UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (71) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 127464  
Subject: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 9:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 26
We recently gave up on a 5 month long effort to buy a fabulous river front property, after spending an unrefundable $1500 on the effort. While I'm not pleased at having spent that money, it paid for one heck of an education, which hopefully you can get here for free.

The house was build to code, out of the 100 year flood plain as it existed at time of construction. Four years ago, FEMA changed the flood plain, so that the bottom floor of the house was now 2' below the new 100 year flood plain. This resulted in the mandatory flood insurance quote going from the $325/year discretionary insurance the seller had bought and maintained since she bought the house 5 years earlier, to $9300/year.

We thought for sure this had to be an error on Fema's part. Perhaps they did not understand that the house was on stilts? After requesting several times for an elevation certificate, which the seller and her agent insisted they never had, we shelled out close to $500 to get one of our own.

Lesson No. 1: Make the seller provide or pay for an elevation certificate if you believe flood insurance will be required.

Clearly, we violated lesson #1. The seller on this property was difficult at best, and we really wanted this property. We ponied up the $500 only after checking in with the county planning office to see if they had one on file, and while indeed an elevation certificate would have been needed for construction, the files of that era were in complete disarray. I had also contacted the surveyor of the plat I had in my hand for the property, to see if they had the original elevation cert, but either they didn't understand what I was looking for, or they wanted me to pay for a new one, which is what I wound up doing.

FEMA, elevation cert. in hand, came back with the same verdict of $9300/year. This time they suggested we look to "grandfather" the property. If a property was built to code, with proper permits, it could be insured for the flood plain it was originally built on. We had two people go search the files at the planning commission to no avail, to try to find the original elevation cert. Calling around, using random phone numbers that were written on the original subdivision plot some 25 years earlier, I finally track down the original cert, ironically at the office which I hired to do the new one. At the same time, the listing agent finally decided to make an effort to sell her listing, and tracked down the original cert at the settlement office they had used. Her family has been the only agents to handle this property over the years. How I wish her epiphany of where to look had come in to play when I first started asking for it when the contract was ratified 2 months earlier!

Lesson No. 2: Look for elevation certs at surveyors offices and settlement offices before shelling out good money, or better yet, tell the listing agent to earn their commission and do so.

So after a couple more weeks of deliberation, and the bank kindly extending our rate lock for a couple of weeks for free, FEMA comes back to us to tell us that the "shed," consisting of 4 pieces of plywood enclosing 4 of the piers, effectively made the first floor at ground level, and the rate was...you guessed it...$9300. To help you understand the absurdity of this, that annual premium is for an insurance value of $200,000 and on a property that was essentially unscathed in major flooding that submerged houses along this river in the 1990's. The shed, whose contents would not be insured, also houses the pipe bringing well water up to the house, the pressure tank for the well, (supposedly, as we never saw it,) and the soil pipe bringing the waste water down to the septic system. I don't know how the property could have been built without it, but again, no records. Welcome to rural WV.

So at this point, we shift tactics. It was our understanding that if flood insurance had been continuous, there would be no significant changes to premium if the policy were transferred at sale from one owner to another. There was even what is basically an ad campaign from FEMA that encourages those in an area whose flood plain will change soon to get insurance now. They point out that it is a good marketing approach to get insurance before flood plain changes, because as a seller it will make your property more marketable when you go to sell it with the low flood premium.

Our problem with transferring the policy is that the seller has USAA, which being for military, we didn't qualify for, so it could not be transferred. By this time, however, the seller's policy was up for renewal, and she was able to transfer it to a more conventional agency, where it could in theory then be transferred to us.

FEMA gave us a provisional transfer rate of $380/year, and told us the official one would be in our hands within a couple of days. We celebrated, and tried darn hard to get the bank to schedule settlement, but by now FEMA had violated their timing promises so many times that the bank refused to move until the firm offer was in our hands. We begged, we pleaded, and reminded the bank that by law they only needed to see proof of flood insurance within so many weeks of settlement, and did not need it to settle. If they did not proceed TODAY, we would lose our free rate lock and have to pay over $1,000 to extend it for another month.

FEMA of course went well past their promised time. Our bank provided rate lock was expiring, and we got the less than stellar Realtors on both sides of the transaction to pick up the $1,000 to extend it for the final 30 days. The rate lock extension only would be charged if the property went through to closing. 10 days later, FEMA comes back with a verdict...$9300!

Lesson No. 3: DON'T PROCEED ON A PURCHASE WITHOUT THE FLOOD INSURANCE RATE DECLARATION IN HAND!!! Thank God that bank was such a PITA, because it may have been painful, but they covered our a$$. If I had convinced them to let us buy the property without having the flood insurance first, as allowed by law, we would be paying an insane amount of money each year for flood insurance, and been left with an unmarketable property.

Lesson No. 4: FEMA lies.

Their information on the web is misleading at best, bait and switch at worst. Not only is a flood insurance premium not necessarily transferable at sale, but we also discovered by talking to people who've experience this, it can be reviewed and changed when you refinance a property as well. One owner I spoke with told me that her rate went up from $300 to over $3,000 when she refinanced. Because it was reviewed at that time, even if she canceled the refi it would still go up. She refied her residence instead and pulled out cash to pay off the vacation home, which would realistically only flood if you saw Noah's Ark on the horizon. They are now self-insured, and owners of an unmarketable property.

So all in all, we profited mightily from this $1500 5 month lesson. We are not that seller who is stuck with a nearly unmarketable property, which will either have to be bought for cash and kept forever, or sold to someone insane enough to pay over $10,000 for insurance for this property, which they will then have issues selling. I'm sure that makes qualifying for that loan very difficult.

Do not assume that only vacation properties are subject to this issue. There are huge numbers of residential properties in the Midwest that are flooded at this time.

Lesson No. 5: If you are planning to sell, ask your insurance agent when the flood plains changed in your area, or if there are plans to change them. Find out what the flood policy would be for your place on transfer of ownership. It's better to be prepared on this. If there are plans for the flood plain to be re-evaluated, consider selling now, or refinancing if you plan to stay.

We have not given up on our search, but are now looking at how close to the 100 year flood plain the house is. We are looking higher on the hill for sure.

Lesson No. 6: If you can't fight city hall, you sure as heck can't fight FEMA.

At one point, we requested help from the office of the Senator for the area the property was in. This Congressional Inquiry got us in touch with someone from FEMA who flat out told us not to expect to understand the logic of the flood insurance process. Fema has their regs, which they follow rigorously, and it may not make sense for every property. In theory, one can contest FEMA's findings, but based on our experience I wouldn't hold out much hope, and certainly wouldn't take on this property's liability with that hope.

This post is already way too long, and believe it or not, a very brief summary of our process. There may be gaps of understanding because of the condensed version, so please ask away if you have questions.

IP
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Lurker1999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119941 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 12:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I wonder why the sellers were so quiet in this entire process. This entire fiasco is now disclosable to the next possible buyer and I don't see why someone else would be willing to be as patient as you are.

On the other hand, could you have used this as leverage for a "massive" price reduction on the property since the sellers now know this place has a huge flood insurance premium attached to it?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119942 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 12:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
inparadise: "We recently gave up on a 5 month long effort to buy a fabulous river front property, after spending an unrefundable $1500 on the effort. While I'm not pleased at having spent that money, it paid for one heck of an education, which hopefully you can get here for free.

The house was build to code, out of the 100 year flood plain as it existed at time of construction. Four years ago, FEMA changed the flood plain, so that the bottom floor of the house was now 2' below the new 100 year flood plain. This resulted in the mandatory flood insurance quote going from the $325/year discretionary insurance the seller had bought and maintained since she bought the house 5 years earlier, to $9300/year.

We thought for sure this had to be an error on Fema's part. Perhaps they did not understand that the house was on stilts? After requesting several times for an elevation certificate, which the seller and her agent insisted they never had, we shelled out close to $500 to get one of our own."


IP, sorry for your difficulties. I have been reading your posts about this issue, and I ihave thought that several matters never sounded quite right to me.

First, flood plains change. This is especially true in rural areas as development occurs and impermable ground cover increases. But it is also true elsewhere.

Second, I have never heard of grandfathering for insurance purposes as you described it (not that my knowing or not knowing is necessarily indiciative of anything), other than for purposes of the existing policy (which has a one year term). If the flood plain moves, then the risk increases. Flood insurance is already subsidized, but as a taxpayer it sounds even worse to read that FEMA wouold agree to insure for a premium that is way under the the premium required by the program based on the ned flood plain.

Third, even if you received an assignment of the owner's existing policy, I strongly suspect that the rate would have increased at the next renewal date to reflect the change in flood plain.

"A "100-year flood" or "100-year floodplain" describes an event or an area subject to a 1% probability of a certain size flood occurring in any given year. . . . This concept does not mean such a flood will occur only once in one hundred years. Whether or not it occurs in a given year has no bearing on the fact that there is still a 1% chance of a similar occurrence in the following year."

http://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/unit/oea66e/ch08.htm

See subpart d. "Effects of Development Practices on Flooding and Floodplains, and the Role of Mitigation" from the same source for a brief discussion of how develoment can change the flood plain.

Flood plains can also change naturally. "Floodplains are neither static nor stable. . . . [T]they are rapidly eroded during floods and high flows of water, or they may be the site on which new layers of mud, sand, and silt are deposited. As such, the river may change its course and shift from one side of the floodplain to the other. . . . [T]he river channel may change within the broader floodplain and the floodplain may be periodically modified by floods as the channel migrates back and forth across the it. Floodplain width is [also] a function of the size of the stream, the rates of downcutting, the channel slope, and the hardness of the channel wall."

Id.

Fourth, as another poster noted, the Seller's issues WRT to flood plain are probably not gogin away any time soon, and once they realize that the issue persists (and probably lessens the value of their property), you may be able to purchase the property for less (because its operating costs are significantly higher). At least, that is how a commercial property would be affected by a reduction in NOI.

Regards, JAFO

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119943 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 12:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I wonder why the sellers were so quiet in this entire process. This entire fiasco is now disclosable to the next possible buyer and I don't see why someone else would be willing to be as patient as you are.

