«  
  »

Foreclosure Activity Decreases 15 Percent during First Quarter of 2011

By , on April 14th, 2011

The 800 pound gorilla in the room has finally lost some weight!

RealtyTrac released their foreclosure report for the first quarter of 2011 which shows foreclosure filings were reported on 681,153 U.S. properties during the quarter, a 15 percent decrease from the previous quarter and a 27 percent decrease from the first quarter of 2010.  St. Louis did not see as big of a decrease but still the numbers are looking better!  St. Louis had 5,023 properties with foreclosure filings during the first quarter 2011 which works out to one in every 248 St. Louis properties and represents a decrease of 17.82 percent from the previous quarter and a 11.80 decrease from the 1st quarter of 2010.

Foreclosure Activity Hits Three-Year Low…

Foreclosure filings were reported on 239,795 U.S. properties in March, a 7 percent increase from the previous month but still down 35 percent from March 2010, when 367,056 homeowners received a foreclosure notice – the highest monthly total in the history of the RealtyTrac monthly report since its inception in January of 2005.

“The nation’s housing market continued to languish in the first quarter, even as foreclosure activity fell to a three-year low,” said James J. Saccacio, chief executive officer of RealtyTrac. “Weak demand, declining home prices and the lack of credit availability are weighing heavily on the market, which is still facing the dual threat of a looming shadow inventory of distressed properties and the probability that foreclosure activity will begin to increase again as lenders and servicers gradually work their way through the backlog of thousands of foreclosures that have been delayed due to improperly processed paperwork.”

Housing Market Recovery Coming?

Whoa, I don’t want to use the “R” word prematurely, but, as I have been saying for some time now, until we work our way through the foreclosure and REO inventory and foreclosure rates subside to more normal levels, we have no hope of a sustainable housing recovery. So, seeing the foreclosure rates decline like they did this quarter is a huge step toward the market being able to being recovery...we are starting to see signs of price stabilization on non-distressed sales in many markets already which would indicate the distressed sales in those areas are having lessor impact on the market.

One such example of progress comes from a wall post I saw by Jack Solloway from RightChoice Realty in Fort Myers, Florida on Real Estate Consumer News Facebook Page share market stats for Lee County, Florida:

TOTAL Lee County foreclosure filings. since 08 71,235
Total MLS REO SALES since 08 minus 23,794
Total MLS Short Sales since 08 minus 9,367
Total “CERT SALES” court steps since 08 minus 37,042
the rate of filings is down 90% from its peak in 08/09. We have pricing rebounds from 08 distress pricing levels to current distress pricing of over o% – 25% depending on demographics of the inter county area. Higher price areas are firming NOW and the lower end has seen dramatic improvement

Q1 2011 U.S. Metro Foreclosure Market Data

Rate Rank Metro Name Properties with Filings %Housing Units

1/every X HU

%? from Q4 2010 %? from Q1 2010
— U.S. Total 681,153 0.52 191 -14.76 -26.93
1 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 26,275 3.21 31 -11.54 -7.74
2 Modesto, CA 3,809 2.17 46 -9.52 -25.87
3 Stockton, CA 4,821 2.11 47 -7.20 -23.80
4 Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 36,422 2.10 48 14.16 -19.42
5 Vallejo-Fairfield, CA 3,111 2.06 48 -5.53 -14.11
6 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 29,859 2.04 49 -6.84 -27.17
7 Merced, CA 1,605 1.91 52 -11.18 -30.43
8 Reno-Sparks, NV 3,369 1.84 54 -5.66 -10.78
9 Bakersfield, CA 4,729 1.72 58 -17.35 -25.45
10 Fresno, CA 4,986 1.61 62 5.21 -7.51
11 Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA 13,606 1.59 63 -10.94 -21.98
12 Visalia-Porterville, CA 2,091 1.50 67 -7.93 -14.69
13 Boise City-Nampa, ID 3,458 1.42 70 3.01 -10.58
14 Prescott, AZ 1,456 1.36 73 25.41 -9.79
15 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 27,250 1.26 79 -4.13 -6.48
16 Salt Lake City, UT 4,907 1.22 82 -0.45 -4.81
17 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA 3,340 1.22 82 -9.44 -15.06
18 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL 4,248 1.16 86 -34.48 -58.74
19 Salinas, CA 1,616 1.15 87 2.34 -31.93
20 Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 21,192 1.12 90 -9.58 -25.31
21 San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA 1,263 1.08 93 12.07 7.58
22 Tucson, AZ 4,606 1.07 93 21.15 0.15
23 Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA 2,112 1.06 94 -5.29 -4.69
24 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 11,784 1.03 97 -4.91 -28.88
25 Greeley, CO 971 1.03 97 -25.99 -26.83
26 Provo-Orem, UT 1,504 1.02 98 -18.35 -21.67
27 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 45,083 1.02 98 0.98 -23.97
28 Flint, MI 1,995 1.01 99 -20.17 -6.21
29 Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA 1,473 0.97 103 1.87 -7.12
30 Racine, WI 785 0.97 104 44.30 12.79
31 Chico, CA 929 0.97 104 -5.59 -8.29
32 Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO 1,809 0.96 105 -7.47 -23.77
33 San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 16,240 0.95 105 -1.05 -16.46
34 Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA 977 0.94 106 14.94 -8.61
35 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 5,448 0.85 117 13.62 -21.78
36 Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL-IN-WI 30,172 0.80 125 -22.52 -28.24
37 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 18,867 0.78 129 -49.98 -63.87
38 Lansing-East Lansing, MI 1,472 0.75 134 -15.55 9.20
39 Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI 2,335 0.73 137 -6.49 -6.90
40 Savannah, GA 1,083 0.72 139 -6.64 -2.87
41 Ogden-Clearfield, UT 1,280 0.71 142 -18.68 -11.11
42 Ocala, FL 1,148 0.70 142 -20.17 -49.25
43 Denver-Aurora, CO 7,382 0.70 144 -14.60 -19.21
44 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 6,130 0.68 148 -55.05 -70.42
45 Jacksonville, FL 3,900 0.65 154 -24.87 -50.09
46 Port St. Lucie, FL 1,356 0.65 154 -48.85 -67.80
47 Sarasota-Bradenton-Venice, FL 2,547 0.65 155 -41.22 -60.02
48 Rockford, IL 930 0.64 156 -14.44 -41.25
49 Colorado Springs, CO 1,652 0.64 157 -16.69 -17.85
50 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 8,438 0.63 158 -51.99 -56.24

Don’t miss these posts!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

🤞 Don’t miss info like this!

We don’t spam! Read more in our Privacy Policy

Leave a Reply