Question for the bulls

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Now we all know you are full of it. I have concrete proof of a 2nd that negotiated a short payoff outside of a short sale and you cant accept that you are wrong. It was not a short sale or foreclosure when they negotiated the short payoff on the 2nd. They resolved their 2nd for pennies on the dollar. It was done! They had a pass as you say. They had the option to stay with a de facto principal reduction but chose not to. They did not lose the home, they sold the home by choice.

I have the documentation because a sale was ultimately involved. There are other cases of the 2nd getting settled and the 1st modifying by my associate which I dont have access to because they arent my clients but I have seen many of them.

I have seen letters sent to borrowers offering these kinds of payoffs without the borrower even asking for one. I had a client that owed $105K on a 2nd who stopped paying it. They got a Xmas letter last Dec saying send us $6,000 and you are done…d….o…n…e…DONE!!!

You asked for proof, I have it ready to send to you but you cant admit you are wrong. It must really suck to be you. Good Bye asswipe…[/quote]

How convenient that your example was a short sale but you “say” they could have chosen to keep the house. If they could have kept the home or if they sold the home by “choice” why the need for a short sale? WTF?

You have a very loose definition of proof. As always with you we are left being asked to trust what you say is true, that’s not going to happen, and each post you make exemplifies why.

Dude this is not a difficult concept to grasp. I do not want your word or opinion, I want a real source. No more “I’ve seen with my own eyes” BS, please. No “it’s a short sale but did not have to be”, how believable is that? No “I’ve seen it but it’s in someone else’s office”. Shit how hard is this?

I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything. That’s pretty telling and if your story had even the remotest relationship with truth and was happening in appreciable numbers you’d think there would be something out there.

That Xmas letter fable reeks of BS.

Is anyone buying this crap from this guy?

Hey, I have seen with my own eyes documentation showing that all the top banks have policies to never allow a debtor to remain in a home long term if they are not meeting obligations to a second mortgage holder. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and by your standards that’s proof it’s true!

I would post it right now but its locked in the CEOs office.

I guess I’ll argue like you and see how many people give me a pass.

[sdcellar]

Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?

[sdcellar]

Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?

[sdcellar]

Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?

[sdcellar]

Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?

[sdcellar]

Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rt.66][quote=sdrealtor]I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything.[/quote]

Here’s a little suggestion for which you might not have thought of as it really is complex.

Try Googling this: short payoff loan modification

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rt.66][quote=sdrealtor]I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything.[/quote]

Here’s a little suggestion for which you might not have thought of as it really is complex.

Try Googling this: short payoff loan modification

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rt.66][quote=sdrealtor]I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything.[/quote]

Here’s a little suggestion for which you might not have thought of as it really is complex.

Try Googling this: short payoff loan modification

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rt.66][quote=sdrealtor]I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything.[/quote]

Here’s a little suggestion for which you might not have thought of as it really is complex.

Try Googling this: short payoff loan modification

[sdrealtor]

[quote=Rt.66][quote=sdrealtor]I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything.[/quote]

Here’s a little suggestion for which you might not have thought of as it really is complex.

Try Googling this: short payoff loan modification

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?[/quote]

Yes, absolutely I can see that happening in a few cases. I can also see some people trying voodoo and witchcraft to turn all record of their mortgage at the bank into dust. But this is not a debate on what a few people will do even hundreds is it.

This is a debate on whether or not the statement is a valid Bull argument.

Your hypothetical family I guess might look at it like renting. The second is not going away so whatever amount they are underwater they will remain and actually fees and interest will accrue, so this hypothetical family will be living everyday knowing the piper to be paid is getting fatter. And they know someday they will have to pay the principal, penalties and interest to the second or go short sale or into foreclosure.

Also there is the non-stop debt collector calls. And then there is the fact that a foreclosure is bad enough on your record but keeping the asset and having record of not paying the debt for three years while junior finishes high school well that’s going to look really, really bad. Plus the 5-7 year clock on that bad mark does not start until the debt is discharged by payment or foreclosure or short.

So those are probably just a few reasons we don’t see it happening.

I did not say no one is doing something like this I said:

“I’d like to see some proof it’s a regular occurrence”

“Fictitious mass occurrence”

“This issue of seconds is not going to prevent an appreciable number of foreclosures”

I doubt the numbers are large enough to even be a blip in REO numbers. I merely asked for just one instance of proof this was happening, to illustrate that it’s such a small number as to be invisible.

I’m saying that the number from that category is so small as to be seemingly undocumentable and thus will not be a positive factor for RE or for the dismal REO numbers and is NOT a good bull argument.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?[/quote]

Yes, absolutely I can see that happening in a few cases. I can also see some people trying voodoo and witchcraft to turn all record of their mortgage at the bank into dust. But this is not a debate on what a few people will do even hundreds is it.

