“Dear Homeowner, we lowered your payment” letter

[djc]

I’ll have more details on this midweek, but wanted to share this anyway…

Some friends of mine received a letter from their lender notifying them that their payment has been reduced. While I am not sure on the details of what exactly was reduced besides interest rate (they were previously locked at 5.7x), their payments dropped a sizeable about.

While I have read about this happening to “help keep people in their house” (i.e, ARM borrowers, people behind on payments etc), I hadn’t heard about this happening to people who are in good standing with their mortgage. The owners are well funded have a 30y/f, pay on time, never behind, etc.

Are lenders just cutting loans now? I knew BofA had some lawsuit to settle with CA, but these friends are not with them. They had asked if I had heard about this and the only cases I could recall were ones not in good standing.

Should I buy my 800k La Costa house and expect a letter in a year cutting my payment? 🙂

[Coronita]

I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.

[SD Realtor]

DJC you cannot open that box…

You see this issue extends to the greater moral hazard that is not only being ignored by the government, but so far by courts. I cannot believe we will not see cases cropping up soon.

Seriously what will happen when thousands, or shall I say tens of thousands of people receive such treatment. Maybe even hundreds of thousands? Who makes the choice? Who makes the rules? When the first lawsuits come, and they will… how will courts rule? Because if courts side with the first plaintiffs that get pissed of because the neighbor next door received a rework and principal reduction while he did not then it seems to me the entire bailout will be jeopardized.

I have already seen a few situations of interest rate reworks but no principal reductions yet.

However it is arguable that even these sort of reworks create a potential source for litigation don’t they?

[SDowner]

I cannot believe this. Responsibility is being punished while people who are not are rewarded. This will only encourage further deliquency in payments.

Okay, now I need to know how to divert my cash reserves and default on a recourse loan without if affecting my assets.

[TheBreeze]

Maybe your friends’ loan got bought by the government and this is part of the $700 billion bailout? God bless America.

Mr. Mortgage had an article on something similar the other day. Supposedly, some “home owners” are getting their interest rates dropped to as low as 2%.

[temeculaguy]

First off, casual coctail party conversation cannot be deemed reliable. People tend to ommit things and overstate the positive. Secondly, without seeing the fine print, you can’t tell if they have sold off half their potential future profits as is the case with all reworks and principal reductions thus far.

I can’t tell you how many people described the option arm loans inaccurately in 2005, most saying that they will pay it off in 30 years by paying the lowest amount, people actually think these things and can’t be faulted for not understanding complex formulas.

Don’t be envious of these people, they are in debtors prisons, none are paying the same as rent and none are building any equity, yet most wont benefit from appreciation when it does come. So far, everything I’ve seen to “keep people in their home” only serves to “keep them from ever owning their home.”

[peterb]

Temeculaguy makes a very good point here!! This is a huge thing to happen “outta nowhere”. So I doubt very much there’s not some gigantic gotcha associated with it in the details. It’s a loan contract! Casual talk means nothing regarding contracts.

[peterb]

Temeculaguy makes a very good point here!! This is a huge thing to happen “outta nowhere”. So I doubt very much there’s not some gigantic gotcha associated with it in the details. It’s a loan contract! Casual talk means nothing regarding contracts.

[peterb]

Temeculaguy makes a very good point here!! This is a huge thing to happen “outta nowhere”. So I doubt very much there’s not some gigantic gotcha associated with it in the details. It’s a loan contract! Casual talk means nothing regarding contracts.

[peterb]

Temeculaguy makes a very good point here!! This is a huge thing to happen “outta nowhere”. So I doubt very much there’s not some gigantic gotcha associated with it in the details. It’s a loan contract! Casual talk means nothing regarding contracts.

[peterb]

Temeculaguy makes a very good point here!! This is a huge thing to happen “outta nowhere”. So I doubt very much there’s not some gigantic gotcha associated with it in the details. It’s a loan contract! Casual talk means nothing regarding contracts.

[temeculaguy]

First off, casual coctail party conversation cannot be deemed reliable. People tend to ommit things and overstate the positive. Secondly, without seeing the fine print, you can’t tell if they have sold off half their potential future profits as is the case with all reworks and principal reductions thus far.

I can’t tell you how many people described the option arm loans inaccurately in 2005, most saying that they will pay it off in 30 years by paying the lowest amount, people actually think these things and can’t be faulted for not understanding complex formulas.

Don’t be envious of these people, they are in debtors prisons, none are paying the same as rent and none are building any equity, yet most wont benefit from appreciation when it does come. So far, everything I’ve seen to “keep people in their home” only serves to “keep them from ever owning their home.”

[temeculaguy]

First off, casual coctail party conversation cannot be deemed reliable. People tend to ommit things and overstate the positive. Secondly, without seeing the fine print, you can’t tell if they have sold off half their potential future profits as is the case with all reworks and principal reductions thus far.

I can’t tell you how many people described the option arm loans inaccurately in 2005, most saying that they will pay it off in 30 years by paying the lowest amount, people actually think these things and can’t be faulted for not understanding complex formulas.

Don’t be envious of these people, they are in debtors prisons, none are paying the same as rent and none are building any equity, yet most wont benefit from appreciation when it does come. So far, everything I’ve seen to “keep people in their home” only serves to “keep them from ever owning their home.”

[temeculaguy]

First off, casual coctail party conversation cannot be deemed reliable. People tend to ommit things and overstate the positive. Secondly, without seeing the fine print, you can’t tell if they have sold off half their potential future profits as is the case with all reworks and principal reductions thus far.

I can’t tell you how many people described the option arm loans inaccurately in 2005, most saying that they will pay it off in 30 years by paying the lowest amount, people actually think these things and can’t be faulted for not understanding complex formulas.

Don’t be envious of these people, they are in debtors prisons, none are paying the same as rent and none are building any equity, yet most wont benefit from appreciation when it does come. So far, everything I’ve seen to “keep people in their home” only serves to “keep them from ever owning their home.”

[temeculaguy]

First off, casual coctail party conversation cannot be deemed reliable. People tend to ommit things and overstate the positive. Secondly, without seeing the fine print, you can’t tell if they have sold off half their potential future profits as is the case with all reworks and principal reductions thus far.

I can’t tell you how many people described the option arm loans inaccurately in 2005, most saying that they will pay it off in 30 years by paying the lowest amount, people actually think these things and can’t be faulted for not understanding complex formulas.

Don’t be envious of these people, they are in debtors prisons, none are paying the same as rent and none are building any equity, yet most wont benefit from appreciation when it does come. So far, everything I’ve seen to “keep people in their home” only serves to “keep them from ever owning their home.”

[TheBreeze]

Maybe your friends’ loan got bought by the government and this is part of the $700 billion bailout? God bless America.

Mr. Mortgage had an article on something similar the other day. Supposedly, some “home owners” are getting their interest rates dropped to as low as 2%.

[TheBreeze]

Maybe your friends’ loan got bought by the government and this is part of the $700 billion bailout? God bless America.

Mr. Mortgage had an article on something similar the other day. Supposedly, some “home owners” are getting their interest rates dropped to as low as 2%.

[TheBreeze]

Maybe your friends’ loan got bought by the government and this is part of the $700 billion bailout? God bless America.

Mr. Mortgage had an article on something similar the other day. Supposedly, some “home owners” are getting their interest rates dropped to as low as 2%.

[TheBreeze]

Maybe your friends’ loan got bought by the government and this is part of the $700 billion bailout? God bless America.

Mr. Mortgage had an article on something similar the other day. Supposedly, some “home owners” are getting their interest rates dropped to as low as 2%.

[SDowner]

I cannot believe this. Responsibility is being punished while people who are not are rewarded. This will only encourage further deliquency in payments.

Okay, now I need to know how to divert my cash reserves and default on a recourse loan without if affecting my assets.

[SDowner]

I cannot believe this. Responsibility is being punished while people who are not are rewarded. This will only encourage further deliquency in payments.

Okay, now I need to know how to divert my cash reserves and default on a recourse loan without if affecting my assets.

[SDowner]

I cannot believe this. Responsibility is being punished while people who are not are rewarded. This will only encourage further deliquency in payments.

Okay, now I need to know how to divert my cash reserves and default on a recourse loan without if affecting my assets.

[SDowner]

I cannot believe this. Responsibility is being punished while people who are not are rewarded. This will only encourage further deliquency in payments.

Okay, now I need to know how to divert my cash reserves and default on a recourse loan without if affecting my assets.

[SD Realtor]

DJC you cannot open that box…

You see this issue extends to the greater moral hazard that is not only being ignored by the government, but so far by courts. I cannot believe we will not see cases cropping up soon.

Seriously what will happen when thousands, or shall I say tens of thousands of people receive such treatment. Maybe even hundreds of thousands? Who makes the choice? Who makes the rules? When the first lawsuits come, and they will… how will courts rule? Because if courts side with the first plaintiffs that get pissed of because the neighbor next door received a rework and principal reduction while he did not then it seems to me the entire bailout will be jeopardized.

I have already seen a few situations of interest rate reworks but no principal reductions yet.

However it is arguable that even these sort of reworks create a potential source for litigation don’t they?

[SD Realtor]

DJC you cannot open that box…

You see this issue extends to the greater moral hazard that is not only being ignored by the government, but so far by courts. I cannot believe we will not see cases cropping up soon.

Seriously what will happen when thousands, or shall I say tens of thousands of people receive such treatment. Maybe even hundreds of thousands? Who makes the choice? Who makes the rules? When the first lawsuits come, and they will… how will courts rule? Because if courts side with the first plaintiffs that get pissed of because the neighbor next door received a rework and principal reduction while he did not then it seems to me the entire bailout will be jeopardized.

I have already seen a few situations of interest rate reworks but no principal reductions yet.

However it is arguable that even these sort of reworks create a potential source for litigation don’t they?

[SD Realtor]

DJC you cannot open that box…

You see this issue extends to the greater moral hazard that is not only being ignored by the government, but so far by courts. I cannot believe we will not see cases cropping up soon.

Seriously what will happen when thousands, or shall I say tens of thousands of people receive such treatment. Maybe even hundreds of thousands? Who makes the choice? Who makes the rules? When the first lawsuits come, and they will… how will courts rule? Because if courts side with the first plaintiffs that get pissed of because the neighbor next door received a rework and principal reduction while he did not then it seems to me the entire bailout will be jeopardized.

I have already seen a few situations of interest rate reworks but no principal reductions yet.

However it is arguable that even these sort of reworks create a potential source for litigation don’t they?

[SD Realtor]

DJC you cannot open that box…

You see this issue extends to the greater moral hazard that is not only being ignored by the government, but so far by courts. I cannot believe we will not see cases cropping up soon.

Seriously what will happen when thousands, or shall I say tens of thousands of people receive such treatment. Maybe even hundreds of thousands? Who makes the choice? Who makes the rules? When the first lawsuits come, and they will… how will courts rule? Because if courts side with the first plaintiffs that get pissed of because the neighbor next door received a rework and principal reduction while he did not then it seems to me the entire bailout will be jeopardized.

I have already seen a few situations of interest rate reworks but no principal reductions yet.

However it is arguable that even these sort of reworks create a potential source for litigation don’t they?

[jficquette]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.[/quote]

Class action suit would be the way to go.

[jficquette]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.[/quote]

Class action suit would be the way to go.

[jficquette]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.[/quote]

Class action suit would be the way to go.

[jficquette]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.[/quote]

Class action suit would be the way to go.

[jficquette]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.[/quote]

Class action suit would be the way to go.

[Coronita]

I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.

[Coronita]

I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.

[Coronita]

I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.

[Coronita]

I wish I could threaten to sue to have my principle or loan payment lowered. Sue for being overly responsible.

[PadreBrian]

op, this needs details. did they reappraise the house or did they get one of the new h4h fha loans?

[nla]

It’s principal not principle.

