Apparently it’s not just us cry-baby homeowners that want the banks to pay us back for our housing losses:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/25/news/companies/illinois_countrywide.ap/index.htm
.
.
“Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you’re in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you.”
Replies
How did they make your house worth less then you paid for it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
"right now its all over the news that it is speculators causing the run up in fuel and energy, its all a game to these people, but they're playing with money"
Yea that's what frustrates me with all these games they play. No concern or conscious thought about the rest of society, or the backlash of their actions. Just napalm everything.
I'm getting close to pulling a coupe on some small town and declaring it a soverign nation. Then I'm gonna do it right. Come on over and visit me in Gunner town when I get it going. Free Whiskey for everyone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
I'm getting close to pulling a coupe on some small town and declaring it a soverign nation. Then I'm gonna do it right. Come on over and visit me in Gunner town when I get it going. Free Whiskey for everyone
Pick something with water access or along a seashore, it will be much more dramatic that way after you declare war on the US to get rebuilt afterwards <g> (Hey, it working in that movie "Mouse That Roared" didn't it?<G>)
Offer free beer-bait-n-ammo and you ought to be able to scrounge up a redneck army pretty quick <g>Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
A beach would be great. That way we can go surfing after the battle. I don't want a redneck army. I'm recruiting ex Blackwater guys. They just blast everyone and don't ask any questions later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
I don't want a redneck army. I'm recruiting ex Blackwater guys. They just blast everyone and don't ask any questions later.
LoL! BW pays big bucks though. You can get rednecks for a suitcase of keystone lite, a bucket of nightcrawlers, and a couple boxes of walmart ammo . . . <g>
Besides, you want to lose and be occupied--lowers the tax base doncha know?
Oh, and tax policiticans, not income earners (you want to tax activities you want to limit after all).Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
I don't want any Rednecks. That's one of the beautiful things about Gunner Town. No #### attitudes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
one of the beautiful things about Gunner Town. No #### attitudes
Oh my, you will not enjoy the interview process with some ofthe BW boys, then . . .
What if they were but "country boys" (as in the kind that will survive)?
I mean, really, you going to turn away Johnnie as Secretary of Concrete Stuff? <g>Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
That's the good thing about Mercs. They have whatever attitude you pay them to have.
I mean, really, you going to turn away Johnnie as Secretary of Concrete Stuff? <g>
That's the greatness of Gunner Town. I can say no to anyone I want. I don't think Johnnies a redneck anyway.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
Edited 6/26/2008 8:31 pm ET by Gunner
That's the good thing about Mercs. They have whatever attitude you pay them to have.
Well, Macciavelli taught us long ago that is both the greatest virtue is also the greatest vice in hiring mercenaries for a Prince or his State. The best bankrupt you, it becomes, de facto, their state; less than the best fail to win; the worst corrupt your State and lose as well (or sell out to your enemies).
Shoot find a way to keep the locals employed buildin' houses without wheels on 'em, there west of the Swanee, might not need a coup . . .
Mind you, a nice, fair, flat sales tax would help, and an abolition of "sin" taxes, 'cept on bannkin', lawyerin', and especially politicking. Free coffe for first responders, too. Drinking age 16; driving age 21--with a must pass driving course, and multi-month driving education with witnessed experience Under Instruction.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
No driving in my town. That just starts you down the road to ruin. We are going to skip everywhere.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
EDIT: this was for Jon, sorry.
The banks were controlling the values with their buddies the appraisers. Intentionally inflating the values to make larger loans is criminal IMO and screws the normal family w/30 fixed mortgages.
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Edited 6/27/2008 9:29 am ET by Buttkickski2
OK, but weren't the houses selling for the "inflated" amounts?If the market is buying at a certain price, doesn't that make the "inflated" price the market price?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Not sure I follow...
The banks IMO inflated the market price.
We had to live somewhere, right? So we were stuck buying at an inflated price (unless we live in the ghetto housing or rent)
Gasoline is inflated right now. Are you going to just stop buying it hoping it gets cheaper?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
The banks didn't inflate the market price without the sellers help.How many people who have lost big on a $750k house sold their previous house for $150k more than they paid for it?The banks don't operate in a bubble. Unless you're buying directly from a bank, the seller is just as culpable for the crime of "inflation", if not more.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"If the market is buying at a certain price, doesn't that make the "inflated" price the market price?"Yes. Its the market price but it's an artificial market price created by loose lending standards that they know they are going to change. They know they are going to change the rules and the ensuing drop in property values will result in them owning the homes. It also locks in the "A" borrowers into propertys that are upside down. Upside down means the loan is more than the property is worth. So, the policies of the banks were structured to: end up with the houses of the sub prime and essentially strip the equity of the prime market. If the banks were following ethical lending policies with regard to appraisals, as they are being forced to do now, they wouldn't have gotten away with as much as they did. Remember, they were breaking records in profitability during the lending frenzy. Also, you have to remember they were nothing more than middlemen. They made their money both ways on the loans, then on the sale of the loans. They did that while abidcating their fiduciary duty to properly appraise the homes.Once the mud hit the fan, they started properly appraising them. Right now, you can find all the buyers you want but the banks won't appraise it. Why? According to your statment, the market sets the value right? But....now, the bank is not lending even though the market seems to be saying the house is what it's asking price is. So....the banks policies are now driving the house value down and there is nothing we can do about it as individuals. We are at their mercy. So, when individuals look at the situation and decide that they are going to let the bank have the house according to the terms of the contract, I see nothing wrong, unethical or anything negative about that. It is what it is: the termination of the contract. The homeowner has lost all his equity and is now losing his place to lay his head. He gets out. The banks gets the house and another transaction is closed. Millions of average americans have been victimized and stripped of their equity, credit and homes because the banks changed their lending policies. If the policie were not changed, those same homeowners could sell their house and not lose everything. Thats the key difference in this discussion. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Thank you for taking the time to clearly explain all of that to him. You are much more patient than I am..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I think most in here could probably benefit from a bit of patience from more of us. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
"So, the policies of the banks were structured to: end up with the houses of the sub prime and essentially strip the equity of the prime market."I've said this before and I'll say it again- I'm not an expert in money & banking so there is a good possibility I'm missing the finer points that make all the difference.Still, I don't understand why you're saying that the banks goal was to end up owning properties that the borrower had to walk away from. Owning a property can be a great investment, but if the bank loaned some guy $300k on a property and it's only worth $200k now, how is that beneficial to the bank?I do understand what you're saying about loose appraising by the banks, but what I don't understand is why this matters.I have a budget that allocates how my income is alloted. If I buy a house I have to pay on that note. My payment does not go up or down based on the appraised value. Maybe there are some loans where this is a factor, but not mine or any common ones that I'm aware of.So if the appraised or market value doesn't affect the payment on the loan, how does that change force me to move? If I bought a house that was too expensive for me I'm going to lose it because I can't afford it.From an investment point of view, the market price dropping stinks, but that doesn't mean I need to jump ship.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"Still, I don't understand why you're saying that the banks goal was to end up owning properties that the borrower had to walk away from. Owning a property can be a great investment, but if the bank loaned some guy $300k on a property and it's only worth $200k now, how is that beneficial to the bank?"Their goal wasn't to end up with the houses but they knew they would end up with the houses.The banks goals, when they were loaning the subprime money, was to get as much money lent as they possibly could. They were making huge fees writing the loans. They knew they were going to bundle the loans and resell them to wall street investors and therefore be out of the loop when the loans started defaulting. Since they weren't going to be the ones stuck for the money, they abandoned their normal business practices and started loaning as much money as they could to anybody that walked through the door. Keep in mind that not all banks jumped on that bandwagon but enough did to alter the market. During the time of the runup, the country was experienced flat economic growth in all the major sectors except housing. The housing market was rapidly appreciating in value even when it made more sense that housing should have been flat. So, what was driving the prices up in a flat economy? It was the financing vehicle...the mortgage industry. And how was the mortgage industry contributing to the growth of the housing prices? They lending policies. How were the lending policies able to be implemented? Because the lenders were putting pressure on the appraisers to appraiser for the loan, rather than the market value. The banks put everybody at risk by not properly doing their fiduciary duty. They didn't care. They were making their money on the refi fees and loan origination fees. The were making loans that they knew were bad knowing that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be holding the bag. It all started when regulators opened the reserve floodgates. Then, the banks couldn't find enough borrowers so they started throwing money into the sub prime market and passing them off as safer investments than they really were. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
I'm getting close to pulling a coupe on some small town and declaring it a soverign nation. Then I'm gonna do it right.
Make you the mayor. JeffBuck could be chief of police. Diesel could be the BI. Piffin the town sage. Splinter could be the librarian. Sphere the town pharmacist. McDesign the town engineer...............
We could have the coolest f*ckin town ever.................Naive but refreshing !
Nice lineup you got going there. I like your thinking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
Ooh, ooh, can I be town grumpy old man? Please please please
(can you have Breaktimes' version of Ann Margaret on hand, too!!!)