As I mentioned briefly, this was a VERY difficult seller. Heck, getting a legible contract from her was like pulling teeth.

On the other hand, could you have used this as leverage for a "massive" price reduction on the property since the sellers now know this place has a huge flood insurance premium attached to it?

We have made that offer to her, with the only contingency being title insurance. The property is now off the market while she figures out what to do. She may get back to us when she realizes how restricted her options are, and if we have not bought another property at that time we will strongly consider it. Minimally, she needs time to process the idea of the offer, but it's essentially an offer for the value of the land plus a small premium that takes it up to what she bought the property for 5 years ago. Meanwhile, we are extending our search to other areas, and considering building new.

Thanks for your input.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: foo1bar Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119944 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 1:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
and considering building new.

So you're looking to build with the waterfront just a few feet from the backdoor, right? Heck with those flood plains... :D

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119945 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 1:35 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
First, flood plains change. This is especially true in rural areas as development occurs and impermable ground cover increases. But it is also true elsewhere.

Well, sure. Not that development is the cause of the re-evaluation here. This flood plain map for this property was changed about 4 years ago. About 6 years ago, they changed the flood plain maps in our residential area. IIRC, they are examining every part of the US to see if changes need to be made, so if changes have not yet come to your neck of the woods, they may be coming in the near future.

RE Grandfathering, from FEMA: http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=2845

The NFIP’s grandfathering provision offers savings for
structures that were built before a flood map was issued
for the community, or that were built in compliance with
the flood map in effect at the time of construction. The
simplest way to grandfather is to purchase a flood insurance
policy before the new map takes effect and maintain
coverage without a lapse.
If a structure was built in compliance with the requirements
in place at the time of construction, the zone and
base flood elevation (BFE)* that was in effect can be used
for rating purposes, if either is affected due to a map
change. Sometimes using the new zone can provide a better
rate than using the older one, so the property owner
should always ask his/her agent to look at both options.

HOW GRANDFATHERING WORKS
If a policy is obtained before a new map becomes effective,
policyholders can retain the rate associated with the
previous map’s flood zone and BFE, as long as continuous
coverage has been maintained. For structures built
after a FIRM was issued, insurance costs will be based on
the zone designation and BFE for the map in effect at the
time the structure was built (unless the new map offers a
lower rate). However, policyholders must submit supporting
documentation to their insurer that shows the structure
was built to conform to standards on the earlier map. Continuous
coverage is not required in this case. If a structure
was built before the community’s first FIRM was issued
and the policy was not purchased prior to the effective
date of a new map, policyholders can still save, but policy
costs will be defined by pre-FIRM rates associated with
their zone designation on the new map.


The property had continuous coverage.

And this:

SUMMARY
When a map change is approaching, it is important to remember that most pre-FIRM structures have but one chance to lock in the
current flood zone for future rating and that policy needs to be renewed each year. The benefits of the grandfathered zone can
always be transferred to the new owner if the building is sold.
Post-FIRM buildings have two chances to lock in the BFE and/or flood
zone at the time of construction. Continuous coverage is not required. If, however, a building is substantially damaged or improved,
grandfathering of previous zones or BFEs can no longer be applied.


http://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/pdfs/grandfathering_fac...

None of us involved, not the insurance agent, the banker, the sales agents, the buyers or the seller can figure out how they could change the rate like they did given the above.

IP

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119946 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 1:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So you're looking to build with the waterfront just a few feet from the backdoor, right? Heck with those flood plains... :D

Sure. Flushing money down the toilet is fun too.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119948 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 2:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm saddened by the difficulties and ultimate failure you experienced. I thought we were kindred spirits what with both of use working on a waterfront property at the same time.

Now I feel guilty that I closed my deal and you didn't get yours. But I did have some bad luck after all; discovered a broken water main in the front yard five days after closing!

xtn

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119949 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 3:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Now I feel guilty that I closed my deal and you didn't get yours. But I did have some bad luck after all; discovered a broken water main in the front yard five days after closing!

No need to feel guilty!

Let me live vicariously...what's your property like?

Bummer about the water main. Sounds like the property is in a civilized area if you have water mains.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119950 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 4:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
inparadise: "RE Grandfathering, from FEMA: http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=2845

The NFIP’s grandfathering provision offers savings for structures that were built before a flood map was issued for the community, or that were built in compliance with the flood map in effect at the time of construction. The simplest way to grandfather is to purchase a flood insurance policy before the new map takes effect and maintain coverage without a lapse. If a structure was built in compliance with the requirements in place at the time of construction, the zone and base flood elevation (BFE)* that was in effect can be used for rating purposes, if either is affected due to a map change. Sometimes using the new zone can provide a better rate than using the older one, so the property owner should always ask his/her agent to look at both options."


Seems to me to be a lousy business model - we know you are in a higher risk category but will. nonetheless, charge you the older, lower rate from when you were in a lower risk category.

"HOW GRANDFATHERING WORKS
If a policy is obtained before a new map becomes effective, policyholders can retain the rate associated with the previous map’s flood zone and BFE, as long as continuous coverage has been maintained. For structures built after a FIRM was issued, insurance costs will be based on the zone designation and BFE for the map in effect at the time the structure was built (unless the new map offers a lower rate). However, policyholders must submit supporting documentation to their insurer that shows the structure was built to conform to standards on the earlier map. Continuous coverage is not required in this case. If a structure was built before the community’s first FIRM was issued and the policy was not purchased prior to the effective date of a new map, policyholders can still save, but policy costs will be defined by pre-FIRM rates associated with their zone designation on the new map.

The property had continuous coverage.

And this:

SUMMARY
When a map change is approaching, it is important to remember that most pre-FIRM structures have but one chance to lock in the
current flood zone for future rating and that policy needs to be renewed each year. The benefits of the grandfathered zone can
always be transferred to the new owner if the building is sold. Post-FIRM buildings have two chances to lock in the BFE and/or flood
zone at the time of construction. Continuous coverage is not required. If, however, a building is substantially damaged or improved,
grandfathering of previous zones or BFEs can no longer be applied.

http://www.floodsmart.gov/floodsmart/pdfs/grandfathering_fac......

None of us involved, not the insurance agent, the banker, the sales agents, the buyers or the seller can figure out how they could change the rate like they did given the above."


While it still sounds like an idiotic policy to me, but in the face of the language you provided, I agree with you, the insurance agent, the banker, the sales agents, and the sellers. BWDIK.

Regards, JAFO

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119951 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 4:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Seems to me to be a lousy business model - we know you are in a higher risk category but will. nonetheless, charge you the older, lower rate from when you were in a lower risk category.

Which is probably why it's gov't run. Of course, they also set the flood plain, so if they didn't give you a way to lock in the rate, they could simply go around jacking up the flood plain whenever they needed money.

A home is such a big purchase, a large part of most family's "wealth," that I don't know how the system would hold together if there were not some sort of "guarantee" that the price of mandatory flood insurance, (mandatory for those with a mortgage and in a flood plain,) would not skyrocket at the whim of the gov't.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119952 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 5:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 13
I'm glad to hear that FEMA finally did something right.

We can't afford to be subsidizing flood insurance with federal dollars for real estate speculators who insist in doing business in known flood zones.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119953 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 6:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I'm glad to hear that FEMA finally did something right.

We can't afford to be subsidizing flood insurance with federal dollars for real estate speculators who insist in doing business in known flood zones.


Lol. And yet the irony is that this property has survived catastrophic flooding without impact, referred to in some texts as a 500 year flood, but they want to raise the rates sky high on THIS property, while others that would flood in a heart beat keep their low rates.

The house on this lot would be rated the very same as a property at the same elevation, but up against a rock wall behind it. Because this property is surrounded by acres of flat pasture before any hills are encountered, it is one of those houses that will flood when you see Noah's Ark coming round the mountain. The water will spread out instead of up.

We have no desire to be constantly fixing up flood damage, and have learned what to look for to minimize risk.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119954 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
I'm glad to hear that FEMA finally did something right.

We can't afford to be subsidizing flood insurance with federal dollars for real estate speculators who insist in doing business in known flood zones.


So just who do you think is the speculator? The original owner who built to specifications to be outside the 100 year flood plain, by elevating the property, the current seller who bought the property when it was still considered outside of the flood plain, voluntarily purchasing flood insurance even though it was not mandatory, and then having her property rendered unmarketable, through no fault of her own when the gov't hiked the flood plain higher one year into her ownership?

Why do you think it would be any different for the house you own? I live in a residential suburb, with the occasional small creek here and there, and was selling real estate when the flood plains changed 5 or so years ago. It was amazing how one suburban cookie cutter home after another ran into flood insurance issues now that the NFIP maps changed. Were those residential home owners the "speculators" you refer to?

I don't know how the system of home ownership will hold up if there can't be some sort of guarantee that if you follow the rules, you won't all the sudden have the majority of your assets penalized because the gov't arbitrarily changes them on you.

Could just as easily happen to you, or him, or her...wonder if you'll be so sanctimonious then.

IP

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119955 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 7
So just who do you think is the speculator?

You. You are the speculator. I thought that was rather obvious.



The original owner who built to specifications to be outside the 100 year flood plain, by elevating the property,

What does that have to do with you?


the current seller who bought the property when it was still considered outside of the flood plain, voluntarily purchasing flood insurance even though it was not mandatory,

Presumably she bought the insurance to protect her interests. Why do you think that should be "mandatory"? But again: what does that have to do with your actions? Nothing.



and then having her property rendered unmarketable, through no fault of her own when the gov't hiked the flood plain higher one year into her ownership?

Tough noogies. If you build close to a water source--or IN a water source, at least when the river is high, as the case may be--you take your chances.

Again what a prior owner did or didn't do has nothing to do with you, though.



Why do you think it would be any different for the house you own?

I don't. We weren't talking about my house, though. We were talking about the fact that FEMA shouldn't be subsidizing flood insurance for real estate speculators who insist on purchasing homes in flood plains. That would be you we are talking about.


I live in a residential suburb, with the occasional small creek here and there, and was selling real estate when the flood plains changed 5 or so years ago. It was amazing how one suburban cookie cutter home after another ran into flood insurance issues now that the NFIP maps changed. Were those residential home owners the "speculators" you refer to?

