Client needs a loan

[Troubled Loner]

flu, they (husband and wife) are mid-50’s. Their equity estimate is actually higher, I believe $300,000 is accurate.

Russell, they both have medical conditions, cannot get medical insurance. They have depleted their IRA’s and pensions down to nothing, they can no longer pay the medical bills, and they are considering bankruptcy, but really don’t want to (they don’t feel it is right ethically). If they were able to pay off the $75,000 of medical bills, they would probably be OK (the monthly payments are quite high).

[enron_by_the_sea]

Seriously, why would they want to do it?

Either they have income to pay for the home loan or they don’t.

If they have income to pay for the home loan – they should instead renegotiate the amount with their doctors/hospitals and pay in installments instead of taking on a mortgage.

If they don’t have income to pay for the home loan then their options are

1. declare bankrupcy and keep the house. or,
2. Sell the house and pay the medical bills (if they feel like they need to do the right thing.)

Taking on a mortgage makes an unsecured debt (medical bill) secured and it is probably not in their best interest.

Maybe I missed something in which case I apologize.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Seriously, why would they want to do it?

Either they have income to pay for the home loan or they don’t.

If they have income to pay for the home loan – they should instead renegotiate the amount with their doctors/hospitals and pay in installments instead of taking on a mortgage.

If they don’t have income to pay for the home loan then their options are

1. declare bankrupcy and keep the house. or,
2. Sell the house and pay the medical bills (if they feel like they need to do the right thing.)

Taking on a mortgage makes an unsecured debt (medical bill) secured and it is probably not in their best interest.

Maybe I missed something in which case I apologize.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Seriously, why would they want to do it?

Either they have income to pay for the home loan or they don’t.

If they have income to pay for the home loan – they should instead renegotiate the amount with their doctors/hospitals and pay in installments instead of taking on a mortgage.

If they don’t have income to pay for the home loan then their options are

1. declare bankrupcy and keep the house. or,
2. Sell the house and pay the medical bills (if they feel like they need to do the right thing.)

Taking on a mortgage makes an unsecured debt (medical bill) secured and it is probably not in their best interest.

Maybe I missed something in which case I apologize.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Seriously, why would they want to do it?

Either they have income to pay for the home loan or they don’t.

If they have income to pay for the home loan – they should instead renegotiate the amount with their doctors/hospitals and pay in installments instead of taking on a mortgage.

If they don’t have income to pay for the home loan then their options are

1. declare bankrupcy and keep the house. or,
2. Sell the house and pay the medical bills (if they feel like they need to do the right thing.)

Taking on a mortgage makes an unsecured debt (medical bill) secured and it is probably not in their best interest.

Maybe I missed something in which case I apologize.

[enron_by_the_sea]

Seriously, why would they want to do it?

Either they have income to pay for the home loan or they don’t.

If they have income to pay for the home loan – they should instead renegotiate the amount with their doctors/hospitals and pay in installments instead of taking on a mortgage.

If they don’t have income to pay for the home loan then their options are

1. declare bankrupcy and keep the house. or,
2. Sell the house and pay the medical bills (if they feel like they need to do the right thing.)

Taking on a mortgage makes an unsecured debt (medical bill) secured and it is probably not in their best interest.

Maybe I missed something in which case I apologize.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The only way to address this is to understand whether the medical bills are temporary or likely to be on-going ?

If it is likely to be on-going, then they are going to go bankrupt anyway. They probably should have considered bankruptcy before draining their pensions.

Their best bet is to negotiate scheduled payments with the hospitals/providers for their debt. They can probably get some of it written down and effectively get a zero interest rate loan by requesting to make payments.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The only way to address this is to understand whether the medical bills are temporary or likely to be on-going ?

If it is likely to be on-going, then they are going to go bankrupt anyway. They probably should have considered bankruptcy before draining their pensions.

Their best bet is to negotiate scheduled payments with the hospitals/providers for their debt. They can probably get some of it written down and effectively get a zero interest rate loan by requesting to make payments.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The only way to address this is to understand whether the medical bills are temporary or likely to be on-going ?

If it is likely to be on-going, then they are going to go bankrupt anyway. They probably should have considered bankruptcy before draining their pensions.

