Don’t Read if You Have High Blood Pressure

[UCGal]

[quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.

[Coronita]

[quote=UCGal][quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.
[/quote]

Again, I’m not a lawyer. But if there’s any indication, you should read about the stories about banks paying folks being foreclosed on thousands to just walk away and not do any damage. If there were legal means to go after them, I’d think banks would pursue that.

[Coronita]

[quote=UCGal][quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.
[/quote]

Again, I’m not a lawyer. But if there’s any indication, you should read about the stories about banks paying folks being foreclosed on thousands to just walk away and not do any damage. If there were legal means to go after them, I’d think banks would pursue that.

[Coronita]

[quote=UCGal][quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.
[/quote]

Again, I’m not a lawyer. But if there’s any indication, you should read about the stories about banks paying folks being foreclosed on thousands to just walk away and not do any damage. If there were legal means to go after them, I’d think banks would pursue that.

[Coronita]

[quote=UCGal][quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.
[/quote]

Again, I’m not a lawyer. But if there’s any indication, you should read about the stories about banks paying folks being foreclosed on thousands to just walk away and not do any damage. If there were legal means to go after them, I’d think banks would pursue that.

[Coronita]

[quote=UCGal][quote=patientrenter][quote=flu][quote=patientrenter]Is this legal?[/quote]

yup.[/quote]

flu, or any pigg lawyers out there, surely it is not legal to trash property, especially for self-enrichment, when the property is collateral for a loan and the property owner has, and knows they have, no equity.

Can this really be legal?[/quote]

There is nothing in any mortgage contract I’ve seen that prevents me from tearing out my kitchen, or removing the windows.
[/quote]

Again, I’m not a lawyer. But if there’s any indication, you should read about the stories about banks paying folks being foreclosed on thousands to just walk away and not do any damage. If there were legal means to go after them, I’d think banks would pursue that.

[patientrenter]

With such lousy protections for lenders, why would any sane person or institution ever lend more than 50-60% of the price of a home?

[patientrenter]

With such lousy protections for lenders, why would any sane person or institution ever lend more than 50-60% of the price of a home?

[patientrenter]

With such lousy protections for lenders, why would any sane person or institution ever lend more than 50-60% of the price of a home?

[patientrenter]

With such lousy protections for lenders, why would any sane person or institution ever lend more than 50-60% of the price of a home?

[patientrenter]

With such lousy protections for lenders, why would any sane person or institution ever lend more than 50-60% of the price of a home?

[Diego Mamani]

FLU: Even if the bank has a legal basis for going after these deadbeats who strip a house, the bank may still prefer to “bribe” them to leave the house intact.

For one, the bribe is cheaper than legal fees. And two, these deadbeats hardly have any assets. Any money they get from selling the kitchen sink, etc., will simply go to consumption or paying credit cards. Again, even if the bank can sue them for damaging the collateral (the house), it may be better to bribe them prior to taking the house over. If the house has already been stripped/damaged, then again it may not be worth for the bank to sue these asset-less people.

[Diego Mamani]

FLU: Even if the bank has a legal basis for going after these deadbeats who strip a house, the bank may still prefer to “bribe” them to leave the house intact.

For one, the bribe is cheaper than legal fees. And two, these deadbeats hardly have any assets. Any money they get from selling the kitchen sink, etc., will simply go to consumption or paying credit cards. Again, even if the bank can sue them for damaging the collateral (the house), it may be better to bribe them prior to taking the house over. If the house has already been stripped/damaged, then again it may not be worth for the bank to sue these asset-less people.

[Diego Mamani]

FLU: Even if the bank has a legal basis for going after these deadbeats who strip a house, the bank may still prefer to “bribe” them to leave the house intact.

For one, the bribe is cheaper than legal fees. And two, these deadbeats hardly have any assets. Any money they get from selling the kitchen sink, etc., will simply go to consumption or paying credit cards. Again, even if the bank can sue them for damaging the collateral (the house), it may be better to bribe them prior to taking the house over. If the house has already been stripped/damaged, then again it may not be worth for the bank to sue these asset-less people.

[Diego Mamani]

FLU: Even if the bank has a legal basis for going after these deadbeats who strip a house, the bank may still prefer to “bribe” them to leave the house intact.

For one, the bribe is cheaper than legal fees. And two, these deadbeats hardly have any assets. Any money they get from selling the kitchen sink, etc., will simply go to consumption or paying credit cards. Again, even if the bank can sue them for damaging the collateral (the house), it may be better to bribe them prior to taking the house over. If the house has already been stripped/damaged, then again it may not be worth for the bank to sue these asset-less people.

[Author]

Posts