No, you are the speculator I am referring to, with respect to the house that you posted this thread about. Again, obviously.



I don't know how the system of home ownership will hold up if there can't be some sort of guarantee that if you follow the rules, you won't all the sudden have the majority of your assets penalized because the gov't arbitrarily changes them on you.

No one changed anything on you, certainly not "arbitrarily." Do you have no comprehension that the flooding patterns can change over time therefore resulting in changes in the maps and therefore in the flood insurance coverage requirements?

Sorry but no one can guarantee that your home will be safe from nature's hazards. You're just very upset that you couldn't scam the government into grandfathering you with a ridiculous flood insurance subsidy. FEMA did the right thing, out you go, too bad, so sad.



Could just as easily happen to you, or him, or her...wonder if you'll be so sanctimonious then.

IP



No it couldn't because I'm not stupid enough to deliberately try to purchase a home that is in an existing flood zone.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119956 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
None of us involved, not the insurance agent, the banker, the sales agents, the buyers or the seller can figure out how they could change the rate like they did given the above.

IP



For one thing, you didn't mention whether you ever received verification of "continuous" flood insurance coverage having remained in effect throughout the applicable period, as required by the language you quoted.

People let insurance coverage lapse all the time, even temporarily could have voided the grandfather clause.

I'm sure there must be a hundred other loopholes and exceptions that might apply to your situation.

After all, it sounds like you were irritated at your bank, at least until they saved your bacon, for doing its job. For an experienced realtor you sound awfully careless. Maybe you should drop the "entitlement" attitude?

You were very lucky.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119957 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
You. You are the speculator. I thought that was rather obvious.

LOL. You are delusional. I get notified by the bank, who ran a flood cert that I paid for, that unlike what the seller told me the property is now in the flood plain and I'll need flood insurance, and that makes me a speculator? Do you know the definition of the word?

Rhetorical, really. You are right up there with Charlie Sheen when it comes to rambling, and I have no desire to participate in your nonsensical rants.

Take your meds, now.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119958 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
inparadise:

<<<Seems to me to be a lousy business model - we know you are in a higher risk category but will. nonetheless, charge you the older, lower rate from when you were in a lower risk category.>>>

"Which is probably why it's gov't run."

Nice back-handed compliment. It is government run because the private insurers want nothing to do with it.

"Of course, they also set the flood plain, so if they didn't give you a way to lock in the rate, they could simply go around jacking up the flood plain whenever they needed money."

Easier said than done. There is science behind the estimates, and, IIRC, administrative procedures for challenging flood plain determinations.

"A home is such a big purchase, a large part of most family's "wealth," that I don't know how the system would hold together if there were not some sort of "guarantee" that the price of mandatory flood insurance, (mandatory for those with a mortgage and in a flood plain,) would not skyrocket at the whim of the gov't."

If you really believe in the free market, then perhaps only those who do not need mortgages (and are willing to assume the risk) should be building in a flood plain?

There is no Constiutional right to a mortgage? And lenders, subject to discrimination laws, are generally allowed to determine their own underwriting risks.

And I believe that it is only mandatory if your lender wants to sell into the secondary market. Perhaps you need to to search for a portfolio lender who will lend without flood insurance?

If none exist, then the market is clearly suggesting that it perceives too much risk to make any such loans, and, as a consequence, only those who can take the risk directly, by buying without a mortgage, can really afford it.

Food for thought.

Regards, JAFO

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Lurker1999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119959 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
We have made that offer to her, with the only contingency being title insurance. The property is now off the market while she figures out what to do. She may get back to us when she realizes how restricted her options are, and if we have not bought another property at that time we will strongly consider it. Minimally, she needs time to process the idea of the offer, but it's essentially an offer for the value of the land plus a small premium that takes it up to what she bought the property for 5 years ago. Meanwhile, we are extending our search to other areas, and considering building new.

You've clearly done a lot of research in the area. As in other cases, what the owner purchased the property for really doesn't matter at this point in time. Given that the land is now in a flood plain I assume this affects the value of the land. I'd consider offering that plus whatever you value the structure at.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119960 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
inparadise: "The house on this lot would be rated the very same as a property at the same elevation, but up against a rock wall behind it."

Only if it is in the flood plain.

"Because this property is surrounded by acres of flat pasture before any hills are encountered, it is one of those houses that will flood when you see Noah's Ark coming round the mountain. The water will spread out instead of up."

And those issues are considered when flood plain analysis is performed.

Regards, JAFO

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119961 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
LOL. You are delusional.

Not so delusional so as to attempt to buy a house in a flood plain without doing the proper due diligence first, and without the appropriate contingencies in the contract of sale that would protect me against financial loss in the event the transaction fell through due to the property's uninsureability.



I get notified by the bank, who ran a flood cert that I paid for, that unlike what the seller told me the property is now in the flood plain and I'll need flood insurance, and that makes me a speculator? Do you know the definition of the word?

The house is on stilts. Seems to me that the house being on stilts might indicate a possible flooding issue. Basically what you're saying is the seller told you otherwise. Did you get that disclosure in writing? If so, it's a fraudulent representation about the condition of your property, and you should be able to get your money back. (You should know that already--weren't you/aren't you a realtor?) Even if it's only an oral misrepresentation, it's still probably actionable fraud. Again this is pretty obvious, why wouldn't you already know this stuff?



Rhetorical, really. You are right up there with Charlie Sheen when it comes to rambling, and I have no desire to participate in your nonsensical rants.

Take your meds, now.


Are you sure your IQ is high enough to be living in West Virginia?

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119962 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 7:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
inparadise: "Why do you think it would be any different for the house you own?"

I don't.

"I don't know how the system of home ownership will hold up if there can't be some sort of guarantee that if you follow the rules, you won't all the sudden have the majority of your assets penalized because the gov't arbitrarily changes them on you."

First, it is not arbitrary.

Second, moving the flood plain lines recognizes the new reality, which new reality is not necessarily of the government's making.

Did you read any of the details I previously provided about how and why fllod plains change over time.

"Could just as easily happen to you, or him, or her..."

Yes.

"wonder if you'll be so sanctimonious then."

Not the OP; I do not know but I hope that I would have some equanimity.

OTOH, you are neither the original owner who built to specifications to be outside the then 100 year flood plain or the current seller.

In addition, the property is not unmarketable.

Unmarkteble title is title "that a reasonable buyer would fail to accept, due to pending litigation or some other unresolved conflicts over the property."

http://law.yourdictionary.com/title

Marketable title is title "that would be acceptable to a reasonable buyer, in that it appears to cover all the property that the seller is offering and it lacks any defect or limitation."

There is nothing wrong with title to the property.

Regards, JAFO

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: SeattlePioneer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119963 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 10:33 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Interesting story, Inparadise.


The 100 year flood plain ends at the boundary for one side of my property.

A couple of years after I bought my house the basement flooded out during a bad rainy spell.

Local government wound up spending BIG BUCKS to build a stormwater runoff system right to drain this flat, low area, and things have been fine until a couple of years ago, when a weakened dam threatened a 1/3 chance of serious flooding which didn't occur and the dam is being repaired.

Interestingly, the area I live in is threatened by tsunamis coming up the river from downtown Seattle from landslides off of bluffs, and also by mudflows from Mt Rainier from 50 miles away coming downstream!



Seattle Pioneer

Print the post Back To Top
Author: WendyBG Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Winner! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119964 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 11:18 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I have nominated your amazing post for Post of the Day. Thank you for sharing.
Wendy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Donna405 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119965 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/9/2011 11:49 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Thank you, Wendy, for seeing the value of inparadise's post.

Donna

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Watty56 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119966 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 12:13 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
I had a different experience with flood zones being redrawn.

I bought a house in the suburbs of Portland Oregon in the mid-1980's. It was about a quarter mile from a small river that is normally about 20 feet wide. It was on a small hill next to wetlands so I was careful to check to make sure it was outside the flood zone (100 year? I don't remember exactly). It was OK and no flood insurance was required.

In the early 1990's I refinanced my loan and they required me to get flood insurance since the maps had been redrawn, but the savings were a lot more than the flood insurance so I did not fight it.. A few years later in 1996 there was a series of fluke weather system and the 20 foot wide river flooded to the point where it was at least a mile wide. Several times I saw my house on TV on the news helicopter video. My house was sandbagged but I still got several feet of water in my crawlspace, but it luckily stopped just a few inches short of getting into the flooring.


There was about $10,000 in damage that was mostly covered by the flood insurance. This was mostly replacing insulation and duct work.


The reports on the flood were not definitive, but it was probably about a 75 year flood. but within the next 18 months(as I best recall) there were two more floods that came within about three feet of the same level but we did not have any damage in those floods.


As I went through this I learned that there are some additional problems with flood insurance for houses that are built then the flood zone is redrawn. These could make your post flood insurance claim even more of a nightmare.


1) If there is major damage to the house (51% ?), then you need a full set of permits to rebuild and bring the entire house up to the current building code.

2) You likely will not be able to get permits to rebuild in a flood zone, or at least have a LOT of trouble getting the permits. Even if you get the building permits, there are other things like sewer and water connections that will have special flood zone requirements. Part of your land may now be considered to be wetlands which would have lots of other requirements. Septic tanks in what is now a flood zone cause lots of permitting problems.


3) Flood insurance is usually set up to pay for the actual repairs, so if you do not do the repairs (even if it because cannot get a needed permit) then the process of getting paid for the flood damage is much complicated.

4) If you have 51% damage and cannot rebuild because of zoning and permits, then the most the flood insurance company will pay is 51%. Even thought he rest of the structure and the lot are now pretty worthless. Any costs to bring the structure up to code may not be covered by the insurance policy.

5) If you have a mortgage, the payment for the repairs is made out with the mortgage companies name on the check so you have to work it out with the mortgage company on how to cash the check. My mortgage company required that the repairs be done before they would release the money to me. I ended up paying for the repairs out of pocket and then went through the process of getting the money released.



Greg

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119967 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 7:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
As in other cases, what the owner purchased the property for really doesn't matter at this point in time.

