Hurricane Safety Checklist

Be Red Cross Ready


Hurricanes are strong storms that cause life- and property- threatening hazards such as flooding, storm surge, high winds and tornadoes.
Preparation is the best protection against the dangers of a hurricane.

Know the Difference

Hurricane Watch—Hurricane conditions are a threat within 48 hours. Review your hurricane plans, keep informed and be ready to act if a warning is issued.

Hurricane Warning—Hurricane conditions are expected within 36 hours. Complete your storm preparations and leave the area if directed to do so by authorities.


What should I do? What supplies do I need? What do I do after a hurricane?

❏ Listen to a NOAA Weather Radio for critical information from the National Weather Service (NWS).

❏ Check your disaster supplies and replace or restock as needed.

❏ Bring in anything that can be picked up by the wind (bicycles, lawn furniture).

❏ Close windows, doors and hurricane shutters. If you do not have hurricane shutters, close and board up all windows and doors with plywood.

❏ Turn the refrigerator and freezer to the coldest setting and keep them closed as much as possible so that food will last longer if the power goes out.

❏ Turn off propane tanks and unplug small appliances.

❏ Fill your car’s gas tank.

❏ Talk with members of your household and create an evacuation plan. Planning and practicing your evacuation plan minimizes confusion and fear during the event.

❏ Learn about your community’s hurricane response plan. Plan routes to local shelters, register family members with special medical needs as required and make plans for your pets to be cared for.

❏ Evacuate if advised by authorities. Be careful to avoid flooded roads and washed out bridges.

❏ Because standard homeowners insurance doesn’t cover flooding, it’s important to have protection from the floods associated with hurricanes, tropical storms, heavy rains and other conditions that impact the U.S. For more information on flood insurance, please visit the National Flood Insurance Program Web site at www.FloodSmart.gov.



❏ Water—at least a 3-day supply; one gallon per person per day

❏ Food—at least a 3-day supply of

non-perishable, easy-to-prepare food

❏ Flashlight

❏ Battery-powered or hand-crank radio

(NOAA Weather Radio, if possible)

❏ Extra batteries

❏ First aid kit

❏ Medications (7-day supply) and medical items (hearing aids with extra batteries, glasses, contact lenses, syringes, cane)

❏ Multi-purpose tool

❏ Sanitation and personal hygiene items

❏ Copies of personal documents (medication list and pertinent medical information, proof of address, deed/lease to home, passports, birth certificates, insurance policies)

❏ Cell phone with chargers

❏ Family and emergency contact information

❏ Extra cash

❏ Emergency blanket

❏ Map(s) of the area

❏ Baby supplies (bottles, formula, baby food, diapers)

❏ Pet supplies (collar, leash, ID, food, carrier, bowl)

❏ Tools/supplies for securing your home

❏ Extra set of car keys and house keys

❏ Extra clothing, hat and sturdy shoes

❏ Rain gear

❏ Insect repellent and sunscreen

❏ Camera for photos of damage



❏ Continue listening to a NOAA Weather Radio or the local news for the latest updates.

❏ Stay alert for extended rainfall and subsequent flooding even after the hurricane or tropical storm has ended.

❏ If you evacuated, return home only when officials say it is safe.

❏ Drive only if necessary and avoid flooded roads and washed-out bridges.

❏ Keep away from loose or dangling power lines and report them immediately to the power company.

❏ Stay out of any building that has water around it.

❏ Inspect your home for damage. Take pictures of damage, both of the building and its contents, for insurance

purposes.

❏ Use flashlights in the dark. Do NOT

use candles.

❏ Avoid drinking or preparing food with tap water until you are sure it’s not contaminated.

❏ Check refrigerated food for spoilage. If in doubt, throw it out.

❏ Wear protective clothing and be cautious when cleaning up to avoid injury.

❏ Watch animals closely and keep them under your direct control.

❏ Use the telephone only for emergency calls.





Let Your Family Know You’re Safe

If your community has experienced a hurricane, or any disaster, register on the American Red Cross Safe and Well Web site available through RedCross.org/SafeandWell to let your family and friends know about your welfare. If you don’t have Internet access, call

1-866-GET-INFO to register yourself and your family.