LMAO. I like your lineup.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
Imagine JeffBuck as sherrif. I see crime becoming non-existant as soon as word gets around that he uses Cell block one for PPV caged death matches.
I didn't think about it at the time, but Splinter as librarian was truly inspired on so many levels.........................lol Naive but refreshing !
"I'm getting close to pulling a coupe on some small town and declaring it a soverign nation. Then I'm gonna do it right. Come on over and visit me in Gunner town when I get it going. Free Whiskey for everyone."
Hahahahaha....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
It sure takes great courage to walk away from a commitment, doesn't it?
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
The banks screwed him and me and millions of others.
You have anything to say about the article I posted? Is Illinois wrong too?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
From what I can see in the article, I think Illinois is wrong.I would not be surprised if Countrywide has committed fraud or some other crime, but I don't see that specifically mentioned.What I do see is them putting the onus on the lender for selling things like "adjustable rate mortages" and other instruments. I don't know about you, but I can pretty well determine that the "adjustable" part of the name means that the rate will go up. How many people could reasonable think that their rate will go DOWN from the 4.5% or whatever their rate started at?At every real estate closing I've been to, the amount of paperwork and information that was reviewed was incredible. If the buyers had taken it upon themselves to educate themselves, don't you think they would have been able to determine that the loan was not what they thought?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Countrywide molested the system causing countless millions in losses in Illinois. They should pay..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
While I agree with you, there is also the Caveat Emptor song playing in my head..Spheramid Enterprises Architectural Woodworks
Repairs, Remodeling, Restorations
"We strive for conversion,we get lost in conversation, and wallow in consternation. "Me.
I'm not sure why we're so quick to blame the homeowners.'walking a way from commitment' is a pretty standard business practice. That's pretty much how this mess happened. Make a loan knowing that as soon as it clears, you're going to pass it along to the next investment scam and basically walk away from any obligation you as the lender might have had to insure that it was a valid loan.There are homeowners to blame, and then there's the entire mortgage industry that is also to blame.
"'walking a way from commitment' is a pretty standard business practice."Yeah, but when a business divests an investment, they usually have to pay a penalty. And just because some in business do that, it's not necessarily right."Make a loan knowing that as soon as it clears, you're going to pass it along to the next investment scam and basically walk away from any obligation you as the lender might have had to insure that it was a valid loan."Maybe I'm showing my ignorance, but the loan's terms remain the same no matter who holds the paper on that loan, right? If I sign up with Countrywide for a 5/1 ARM with a specific set of terms that govern the loan, they can sell that loan to ACME Financial but I would think the terms must be the same.Assuming my understanding is correct, I really don't see the problem with your "scam".
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Our commitment is to repay the loan OR give the property to the bank..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Yeah, I wouldn't waste a lot of breath here Jon. This turd of information is far more polished than you will ever be able to respond to. Practice makes perfect I guess. I guess if you tell yourself something over and over you can justify anything. DanT
Jon
"to walk away from a commitment" Business does it all the time. If it's not profitable declare bankruptcy and walk away.
It's nothing personal, just business they say!
""to walk away from a commitment" Business does it all the time. If it's not profitable declare bankruptcy and walk away.It's nothing personal, just business they say!"That's where you and I part ways.If I contract with a homeowner to build an addition on their home, I'm going to do everything I can to finish it. I may have made a mistake and not estimated correctly, but that doesn't give me carte blanche to just walk away (at least in my book). I may have to close the doors of my company and take a job at Lowes, but I will work evening and weekends to finish.How many posts are there in this forum where a HO comes here and posts about their contractor who committed to do something but is not living up to it? A lot. And, almost always, the "contractor" is lambasted for not fulfilling their obligations.Somehow, when it's big business, obligations and personal responsibility are thrown out the window and everything goes under the cover or "it's just business".
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Well, I see the respect meter going down. Good luck. I hope you find that in life there is some payoff for avoiding obligations. Maybe skipping child support should be ok? DanT
The banks screwed him and me and millions of others.
You have anything to say about the article I posted? Is Illinois wrong too?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"...I would have no problem being unethical if it would profit me"
I had quite a lot of sympathy for you till you posted this -
"...and i only feel i should be truthfull"
unless to do otherwise would profit you?
"I would have no problem being unethical if it would profit me."
Which explains why people (including me) think that you're unethical.
<spoon>
There's a difference between owning a house and playing the stock market.
You know anyone with stock in Enron now? Why can't they just "make a business decision" and walk away?
Because they own the stock, and there are no buyers who are interested in Enron.
You did not own your house. You purchased it from a seller, then asked the lender to front you the money because you were going to pay them back. If you owned your house free and clear, then go ahead and do whatever you want with. Write up a quit claim deed to the city or your neighbor, or whatever.
The problem is that you did not fulfill your obligation. And now you have the nerve to refer to decent contributing citizens as not having the "balls" to do what you did?
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Jon, the worst thing about this situation, other than the total lack of ethics, is the house was in his wifes name, not his!
Again showing a complete lack of ethics, even to his own wife!
>>Apparently it's not just us cry-baby ....
Ever returned a defective tool or purchase to a store?
Ever taken advantage of an auto company recall?
Ever collected on an insurance claim?
Ever taken advantage of the guarantee of free speech?
Own a gun?
You owe thanks to a lot of "crybabies."
Remember Mary Dyer, a Christian Martyr (Thank you, Puritans)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Dyer
May your whole life become a response to the truth that you've always been loved, you are loved and you always will be loved" Rob Bell, Nooma, "Bullhorn"
What?
I was referring to me and millions of others being labeled as "cry-baby" because we're upside down in our mortgages..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"I would have no problem being unethical if it would profit me."
Now I understand.
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Segundo,
After you posted that you have no problem with being unethical, I have realized the futility of my observations.
I'm not trying to sound condescending, but if you don't appreciate the value of standing behind your commitments and fulfilling your obligations, then nothing I say is going to make sense.
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Smart.
Screw ethics when you consider we're talking about banks vs. you and your family.
Where were the banks ethics when they were bending us over while inflating this bubble?
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
My basic problem with your rationalization is that you aren't just 'screwing' Countrywide, you're doing it to your neighbors and eventually taxpayers as a whole.
I bought a 50-year-old house in 1999, remodeled in '05, and refinanced the remodel money earlier this year. The refinance process was much more rigorous than in the past, and the appraisal was ~$25k less than we put into the house when we added on. That cost us an extra $6k at closing to get the interest rate we wanted.
I take checks. Feel free to make one out in that amount.
Not to mention that I have a foreclosed home 3 doors down. That asshat, who probably had dreams of making his fortune by flipping the place, walked away when his ARM adjusted and trashed the house too. At some level, that affects value for everyone in the neighborhood, some who've just moved in, some who've lived there since the places were built.
As for the Illinois lawsuit, I tend to be skeptical. Yes, you want someone to pay for the market situation. But ultimately, the politicos probably think they've found a way to glory or pockets to raid.
MI arrested a couple dozen people a week or so ago for fraud. Now Illinois is suing. I don't have any resentment about people walking away. It's hard for me to feel sorry for the banks when they were cashing in on zillions on their remortgaging fees alone. Now, they own the property and they are handing their investors the losses. The banks win no matter what. Look at the situation. Millions of average americans losing everything. How many banks have closed their doors? ONe?I wouldn't be bragging or proud that I had to walk away but I wouldn't feel any remorse for the bank either. It was a business decision for them to make the loan and now they have the house. They controlled their own fate. They didn't have to make the loans.They are responsible in a big way for feeding the run up. They knew exactly what they were doing. They knew what was going to happen. There were books written about this five years ago explaining exactly what was going to happen. The bank people are not idiots. They knew the loans were going to go bust so they shuffled them along to investors and hid the true nature of what the risk was. The knew that a very high percentage was going to take down the entire mortgage structure and didn't care. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
I guess I have a hard time with it all. Maybe I am a moron or something but I have always been able to borrow more than I could pay back. But I didn't.
I have always guarded my credit score so as to not have a difficult time borrowing. And usually haven't.
I just don't get it that when you close a loan, with all the info given, that when the terms turn against you it is suddenly someone else's fault.
Often during the remodeling process I am given the task of telling someone that their selection may not be of good quality. When that poor selection fails early is it now my fault because what I said came true?
So if I borrow money and take the variable rate, and the rate increases as does the payment. Now that is the banks fault? How about if taxes go up in the area do to increased value, banks fault again?
Or if the bank lends me money for a house at an amount that I agree to and then the value falls off because of the economy, a trash burning power plant suddenly will be built near by, or any number of other issues then I should assume no risk? It is entirely the banks issue, let them deal with it?
I don't buy it. Like it or not in life we simply all don't get to win. Sometimes things go against us.