This is a debate on whether or not the statement is a valid Bull argument.

Your hypothetical family I guess might look at it like renting. The second is not going away so whatever amount they are underwater they will remain and actually fees and interest will accrue, so this hypothetical family will be living everyday knowing the piper to be paid is getting fatter. And they know someday they will have to pay the principal, penalties and interest to the second or go short sale or into foreclosure.

Also there is the non-stop debt collector calls. And then there is the fact that a foreclosure is bad enough on your record but keeping the asset and having record of not paying the debt for three years while junior finishes high school well that’s going to look really, really bad. Plus the 5-7 year clock on that bad mark does not start until the debt is discharged by payment or foreclosure or short.

So those are probably just a few reasons we don’t see it happening.

I did not say no one is doing something like this I said:

“I’d like to see some proof it’s a regular occurrence”

“Fictitious mass occurrence”

“This issue of seconds is not going to prevent an appreciable number of foreclosures”

I doubt the numbers are large enough to even be a blip in REO numbers. I merely asked for just one instance of proof this was happening, to illustrate that it’s such a small number as to be invisible.

I’m saying that the number from that category is so small as to be seemingly undocumentable and thus will not be a positive factor for RE or for the dismal REO numbers and is NOT a good bull argument.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?[/quote]

Yes, absolutely I can see that happening in a few cases. I can also see some people trying voodoo and witchcraft to turn all record of their mortgage at the bank into dust. But this is not a debate on what a few people will do even hundreds is it.

This is a debate on whether or not the statement is a valid Bull argument.

Your hypothetical family I guess might look at it like renting. The second is not going away so whatever amount they are underwater they will remain and actually fees and interest will accrue, so this hypothetical family will be living everyday knowing the piper to be paid is getting fatter. And they know someday they will have to pay the principal, penalties and interest to the second or go short sale or into foreclosure.

Also there is the non-stop debt collector calls. And then there is the fact that a foreclosure is bad enough on your record but keeping the asset and having record of not paying the debt for three years while junior finishes high school well that’s going to look really, really bad. Plus the 5-7 year clock on that bad mark does not start until the debt is discharged by payment or foreclosure or short.

So those are probably just a few reasons we don’t see it happening.

I did not say no one is doing something like this I said:

“I’d like to see some proof it’s a regular occurrence”

“Fictitious mass occurrence”

“This issue of seconds is not going to prevent an appreciable number of foreclosures”

I doubt the numbers are large enough to even be a blip in REO numbers. I merely asked for just one instance of proof this was happening, to illustrate that it’s such a small number as to be invisible.

I’m saying that the number from that category is so small as to be seemingly undocumentable and thus will not be a positive factor for RE or for the dismal REO numbers and is NOT a good bull argument.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]Okay, how about we end this “argument” and try to simplify things a bit. Rt.66, do you think it’s out of the question that some homeowners will give themselves their own form of debt relief simply by ignoring their second for some period of time?

Maybe their credit will take a hit. Maybe they’ll have this nasty debt liability they’ll have to take care of some number of years down the road. Maybe a lot of things, but they’ll get to “keep” their house, keep junior in the same school and maybe down the road when “life is better” they (believe) they’ll be able to get things back in order.

Does this seem like a reasonable premise to you? There is one solid argument that I can think of and another one that’s hedgey, but not interesting. Anyway, what do you think?[/quote]

Yes, absolutely I can see that happening in a few cases. I can also see some people trying voodoo and witchcraft to turn all record of their mortgage at the bank into dust. But this is not a debate on what a few people will do even hundreds is it.

This is a debate on whether or not the statement is a valid Bull argument.

Your hypothetical family I guess might look at it like renting. The second is not going away so whatever amount they are underwater they will remain and actually fees and interest will accrue, so this hypothetical family will be living everyday knowing the piper to be paid is getting fatter. And they know someday they will have to pay the principal, penalties and interest to the second or go short sale or into foreclosure.

Also there is the non-stop debt collector calls. And then there is the fact that a foreclosure is bad enough on your record but keeping the asset and having record of not paying the debt for three years while junior finishes high school well that’s going to look really, really bad. Plus the 5-7 year clock on that bad mark does not start until the debt is discharged by payment or foreclosure or short.

So those are probably just a few reasons we don’t see it happening.

I did not say no one is doing something like this I said:

“I’d like to see some proof it’s a regular occurrence”

“Fictitious mass occurrence”

“This issue of seconds is not going to prevent an appreciable number of foreclosures”

I doubt the numbers are large enough to even be a blip in REO numbers. I merely asked for just one instance of proof this was happening, to illustrate that it’s such a small number as to be invisible.

I’m saying that the number from that category is so small as to be seemingly undocumentable and thus will not be a positive factor for RE or for the dismal REO numbers and is NOT a good bull argument.

[Author]

Posts