Helen Oliveri

Members of the International Code Council's Residential Building Code Committee (RBCC) have made it clear that fire sprinklers are destined to become a standard feature in all new homes. The fire sprinkler requirement was added to the International Residential Code (IRC) last year, and it is scheduled to become effective January 1, 2011, in states that adopt the latest version of this code. Currently, 48 states use the IRC as a basis of regulating residential construction, although some states lag behind in adopting updates.

At a hearing held earlier this week, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) had petitioned the International Code Council (ICC), which publishes the IRC, to repeal the fire sprinkler requirement, but the RBCC rejected that request by a vote of 7 to 4.

"This vote is significant in two ways," said Chief Ronny J. Coleman, president of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition and former fire marshal for the state of California. "Not only did the RBCC reject the homebuilders' request to repeal the sprinkler requirement, but if you look at the vote, every member of the committee, other than the four who are appointed by NAHB, voted to uphold the fire sprinkler requirement." Following the committee vote, NAHB attempted to use a new procedure in the ICC process that allows members assembled at the hearing to overrule the committee decision, but the members made it clear that they were standing firm on protecting American families from fire. More than 1,000 ICC members in attendance voted overwhelmingly to affirm the RBCC's decision.

"ICC's message on this matter is pretty clear," said Jeffrey Shapiro, P.E., executive director of the IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition. "Their membership has now supported the home fire sprinkler requirement at both the 2008 and 2009 annual hearings, and each of those votes passed by more than a two-thirds margin." Those decisions have now been further affirmed by the RBCC, which is a balanced, consensus committee that includes homebuilders, building and fire safety officials, architects and engineers.

"People who buy new homes that comply with the IRC fire sprinkler and smoke alarm requirements can sleep peacefully knowing that their families and their homes are protected from fire," said Meri-K Appy, president of the non-profit Home Safety Council.

While fire sprinklers provide a level of comfort, further prevention is sometimes necessary. Take for example the recent announcement from the Communications Cable and Connectivity Association, Inc. (CCCA) that warns of an increased risk of fire from offshore-manufactured communications cable products which fail to meet National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) minimum requirements for fire safety. It's a problem, the CCCA says, that continues to plague the industry and marketplace.

"As we witnessed last year, the failing products were made with inferior materials and designs to save on production costs and they predictably failed the minimum fire safety requirements," said CCCA Executive Director, Frank Peri, whose organization's test results showed that six of the eight samples failed to meet the minimum NFPA code requirements for low flame spread and/or smoke generation for installation in commercial buildings, schools and multi-tenant residences. "All of the failing samples exhibited catastrophic results, indicating an unacceptable public safety hazard still exists."

Cables selected for the tests were all procured from North American distributor's inventory between March and May 2009 and were comprised of riser and plenum rated Category 5e and Category 6 cables, which are the predominant cable types used for wired local area networks (LAN). Category 5e cables also are typically used for telephone interconnection within a building. These cables are commonly installed behind walls and in ceiling cavities, and are connected to wall outlets that have phone or Ethernet ports.

"The CCCA has taken the position that this serious problem will not go away until quality assurance procedures include testing of samples of finished cable procured directly from the marketplace. Our association is cooperating with the major independent telecommunications industry testing agencies to establish a stronger approach to assure compliance to safety standards," Peri added. "We are very encouraged that a major independent testing agency has informed our association that it plans to put in place new quality assurance measures which include testing of finished product procured directly from the marketplace."

P. Mosca

Congress's extension and expansion of the $8,000 tax credit through next June 30 should take the pressure off first time home buyers who've been rushing to close deals before the November 30 deadline.

That deadline is now gone. Everybody's got until next June 30 to settle on their purchases.

But here's something in the expanded program that hasn't gotten much attention: The new $6,500 federal tax credit for so-called "move up" buyers took effect immediately upon enactment.

That means that potentially hundreds of thousands of Americans who fit the key ownership and income criteria for the new credit are eligible for it … right now.

What are those tests?

Number one: You have to have owned and used your current home as your principal residence for five consecutive years out the past eight;

Number two: Your adjusted household annual income cannot exceed $125,000 if you file taxes as a single, or $225,000 if you are married filing jointly.

To qualify, you've got to sign a contract to purchase a replacement residence before next April 30, and go to closing on it by June 30, 2010.

That's potentially huge for all sorts of people who never thought of themselves as qualifying for a tax credit under any circumstances, because they've owned a home for years.

Here are some other useful facts about the revised credit program:

* Although the $6,500 feature has been labeled the "move up” credit, there is nothing in the law forcing anybody to buy a bigger or costlier house. You can downsize or upsize and still get the credit.

For example, one Treasury investigation found 500 claims for the credit were submitted by kids under four years of age!

Other audits have documented violations of rules against purchases of homes from relatives, and the requirement that purchasers must not have owned a principal residence any time during the preceding three years.

In other cases, investigators found that no purchase had taken place! The whole thing was a fraud.

This time around, the IRS plans to evaluate credit claims much closely, up front.

K. Harney

McLean, VA – Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE) today released the results of its Primary Mortgage Market Survey® (PMMS®) in which the 30-year fixed-rate mortgage (FRM) averaged 4.98 percent with an average 0.7 point for the week ending November 5, 2009, down from last week when it averaged 5.03 percent. Last year at this time, the 30-year FRM averaged 6.20 percent.

The 15-year FRM this week averaged 4.40 percent with an average 0.6 point, down from last week when it averaged 4.46 percent. A year ago at this time, the 15-year FRM averaged 5.88 percent.

The five-year Treasury-indexed hybrid adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) averaged 4.35 percent this week, with an average 0.6 point, down from last week when it averaged 4.42 percent. A year ago, the 5-year ARM averaged 6.19 percent.

The one-year Treasury-indexed ARM averaged 4.47 percent this week with an average 0.5 point, down from last week when it averaged 4.57 percent. At this time last year, the 1-year ARM averaged 5.25 percent.

"Mortgage rates fell back this week pulling interest rates on 30-year fixed mortgages under 5 percent," said Frank Nothaft, Freddie Mac vice president and chief economist. "Lower mortgage rates should help homeowners lower their monthly payments and feed the ongoing recovery in the housing market." For instance, the Federal Housing Finance Agency reported that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have financed more than 3.5 million refinance loans during the first nine months of 2009. Freddie Mac estimates that borrowers who refinanced their conventional loan during the third quarter reduced their interest rate by a median of 1.1 percentage points, which will save these borrowers an aggregate of $3 billion in mortgage payments over the next 12 months.

"Further, pending sales for existing homes rose for the eighth straight month in September to the strongest pace since December 2006, while spending on private residential construction jumped 3.9 percent and represented the largest gain since July 2003. In the third quarter of this year, residential fixed investment added almost a full percentage point to economic growth."

There is a lot of talk about foreclosures in the news today. One aspect of foreclosures that has received little attention is difference between a judicial state and a non-judicial state. A judicial state requires that a lender file a foreclosure action in the court system and get an order from a judge before the property goes to a foreclosure sale. This provides the opportunity for the homeowner to assert any claims against the lender he or she may have and allow a judge to make a determination before the homeowner loses the home.

Homeowners that do fight the foreclosure in the court system obtain a better result and have a much higher rate of success in obtaining loan modifications or other favorable outcomes. In the states that follow this protocol, lender abuse, misrepresentation, neglect and lack of oversight has been exposed. Florida is in the top four of the highest foreclosure rate in the country and is a judicial foreclosure state. The amount of lender wrong doing that been exposed in the clients we represent has been enormous. This abuse would have never been exposed if we did not have the ability to fight these cases in the court system.

However, not every state follows the judicial foreclosure model. In fact, the majority of the states does not require a judicial process at all, but instead follow what is termed a non-judicial foreclosure. In a non-judicial foreclosure state, the lender only has to put the borrower on notice as to the default in payments and schedule the sale in as little as 30 days in some states. This process does not give the homeowner the opportunity to assert claims against the lender before the property is taken. Unfortunately, for the thousands of homeowners that do have legitimate claims to assert against their lenders they are prevented from doing so before their property is taken. More importantly, lenders that have engaged in misconduct get off the hook without their bad behavior being exposed.

Most of the lender abuses occurred in states that are now the hardest hit in the country with foreclosures. The three other hardest hit states in the country for foreclosures are California, Nevada and Arizona. All three of these states are non-judicial and mortgage lenders have continued to avoid taking responsibility for their actions in these hard hit states. Therefore, homeowners that have been taken advantage of or lied to in these states currently have no way to assert their claims to a third party who can make an impartial ruling on those issues before their property is taken. That is a travesty and is my humble opinion un-American.

Another unfortunate aspect of the non-judicial process is a lack of oversight as to the implementation of the HAMP (Home Affordable Modification Program) passed by the Obama administration earlier this year. This program provides that if a lender is participating in the program and a homeowner qualifies the lender MUST approve the loan modification. Unfortunately, some of the criteria listed in order to qualify is a matter of opinion and can be debated. In a non-judicial state, if the lender tells the homeowner he or she does not qualify for it that is the end of it. There is no impartial third party that can make a determination as to whether the homeowner really qualifies. In a judicial state, the homeowner can assert this claim in the court system and the judge hearing the case can make this determination.

As a result of this injustice, Kaufman, Englett and Lynd, LLC (KEL Attorneys) is going to start taking cases in the State of California this month. We will be representing homeowners facing a foreclosure and filing a lawsuit as the Plaintiff against the lender in order to assert any claims the homeowner may have against the lender. We will immediately move for injunctive relief so the lender is prevented from proceeding with the foreclosure until the homeowners claims are heard by a judge. We will be filing in state court and federal court if necessary. In the next couple of months, KEL Attorneys will also be going into Nevada and Arizona as well. Lenders should not be able to steam roll homeowners in foreclosures actions without the opportunity to be heard by a fair and impartial third party. We at KEL Attorneys will do everything in our power to make sure this most fundamental right is not denied.

M. Englett

The legislation also would extend the $8,000 homebuyer tax credit to contracts signed by April 30 and closed by June 30. The controversial credit, which many say has boosted home sales in recent months, was set to expire after Nov. 30.

The Senate's bill also created a $6,500 credit for those who buy a home after owning one for the last five years. That measure would apply to contracts signed by April 30 and closed by June 30. The current credit defines a first-time homebuyer as someone who has not owned a residence within the past three years.

The Senate bill would raise the adjusted gross income cap to $125,000 for single filers and $225,000 for joint filers. The amount of the credit currently begins to phase out for taxpayers whose adjusted gross income is more than $75,000, or $150,000 for joint filers.

"It's gonna put people back to work, the home builders, put people in the real estate business," said Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn. "The kind of jobs that can make a difference."

The extension will cost $10.8 billion over 10 years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Through mid-September, 1.4 million tax returns had qualified for the credit, according to the IRS. Some portion of those returns, which the IRS couldn't specify, represents buyers who took advantage of an earlier version of the tax credit, which was only worth $7,500 and has to be repaid over time.

By the end of November, the credit will have been used by 1.8 million homebuyers, at least 355,000 of whom would not have bought a house without the tax break, according to estimates by the National Association of Realtors.

"The data on the present home buyer tax credit show that the credit has had its intended impact -- sales have jumped in recent months to a projected 5.1 million for the year and housing inventory has been trimmed, thus stabilizing home prices noticeably," said Ron Phipps, the association's first vice president, in Senate testimony last month.

The credit, however, has also posed many problems. Critics say it's a waste of money because most of those claiming the credit would have bought homes anyway.

It's also been the target of fraud. Some 74,000 people claimed more than $500 million in credits even though they may not be first-time homeowners, according to Treasury officials. And more than 580 children, including some as young as 4-years-old, have claimed the credit.

"Some key controls were missing to prevent an individual from erroneously or fraudulently claiming the Credit and receiving an erroneous refund of up to $8,000," said J. Russell George, Treasury inspector general for tax administration, before a House subcommittee last month.

CNN Radio Capitol Hill correspondent Lisa Desjardins contributed to this report.