From the May issue: They’re back after barely a decade: Escalation clauses in real estate contracts, “naked” contingency-free offers and lowball-priced listings designed to pull in dozens of bidders and turn routine sales transactions into auctions. [more]

With full-fledged sellers’ markets underway in dozens of metropolitan areas around the country, new research has found curious statistical patterns emerging: Even in cities where listings get multiple offers within days or hours, significant numbers of homes are sitting on the market for six months, 12 months, or more with no takers. [more]

Using your home as an ATM is no longer a financial option, but the tools that allowed owners to pull out massive amounts of money during the boom years — equity credit lines and second mortgages — are making a comeback. [more]

Got a beef with your mortgage company or loan servicer? Lots of people do, and thousands of them have been turning to a Federal complaint hotline for action — or at least a quick response from the lender. [more]

If you buy or own an energy efficient house, does this make you less likely to default on your mortgage? Is there a connection between the monthly savings on utility costs and the probability that you’ll pay your loan on time? A new study by the University of North Carolina suggests that the answer to both questions is a resounding yes. [more]

When it comes to energy efficiency and “green” features in homes, there’s a chasm-sized disconnect in the marketplace among consumers, real estate appraisers and the nation’s realty sales system. On the one hand, prospective buyers routinely tell researchers that they place a high priority on energy-saving and environmentally friendly components in houses. The presence of high-efficiency systems in a home makes shoppers more interested in buying because they’ll save money in the long run. [more]

Could rental houses owned and managed by deep-pocketed hedge funds and big investors be the post-bust steppingstones to homeownership for huge numbers of renters? Could they also provide a form of safe harbor or sanctuary for thousands of families who were displaced from their previous homes through foreclosures or short sales? A new national study suggests that the answer to both questions is yes. [more]

Jeanette Ogle, a 92-year-old widow with a reverse mortgage on her house, got a huge birthday surprise last week: She did not lose her home at a scheduled foreclosure auction that had drawn scrutiny from federal and state agencies and consumer advocates.

Because of obscure federal rules that critics say have snared unwitting elderly homeowners across the country, Ogle’s home in Lake Havasu City, Ariz., had been set for foreclosure on Feb. 27, her birthday. But after interventions on her behalf by the Federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, AARP and the Arizona Attorney General’s office, the auction was canceled. [more]

In the contentious debate over whether to reduce or eliminate the home mortgage-interest tax deduction — or leave it alone — one fact has been virtually unchallenged: The popular write-off used by millions of U.S. homeowners costs the government massive amounts of revenue, somewhere in the range of $100 billion a year. [more]

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has a birthday gift for 91-year-old widow Jeanette Ogle that should cause any senior to think twice before signing up for a government-insured reverse mortgage. Later this month, on Ogle’s 92nd birthday, her home in Lake Havasu City, Ariz., is scheduled for foreclosure — not because she did something wrong. Instead, she is expected to lose her house because during a refinancing in 2007, only her husband’s name was included on the reverse mortgage documents prepared by a loan broker. [more]