While it does not matter in valuing the property, it does have impact on her ability to sell for that price. I only tilt at windmills that I have a prayer of knocking down.

Given that the land is now in a flood plain I assume this affects the value of the land.

There are several building sites that are outside of the flood plain, and there is always the option to build on higher stilts. Flood insurance is not so dependent on the land, but where the structure sits with regard to where the water could rise. The comps I used to come up with a price are similar properties with some flood plain and some land well out of the flood plain.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119968 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 7:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
And those issues are considered when flood plain analysis is performed.

Do you have a link to how the flood plain is determined, or is this speculation? I've seen way too many properties marked as flood plain, where there is no way it will flood. Indeed, as I stated, this property was basically unscathed by what has been referenced as a 500 year flood, and is now considered under the 100 year flood plain. That tells me there are inefficiencies in the flood plain determination system.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119969 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 7:38 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The 100 year flood plain ends at the boundary for one side of my property.

SP,

You bought your property some time ago, IIRC. Do you know if the NFIP maps have changed for your area, or if they are planned to be re-evaluated? Pretty much a nationwide re-evaluation is planned.

I hope you will be able to sell if they do change the map.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119970 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 7:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I have nominated your amazing post for Post of the Day. Thank you for sharing.
Wendy


Thanks Wendy, though that's bound to bring more trolls.

This was not a fun experience, and as I stated in my original post, mistakes were made from which I hope others can learn. In the very least, perhaps it will trigger people to ask the right questions.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119971 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 7:48 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Greg,

Thanks for sharing.

Flood insurance is a very complicated and involved plan, and it does not protect you from all risk. What in life does? I'm glad it worked out well for you.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: bosslady52 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119972 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 8:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Sorry about the unfortunate outcome on this deal; good luck in your search for a better property!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119973 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 8:07 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
While I thank (almost) everyone for their replies, I am going to ignore theoretical debates over whether flood insurance should or should not be available.

The purpose of this thread was to:

*present the fact that FEMA has documentation stating that when flood plain ratings change, flood insurance at the lower risk is transferable, or a property can be grandfathered back to the risk level at the time it was built, if it can be shown to have been built with proper permits for that time.

*FEMA blows the above off, and does what they want.

*If you are looking to buy or sell a property, pay attention to the current flood plain, AND HOW CLOSE THE PROPERTY IS TO BEING IN THE FLOOD PLAIN, because if they ever change the flood plain designation, your ability to sell the place at the value it would command had the flood plain not changed, you could be screwed. While this again is no guarantee, minimize your risk of having your new purchase property value diminished via flood plain changes.

*Mortgage co's protect their own bottom line, but your bottom may be the one to get protected in the process.

We've been looking for the right waterfront property for about 10 years now, and have learned much along the way. This is the first time there has been any indication that contrary to the FEMA docs I linked, your flood premiums can change insanely. This is not the conventional wisdom, and real estate professionals will tell you otherwise, because that is what they have read and experienced. Please just be aware that there is much potential for uncertainty involved when it comes to the future of your property's flood insurance premium. It's been a game changer for us, in that we are now looking higher on the hill, though still on the river.

IP
whose residential area is under serious flood watch right now

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119974 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 8:36 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
A few years later in 1996 there was a series of fluke weather system and the 20 foot wide river flooded to the point where it was at least a mile wide. Several times I saw my house on TV on the news helicopter video. My house was sandbagged but I still got several feet of water in my crawlspace, but it luckily stopped just a few inches short of getting into the flooring.

===============================

I remember that flood. Much of the water you received came from here...The Blue Mountains in SE Washington.

If I remember right there was heavy snow fall then really warm temps, melting the snow rapidly. Part of our business property flooded during that time.

IMHO, we caused the change in your flood plain. Part of the reason the flood plain changes is the amount of work that is done to control flooding.

Way back in the 50's or 60*s the Corp of Engineers built dikes to prevent flooding in Starbuck, Waitsburg and Dayton. Part of the agreement when they built the dikes was that the cities would maintain them. Part of that maintenance was removing the silt etc. from the river bottom and keeping the brush cut back.

This worked pretty well until the 1980's when the Department of Fish and Wildlife decided that the work being done to maintain the dikes was damaging to the fish. The city could no longer dredge the river. When I moved here 30 years ago I could walk under the bridge and not touch the bottom of the bridge. When the flood occured I would have had to bend over to walk under the bridge.

When the water came down out of the mountains there was no where for it to go, but on to Portland. The river channel had become so narrow and shallow.

I guess my whole* point is, IMHO, your flood plan changed because of the changes in land/river channel 300-400 miles away.

Jean

* Well, there is the point that the Department of Fish and Wildlife could work better with the cities to save the fish and prevent flooding...but that's OT for this board.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: WendyBG Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Winner! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119975 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 9:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
<mistakes were made from which I hope others can learn. In the very least, perhaps it will trigger people to ask the right questions.>

The reason I appreciate your post so much was that you listed issues that I never even knew existed.

I will certainly look up your post in the future, should I ever buy another house. If the "Buying and Selling a House" board has a FAQ section to collect most useful reference posts in one place (as I maintain on METAR), I suggest that you add your post to that reference section so that people can easily find it again.

Thanks again,
Wendy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119976 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 9:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
No need to feel guilty!

Let me live vicariously...what's your property like?

Bummer about the water main. Sounds like the property is in a civilized area if you have water mains.


Seventeen acres. Basically a rectangle with a 2:1 ratio of depth to width. Front end along a one lane country road. Front half slowly sloping up away from the road with a few trees scattered here and there (mostly lining the gravel driveway) but mostly was used for hay production. The long sides are both thick tree lines. Back half slopes down through some big, old trees to the water. This area is clean and the trees are trimmed up nicely so the view from the middle of the property is under the branches to the water. The water is a 20 Acre conservation pond shared by us and three other property owners around it. A few of the ducks seem to like leftover bread crusts.

House is wood siding, about 2000 square feet, with the second floor being only two small kids' bedrooms with a Jack-n-Jill bathroom. Built in the mid eighties and kind of shoddy, but quaint and pleasant with lots of windows.

It's about eight miles outside of a small town. Water utility service is a privately owned co-op system. Turned off the meter valve and dug up the muddy bit yesterday after work. Found a 1-1/2" PVC line with a big crack halfway around it. Will repair this weekend.

Have an 18-wheeler tire in the bed of my truck, assembled with eye bolts and chains, ready to hang from a tree out back this evening with the help of my 7 and 8 year old boys!!!

I guess I'm going to be in the market for a small tractor in the next month or two, to keep the mowing time down to 16 hours or so.

xtn

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: JAFO31 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119977 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 9:51 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
inparadise:

<<<And those issues are considered when flood plain analysis is performed.>>>

Do you have a link to how the flood plain is determined, or is this speculation? I've seen way too many properties marked as flood plain, where there is no way it will flood.

http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/floodplain/fis_data.shtm

http://www.fema.gov/hazard/map/flood.shtm

http://www.fema.gov/hazard/map/fis.shtm

http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/fhm/hm_main.shtm

http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=4053

"Indeed, as I stated, this property was basically unscathed by what has been referenced as a 500 year flood, and is now considered under the 100 year flood plain."

If so, then was then, and this is now. As I have noted several times, fllod plains change over time, for any number of reasons.

"That tells me there are inefficiencies in the flood plain determination system."

Is it perfect, no. But what system is. But it is not att he whim of the government nor does it make title umarketable.

"Nearly 20,000 communities across the United States and its territories participate in the NFIP by adopting and enforcing floodplain management ordinances to reduce future flood damage. In exchange, the NFIP makes Federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in these communities. Community participation in the NFIP is voluntary."

http://www.fema.gov/about/programs/nfip/index.shtm

http://water.ky.gov/floodplain/Pages/BriefHistory.aspx

http://www.ehow.com/about_5220277_history-federal-flood-insu...

"Many people seem to believe that a 100-year flood should happen once every 100 years, or that a 500-year flood should happen every 500 years. But that's not how it works.

A 100-year flood is defined as a flood so big that it has a 1 percent chance of happening in any given year. A 500-year flood is one with a 0.2 percent chance of happening in a given year — a 1-in-500 chance.

Scientists say it is not unusual to hear from people who want to know if they have lived through a "100-year" event and want to cancel their flood insurance, believing one recent big flood lowers the risk of another. But that's not the case."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25463476

"The government uses information about a river's elevation and flow rate, along with historical records, to determine the chances of a flood at the 100- or 500-year level."

Id.

See also: http://www.propex.com/C_f_env_fld0.htm

And the National Flood Insurance Program Description
available at:

http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?id=1480

Nonetheless, you can continue to believe as you wish.

The facts, however, are that historically private insurers did not want to write flood insurance, participation by a commuminity is voluntary, and there is science behind the mapping process.

Regards, JAFO

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119978 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 10:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So you bought that place! Last I remember you didn't think it was worth the money. Who caved?

I guess I'm going to be in the market for a small tractor in the next month or two, to keep the mowing time down to 16 hours or so.

Since it was used for hay production before, what about contracting out the mowing in exchange for the hay?

Congrats on your success.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: foo1bar Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119979 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 11:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I guess I'm going to be in the market for a small tractor in the next month or two, to keep the mowing time down to 16 hours or so.
See if you can find a used Zero-Turn-Radius mower. There's probably a used equipment dealer or 3 around and good chance one of them has one or will have one.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jackcrow Big gold star, 5000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119981 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 2:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Sorry for your frustrating journey, I know how much you wanted this to work out.

jack

Print the post Back To Top
Author: jackcrow Big gold star, 5000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119982 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/10/2011 3:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Do you have a link to how the flood plain is determined, or is this speculation?

JAFO is spot on.

The short version is Hydrology and Geology methods are used to study the past behavior of the river/lake and that is compared to current topography. If you walk any stream or river it is not very hard to find the annual high flow level, the 10 year high flow level and the 20 and 30 years are often discernible. Ideally the area is studied and surveyed with boots on the ground. It is also very common to use on the ground studies for a sample area of a water shed and then use remote sensing data like topo-maps, aerial photographs and subsurface geological structures maps to fill in the rest. This is hard science not thumb in the air guess work.