I guess I just believe in personal responsibility. I have had houses fall in value and have (and am) waiting the market out to come around again. Part of the deal. Part of the risk vs reward. My dad owned his last house for 37 years. It didn't always increase in value. In the end it did. Just my take on the matter. Who knows, maybe I am foolishly ethical. DanT
Like that post Dan!!!
The problem is certainly about ethics. Under normal circumstances, everything your said makes perfect sense. The problem is that the banks intentionally fueled the runup. They were making their money as middlemen and created a system that was unsustainable. They knew they would trap millions of us into houses that wouldn't equal the value of their mortgages. It all started when federal regulators loosened the reserve requirements of the two guarantors; fannie mae and freddie mac. That suddenly created a huge market for new loans. So, instead of just feeding the market and allowing it to expand naturally, they created an unnatural system that was nothing more than a giant pyramid scheme destined to collapse if they ever decided to tighten the lending standards back to the levels that they were. And thats just what they did.If this was an unintentional mistake, and there were a lot of banks failing because they got caught blindsided, I'd see it your way. That isn't happening because they knew the losses were coming and STOLE THE FUTURE MONEY OUT OF PEOPLE PENSIONS AND 401KS!!!! The banks are 100% responsible for creating a system that was unsustainable. The bleeding could easily be stopped right now. The banks just have to loosen up their lending standards to what they were or ease them more and reverse this trend. In any event, I understand why many would get a bit annoyed if someone s trumpeting about foreclosing and calling those that stay and pay "chumps". Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Jim, I don't know how you can say that the banks are 100% culpable.What do you say to someone who pays $500k for a house that was worth $275k three years ago? Are they just a pawn in the banking game, or should they be able to recognize that what goes up, must come down?I don't think the banks (or the government) is completely off the hook. In a mess, all parties typically share the blame. Still, to say that the homeowners had no way of knowing that they were not acting in a fiscally prudent manner is way off base.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
The banks are 100% culpable. They write the rules regarding the way the loan are made. They know that if they are writing zero interest loans now and loaning 100% on the false value created by the artificial low payments and then they change the criteria later, it all will collapse. That's exactly what they did. They pull every chain in the value created or diminished in the housing market. Five years ago, there were bank officials sitting with their feets on the desk laughing about how many houses they were going to be foreclosing during this period. They knew it was going to happen. They didn't keep those loan for their portfolio. They suckered the institutional buyers into taking these loans and lied about how secure they were. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that.It takes two to tango. For every banking executive that was laughing about naive homeowners, there are dozens of homeowners who bought houses that they couldn't afford if the wild appreciation didn't continue.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
The point you are missing is the the banks created an institutionalized pyramid scheme that was destined to take done millions of homeowners who were not buying house for investments. They were buying houses to raise their families in. The subprime market only represented about 15% of the total market but it was the driving force that both skyrocketed the prices and sent them into bankruptcy. In both cases it was the banks lending policies that caused the huge swing. The average americans with normal 30year fixed mortgages were the victims. They didn't do anything wrong but ended up upside down because of the banks policies. I'm not telling you that someone should get bailed out. I'm just saying that I don't feel one iota of anything for the banks. Right now, they are sitting on their future paychecks while the average blue collar guy is wondering how to house his family. The banks in MI are holding property and doing nothing with it till the one year anniversary expires. Why? So all the liens that the workers have filed will go away. The bank is capitalizing on the backs of carpenters, bricklayers, plumbers and roofers etc because the builder didn't pay. The bank now has the goods and will sell and make millions and they'll laugh as they stiff the poor tradesmen who can't afford to hire a lawyer to perfect the liens. It's a racket and the banks hold all the keys. Do you ever remember hearing the old saying " He who has the money, makes the rules.". The banks in MI are speccing houses right now! Yes....speccing houses! Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Like I said, I don't lose much sleep at night for the banks. They're big boys and should be able to take their licks.What I still don't understand, is how someone who was "buying houses to raise their families in" can be affected (or forced) by the banks to purchase more than they could afford. What does it matter if you're upside down?If you have a 30 year fixed mortgage, the payment is fixed for 30 years no questions asked. It's news to me if the banks are coming in and taking conventional loans and then increasing the rates or otherwise changing the terms.If those families purchased the house with an ARM, and didn't take the time to figure out that the house they could afford at a 5% rate would break them at a 10% rate, they are accountable for their actions.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"If you have a 30 year fixed mortgage, the payment is fixed for 30 years no questions asked. It's news to me if the banks are coming in and taking conventional loans and then increasing the rates or otherwise changing the terms."
You're right, but what happens to people that have to move out of state to find work and their house is worth $50K less than they owe on it? That drop in value is directly associated to the inflated price when it was bought and also the foreclosures in the neighborhood. Both caused by the banks lending practices..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"You're right, but what happens to people that have to move out of state to find work and their house is worth $50K less than they owe on it?"My BIL cannot hold a job for more than year, and does not make a large amount of money when he is working. Still, he found that he could get a loan for a $45k car. Now he's upside down and wants to get rid of the car but can't come up with the money to pay off the loan to sell.Is the lender at fault or my BIL? I would say my BIL."That drop in value is directly associated to the inflated price when it was bought and also the foreclosures in the neighborhood. Both caused by the banks lending practices."The drop in value is also caused by people walking away from their loans.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"The drop in value is also caused by people walking away from their loans."
People walked away from loans they never should have been offered.
Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
If the banks would have stuck to the strict lending practices they used too, non of this would be happening. Now it's lowered the value so much even the qualified non-greedy people that did it right with the right intentions are walking away because they're upside down.
Why should I pay $50K to sell my house to the bank that CAUSED MY VALUE TO DROP THAT AMOUNT? It's a frickin' scam if you look at it from a business POV..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"People walked away from loans they never should have been offered.Why is this so hard for you to grasp?"Why is it so hard for you to grasp that people should not have purchased when they couldn't afford it?You must have a very low opinion of the general population. That's the only explanation I can think of that explains why you think the banks tricked everybody in to doing something that they didn't want to do.Cannot the average person read a loan contract? If there is a term that they don't understand, can't the average person go to a public library and do a google search on that term?You make it sound like the banks sent thugs out and snagged poor, stupid people and forced them to buy mansions.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"Why is it so hard for you to grasp that people should not have purchased when they couldn't afford it?"
The banks enabled them to do just that. Those people never should have had the opportunity to purch what they couldn't afford, but the greedy banks loaned them the $$ anyway.
"You must have a very low opinion of the general population."
Yes, I do.
"You make it sound like the banks sent thugs out and snagged poor, stupid people and forced them to buy mansions."
That's not far from the truth..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I don't think enabling is the same thing as forcing.I'm able to do a lot of things, but because of moral, ethical, and legal constraints, I refrain from a lot of things.I am sorry to hear of your pessimism. I think that it's great that we in this country can make our own choices. We should be responsible for our choices, but we have the freedom to choose. There are many places that don't let the individual have any freedom, but we're not one of them (yet).
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
The banks choose to bend us over the barrel by offering loans to people who don't deserve them. That's great....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
And yet 80% of them are paying back those loans on time. Only less than 1% of these people have allowed their house to go into forclosure.Mi. is different than Cal. imo because Mi is suffering from a lack of jobs, and Cal. is not.
Your experience is different than most people that have had to default on loans. In Cal. the problem appears to be more from speculators driving up the price from their activities.
I understand your position, but don't blame the banks. If there was no demand for the product, it would not have been sold. Your situation, as you describe it, is there were no jobs available for you. You have to look out for your family. Your attitude and situation is completely different from Segundo. I believe that you had good intentions.
Frammer that may be why I seem to be missing the point. Maybe MI is worse than all the others as you say and all I know is what's happening in MI.
I don't know Segundo's story..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"You make it sound like the banks sent thugs out and snagged poor, stupid people and forced them to buy mansions."
I think they did, his name is Buttkickski.
I am think about putting the guy on ignor. He seems to take no personal resposibilty for anything. It's always someone elses fault and man is he pissed at them. The nerve of everyone else in society, how dare them!
Buttkickski: grow up, life ain't always gonna be great or even fair (you can thank the republicans), but you gotta move on. Be a man, not a cry baby.
Hahaha...you don't have a clue WTF you're talking about.
My home is far from a mansion. I am far from stupid and the banks are far from deserving my money.
How do you propose I move on when according to some here I can't walk away from the house but yet I don't have the $$ to sell it either?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Why do you have to move?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
We left because I was a residential trim carp and cabinet maker and there's no more work in MI. I went back into engineering and my job moved us to NC.
Now our home we paid $200K for is listed at $150K for 7 months and still no offer on it. We have 6 of 14 homes on our street that went to foreclosure and all of them sold for under $130K. I know for a fact 3 of those were ARM loans that went bad.
Those ARM loans directly attributed to the loss of new home building in MI and the loss of value to my home..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"Those ARM loans directly attributed to the loss of new home building in MI and the loss of value to my home."
Just a bit of information. Those ARM loans have been around since 1980 to my knowledge. I was offered one on my first rental property in 83'. The base interest rate was lower. I took fixed at 16.5% as that was all that was available at the time.
