On May 1 — while the financial media focused on construing a blip up in housing data as signs of an imminent bottom — little was made of new appraisal guidelines that went live and immediately began to eat away at the core of the nascent housing “recovery.” To be sure, trade groups like the Mortgage Bankers Association and the National Association of Realtors (NAR) fought the revised rules, but to no avail.

Stemming from a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo alleging Washington Mutual (JPM) and First American Corp illegally conferred on the results of home appraisals with the goal of inflating prices, the new rules put up a Chinese wall between banks like Citigroup (C), Wells Fargo (WFC), Bank of America (BAC), and appraisers. The goal was to create an environment where appraisals would reflect an expert’s unbiased assessment of a home’s true value, rather than evaluations tailored to a lender’s desire to make a loan.

The new rules affect loans guaranteed by Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE), but since the 2 government-run mortgage giants effectively control the secondary mortgage market, they’ve become the defacto guidelines for the entire industry.

In order to separate lenders and appraisers, appraisal-management companies (AMCs), cropped up, offering banks access to a network of appraisers around the country. This makes the appraiser selection process random, preventing collusion. And while AMCs claim appraisers are selected using proprietary scoring algorithms that evaluate performance, the reality is that jobs are handed out on the basis of fastest turnaround time and lowest cost.

In short, we’ve traded bias for incompetence.

Readers of this column know that I have little, if anything good to say about the NAR — which is not only the Realtors’ trade organization, but a powerful Washington lobby. Nevertheless, earlier this week, when the NAR released data on existing home sales, their statement about appraisers’ role in killing purchase transactions was dead on the mark:

“The increase in sales is less than expected because poor appraisals are stalling transactions. Pending home sales indicated much stronger activity, but some contracts are falling through from faulty valuations that keep buyers from getting a loan. Lenders are using appraisers who may not be familiar with a neighborhood, or who compare traditional homes with distressed and discounted sales.”

Currently embroiled in this very scenario, my firm, Cirios Real Estate, is witnessing first-hand just how bad the new appraisal rules are.

Assessing a property’s value in’t rocket science, despite appraisers’ claim that their extensive training and years of experience make them the only people qualified to determine home prices. All it takes is access to the right information, an understanding of what drives desirability, and a little pride in one’s work.

That last criterion is perhaps the most difficult to find. Appraisers earn a flat fee for their services, giving them little incentive to provide the best analysis possible. Knowing they can now earn repeat business by turning around jobs in 48 hours and charging less than their competitors, there’s little reason to go the extra mile to ensure appraisals take into consideration only the best information to come up with the best possible results.

Sure — there are good appraisers out there with integrity that offer up great analysis. But as lower priced, lower quality work becomes the norm (thanks to the new appraisal guidelines), the best appraisers will seek greener pastures - as well they should.

Lawrence Yun, the NAR Chief Economist, finally got it right when he said, “Sometimes policy can lead to unintended consequences.”

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Banks like Washington Mutual (JPM), Wachovia (WFC), and Countrywide (BAC) — along with Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) — once used mortgage underwriting guidelines that were thin at best, nonexistent at worst.

Congress, in turn, pushed for leniency for low-income borrowers and for those with spotty credit, assuring their constituencies that the American dream of home ownership would be available to all.

As a result, the housing bubble expanded — and then it burst.

But it would appear that our elected officials have yet to learn their lesson: According to the Wall Street Journal, representatives Barney Frank of Massachusetts and Anthony Weiner of New York are urging Fannie and Freddie to loosen up qualification requirements even more.

You see, Fannie and Freddie recently limited their exposure to condominiums where a high percentage of the owners were past due on their mortgages, or where many units remained unsold. Frank and Weiner claim the tighter rules are limiting condo sales, even though prices have come down to generate material buyer interest.

To wit, condos just off the Las Vegas strip can be snatched up for less than $50,000 apiece, and downtown San Diego remains surfeited with inventory, even though prices have fallen more than 50% since the market’s peak, according to MDA Dataquick.