Foreclosure reforms may be coming to a head

Getting banks, investors and borrowers together to work out a solution that benefits them all is the most promising idea to emerge since the housing market first crashed.

We are now in the fifth year of a housing crisis in which more than 3 million Americans have lost their homes to foreclosure, with millions more still at risk.

Every initiative — government or private — to stem the tide of misery has fallen leagues short in the face of continued economic gloom and the intransigence of lenders.

So it's an odd moment to be identifying glimmers of optimism that solutions to the crisis might finally be emerging. Yet that may be the case.

Over the next few weeks, several initiatives aimed at reforming the foreclosure process, holding mortgage lenders and services accountable for their past abuses, and creating more effective mortgage workouts are coming to a head.

First, some context. The complexity of the foreclosure crisis stems from the process of bundling hundreds of thousands of mortgage loans into securities and selling them to investors.

Typically, banks and other lenders retained almost no financial interest in the mortgages they originated, other than the duty to service them — collect payments and pursue delinquent borrowers, say — for which they received a fee.

Several drawbacks to that system emerged when the housing economy crashed. Because the loans weren't going to stay on their books, the lenders hadn't been too careful about whom they lent to and on what terms.

Ownership of the repackaged loans was dispersed among investors, so it's hard to know even today who the owners are or whether their ownership is properly documented. This has led to further abuses, such as the infamous "robo-signing" outbreak, in which institutions trying to foreclose on mortgages have submitted forged documents attesting to their legal right to do so.

Perhaps the biggest problem is that although the servicers, which include huge banks such as Bank of America and Wells Fargo, are burdened with the responsibility to renegotiate mortgages to keep borrowers out of foreclosure, their authority to do so on behalf of investors is murky.

As a result, though the investor, the borrower and the economy in general benefit if a home is kept out of foreclosure, even if that means its owner makes lower payments than were required by the original mortgage, the servicing banks are leery of renegotiating too aggressively.

The most closely followed remedial effort involves the 50 state attorneys general under the leadership of Iowa Atty. Gen. Tom Miller.

Last March, the group produced a 27-page proposal for foreclosure reforms that drew fire from some consumer advocates for being too lenient — its provisions include mandates that banks comply with state law in dealing with borrowers, as if that's a novel concept — and from business interests for putting too much pressure on banks to reduce principal balances for homeowners having trouble keeping up payments on homes with values that have fallen below the mortgage balance.

But Miller's group is under pressure to issue a final proposal around Labor Day. The longer the settlement talks drag on, some observers say, the harder it becomes to keep all the participants on board.

Indeed, a key attorney general who has been skeptical of Miller's approach is pursuing his own line.

New York's Eric T. Schneiderman recently took a promising step by filing to intervene in the proposed legal settlement between Bank of America, which acquired mortgage king Countrywide Financial, and Bank of New York, which managed 530 investment trusts that bought packages of Countrywide mortgages. Schneiderman wants to block the settlement unless it's improved.

The settlement calls for BofA to pay investors in the trusts $8.5 billion and to commit to an improved mortgage servicing and modification process, including giving "individualized attention" to high-risk borrowers aimed at helping them stay in their homes.

Among the deal's flaws, according to Schneiderman's motion, is that the payment is too low and the settlement indemnifies Bank of New York against further claims for fraud in its handling of the trusts. Schneiderman says the bank, which he contends is guilty of numerous violations of state law, had a conflict of interest in cutting a deal that let itself off the hook. (The New York state judge overseeing the BofA settlement talks with Bank of New York hasn't yet ruled on Schneiderman's motion.) Several investors have also objected that the two banks made the settlement privately and secretly.

Despite its shortcomings, the proposal settlement does provide a possible framework for solving the foreclosure crisis by giving all parties something they want: Borrowers get efforts at loan modifications from their banks, in return for which the banks and investors would get the borrowers' acknowledgment that they're owed the money. Fewer foreclosures, more loan modifications and an end to robo-signing — in the housing world, that's nirvana.

Schneiderman has some pretty heavy artillery to bring to the battlefield.