My point being ARM sure took a long time to affect the housing market if what you say is true. DanT
ARMs and home loans in general weren't available to the type of people (high risk) that they were recently..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"How do you propose I move on when according to some here I can't walk away from the house but yet I don't have the $$ to sell it either?"
I ain't gonna propose nothing to you!......
Don't try to blame me now......
Buck up. you are in a bad spot, deal with it.
It's your problem (lord knows Iv'e had some big one's in my time, right now I might have a 700k home I can't sell soon). Blaming someone else (besides a republican, they are a well deserving , easy target) makes you look small.
So lemme get this straight: if for example your city rezoned the property adjacent to you to industrial and someone built a turd processing plant next door thereby lowering your value significantly, you'd still "buck up and deal with it"? I'd sue the city for loss in value.
The banks screwed with the system so bad the market is flooded with foreclosures thereby lowering home values significantly. If this was my fault as a result of being stupid getting an ARM or overextending, then you'd be right. But when the very banks that did this to all of us want me to pay them, I'm a little bitter toward that.
Now, since you have all the answers, why won't you offer a solution here: How do you propose I move on when according to some here I can't walk away from the house but yet I don't have the $$ to sell it either?"
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Like I have said in so many words.
You have to come up with your own solution. Solve the problem and move on.
Now your "solution" that you came up with might be painful (I know, I know, it's someone elses fault) but do it. It might mean no vactions for several years (I've done it), delaying college plans for several years (I've done it), or even living in a cheap rental (I've done it). There are many ways to save money, why don't you come up with some ideas of your own, you said you aren't stupid.
Banks are not your friend, I have known that since I was a little kid. But we all have to use them to varying amounts. I have taken out many loans (including a ARM [scary!]), I always keep in the back of my mind that I am sort of making a deal with the devil. Kinda like our current republican adminastration.
What I am saying is you have walked into the situation with your eyes wide open, you made your own decisions and now your are blaming someone else for what happened to you. I have been on this web site for several years and watched your bs with amusment. It's always someone else! Well I got news for you , life ain't fair. Own up to your actions and decisions.
How is it not the banks fault for this loss in value? By you're reasoning they could do anything to any of us but we should still pay them because "it's the right thing to do".
Since when is it the American way to just roll over and take it?
Look, you're not going to convince me the banks aren't at fault. So please either offer a reasonable suggestion on how to unload my vacant house without foreclosing or move on with your life. There is no solution IMO but to walk away except forfeiting my kids college and you're crazy if you think I should do that. My kids are more important that National City Mortgage..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
How is it not the banks fault for this loss in value?
I can't say who or what is at fault. this is a incredibly complicated situation and I am not an economist. You like the simple blame game answer of the "banks" I'll raise you five and blame the republicans.
By you're reasoning they could do anything to any of us but we should still pay them because "it's the right thing to do". Isn't that what you agreed to when you signed your loan papers. Let me put it another way, you went to a loan shark and borrowed money and now you don't think you need to pay it back. I bet they won't agree with you. You made an agreement with another party, hell yes it's the right thing to do
Since when is it the American way to just roll over and take it?
Don't make this a "patriotic thing" (sp) when it isn't. Typical republican bs-wrap your self in the flag while you go and ignore our laws or constitution.
Look, you're not going to convince me the banks aren't at fault.
you made the initial accusation that the banks were at fault, but you followed up with no proof. All I want is a logical well thought out explanation. And you know what, you might be partially correct.
So please either offer a reasonable suggestion on how to unload my vacant house without foreclosing or move on with your life.
You are a grown up, make your own decisions.
What are other people in similar situations doing? I'm sure you can find someone who came up with a plan that did not renig on a deal. I've made a lot of very difficult decisions ( and alot of wrong or bad decisions that I paid dearly for) in my life. I have never not done what I agreed to do in writing.
There is no solution IMO but to walk away except forfeiting my kids college and you're crazy if you think I should do that. My kids are more important that National City Mortgage.
So don't you think your credit rating is going to be major screwed. What are you going to do if someone needs something you don't have the money for (braces, better university, new engine in car, etc) Maybe paying your debts would prove that you do care about your childrens future, via preserving your credit rating and therby being able to borrow when needed.
Oh I see the problem: you're out of touch with priorities and reality.
Have a nice life....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I don't think he is out of touch with priorities at all. You just may not agree with his priorities. Just because you think it so doesn't make it true for everyone. You seem to view your situation as being the only way things are going nationwide. Not true. There are certainly folks that share your issues and yet a lot more that don't.
So if you think your kids "deserve" a college education then so be it. But not everyone feels that way. Some of "us" think you can still earn a living without it and if you are going to get an education to increase your earning potential then consider it an investment. (by the way my son did go to college, I just don't feel it is a must do thing)
If you think cell phones are a must, again, spend it. But I can do without mine if I needed to. The list goes on and on. Being in a bad spot doesn't make you unique, it is just a rough time and Bobtim is saying just that. We all have bad times in one way or another and figuring out how to get through them is a personal decision issue at it's finest. Good luck. Calm down. Working through the problem is the solution. Not blaming the world. DanT
DanT, you're right.
Thanks for taking the time..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
You Segundo and to some extent Jim Allen are all saying that the banks are at fault, that the rules were changed mid stream, is it possible for you to provide some proof of this? Just saying that the banks gave out ARM loans does not prove anything. Just as saying that the banks are all at fault here does not prove anything.
I purchased a home 22 years ago, only loan I could get was an ARM, didn't like it but I was willing to take the risk, paid off because that loan interest never went up but every three years it went down. Lucky me I guess, Bought the house for 33k and probably worth 175-225k now. I do know that I wouldn't take an ARM loan now for anything but I was in college at the time and that's all that was being offered. I didn't have to take it, banks didn't have a gun to my head, I could have walked away from the deal.
Jim has gone so far as to say that the banks had actually known that this was going to happen and continued doing business as usual, not buying that either. I think he even mentioned that it's in print somewhere, maybe a book written on the subject, not sure, don't care enough to go back and look.
You mention that if the city built some unsightly structure next to you that you'd have grounds for suing the city, that may be so but that's not what happened here. Value on yours and others property went down for numerous reasons, maybe some were the banks fault, maybe some were people over spending, probably a whole boat load of reasons but doubtful that all of the blame goes to the bankers, that's just to damn convenient in my eyes.
In my area of the country property value has not droped a dime, I'm sure there are ARM loans here just like every place else. Why hasnt the property value droped off the face of the earth here? I'm guessing that the decrease in value has far more to do with economics then banks loaning practices.
Banks are an easy target right now for blame, hell who cares about the bank, lets blame them!
I personally dont care what you do with your house in MI, not my concern, I'm just not buying the "its all the banks fault". If that was the case then can I assume you didnt use a bank on your current house? I sure as hell wouldnt if they are doing to you/all of us what you say they are.
Doug
"If that was the case then can I assume you didnt use a bank on your current house? I sure as hell wouldnt if they are doing to you/all of us what you say they are."
Of course I did, I don't have $200K cash. That's what makes the scam so great: we have to use them for a home.
I did pass on the VA loan and put $40K of my 401K money down..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"Of course I did, I don't have $200K cash. That's what makes the scam so great: we have to use them for a home."
That is the most bizarre thing you have said of the many bizarre things you have said! There are a hundred ways to buy a home that don't include bank or institutional financing. You b*tch and moan about all the things banks have done to you and those in your shoes and then turn around and do the same practice you are whining about again. Amazing!
So with all the supposed research you have done on this matter it never occured to you to research a little more and take the very institution you complain about out of the mix in terms of your life so it won't happen again. You were right all along. Some people need a keeper. And you are one of those people. This situation IMO is no different than someone complaining about spouse abuse and refusing to leave. Save your complaints for someone else in the future. DanT
What do you mean? How do I gather the $160K to go with my $40K without getting a bank loan?
Are you suggesting I live in a $40K house? Or I should move to the ghetto so my kids can have a shiddy education and live in fear? The mean price in our city is $254K so we're already keeping ourselves minimized compared to those surrounding us.
And when did I say I did any research? I'm just stuck swimming this stream like millions of other homeowners. If you have a way for me to get this house without a mortgage, then I'm all ears!.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Dan, I'm anxiously waiting to hear what other options I have to get $160K without using the bank for a mortgage. Really, I'm all ears.
http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=106242.152
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Owner financing. You can get that anywhere that people are behind on their mortgage payments. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Owner financing as in the seller finances the buyer somehow?
I'll look on the net, thanks..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Owner financing as in you take over the sellers 160k mortgage because he can't make his payments. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Oh well unfortunately for us there's nobody in that predicament in this area of NC. Inventory on homes is about 2 weeks due to the rapid growth, and nobody is having trouble selling, even the trailer homes.
