Deborah Foss is a 67-year-old grandmother in New Bedford, Massachusetts, who survives on a small fixed income from Social Security. She has several medical conditions, including chronic lymphocytic leukemia, COPD and neuropathy.

She used to be a homeowner, but now resides in her car.

She no longer has a roof over her head -- largely because an investor in tax liens took the equity she had in her home. But with the help of a nonprofit legal group, she is fighting back.

Foss has filed suit against Massachusetts, challenging a law that allows private investors to confiscate all the equity owners have in their homes -- above and beyond what they owe in back taxes and interest on the unpaid balance.

Pacific Legal Foundation is the nonprofit representing Foss, as well as homeowners in other states who have suffered the same fate. Between 2014 and 2020, according to PLF, Massachusetts has allowed the taking of some $37 million more than what owners owed in property taxes. In Foss' case, she was delinquent on roughly $30,000 in back taxes, yet the private investor who purchased her tax lien foreclosed, taking a house that was valued at $241,600.

That's what makes investing in tax liens so profitable. Though PLF does not have an exact count, "it's fairly safe to say" investors have raked in "hundreds of millions" nationally, senior attorney Christina Martin told me. She called the practice "despicable."

While it's entirely legal to collect on tax liens, PLF argues that collecting more than what's owed amounts to "equity theft." Says Martin: "We believe it's not only unconstitutional, but excessive punishment." And the Sacramento-based legal group is having none of it.

PLF, which defends people from government overreach, says 11 states -- Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York and Oregon -- allow this sort of thing, which can affect commercial and residential property owners alike. A handful of other states have loopholes that allow the practice.

But a few states have seen the folly of legalized tax lien thievery and changed their rules. Last month, Wisconsin modified its law to ensure that property taxes are paid, while providing that former homeowners receive whatever is left over from the sale of their property. North Dakota and Montana have done the same.

In Michigan, meanwhile, the state's supreme court found the old lien law violated the state's constitution, ruling that people have a right to any surplus equity in their homes after back taxes are settled. In the case that spurred that ruling, Oakland County sold Uri Rafaeli's house at auction for $24,500 because he underpaid his property tax by $8.41. The county took all of the proceeds.

Nevertheless, PLF is now working with eight homeowners in their suit against the same county Michigan's high court ruled against. They are seeking to recover hundreds of thousands of dollars in equity lost when the county treasurer took their homes as payment for tax debts totaling only a fraction of their value.

According to PLF, the city of Southfield, Michigan (where Rafaeli lived), took advantage of a loophole in the state law that lets cities buy foreclosed homes from the county for the cost of the tax debt -- while not paying former owners the difference. While this scheme is a boon to some well-connected businesses in the area, it perpetuates the predatory seizure of home equity, says attorney Martin.

"When the government takes private property, it must pay just compensation, no matter how it acquires the property," she says. "The government has compensated homeowners with forgiveness of debts worth only a fraction of the homes that the government took. That is unconstitutional and unjust."

In New Jersey, the group is aiding an East Orange property owner who is challenging a state tax scheme that allowed the city to take her commercial property because she paid her taxes late. The property was worth about $80,000 more than she owed.

Lynette Johnson purchased the property in 2014 but claims she never received her tax bill for that year. Unbeknownst to her, the city purchased a lien on her property, foreclosed and sold the property to private investors for $101,000 in 2018. The city kept every penny from the sale, leaving Johnson with nothing.

"Although the government can take property to settle back taxes, it isn't entitled to anything more than it's owed," says David Deerson, the PLF attorney representing Johnson. "When the government takes more than someone owes, it's stealing, and it's wrong."

Even in places where owners are allowed to keep what's left over, state and local jurisdictions can sell tax liens to investors, usually for pennies on the dollar. Not only can those investors force the sale of the property, they can often charge whatever interest rate they want until the lien is finally satisfied.

Still, the news isn't all bad, says Martin, citing Florida as an example. The Sunshine State requires investors to compete on the interest rates they charge. The winning bidder is the one offering the lowest rate, meaning delinquent owners will owe less interest. Investors can still foreclose to satisfy liens in the state, but what's left over must be returned to the former owner.

There are several lessons here, with No. 1 being, "Pay your taxes." States aren't the only entities that can take your house in lieu of payment: Private investors can, too. So can Uncle Sam, if you don't pay your income taxes.