[nla]

It’s principal not principle.

[nla]

It’s principal not principle.

[nla]

It’s principal not principle.

[nla]

It’s principal not principle.

[PadreBrian]

op, this needs details. did they reappraise the house or did they get one of the new h4h fha loans?

[PadreBrian]

op, this needs details. did they reappraise the house or did they get one of the new h4h fha loans?

[PadreBrian]

op, this needs details. did they reappraise the house or did they get one of the new h4h fha loans?

[PadreBrian]

op, this needs details. did they reappraise the house or did they get one of the new h4h fha loans?

[djc]

as I said, I will get more details this week when I see the letter. This was not a “casual cocktail conversation” but more along the lines of my phone ringing and asking if I had heard of this happening to others. they know how closely I follow the RE debacle and knew I’d find it interesting.

I hope that some of the cynics are right and my friend has lost his mind, however with how things have been panning out lately, this scenario would not surprise me.

[temeculaguy]

djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.

[CA renter]

Another possibility is if the lender is trying to turn a non-recourse loan into a recourse loan. They should definitely have an attorney check out all the paperwork before they sign anything.

[CA renter]

Another possibility is if the lender is trying to turn a non-recourse loan into a recourse loan. They should definitely have an attorney check out all the paperwork before they sign anything.

[CA renter]

Another possibility is if the lender is trying to turn a non-recourse loan into a recourse loan. They should definitely have an attorney check out all the paperwork before they sign anything.

[CA renter]

Another possibility is if the lender is trying to turn a non-recourse loan into a recourse loan. They should definitely have an attorney check out all the paperwork before they sign anything.

[CA renter]

Another possibility is if the lender is trying to turn a non-recourse loan into a recourse loan. They should definitely have an attorney check out all the paperwork before they sign anything.

[djc]

[quote=temeculaguy]djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.[/quote]

tg,

Thanks for your reply and clarification. I too thought ‘why would they do this, this makes no logical sense at all’, which is why I brought the question here to solicit answers from people whose opinion I respect on the subject.

Speaking of, I am interested in the criteria you are using for your Temecula house hunt. As you may remember, I’m renting in VR as this is shaking out and may end up staying in Temecula depending on a few factors. You have some specific things you are looking for, one of which is orientation to the sun which is something I had not even thought of. Would you mind sharing some of this information with me so I know what to look for and what to avoid? If so, my email is svtdriver(at)gmail.

thanks

[temeculaguy]

djc, i sent you an e-mail.

23109, when you talk yourself into something there’s no talking you out of it so just walk away after your free rent period. Your wife wants a bigger house, if you recall i hounded you about resisting her urge to buy because you were planning/expecting more kids and would outgrow the place, now you have. I remember writing extensively on the psychological influence of female nesting, those were good times.

Most of us, self included, have been upside down on houses before. I made a down payment in 1991 and was still underwater until about 1998. It didn’t hurt too bad, my payment was managable and I survived because i didn’t sell while I was underwater, I just had too small of a house. The one regret i have about that house is that i sold it, I really wish i had kept it as a rental, even in this market it would have equity and the rent is double what the payment was. You might think about getting the bigger house and keeping the current one, renting it out. It might sting for a few years but in time it will work out and you have the income to support it. R/E is funny like that, this last cycle twisted people’s mind thinking it goes up quickly, prior to this bubble, if you stayed in a house less than 3 years you lost money, keep it 20 years, you make money, those rules still apply today.

[temeculaguy]

djc, i sent you an e-mail.

23109, when you talk yourself into something there’s no talking you out of it so just walk away after your free rent period. Your wife wants a bigger house, if you recall i hounded you about resisting her urge to buy because you were planning/expecting more kids and would outgrow the place, now you have. I remember writing extensively on the psychological influence of female nesting, those were good times.

Most of us, self included, have been upside down on houses before. I made a down payment in 1991 and was still underwater until about 1998. It didn’t hurt too bad, my payment was managable and I survived because i didn’t sell while I was underwater, I just had too small of a house. The one regret i have about that house is that i sold it, I really wish i had kept it as a rental, even in this market it would have equity and the rent is double what the payment was. You might think about getting the bigger house and keeping the current one, renting it out. It might sting for a few years but in time it will work out and you have the income to support it. R/E is funny like that, this last cycle twisted people’s mind thinking it goes up quickly, prior to this bubble, if you stayed in a house less than 3 years you lost money, keep it 20 years, you make money, those rules still apply today.

[temeculaguy]

djc, i sent you an e-mail.

23109, when you talk yourself into something there’s no talking you out of it so just walk away after your free rent period. Your wife wants a bigger house, if you recall i hounded you about resisting her urge to buy because you were planning/expecting more kids and would outgrow the place, now you have. I remember writing extensively on the psychological influence of female nesting, those were good times.

Most of us, self included, have been upside down on houses before. I made a down payment in 1991 and was still underwater until about 1998. It didn’t hurt too bad, my payment was managable and I survived because i didn’t sell while I was underwater, I just had too small of a house. The one regret i have about that house is that i sold it, I really wish i had kept it as a rental, even in this market it would have equity and the rent is double what the payment was. You might think about getting the bigger house and keeping the current one, renting it out. It might sting for a few years but in time it will work out and you have the income to support it. R/E is funny like that, this last cycle twisted people’s mind thinking it goes up quickly, prior to this bubble, if you stayed in a house less than 3 years you lost money, keep it 20 years, you make money, those rules still apply today.

[temeculaguy]

djc, i sent you an e-mail.

23109, when you talk yourself into something there’s no talking you out of it so just walk away after your free rent period. Your wife wants a bigger house, if you recall i hounded you about resisting her urge to buy because you were planning/expecting more kids and would outgrow the place, now you have. I remember writing extensively on the psychological influence of female nesting, those were good times.

Most of us, self included, have been upside down on houses before. I made a down payment in 1991 and was still underwater until about 1998. It didn’t hurt too bad, my payment was managable and I survived because i didn’t sell while I was underwater, I just had too small of a house. The one regret i have about that house is that i sold it, I really wish i had kept it as a rental, even in this market it would have equity and the rent is double what the payment was. You might think about getting the bigger house and keeping the current one, renting it out. It might sting for a few years but in time it will work out and you have the income to support it. R/E is funny like that, this last cycle twisted people’s mind thinking it goes up quickly, prior to this bubble, if you stayed in a house less than 3 years you lost money, keep it 20 years, you make money, those rules still apply today.

[temeculaguy]

djc, i sent you an e-mail.

23109, when you talk yourself into something there’s no talking you out of it so just walk away after your free rent period. Your wife wants a bigger house, if you recall i hounded you about resisting her urge to buy because you were planning/expecting more kids and would outgrow the place, now you have. I remember writing extensively on the psychological influence of female nesting, those were good times.

Most of us, self included, have been upside down on houses before. I made a down payment in 1991 and was still underwater until about 1998. It didn’t hurt too bad, my payment was managable and I survived because i didn’t sell while I was underwater, I just had too small of a house. The one regret i have about that house is that i sold it, I really wish i had kept it as a rental, even in this market it would have equity and the rent is double what the payment was. You might think about getting the bigger house and keeping the current one, renting it out. It might sting for a few years but in time it will work out and you have the income to support it. R/E is funny like that, this last cycle twisted people’s mind thinking it goes up quickly, prior to this bubble, if you stayed in a house less than 3 years you lost money, keep it 20 years, you make money, those rules still apply today.

[djc]

[quote=temeculaguy]djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.[/quote]

tg,

Thanks for your reply and clarification. I too thought ‘why would they do this, this makes no logical sense at all’, which is why I brought the question here to solicit answers from people whose opinion I respect on the subject.

Speaking of, I am interested in the criteria you are using for your Temecula house hunt. As you may remember, I’m renting in VR as this is shaking out and may end up staying in Temecula depending on a few factors. You have some specific things you are looking for, one of which is orientation to the sun which is something I had not even thought of. Would you mind sharing some of this information with me so I know what to look for and what to avoid? If so, my email is svtdriver(at)gmail.

thanks

[djc]

[quote=temeculaguy]djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.[/quote]

tg,

Thanks for your reply and clarification. I too thought ‘why would they do this, this makes no logical sense at all’, which is why I brought the question here to solicit answers from people whose opinion I respect on the subject.

Speaking of, I am interested in the criteria you are using for your Temecula house hunt. As you may remember, I’m renting in VR as this is shaking out and may end up staying in Temecula depending on a few factors. You have some specific things you are looking for, one of which is orientation to the sun which is something I had not even thought of. Would you mind sharing some of this information with me so I know what to look for and what to avoid? If so, my email is svtdriver(at)gmail.

thanks

[djc]

[quote=temeculaguy]djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.[/quote]

tg,

Thanks for your reply and clarification. I too thought ‘why would they do this, this makes no logical sense at all’, which is why I brought the question here to solicit answers from people whose opinion I respect on the subject.

Speaking of, I am interested in the criteria you are using for your Temecula house hunt. As you may remember, I’m renting in VR as this is shaking out and may end up staying in Temecula depending on a few factors. You have some specific things you are looking for, one of which is orientation to the sun which is something I had not even thought of. Would you mind sharing some of this information with me so I know what to look for and what to avoid? If so, my email is svtdriver(at)gmail.

thanks

[djc]

[quote=temeculaguy]djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.[/quote]

tg,

Thanks for your reply and clarification. I too thought ‘why would they do this, this makes no logical sense at all’, which is why I brought the question here to solicit answers from people whose opinion I respect on the subject.

Speaking of, I am interested in the criteria you are using for your Temecula house hunt. As you may remember, I’m renting in VR as this is shaking out and may end up staying in Temecula depending on a few factors. You have some specific things you are looking for, one of which is orientation to the sun which is something I had not even thought of. Would you mind sharing some of this information with me so I know what to look for and what to avoid? If so, my email is svtdriver(at)gmail.

thanks

[temeculaguy]

djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.

[temeculaguy]

djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.

[temeculaguy]

djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.

[temeculaguy]

djc, I wasn’t trying to be cynical, just looking at it logically and asking myself the question, “why would a bank who is getting all of their money every month and on time, suddenly ask permission to lose money?” Even when people are in distress they don’t get deals like that, why solicit reworks from your performing loans if you are the bank?

Taking the “no free lunch approach” I assume there is a catch or a part of the scenario missing. Be sure to ask questions other than read the letter. There is one other possibility, it could be a scam of some sort from someone other than their bank or someone posing as the bank, verify the phone number with the actual mortgage servicer’s number listed online or on the bill. There are outfits fleecing people right now and there have always been mortgage companies marketing to get people out of good loans into bad ones, countrywide was notorious for this, marketing to their own clients.

[djc]

as I said, I will get more details this week when I see the letter. This was not a “casual cocktail conversation” but more along the lines of my phone ringing and asking if I had heard of this happening to others. they know how closely I follow the RE debacle and knew I’d find it interesting.

I hope that some of the cynics are right and my friend has lost his mind, however with how things have been panning out lately, this scenario would not surprise me.

[djc]

as I said, I will get more details this week when I see the letter. This was not a “casual cocktail conversation” but more along the lines of my phone ringing and asking if I had heard of this happening to others. they know how closely I follow the RE debacle and knew I’d find it interesting.

I hope that some of the cynics are right and my friend has lost his mind, however with how things have been panning out lately, this scenario would not surprise me.

[djc]

as I said, I will get more details this week when I see the letter. This was not a “casual cocktail conversation” but more along the lines of my phone ringing and asking if I had heard of this happening to others. they know how closely I follow the RE debacle and knew I’d find it interesting.

I hope that some of the cynics are right and my friend has lost his mind, however with how things have been panning out lately, this scenario would not surprise me.