Most of the trusts subject to the proposed settlement fall under the jurisdiction of New York law (the rest come under the law of Delaware, whose attorney general, Beau Biden, is working with Schneiderman). As my colleagues Nathaniel Popper and Alejandro Lazo reported last month, the standard for fraud claims under New York law is less stringent than under federal law.

A third driver of solutions to the foreclosure crisis is investigations by individual states into foreclosure abuses. California, where nearly 800,000 homes have been lost to foreclosure since 2006, according to the property information service DataQuick, and tens of thousands more might fall in the next year, is ground zero of the foreclosure crisis.

Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris has been playing both sides of the fence; she has met with Schneiderman to discuss cooperating in his investigation of securitization fraud, but is also watching the 50-state effort to see if it produces "accountability and results" for California borrowers. Read that as: a cash settlement commensurate with the pain caused to Californians by foreclosure abuses, and real reform. The louder that states like California threaten investigations, the more inclined banks may be to agree to reform.

It's still unclear how each of these initiatives will influence the others, or indeed if any of them will result in relief for strapped and defrauded homeowners. Bankers have been perfectly candid about their power to draw out the legal process indefinitely if they choose: Bank of New York has defended its proposed $8.5-billion settlement with Bank of America in court by warning that the alternative is "litigation …over the course of several years."

It warns that there might be legal questions over whether Bank of America, which acquired Countrywide in 2008, could be forced to cover judgments against the latter. Without BofA's deep pockets, it's hinted, there won't be money for anyone.

The one incontrovertible fact about the foreclosure crisis is that voluntary loan modification efforts, whether they're conducted under the sponsorship of the government's Home Affordable Modification Program or the mortgage industry, haven't helped more than a handful of affected borrowers.

Bringing the banks, investors and borrowers to the same table to work out a solution that benefits them all is the most promising idea to emerge since the housing market first crashed. Why has it taken so long to get there?

Mortgage Lending News

Massachusetts Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm Regulations

Massachusetts Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Detector Laws


Whenever a home is sold in Massachusetts, it is required that the home is inspected by the local fire department for properly working smoke detectors, as well as carbon monoxide detectors. Massachusetts has had their smoke detector law in place for decades and is designed to save lives. A property can not change hands without a certificate issued by the local fire department.

One of the 1st things I always do when meeting with a perspective home seller is to educate them on all the laws they will need to know about in selling their home. The smoke and carbon monoxide detector by-laws are very important along with the Massachusetts Title V Septic law if the home does not have public sewer.


Effective April 5, 2010, a new regulation relating to the installation and maintenance of certain smoke detectors will be put in place. Staying up to speed on a change in the law like this is critical for landlords, home owners and Realtors alike.

It goes without saying that it is imperative that home owners ensure that their properties comply with these laws, both from a public safety and liability stand point. In order to know exactly how your property could be impacted it would be prudent to speak with the local fire Marshall or a lawyer that is well versed in this new amendment.


TWO TYPES OF SMOKE DETECTOR TECHNOLOGY

There are two primary detection methods used in todays smoke detectors. They can be either ionization or photoelectric.

Ionization detectors typically have a constant current running between two electrodes. When smoke hits the device, it blocks the current which causes the alarm to trip.

Ionization detectors are usually faster to go off than photoelectric detectors. The problem with ionization detectors though is that they are unable to differentiate between smoke and steam.

This makes them prone to false alarms when steam from a shower or other source interrupts the current. This is especially true when the ionization detector is placed near a kitchen or bathroom.

Photoelectric detectors send a beam of light. This beam passes in front of the detector in a straight line. When smoke crosses the path of the light beam, some light is scattered by the smoke particles causing it to trigger the alarm. Photoelectric detectors are less sensitive to false alarms from steam or cooking fumes but can take longer than ionization detectors to work.

Another major concern was that ionization detectors do not offer the best protection in smoldering fires which are some of the deadliest blazes across the country. Photoelectric smoke alarms are more sensitive to smoldering smokey fires. Most of the homes across the country have ionization detectors which are more sensitive to flames.

In 2007, WBZ News in Boston tested both types of smoke alarms. In a smoky fire the photoelectric detector sounded the warning first. While took almost 17 minutes into the fire before the ionization alarm finally went off!