Quite a difference from MI..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
There will be motivated sellers in your neighborhood even though you don't think so. Think about the guy who has a 100% note for 160k. He's borrowed the money on a refi and spent it on his SUV and toys. Now, he's outta work and can't make the payments. Intuitively, you say "sell". Well, whos going to pay the 7% sales commission? If he can't pay the mortgage payment, he can't go to closing and pay 12k in closing costs and commission can he? There are no closing costs on this transaction (very little) so often it's the only solution. The problem is....he doesn't know you and you don't know him so you can't help him out and he can't take your help. You have to find them. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Well, I'll look into how to find people like that, but we're pretty happy with the home we have.
Do you know any of the "hundred" other ways we can get the $160K for this house without using the bank? .
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Yep, find those hundred people who are a couple months behind in their mortgage payments. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
"Yep, find those hundred people who are a couple months behind in their mortgage payments."
"The problem is....he doesn't know you and you don't know him so you can't help him out and he can't take your help."
Any ideas how to find them?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Advertise, advertise, advertise. Then, be prepared to evaluate the situation and make offers "subject too" the existing mortgage. Go do some research on the subject. Theres more properties out there than takers but you gotta want to be in the landlord business and you seem to be resistant to that idea for your MI home. I'd make a decision on that one: either quit paying or get it leased...preferably on a lease to own basis. The best thing to do about that is get out of your listing agreement. Just ask for the release and ask them if they'll be your property manager. My realtor agreed to do it for me and I had a local guy that did repairs. It was a painless decision till the end when the tenant hit me for $500. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
I'm searching for a list of property managers now. Maybe I'll call a few this week.
Our homes listing agreement was only 6 months between my employer and the realtor. Now it's expired and she's asking me to sign another with her for 6 months. I've been dragging my feet with her.
My employer won't even make a low ball offer to people that came from MI (there's 4 of us at this company)..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
You said: "There are a hundred ways to buy a home that don't include bank or institutional financing." (I left out the insults you threw at me to keep it civilized)
Dan, I need your help. Just tell me five ways please, not all 100..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Heaven forbid he consider something like renting.Buttkickski, it may sound like I'm saying you did wrong to walk out on your 30-year fixed rate mortgage when, through no fault of your own, you had to move to find work and could not sell your house for enough money to repay your mortgage, and your lender (or the loan servicing company) wouldn't negotiate a short sale or some other form of debt remediation. I'm not. I couldn't form an opinion on that out without much more detailed information than I actually want to know.However, it's not the case that you have "no other choice" than to take out another mortgage. You can rent. I do. I've rented, and I've owned, and while it's nicer to be able to do whatever you want with a piece of property, it's also a lot more expensive when you add in homeowner's insurance, repairs and maintenance, and actually implementing all of those things you want to do that you can with your own property and can't with a rental.Owning is NOT a necessity, and it ties you down to one location, if you have an emotional attachment to the property (like Frenchy) or a financial obligation that you take seriously.Rebeccah
Short sale is considered unethical here also. I mentioned a while ago I'd do just that and most threw me under the bus.
Renting a decent home for a full family in this county is unheard of. We wanted the good schools and neighborhoods. We see very few rentals here and the ones we do see are dumps.
As for renting our MI place out, see my response to Jon. If I hang onto the house another year, I'll likely be $120K upside down, plus the additional $12K in monthly payments...not exactly a good plan.
DanT says there's "hundreds" of options. You and on shared 2 so where's the other 98?
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Edited 6/29/2008 4:39 pm ET by Buttkickski2
BTW, I agree with you about the likely infeasibility of renting out your old house in a declining market. I was not upside down when I sold my house a few months ago to move 400 miles south for a new job, but if I had kept it to rent out, I would have been in another year. I lucked out and got a buyer the first week the house was on the market. But I had spent some $60K on infrastructure repairs and improvements over the previous 4 years, and recouped none of that. I just felt lucky to be out.Did people really want to throw you under a bus for considering a short sale, or were you making it sound like something to be proud of, a la segundo? Or perhaps it was back to the priorities issue again, your signed financial obligations to others vs your innate sense of responsibility to your family? No one wants to think it could happen to them, of course... "We wanted....the ones we do see are dumps." There's a saying, "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride." It's the American way to ride, regardless of income level. No one wants to live in a dump, or in a bad neighborhood, or to send their kid to bad schools. But if you don't have unlimited funds, there are tradeoffs. One of those tradeoffs is one's image (in one's own eyes, in the eyes of fellow BT'ers, in the eyes of one's children, business associates, credit reorting agencies, whomever) as someone whose word is good -- as some one who can be trusted when they promise something, or as someone who will walk when times get tough and they see something else they like better.For some, that image is more precious than any of the others. For others, doing as much as is humanly possible for one's children is more important. My own feeling is that doing too much for your children does them a disservice; rarely do they appreciate it, and they often grow up with a sense of entitlement.That said, I can only repeat that I do not know what I would have done in your situation.Rebeccah
I haven't "done" anything yet...
In fact, we just mailed our July payment Friday along with our lawncare check so we're even current with the bank.
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Edited 6/29/2008 5:49 pm ET by Buttkickski2
Well, all I can think of are unappealing options:1. Rent your place out for whatever rent you can get, and wait out the storm for 5 or more (more likely 10) years. I know I said I agreed it didn't seem financially feasible, but I wasn't upside down yet and I actually did succeed in selling my house. Sucks being a landlord, especially from a distance, but it *is* an option. Rent may not (probably won't) cover the mortgage, but it does decrease the monthly loss of cashflow. My current landlady is renting out because she just got married and moved into her husband's house; I'm not paying enough to cover her mortgage payments, but she'd take a loss if she sold now. At least she's not far away, though (and she got a good tenant, to boot).You might want to consider having a property management company manage the rental if you go this route, but that's a whole 'nother topic to research.2. Miss enough payments to get a Notice of Default, in an attempt to get the lender to pay attention and negotiate a short sale that is low enough to actually sell the property. It's still a long shot, because depending on the exact financials, the lender may still prefer to just foreclose. In southern California, a very small percentage of short sales listed (and there are a lot of them) actually close, because the lender doesn't agree to it. I am NOT an expert on this. There's a ton of stuff on the Internet about it, though.3. Default and let the bank foreclose, with the consequent hit to your credit rating. Others have talked about the tax ramifications of this and the short sale thing. I knonw nothing about how all that works.4. Read the fine print on your loan contract like segundo did, and come up with something else to propose to the lender.5. Keep paying two mortgages, draw down your savings, your retirement plans, your kids' education accounts, etc.6. Move back to your old home (where there is no work) and sell your new one. I'm just including this for completeness; it is an option, though I don't know why you'd want to take it.There may be other options, but I can't think of them right now.BTW, buying a house with alternative financing isn't going to protect you from the housing market continuing to go south (due to whoever's fault) and your needing to move again, so I see all of that discussion as a red herring. The question of rent vs buy your new home has already been decided; all that's left is to decide what to do with the old one.Rebeccah
Thanks, those are what I came up with too.
Short sale or rent it out is my most likely option..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
They won't short sale any home that is current. Stop paying or just figure on paying forever till it's paid off. You aren't going to sell it. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
<sigh>
You sound just like my realtor....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I ran a craigslist ad and got a guy to buy our spec house on a lease option in one week. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
In MI?
Maybe I'll look into that. Who'd you use to back you up legally? (paperwork, laws, liability etc.).
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I used a MLS rental form for my house and I used my realtor for the property management. She found the tenant and did all the paperwork for one months rent. I found the spec house lease option buyer but I wasn't involved in the paperwork at all. It was easy to find a renter because it is being leased out about $1000 cheaper per month than if he'd buy it. The guy would be crazy to get a new mortgage but his gravy train is going to end sometime.The key to doing business in MI is to sell at a very big loss or lease at a very big negative cashflow. Or...give it back to the bank! If you are looking to lease option your home and try to cover your entire note and break even, you might have trouble. The lease option is an important pyshological tool to someone that has lost their home but recently had good credit. You can "sell" your house to them and they get to tell their friends that they "bought" a new home. They save face. Really though, they are leasing and the sale will come in the future when they get their credit fixed. Do you think there are many people in MI with bruised credit looking for a place to stay? If you think there are, those are your customers. Now...get off your duff and get your place lease optioned! Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Dan, the banks made huge sums of money selling the loans in the secondary markets. Some were making huge sums on early payment penalties as they constantly refied the homes and wrapped the ever increasing loan amounts into a new loan, while lowering the payment with postponed interest payments. You do understand that when they sold the paper on the secondary market, they took their cut. So, a measley $1000 fee might balloon up to a lot more than that. I knew mortgage originators that were making $1000 and more on each loan package they put out. Loan fees are paid according to the loan package. Each package pays a different premium just like any sales object. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Thanks for the info.
We've already conceded the lease won't cover everything, but I'd rather lose 4-$500 per month than $1350.