The law of supply and demand is a beautiful thing.

A quick tour of VRBO, a vacation rental website, illustrates why snapping up Vegas condos on the cheap may not be such a great idea. The monthly loan payments may be just a few hundred dollars, but surplus supply means rents have tumbled and vacancies have soared. In coastal cities like Miami and San Diego, massive overbuilding of condo complexes will depress local real estate markets for years to come. Metrostudy, a market research firm, estimates that Miami has a more than 40-month supply of condos.

Falling prices, which can provide opportunities for savvy investors, are part of a healthy correction process. To the extent the government continues to prop up prices by transferring risk to the taxpayer, these opportunistic investors will stay on the sidelines, thereby forestalling any eventual recovery.

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

It’s the government, stupid.

As Washington expands its role in managing the day-to-day operations of American business, companies are increasingly turning their strategic focus to tapping federal cash and lending programs. And despite the strings often attached to government money, many are finding that Uncle Sam is the only game in town during these troubled economic times.

This morning’s Wall Street Journal highlights just how essential lawmakers and regulators have become in America’s new breed of government-directed capitalism. Hunting retailers, farm-equipment manufacturers, and, of course, banks (Bank of America (BAC), Citigroup (C), Wells Fargo (WFC)) and insurance companies are all sidling up to the government trough.

And even as public opinion slowly turns against bureaucrats’ massive intervention into the private economy, Washington insiders are raking in piles of cash. According to the Journal, spending on lobbyists in 2009 could reach $3.3 billion, equal to the total during the 2008 election year. And for good reason: Without representation in Washington, companies just can’t compete.

After the financing arm of Deere & Co. (DE) tapped the FDIC to guarantee $2 billion in debt last December, the Equipment Leasing and Finance Association, a trade group, leapt into action to protect other members. Deere rivals, including Caterpillar (CAT) and a host of smaller firms, weren’t eligible for government-supported debt issuances, so the group’s president asked the Federal Reserve to expand the Troubled Asset Lending Facility to include sales of farm equipment and other machinery.

The Fed acquiesced; the agricultural industry must also be too big to fail.

But not every company has the ear of the Washington power brokers, leaving those forced to go it alone at a distinct disadvantage. Credit is already precious for small businesses, and what little they do have is far more expensive than that of their larger, better-connected rivals. This doesn’t bode well for an economy struggling to drag itself out of recession, since small businesses account for the lion’s share of job growth on the other side of a downturn.

The eventual recovery, which a growing number of optimists predict is just around the corner, could yield a bitter pill for corners of the economy still heavily dependent on government handouts. Although lawmakers vow to support systemically vital companies and industries for as long as needed, at some point Washington must try to take back what it has so generously given.

Witness the market for home loans, where government purchases of mortgage-backed securities have helped keep rates abnormally low. Even without the Fed dumping its Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) bond portfolio onto the market, rates have risen sharply in the past month, threatening to forestall the nascent “recovery” in the housing market.

Were the Fed to pull back its support of the housing market, rates would skyrocket. This would be politically — not to mention economically — unacceptable.

And while the ideological debate rages over whether Washington bureaucrats are becoming too entrenched in the American economy, businessmen and -women still must get up each morning, head to work, and try to stay above water. And — insofar as lobbying for government money outstrips developing new technologies or innovating, producing and otherwise generating economic output — the economy suffers.

And green shoots or no, this economy already has enough cards stacked against it.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Mortgage guidelines have become increasingly strict — not to mention regimented — as the private secondary-mortgage market has all but disappeared in the past 24 months. But according to the Wall Street Journal, appraisals are increasingly becoming one of the biggest hurdles for new purchase and refinance transactions.

In the wake of the recent collapse in home prices, appraisers have come under fire for bowing to lender demands during the boom, offering up property values more aligned with lenders’ wishes than with reality. In 2007, the state of New York sued Washington Mutual — now owned by JPMorgan (JPM) — for colluding with a subsidiary of First American Corporation to overinflate home values.