Their best bet is to negotiate scheduled payments with the hospitals/providers for their debt. They can probably get some of it written down and effectively get a zero interest rate loan by requesting to make payments.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The only way to address this is to understand whether the medical bills are temporary or likely to be on-going ?

If it is likely to be on-going, then they are going to go bankrupt anyway. They probably should have considered bankruptcy before draining their pensions.

Their best bet is to negotiate scheduled payments with the hospitals/providers for their debt. They can probably get some of it written down and effectively get a zero interest rate loan by requesting to make payments.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The only way to address this is to understand whether the medical bills are temporary or likely to be on-going ?

If it is likely to be on-going, then they are going to go bankrupt anyway. They probably should have considered bankruptcy before draining their pensions.

Their best bet is to negotiate scheduled payments with the hospitals/providers for their debt. They can probably get some of it written down and effectively get a zero interest rate loan by requesting to make payments.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Troubled Loner]flu, they (husband and wife) are mid-50’s. Their equity estimate is actually higher, I believe $300,000 is accurate.

Russell, they both have medical conditions, cannot get medical insurance. They have depleted their IRA’s and pensions down to nothing, they can no longer pay the medical bills, and they are considering bankruptcy, but really don’t want to (they don’t feel it is right ethically). If they were able to pay off the $75,000 of medical bills, they would probably be OK (the monthly payments are quite high).[/quote]
That’s what I am getting at Troubled Loaner, they can’t get insurance where poor people have free medical. Maybe they could pay it off assuming those “disproportionate costs”. That is admirable, but what about future problems with health? They are at high risk for going down the tubes when there have been more irresponsible and physically healthy people, with hidden assets or from families of some means, getting bailouts.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Troubled Loner]flu, they (husband and wife) are mid-50’s. Their equity estimate is actually higher, I believe $300,000 is accurate.

Russell, they both have medical conditions, cannot get medical insurance. They have depleted their IRA’s and pensions down to nothing, they can no longer pay the medical bills, and they are considering bankruptcy, but really don’t want to (they don’t feel it is right ethically). If they were able to pay off the $75,000 of medical bills, they would probably be OK (the monthly payments are quite high).[/quote]
That’s what I am getting at Troubled Loaner, they can’t get insurance where poor people have free medical. Maybe they could pay it off assuming those “disproportionate costs”. That is admirable, but what about future problems with health? They are at high risk for going down the tubes when there have been more irresponsible and physically healthy people, with hidden assets or from families of some means, getting bailouts.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Troubled Loner]flu, they (husband and wife) are mid-50’s. Their equity estimate is actually higher, I believe $300,000 is accurate.

Russell, they both have medical conditions, cannot get medical insurance. They have depleted their IRA’s and pensions down to nothing, they can no longer pay the medical bills, and they are considering bankruptcy, but really don’t want to (they don’t feel it is right ethically). If they were able to pay off the $75,000 of medical bills, they would probably be OK (the monthly payments are quite high).[/quote]
That’s what I am getting at Troubled Loaner, they can’t get insurance where poor people have free medical. Maybe they could pay it off assuming those “disproportionate costs”. That is admirable, but what about future problems with health? They are at high risk for going down the tubes when there have been more irresponsible and physically healthy people, with hidden assets or from families of some means, getting bailouts.

[NotCranky]

[quote=Troubled Loner]flu, they (husband and wife) are mid-50’s. Their equity estimate is actually higher, I believe $300,000 is accurate.

Russell, they both have medical conditions, cannot get medical insurance. They have depleted their IRA’s and pensions down to nothing, they can no longer pay the medical bills, and they are considering bankruptcy, but really don’t want to (they don’t feel it is right ethically). If they were able to pay off the $75,000 of medical bills, they would probably be OK (the monthly payments are quite high).[/quote]
That’s what I am getting at Troubled Loaner, they can’t get insurance where poor people have free medical. Maybe they could pay it off assuming those “disproportionate costs”. That is admirable, but what about future problems with health? They are at high risk for going down the tubes when there have been more irresponsible and physically healthy people, with hidden assets or from families of some means, getting bailouts.

[Author]

Posts