[djc]

as I said, I will get more details this week when I see the letter. This was not a “casual cocktail conversation” but more along the lines of my phone ringing and asking if I had heard of this happening to others. they know how closely I follow the RE debacle and knew I’d find it interesting.

I hope that some of the cynics are right and my friend has lost his mind, however with how things have been panning out lately, this scenario would not surprise me.

[23109VC]

i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[peterb]

23109VC – call you lender and play hardball. Most lenders are only surviving right now because they dont have to recognize upside down loans. But, they cannot avoid defaults. So, they are deathly afraid of people defaulting on their mortgages.
Go on Mr Mortgages website, I think there are some pro’s on there that do this kinda thing. Worth a look. Your chance to get back at the Man!

If I still had a mortgage right now, I would be kicking these guys in the crotch as hard as I could. Just my 2 cents.

[peterb]

23109VC – call you lender and play hardball. Most lenders are only surviving right now because they dont have to recognize upside down loans. But, they cannot avoid defaults. So, they are deathly afraid of people defaulting on their mortgages.
Go on Mr Mortgages website, I think there are some pro’s on there that do this kinda thing. Worth a look. Your chance to get back at the Man!

If I still had a mortgage right now, I would be kicking these guys in the crotch as hard as I could. Just my 2 cents.

[peterb]

23109VC – call you lender and play hardball. Most lenders are only surviving right now because they dont have to recognize upside down loans. But, they cannot avoid defaults. So, they are deathly afraid of people defaulting on their mortgages.
Go on Mr Mortgages website, I think there are some pro’s on there that do this kinda thing. Worth a look. Your chance to get back at the Man!

If I still had a mortgage right now, I would be kicking these guys in the crotch as hard as I could. Just my 2 cents.

[peterb]

23109VC – call you lender and play hardball. Most lenders are only surviving right now because they dont have to recognize upside down loans. But, they cannot avoid defaults. So, they are deathly afraid of people defaulting on their mortgages.
Go on Mr Mortgages website, I think there are some pro’s on there that do this kinda thing. Worth a look. Your chance to get back at the Man!

If I still had a mortgage right now, I would be kicking these guys in the crotch as hard as I could. Just my 2 cents.

[peterb]

23109VC – call you lender and play hardball. Most lenders are only surviving right now because they dont have to recognize upside down loans. But, they cannot avoid defaults. So, they are deathly afraid of people defaulting on their mortgages.
Go on Mr Mortgages website, I think there are some pro’s on there that do this kinda thing. Worth a look. Your chance to get back at the Man!

If I still had a mortgage right now, I would be kicking these guys in the crotch as hard as I could. Just my 2 cents.

[temeculaguy]

23109, you made your own bed, now you have to sleep on it. We spent months trying to talk you out of it, but you didn’t listen then and you aren’t listening now.

The question on the table is why would the bank choose to lose money on the loans they are making money on, why would they solicit a loss on their entire portfolio? My personal question is why would anyone who didn;t need a rework, take one, they are bad for the owner if you have other alternatives.

The other statement that has yet to be refuted is what is so cool about wrecking your credit and then getting a recourse loan and entering into a rework that is designed to never build equity. The same people on here that wouldn’t dream of an I/O loan are jealous that reworks are getting what amounts to a deal with the devil and a lifetime I/O loan, yet the reworks sell half of their future appreciation in addition to a lifetime I/O. People hear the words “principal reduction” and lose their minds, I repeat, that principal amount never goes away, they just reduce it for purposes of determining payment, they still owe it. It’s like taking on a partner, like going halfsies on a house with a relative.

They never reduce your balance, they just base the payment on a reduced amount, so you pay less per month but the original loan amount haunts you forever. You can never take out a heloc, refi, sell or do anything without settling the original debt, fees, etc. It’s just renting with a lifetime overpriced lease.

The system doesn’t drive anyone anywhere, it fools them, just like teaser rates and 0 down fooled them into thinking they could afford more than they could, this fools them into thinking they can keep what they can’t afford, they can live there but they keep nothing when the ride is over. Look at 10 years from now, they will essentially have nothing after they sell, that is not how I define home ownership.

You may feel like the good guy 23109, and you have the opportunity to be that guy, by paying your mortgage and paying for the mistake that YOU made, not the guy across the street, not the government, not the bank, but the mistake that YOU made. Your eyes were wide open, you knew the risks, no unscrupulous lender lied to you.

It’s not the end of the world, people make worse mistakes all the time. How we behave after we make mistakes is what defines us, I’ve screwed up before and I will again but it will be my fault and I will make amends, you need to as well.

BTW-they wont renegotiate with you, you have an “over the table” job with all your income reported. The best they will do is make your payment .37 of your gross income, if you gross 10k a month, that is 3700, and I believe it is P&I, not inclusive of hoa, tax and ins., so unless you are paying more than 4k, they wont help. From memory, you didn’t put 20% down and I can’t remember if you took a fixed rate fully amortized 30 yr. If you have an adjustable or an I/O you can probably get it switched into a 30 yr fixed for nothing, that is where you can negotiate, however, the payment goes up, not down.

[23109VC]

everyone here told me not to buy. i did. shame on me. but I could care less at this point about being “the good guy” and just paying on my loan. in my opnion, that would be the dumb schmuck way to do it.

in this game, being nice nd upstanding gets you nothing. if the tables were turned, and I fell on hard times, and my house was worth twice what I paid, the banks would froth at the mouth to kcik me out, sell it, and pocket the money. now that it’s the reverse, why should I be “mr nice guy” and just take it up the a$$.

housin prices got run up b/c of these frickin banks, and b/c of morons who bought what they coudlnt’ buy. yeah, I bought it. but why should I pay the high inflated price, and when it all collapses, just hold hte bag and take it while everyone else gets a freebie.

in the end, I can just milk it for a year, then walk away. i have some rich relatives who could buy me a house for cash and carry paper. i could just rent for a while and repair my credit. i’m at the point where I honestly don’t care.

if I stay in myh ouse, lose my house, rent a house – given everything going on with the economy, the housing market, I don’t care anymore. i may have gotten caught up in that whole” i’ve got to own a house” thing, and now i’ve snapped out of it and relaize it’s just a box i live in, and as far as I’m concerned, i’m just looking to pay as little as possible for the nicest place to live.

if staying in my house ends up making sense, I’ll do it. but when you have a mortgage amount of approx $350k and your house is worth $200k, staying in the house might actually be the STUPID thing to do. i have a 100% non recourse loan. I can pack up my stuff, walk away, and the bank takes it up the a$$ not me. my credit gets screwed, but i really dont’ care. hal fthe country will have scrwed up credit by the time this is said and done with, maybe more than 50%…

i’m trying to view this from a rational standpoint. i’m envisioning that there is going to come a point where my house price will go so low, that if I were to sit down with a financial planner, economic advisor – and explained my situation they woudl say “dump your house”. that is the SMART thing to do. let the bank eat the loss. rent something else.

it realistically may be that I would be AHEAD financially if I were to let my credit get hit, spend less oney on a rental, and pocket money, repair my creidt, and then rebuy later when prices are more rational. VS suck it up an stay/pay and wait 15 years to see any equity….

i made the bed, I’m lying in it. I’m not blaming others. I’m not a “victim” – but I do feel a sense of frustration that as a hard working productive member of society who got caught up i the “buy the American dream” and boght a home that I COULD afford..I have a big payment but I have a big salary (relative to the general public) I”m sure many of you are far better off than me..I don’t mean it in an arrogant way..just that I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.

now prices are collapsing. and b/c the dumb banks let me in wiht 100% financing, I have the option to just walk and lose no money. just my credit..so at some point, you ahve to seriously consider that option.

if the bank will renegotiate with me and make it worthwhile to stay, great. if not, they can frickin have it.

now I don’t know about temecula guys statements that banks aren’t really giving any one anything. if they say they will convert my 30 yr fixed P&I loan into an interst only..that gets me nothign excpet saving montly monty and effectivel make me like a long term renter…

now if they would actually reduce my principal, just write off part of what I owe, and/or lower my int rate, that would be great. my rates now are only so-so. i have a first at like 6.5 and a second at over 7 i think…crappy rates. i coud probably push hard for them to drop those to very aggressive rates..

but i’m not going to makei t recourse debt. if they want to play that game, i can just tell them to come get the house. in the end, they lose harder than I do. which is why i think an effective negotiator has them over a barrel and can dictate terms.

it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business.

[Arraya]

“it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business”

Why not take it a step further. Familiarize yourself with the 1969 case of Daly V some bank.

The case was made that the home was never really the banks because it did not have in legal speak “consideration”. The money was was created out of thin air and was never in the possession of the bank and thus the home was not the property of the bank in legal terms.

http://www.foreclosurefish.com/blog/index.php?id=439

The judge and a representative testifying on behalf of the bank also agreed with Daly’s argument, in effect. The bank’s president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that the money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage, and the money was created out of thin air.

The judge wrote a supporting decision in the case agreeing with Daly, writing “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan [the bank’s president] admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.” Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form of a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration. The bank did not even have the authority to create money out of thin air according to any known law or statute.

This case has been suppressed far more than argued against, and it has not been overturned. What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of debt-jail free card.

[patientlywaiting]

23109VC, even if you were to refinance and have a recourse mortgage, as I understand it, the lender can only obtain a deficiency judgment though legal foreclosure (and not trustee’s sale).

So lenders who foreclose through trustees’ sales (the normal way of foreclosing in CA) actually give up recourse, regardless of whether the loans were purchase money or not.

Of course, if there are other recourse debts, those lenders could go to court and obtain deficiency judgments. But would they want to spend good money trying to get blood out of a turnip?

[patientlywaiting]

23109VC, even if you were to refinance and have a recourse mortgage, as I understand it, the lender can only obtain a deficiency judgment though legal foreclosure (and not trustee’s sale).

So lenders who foreclose through trustees’ sales (the normal way of foreclosing in CA) actually give up recourse, regardless of whether the loans were purchase money or not.

Of course, if there are other recourse debts, those lenders could go to court and obtain deficiency judgments. But would they want to spend good money trying to get blood out of a turnip?

[patientlywaiting]

23109VC, even if you were to refinance and have a recourse mortgage, as I understand it, the lender can only obtain a deficiency judgment though legal foreclosure (and not trustee’s sale).

So lenders who foreclose through trustees’ sales (the normal way of foreclosing in CA) actually give up recourse, regardless of whether the loans were purchase money or not.

Of course, if there are other recourse debts, those lenders could go to court and obtain deficiency judgments. But would they want to spend good money trying to get blood out of a turnip?

[patientlywaiting]

23109VC, even if you were to refinance and have a recourse mortgage, as I understand it, the lender can only obtain a deficiency judgment though legal foreclosure (and not trustee’s sale).

So lenders who foreclose through trustees’ sales (the normal way of foreclosing in CA) actually give up recourse, regardless of whether the loans were purchase money or not.

Of course, if there are other recourse debts, those lenders could go to court and obtain deficiency judgments. But would they want to spend good money trying to get blood out of a turnip?

[patientlywaiting]

23109VC, even if you were to refinance and have a recourse mortgage, as I understand it, the lender can only obtain a deficiency judgment though legal foreclosure (and not trustee’s sale).

So lenders who foreclose through trustees’ sales (the normal way of foreclosing in CA) actually give up recourse, regardless of whether the loans were purchase money or not.

Of course, if there are other recourse debts, those lenders could go to court and obtain deficiency judgments. But would they want to spend good money trying to get blood out of a turnip?

[SD Realtor]

“What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract.”

Why would this apply only to homeowners facing foreclosure?

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

[Arraya]

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

That’s right. Kind of a trip when you think about it. Now just think about the huge wave of defaults on mortgages and other debts that is starting. All was created out of thin air from the privately run Federal Reserve and it’s web of commercial banks around it.

