Question for the bulls

[gn]

[quote=jpinpb]I think there may be more unemployment on the horizon. But what’s troubling is there isn’t a sign of employment for the carnage that has occurred, i.e. job creation, in the future.
[/quote]

I agree with JP, even in a situation where the unemployment rate stays the same, there are layoffs & there are hiring. In this situation, the layoffs & the hiring balance each other out.

In the aftermath of a recession, many companies are reluctant to hire, hence the unemployment rate keeps climbing.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]

You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.

They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.

Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.

The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.

Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”

——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”

BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]

You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.

They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.

Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.

The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.

Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”

——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”

BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]

You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.

They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.

Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.

The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.

Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”

——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”

BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]

You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.

They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.

Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.

The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.

Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”

——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”

BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]

You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.

They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.

Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.

The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.

Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”

——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”

BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.

[jameswenn]

Alot of companies are outsourcing and that doesn’t mean the work actually goes overseas. We have a floor in our building that once had cubes, but since the beginning of the year, rows of cubes were removed monthly and lined with 2×4 foot desks with workers from India. I have a feeling that a bunch of them live together, packed in houses.

The company we contract with charges 20 bucks an hour offshore, but they can bring the same person over here for 50 an hour, which is less than what we’d have to pay for an American. We must have 400 of them on that one floor, and i’m sure there are more scattered in other places too.

I don’t support it, but that’s how it is now.

[jameswenn]

Alot of companies are outsourcing and that doesn’t mean the work actually goes overseas. We have a floor in our building that once had cubes, but since the beginning of the year, rows of cubes were removed monthly and lined with 2×4 foot desks with workers from India. I have a feeling that a bunch of them live together, packed in houses.

The company we contract with charges 20 bucks an hour offshore, but they can bring the same person over here for 50 an hour, which is less than what we’d have to pay for an American. We must have 400 of them on that one floor, and i’m sure there are more scattered in other places too.

I don’t support it, but that’s how it is now.

[jameswenn]

Alot of companies are outsourcing and that doesn’t mean the work actually goes overseas. We have a floor in our building that once had cubes, but since the beginning of the year, rows of cubes were removed monthly and lined with 2×4 foot desks with workers from India. I have a feeling that a bunch of them live together, packed in houses.

The company we contract with charges 20 bucks an hour offshore, but they can bring the same person over here for 50 an hour, which is less than what we’d have to pay for an American. We must have 400 of them on that one floor, and i’m sure there are more scattered in other places too.

I don’t support it, but that’s how it is now.

[jameswenn]

Alot of companies are outsourcing and that doesn’t mean the work actually goes overseas. We have a floor in our building that once had cubes, but since the beginning of the year, rows of cubes were removed monthly and lined with 2×4 foot desks with workers from India. I have a feeling that a bunch of them live together, packed in houses.

The company we contract with charges 20 bucks an hour offshore, but they can bring the same person over here for 50 an hour, which is less than what we’d have to pay for an American. We must have 400 of them on that one floor, and i’m sure there are more scattered in other places too.

I don’t support it, but that’s how it is now.

[jameswenn]

Alot of companies are outsourcing and that doesn’t mean the work actually goes overseas. We have a floor in our building that once had cubes, but since the beginning of the year, rows of cubes were removed monthly and lined with 2×4 foot desks with workers from India. I have a feeling that a bunch of them live together, packed in houses.

The company we contract with charges 20 bucks an hour offshore, but they can bring the same person over here for 50 an hour, which is less than what we’d have to pay for an American. We must have 400 of them on that one floor, and i’m sure there are more scattered in other places too.

I don’t support it, but that’s how it is now.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.

Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.

More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]

No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:

1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.

The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.

Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?

I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?

I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.

Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.

More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]

No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:

1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.

The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.

Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?

I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?

I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.

Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.

More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]

No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:

1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.

The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.

Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?

I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?

I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.

[Rt.66]

[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.

Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.

More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]

No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:

1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.

The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.

Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?

I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?

I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.

[Author]

Posts