The debate in Massachusetts has been whether to require property owners to replace their ionization detectors with photoelectric detectors.

Home owners have raised concerns about the cost of replacing smoke detectors that still function properly. Fire departments have suggested that the elimination of false alarms outweighs the additional expense that home owners will need to deal with.


NEW FIRE DETECTOR REGULATIONS

Since there are strengths and weaknesses of photoelectric versus ionization smoke detectors, the Board of Fire Prevention Regulation has passed a new regulation (527 CMR 32.00 et seq).

According to the new regulation, owners of certain residential buildings will be required to install and maintain both the ionization and photoelectric smoke detectors.

While the new regulation does not change the locations where smoke detectors are required, it does allow the installation of both technologies in certain locations.

Under the new regulation, an ionization detector can not be placed within 20 feet of a kitchen or a bathroom containing a shower or a tub. In these locations only a photo electronic detector is allowed.

All property owners should determine what type of smoke detectors they are currently have installed. In order to comply with the law you can either install two separate detectors that have both technologies or by installing one that utilizes both.


WHAT PROPERTIES ARE AFFECTED BY THE NEW REGULATION?

In order to determine if your property is affected by this change in the law it would be prudent to check with your local fire department or a local Real Estate attorney who up to speed on the changes in the law. According to to the new amendment the following types of properties are impacted by the new regulation:

■Residential buildings under 70 feet tall and containing less than six dwelling units.

■Residential buildings not substantially altered since January 1, 1975, and containing less than 6 residential units.

■All residential buildings sold or transferred after April 5, 2010, which are less then 70 feet tall, have less than six units, or have not been substantially altered since January 1, 1975.

For all properties in these categories, compliance is mandated by April 5, 2010. It should be noted that the law does not apply to these larger buildings or those which were substantially altered since January, 1975, as these properties already were required to upgrade their fire safety systems under other existing laws.

One other important note regarding smoke detectors: Many towns require hard wired smoke detectors and NOT battery operated. You should make certain you know what the requirement is for the town you are located in. As a general rule according to the State fire Marshall's office, the law is as follows:


1.homes built after 1975 are required upon sale or transfer to comply with the State Building Code in effect at the time of construction.

2.homes built before 1975 are required upon sale or transfer to comply with the requirements of MGL c. 148, §26E(A); and

In order to provide further clarification, homes built between 1975 and 1998 are required to have hard wired interconnected smoke detectors outside the bedrooms and one detector on each floor at the top of the stairs. The smoke detector at the top of the stairs can be the same detector that is required outside the bedroom.

For homes built after 1998, smoke detectors are required to be interconnected and have a battery backup. Smoke detectors are required in each bedroom, outside the bedroom and at the top of each flight of stairs. A single detector can satisfy multiple location requirements, if sited properly. There must also be one smoke detector on each level and one smoke detector for each 1,200 square feet of living space.

These requirements for newer construction also apply to additions and/or renovations where a bedroom is either added or substantially altered. If an addition or renovation involves adding or substantially changing a bedroom, the entire house, including existing bedrooms must be brought up to the present standard according to the Massachusetts State Building Code (780 CMR), regardless of when the original home was built.

If you are selling your home in Massachusetts one other law that you need to be aware of is what is known as Nicole's Law. As of March 2006 when a home is transferred you need to have working carbon monoxide detectors.

Carbon Monoxide detectors are required in any residence that has fossil-fuel burning equipment including, but not limited to, a furnace, boiler, water heater, fireplace or any other apparatus, appliance or device; or has enclosed parking within its structure.

Unfortunately, the law is named for 7-year-old Nicole Garofalo who died in January 2005 when a heating vent in her house was blocked by snow drifts, allowing carbon monoxide to accumulate in the home.

According to the carbon monoxide regulations, you need to have a detector on each finished level of the home. Further there must be a detector placed within ten feet of all the bedroom doors. The detectors do not need to be hard wired. A plug-in or battery operated detector meets the requirements and usually the most viable choice. Here are all the types are carbon monoxide detectors that are allowed:

• Battery powered with battery monitoring;

• Plug-in (AC powered) units

with battery backup;

• AC primary power (hard-wired

– usually involves hiring an

electrician) with battery backup;

• Low-voltage or wireless alarms

with secondary power; and

• Qualified combination smoke

detectors and CO alarms

The inspection for both the smoke and carbon detectors are done by the local fire department prior to closing. The certificate of compliance will need to be brought to the closing. The lenders attorney will most certainly ask for this document and you will not be able to close on your property without it!

