FHA and Fannie/Freddie have recent clamped down on the "2nd home" scam, and things are now much more old-school.  2nd home purchase always had to be at least 50 miles away, etc, to demonstrate plausibility.  That got a little lax in the last few years.

Stated income is pretty much right out the window now unless you can put 25% down on the purchase.

Investment property owners (the people who say they're renting out the current house to move to another one) now generally have to demonstrate 4-6 months of cash reserves on _both_ mortgage payments.

Although there are surely still some loopholes out there, now the only way to buy a 2nd home and still own the first, is to be able to document enough income to swing both mortgage payments at the same time.

People are dipping out left and right in here. Why not let the city take care of green belts and dump the HOA not good for the people that are planning  on staying here. Your paying for everyone that is not, its not RIGHT! The HOA dumped us from the trash pick up to save money so dump the HOA and save money. Big savings. 

This thought crossed my mind,too. However, the City is being squeezed financially,too.  The funds would have to come from somewhere. It's a vicious cycle,someone who is paying will be paying for one's who are not. Some that don't even live in HOA areas will be sharing for upkeep expenses.

I totally agree!

The city needs to juggle somethings around and they can work it in some how.

So it might mean TAX will go up in the HOA communities so be it. I think it will be cheaper than what we pay now. Then there will be more city jobs to be had and more money staying in Maricopa.  

I have faith.

There is a legal way to disband your HOA, I believe it is written out in the CCR's. If not google should help you find the way.

Look in to it Vinny and let us know.

 I believe arizona is a common property state, anything owned by one is owned by the other. Any debt owned by a husband is also the debt of the wife.

 am i now your secretary?????

 I'm not sure about arizona, but some states will allow 67% of the homeowners to vote to dissolve their HOA. You would need to read your paperwork on your HOA, then gather up enough support from other people in your community to vote to dissolve. I'd imagine that would be nearly impossible since many so many homes are owned by banks, owners who don't really care and owners who like the hoa.

 Another option would be to get on the board of your hoa so you can have some control of the direction, or at least go to meetings and speak out there.

 Lastly, you can lobby arizona lawmakers to create legislation to protect home owners from HOA's over stepping their bounds. I bet you could get a lot of support from bank's right now, since they are also paying HOA dues, Fines and so forth.

 If you try any of the steps get ready for the unleashing of hell from your HOA, and if you choose the latter post up so we can all send some emails to our politicians.

 If i remember correctly a disbanded HOA's property (ie common areas, pools, playgrounds) will be transferred to the developer. They may then do as they wish with the land, including more houses, commercial properties or, as your experiencing right now, nothing at all.

AZ is a community property state. However, a home can be purchased and financed in the name of one. The lender will require one spouse to file a quit claim deed to surrender any and all interest to the property. The assets,liabilties,are income, credit score,etc used are solely of the applicant not the spouse.

Therefore, the non owner/borrower spouse could do the same for another property. Again, the underwriting would be completely separated.

Yes, it can be done. I don't think there is anything wrong with it as long as  each application is made in good faith. However, the tendancy is for people to make things more complicated at best. I feel this would be the result if the intent is to walk away from the property.

I don't believe most couples plan on buying a home with an eye on walking away from it eventually. Most(atleast,used to)see home as appreciating in value. So most will buy as joint owners if qualified.

If you're looking to buy on an FHA loan (pretty much the best loan out there right now for most purchase applications), this will not work,  FHA requires that the lender obtain a copy of the spouse's credit report, for the sole purpose of establishing debts held by the spouse (not to rate credit or histories, if the spouse is not on the loan application).  You can't get around this with FHA, so there's no way to hide another mortgage if a borrower is legally married.

For conventional, you can still do an individual underwrite....but that balances against higher down-payment requirements (absolute minimum 5% down instead of 3%), and absolutely ridiculous mortgage insurance premiums.  As such, there are not many purchases going conventional these days, unless the borrower has stunning credit and a big down-payment. 

Abuse of the "2nd home" provision was among the most common ways to steer around this, along with purchasing the new home with the stated intent of renting the old home.  However, in a full-documentation world, this is much less easy to pull off.

That was my point exactly. Usually, if both spouses are working, the couple wants everything factored in to get a bigger home(loan).

Tht's good info regarding FHA. I don't deal with FHA nor recommend it. The interest rates are higher along with PMI. If anything, I recommend conventional with ATLEAST 20% down.

We used a conventional on this property. Here on out, it's cash.

AZPilot-I don't  agree with  FHA being"pretty much the best loan out there for most purchase contracts". What do you base your statement on?

Depends on the person. If they have credit problems, or do not have 20% down, a FHA loan is most likely the best option. The PMI is cheaper and the interest% is still comparable to a conventional.

There are not alot of 80/20 conventional loans anymore, and with the current market most are not selling their home and actually making a profit to use for a DP on another.

While I agree with the statement, I think the premise is what has people in trouble. Generally, one looks for the best loan for the person situation instead of looking for  the best loan period.

The first comes with a higher price tag. Again, I understand what is said. But, people overpay for being the impatiece. That higher price tag creates more risk for things to go wrong. Hence, the higher charges from the lenders on non conventional loans. The downward spiral has begun.

If the best loan isn't an option then create the situation to make it one. I know this takes time.But, the sooner the cycle is broken, the better.

Again, I'd recommend to go all cash  and if not, put ATLEAST 20% down. Make it an option.