A small group of people is going to own everything when this tsunami is done. All from something that is imaginary, created with a keystroke, electrons on a screen. If one wanted to look at this as a huge scam one could. Because the guys who caused this mess are going to own it all in the end and leave us all debt slaves to their imaginary money. Ironically, we will give them things of real value for the fake money they created. Fundamentally our monetary system is modern day wizardry and smoke and mirrors.

Tom Jefferson understood the endgame.

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” — Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[23109VC]

all I know is that in the near future, my house will be worth about $200k LESS than what I owe.

so why keep it? with 100% financing – explain to me the “benefit” of keeping it and paying all that money every month on a house leveraged to $350k that is only worth $150k.

I would think that at some point – I will be able to rent a bigger/better/nicer house for LESS money and since my house is going to be $200k upside down, and I put nothign into it – the most logical and financially reasonable thing to do would be dump it on teh bank and walk.

i really don’t care about what is “right” or what would be the “morally appropriate” thing to do. sad to say it, but if I have to shaft my bank and save my own neck – so be it. it’s money, it was a contract, and it went sour – and unfortuntely for the bank, they were dumb enough to loan me that much money on an asset that just took a dump. I promised to pay, but if I don’t pay, they get to have the house. that’s how it works. it’s all legal.

believe me, if there was a claus that said if my house tripled in value they were entitled to sell my hosue and pocket the proceeds – and it did that – they wouldn’t “feel sorry for me” and let me stay – they’d throw my a$$ out so fast it woudl make my head spin. i’m looking at this STRICTLY from a standpoint of what makes the most financial sense.

the best option woudl to have never bought the house in the first place. i dind’t listen to you guys, did it anyway, so here I am. no point in whining over that now. what’s done is done. you guys were right. i can admit that.

but now that it’s happened – the next question is what is my next option. Keeping or dumping the hosue – to me – is mostly motviated by how upside down the hosue is, how long it will take to recoup that money, and largely – what will it cost me on a monthly basis to replace what I have now.

right now I have what I would consider a very nicely upgraded, nicely loaced, but somewhat “small” house in Harveston. about 1900 sq ft. one story. nicely fixed up. it has all the ‘bells and whistles’ i want in a house.

I pay about $3200-3300 a month when you factor in principal/interest/HOA, etc.

I earn about $140k/year roughly. do the math. even with my tax writeoff – I think I woudl be saving a good $500+/month if I left this house, and rented a bigger/better house that woudl cost me around $2000/month. no HOA, no upkeep – just pay monthly rent.

I could drag out the foreclosure process for a year, pocket about $36000. then paying $2000/month in rent – I’d have a bigger hosue (which my wife wants – we had another baby) – and pay less money.

[PadreBrian]

Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.

[HarryBosch]

[quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.

[ibjames]

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]
I never understood houses that big. Cleaning it must be such a chore

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula.

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula.

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula.

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula.

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula.

[ibjames]

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]
I never understood houses that big. Cleaning it must be such a chore

[ibjames]

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]
I never understood houses that big. Cleaning it must be such a chore

[ibjames]

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]
I never understood houses that big. Cleaning it must be such a chore

[ibjames]

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]
I never understood houses that big. Cleaning it must be such a chore

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula. 🙂

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula. 🙂

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula. 🙂

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula. 🙂

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]

[PadreBrian]

Okay, so he has to move to Temecula. 🙂

[quote=HarryBosch][quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.
[/quote]

[23109VC]

i can take the insults. I know there are people who feel like someone who takes out a loan and walks is doing something morally wrong… everyone has an opinion.

my take is this – in the “old” days – banks made people put down 20% – b/c they wanted to avoid people like me deciding to walk and stuffing the bank wtih the house. they figured if you put 20% down, there was enough PAIN/LOSS associated with walking that you wouldn’t do it. 20% down had nothign to do with “honor” or integrity – it was all about basically forcing you to put something into it as a way to minimize people actually walking.

recently – banks relaxed the rules, and let everyone buy a house with no mney down. so they took on all the risk. bad move. look at values now – and look at what people are doing.

to me, it’s a business decisions. if I assess all the info and decide that while I am upside down, it is advantageous to just stay put – i’ll do that. if it comes to a point where it actually makes SENSE to just dump it – i’ll do that.

I’m not trying to think like an investor. the house is not an investment. it’s a place to live. but at the same time – i don’t want to royally overpay as I watch prices decline and decline.

maybe someone can help me do the math.
I earn $140k/year. stay at home wife, 3 kids. I pay about $3200/month when you add up my P&I, Taxes, and HOA. the HOA are about $120, can’t write that off, but I can write off the majority of my loan payments as it’s a 30 yr fixed and i’m in the second year or so..so it’ smostly interest.

my house is worth say $180k by my estimates. I paid $350k. so i’m approaching 200k in negative equity. that’s not the righ tterm. i have no equity, the BANK has $200k in negative equity..

so I can rent that “bigger” house my wife wants for about $2000-2200/month.

how much do I actually “save” on my income by writing off the interest/taxes?

I think my monthly taxes are around $400/month. My monthly mortgage payments are around $2600 when you add up the first/second. my int rates are not that great – not horrid but not the greatest.

if you look at what I pay, what I can write off, and my income/tax bracket – I think I’m saving 500-600/month by writing this stuff off. so if you take my $3200/month in carrying costs, and take off the lower figure – 500, you get a $2700/month is actual cost to carry this house.

I can rent the same thing – actually something larger/better for 700 less/month. so each year I stay in this house, I’m losing $700/month.

now if housing prices were going to come back quickly, staying underwater seems like less of aproblem, but when you estimate that it may take a decade or longer before prices come back – it makes me thing that I will be eating this upside down loss for the next ten years.

so take that 700/month and multiply that out by 10 years…and then figure around then, will values be about where they were when I bought.

the downside to walking away is my credit will tank, I will wind up renting something, and it will be 5-7 years before I could buy something – but perhaps it will be that long before I’d WANT to buy anything…

a good friend of mine who owns his own business, used his original house to fund his business – HELOC. the business tanked, he coudln’t make his payments, and left his home/foreclosure. he now rents a house for less than what his old payments were, and the new house he is in is twice as nice as the one he left. in many ways, he’s better off after the “foreclosure”. he lives in a better house, pays less per month, he just can’t say he “owns” it.

but in this market – no one really owns anything the vast majority of people are holding an ownership interest in an asset that is leverage far beyond what it’s worth… so we all own debts…

to me it’s a numbers game. i like my house and am content to stay, but at some point I feel like maybe i’d just be stupid to stay and keep paying.

if I were to be able to save $700 (maybe more) per month, and put that money into an investment, or my 401k, and just rented for 10 years – who is ahead? the guy who “honors” his obligations, stays in the house, pays the mortgage every month, and figure in 10 years the house value is close to the 350k i paid, and my balance has gradually paid down over the 10 years to where there is equity in the home, OR the guy who pulled the plug, rented, and invested that 700/month over the next 10 years into a 401k, or some other investment – hell, just putting it in a hole in the ground, with no interest would net me 84000. stiffing the bank for the next 12 months and not paying the mortgage nets me another 30k…

so am I correct in thinking I realistically could be $100,000 ahead by just walking and renting for ten years?

if values came back to current levels in 10 years, and I paid my loan down over 10 years, somehow I don’t think i’d have paid off 100k when the loan is a 30 year fixed….

[peterb]

23109VC, for a guy who doesnt think his house is an investment, you sure are doing a lot of investment analysis. 🙂

[23109VC]

maybe i am thinking of it as an investment. maybe it depends how you define the term. i’m not planning on selling my house to make money on it. it’s not an investment in that sense – not a short term one.

long term – sure. but that’s a given. any homewoner considers their home a long term investment..the problem being – my hosue is so underwater that it has perhaps become a HORRIBLE investment and I’d be advised to get out of it and put my money elsewhere.

so in that sense – yeah, i’m considering it an investment – but in the long term. and it’s probably going to take hte LONG LONG LONG term to see any return on the investment.

i’m also looking at bang for the buck. I could probably dump my house and rent something far nicer and larger for far less and come out ahead financially.

if my home is now so far underwater – i don’t own jack squat – so what am i really giving up??? dumpign my hosue screws my credit but frees up cash.

if i really really had to buy – i have some relatives who are fairly well off who would probably buy something for cash – and carry the paper and let me “buy” it from them and pay them the payment. one way to bypass all th banks and just get into somethig else..but given all i’ve seen – i’d be hesitant to buy anythign right now.

the only upside to buying i could see would be if someone could obtain a dirt cheap cash price on a good house, good area, and be able to know that the rents for that rea would turn a profit – and that profit would beat out other types of investments. i coudl see buying then – rather than putting money in a stock market that is maybe doing to dump further – at least putting some money into a house with a good rental return would be a worthwhile place to put somemoney.

it all depends on how CHEAP the hosue coudl be had for and how HIGH the rent would be. i have heard of cash buyers/investors getting deals that are uninmaginable due to the banks just dumping stuff.

i know the hosue next to me sodl for less than 300k. it’s in escrow but i dont’ knwo the final sale price. i know asking was 299k. this house sold for like $525 a couple years ago. so at LEAST a $200k drop! knowing what this new homeowner will pay for their monthly housing bill, compared to me and the rest of the street -0 this is what pisses people off. it makes you feel like your mortage payment is pissing money away

which is why i’m not going to pay this month. let the bank call me and bitch at me and then i can put it to them bluntly. they can negotitate with me or they can have it back and lose even more money…

my payment is late one day now – it’s the 16th. i’m waiting for them to call and ask where’s the money. 🙂 i’ll let you know how my DIY loan renegotation goes.

[Anonymous]

“I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.” from 23109VC

I agree with this statement. Anyone that has a 30 year fixed and put money down to purchase a house should be royally pissed at the banks. The banks were lending to anyone with a pulse and used loan products that were destined to blow up in the majority of borrower’s faces(NINA, SISA, SIVA W-2, Option ARM, 2yr fixed, 100% financing, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised to see banks permanently forgive part of the principal at some point, depending on how successful or unsuccessful they are with their current method of handling loan mods. I imagine that debt being permanently foregiven though would be a HUGE tax bill for the borrower.

This OP’s biggest mistake was buying in the first place. His next biggest mistake would probably be continuing to pay his mortgage. He should be meeting with a an attorney and a CPA(IRS ramifications). He could walk away and be in position to purchase a house in 2-3 years with 20% down.

[peterb]

Damn Banks. Yeah, that’s it, they screwed all of us!! Now that we’ve got the justification behind us, let’s get on with the business of business. Please let us know how it pans out.

[temeculaguy]

You tax savings are over $800/mo The only true way to calculate them is to do your own taxes and use the same numbers from your return, backing out the mortgage in a second scenario. You bought mid 2007 so you have never had a full year with mortgage tax savings, this february is the first time you will have a full year and be able run both scenarios.

Your interest rates don’t actually suck, libor spreads are getting worse and should stay there through the recession, 6.75 was todays’s average 30 year fixed with 20% down.

Another thing, it isn’t going to take ten years to return to your price, you didn’t buy at peak, you bought too early but you bought a year or two into the decline about 25% off peak. In nominal terms it should take just a few years for you to get back above water since inflation is how they are going to save the market ultimately, it will take a couple of years but inflation will come, too much money is being printed right now. Inflation may also affect rents in that ten years. It’s a bet either way, but right now you have a recession proof job and a mortgage that can’t go up and it’s less than 28% of your income. The only thing driving you is your equity but you said it isn’t an investment, it is a place to live, so treat it like one. Hunker down, if it gets too much worse, buy a rental and reduce your base through dollar cost averaging.