Most Educated Cities in America - Percentage of residents with graduate degrees

Most Educated Cities in America -  Percentage of residents with graduate degrees

1 Arlington,              VA 35.70%

2 Davis,                    CA 34.60%

3 Brookline,              MA 32.50%

4 Evanston,               IL 31.20%

5 Bloomington,          IN 31.20%

6 Towson,                MD 31.20%

7 Oak Park,              IL 29.10%

8 Bethesda,              MD 29.10%

9 Alexandria,             VA 29.00%

10 West Hartford,     CT 28.90%

11 College Station,    TX 27.70%

12 Ames,                   IA 27.50%

13 Columbia,             MO 27.50%

14 Iowa City,             IA 27.40%

15 Newton,                MA 26.90%

16 Cambridge,           MA 26.30%

17 Corvallis,               OR 25.70%

18 Palo Alto,              CA 25.40%

19 Berkeley,               CA 24.50%

20 Lawrence,              KS 24.30%

21 Champaign,             IL 24.10%

22 Irvine,                    CA 24.00%

23 Santa Monica,       CA 23.80%

24 Catalina Foothills,  AZ 23.70%

25 Gainesville,             FL 23.70%



Source: US Census Bureau

Boston Housing Market Beats Most in Declining Home Value (versión en español a continuación )

Homeowners in the Boston area don't have to worry as much as most of the country when it comes to declining home values, according to a recent report from real estate website Zillow.


The average Boston home value was reported to be $314,200 in the fourth quarter 2010, a 1.9 percent decrease from the same time in 2009. It was a 3.2 percent decline from the third quarter 2010.
The country as a whole experienced a 5.9 percent decline in home value between the fourth quarter 2009 and the fourth quarter 2010, according to Zillow's report. The end of the homebuyer tax credits contributed to the decline in home value.

"While the tax credits did not hurt the housing market, they did delay its bottom by interrupting the housing correction that was taking place," said Stan Humphries, Zillow chief economist. "Home value trends in the fourth quarter remained grim, but the good news is that these declines, while painful in the short-term, mean we're getting closer to the bottom."
Zillow

When you are looking for a property go to my website:
http://www.creatini.com/ 



Los propietarios de viviendas en el área de Boston no tiene que preocuparse tanto como la mayoría del resto del país cuando se trata del decenso de los valores de las casas, según un informe reciente reporte de  Zillow.

El valor medio de las casas en Boston segun se informó fue de $314.200 dólares en el cuarto trimestre de 2010, una disminución de 1,9 por ciento con respecto al mismo trimestre en el 2009, y  un descenso del 3,2 por ciento respecto al tercer trimestre de 2010.

El país en su conjunto experimentó una disminución del 5,9 por ciento en el valor de la vivienda entre el cuarto trimestre de 2009 y el cuarto trimestre de 2010, según el informe de Zillow. El resultado de los créditos fiscales para  primeros compradores de vivienda no ha afectado el mercado de la vivienda pero si contribuyo al retraso en  la corrección que estaba teniendo lugar", dijo Stan Humphries, economista jefe de Zillow.

"Las tendencias en cuanto a la valuación de la vivienda en el cuarto trimestre se manifestó sombrío, pero la buena noticia es que estos descensos, aunque dolorosos en el corto plazo, significa que nos estamos acercando al piso del mercado."
Zillow


Si esta buscando comprar una propiedad vaya a mi website:
http://www.creatini.com/

Alejandra

How Many Folks Have “Lost Their Homes” to Foreclosure/Short Sales/DILs?

How Many Folks Have “Lost Their Homes” to Foreclosure/Short Sales/DILs?



According to Hope Now estimates, completed foreclosure sales (rounded) were about as follows over the past few years.