Collusion between appraisers and mortgage brokers, real-estate agents, banks, and borrowers helped fuel runaway price appreciation. In response, Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) — the 2 government-owned giants that control around two-thirds of the mortgage market — issued new guidelines dictating how lenders can select and evaluate appraisals. The new policies went into effect May 1.

To help facilitate the new, tighter rules, lenders are using appraisal management companies, or AMCs, which employ networks of appraisers around the country to provide what purport to be unbiased value analysis. All this, of course, comes at a cost which is ultimately borne by borrowers.

And, in what could be considered ironic if it weren’t so repellent, appraisers are crying foul.

This from a group whose moral backbone during the housing boom most closely resembled that of a jellyfish - one seemingly incapable of preventing its members from being wooed by banks into committing fraud.

An appraisal is simply one person’s opinion of a home’s value on a given day. And although that person is licensed to provide such an opinion, the very nature of an appraisal renders its usefulness as a true risk management tool questionable at best.

The growing use of AMCs, opponents argue, reduces appraisal quality even as it increases costs. Appraisers are selected based on proprietary quality scoring mechanisms employed by each AMC, which may or may not be a good measure of reliability. And since AMCs take on average a 40% cut on the total appraisal fees and lenders demand quick turnaround, appraisers are working for less on a tighter timeline.

Sure, fraud may be reduced, but incompetence could more than make up for that as AMCs scramble to employ barely capable appraisers in order to ensure complete geographic coverage for their clients.

The real losers in all this — as is the case when poorly conceived regulation is aimed at making up for past mistakes without proper consideration for the root cause of those mistakes — are homeowners, who must now pay more for a property valuation mechanism that isn’t likely to be much better than the old one.

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Despite the best efforts of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department, the free market is winning the battle over mortgage rates. Tens of trillions of dollars in support for the financial system can’t change the stark reality: Giving out home loans remains risky business.

Borrowers looking to take advantage of rock-bottom interest rates are seeing the opportunity slip through their fingers, as rates have risen by more than 0.50% in the past few weeks.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the pop in rates is due to expectations of economic recovery, combined with fears that the mounting pile of debt incurred by Washington’s central economic planners may not be sustainable. As the government prints money and plunges the country into an ever-deeper deficit, holders of US Treasuries (e.g. China) are getting skittish. These investors are quietly demanding a higher return on their bet that our economy will pull out of its current tailspin.

This, in turn, is pushing up mortgage rates, which doesn’t bode well for nascent signs of recovery. Big lenders like Wells Fargo (WFC), Bank of America (BAC) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM) — despite offloading nearly all default risk to taxpayers via Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE), or the Federal Housing Administration — are asking prospective borrowers to pony up hefty points up front to get the lowest rate possible.

And this at a time when pundits and performance-chasing portfolio managers are latching onto the absurd notion that the nation’s housing market is making some sort of fundamentally sound turnaround. A contributor to CNBC actually said with a straight face that our economy can’t grow with mortgage rates this “high,” and that the Fed is derailing the recovery by letting rates move up.

To say that our economy is undergoing some sort of legitimate recovery, and at the same time assert mortgage rates a hair above 5% are too high is to confirm that those declaring the recession in our rear view mirror are delusional at best, talking their book at worst.

As renewed fears of inflation percolate and investors begin to snatch up commodities in expectation of future prices, pressure will mount on the Fed to keep rates of all kinds low to ensure the economy doesn’t remain mired in its current malaise. This means more printing press activity, more “quantitative” easing, and more social-welfare programs packaged as “progressive” economic policy.

Battle lines are being drawn: Washington bureaucrats on one side, advancing the theory that money can be printed seemingly without limit to generate legitimate economic growth - and the market on the other. And each time the Fed takes its foot off the dollar-debasement accelerator, we get a peek into what will happen when the printing presses finally run out of ink.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Despite Herculean efforts, the Federal Reserve is losing its battle to keep mortgage rates at all-time lows.

