- This topic has 40 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by patientrenter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 16, 2007 at 8:42 AM #11226December 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM #118246barnaby33Participant
This isn’t really a question about the number, its a question about the consequences.
JoshDecember 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM #118473barnaby33ParticipantThis isn’t really a question about the number, its a question about the consequences.
JoshDecember 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM #118380barnaby33ParticipantThis isn’t really a question about the number, its a question about the consequences.
JoshDecember 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM #118414barnaby33ParticipantThis isn’t really a question about the number, its a question about the consequences.
JoshDecember 16, 2007 at 9:30 AM #118453barnaby33ParticipantThis isn’t really a question about the number, its a question about the consequences.
JoshDecember 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #118507ArrayaParticipantIt is unfortunate that the interests of the indvidual and the financial institution are so opposed.
Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?
December 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #118530ArrayaParticipantIt is unfortunate that the interests of the indvidual and the financial institution are so opposed.
Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?
December 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #118469ArrayaParticipantIt is unfortunate that the interests of the indvidual and the financial institution are so opposed.
Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?
December 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #118435ArrayaParticipantIt is unfortunate that the interests of the indvidual and the financial institution are so opposed.
Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?
December 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #118301ArrayaParticipantIt is unfortunate that the interests of the indvidual and the financial institution are so opposed.
Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?
December 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM #118539patientlywaitingParticipant“Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?”
———–Bad timing for the banks because the new law encourages people decide to walk from their mortgages rather than their credit card debts (which can no longer be discharged).
Underwriting is now upside-down where mortgages are riskier than credit card loans. Big problem for the banks is that mortgages pay low interest rates but have high risks. It’ll take the banks a few years to rethink their business models.
December 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM #118479patientlywaitingParticipant“Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?”
———–Bad timing for the banks because the new law encourages people decide to walk from their mortgages rather than their credit card debts (which can no longer be discharged).
Underwriting is now upside-down where mortgages are riskier than credit card loans. Big problem for the banks is that mortgages pay low interest rates but have high risks. It’ll take the banks a few years to rethink their business models.
December 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM #118445patientlywaitingParticipant“Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?”
———–Bad timing for the banks because the new law encourages people decide to walk from their mortgages rather than their credit card debts (which can no longer be discharged).
Underwriting is now upside-down where mortgages are riskier than credit card loans. Big problem for the banks is that mortgages pay low interest rates but have high risks. It’ll take the banks a few years to rethink their business models.
December 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM #118311patientlywaitingParticipant“Does anybody else think that the BK law changed back in 05 was good timing for the banks or what?”
———–Bad timing for the banks because the new law encourages people decide to walk from their mortgages rather than their credit card debts (which can no longer be discharged).
Underwriting is now upside-down where mortgages are riskier than credit card loans. Big problem for the banks is that mortgages pay low interest rates but have high risks. It’ll take the banks a few years to rethink their business models.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.