Often on this blog, we talk about the real estate market and properties from the perspective of the agent. Of course, that’s the audience for the blog, but sometimes, as with all industries, the agent needs to think from the view of the consumer. In the case of the current real estate market gradually on the rebound, nearly anyone considering buying or selling a home is asking, “Is now a good time to do it?” Three years ago, the answer would have been, “No.” But, particularly since the start of 2010, the amount of properties being bought has increased and prices have slowly crept up, as well. Tax credits played a part in the slight increase of homes bought this year, but even without these, should a person be buying a home in the current market?

A recent article captures much of the view for a homebuyer in the current real estate market. Many still strive to own a home and will find a way to do so. Those also considering purchasing a new home, not a foreclosure, also see the market as being more affordable than a few years ago. Couple this with solid mortgage rates and better lending practices, and now, more than three years ago, looks like a more stable time for purchasing a property.

Of course, the real estate market is far from perfect at the moment. For many who bought a home between 2004 and 2007, their property has been devalued because of the real estate crash and the disparity between their mortgage and what their home now goes for is too great. Prices, however, are gradually rising but are nowhere near where they were in 2007 and a few years before. Presently, such factors make the market better for first time homebuyers and still significantly questionable for a person looking to sell a home and buy another.

Is commercial real estate on the way down or is it on its way up? According to a post we published a few weeks ago, the commercial real estate market was next to crash, with the construction industry going with it. One result of the real estate crash a few years ago was the lack of properties being built. Add the rising unemployment rates seen in 2008 to the present in the picture, and fewer employment opportunities meant fewer commercial buildings being created. But, according to a recent article, the trend may be reversing for industrial businesses.

Many towns want to attract businesses to the area and increase jobs. As a result, the sales of industrial real estate – a subset of commercial real estate – have been increasing in Minnesota and other parts of the US. This has been the result of tax incentives and favorable loans. Instead of renting more office or industrial space, a company will purchase a building to expand its facilities and services. Generally, local governments have been offering lower prices for properties to be purchased and tax incentives for more jobs to be created, according to the article linked from the Star Tribune. As a result, these two factors have resulted in increasing sales of industrial properties in Minnesota.

But this increase isn’t across all fields for employment. Rather, Minnesota has seen existing companies in the state expanding their manufacturing facilities. Because more space is needed, a company will purchase a new building and offer more industrial jobs to the area.

As far as commercial real estate overall is concerned, fewer properties are being built from the ground up. Rather, existing structures that have been empty are being purchased by manufacturing companies expanding their facilities and services. In time, this may translate to newer buildings needing to be created for more jobs.

Several instances on this blog, we’ve discussed one of the results of lending practices and high property prices being foreclosure. But, since the market is in a better state than 2007, those who are now filing for foreclosures aren’t always filing because of an adjustable rate mortgage (ARM). While ARMs given to people who couldn’t afford the raising prices were one culprit in 2007, those who are filing for foreclosure are doing it for different reasons, according to a recent piece in the New York Times. The author follows a few couples in Florida regarding reasons why they filed for foreclosure instead of continuing to make monthly payments.

One couple, for example, decided to stop paying to help their failing business. The money that would have went to paying the mortgage instead went to advertising. But, as the article details, many file for foreclosure not only to help another aspect in their life but also because of lenders who don’t meet their needs.

Those interviewed in the article discuss lenders who wouldn’t help with adjusting their monthly payments, and the procedures, in general, end up being slow. Additionally, the crash of the real estate market resulted in properties being devalued. Many are still paying loans on properties that were worth more four years ago.

But, unlike getting evicted from an apartment, filing for foreclosure and being evicted is a far more drawn out process. The average time period, according to the New York Times article for an owner to be evicted is 438 days. This may end up being longer in some states due to judicial foreclosure procedures. As a result, the owner ends up living on a property, without making payments, for several months to over a year, waiting for the case to be resolved. During that time, the owner can make alternative living arrangements, either through renting or looking for a more affordable property.

When you’re considering purchasing residential real estate, having the current state of the property disclosed seems like a given. This isn’t the case in all states, however. In Pennsylvania, until recently, sellers didn’t need to give a full description of the property to the buyer. The buyer, then, would be required to use his or her own judgment to survey the property or pay for a professional to do it. As soon as the property was sold to the buyer, all existing problems were placed on his or her shoulders.

But, according to a recent article, this is no longer the case, as the Real Estate Seller Disclosure act requires all sellers to give the buyer a full picture of the property before the agreement is signed.

The document given to the buyer is extensive and thorough but it gives a person interested in purchasing the property the full picture. For example, according to the linked article above, the age and condition of the roof, state of the walls and foundation, and condition of sewer, plumbing, electrical, heating, and air conditioning systems must all be disclosed. Additionally, other important factors like a boundary dispute with neighboring properties must also be disclosed.

This isn’t the extent of a seller’s responsibilities, however. If all conditions aren’t disclosed and listed fully, the seller is responsible for the buyer’s financial losses. The buyer must file a claim within two years, or else the issues for the property become the buyer’s responsibility.

If you’re considering purchasing real estate, either for yourself or to rent, keep these points in mind and wait for the seller to give you a document disclosing the state of the property. Nevertheless, because a buyer could be dishonest, having a professional survey the property is also recommended, in case the disclosure document wasn’t accurate.