Question is: how many months will I lose that $500 before the leaser buys the place? Guess that's up to him and the bank..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
what about MSA1 i thought he was looking for MI rental properties, sell it to him. i am sure if he is close enough to handle the property he would be interested.
According to his other posts he can't get the $$ from the bank.
MSA1: I have a lovely 7 y/o Cape on 5/8 treed acre with finished and a/c'd garage in Livingston County.
Includes the lawn tractor w/plow and leaf sweeper.
Closing costs are paid by my company too.
Offer me $145K and it's yours!
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Edited 6/29/2008 9:51 pm ET by Buttkickski2
you will probably have to make him a better offer than that, like if you carry the paper and he rents it, he will probably want it to cash flow to take it on.
better to lose a little than a lot.
From one of your earlier posts "The banks win no matter what. Look at the situation. Millions of average americans losing everything. How many banks have closed their doors? ONe?"
From this post " If this was an unintentional mistake, and there were a lot of banks failing because they got caught blindsided"
So which is it? Blindsided and failing or only one closed?
I am with Jon on this. I currently own 8 addresses. All but one are financed. 4 I would like to sell but are unsaleable due to the fact that there are so many repo's on the market in the lower price range that it is a better buy for people to buy the repo instead of my property. A lot of people are in the same boat I am in where I live.
So I just bail and that makes it all ok? I should have never planned for my own "tough times"? Because they always come.
I too have no love for banks or bankers in general. And I agree that they probably were over zealous at their practices and made some dumb moves. They probably plotted to make money even figuring in the end that some folks would fail. But you see that daily in business at all levels.
In our area a few years ago we had a couple of guys score a framing contract for a major developement here. Would have been 5 years worth of work easy for 2 maybe 3 crews. They bought new trucks, new trailer, new gear, hired some of the better framers based on the promise of long term work. Within a year they were gone. Poorly managed, poor quality. Did that effect a lot of people? Sure, all the guys they hired. It happens all the time.
But it doesn't make it ok to agree to terms and the minute you decide you don't like them any more you dump the contract. And again even if you were upside down in a house (which has happened so many times in our society it is uncountable) having your house payment and other payments at a sustainable level is the prudent move. And blaming the bank when you don't makes no sense to me what so ever.
What ever happens to the banks is what happens to the banks. The money they loan us is what we asked for and agreed to. So they take there lumps and I take mine if that is the case. But one has little to do with the other. DanT
Well said.
Naive but refreshing !
But the contract says the ho will give the house to the bank if he can't pay so how is walking away dumping the contract?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I've followed this discussion with interest, and have to admit that I'm not sure where I stand on this issue. On the one hand, I agree that people have a moral obligation to stand by their word, even when things don't go their way. On the other hand, I have seen "techniques" that banks use that are questionable, even if technically legal. Back in the eighties I obtained a 10 year home improvement loan. It was when the interest rates were sky high, and I made sure that there would be no penalty for early payoff, since I knew that I would probably refinance the house once I completed the remodeling. What I didn't catch was that the interest was calculated by the "rule of 78's". That one little phrase in a 15 page contract. When I went to pay off the loan after about 4years, I found that I owed more than what I borrowed. The reason is that the rule of 78 front loads the interest. Perfectly legal. I talked to a banker friend (VP at a national bank) and he had no idea what the rule of 78's was. So, by using this system they could state that their was no prepayment penalty, when in actual fact there was. You could argue that I should have had a lawyer look at the contract, but I don't think that should be required to prevent what I consider fraudulent activity.
According to many you were greedy and/or stupid and deserved what you got. I think you were screwed and if it were me I'd have let that go to collections then paid half to settle.
If it's illegal to scam old people with telemarketing it should be illegal to scam homeowners with dirty loans.
Are you allowed to prescribe your patients something that will force them to come back to you for more prescriptions? I doubt that's legal..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Actually, it says the bank can take the house if the homeowner can't/won't pay. There's a difference...
ooookkkkkaaaayyyyy...
The buyer signed the contract right? So the contract clearly says the home is the collateral. Why would allowing the bank to take the home be a breach of contract?
Burning it down would be a breach; giving it up isn't..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Need to reread your contract. The contract is for the buyer (borrower) to repay the loan. Nothing more, nothing less. The recourse the bank has is the ability to take the home back if the contract is defaulted. Nowhere in the contract will it say " Borrower must repay the loan or give the collateral back."
It's the same thing. It's not an unsecured loan like a credit card. The security (collateral) was the house.
Banks send an appraiser before closing to verify the home is worth the loan amount in case they need to repo it.
How do you propose a HO pay back the loan without giving the house to the bank? Obviously if he had that kind of $$ he would be able to keep making the payments..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I don't see how you can say he's screwing Countrywide or his neighbors. Thats a huge overstatement. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
That is not quite true, they can sue you for the balence that is owed after forclosure sale. Of course if you continue to live in NC, that won't bother you, because they can't attach your wages. Unlike most states.
I would have no problem being unethical if it would profit me
That says it all.
Is the adjustable rate mortgage the big problem? Or is it lending money to people that aren't responsible?
As good as it sounds I've never felt comfortable with an adjustable rate mortgage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
Both. Neither used to be allowed until the banks got extra greedy in the last decade.
Now as a result of the above mentioned stupid lending the country is in recession and millions are upside down in their mortgages because of the houses around them being foreclosed and dropping their home values.
I never did adjustable rate either. I also never refinanced for cash, only once for a lower rate..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
What a coinkydink. We just kicked a countrywide rep out of our house. It's too late to go into all the details but we are in the process of refininacing. Being a lazy #### I let the wife do all the work. Well she decided countrywide was the best deal. I've mentioned to her that it's not a good idea. Since she did the shopping she got to give it a try.
I don't want to string the story along but I have to get to bed. I'll give the full blown deal tommorrow. The "loan signer guy" came in pretty cocky and left on the verge of tears. He was actualy puffing up ready to bawl. F em.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHE1dM4hYCw
F em.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Mom dropped you on the head when you were a baby didnt she?
If a stock starts to drop, you sell it, you dont give it back.
If your house drops in value you SELL IT, you dont walk away from a commitment.
Why would you ditch a house simply due to lower value? You're not one of these geniuses that believed that real estate only goes up and figured you'd make a killing are you?
IMO my opinion you're a crappy businessman.
Nice follow through. Ya think you're walking away helped neighborhood values much?
I must be lost cause I can only find one camp.
I cant believe you would use the tired excuse of "they made money so screw um".
You made a commitment. They're in the business of making money writing loans on real estate.
Was it right that some were deceitful? No not at all, but it doesnt sound like anyone lied to you.
If they signed docs without a proper understanding of them, then they are not blameless.
EVERYONE that signs a mortgage is legally allowed to have it reviewed by a lawyer and (if they want) can sit in closing and read everyword on every page.
If Countrywide intentionally hid something, then they should rot in hell for this mess.
If its simply a case of too many rushing into deals they knew deep down they couldnt afford then the company should get off.
There is plenty of blame to go around here. I believe California is also suing Countrywide (which no longer exists since it's been bought out).
In many states, the main reason for the spike in housing prices was due to speculators buying housing as an investment. Those speculators drove the prices up for everyone, and Countrywide, among others, offered easy money for anyone wanting to buy.
Like I said, plenty of blame to go around. And now the speculators have moved on to oil and gas.
Like housing, oil and gas are needs not wants so we are screwed into paying what the market tells us too..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
What they did was unethical.
I'm not a big fan of regulating an industry but they already were regulated. The regulations simply failed to stop the trainwreck that the bank was creating by fueling the runaway train. The banks knew full well what was going to happen and they kept shoveling the coal because they were going to be winners both ways.
Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Jim,
Are you implying the banks did this on purpose to "adjust an inflating market"?
Or are you saying they just didnt care, and were only watching the bottom line from all the notes they wrote?
I'm saying they didn't care because they were making their money on loan origination fees and selling the loans on the secondary market. With the loosened reserve rules, they couldn't find enough people to take the loans so they started lending to people who they knew shouldn't be getting loans. It didn't matter to the banks because they were going to sell the loans anyways. Then, in order to keep the loan amounts high, they also were instrumental in manipulating the appraisal process. That is evidenced by the new federal guidelines in the appraising industry and the tightening of the lending rules. Common sense wasn't guiding the banker's decisions anymore so the regulators had to step in.I brought this entire scenario up about two years ago before the bubble burst. I gave the title of the book and explained everything that was going to happen. Everyone in this forum pooh poohed me as being a chicken little because their houses were going up 50k per year and there was new construction everywhere. The author was right and if he could see what was coming down the tubes, certainly the banks could but they kept making the loans and accepting the false appraisals. Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
Once that is understood, it makes Enron look like nothing.
I had an uncle in law that was a CFO of the sugar division of a NYSE company. During the sugar cane shortage back in the late 70's I asked him how his business was doing because of the shortage. He was estatic...record profits.