Lastly, your house isn’t worth 180k, more like 250-275k, don’t exaggerate the numbers to talk yourself into something, works both ways, you talked yourself into buying and now you are talking yourself into walking. Doubtful you can sell short, you can’t show hardship and doubtful you’ll get much relief from in a workout for the same reasons. The reality is that you can afford it, you just want something extra, they are keen to that play, just like they are about the buy a second home and plan to rent then walk from first, it can be done but they are watching for it. Be wary of seeing the comps without seeing the actual deal, there are a lot of listings that are priced very low to get multiple bids, I’ve been one of the bidders three times this month alone, standing there with cash in hand, willing to pay full price and getting shut out by 3, 4, and even 8 others who made offers within 3 hours of the sign going up. It primarily happens in the premium areas, which harveston is one of. Another reason to keep paying and wait, you have no idea what the recent events will end up once the rubber hits the road, who knows what tax advantages or save the homeowner programs will show up in the next six months, you already spilled the milk, hang out and see what free towels they start giving out.

I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.

[temeculaguy]

You tax savings are over $800/mo The only true way to calculate them is to do your own taxes and use the same numbers from your return, backing out the mortgage in a second scenario. You bought mid 2007 so you have never had a full year with mortgage tax savings, this february is the first time you will have a full year and be able run both scenarios.

Your interest rates don’t actually suck, libor spreads are getting worse and should stay there through the recession, 6.75 was todays’s average 30 year fixed with 20% down.

Another thing, it isn’t going to take ten years to return to your price, you didn’t buy at peak, you bought too early but you bought a year or two into the decline about 25% off peak. In nominal terms it should take just a few years for you to get back above water since inflation is how they are going to save the market ultimately, it will take a couple of years but inflation will come, too much money is being printed right now. Inflation may also affect rents in that ten years. It’s a bet either way, but right now you have a recession proof job and a mortgage that can’t go up and it’s less than 28% of your income. The only thing driving you is your equity but you said it isn’t an investment, it is a place to live, so treat it like one. Hunker down, if it gets too much worse, buy a rental and reduce your base through dollar cost averaging.

Lastly, your house isn’t worth 180k, more like 250-275k, don’t exaggerate the numbers to talk yourself into something, works both ways, you talked yourself into buying and now you are talking yourself into walking. Doubtful you can sell short, you can’t show hardship and doubtful you’ll get much relief from in a workout for the same reasons. The reality is that you can afford it, you just want something extra, they are keen to that play, just like they are about the buy a second home and plan to rent then walk from first, it can be done but they are watching for it. Be wary of seeing the comps without seeing the actual deal, there are a lot of listings that are priced very low to get multiple bids, I’ve been one of the bidders three times this month alone, standing there with cash in hand, willing to pay full price and getting shut out by 3, 4, and even 8 others who made offers within 3 hours of the sign going up. It primarily happens in the premium areas, which harveston is one of. Another reason to keep paying and wait, you have no idea what the recent events will end up once the rubber hits the road, who knows what tax advantages or save the homeowner programs will show up in the next six months, you already spilled the milk, hang out and see what free towels they start giving out.

I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.

[temeculaguy]

You tax savings are over $800/mo The only true way to calculate them is to do your own taxes and use the same numbers from your return, backing out the mortgage in a second scenario. You bought mid 2007 so you have never had a full year with mortgage tax savings, this february is the first time you will have a full year and be able run both scenarios.

Your interest rates don’t actually suck, libor spreads are getting worse and should stay there through the recession, 6.75 was todays’s average 30 year fixed with 20% down.

Another thing, it isn’t going to take ten years to return to your price, you didn’t buy at peak, you bought too early but you bought a year or two into the decline about 25% off peak. In nominal terms it should take just a few years for you to get back above water since inflation is how they are going to save the market ultimately, it will take a couple of years but inflation will come, too much money is being printed right now. Inflation may also affect rents in that ten years. It’s a bet either way, but right now you have a recession proof job and a mortgage that can’t go up and it’s less than 28% of your income. The only thing driving you is your equity but you said it isn’t an investment, it is a place to live, so treat it like one. Hunker down, if it gets too much worse, buy a rental and reduce your base through dollar cost averaging.

Lastly, your house isn’t worth 180k, more like 250-275k, don’t exaggerate the numbers to talk yourself into something, works both ways, you talked yourself into buying and now you are talking yourself into walking. Doubtful you can sell short, you can’t show hardship and doubtful you’ll get much relief from in a workout for the same reasons. The reality is that you can afford it, you just want something extra, they are keen to that play, just like they are about the buy a second home and plan to rent then walk from first, it can be done but they are watching for it. Be wary of seeing the comps without seeing the actual deal, there are a lot of listings that are priced very low to get multiple bids, I’ve been one of the bidders three times this month alone, standing there with cash in hand, willing to pay full price and getting shut out by 3, 4, and even 8 others who made offers within 3 hours of the sign going up. It primarily happens in the premium areas, which harveston is one of. Another reason to keep paying and wait, you have no idea what the recent events will end up once the rubber hits the road, who knows what tax advantages or save the homeowner programs will show up in the next six months, you already spilled the milk, hang out and see what free towels they start giving out.

I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.

[temeculaguy]

You tax savings are over $800/mo The only true way to calculate them is to do your own taxes and use the same numbers from your return, backing out the mortgage in a second scenario. You bought mid 2007 so you have never had a full year with mortgage tax savings, this february is the first time you will have a full year and be able run both scenarios.

Your interest rates don’t actually suck, libor spreads are getting worse and should stay there through the recession, 6.75 was todays’s average 30 year fixed with 20% down.

Another thing, it isn’t going to take ten years to return to your price, you didn’t buy at peak, you bought too early but you bought a year or two into the decline about 25% off peak. In nominal terms it should take just a few years for you to get back above water since inflation is how they are going to save the market ultimately, it will take a couple of years but inflation will come, too much money is being printed right now. Inflation may also affect rents in that ten years. It’s a bet either way, but right now you have a recession proof job and a mortgage that can’t go up and it’s less than 28% of your income. The only thing driving you is your equity but you said it isn’t an investment, it is a place to live, so treat it like one. Hunker down, if it gets too much worse, buy a rental and reduce your base through dollar cost averaging.

Lastly, your house isn’t worth 180k, more like 250-275k, don’t exaggerate the numbers to talk yourself into something, works both ways, you talked yourself into buying and now you are talking yourself into walking. Doubtful you can sell short, you can’t show hardship and doubtful you’ll get much relief from in a workout for the same reasons. The reality is that you can afford it, you just want something extra, they are keen to that play, just like they are about the buy a second home and plan to rent then walk from first, it can be done but they are watching for it. Be wary of seeing the comps without seeing the actual deal, there are a lot of listings that are priced very low to get multiple bids, I’ve been one of the bidders three times this month alone, standing there with cash in hand, willing to pay full price and getting shut out by 3, 4, and even 8 others who made offers within 3 hours of the sign going up. It primarily happens in the premium areas, which harveston is one of. Another reason to keep paying and wait, you have no idea what the recent events will end up once the rubber hits the road, who knows what tax advantages or save the homeowner programs will show up in the next six months, you already spilled the milk, hang out and see what free towels they start giving out.

I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.

[temeculaguy]

You tax savings are over $800/mo The only true way to calculate them is to do your own taxes and use the same numbers from your return, backing out the mortgage in a second scenario. You bought mid 2007 so you have never had a full year with mortgage tax savings, this february is the first time you will have a full year and be able run both scenarios.

Your interest rates don’t actually suck, libor spreads are getting worse and should stay there through the recession, 6.75 was todays’s average 30 year fixed with 20% down.

Another thing, it isn’t going to take ten years to return to your price, you didn’t buy at peak, you bought too early but you bought a year or two into the decline about 25% off peak. In nominal terms it should take just a few years for you to get back above water since inflation is how they are going to save the market ultimately, it will take a couple of years but inflation will come, too much money is being printed right now. Inflation may also affect rents in that ten years. It’s a bet either way, but right now you have a recession proof job and a mortgage that can’t go up and it’s less than 28% of your income. The only thing driving you is your equity but you said it isn’t an investment, it is a place to live, so treat it like one. Hunker down, if it gets too much worse, buy a rental and reduce your base through dollar cost averaging.

Lastly, your house isn’t worth 180k, more like 250-275k, don’t exaggerate the numbers to talk yourself into something, works both ways, you talked yourself into buying and now you are talking yourself into walking. Doubtful you can sell short, you can’t show hardship and doubtful you’ll get much relief from in a workout for the same reasons. The reality is that you can afford it, you just want something extra, they are keen to that play, just like they are about the buy a second home and plan to rent then walk from first, it can be done but they are watching for it. Be wary of seeing the comps without seeing the actual deal, there are a lot of listings that are priced very low to get multiple bids, I’ve been one of the bidders three times this month alone, standing there with cash in hand, willing to pay full price and getting shut out by 3, 4, and even 8 others who made offers within 3 hours of the sign going up. It primarily happens in the premium areas, which harveston is one of. Another reason to keep paying and wait, you have no idea what the recent events will end up once the rubber hits the road, who knows what tax advantages or save the homeowner programs will show up in the next six months, you already spilled the milk, hang out and see what free towels they start giving out.

I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.

[peterb]

Damn Banks. Yeah, that’s it, they screwed all of us!! Now that we’ve got the justification behind us, let’s get on with the business of business. Please let us know how it pans out.

[peterb]

Damn Banks. Yeah, that’s it, they screwed all of us!! Now that we’ve got the justification behind us, let’s get on with the business of business. Please let us know how it pans out.

[peterb]

Damn Banks. Yeah, that’s it, they screwed all of us!! Now that we’ve got the justification behind us, let’s get on with the business of business. Please let us know how it pans out.

[peterb]

Damn Banks. Yeah, that’s it, they screwed all of us!! Now that we’ve got the justification behind us, let’s get on with the business of business. Please let us know how it pans out.

[Anonymous]

“I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.” from 23109VC

I agree with this statement. Anyone that has a 30 year fixed and put money down to purchase a house should be royally pissed at the banks. The banks were lending to anyone with a pulse and used loan products that were destined to blow up in the majority of borrower’s faces(NINA, SISA, SIVA W-2, Option ARM, 2yr fixed, 100% financing, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised to see banks permanently forgive part of the principal at some point, depending on how successful or unsuccessful they are with their current method of handling loan mods. I imagine that debt being permanently foregiven though would be a HUGE tax bill for the borrower.

This OP’s biggest mistake was buying in the first place. His next biggest mistake would probably be continuing to pay his mortgage. He should be meeting with a an attorney and a CPA(IRS ramifications). He could walk away and be in position to purchase a house in 2-3 years with 20% down.

[Anonymous]

“I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.” from 23109VC

I agree with this statement. Anyone that has a 30 year fixed and put money down to purchase a house should be royally pissed at the banks. The banks were lending to anyone with a pulse and used loan products that were destined to blow up in the majority of borrower’s faces(NINA, SISA, SIVA W-2, Option ARM, 2yr fixed, 100% financing, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised to see banks permanently forgive part of the principal at some point, depending on how successful or unsuccessful they are with their current method of handling loan mods. I imagine that debt being permanently foregiven though would be a HUGE tax bill for the borrower.

This OP’s biggest mistake was buying in the first place. His next biggest mistake would probably be continuing to pay his mortgage. He should be meeting with a an attorney and a CPA(IRS ramifications). He could walk away and be in position to purchase a house in 2-3 years with 20% down.

[Anonymous]

“I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.” from 23109VC

I agree with this statement. Anyone that has a 30 year fixed and put money down to purchase a house should be royally pissed at the banks. The banks were lending to anyone with a pulse and used loan products that were destined to blow up in the majority of borrower’s faces(NINA, SISA, SIVA W-2, Option ARM, 2yr fixed, 100% financing, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised to see banks permanently forgive part of the principal at some point, depending on how successful or unsuccessful they are with their current method of handling loan mods. I imagine that debt being permanently foregiven though would be a HUGE tax bill for the borrower.