Short-term interest rate buy-downs and free or discounted upgrades may soon be coming to a housing market near you.

Right now, the market is hot -- "too hot for its own good," says Ali Wolf, chief economist at Zonda, a research and marketing advisory firm. Builders are either staying the course or capping sales so their construction crews can keep up with demand.

But in a recent webinar, Wolf advised her clients to "begin strategizing" about what they need to do to keep selling when the market slows, as it will inevitably do. And the most frequent tactics builders employ when sales are hard to come by are temporary buy-downs and incentives.

Actually, because of skyrocketing mortgage rates and house prices, builders are already having trouble satisfying entry-level and midrange buyers. "Qualification is starting to become an issue," said Tim Sullivan, Zonda's managing principal.

Most new home sales these days are being made to what Wolf referred to as "people of wealth," who are "a lot less sensitive" to rising prices and higher mortgage rates.

Nevertheless, 97% of builders surveyed by Zonda are raising their prices every month. Six out of 10 of those are hiking prices by $10,000 or more monthly, some by as much as $300 a day -- pricing out even well-heeled would-be buyers by the thousands.

In addition, financing costs are close to 5% at this writing, pushing aside buyers who can't come up with a 20% down payment and don't have excellent credit scores.

Take a gander at what happens with a 30-year, $350,000 mortgage with a 5% down payment. The difference in payments for principal and interest between 4% and 5% is $51 a month, $612 a year and $18,360 over the life of the loan.

Another way to look at the problem: According to CoreLogic, those who financed their houses using government-insured mortgages, many of whom were first-time buyers, walked away with a $1,710 monthly payment in the second half of last year. That's $282 more -- almost a 20% increase -- above what they would have paid at prepandemic loan rates.

"Just looking at the math" makes Wolf "nervous," she said.

One way builders can combat the problem, obviously, is to lower their asking prices, but they are loath to do that. They see buy-downs as a better method of reaching deeper into the market because they allow more buyers to qualify for funding.

A typical buy-down, known as a "2-1," calls for a rate that's 2 percentage points below market for the first year. In the loan's second year, the rate rises to 1 percentage point below market; after two years, it goes up to the original market rate, where it remains for the life of the mortgage.

Other popular versions include a "3-2-1" buy-down, in which the rate is 3 points below market the first year, 2 points during the second year and 1 point in the third, and a "condensed" buy-down, in which the rate rises every six months instead of every 12. In all cases, the builder pays the lender a fee to drop the rate.

On a $250,000, 30-year mortgage with a start rate of 6.25% and 10% down, a 2-1 buy-down would work like this: For the first year, the rate would be 4.25%, resulting in a $1,230 payment. In year two, the rate rises to 5.25% and the payment would rise $151 a month to $1,381.

Then, beginning in year three, the rate would bounce to 6.25% and the payment would go up $159 more to $1,540. The savings over the two-year period: $5,628.

Adjustable-rate mortgages also start at a somewhat discounted rate, though not usually as much. And even though they tend to come with periodic and life-of-the-loan caps -- meaning the rate you pay can only go up so much at each adjustment interval, and never more than a certain amount -- they are somewhat unpredictable.

Yes, you'll know when rate changes will occur -- ARMs are usually of the one-, two- or five-year variety -- but never by exactly how much. There's no uncertainty with a buy-down, though. You know when you'll pay more and by exactly how much. And you'll know that once your rate reaches a certain point, it won't go any higher.

The big advantage, of course, is that you'll be able to qualify for financing at the lower rate. Beware, though: Some builders will jack up their prices to cover the cost of buying down your interest rate. And some might require you to use their own affiliated mortgage company, or at least one of their choosing.

Builders also almost always roll out the freebies when the going gets tough. The most popular "giveaways" are options and upgrades at a reduced cost -- or at no cost at all -- and a percentage discount off the total price of the house. Paying the buyer's closing costs is another popular way to land customers. Sometimes they'll even throw in a new automobile.

It's impossible to predict how many builders will go that route this time around, or what they will offer. But in 2008, when the housing market last imploded, nearly two-thirds offered one goody or another, according to the National Association of Home Builders.

Buyers should realize, though, that not all giveaways are created equal: Not all upgrades add value, and you'll likely be told the item is worth far more than what it actually cost the builder.