Big business can make big money but when they create a market that will make millions of normal, average everyday americans upside down, I sure ain't going to condemn anyone that gives their property back...as long as they don't rip out the plumbing and sell the copper for scrap and sell the cabinets etc.
Bob's next test date: 12/10/07
So did the powers that be go through and delete your posts or did you do it? Just decided to bring out the kinder gentler version after finding out some people took offense to being considered one of the chumps that didn't handle it your way? Just curious. Maybe you didn't wish for those thoughts to be held for history lol. DanT
I was curious myself!
I think its obvious what happened
"...I would have no problem being unethical if it would profit me" Segundo
If I made a comment like the one posted regarding ethics, or lack of them, I'd be punching as many keys as fast as I could to get it deleted.
Doug
Edited 6/27/2008 9:19 pm ET by DougU
When he first posted on here, we had a discussion about ethics, can't find that one. Of cource that might be my poor computor skills!
The problem is they don't write off everything, just the amount of the expected loss.
I just listened to the twelve minute NPR audio file.
The first guy they talked to, the one with the $540k loan, said that he himself would not have loaned him the money. I'm assuming this was because he knew he would not be able to pay it back.
While this may not be fraud on the borrower's part, it is certainly foolish, unsavory, and reckless. What in the world is he doing borrowing over half a million dollars if he knew he could not pay it back!
Hey, the bank was definitely stupid to make that loan. But he is the root of the problem.
That lack of personal responsibility that some exhibit almost makes me sick.
Jon Blakemore
RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"foolish, unsavory, and reckless" is the bank.
When talking about money the adults in this country that have poor credit are basically kids; money-children that need some restrictions. When a kid gets hooked on drugs, who do you blame: kid or pusher?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
You blame both.It's not like the bank went down to an insane asylum and started signing people up. The majority of people who took loans, knowing they couldn't service them, are responsible for their actions.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
Try to understand: they never should have been offered the loan because they'd already proven themselves irresponsible with money or under qualified with low wages.
Who's at fault more: the drug dealer or the addict?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"Who's at fault more: the drug dealer or the addict?"I know you want me to say the dealer is at fault and the addict is just a hapless victim. I just can't go along with that.The addict made a choice to think about doing drugs. The addict made a choice to acquaint themselves with people who know drug dealers. The addict made a choice to seek out the dealer. They made a choice to procure the funds, purchase the drugs, ingest the drugs, and do it over and over and over.Just as I cannot believe that the addict is blameless I also cannot accept that the borrower who took on more than they could handle is faultless.I have two children, my son is about 2-1/2. Fortunately I don't have to deal with drug or financial problems at this point, and I hope I never have to. Still, if he were to come to me with an addiction or debt, my focus would be on his actions and how to change them. Neither I nor my son can control all the potential drug dealers or loan sharks out there. We can control our own actions.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
I never said exclusively at fault, I specifically asked "Who's at fault more:...?"
Anybody that is paying attention knows the banks are more at fault. They've got the drug (money) and they know they're giving it to addicts (poor credit borrowers) at the cost of ruining good people. Yet according to you we're not allowed to fight back for our losses?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Why does it matter who is at fault MORE?If I'm in a messy situation with someone else I worry primarily about my actions, not their's. I can change my behavior but cannot change another person's.Why do you have to try so hard ascribe blame? Do you think that blaming the banks excuses any unethical actions on the borrower's part?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
"Why do you have to try so hard ascribe blame?"
So if you're hit by a car running a red light you don't point blame? The banks have caused me and millions of other 10's of thousands of dollars but you don't think we should point blame? I just can't follow your reasoning...sorry.
"Do you think that blaming the banks excuses any unethical actions on the borrower's part?"
So I'm unethical for walking away from a home I can't sell? So tell me, what do you propose I do? Don't give me the "you're an adult, figure it out" answer. What exactly do you propose I do? By the time I lower the price enough to sell it, I will owe $80K. I don't have $80K to spare and the bank won't loan it.
Is it more ethical to not pay for my kids college?.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
The kids can take out educational loans and part-time jobs and pay for their own college. That's what people used to do. They also tend to take a greater interest in succeeding there if they have some investment in it.Rebeccah
Edited 6/29/2008 3:56 pm by Rebeccah
So push my financial burden onto them? Don't think so but thanks for the idea.
Besides, the money is in a 529 plan so the penalties would be excessive if used for anything but their college..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
The difference is that you think their higher education is your responsibility. I think it's their own. Anything you can do to help them is great, but it's still their responsibility. So I don't see failing to fund their college educations as pushing your financial burden onto them.You and I think differently in this.Yes, the penalties would be heavy, and you would feel even more screwed, if you used 529 plan funds to pay off your mortgage. They would also be heavy if you had not actually found work in another state and had to draw them to pay (gasp!) rent after you lost your house.I cannot say what I would have done with regard to the house you walked away from, and I'm sure it would have involved a lot of poring over the fine print in the loan agreement.Rebeccah
I'm not forfeiting my kids college fund.
I haven't walked away from anything yet, that's why I'm waiting for someone here to give me a alternative other than the one above..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Sorry, I'm getting you and segundo mixed up again.So, you have already moved and bought a new place, but have not yet sold the old one, is that right?Rebeccah
Edited 6/29/2008 5:21 pm by Rebeccah
Correct.
House is listed for 7 months way below what we paid and what we owe. It's had one viewing and no offers.
Not a McMansion. Not an ARM. No refinancing. Well within our means but every day we keep it we lose more $$ that could go to retirement, college, savings etc. Two house payments isn't fun but is manageable for us.
It does not make any economic sense to keep it for the 22 months my realtor says it will take to sell it...after it drops another 10-20%.
The only reason to keep it is "ethics" which I'm really wrestling with because IMO this is an unethical business..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
i for one do not think it unethical if you follow the rule of law in your actions.
its up to you to decide if it is worth it to let it go to foreclosure or to keep making the payments.
if your credit rating suffers from a foreclosure is the money you save worth it?
if you preserve your credit by paying the mortgage on an empty house is it worth it for the money you spend?
for me it was a simple decision, i asked friends, bank officers, CPA's, bankruptcy lawyers, and realtors for advice so i knew what the consequences would be before i acted. in my case the consequences were minimal, the worst was the badmouthing on breaktime, serious.
We've done the math and it's not even close: foreclosure will save us 10's of thousands. It's not on the credit record forever and we have a house, two cars, credit cards and savings everything we need for the 7-10 years.
My ethical dilemma is how my foreclosure will affect the neighbors we left behind. A few of them were good people and I'd hate to lower their value more but goddamnit the banks make it nearly impossible not do. They're unwillingness to help and they're "haha we have you by the balls" attitude burns me up.
If they'd only loan me the balance I'd sell the house cheap and fast. I'm not willing to dump my savings and/or kids college fund into their screw up..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
that is nice that you are considering your neighbors, just one question.
what happens if it doesn't sell in the realtors projected 22 months, and you or your wifes job is downsized or cut back?
if forclosure is inevitable it is better for the neighborhood to get it over with as quickly as possible, trying to hang on and failing prolongs the agony.
another question, are you contemplating bankruptcy? or are you going to let it foreclose and then pay the difference between what you owe and what it sells for?
I know...I know about waiting...
Short sale or rent it out is my most likely option.
I won't even pursue bankruptcy because I make too much, adn I'm not bankrupt. We can pay both home notes indefinitely and all other bills too.
That MI home is just a black hole I don't want to keep throwing money into..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
there will be consequences from not paying the mortgage, the mortgage holder could sue you for the difference between what they sell it for and what you owe on it.
i am confused as to what happens if they hold it for seven years and make a profit on it, but lets not confuse the issue.
if you are sued and lose the suit you will still have to pay and you will have the bad mark on your credit, you should look into bankruptcy and see what that will be like for your situation. the right bankruptcy lawyer can make all the difference.
and as rebeccah says you have to pore over the contract, did both you and your wife sign the prommisory note? that is the first question a good bankruptcy lawyer will ask. any refinances? there is the second question.
it is amazing what you can learn by poring over the fine print and asking some questions.
there seems to be a consensus of opinion here in this forum that anything less than paying the mortgage in full as per is unethical and unfulfilling of your obligations.
yet what about the bank calling the note the instant it benefits them financially? is not the reverse of walking away from the mortgage?
so banks are unethical, no news flash there, what i can't understand is why would anybody even consider ethics in any dealing with any bank?
why should individuals be ethical in their dealings with banks, when banks are not ethical in their dealings with individuals? i can't speak for others, but i hate it when i show up to a gunfight with a knife.
I have never seen a clause in any mortgage that allows the bank to call a mortgage. This is a new one to me.
I have owned in excess of 20 homes over the years with various mortgage products, both in Florida and NY.
Banks are not unethical, some bankers are, just like any profession. The part that pisses me off about the current situation, is that the hedge funds are not taking the big hit they should have.
You are only responsible for the deficit balance, if there is one when the sale or repossession is complete. The gov. gave away the store by not making people pay taxes on this amount through 2010.