This OP’s biggest mistake was buying in the first place. His next biggest mistake would probably be continuing to pay his mortgage. He should be meeting with a an attorney and a CPA(IRS ramifications). He could walk away and be in position to purchase a house in 2-3 years with 20% down.

[Anonymous]

“I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.” from 23109VC

I agree with this statement. Anyone that has a 30 year fixed and put money down to purchase a house should be royally pissed at the banks. The banks were lending to anyone with a pulse and used loan products that were destined to blow up in the majority of borrower’s faces(NINA, SISA, SIVA W-2, Option ARM, 2yr fixed, 100% financing, etc). I wouldn’t be surprised to see banks permanently forgive part of the principal at some point, depending on how successful or unsuccessful they are with their current method of handling loan mods. I imagine that debt being permanently foregiven though would be a HUGE tax bill for the borrower.

This OP’s biggest mistake was buying in the first place. His next biggest mistake would probably be continuing to pay his mortgage. He should be meeting with a an attorney and a CPA(IRS ramifications). He could walk away and be in position to purchase a house in 2-3 years with 20% down.

[23109VC]

maybe i am thinking of it as an investment. maybe it depends how you define the term. i’m not planning on selling my house to make money on it. it’s not an investment in that sense – not a short term one.

long term – sure. but that’s a given. any homewoner considers their home a long term investment..the problem being – my hosue is so underwater that it has perhaps become a HORRIBLE investment and I’d be advised to get out of it and put my money elsewhere.

so in that sense – yeah, i’m considering it an investment – but in the long term. and it’s probably going to take hte LONG LONG LONG term to see any return on the investment.

i’m also looking at bang for the buck. I could probably dump my house and rent something far nicer and larger for far less and come out ahead financially.

if my home is now so far underwater – i don’t own jack squat – so what am i really giving up??? dumpign my hosue screws my credit but frees up cash.

if i really really had to buy – i have some relatives who are fairly well off who would probably buy something for cash – and carry the paper and let me “buy” it from them and pay them the payment. one way to bypass all th banks and just get into somethig else..but given all i’ve seen – i’d be hesitant to buy anythign right now.

the only upside to buying i could see would be if someone could obtain a dirt cheap cash price on a good house, good area, and be able to know that the rents for that rea would turn a profit – and that profit would beat out other types of investments. i coudl see buying then – rather than putting money in a stock market that is maybe doing to dump further – at least putting some money into a house with a good rental return would be a worthwhile place to put somemoney.

it all depends on how CHEAP the hosue coudl be had for and how HIGH the rent would be. i have heard of cash buyers/investors getting deals that are uninmaginable due to the banks just dumping stuff.

i know the hosue next to me sodl for less than 300k. it’s in escrow but i dont’ knwo the final sale price. i know asking was 299k. this house sold for like $525 a couple years ago. so at LEAST a $200k drop! knowing what this new homeowner will pay for their monthly housing bill, compared to me and the rest of the street -0 this is what pisses people off. it makes you feel like your mortage payment is pissing money away

which is why i’m not going to pay this month. let the bank call me and bitch at me and then i can put it to them bluntly. they can negotitate with me or they can have it back and lose even more money…

my payment is late one day now – it’s the 16th. i’m waiting for them to call and ask where’s the money. 🙂 i’ll let you know how my DIY loan renegotation goes.

[23109VC]

maybe i am thinking of it as an investment. maybe it depends how you define the term. i’m not planning on selling my house to make money on it. it’s not an investment in that sense – not a short term one.

long term – sure. but that’s a given. any homewoner considers their home a long term investment..the problem being – my hosue is so underwater that it has perhaps become a HORRIBLE investment and I’d be advised to get out of it and put my money elsewhere.

so in that sense – yeah, i’m considering it an investment – but in the long term. and it’s probably going to take hte LONG LONG LONG term to see any return on the investment.

i’m also looking at bang for the buck. I could probably dump my house and rent something far nicer and larger for far less and come out ahead financially.

if my home is now so far underwater – i don’t own jack squat – so what am i really giving up??? dumpign my hosue screws my credit but frees up cash.

if i really really had to buy – i have some relatives who are fairly well off who would probably buy something for cash – and carry the paper and let me “buy” it from them and pay them the payment. one way to bypass all th banks and just get into somethig else..but given all i’ve seen – i’d be hesitant to buy anythign right now.

the only upside to buying i could see would be if someone could obtain a dirt cheap cash price on a good house, good area, and be able to know that the rents for that rea would turn a profit – and that profit would beat out other types of investments. i coudl see buying then – rather than putting money in a stock market that is maybe doing to dump further – at least putting some money into a house with a good rental return would be a worthwhile place to put somemoney.

it all depends on how CHEAP the hosue coudl be had for and how HIGH the rent would be. i have heard of cash buyers/investors getting deals that are uninmaginable due to the banks just dumping stuff.

i know the hosue next to me sodl for less than 300k. it’s in escrow but i dont’ knwo the final sale price. i know asking was 299k. this house sold for like $525 a couple years ago. so at LEAST a $200k drop! knowing what this new homeowner will pay for their monthly housing bill, compared to me and the rest of the street -0 this is what pisses people off. it makes you feel like your mortage payment is pissing money away

which is why i’m not going to pay this month. let the bank call me and bitch at me and then i can put it to them bluntly. they can negotitate with me or they can have it back and lose even more money…

my payment is late one day now – it’s the 16th. i’m waiting for them to call and ask where’s the money. 🙂 i’ll let you know how my DIY loan renegotation goes.

[23109VC]

maybe i am thinking of it as an investment. maybe it depends how you define the term. i’m not planning on selling my house to make money on it. it’s not an investment in that sense – not a short term one.

long term – sure. but that’s a given. any homewoner considers their home a long term investment..the problem being – my hosue is so underwater that it has perhaps become a HORRIBLE investment and I’d be advised to get out of it and put my money elsewhere.

so in that sense – yeah, i’m considering it an investment – but in the long term. and it’s probably going to take hte LONG LONG LONG term to see any return on the investment.

i’m also looking at bang for the buck. I could probably dump my house and rent something far nicer and larger for far less and come out ahead financially.

if my home is now so far underwater – i don’t own jack squat – so what am i really giving up??? dumpign my hosue screws my credit but frees up cash.

if i really really had to buy – i have some relatives who are fairly well off who would probably buy something for cash – and carry the paper and let me “buy” it from them and pay them the payment. one way to bypass all th banks and just get into somethig else..but given all i’ve seen – i’d be hesitant to buy anythign right now.

the only upside to buying i could see would be if someone could obtain a dirt cheap cash price on a good house, good area, and be able to know that the rents for that rea would turn a profit – and that profit would beat out other types of investments. i coudl see buying then – rather than putting money in a stock market that is maybe doing to dump further – at least putting some money into a house with a good rental return would be a worthwhile place to put somemoney.

it all depends on how CHEAP the hosue coudl be had for and how HIGH the rent would be. i have heard of cash buyers/investors getting deals that are uninmaginable due to the banks just dumping stuff.

i know the hosue next to me sodl for less than 300k. it’s in escrow but i dont’ knwo the final sale price. i know asking was 299k. this house sold for like $525 a couple years ago. so at LEAST a $200k drop! knowing what this new homeowner will pay for their monthly housing bill, compared to me and the rest of the street -0 this is what pisses people off. it makes you feel like your mortage payment is pissing money away

which is why i’m not going to pay this month. let the bank call me and bitch at me and then i can put it to them bluntly. they can negotitate with me or they can have it back and lose even more money…

my payment is late one day now – it’s the 16th. i’m waiting for them to call and ask where’s the money. 🙂 i’ll let you know how my DIY loan renegotation goes.

[23109VC]

maybe i am thinking of it as an investment. maybe it depends how you define the term. i’m not planning on selling my house to make money on it. it’s not an investment in that sense – not a short term one.

long term – sure. but that’s a given. any homewoner considers their home a long term investment..the problem being – my hosue is so underwater that it has perhaps become a HORRIBLE investment and I’d be advised to get out of it and put my money elsewhere.

so in that sense – yeah, i’m considering it an investment – but in the long term. and it’s probably going to take hte LONG LONG LONG term to see any return on the investment.

i’m also looking at bang for the buck. I could probably dump my house and rent something far nicer and larger for far less and come out ahead financially.

if my home is now so far underwater – i don’t own jack squat – so what am i really giving up??? dumpign my hosue screws my credit but frees up cash.

if i really really had to buy – i have some relatives who are fairly well off who would probably buy something for cash – and carry the paper and let me “buy” it from them and pay them the payment. one way to bypass all th banks and just get into somethig else..but given all i’ve seen – i’d be hesitant to buy anythign right now.

the only upside to buying i could see would be if someone could obtain a dirt cheap cash price on a good house, good area, and be able to know that the rents for that rea would turn a profit – and that profit would beat out other types of investments. i coudl see buying then – rather than putting money in a stock market that is maybe doing to dump further – at least putting some money into a house with a good rental return would be a worthwhile place to put somemoney.

it all depends on how CHEAP the hosue coudl be had for and how HIGH the rent would be. i have heard of cash buyers/investors getting deals that are uninmaginable due to the banks just dumping stuff.

i know the hosue next to me sodl for less than 300k. it’s in escrow but i dont’ knwo the final sale price. i know asking was 299k. this house sold for like $525 a couple years ago. so at LEAST a $200k drop! knowing what this new homeowner will pay for their monthly housing bill, compared to me and the rest of the street -0 this is what pisses people off. it makes you feel like your mortage payment is pissing money away

which is why i’m not going to pay this month. let the bank call me and bitch at me and then i can put it to them bluntly. they can negotitate with me or they can have it back and lose even more money…

my payment is late one day now – it’s the 16th. i’m waiting for them to call and ask where’s the money. 🙂 i’ll let you know how my DIY loan renegotation goes.

[peterb]

23109VC, for a guy who doesnt think his house is an investment, you sure are doing a lot of investment analysis. 🙂

[peterb]

23109VC, for a guy who doesnt think his house is an investment, you sure are doing a lot of investment analysis. 🙂

[peterb]

23109VC, for a guy who doesnt think his house is an investment, you sure are doing a lot of investment analysis. 🙂

[peterb]

23109VC, for a guy who doesnt think his house is an investment, you sure are doing a lot of investment analysis. 🙂

[23109VC]

i can take the insults. I know there are people who feel like someone who takes out a loan and walks is doing something morally wrong… everyone has an opinion.

my take is this – in the “old” days – banks made people put down 20% – b/c they wanted to avoid people like me deciding to walk and stuffing the bank wtih the house. they figured if you put 20% down, there was enough PAIN/LOSS associated with walking that you wouldn’t do it. 20% down had nothign to do with “honor” or integrity – it was all about basically forcing you to put something into it as a way to minimize people actually walking.

recently – banks relaxed the rules, and let everyone buy a house with no mney down. so they took on all the risk. bad move. look at values now – and look at what people are doing.

to me, it’s a business decisions. if I assess all the info and decide that while I am upside down, it is advantageous to just stay put – i’ll do that. if it comes to a point where it actually makes SENSE to just dump it – i’ll do that.

I’m not trying to think like an investor. the house is not an investment. it’s a place to live. but at the same time – i don’t want to royally overpay as I watch prices decline and decline.

maybe someone can help me do the math.
I earn $140k/year. stay at home wife, 3 kids. I pay about $3200/month when you add up my P&I, Taxes, and HOA. the HOA are about $120, can’t write that off, but I can write off the majority of my loan payments as it’s a 30 yr fixed and i’m in the second year or so..so it’ smostly interest.

my house is worth say $180k by my estimates. I paid $350k. so i’m approaching 200k in negative equity. that’s not the righ tterm. i have no equity, the BANK has $200k in negative equity..

so I can rent that “bigger” house my wife wants for about $2000-2200/month.

how much do I actually “save” on my income by writing off the interest/taxes?