Depending on where you are in W WV there is a great deal of hydrological data compiled by several Federal agencies that is only a data base query away. WVU is also likely to have piles and piles of data as folks work on their masters and PhD's.

The argument that last time this place didn't flood during an X year event is the same argument used by gamblers in Atlantic City when they pull the arm on the slot machine. Every pull has the same odds, they do not change because we pull the arm 100 times; the odds are set so the machine pays out X and the house keeps Y. It does not matter if you do 100 pulls with one each on 100 machines or 100 pulls on one machine the average outcome would be the same.

The fact that this stilt house didn't flood last time probably lies within the realm of chaos theory, it could have but this random time it did not.

Or better on the ground analysis is required to verify this plot is actually out of the flood plane for specific scientific reasons.

jack

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119990 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 9:27 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I've seen way too many properties marked as flood plain, where there is no way it will flood.


Maybe you should go into the business of providing private flood insurance to home owners, and take advantage of your superior knowledge.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119991 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 9:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
We've been looking for the right waterfront property for about 10 years now, and have learned much along the way. This is the first time there has been any indication that contrary to the FEMA docs I linked, your flood premiums can change insanely. This is not the conventional wisdom, and real estate professionals will tell you otherwise, because that is what they have read and experienced. Please just be aware that there is much potential for uncertainty involved when it comes to the future of your property's flood insurance premium. It's been a game changer for us, in that we are now looking higher on the hill, though still on the river.

Actually it sounds like the problem is you are trying to "bargain hunt" your way into a premium water front property, which is not going to work, unless you are very very lucky.

Your posts in this thread reflect multiple cognitive biases on your part which is probably making the process far more difficult than it should be. (Example: No, you DON'T know better than FEMA about flooding.)

If you want to buy a premium water front property that is safe, has a good view, has excellent improvements built upon it, and has the other criteria you are looking for, and is a high value in other ways, then you will have to pay up for it.

You are looking for that $10 bill lying in the street that the economists tell us is not there because someone else already picked it up.

You are likely competing for that $10 bill against much more experienced and savvy real estate investors who for instance might specialize in properties on or near flood plains. It might not be a professional real estate investor, just someone else who has always lived in that area, has invested in a few properties along the way, knows the river, knows the history, and knows how FEMA operates.

If you have been looking for the "right" waterfront property for ten years now, then you will never find it, because whatever methodology you are using is ineffective. Most likely, the problem is that you don't want to pay full market price for a quality waterfront property; yet you don't have the real estate investing "chops" to be able to accurately assess risk/reward to give you any advantage in "bargain hunting."

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: EarlyToRise Two stars, 250 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119992 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 10:01 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
If you have been looking for the "right" waterfront property for ten years now, then you will never find it, because whatever methodology you are using is ineffective.

Not to mention 10 (likely) prime years spent not living on the waterfront (even if it's just visiting on weekends). Opportunity cost, and such.

ETR

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119993 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 10:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Hey I here you can get water front property in Japan pretty cheaply.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BoredPerson One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119994 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 10:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Hey I here you can get water front property in Japan pretty cheaply.

Ha ha ha! Let's make jokes about a current event where hundreds have died already and there is massive damage.

The spelling mistakes makes you look even more stupider.

My gut hurts from laughing.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119995 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 10:30 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Or, we are not in a hurry, and are willing to wait for the right place at the right price. Retirement is still at least 5 years away, but since our preferences are very specific, we chose not to put off looking. We have put offers in on more than one of those properties we've looked at over the years. Some got snatched off the market before we could act on it, as it's tough for DH to get away from work to travel to the property at a moment's notice, and several of them are still on the market, still over priced. Many that have sold have done so at prices less than our final offer, and we have come to feel as though we are the one who prepares the seller for reality, which they then accept from someone else. At least one property probably is facing the same flood insurance issues that we faced with this property, and will have significant problems selling at the price the seller insists upon. Meanwhile, his property sits vacant and gets eaten away by carpenter bees.

Discretionary purchases are much more fun in some ways. Meanwhile, VRBO.com provides us with the riverfront homes when we want to use them. We are not pressed to settle for less than we want.

It's so touching you care enough to show me the error of our ways.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119996 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 10:32 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Not to mention 10 (likely) prime years spent not living on the waterfront (even if it's just visiting on weekends). Opportunity cost, and such.

ETR

VRBO.com
homeaway.com
cyberrentals.com
vacationrentals411.com

etc.

No shortage of opportunities, sadly a shortage of time to take advantage of them.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119997 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 11:32 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Or, we are not in a hurry, and are willing to wait for the right place at the right price.

Time is money. It is not likely you will be able to get the "right price" (i.e. a significant bargain) unless you bring some very specific and useable advantage to the table. No matter how long you wait, this is not going to change--there is no advantage simply in waiting, for waiting's sake.


Retirement is still at least 5 years away, but since our preferences are very specific, we chose not to put off looking.

Two points--it probably doesn't make sense to actually buy now if the property is not to be used for its purpose as a retirement home for another several years. Generally speaking, second homes are not particularly good investments for most people. Second, if this is a house you are actually going to live in, then you need to avoid being penny wise and pound foolish.

Obviously you should do as much looking as you want, but looking isn't buying. In your OP you stated that the flood plain had been changed four years ago and that the existing structure you were thinking of buying was IN the flood plan and you already knew that. Regardless of how much the insurance cost, I can't imagine why anyone would EVER think it wise to knowingly buy a house in an existing flood plain. You're just taking on uncompensated for and undiversified flood risk, regardless of the insurance rate being charged by FEMA. I am pretty certain that most people whose homes do get flooded, even if they get a big check from FEMA, aren't very happy to be flooded.

That's probably because you were looking at the transaction from the viewpoint of a realtor rather than as an owner. To a realtor, closing the transaction is all that matters, and if the place gets flooded ten or fifteen years down the road, what does the realtor care? But, as an owner, (or as a mortgage lender with proper risk controls), you can't be so short-sighted.

It boggles my mind that anyone with a choice would voluntarily even consider purchasing a home in an existing flood zone, stilts or no stilts; low FEMA flood premium or not. The only possible reason must have been the offering price seemed cheap to you in comparison to similar nearby houses not in the flood plain.

Even if you got grandfathered now, and paid the low rate, who's to say FEMA wouldn't change its policies and rating structure five or ten years down the line? Esp. if there were a few floods and an increased number of claims in the area, even if not your house in particular. Also what about the issue of counterparty risk? That FEMA just doesn't have enough money to pay all the claims? Or, that FEMA games your damages claim and you end up with a check that only compensates you very inadequately for your loss (an issue with ALL casualty insurers--they will pay you as little as they can get away with).



We have put offers in on more than one of those properties we've looked at over the years.

It's easy to put in offers. When you've found yourself in a pattern of putting in multiple offers over a time period and they keep getting rejected, then your ability to properly value the market is in question.


Some got snatched off the market before we could act on it,

That's the problem with "being willing to wait."



as it's tough for DH to get away from work to travel to the property at a moment's notice, and several of them are still on the market, still over priced.

Wow, you really are a bargain hunter, aren't you? But you're competing not only against full time r.e. investors, but also all of those buyers who are not full time but willing to compensate a buyer's broker or agent.

When you get really serious about this, you will probably hire a local buyer's agent in the area that you want to actually buy in. That way you don't have to wait for your husband to get off from work.

As far as your opinion that the properties remain over-priced, the answer is, "compared to what"? And, by how much? Maybe it is worth your while to spend a few thousand more than you think you should to get the property you want and accomplish your objective, which is not or should not be to get the rock bottom cheapest price, but rather, to get the best retirement home you can afford for purposes of living in rather than as a financial investment.

You are talking about properties in the 200k range, right? How overpriced could they possibly be? five or ten grand? So pay it and get the house that you really like, be done with this nonsense.





Many that have sold have done so at prices less than our final offer, and we have come to feel as though we are the one who prepares the seller for reality, which they then accept from someone else.

OK, this is guesswork, but it sounds to me that there must be something personal to you, your husband, and/or the way you are trying to do these transaction that is turning sellers off. I mean let's face it, you got incredibly defensive, insulting, and obnoxious when questioned in this thread, right? You seem to believe you know more than FEMA about the nuts and bolts of defining flood plains, even though you are apparently entirely unqualified, right?

I know you made Post of the Day, congrats, but seriously, your entire OP could have been reduced to the following:

"NEVER BUY A HOUSE IN A FLOOD PLAIN. EVER."

The fact is that if you really wanted to actually buy a house, and not just be a looky-loo, or make offers only to be rejected, you would hire a qualified, experienced buyer's broker or agent in the specific area you have chosen, give them your check list for what you were looking for in a property, and let them do the looking for you, and try to follow their advice on valuation criteria.

If your h has to take off from work and travel any time a good opportunity comes up, and you insist on making low ball offers, perhaps being somewhat nasty about it, you are probably going to miss every single opportunity that does come along. You are at way too much of a disadvantage trying to shop for a bargain long distance, without qualified representation on the spot.

You would then make a "fair" offer. No doubt what you have been trying to do is get a nice property on the cheap, at a 10 - 20% discount. But it doesn't work that way, not unless you are very very lucky. You end up buying dogs or white elephants thinking you got a great deal but actually buying a value trap, as ALMOST happened in this case.

What is astounding is that you seem to be complaining about spending the $1500 rather than thanking your lucky stars at avoiding an absolute CATASTROPHE. Not because the insurance rate would have been jacked up, but BECAUSE YOU ALMOST BOUGHT YOUR RETIREMENT "DREAM HOME" IN A FLOOD PLAIN.

STOP HUNTING FOR (so called) "BARGAINS." You've been doing it for ten years and that's more than enough time to know that you're no good at it. This is the house you will be living in, right?

You've said there are several houses out there, that you like, but are all overpriced. If they are all overpriced, that means your offers have been too low. That is, if you actually want to buy one of them.

If you haven't completely alienated the sellers of these properties, you should go back--better yet retain a buyer's broker to do so--to these properties, review them again, pick out the best one as defined by your personal needs, and then make a FAIR offer. Again, that is if you actually want to buy, rather than just look.