As fear that we’re headed for imminent collapse slowly wanes, investors’ appetite for risk is coming back. This renewed confidence has helped buoy stocks, and the major equity indices have rallied more than 30% from their March lows. The shift, however, has come at the expense of the Treasury market, which has been in a 7-week slump.

According to Bloomberg, big money managers like Blackrock (BLK) are betting the Fed will step in to support the Treasury market (again), as regulators hope renewed Treasury purchases will push down mortgage rates (again).

Bond prices and yields move in opposite directions. When investor demand falls, so do prices, pushing up yields. And as investors shun the safety — but relatively low return — of government-backed debt, the impacts are felt throughout the credit markets. Of concern to the Fed, and what has led Chairman Ben Bernanke to increase Treasury purchases in the past, is the effect this dynamic has on mortgage rates.

A mortgage is nothing more than a long term bond, given to a borrower to purchase a home. So when lenders get fearful they’re not being compensated for tying up money for as long as 30 years, they increase rates. Further, as the specter of inflation rises, lenders demand bigger interest payments to keep up with higher prices. In other words, when dollars in the future are worth less than dollars today, banks demand higher payments to make up the difference.

Keeping mortgage rates low has been a cornerstone of Washington’s efforts to jump start the flagging housing market. But with rates at the highest level since April, the “smart money” is betting the Fed may return to the Treasury market en masse.

Paradoxically, even as the Fed tries to keep interest rates low — which are rising in part due to the expectation that higher prices loom in the years ahead — its actions increase the likelihood of future inflation. Running its printing presses around the clock has consequences, even if Fed officials are loathe to admit it.

Minyanville’s Mr. Practical often discusses the fallacy that credit markets are improving. As he points out, only in corners of the market where the government has stepped in to support lending is any so-called “normalcy” returning.

So too in the mortgage market.

Loans backed by Fannie Mae (FNM), Freddie Mac (FRE) and the Federal Housing Administration account for the lion share of mortgages currently being issued in this country. Aside from the occasional jumbo loan written by banks like JPMorgan (JPM) or Wells Fargo (WFC), government mortgages are the only game in town. Coupled with the Troubled Asset Lending Facility (or TALF), which funnels money into the market for mortgage-backed securities, the home-loan market remains completely dependent on government support.

This is one reason recent “strength” in the housing market will provide transitory. There’s a limit on how much government can control markets, as evidenced by mortgage rates that move persistently higher every time the Fed eases its aggressive intervention. Fundamentals, not subsidies, will provide a true floor in prices.

And as banks prepare to unleash a firestorm of foreclosure inventory into the market, fundamentals will remain pointed south, thereby pushing down prices. And as foreclosures continue to infect higher end real-estate markets, these price declines will be felt by a growing — and more prosperous — segment of the population.

Mortgage rates, left to their own devices, would be far, far higher without government support. This is the message of the market - one bureaucrats in Washington seem unwilling to learn.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

As a growing number of economists, pundits and real-estate professionals assure us the housing market’s worst days are over, prospective home buyers need a trusted advocate to make sure they don’t end up on the wrong side of someone else’s trade.

More often than not, that person will come in the form of a real-estate professional working on the buyer’s behalf and earning a commission for their trouble. Below are 5 simple questions you can ask to gauge whether a given candidate is looking out for your best interests - or his or her own.

But first, a word on terminology.

The terms “agent,” “broker” and “realtor” are often thrown around interchangeably. This isn’t exactly right. While laws differ from state to state, acquiring a broker’s license typically requires a series of courses on real estate practices, principals, finance, law, appraisal and the escrow process. A broker can use his license to form a brokerage, and the company can then perform services as a licensed entity.

In many states (like California) a licensed broker can not only conduct real estate transactions, but earn commissions for arranging mortgages and other types of real estate-related loans. For this reason, a brokers license offers the holder huge potential earnings power.

An agent is a step below a broker. While requiring a license, an agent is normally treated as an employee of the broker and thus the broker is responsible for the actions of the agents under his charge. If an agent screws up, his reputation (and license) as well as his broker’s is on the line. Agents can typically conduct the same transactions as a broker, but must do so under the supervision of their boss.

Finally, the term “Realtor” is used to specifically identify a real estate broker or agent who is a member of the National Association of Realtors, or NAR. The NAR is a nationwide trade group that collects member dues, lobbies in Washington and runs marketing campaigns urging Americans to buy homes. The NAR is conspicuous in its role as national housing cheerleader, as it’s chief economist Lawrence Yun has been predicting an imminent bottom in prices since early 2006.

1. Is it a good time to buy?

Of any question a buyer is likely to ask his broker (or agent), this may be the first. And the most important. The answer itself isn’t nearly as important as how the broker responds.

Any broker that says definitely that yes, this is a great time to buy, should be eyed with skepticism. Without knowing a buyer’s specific circumstances, understanding localized market trends and the underlying value of a specific home, saying it is a great time to buy is a sales pitch, pure and simple.

Brokers will often cite low interest rates, high levels of affordability, low replacement costs and home prices that have fallen precipitously from their peaks as reasons its never been a better time to buy. But ask yourself, all those conditions were true six months ago — was it a great time to buy then?

The proper response to this question from a responsible broker is to answer the question with a question, or questions. How much money have you saved? How long do you plan on owning the home? How much money do you make? How much is your other debt service? What are your contingencies if you lose your job? How is your credit? What are your other motivations for wanting to buy?

Only armed with answers to these and other questions can a broker — or a buyer for that matter — determine whether its the right time to buy.

2. Are home prices near a bottom?

As with the previous question, the answer should be in the form of a question. Where and when are you looking to buy? Do you want a move in ready home or one that needs some work?

While there is no crystal ball as to the direction of home prices in the near or long term, a broker should have a clear understanding of the dynamics effecting his or her local market. I hear ad nauseum here in California that home prices are stabilizing because demand is up, prices are down and homes are receiving multiple bids. But those are external symptoms of market machinations underneath the surface.

Foreclosure moratoriums put in place late last year limited the number of bank owned homes dumped onto the market. This constricted supply, and coupled with tax incentives, low interest rates and aggressive marketing from the NAR, led to a situation where in some areas, for some homes, demand outweighs supply. But that doesn’t mean the situation will persist — in fact, the smart money is betting it won’t.

This dynamic is far from ubiquitous, as most high end markets remain illiquid with prices tumbling into an apparent vacuum.

Real estate is, and will always remain, local.

3. How do you determine which homes to show me?

Not to beat a dead horse, but this question should be met with yet another series of questions. What size home are you looking for? Are schools important to you? How close do you want to be to public transportation? Do you care about being within walking distance to shops and restaurants? What style of home do you like? Do you want a yard?

A good real estate broker should be a blank slate, absorbing your preferences, desires and reasons for buying without injecting his own bias. Just because your agent loves a certain home and thinks its a great buy, doesn’t mean it fits your criteria. Don’t be afraid to tell your broker that you don’t like a particular home.

Brokers should show you a variety of homes, below, within and above your price range, to give you a sense of what is out there on the market. With prices still coming down in most areas, you may walk inside your dream house and decide its worth it to keep renting — and saving — for another year until prices fall to something you can afford.

Until you feel comfortable your broker is showing you everything that may fit your criteria, perform your own searches on the myriad free websites out there. Redfin.com is a great resource for the metropolitan areas it covers, while Trulia.com, ziprealty.com and even Realtor.com have excellent free search features.

4. What are my financing options? How much can I afford?

While real-estate brokers are often legally allowed to arrange loans, more often than not its a dicey legal proposition for the broker to sell you a house as well as a mortgage.

Nevertheless, brokers should be well-versed in available financing, rates, qualification requirements and whether sellers require a mortgage pre-approval letter to accompany any offer (these days, most do). If your broker doesn’t know the answer to a certain question, that’s OK as the rules change almost daily, but he should actively pursue the answer and report his findings back without too much delay.

Shopping around for the best loan terms can be a time consuming and confusing process, but it must be done. Gone are the days where Wells Fargo (WFC) always gave you the best rate, or your buddy down at Chase (JPM) could get you a great deal. Keep in mind most loans these days are originated to Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) guidelines, which means most big lenders offer similar loan programs.

All things being equal, choose a lender you feel you can trust (not just the one offering you the best deal) and always have a backup.

Lastly, never trust a broker to “tell” you how much you can afford. This decision, especially in an environment where home prices are likely to fall for the foreseeable future, should be one each buyer must make for himself.

Plans change, life doesn’t always follow the path you hope it does. Being conservative in what you can afford, leaving a cushion and planning for the unexpected are paramount in today’s uncertain market conditions.

5. Provide me with examples of a few closings you are the most proud of over the past year.

This question gives your broker a bit of an opening to sell himself, and will go along way towards helping figure out whose side he is actually on. If your broker launches into a a story about this cute young couple he helped get into the house of their dreams, move along, cute young couples rarely make savvy home buying decisions and are easy prey for aggressive brokers. Also pass if you hear things like, “I found this great house right when it came on the market, we jumped at it and got in before the other buyers had a chance to bid.”

Sellers, by and large, are still unrealistic about how much they can sell their homes for. This means that when houses come out onto the market, the asking price is nearly always above where it will actually go for. Be patient, make your broker work for his money.

Although there are situations where multiple bids will come in from prospective buyers, chances are this isn’t a house you want to buy. Most of this sort of activity is going on in areas with high levels of foreclosures. Now that the moratoria are lifted, banks will start flooding the market again come next month. All that great news about limited supply will become ancient history as prices plunge once again. The house itself may be great, but just because homes are “cheap,” doesn’t mean they won’t get cheaper.

A good response is one where a broker tells you a story of a buyer he worked with for months, go to know a few neighborhoods that fit all the pertinent criteria, and waited for the right house to come on the market. Many sellers will list their house at a “hopeful” price for the first 30 or 45 days, then drop it down to something more reasonable. Rarely will a house sold in the first couple weeks be a “steal” for the buyer.

Your broker should stress that patience, research and shrewd negotiating got his client a great home at a great price.

To be sure, there are other questions to ask of a prospective broker, but this is a good start. Finding a broker should be treated like a job interview, after all, even though the commission may not be coming out of your pocket, you, as the buyer, end up paying one way or another. Make sure your broker is worth his salt.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

Every month, it seems, Washington dreams up new and fantastic ways to funnel taxpayer money towards a growing list of undeserving recipients.

Now, in the latest attempt to coerce banks into modifying delinquent mortgages en masse, the Treasury Department plans to offer cash incentives to lenders who lower interest rates or forgive principal on second liens (so-called “piggyback” loans). According to Bloomberg, the new program aims to simplify the modification process and help struggling borrowers avoid foreclosure.

The subprime second lien was a highly profitable, nearly usurious loan product that proliferated during the housing boom. Once reserved for high-quality borrowers and those with sufficient equity in their homes, seconds became an easy way to jam borrowers into homes they couldn’t otherwise afford.

If a homeowner wants to take out a first mortgage for more than 80% of the home’s value, he or she is typically required to take out mortgage insurance, issued by firms like Radian (RDN), MGIC Investment Corp (MTG) and the PMI Group (PMI). For years, the cost of insurance — plus the required down payment — limited home ownership to those who, by and large, could afford to buy responsibly.

But as housing demand ballooned from 2002 to 2005, banks discovered they could just loan borrowers the down-payment money - and charge a hefty fee to do so. Without those pesky requirements — and by bypassing the sometimes strict credit guidelines of mortgage insurers — banks were able to open up their loan products to a whole new group of unqualified borrowers.

Second liens, by virtue of being subordinate to first liens, carry additional risk, and thus a higher interest rate. In other words, if a borrower defaults, the holder of the second lien has to wait until the first mortgage holder is made whole before getting paid.

And since seconds carried super-high interest rates, securities backed by this type of loan offered juicy returns for investors. It should come as no surprise that the second-lien market was dominated by Bear Stearns (now JPMorgan (JPM)), Countrywide (now Bank of America (BAC)), and Citigroup (C) (now in hock to Uncle Sam for a cool $300 million).

Now, the Obama Administration wants to give billions to not only the banks who wrote these loans, but the borrowers who accepted them. The program is destined for failure.

In fact, it’s already failed.

A little over a year ago, Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) introduced an initiative called the “HomeSaver Advance.” Under the program, borrowers behind on their mortgage payments could take out an unsecured line of credit to get current. Under this program, Fannie and Freddie lent out $462 million over the course of the next 12 months.

Now, based on current market prices, the loans are worth a whopping $8 million, or $0.017 cents on the dollar. Talk about throwing good money after bad.

The President’s initiative to modify seconds is no different: It takes a situation destined for foreclosure and simply prolongs the agony. This prevents the borrower from getting out from under his mountain of debt and starting anew. Meanwhile, homes become ever more dilapidated, and banks further delay their own days of reckoning.

The rationale for this program is obscure - though it does provide yet another way to hand taxpayer money over to the very banks who got us into this mess in the first place.

By ANDREW JEFFERY

This post first appeared on Minyanville.

For almost 2 years, we’ve been told government-backed loan modification efforts and foreclosure moratoriums would help ease the pain of the ongoing housing crisis. It’s not working.

Despite recent calls to the contrary — this morning’s came courtesy of real-estate mogul Sam Zell — residential home prices are still in free fall, and the bottom will remain elusive.

Picking up a trend noted weeks ago by housing blogs and other real-estate analysts, the Wall Street Journal reports banks and mortgage-servicing companies are pushing through foreclosures at the fastest rate in more than a year.

JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C) and Wells Fargo (WFC), 3 of the country’s biggest loan servicers, scaled back foreclosure efforts in recent months at the request of the Obama Administration. Now, with the bans lifted, a new wave of repossessions are simply a matter of time. In California, notices of default and trustee sale, which precede foreclosures, spiked in March as moratoriums expired and lenders returned to “business as usual.”

Banks, especially those collecting payments on behalf of Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE), say they’re doing everything they can to keep borrowers in their homes. But according to GMAC (GM), as few as 10% of struggling homeowners qualify for the Obama Administration’s highly touted foreclosure prevention program.

The logical conclusion is that this new wave of bank owned homes being dumped onto the market will put even more downward pressure on housing prices. And while this is true on a localized, market by market level, widely monitored home price indicators may not tell the whole story.

As noted by the Field Check Group, a real-estate analysis firm, delinquencies on jumbo loans are rising at an alarming rate. This is consistent with trends we have been seeing over the past 6-9 months as prime defaults are now rising faster than subprime.

Currently, low-end, inexpensive homes dominate sales data, dragging down median and average prices. Foreclosures, however, are creeping into high-end markets, and coupled with high levels of inventory and weak demand, prices are tumbling. As forced sales become more prevalent and transactions rise in these well-to-do areas, expensive home sales will begin to represent a larger portion of transactions used in broad measures of prices.

In the coming months, we could see home price measures falling at a less severe rate as the data mix becomes less skewed towards the low end. The bottom will be cheered, recovery will be lauded by the spin machine known as the National Association of Realtors, and buyers around the country will be lured into a false sense of security that housing has finally hit rock bottom.

Meanwhile, back in reality, property values — actual homes, rather than statistics — will keep sliding.