I think my monthly taxes are around $400/month. My monthly mortgage payments are around $2600 when you add up the first/second. my int rates are not that great – not horrid but not the greatest.

if you look at what I pay, what I can write off, and my income/tax bracket – I think I’m saving 500-600/month by writing this stuff off. so if you take my $3200/month in carrying costs, and take off the lower figure – 500, you get a $2700/month is actual cost to carry this house.

I can rent the same thing – actually something larger/better for 700 less/month. so each year I stay in this house, I’m losing $700/month.

now if housing prices were going to come back quickly, staying underwater seems like less of aproblem, but when you estimate that it may take a decade or longer before prices come back – it makes me thing that I will be eating this upside down loss for the next ten years.

so take that 700/month and multiply that out by 10 years…and then figure around then, will values be about where they were when I bought.

the downside to walking away is my credit will tank, I will wind up renting something, and it will be 5-7 years before I could buy something – but perhaps it will be that long before I’d WANT to buy anything…

a good friend of mine who owns his own business, used his original house to fund his business – HELOC. the business tanked, he coudln’t make his payments, and left his home/foreclosure. he now rents a house for less than what his old payments were, and the new house he is in is twice as nice as the one he left. in many ways, he’s better off after the “foreclosure”. he lives in a better house, pays less per month, he just can’t say he “owns” it.

but in this market – no one really owns anything the vast majority of people are holding an ownership interest in an asset that is leverage far beyond what it’s worth… so we all own debts…

to me it’s a numbers game. i like my house and am content to stay, but at some point I feel like maybe i’d just be stupid to stay and keep paying.

if I were to be able to save $700 (maybe more) per month, and put that money into an investment, or my 401k, and just rented for 10 years – who is ahead? the guy who “honors” his obligations, stays in the house, pays the mortgage every month, and figure in 10 years the house value is close to the 350k i paid, and my balance has gradually paid down over the 10 years to where there is equity in the home, OR the guy who pulled the plug, rented, and invested that 700/month over the next 10 years into a 401k, or some other investment – hell, just putting it in a hole in the ground, with no interest would net me 84000. stiffing the bank for the next 12 months and not paying the mortgage nets me another 30k…

so am I correct in thinking I realistically could be $100,000 ahead by just walking and renting for ten years?

if values came back to current levels in 10 years, and I paid my loan down over 10 years, somehow I don’t think i’d have paid off 100k when the loan is a 30 year fixed….

[23109VC]

i can take the insults. I know there are people who feel like someone who takes out a loan and walks is doing something morally wrong… everyone has an opinion.

my take is this – in the “old” days – banks made people put down 20% – b/c they wanted to avoid people like me deciding to walk and stuffing the bank wtih the house. they figured if you put 20% down, there was enough PAIN/LOSS associated with walking that you wouldn’t do it. 20% down had nothign to do with “honor” or integrity – it was all about basically forcing you to put something into it as a way to minimize people actually walking.

recently – banks relaxed the rules, and let everyone buy a house with no mney down. so they took on all the risk. bad move. look at values now – and look at what people are doing.

to me, it’s a business decisions. if I assess all the info and decide that while I am upside down, it is advantageous to just stay put – i’ll do that. if it comes to a point where it actually makes SENSE to just dump it – i’ll do that.

I’m not trying to think like an investor. the house is not an investment. it’s a place to live. but at the same time – i don’t want to royally overpay as I watch prices decline and decline.

maybe someone can help me do the math.
I earn $140k/year. stay at home wife, 3 kids. I pay about $3200/month when you add up my P&I, Taxes, and HOA. the HOA are about $120, can’t write that off, but I can write off the majority of my loan payments as it’s a 30 yr fixed and i’m in the second year or so..so it’ smostly interest.

my house is worth say $180k by my estimates. I paid $350k. so i’m approaching 200k in negative equity. that’s not the righ tterm. i have no equity, the BANK has $200k in negative equity..

so I can rent that “bigger” house my wife wants for about $2000-2200/month.

how much do I actually “save” on my income by writing off the interest/taxes?

I think my monthly taxes are around $400/month. My monthly mortgage payments are around $2600 when you add up the first/second. my int rates are not that great – not horrid but not the greatest.

if you look at what I pay, what I can write off, and my income/tax bracket – I think I’m saving 500-600/month by writing this stuff off. so if you take my $3200/month in carrying costs, and take off the lower figure – 500, you get a $2700/month is actual cost to carry this house.

I can rent the same thing – actually something larger/better for 700 less/month. so each year I stay in this house, I’m losing $700/month.

now if housing prices were going to come back quickly, staying underwater seems like less of aproblem, but when you estimate that it may take a decade or longer before prices come back – it makes me thing that I will be eating this upside down loss for the next ten years.

so take that 700/month and multiply that out by 10 years…and then figure around then, will values be about where they were when I bought.

the downside to walking away is my credit will tank, I will wind up renting something, and it will be 5-7 years before I could buy something – but perhaps it will be that long before I’d WANT to buy anything…

a good friend of mine who owns his own business, used his original house to fund his business – HELOC. the business tanked, he coudln’t make his payments, and left his home/foreclosure. he now rents a house for less than what his old payments were, and the new house he is in is twice as nice as the one he left. in many ways, he’s better off after the “foreclosure”. he lives in a better house, pays less per month, he just can’t say he “owns” it.

but in this market – no one really owns anything the vast majority of people are holding an ownership interest in an asset that is leverage far beyond what it’s worth… so we all own debts…

to me it’s a numbers game. i like my house and am content to stay, but at some point I feel like maybe i’d just be stupid to stay and keep paying.

if I were to be able to save $700 (maybe more) per month, and put that money into an investment, or my 401k, and just rented for 10 years – who is ahead? the guy who “honors” his obligations, stays in the house, pays the mortgage every month, and figure in 10 years the house value is close to the 350k i paid, and my balance has gradually paid down over the 10 years to where there is equity in the home, OR the guy who pulled the plug, rented, and invested that 700/month over the next 10 years into a 401k, or some other investment – hell, just putting it in a hole in the ground, with no interest would net me 84000. stiffing the bank for the next 12 months and not paying the mortgage nets me another 30k…

so am I correct in thinking I realistically could be $100,000 ahead by just walking and renting for ten years?

if values came back to current levels in 10 years, and I paid my loan down over 10 years, somehow I don’t think i’d have paid off 100k when the loan is a 30 year fixed….

[23109VC]

i can take the insults. I know there are people who feel like someone who takes out a loan and walks is doing something morally wrong… everyone has an opinion.

my take is this – in the “old” days – banks made people put down 20% – b/c they wanted to avoid people like me deciding to walk and stuffing the bank wtih the house. they figured if you put 20% down, there was enough PAIN/LOSS associated with walking that you wouldn’t do it. 20% down had nothign to do with “honor” or integrity – it was all about basically forcing you to put something into it as a way to minimize people actually walking.

recently – banks relaxed the rules, and let everyone buy a house with no mney down. so they took on all the risk. bad move. look at values now – and look at what people are doing.

to me, it’s a business decisions. if I assess all the info and decide that while I am upside down, it is advantageous to just stay put – i’ll do that. if it comes to a point where it actually makes SENSE to just dump it – i’ll do that.

I’m not trying to think like an investor. the house is not an investment. it’s a place to live. but at the same time – i don’t want to royally overpay as I watch prices decline and decline.

maybe someone can help me do the math.
I earn $140k/year. stay at home wife, 3 kids. I pay about $3200/month when you add up my P&I, Taxes, and HOA. the HOA are about $120, can’t write that off, but I can write off the majority of my loan payments as it’s a 30 yr fixed and i’m in the second year or so..so it’ smostly interest.

my house is worth say $180k by my estimates. I paid $350k. so i’m approaching 200k in negative equity. that’s not the righ tterm. i have no equity, the BANK has $200k in negative equity..

so I can rent that “bigger” house my wife wants for about $2000-2200/month.

how much do I actually “save” on my income by writing off the interest/taxes?

I think my monthly taxes are around $400/month. My monthly mortgage payments are around $2600 when you add up the first/second. my int rates are not that great – not horrid but not the greatest.

if you look at what I pay, what I can write off, and my income/tax bracket – I think I’m saving 500-600/month by writing this stuff off. so if you take my $3200/month in carrying costs, and take off the lower figure – 500, you get a $2700/month is actual cost to carry this house.

I can rent the same thing – actually something larger/better for 700 less/month. so each year I stay in this house, I’m losing $700/month.

now if housing prices were going to come back quickly, staying underwater seems like less of aproblem, but when you estimate that it may take a decade or longer before prices come back – it makes me thing that I will be eating this upside down loss for the next ten years.

so take that 700/month and multiply that out by 10 years…and then figure around then, will values be about where they were when I bought.

the downside to walking away is my credit will tank, I will wind up renting something, and it will be 5-7 years before I could buy something – but perhaps it will be that long before I’d WANT to buy anything…

a good friend of mine who owns his own business, used his original house to fund his business – HELOC. the business tanked, he coudln’t make his payments, and left his home/foreclosure. he now rents a house for less than what his old payments were, and the new house he is in is twice as nice as the one he left. in many ways, he’s better off after the “foreclosure”. he lives in a better house, pays less per month, he just can’t say he “owns” it.

but in this market – no one really owns anything the vast majority of people are holding an ownership interest in an asset that is leverage far beyond what it’s worth… so we all own debts…

to me it’s a numbers game. i like my house and am content to stay, but at some point I feel like maybe i’d just be stupid to stay and keep paying.

if I were to be able to save $700 (maybe more) per month, and put that money into an investment, or my 401k, and just rented for 10 years – who is ahead? the guy who “honors” his obligations, stays in the house, pays the mortgage every month, and figure in 10 years the house value is close to the 350k i paid, and my balance has gradually paid down over the 10 years to where there is equity in the home, OR the guy who pulled the plug, rented, and invested that 700/month over the next 10 years into a 401k, or some other investment – hell, just putting it in a hole in the ground, with no interest would net me 84000. stiffing the bank for the next 12 months and not paying the mortgage nets me another 30k…

so am I correct in thinking I realistically could be $100,000 ahead by just walking and renting for ten years?

if values came back to current levels in 10 years, and I paid my loan down over 10 years, somehow I don’t think i’d have paid off 100k when the loan is a 30 year fixed….

[23109VC]

i can take the insults. I know there are people who feel like someone who takes out a loan and walks is doing something morally wrong… everyone has an opinion.

my take is this – in the “old” days – banks made people put down 20% – b/c they wanted to avoid people like me deciding to walk and stuffing the bank wtih the house. they figured if you put 20% down, there was enough PAIN/LOSS associated with walking that you wouldn’t do it. 20% down had nothign to do with “honor” or integrity – it was all about basically forcing you to put something into it as a way to minimize people actually walking.

recently – banks relaxed the rules, and let everyone buy a house with no mney down. so they took on all the risk. bad move. look at values now – and look at what people are doing.

to me, it’s a business decisions. if I assess all the info and decide that while I am upside down, it is advantageous to just stay put – i’ll do that. if it comes to a point where it actually makes SENSE to just dump it – i’ll do that.

I’m not trying to think like an investor. the house is not an investment. it’s a place to live. but at the same time – i don’t want to royally overpay as I watch prices decline and decline.

maybe someone can help me do the math.
I earn $140k/year. stay at home wife, 3 kids. I pay about $3200/month when you add up my P&I, Taxes, and HOA. the HOA are about $120, can’t write that off, but I can write off the majority of my loan payments as it’s a 30 yr fixed and i’m in the second year or so..so it’ smostly interest.

my house is worth say $180k by my estimates. I paid $350k. so i’m approaching 200k in negative equity. that’s not the righ tterm. i have no equity, the BANK has $200k in negative equity..

so I can rent that “bigger” house my wife wants for about $2000-2200/month.

how much do I actually “save” on my income by writing off the interest/taxes?