At least one property probably is facing the same flood insurance issues that we faced with this property, and will have significant problems selling at the price the seller insists upon. Meanwhile, his property sits vacant and gets eaten away by carpenter bees.

Very simply, any home that is in a flood plain, or where there is any question about availability of insurance, is or should NOT be on your "buy" list, for ANY price. You are improperly discounting the risk/diminished value of these properties. They may have an effective or actual or practical value or risk-adjusted value of zero or close to it.

So, these houses may be discounted from similar houses outside the flood plain, looking like a "great" bargain, but actually they are insufficiently discounted, and what you are doing in your mental accounting is assuming the opposite--that they are over-discounted. You do this by assuming FEMA is wrong and that there will "never" be a flood during your period of ownership. These are examples of the cognitive biases I was talking about.

Do you really want to put your potential financial future in the hands of FEMA, regardless of what premium they might charge? (You know the same FEMA of "Brownie you're doing a helluva job" fame?) You questioned the accuracy of their flood plain designations but only one way, in the way that you thought favored the transaction. Did it never occur to you that FEMA may have underestimated rather than overestimated the flooding risk? Maybe they "should" be charging you 18,000/year not 9,000 for that property. The problem is there is no way for you to know. You are just taking a huge amount of uncompensated, undiversified risk by purchasing a house in a flood plain.


Discretionary purchases are much more fun in some ways. Meanwhile, VRBO.com provides us with the riverfront homes when we want to use them. We are not pressed to settle for less than we want.

It's so touching you care enough to show me the error of our ways.

IP


No the market is your best teacher, you should start listening to it.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119998 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 11:44 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ha ha ha! Let's make jokes about a current event where hundreds have died already and there is massive damage.

I have a better idea. Let's be hypocritical, sanctimonious and condescending on the internet about something that we claim to care about, but are not actually doing anything about, to stroke our egos.

Oh wait you just did that, didn't you? So, did you make your meaningful charitable contribution to a relief organization of your choice dedicated to helping the tsunami victims before or after you posted what you posted?



The spelling mistakes makes you look even more stupider.

My gut hurts from laughing.


I'll bet that's a lot of hurting, isn't it? You might want to lay off the Cheez Doodles and ding dongs champ.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: reallyalldone Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 119999 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 12:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Retirement is still at least 5 years away, but since our preferences are very specific

Maybe it's just me but I'm confused. You were talking about buying a vacation rental property. Now it's a retirement home ?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120000 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 12:35 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
It constantly amazes me the volumes you can write about what is best for me, someone you don't even know. What a good person you are to spend so much time telling a complete stranger how to live their lives. If only everyone could be so unselfish with their time!

Sure, I could have followed your line of thinking, and bought the property we liked in GA two years ago for $400,000. Now of course, we are looking at an even better property just a few lots upstream that is listed for less than half that price. Time is money! I should have snapped up that property I strongly believed to be overpriced, which has since been pulled from the market. Another truism you forgot to use is that real estate only goes up. Not.

So second homes are not good investments? Yet based on market research the properties we are looking at will be cash flow positive when put on the vacation rental market, even before the tax benefits are accounted for. While I do not include any appreciation in these profit projections, I certainly do pay attention to valuation and where I think they are going based on my research. Meanwhile, our savings accrue, and compound in the hands of our financial adviser. I dare say the funds we have saved and invested have done much better than the price of real estate over the past 10 years. Significantly better. Silly me.

Second, if this is a house you are actually going to live in, then you need to avoid being penny wise and pound foolish.

This one really cracks me up. The main reason why we are able to retire at such a young age, particularly in this economy, is because we have delayed impulses for instant gratification. Considering we currently have a roof over our heads, and need to stay here until Youngest goes off to college, I feel zero need to rush. Clearly your approach is superior, and I am foolish. Or is that Foolish.

In your OP you stated that the flood plain had been changed four years ago and that the existing structure you were thinking of buying was IN the flood plan and you already knew that.

Your lack of reading comprehension continues to stun me. You were given an overview of what we learned over a 5 month period, not what we knew going into the purchase. The purpose of this recital was simply to give people a heads up of questions to ask before putting money down, rather than make assumptions based on what you are told. We feel our $1500 tuition was well worth the lessons learned, and hoped to spare others the expense.

Even if you got grandfathered now, and paid the low rate, who's to say FEMA wouldn't change its policies and rating structure five or ten years down the line?

Very good. You finally understood the original post. CONTRARY TO WHAT FEMA HAS POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITE, STATING THAT THE LOW RISK POLICIES CAN BE TRANSFERRED TO NEW OWNERS, AND A HOMEOWNERS RATE WILL CONTINUE WITH CONTINUOUS POLICY, THEY CAN AND DO IGNORE THEIR OWN WRITTEN STATEMENTS.

as it's tough for DH to get away from work to travel to the property at a moment's notice, and several of them are still on the market, still over priced.
...
Wow, you really are a bargain hunter, aren't you? But you're competing not only against full time r.e. investors, but also all of those buyers who are not full time but willing to compensate a buyer's broker or agent.


LOL. You really are funny in how you make bold statements about something you know nothing about. Are you married? Would you actually be OK with your spouse spending up to $400,000 for an investment/future retirement home sight unseen? Some of these properties were snapped up within days. Some are sold the moment the sign goes in the ground. We had a contract to the listing agent on the place in question within 4 days of it listing, because as soon as the listing hit my search feed, knowing the place I insisted he take the day off and we go see it that week. My buyer's agent, whom you seem to think I would do without, (although he has already been mentioned in this thread,) caused us to not be able to see the property until day 3. BTW, we offered list price. So much for being an indecisive bargain hunter. But you know best!

Sorry, but I can't read this insanely long and preachy post any more. I'm laughing to hard to see the words.

IP
done feeding the trolls

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120001 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 12:41 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Maybe it's just me but I'm confused. You were talking about buying a vacation rental property. Now it's a retirement home ?

That is our back up plan, if the profit projections don't work as expected, or if the reality of running the business is more than we bargained for. If we decide to move in full time, there will no longer be a concern about whether or not mortgage interest of a second home is tax deductible, as I expect that deduction to disappear very soon. So yes, while the plan is to rent the place out and use it as a business, minimally over the next five years which makes sense given how little free time available we have, it also has to be able to work as our retirement home if we decide that's what we want to do with it.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BoredPerson One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120002 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 1:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
I have a better idea. Let's be hypocritical, sanctimonious and condescending on the internet about something that we claim to care about, but are not actually doing anything about, to stroke our egos.

Ah... you make a tasteless joke and now want to make me look like the bad guy. Nice little deflection there. Just like inparadise mentioned in a later post, you like to make assumptions about people you don't know anything about. You don't know if I'm doing anything about the situation. Even if I am not, I can say I'm not going around making jokes about people who have suffered immensely from the disaster.

Oh wait you just did that, didn't you? So, did you make your meaningful charitable contribution to a relief organization of your choice dedicated to helping the tsunami victims before or after you posted what you posted?

If my crystal balls was working so well that I could make a contribution before the tsunami occurred, I would probably have bought a MegaMillions ticket that is worth $151 million today and contributed a portion of it.

The fact that I may or may not have contributed anything to the victims does not have any effect on the fact that you are using their loss to make a tasteless joke. It is not surprising. Your brief history on the boards indicates a self-centered person who has little feelings or compassion for other posters.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Lurker1999 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120003 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 2:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The fact is that if you really wanted to actually buy a house, and not just be a looky-loo, or make offers only to be rejected, you would hire a qualified, experienced buyer's broker or agent in the specific area you have chosen, give them your check list for what you were looking for in a property, and let them do the looking for you, and try to follow their advice on valuation criteria.

I think it's problematic placing too much trust into a party whose sole paycheck at the end of the day depends on their ability to convince you to close a deal on a property.

If life circumstances press one into having to purchase something for whatever non-monetary justification it may raise the amount of money that someone is willing to spend. However, if it's an optional purchase, I see no need fall into the same 'buy now or be priced out forever' trap that has drawn us the pretty Case-Shiller graphs which highlight just how quickly prices have risen with loosening lending standards.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120004 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 2:29 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It constantly amazes me the volumes you can write about what is best for me, someone you don't even know.

You are easily amazed.


What a good person you are to spend so much time telling a complete stranger how to live their lives. If only everyone could be so unselfish with their time!

Everything I have written in your thread makes perfect sense and is based on the facts that you posted. You are certainly free to disagree and disregard anything I or anyone else chooses to post. Others who are reading your thread may benefit from opinions other than that of your own umbrage, however.



Sure, I could have followed your line of thinking, and bought the property we liked in GA two years ago for $400,000.

If you actually wanted to buy that particular property, at that particular time and place, then you needed to make a market-clearing offer. You didn't. Any regrets you might have about that should not be directed at others.

However, I can tell you with relative certainty that if your search for a retirement home is spanning Georgia, West Virginia, and perhaps other states, the problem may be that you (i.e. you + your husband) don't really know what it is that you actually want in a retirement home. That is way too scatter shot of an approach.

You need to focus on a particular state, then further focus to a particular community or perhaps two or three similar communities in that state, and then concentrate your efforts like a laser beam once your have narrowed down the state, area, and community you wish to retire to.



Now of course, we are looking at an even better property just a few lots upstream that is listed for less than half that price.

OK so you are simultaneously still looking in GA and West Virginia? Or, you are saying that you are now looking at additional properties in W Va that are better/cheaper than the GA property?

Why would you believe that the pricing of a particular property in Georgia should bear any relationship to the pricing of a property in West Virginia? Or, that the pricing of a property two years ago, should bear any relationship to the pricing of a property today? Or, two years from today? (Your relevant time line is your approximate retirement date which is about five years from today.)


Time is money! I should have snapped up that property I strongly believed to be overpriced, which has since been pulled from the market. Another truism you forgot to use is that real estate only goes up. Not.

