Real Estate and Market Trends

We’re only weeks away from the spring housing market when the bulk of sales occur. One thing that homebuyers will no doubt face is the question of whether or not they should buy a home warranty plan. 

On average, a home warranty plan costs between $36 and $68 per month ($432 to $816 per year), according to ConsumerAffairs' most recent cost analysis, and can come in handy if a seller wasn’t exactly forthcoming on things like the condition of the appliances they left behind or write off that musty basement as one of those “Oh, we get a big rain ever so often, but it’s nothing to worry about” type things.

Especially with an older home, the service agreement can save a homeowner thousands of dollars while they are living there. But the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) says a homeowner needs to understand how these plans work.

In addition to the upfront cost, some warranty companies charge a service call fee each time a homeowner files a claim which results in sending a contracted technician to the home. The fees quickly add up if there are a lot of claims.

“When big things in your home break — like your dishwasher or air conditioning system — they can cost lots of money to fix,” said Kira Krown, a consumer education specialist with the FTC. That said, Krown believes homeowners should be very familiar with how their plans work before signing on the dotted line. 

What questions to ask

“There are different types and options depending on the company and amount you pay, but home warranties typically cover replacements and repairs for things like appliances or air conditioning systems. They last for a set amount of time and — unlike builder warranties for new homes, or warranties included with some products — they cost extra,” Krown said.

“And after looking at the details, you may find that a home warranty duplicates coverage you already have. Or covers only part of a product. Or makes it nearly impossible to get repairs done when you need them.”

She offered four key things everyone should consider: 

• Is it likely to save you money? Two things to weigh here – both the upfront cost and extra costs like deductibles or fees you have to pay every time a product is serviced.

• What are the limitations? The questions to ask here are: Are there limits on the amounts you can be reimbursed? Is accidental damage covered? Are certain appliances or systems not included? Are there restrictions or fees for cancellation?

• Does the claims process seem difficult or slow? Waiting a long time to get paid back can reduce the value of having coverage.

• Does the company have a good reputation? A home warranty is only as good as the company responsible for coverage. Search for the name of the company and words like “review” or “complaint” to see if people have had issues in the past.

Reputation

That last part – reputation – is crucial. Separate from the FTC, ConsumerAffairs has done its homework on that angle.

After analyzing more than 200,000 reviews and more than 20 home warranty companies, our research team recently released the results of research on available plans, what customers raved and complained about, and coverage limits and prices. A breakout of that research is available here.

Our experts at ConsumerAffairs advise homeowners to get quotes from multiple home warranty companies, noting that some companies offer price-matching guarantees. Consider both the monthly and yearly costs, as well as what is covered. If you have an ancient air conditioning system you want to make sure that's covered.

Warranty plans come with a cost, but paying a monthly premium could be much less expensive than paying hundreds or thousands of dollars out of pocket for a system or appliance repair or replacement.

A new study conducted by researchers from the American College of Cardiology explored how redlining, a term that encompasses several discriminatory housing practices that date back to the 1960s, can imapct consumers’ health. According to their findings, redlining may increase consumers’ future risk of heart disease. 

“We already know historic redlining has been linked with modern-day health inequities in major urban areas, including asthma, certain types of cancer, preterm birth, mental health, and other chronic diseases,” said researcher Dr. Sadeer Al-Kindi.

“While ours is the first study to examine the national relationship between redlined neighborhoods and cardiovascular diseases, it’s logical that many socioeconomic, environmental, and social impacts of redlining on other areas of residents’ health outcomes would also be seen in heart disease.” 

Long-term heart health risks

For the study, the researchers analyzed data from Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) and the 2020 U.S. Census. The HOLC provided data on how neighborhoods were graded based on old redlining records; neighborhoods were given an A (the best), B (still desirable), C (definitely declining), or D (hazardous). Areas that fell into the latter group were considered to be redlined, and residents experienced discrimination while living in these areas. 

Ultimately, the researchers learned that the prevalence of heart disease and its related risk factors increased with each succeeding letter grade. For example, residents in A-level neighborhoods had lower risks of heart disease, whereas residents in D-level neighborhoods had the highest levels of stroke, coronary heart disease, and chronic kidney disease. 

The researchers explained that members of redlined neighborhoods were more likely to struggle financially and experience racial discrimination, both of which can impact heart health. Residents in these areas were more likely to be exposed to environmental toxins, higher levels of pollutants, and have less access to green spaces. 

“We found neighborhoods with so-called better HOLC grades had higher cholesterol screening and routine health visits when compared to neighborhoods with worse HOLC grades,” said researcher Dr. Issam Motairek.