For example, if a builder claims they're offering you $25,000 in kitchen upgrades, they likely paid about half that for the materials and appliances in question. What you'll really be getting is a $12,000 kitchen. And you may be able to secure a better deal for a tricked-out refrigerator at a local discount store.

Also, as with a buy-down, realize that some builders offer incentives only if you obtain your financing from a certain lender. There may be nothing wrong with that, but it's always best to shop around to be sure.

Wits' End would make an appropriate name for a new subdivision in today's wild housing market. But even though there's no such place on the map, at least not yet, many would-be buyers are quickly running out of patience.

Their frustration is not necessarily due to high loan rates, but rather the fact that house prices have outpaced inflation by a whopping 150% over the last 50-odd years, according to researchers at Anytime Estimate, a division of the Clever Real Estate buyer-agent matching service.

If prices had increased at the same rate as inflation since 1970, the median home price nationally would be just $177,788. That's less than half the actual median of $408,100. Put another way, since 1970, inflation has increased 644%. House prices, on the other hand, are up 1,608%.

Speaking of inflation, it likely plays a role in financially strapped homeowners asking lenders to forbear or adjust their monthly payments. But there is some good news on that front.

"The percentage of borrowers in forbearance declined for the 21st consecutive month," said Marina Walsh, vice president of industry analysis at the Mortgage Bankers Association. Walsh added, "The percentage of borrowers with existing loan workouts who were current on their mortgage payments improved for the first time since June 2021."

As of this writing, two American real estate companies have pulled out of Russia because of the Ukraine war: Century 21 and Sotheby's. C-21 had no employees in Russia, but an independently owned affiliate operated more than 75 branches under its banner. Sotheby's says it had a "very limited" franchise business in the country.

The late, great Sen. Everett Dirksen is often credited with the quip, "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money." It hasn't come to that in the housing sector, at least not yet. But consider these numbers from the Redfin brokerage firm:

Nationwide, 5,897 homes sold for at least $100,000 above asking price in the first 45 days of 2022. A few went for $1 million more than their asking price. And as of February, 6 million houses were valued at more than $1 million each. That's 8.2% of all houses in the country!

It's not nearly a billion, but it's still "real money" to most people.

On the flip side, according to estimates from LendingTree, more than 575,000 Americans are considered homeless. And nearly half -- some 280,000 -- are in just three states: California, Florida and New York.

Realizing, perhaps, that the market may be turning because of higher loan costs, homeowners are finally starting to place "For Sale" signs in their front yards. But almost as soon as houses are listed, they are being gobbled up by anxious buyers.

For example, in northern Virginia, where new listings were up nearly 39% in February, more than half were sold within 10 days. Looking at it another way, there were 2.27 pending contracts per listing, up from 1.9 in January and 1.4 in February 2021.

"Long gone are the days when buyers could go home and 'sleep on it,'" commented Reggie Copeland, president of the local Realtor association.

Zombies are believed to exist somewhere between death and the afterlife. And so are some houses.

Whereas people-zombies aren't really dead, but also aren't really alive, "zombie houses" are those that have been vacated by their owners but have yet to be taken over by their lenders. They exist, but without any real life in them. And if you believe the hit TV show "The Walking Dead," the latter's numbers are on the upswing.

According to the latest report from ATTOM Data Solutions, nearly 230,000 residential properties were in the foreclosure process nationwide. And the numbers are rising. But only 7,500 or so are vacant -- a slight decline from previous counts.

Even with foreclosures rising, RealtyTrac's Rick Sharga says a big jump in zombie properties is not likely.

"Zombie status is most likely during a long, protracted foreclosure process," he says. "But with $23 trillion in homeowner equity, and demand outstripping supply, most distressed borrowers should be able to sell their home at a profit before the process drags on."

Zombie houses aren't the same as vacant houses. There are more than 16 million of the latter, according to the Census Bureau, while RealtyTrac counts 13.5 million. But that doesn't mean they are the answer to the woefully under-supplied housing market. Some vacant homes are empty because they are uninhabitable.

But the Census Bureau also counts the following as "vacant": unoccupied units for rent or for sale; units rented or sold, but not yet occupied; vacation places used seasonally or occasionally; and houses used by migrant and other seasonal workers, especially during the crop or logging seasons. Even timeshares are in the mix.