My time is worth money, maybe yours is not. But I'm not really clear on what your point is. So you saw a house in Georgia but according to you it was overpriced? OK what's the big deal? Why waste any time on a seriously overpriced house in the first place? If 400,000 was well out of your buying range, at that time, in that location, for that type of house; then that particular house shouldn't have even come up on your initial screening process.

If you are still interested in the Georgia house why not just call those people up directly and make them [what you believe to be] a fair offer, what you think it's worth? You have nothing to lose, and they will save money because they won't have to pay a listing agent since the listing has been pulled. Otherwise why are you still wasting time monitoring the price action on the GA house?

Also, I never said real estate only goes up. I said if you want to buy a house, you actually have to buy one. But I also said a retirement home is not primarily for investing in, it's primarily for you to live in, and a few thousand here or there is not going to make a bit of difference in the long run. Further, if you are saying you like to make market calls about the direction of housing prices, fine, but did you make that call two years ago? If so, why were you even looking at that time? Where do you think prices are going NOW, going forward? If you think they are still declining, why not wait a couple more years until they stabilize? If you think they are going to rise in the near term, then you are risking opportunity cost by finagling around too much trying to get a "bargain."


So second homes are not good investments?

For most people, no, they are not. The marginal financial benefit of having a second house is questionable at best, for most people.


Yet based on market research the properties we are looking at will be cash flow positive when put on the vacation rental market, even before the tax benefits are accounted for.

OK I thought you said this was a retirement property for your personal use? This sounds like you want to invest in rental property, which is different, but I guess the inference is you will buy it as a rental and then convert to personal use when you retire in five years.

OK you're talking about market research, but what you really need to look at, when you have focused on an individual property, is the actual cash flow characteristics of that particular property if and when it is available to you. If you can actually find a desirable, positive cash flowing and currently occupied with a stable tenant rental property, which is ALSO suitable for future conversion to be your retirement home, you will likely have to pay a FORTUNE for it. You will NOT likely get a discount or bargain price for a property like that.

The way that most landlords get positive cash flow, if they can get it at all, on say a rental with an LTV of 70% (which I think is the bare minimum equity for a rental, it may be even more nowadays), is to get a really inexpensive place and charge a lot of money in rent, meanwhile, putting as little as possible into maintenance and so forth. This is assuming it is even doable on a single family residence as opposed to something like a fourplex.

What is so special about your skills, that you believe you are capable of finding a cash flow positive rental at a bargain price, in a great neighborhood, that you would actually be willing to live in yourself during retirement, and not taking any undue risk (such as flood risk)?

Where are you getting your "market research" from, anyway? Has anyone actually showed you a listed, positive cash flow, occupied SFH that is available for less than full value?


While I do not include any appreciation in these profit projections, I certainly do pay attention to valuation and where I think they are going based on my research. Meanwhile, our savings accrue, and compound in the hands of our financial adviser. I dare say the funds we have saved and invested have done much better than the price of real estate over the past 10 years. Significantly better. Silly me.

LOL do you realize you're taking both/opposite sides of the discussion?

First you contend that you've been "trying" to buy investment real estate for the past ten years. Now you're saying that doing so would have been a mistake, yet portraying yourself as something other than a novice r.e. investor. Did your financial advisor tell you it would be a good idea to purchase rental property in a flood zone?



"Second, if this is a house you are actually going to live in, then you need to avoid being penny wise and pound foolish."

This one really cracks me up. The main reason why we are able to retire at such a young age, particularly in this economy, is because we have delayed impulses for instant gratification. Considering we currently have a roof over our heads, and need to stay here until Youngest goes off to college, I feel zero need to rush. Clearly your approach is superior, and I am foolish. Or is that Foolish.

This whole discussion is premised on the idea that you want to buy a house now. If you don't, then don't. But frankly it sounds like you are looking for a needle in a haystack but don't even know how to get to the farm where the haystack is.



"In your OP you stated that the flood plain had been changed four years ago and that the existing structure you were thinking of buying was IN the flood plan and you already knew that."



Your lack of reading comprehension continues to stun me. You were given an overview of what we learned over a 5 month period, not what we knew going into the purchase. The purpose of this recital was simply to give people a heads up of questions to ask before putting money down, rather than make assumptions based on what you are told. We feel our $1500 tuition was well worth the lessons learned, and hoped to spare others the expense.

LOL you mean the sellers didn't even provide you with a written property disclosure statement before you put money down on the property?

Why would you trust anything a seller or their realtor would tell you about their property, without being able to independently verify it (through inspection, public records, documents, etc.)? The seller told you "Oh don't worry about the flood insurance, we're cool with FEMA" and you believed that, just because they said that to you?






"Even if you got grandfathered now, and paid the low rate, who's to say FEMA wouldn't change its policies and rating structure five or ten years down the line?"

Very good. You finally understood the original post. CONTRARY TO WHAT FEMA HAS POSTED ON THEIR WEBSITE, STATING THAT THE LOW RISK POLICIES CAN BE TRANSFERRED TO NEW OWNERS, AND A HOMEOWNERS RATE WILL CONTINUE WITH CONTINUOUS POLICY, THEY CAN AND DO IGNORE THEIR OWN WRITTEN STATEMENTS.

Actually you have no factual basis to state that based on what you've posted concerning their regulations. The ability to grandfather is not unconditional and that's very clear from the regs you posted. As a matter of fact you even stated there was some kind of structure or building that contained some of the plumbing or sewerage or pipes or mechanicals and that possibly could have been subjected to a prior flood or claim. If so, that would have voided the ability to grandfather, at least according to my reading of the regs you published. You also don't know if the seller kept their insurance premiums up to date and if not the lapse could have eliminated the ability to grandfather. Also your entire interpretation of the regs may be wrong. You simply have no expertise in this area, nor do I, but then I am not claiming that I do.

For example, it's possible that what the regs actually mean is that the grandfathering is only available if the existing owner (your seller) had been properly grandfathered at the time of the map change which was four years ago. If he somehow screwed that up, then he might still be entitled to the low rate, and might even be entitled to the low rate on the new map, but may NOT be entitled to retroactively get the new, low rate and THEN sell the property to someone new who would get the benefit of the grandfathering.

You are trying to look at one small subset of the regs in isolation, and interpreting it in a way that is favorable to yourself, to support your contention, but this is a cognitive bias on your part, since you have no expertise in the interpretation of FEMA regs or their application in particular cases.



as it's tough for DH to get away from work to travel to the property at a moment's notice, and several of them are still on the market, still over priced.

If you think the general market is overpriced then stop wasting your time and wait a couple of years or until you think prices have stabilized. Also the fact that it's inconvenient for your DH to do this doesn't change the fact that it's a huge disadvantage in trying to acquire a desirable property at a very good price.



...
"Wow, you really are a bargain hunter, aren't you? But you're competing not only against full time r.e. investors, but also all of those buyers who are not full time but willing to compensate a buyer's broker or agent."

LOL. You really are funny in how you make bold statements about something you know nothing about.

I don't think it's a particularly bold statement, advising an inexperienced real estate investor to retain and pay for the services of an experienced, competent buyer's broker is a pretty run of the mill suggestion. Obviously it's wasted on you but hopefully it will help others who might be reading here.



Are you married?


LOL sorry I'm def. not interested.



Would you actually be OK with your spouse spending up to $400,000 for an investment/future retirement home sight unseen?

LOL you're the one who brought up the 400,000 house, not me.



Some of these properties were snapped up within days.

Yup, the desirable ones that were priced right can go pretty quickly. You want one of them, you got to get snappin'. It's not my fault you chose not to.




Some are sold the moment the sign goes in the ground. We had a contract to the listing agent on the place in question within 4 days of it listing, because as soon as the listing hit my search feed, knowing the place I insisted he take the day off and we go see it that week. My buyer's agent, whom you seem to think I would do without, (although he has already been mentioned in this thread,) caused us to not be able to see the property until day 3. BTW, we offered list price. So much for being an indecisive bargain hunter. But you know best!

LOL I'm not sure why you're cryin' the blues to me. You do want a house; you don't want a house; you wanted to buy; you're glad you didn't; now you're saying you wanted to buy again?

If it's a seller's market often times a very desirable property will go for higher than list. Are you sure this happened two years ago? Was the market in GA really that strong in 2009, at the height of the market crash? Or are you talking about some other place and some other time now? Since you've been looking for ten years, you must be talking about something that happened in 2005 or 2006, when the feeding frenzy was so extreme that it was not uncommon to have to offer above list for a desirable property.

That was then, this is now.





Sorry, but I can't read this insanely long and preachy post any more. I'm laughing to hard to see the words.

IP
done feeding the trolls



LOL I'm done feeding the farm animals.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120006 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 2:44 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
re: case shiller--

If OP is trying to make a timing call on the further decline of house prices then she is completely wasting her time. She should wait to buy until she believes the market has stabilized.

Prices are what they are, right now.

You can't purchase the house, two years from now when you think it will be 10% cheaper, for 10% cheaper NOW. But, in deciding to wait, you possibly risk opportunity cost if your market timing call is wrong.

Given the general principle that one should try to match the timing of their investments to their needs, it makes no sense to buy a house primarily intended as a retirement purchase, five years in advance of the need for it. Esp. not long-distance.

The supposed hedge that it will be used as a rental to justify buying early simply increases risk hugely and courts catastrophe. She just BARELY avoided a catastrophic outcome in the transaction she posted about, and ONLY because her lender insisted on doing its due diligence job properly. Had things been left up to her judgment, she might have been stuck with the house. Her reaction, to castigate FEMA, is irrational.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120008 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 2:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Ah... you make a tasteless joke and now want to make me look like the bad guy.

No, I didn't call you a "bad guy." Just pointed out that, unless you actually have done something positive to help, you're being completely sanctimonious. I thoroughly reject your intended assumption of moral superiority because it is rooted in fundamental hypocrisy on your part.



Nice little deflection there.


Wrong again. You criticized me for an exploitative joke, yet you are trying to exploit it yourself, by assuming the mantle of moral superiority in response, which you are not entitled to. You are like the censor who can't stop watching dirty movies because, well, someone has to protect the children.



Just like inparadise mentioned in a later post, you like to make assumptions about people you don't know anything about.