“And the prevalence of 18- to 64-year-olds without health insurance nearly doubled from A through D-graded areas. In each stepwise increase across the HOLC grading spectrum, from A to D,  we also observed an overall increase in rates of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and smoking.” 

With a surge in home sales in 2020, a record number of Americans packed up and moved last year, according to a new survey from Zillow.

The online real estate marketplace normally just focuses on the buying and selling of houses. But the company, inspired by the migration triggered by remote work during the pandemic, has published its first-ever Mover Report, a “data-based dive into the people and emotions driving moves this spring home shopping season.”

The first thing that popped out of the survey was this startling fact: In 2020, 11 percent of Americans moved and either bought a home or rented one. Among those recent movers, 75 percent said they didn’t have to move -- they wanted to.

Many moved to be closer to family or friends or to live somewhere they've always dreamed of. They could do it because of the new flexibility provided by remote work during the pandemic.

Moving companies likely to stay busy

With the housing market showing no signs of slowing down, moving companies are likely to stay busy for the remainder of 2021. Zillow’s researchers identified “a significant number” of homeowners who said they're more likely to move and sell their homes as a result of the pandemic. That could result in another 2.5 million real estate transactions, the company said.

A new study by Stoneside reached similar conclusions. It found that 34 percent of Americans are considering a move this year. Only 54 percent of Americans have ruled it out. 

Phoenix, Charlotte, and Austin were the top three destinations for people on the move last year. Zillow said those Sun Belt metros are expected to continue to surge in 2021. Data from North American Van Lines confirmed earlier research showing that large cities lost population during the pandemic. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Chicago were among the metros seeing the most people packing up and leaving.

"The pandemic brought an acceleration of trends we were seeing in 2018 and 2019," said Zillow’s senior economist Jeff Tucker. "More affordable, medium-sized metro areas across the Sun Belt saw significantly more people coming than going, especially from more expensive, larger cities farther north and on the coasts. The pandemic has catalyzed purchases by millennial first-time buyers, many of whom can now work from anywhere." 

What happens if remote work ends?

But what happens if these remote workers who have moved to another state are called back to the office when the pandemic ends? Another survey shows that not that many plan to return, possibly creating turbulence in the labor market.

A poll conducted for personnel staffing firm Robert Half found that a full one-third of remote workers said they would quit their jobs if forced to return to an office setting. 

"After a year of drastic change, many business leaders are eager to restore a sense of normalcy and welcome staff back to the office," said Paul McDonald, senior executive director at Robert Half. "But reopening doors will bring new obstacles for companies to navigate. Not all employees will be ready — or willing — to return to the workplace, so staying flexible and responsive to their needs will be critical."

If you’re planning a move this year, ConsumerAffairs has collected thousands of verified reviews of the top moving companies here.

The Trump administration is extending the moratorium on rental evictions that expired in late July. In an unusual twist, it's using the authority of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to do it.

Under direction from the White House, the CDC has issued an order suspending the eviction of renters who have been financially impacted by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and don't have other good housing options. 

Like the moratorium on foreclosures on homes with federally-backed mortgages announced last week by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), the eviction moratorium is extended through the end of this year.

The CDC action was taken under Section 361 of the Public Health Service Act, which gives the agency the authority to take action to protect public health. In this case, the agency cited the spread of COVID-19 as a serious public health issue and said forcing millions of people from their homes would increase the spread of the virus.

Threat to public health

Declaring that “COVID-19 presents a historic threat to public health,” the CDC said keeping people safe in their homes will reduce the spread of the virus.

“In the context of a pandemic, eviction moratoria -- like quarantine, isolation, and social distancing -- can be an effective public health measure utilized to prevent the spread of communicable disease,” the CDC said in its order.

“Eviction moratoria facilitate self-isolation by people who become ill or who are at risk for severe illness from COVID-19 due to an underlying medical condition. They also allow state and local authorities to more easily implement stay-at-home and social distancing directives to mitigate the community spread of COVID-19.”

The agency also said housing stability helps protect public health, pointing out that homelessness increases the likelihood of individuals moving into congregate settings, such as homeless shelters, which then puts individuals at higher risk to COVID-19.

Limits action by landlords

Under the order, a landlord, owner of a residential property, or “other person with a legal right to pursue eviction or possessory action,” shall not evict any covered person from any residential property in any jurisdiction to which the order applies. The order does not offer a way for landlords to eventually get paid their back rent.

The action means that whether you own a home or rent, you have protection from foreclosure or eviction through December 31, 2020. 

Protections for both groups were provided under the CARES Act, and proposed extensions were contained in renewed stimulus legislation that is currently the object of a stalemate between Republicans and Democrats.