Year Completed Foreclosure

2007     514,000

2008     914,000

2009     949,000

2010    1,070,000


While these numbers are disturbingly high, they are not nearly as large as one would have expected given the surge in seriously delinquent loans and loans in the process of foreclosure. For the latter, here is a chart based on data from the MBA’s National Delinquency Survey, which covers “over 85%” of total 1-4 family first-lien mortgages.


On one side, the “completed foreclosure sales” understates the number of homes “lost,” given that many homeowners have “lost” their homes but been able to negotiate a short sale or (much less likely) done a deed in lieu of foreclosure. While there are no official estimates of either short sales or DILs, there is no doubt that the volume of short sales increased dramatically in 2009 and 2010.

Using CoreLogic’s estimates and grossing them up to reflect its incomplete geographic coverage, one would get short sales estimates of around 78,000 for 2007, 164,000 for 2008, 278,000 for 2009, and 331,000 for 2010. However, based on data reported by lenders on short sales in the OCC/OTS mortgage metrics reports, the CoreLogic estimates of short sales look way too high for 2007 and 2008 (the 2009 estimates look OK, but the 2010 estimates – which admittedly are not available for the full year – look a tad low). Using instead my own estimates for 2008 through 2010, here’s what completed foreclosure sales plus short sales might look like (I don’t have a DIL estimate, but it appears as if the volume of DILs was pretty low).

Year        Completed Foreclosure Sales     Short Sales        Total

2008                      914,000                         95,000         1,009,000

2009                      949,000                       263,000         1,212,000

2010                    1,070,000                       375,000         1,445,000



On the other hand, the above numbers could well OVERSTATE significantly the number of homeowners who lost their primary home either to foreclosure or to a short sale. A “significant” % of completed foreclosure sales has been completed foreclosures on non-owner-occupied homes, though estimates vary as to what that % has been. In addition, not all short sales have involved homeowners “involuntarily” leaving their home, but who instead wanted to (for economic or other reasons) move and who were able to negotiate a short sale with their lender.

So what is the right number for folks who lost their residence to foreclosure, a short sales, or a DIL? I don’t rightly know.

It is pretty clear, however, that overall foreclosure moratoria, foreclosure delays, modifications, and other workout activity continued to keep the number of homeowners who “lost” their homes to foreclosure massively lower than one would have expected given the delinquency/in foreclosure numbers.


Year Completed Foreclosure Sales plus Short Sales Loans in Foreclosure/90+ Delinquent at end of previous year

2008     1,009,000    1,664,760

2009     1,212,000    2,859,959

2010     1,445,000    4,296,018



Note: the loans in foreclosure/90+ delinquent are derived from the MBA National Delinquency Survey, which only covers somewhere around 85-87% of the total 1-4 family first-lien mortgage market. A crude estimate of the “total” market would “gross up” the above numbers by around 1.163 (or 1/0.86).


CR Note: This was from housing economist Tom Lawler.

Posted by CalculatedRisk on 2/02/2011 05:30:00 PM Lawler: How Many Folks Have “Lost Their Homes” to Foreclosure/Short Sales/DILs?

Las 25 Ciudades con más alto nivel de Ejecuciones Hipotecarias

La buena noticia es que la actividad de ejecuciones se ha reducido en las ciudades de los EE.UU. más afectadas por la crisis del mercado de la vivienda. La mala noticia? Las ejecuciones hipotecarias en general han aumentado en un 72% en las otras ciudades importantes de todo el país que no fueron afectadas previamente.

"Estamos siguiendo los hogares que recibieron al menos un aviso de ejecución hipotecaria y que podrían haber estado en cualquier etapa del proceso, o bien al inicio o al final, explica Rick Sharga, vicepresidente senior de RealtyTrac. "Así habrá de extenderse a los hogares en 2011."

Al igual que 2009, Las Vegas fue la peor con 88.198 documentos que  fueron presentados el año pasado, con uno de cada nueve propietarios de viviendas en apuros. Permítanme poner estos números de otra manera: si usted vive en Las Vegas y tiene una cena con sus ocho amigos más cercanos, uno de ellos probablemente estará en el proceso de perder su casa.
La crisis hipotecaria de Las Vegas, al igual que en las peores ciudades afectadas, está mostrando signos de desaceleración.