But my assumption is correct, and I know this since you have not denied that it is correct. You have done absolutely nothing to help the tsunami victims other than to attempt to use their plight to assert a false moral superiority over someone who made a joke about the tsunami. Sanctimonious hypocrites are like that, though.



You don't know if I'm doing anything about the situation.


Yes I do. You've done nothing about it, if you had, you would have simply said so, rather than playing verbal games.



Even if I am not, I can say I'm not going around making jokes about people who have suffered immensely from the disaster.

No, you are doing something far worse--using that tragedy to aggrandize your own completely false sense of self-importance.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: katiewa Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120011 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 3:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I've always been surprised at the interviews of people following a major flood--yes, they're going to rebuild, and in approximately the same spot--it's home.

More surprising to me is the number of people who live in hurricane areas--not only does everything get wet, but everything is also flattened. They generally seem to rebuild in the same spot also.

Then there is California--the whole of which seems to be on major earthquake faults or mud-slide prone hills--unless it's an area that has massive wildfires every year. At least with the floods and hurricanes there is enough advance warning for people to evacuate with a few of their most important belongings.

Personally, we chose to build next to the Yellowstone cauldera. While the probability of it blowing in our lifetime is low compared with the probability of floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, mudslides, and wildfires in other parts of the country, the outcome would be considerably more catastrophic--no warning; very high probability that neither we nor our house nor our belongings nor the paperwork proving that we owned the land will ever be found. Guess I'd just as soon not have to deal with the aftermath of a natural disaster.

inparadise and husband were taking a calculated risk. They thought they had covered their bases. They had researched FEMA to see what the rules were, but, in the end, the FEMA rules were NOT what were stated on their website. Hard to do risk analysis and make good decisions when the real rules are not known. And EXTREMELY irritating.

As for the 2nd home vs. vacation rental vs. retirement home, I've read enough of inparadise's posts to know that they like to have contingency plans--very sensible. They are wanting to try something--good for them!! But they also know it might not work, so they have plans B and C, etc. Because they are not married to the concept of a 2nd home / vacation rental / retirement home, they are willing to wait for what they want, recognizing that it might not happen and that that is fine, too.

Anyone who has been around the boards for a few years should know inparadise this much by now.

Kathleen

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: foo1bar Big gold star, 5000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120012 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 4:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Then there is California--the whole of which seems to be on major earthquake faults or mud-slide prone hills--unless it's an area that has massive wildfires every year. At least with the floods and hurricanes there is enough advance warning for people to evacuate with a few of their most important belongings.

I live in SF bay area - I'm actually not that worried about earthquakes. Sure, you have to make plans for the possibility of the water & electricity & gas being out for a while.
But I don't see it as significantly more risk than living where there's regularly tornadoes... I suspect a good sized tornado would damage my house more than the projected earthquakes for my current location. At least the pictures I've seen of aftermath of earthquakes in areas that are built to withstand it (like here) aren't as dramatic as what I've seen for tornado damage.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120013 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/11/2011 4:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Bottom line is no place is perfect or without risk. You can minimize that risk, but never eliminate it.

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BoredPerson One star, 50 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120014 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/12/2011 12:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 12
Just pointed out that, unless you actually have done something positive to help, you're being completely sanctimonious. I thoroughly reject your intended assumption of moral superiority because it is rooted in fundamental hypocrisy on your part.

That's an interesting perspective. You believe someone can't call you on your boorish behavior if they're not actively involved in the subject in question. If you make a joke about beating your spouse, I can't remark that it was inappropriate unless I'm donating money towards domestic abuse or volunteering on one of the hotlines. If you make a remark that is racist, I can't comment unless I'm a member of the NAACP. It is also a very stupid perspective. Anyone should be able to comment when someone is making inappropriate jokes - being able to call a spade a spade.

Wrong again. You criticized me for an exploitative joke, yet you are trying to exploit it yourself, by assuming the mantle of moral superiority in response, which you are not entitled to. You are like the censor who can't stop watching dirty movies because, well, someone has to protect the children.

No one needs to assume any mantle of moral superiority to point out exploitative jokes. My morality could be worse than yours. It doesn't require a person to establish a mortal standing to point out someone else's crappy behavior.

You did get one thing right in your post. I was exploiting something. You just got what it was wrong. I was exploiting your posting style. You're a person who is thin-skinned. If a poster mentions something you find disagreeable, you ramp up the rhetoric ten fold. You parse each sentence and attack the poster in question. You try to bully people into submission. You must have the last word. You exhibit OCD tendencies. It is quite easy to predict.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: wburble Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120015 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/12/2011 1:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Just pointed out that, unless you actually have done something positive to help, you're being completely sanctimonious. I thoroughly reject your intended assumption of moral superiority because it is rooted in fundamental hypocrisy on your part."

That's an interesting perspective. You believe someone can't call you on your boorish behavior if they're not actively involved in the subject in question.

No, I believe exactly what I said I believe. You may want to re-read it, feel free to do so.


If you make a joke about beating your spouse, I can't remark that it was inappropriate unless I'm donating money towards domestic abuse or volunteering on one of the hotlines.

Stay on the topic please.



If you make a remark that is racist, I can't comment unless I'm a member of the NAACP.

On the contrary. What makes you think only black people have the right to point out racism?



It is also a very stupid perspective. Anyone should be able to comment when someone is making inappropriate jokes - being able to call a spade a spade.

You're not the arbiter of what's appropriate. I never voted for you.


"Wrong again. You criticized me for an exploitative joke, yet you are trying to exploit it yourself, by assuming the mantle of moral superiority in response, which you are not entitled to. You are like the censor who can't stop watching dirty movies because, well, someone has to protect the children."

No one needs to assume any mantle of moral superiority to point out exploitative jokes.

You're missing the key point that I don't care what you think.


My morality could be worse than yours.

Could be.


It doesn't require a person to establish a mortal standing to point out someone else's crappy behavior.

Which I did. I pointed out your crappy behavior. Thank you for giving me permission.


You did get one thing right in your post. I was exploiting something. You just got what it was wrong. I was exploiting your posting style.

You need to develop your own style.



You're a person who is thin-skinned.


No, quite the contrary. I made a joke which you didn't like, you took hypocritical umbrage at it, you got called out on your empty hypocrisy, and now you're all in a tizzy about it.


If a poster mentions something you find disagreeable, you ramp up the rhetoric ten fold.

LOL exaggerate much?



You parse each sentence

....um you mean I read the words people write and respond to them? What do you do--ignore the sentences?



and attack the poster in question.

Who are we talking about now?



You try to bully people into submission.

LOL that's so silly it's freaky dude. It's impossible to "bully" anyone by exchanging text messages on a message board. Grow up. Please.



You must have the last word. You exhibit OCD tendencies. It is quite easy to predict.


Let me know when you have sent that check out for the tsunami victims, then we'll chat again. Adieu.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120030 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 2:36 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So you bought that place! Last I remember you didn't think it was worth the money. Who caved?

We both caved some. I'm sure I still overpaid, but you know what... it isn't an investment play. It's a place I can play with my kids. Swing on a tire, go fishing, camp out in the back, build a tree house, shoot BB guns, etc.

Yesterday we rowed the little rickety boat around on the pond and fed the ducks. Tuesday my boys learned how to lay in the dirt, reach into a hole, and glue PVC pipe together. Tonight we're going to collect wood, build a camp fire, cook hot dogs, make a mess of painting the pantry shelves, and spend the night there for the first time.

So we paid a little more than what I considered a fair market value for the acreage, in exchange for a place we like and can get more out of in our life than just the value of the acreage. I'm okay with that.

RE. the hay... there is a guy willing to cut the hay in exchange for keeping it, but that only takes care of mowing the front half, and only during the hay production time of year.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120031 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 2:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
...you are using their loss to make a tasteless joke.

Is there something wrong with that? Tasteless jokes are often the funniest kind.

I can't see any way that making such a joke compounds their loss. The joke in question wasn't even making fun of the suffering people at all. Am I missing something? I mean something other than the fact that you're overly PC for no good, logical reason?

xtn

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120032 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 3:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Anyone should be able to comment when someone is making inappropriate jokes - being able to call a spade a spade.

And anyone should be able to make inappropriate jokes. I mean EVERYTHING is inappropriate in SOME context. Ruling out inappropriate jokes would pretty much rule out jokes; at least it would rule out most of the funny ones.

The joke was about decreased land values after flooding, not about the suffering people. You should lighten up.

Using the word "spade" is racist by the way. As someone who has a slightly pointy head, I'm offended in a gloriously unnecessary way.

xtn

Print the post Back To Top
Author: inparadise Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120033 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 3:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So we paid a little more than what I considered a fair market value for the acreage, in exchange for a place we like and can get more out of in our life than just the value of the acreage. I'm okay with that.

I agree. I call that opportunity cost, in that you are paying for the opportunity to buy the place. (Yes, I know that's not the conventional definition.) It's very hard to price waterfront properties.

The places I've put an offer in on and passed on were seriously overpriced. Since some of them are still on the market some 3 years later. In a market where well priced nice properties don't last a week, I would say the market agrees with me.

Enjoy!

IP

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PSUEngineer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120034 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 3:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
As someone who has a slightly pointy head, I'm offended in a gloriously unnecessary way.

Only slightly pointy?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: xtn Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120035 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 8:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Only slightly pointy?

Compared to your flat scull, very pointy.

xtn

Print the post Back To Top
Author: PSUEngineer Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120036 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 3/17/2011 8:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Compared to your flat scull, very pointy.

Let's leave my boat out of this discussion.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ferjen Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 120112 of 127464
Subject: Re: FEMA: Buyer AND Seller Beware Date: 4/9/2011 8:15 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You can't fight the government, no matter how unreasonable they might be. If you have time and still really want this property, you could always hire an Engineer to obtain the model used by FEMA to set that floodplain elevation and either corroborate or update it with more accurate information. If the model changes produce the results you suspect, namely that this property is NOT in the 100 year floodplain, your Engineer can submit a LOMR (Letter of Map Revision). Once it is approved, the idiots at FEMA can look at their map and give you something a bit less than $9300.

An alternative would be to move the house up the hill... :)

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (71) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement