[quote=sdrealtor]Again lots of false assumptions. They tried to relo and it didnt work out either. They didnt brag and arent proud of what happened. The mutual acquaintance is a childhood friend.
It isnt as easy as you think for the lenders. They owe the investors due diligence to determine the proper course. At one point and possible to this day the major lenders were receiving several thousand homeowner assistance packages a day. They were set up to make loans not to handle loss mitigation on a major scale. Sometimes it makes sense to foreclose asap and sometimes it doesnt. Your blanket statements show your ignorance as to the nature of things.
That lender is long since gone and rolled into another. You have enough information and arent getting anymore.
Just curious as to how much federal taxes you have paid each of the last 5 years? You can round up to the nearest dollar. I just want to know exactly how much you potentially contributed to home debtors.[/quote]
What money did they use for “relo” when they were “broke?” Why didn’t they give “cash for keys” before they reloed? Why didn’t relo work out for them? Weather not as nice there as SoCal?? I could go on …. lol
As you can see, I’m fundamentally against cramdowns for FB’s who took “cash out” and I am not alone.
Your FB’s would have HAD to brag or YOU wouldn’t have heard about this “spectacular deal” (your words) from your “mutual acquaintance.” This bragging creates a systemic distaste for sticking it out in any underwater home-debtors who hear of this supposedly-successful coup.
If you as a defaulted-upon lender are well on your way to $100K in losses in the form of missed payments and your note is secured by a TD in CA, you have NO EXCUSE not to timely foreclose on that trust deed! This is precisely what the foreclosure laws are in place to prevent!
Why does the “realtor crowd” seem to think that “loss mitigation” in the form of cash-for-keys or SS, is preferable to foreclosure when foreclosure has always been the remedy for default in the past?? Duh, let’s see . . . could it be churning?? Cramdown gives underwater homeowners a fresh start (even if as a result of SS) and their credit may recover a bit earlier than if they get foreclosed upon. Cramdown in the form of mod allows FB’s home values to build above water quicker to enable them to pay a RE commission to sell without a SS. A realtor can ostensibly get a commission for a SS and then get the client again as a buyer in 3 yrs. Not so with a foreclosure (unless one is a broker for an REO lender in a particular region). Of course, someone who makes all or part of their living as a “realtor” handling “short sales” would be in favor of cramdown for FB’s whose “cash out” extractions got them into the situation they are in today – forced to SELL!
Wow, now it all makes sense!! Who woulda thunk it?
Why don’t you reveal the particulars of YOUR tax return on here, sdr?
It doesn’t matter how much Federal income tax a homeowner pays to be affected by cramdown for “cash out” FB’s. All they have to do is have a few successful SS transactions in the vicinity of their property (which sold somewhat or substantially lower than if the same property were marketed and sold as an REO) and there you have it – their OWN property is now worth less! Or a few owners on a very homogenous block (speaking of housing inventory here) where some of the owners took “cash out” along the way and are now receiving cramdowns on all their former “home improvement funds.” Even though the cheaply (or free) remodeled properties’ higher sales prices raise the “sold comps” on the block, those owners of the remodeled properties will no doubt receive MORE for their properties upon sale than those who played by the rules, kept their heads down while the “loose-lending” songs were playing and didn’t install gourmet kitchens and the like.
Simply put, it’s nothing more than unjust enrichment to the fools who borrowed into oblivion, causing their OWN properties to be underwater. Now they are whining claiming they are “entitled victims.”
I don’t have a problem per se with cramdown (within reason) used for bubble-era purchasers who have never taken “cash out.”