Nevada, Florida, Arizona y California han sido líderes en la crisis de ejecuciones hipotecarias del país desde hace varios años,  gracias a los préstamos incobrables y a los severamente depreciados mercados de la vivienda. Su recuperacion esta siendo dificil porque sus economías se han basado en gran medida en industrias relacionadas con la propiedad, como la construcción.

La presencia de varios de los recién llegados a la lista (ver más abajo) significa un cambio de las ejecuciones hipotecarias causadas por las hipotecas sub-prime,  con respecto a  los propietarios de bajos niveles de calificación de las ejecuciones hipotecarias causadas por el desempleo. Estamos presenciando un cambio de la primera ola de ejecuciones,  a la segunda ola.

"El valor atípico en esta lista es la ciudad de Boise [Idaho]," dice Sharga. "Boise es representante de la segunda ola de actividad en las ejecuciones hipotecarias que estamos viendo en este momento.  Donde la causa esta  impulsada en gran medida por el desempleo y la recesión económica"  En 2010, Boise fue la ciudad top 20 para la actividad de ejecuciones, con 11.289 hogares.  Uno de cada 21 propietarios de viviendas Boise perdió o está perdiendo sus propiedades.

Sharga explica que Boise no tienen muchos préstamos tóxicos o denominados exóticos,  que son los que hundieron el mercado de la vivienda en la primera ola de ejecuciones hipotecarias. Más bien, la capital del estado de Idaho está experimentando ejecuciones hipotecarias casi exclusivamente sobre la base de su economía débil y un 9,9% en la tasa de desempleo.

"Es probablemente la vanguardia que veremos en el resto del país", afirma Sharga. En efecto, mientras que las ciudades en Florida, California, Las Vegas, Arizona están mostrando señales de desaceleración de ejecución hipotecaria, un preocupante 72% de todo el resto de las otras ciudades en los EE.UU. están mostrando signos de aumento en la actividad.

Entonces, ¿qué significa todo esto para el 2011? "Estamos viendo otro año récord de ejecuciones hipotecarias y otro año récord de embargos bancarios", afirma Sharga. "Hay una segunda oleada de préstamos tóxicos - que será la tercera ola del ciclo de ejecución hipotecaria - debido a las propiedades que están perdiendo 30-50% de sus valores. Por lo que podría causar problemas este año también. "

A continuación está la lista de RealtyTrac de las 25 peores ciudades para las ejecuciones hipotecarias el año pasado:

1. Las Vegas, NV: 1 de cada 9 los propietarios de viviendas

2. Cape Coral-Fort Meyers, FL: 1 de cada 12 propietarios de viviendas

3. Modesto, CA: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

4.Phoenix, AZ: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

5. Miami-Fort Lauderdale, FL: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

6. Riverside, CA: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

7. Stockton, CA: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

8. Merced, CA: 1 de cada 14 propietarios de viviendas

9. Orlando, FL: 1 de cada 15 propietarios de viviendas

10.Vallejo-Fairfield, CA: 1 de cada 16 propietarios de viviendas

11.Reno, NV: 1 de cada 16 propietarios de viviendas

12. Bakersfield, CA: 1 de cada 17 propietarios de viviendas

13. Deltona, Daytona Beach, FL: 1 de cada 17 propietarios de viviendas

14. Naples, FL: 1 de cada 18 propietarios de viviendas

15. Sacramento, CA: 1 de cada 19 propietarios de viviendas

16. Port St. Lucie, FL: 1 de cada 19 propietarios de viviendas

17. Tampa-St. Petersburg, FL: 1 de cada 20 propietarios de viviendas

18. Lakeland, FL: 1 de cada 21 propietarios de viviendas

19. Sarasota, FL: 1 de cada 19 propietarios de viviendas

20. Boise, ID: 1 de cada dueño de la casa 19

21. Greeley, CO: 1 de cada 19 propietarios de viviendas

22. Palm Bay, FL: 1 de cada 19 propietarios de viviendas

23. Visalia-Porterville, FL: 1 de cada 22 propietarios de viviendas

24. Fresno, CA: 1 de cada 22 propietarios de viviendas

25. Atlanta, GA: 1 de cada 23 propietarios de viviendas