The reason to be ethical, in your dealings, is that people respect and trust you. We have all said the banks are the worst offenders, but I really believe from what I have read, is that the mortgage brokers are the major problem.
Buttickiski, I have thought a lot about your situation,and about your banks refusal to accept a short sale. The only thing I have come up with is that they have sold the mortgage and now are only servicing the debt. Have you asked them that? Will they tell you who holds the actual mortgage? I would think they would have to disclose this if you request. Maybe a reading of the mortgage would help.
To ALL, it is funny in this world, but if you declare bankruptcy, all kinds of banks want to do business with you. In future credit applications, one of the questions is, have you ever had a reposesion or foreclosure. That means unless you lie, it is a part of you forever. Yes it only remains on the credit report for 10 years, but there is no rule to prevent them from asking and using this info. to turn down a loan.
lol who is "blutz"?
I don't think they ever denied me a short sale; I never presented them with one. Problem is, nobody is offering anything for the house. And if they did, I'm already listed out of the short sale "range" which is what it costs to go to foreclosure.
Yes, National City still owns our mortgage. They are the original bank I got the mortgage through.
What they denied me was any kind of loan to finance the difference if I actually found a buyer.
.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Edited 6/29/2008 7:40 pm ET by Buttkickski2
Come on, a car running a red light is hardly akin to going to a closing and signing your name two dozen times saying that you will pay a loan off over time.As to your current situation, I would say that "walking away" would be unethical. Why don't you just rent it out and wait for the market to pick back up?
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
They're both negligent acts that should be punished.
I don't see renting as a safe option but have considered it. We live 670 miles away so the logistics would be tough. Also the values are expected to drop 10-20% more in the next year. Not exactly a good idea to keep it!.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Butt,
I am done responding to you. I learned them on my own. Take some intitiative and learn them on yourself. You won't do anything with the information as you have already proven so skip the lesson, take the easy way out again and go fly your helicopter.
Everyone else:
While doing some filing today I came across the settlement statement for a house I bought recently in Michigan through a (god forbid) bank. For an 85k loan there fees were $982.30 including overnight mail charges and an $8.30 fee for flood certificate. Not exactly a wind fall.
So I went looking at some other older transactions. In 05 we closed a loan with Countrywide using a private mortage broker. For 42k the fees were (gulp) a whopping $951.00.
I check again on a loan from a different bank entirely and for a loan amount of 112k the bank fees were $1282. Now I know I will hear that if we multiply that times the millions of people who got screwed "look how much money it is". But I don't think these fees are a total windfall percentage wise. DanT
Dan, you said to me "There are a hundred ways to buy a home that don't include bank or institutional financing." and I've asked you 3 times to tell me some that fit me and you refuse.
I'm throwing the bullshid flag here. You're done responding to me because you don't know of any more options than I do..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
"I'm throwing the bullshid flag here. You're done responding to me because you don't know of any more options than I do."
Sure I do lol. But I don't have to tell them to you. Throw any flag you want. DanT
You have ideas to prevent me from doing something unethical and from having this problem again but you won't share them with me (us).
Well, I don't know what I did to you to deserve that but thanks for nothing Dan.
Have a nice life....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
when you are done listening to it i will be waiting for your apology and your thanking me for enlightening you on the subject.
Your making me laugh my #### off now!
Just because someone validates your assumptions doesn't make you the geniuses that your making yourself out to be!
Look, I don't give one rats #### what you do with your house, your credit, your wife's credit............but you Buttkiski and Jim Allen can keep patting each other on the #### telling yourself whatever you need to to make yourselves justify your actions but that still doesn't mean I'm buying any of it.
Your comment that you made regarding your ethics, lack of ethics, and your outright statement proclaiming your willingness to compromise those ethics says all that needs to be said. I'm not the judge and jury on this, I, like you, have an opinion regarding what you did and what you said on this forum regarding the subject, don't make me right, wrong or anything else, just exercising my right to voice it, same as you.
Hope everything works out for you in the long run.
Doug
PS, I see the thread that dealt with you going to MA to collect unemployment benefits from a state that you never worked in got moved to the tav, I don't go in there, tell me, how did that work out for you? just curious.
"just because someone validates your assumptions doesnt make you the geniuses that your making yourself out to be"
so even though you admit i gave you evidence i am right i am not a genius. ok well at least i am not stupid.
have you ever in your life actually left the state of iowa? you know there is a whole wide world out there, even people of different color.
have you ever in your life actually left the state of iowa?
Been to every state except for Alaska but that doesn't make me any smarter, dumber, or anything else for that matter.
well at least i am not stupid. Never said you were, never insinuated it either.
You didn't prove anything yet, you just found someone that agrees with you and now your chest is all puffed out and your screaming from the top of the hill about how smart you are!
Keep telling yourself that what you do is right and pretty soon you'll convince yourself, just don't expect everybody to jump on board with ya.
Didn't get an answer on that unemployment question, didn't you see it at the bottom of my post to you? I'm sure you must have missed it. Curiosity is getting the best of me, just not enough to go into the tav to find out.
even people of different color. Where? and what color?
Doug
you have to go to the tavern.
wasa matter can't you get in to the tavern?
are you skeered?
there are messages to you down there you better go read em.
I have no desire to go into the tav, to much of this shid going on there. Those messages to me will just have to go unread, I'll forget about the question by tomorrow.
Hope everything works out for you.
Later
Doug
I listened to the broadcast. Honestly, I was aware of everything they said.
I still say no one was forced into their loans and all had a chance to read and understand what they were signing.
If you can be guilty of severe temptation I guess their guilty, but otherwise......read it before you sign it, use your freakin head. If you are a bus boy, you cant afford a 500k house, not a bankers fault, just simple economics.
it has been explained but still you don't get it. i was not irresponsible. i did not buy more house than i could afford.
i just couldn't afford a house that lost half its value in 18 months. neither could you.
what will you do when every rental property you have rents for less than the mortgage payment, get a job at 7-11 and fulfill your obligations? what would you do if the numbers were turned upside down on you?
i wasn't irresponsible, neither are you, but there are lots of other people that borrowed the money and invested in property they thought would go up, just as the experts on wall street that analyze financials for a living did, and when it went down they couldn't afford to keep it.
some of the brightest money people in the world blew it, average joes that were betting on increasing property values that didn't have deep enough pockets to stay in for the long haul had to walk. smart individuals that figured out walking put them money ahead and left others holding the bag are just smart. are you holding the bag?
Let's go one step further, tell them where the house was located. This to me speaks volumns about what you are saying. In a previous post you told us it was on the coast of NC, near the water or on an island.
I don't know specifically about the local market, but I know a lot of people who vacation on the shore of NC. Now having said that, I would have rented the house for what I could, move to Charlotte which is going great guns in construction.The problem is the complete lack of desire to living up to your contract. On top of that, you were saying that your wife was the one that signed the mortgage.
You my friend are unbelievable!
all your information is wrong, i don't know what you are talking about.
you must have me mistaken with someone else.
Whatever you say.
Must have been the deleted posts!
I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand....
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
When we went to dinner tonight, the appetizer sucked. I ate 1/3 of it before giving up. The waiter took it back and did not charge anything for it. They screwed it up so they ate the loss.
Should I have paid for it?
The banks screwed this market up, they should eat the losses..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
I dont know if the comparision between housing and shrimp quite works. You ate 1/3 of the appetizer then gave up, seems fair to me that you didnt pay, plus restaurants will do about anything to satisfy a customer.
How did you know it was shrimp? Spooky...
Anyhow, I do think it's a fair though outlandish comparison. The restaurant marketed a product to me that I would have paid full price if they did it the way they promised. However, they overcooked it and it wasn't what they said it was so I gave it back and they ate the loss..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
However, they overcooked it and it wasn't what they said it was so I gave it back and they ate the loss.
Wonder how they liked it? Ha ha
heh...did sound kinda funny.
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."
Restaurants have to worry about reputation, bankers dont care what you think of them. You'll be in to see them eventually.
I just see it as a commitment when I sign my name to something. My personal experience right this minute is with plastic. In renovating 4 houses last year, I racked up quite a bit. The big problem really was I had two deal not break the way I anticipated and beacuse of this I have ALOT of debt.
I'm telling you this because honestly right now it would be better for me to default on the debt and start over. As it sits right now I cant get credit to buy a house till I pay down more of the debt. It may take as long to pay down as the waiting period after a bankruptcy.
It sure would save me money by just bailing but I made a deal with these companies to pay back what I borrowed. I knew the possible consequences of thaking the loans and I agreed to it.
"...bankers dont care what you think of them. You'll be in to see them eventually."
And that is what makes their scam criminal: we need them and they know it and they use that against us..
.
"Thank goodness for the Democrats! If you are terminally unemployable, enjoy living off of govt welfare and feel you owe society nothing you're in luck: there is a donkey waiting for you."