I think my monthly taxes are around $400/month. My monthly mortgage payments are around $2600 when you add up the first/second. my int rates are not that great – not horrid but not the greatest.

if you look at what I pay, what I can write off, and my income/tax bracket – I think I’m saving 500-600/month by writing this stuff off. so if you take my $3200/month in carrying costs, and take off the lower figure – 500, you get a $2700/month is actual cost to carry this house.

I can rent the same thing – actually something larger/better for 700 less/month. so each year I stay in this house, I’m losing $700/month.

now if housing prices were going to come back quickly, staying underwater seems like less of aproblem, but when you estimate that it may take a decade or longer before prices come back – it makes me thing that I will be eating this upside down loss for the next ten years.

so take that 700/month and multiply that out by 10 years…and then figure around then, will values be about where they were when I bought.

the downside to walking away is my credit will tank, I will wind up renting something, and it will be 5-7 years before I could buy something – but perhaps it will be that long before I’d WANT to buy anything…

a good friend of mine who owns his own business, used his original house to fund his business – HELOC. the business tanked, he coudln’t make his payments, and left his home/foreclosure. he now rents a house for less than what his old payments were, and the new house he is in is twice as nice as the one he left. in many ways, he’s better off after the “foreclosure”. he lives in a better house, pays less per month, he just can’t say he “owns” it.

but in this market – no one really owns anything the vast majority of people are holding an ownership interest in an asset that is leverage far beyond what it’s worth… so we all own debts…

to me it’s a numbers game. i like my house and am content to stay, but at some point I feel like maybe i’d just be stupid to stay and keep paying.

if I were to be able to save $700 (maybe more) per month, and put that money into an investment, or my 401k, and just rented for 10 years – who is ahead? the guy who “honors” his obligations, stays in the house, pays the mortgage every month, and figure in 10 years the house value is close to the 350k i paid, and my balance has gradually paid down over the 10 years to where there is equity in the home, OR the guy who pulled the plug, rented, and invested that 700/month over the next 10 years into a 401k, or some other investment – hell, just putting it in a hole in the ground, with no interest would net me 84000. stiffing the bank for the next 12 months and not paying the mortgage nets me another 30k…

so am I correct in thinking I realistically could be $100,000 ahead by just walking and renting for ten years?

if values came back to current levels in 10 years, and I paid my loan down over 10 years, somehow I don’t think i’d have paid off 100k when the loan is a 30 year fixed….

[HarryBosch]

[quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.

[HarryBosch]

[quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.

[HarryBosch]

[quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.

[HarryBosch]

[quote=PadreBrian]Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.[/quote]

23109, you can indeed rent a “…bigger better house in the same area for 2k.”

I rent a 3000+ sq.ft. house, 5+BR, 3.5+BA, 3 car garage, in Redhawk area for $2000/month. Also have a pool and spa. But I do my own lawn service and pool service. Not a bad deal.

[PadreBrian]

Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.

[PadreBrian]

Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.

[PadreBrian]

Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.

[PadreBrian]

Not sure where you can rent a bigger better house in the same area for 2k. Check craigslist.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

$500 per month is 4.3% of your income.
That’s what your talking about saving by walking away. And you’ve been in the house less than a year.

I know it is psychologically troubling that your house is $100K underwater. It might ultimately behoove you to walk away. But you have the option of staying there as long as you want before you walk for a relatively small fraction of your salary. Maybe your next raise or two will cover the loss. Small potatoes.
I’d at least hang around for another couple years to see how far it goes and what remedies might be offered before starting to walk.

It is likely that within a few years (maybe 5 or so) that rents will be equal to your payment or higher.

But, why even worry about what your house is worth in order to save a measly 4.3% of your salary ?

[peterb]

OK 23109VC, your last post tells me you’re starting to think like an investor. Cut your losses and make the right move going forward. You just learned a great lesson. Your strategy sounds very logical to me. (Look into the tax implications if you default. I believe you’ll owe the IRS money.)
2009 could be an all-time disaster in CA real estate. Best not to be in it.

$140K/year, good on ya! Now use what you’ve learned to turn that into some real money in the future.

Also consider this…how many investments would let you get away with defaulting? Most people would just lose $200K in a typical venture…OUCH!!! I gotta believe that next year there will incredible amounts of non-payments on mortgages. But I doubt the lenders will be forcing the foreclosure process. They’re screwed.

[peterb]

OK 23109VC, your last post tells me you’re starting to think like an investor. Cut your losses and make the right move going forward. You just learned a great lesson. Your strategy sounds very logical to me. (Look into the tax implications if you default. I believe you’ll owe the IRS money.)
2009 could be an all-time disaster in CA real estate. Best not to be in it.

$140K/year, good on ya! Now use what you’ve learned to turn that into some real money in the future.

Also consider this…how many investments would let you get away with defaulting? Most people would just lose $200K in a typical venture…OUCH!!! I gotta believe that next year there will incredible amounts of non-payments on mortgages. But I doubt the lenders will be forcing the foreclosure process. They’re screwed.

[peterb]

OK 23109VC, your last post tells me you’re starting to think like an investor. Cut your losses and make the right move going forward. You just learned a great lesson. Your strategy sounds very logical to me. (Look into the tax implications if you default. I believe you’ll owe the IRS money.)
2009 could be an all-time disaster in CA real estate. Best not to be in it.

$140K/year, good on ya! Now use what you’ve learned to turn that into some real money in the future.

Also consider this…how many investments would let you get away with defaulting? Most people would just lose $200K in a typical venture…OUCH!!! I gotta believe that next year there will incredible amounts of non-payments on mortgages. But I doubt the lenders will be forcing the foreclosure process. They’re screwed.

[peterb]

OK 23109VC, your last post tells me you’re starting to think like an investor. Cut your losses and make the right move going forward. You just learned a great lesson. Your strategy sounds very logical to me. (Look into the tax implications if you default. I believe you’ll owe the IRS money.)
2009 could be an all-time disaster in CA real estate. Best not to be in it.

$140K/year, good on ya! Now use what you’ve learned to turn that into some real money in the future.

Also consider this…how many investments would let you get away with defaulting? Most people would just lose $200K in a typical venture…OUCH!!! I gotta believe that next year there will incredible amounts of non-payments on mortgages. But I doubt the lenders will be forcing the foreclosure process. They’re screwed.

[peterb]

OK 23109VC, your last post tells me you’re starting to think like an investor. Cut your losses and make the right move going forward. You just learned a great lesson. Your strategy sounds very logical to me. (Look into the tax implications if you default. I believe you’ll owe the IRS money.)
2009 could be an all-time disaster in CA real estate. Best not to be in it.

$140K/year, good on ya! Now use what you’ve learned to turn that into some real money in the future.

Also consider this…how many investments would let you get away with defaulting? Most people would just lose $200K in a typical venture…OUCH!!! I gotta believe that next year there will incredible amounts of non-payments on mortgages. But I doubt the lenders will be forcing the foreclosure process. They’re screwed.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

$500 per month is 4.3% of your income.
That’s what your talking about saving by walking away. And you’ve been in the house less than a year.

I know it is psychologically troubling that your house is $100K underwater. It might ultimately behoove you to walk away. But you have the option of staying there as long as you want before you walk for a relatively small fraction of your salary. Maybe your next raise or two will cover the loss. Small potatoes.
I’d at least hang around for another couple years to see how far it goes and what remedies might be offered before starting to walk.

It is likely that within a few years (maybe 5 or so) that rents will be equal to your payment or higher.

But, why even worry about what your house is worth in order to save a measly 4.3% of your salary ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

$500 per month is 4.3% of your income.
That’s what your talking about saving by walking away. And you’ve been in the house less than a year.

I know it is psychologically troubling that your house is $100K underwater. It might ultimately behoove you to walk away. But you have the option of staying there as long as you want before you walk for a relatively small fraction of your salary. Maybe your next raise or two will cover the loss. Small potatoes.
I’d at least hang around for another couple years to see how far it goes and what remedies might be offered before starting to walk.

It is likely that within a few years (maybe 5 or so) that rents will be equal to your payment or higher.

But, why even worry about what your house is worth in order to save a measly 4.3% of your salary ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

$500 per month is 4.3% of your income.
That’s what your talking about saving by walking away. And you’ve been in the house less than a year.

I know it is psychologically troubling that your house is $100K underwater. It might ultimately behoove you to walk away. But you have the option of staying there as long as you want before you walk for a relatively small fraction of your salary. Maybe your next raise or two will cover the loss. Small potatoes.
I’d at least hang around for another couple years to see how far it goes and what remedies might be offered before starting to walk.

It is likely that within a few years (maybe 5 or so) that rents will be equal to your payment or higher.

But, why even worry about what your house is worth in order to save a measly 4.3% of your salary ?

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

$500 per month is 4.3% of your income.
That’s what your talking about saving by walking away. And you’ve been in the house less than a year.

I know it is psychologically troubling that your house is $100K underwater. It might ultimately behoove you to walk away. But you have the option of staying there as long as you want before you walk for a relatively small fraction of your salary. Maybe your next raise or two will cover the loss. Small potatoes.
I’d at least hang around for another couple years to see how far it goes and what remedies might be offered before starting to walk.

It is likely that within a few years (maybe 5 or so) that rents will be equal to your payment or higher.

But, why even worry about what your house is worth in order to save a measly 4.3% of your salary ?

[23109VC]

all I know is that in the near future, my house will be worth about $200k LESS than what I owe.

so why keep it? with 100% financing – explain to me the “benefit” of keeping it and paying all that money every month on a house leveraged to $350k that is only worth $150k.

I would think that at some point – I will be able to rent a bigger/better/nicer house for LESS money and since my house is going to be $200k upside down, and I put nothign into it – the most logical and financially reasonable thing to do would be dump it on teh bank and walk.

i really don’t care about what is “right” or what would be the “morally appropriate” thing to do. sad to say it, but if I have to shaft my bank and save my own neck – so be it. it’s money, it was a contract, and it went sour – and unfortuntely for the bank, they were dumb enough to loan me that much money on an asset that just took a dump. I promised to pay, but if I don’t pay, they get to have the house. that’s how it works. it’s all legal.

believe me, if there was a claus that said if my house tripled in value they were entitled to sell my hosue and pocket the proceeds – and it did that – they wouldn’t “feel sorry for me” and let me stay – they’d throw my a$$ out so fast it woudl make my head spin. i’m looking at this STRICTLY from a standpoint of what makes the most financial sense.

the best option woudl to have never bought the house in the first place. i dind’t listen to you guys, did it anyway, so here I am. no point in whining over that now. what’s done is done. you guys were right. i can admit that.

but now that it’s happened – the next question is what is my next option. Keeping or dumping the hosue – to me – is mostly motviated by how upside down the hosue is, how long it will take to recoup that money, and largely – what will it cost me on a monthly basis to replace what I have now.

right now I have what I would consider a very nicely upgraded, nicely loaced, but somewhat “small” house in Harveston. about 1900 sq ft. one story. nicely fixed up. it has all the ‘bells and whistles’ i want in a house.

I pay about $3200-3300 a month when you factor in principal/interest/HOA, etc.

I earn about $140k/year roughly. do the math. even with my tax writeoff – I think I woudl be saving a good $500+/month if I left this house, and rented a bigger/better house that woudl cost me around $2000/month. no HOA, no upkeep – just pay monthly rent.

I could drag out the foreclosure process for a year, pocket about $36000. then paying $2000/month in rent – I’d have a bigger hosue (which my wife wants – we had another baby) – and pay less money.

[23109VC]

all I know is that in the near future, my house will be worth about $200k LESS than what I owe.

so why keep it? with 100% financing – explain to me the “benefit” of keeping it and paying all that money every month on a house leveraged to $350k that is only worth $150k.

I would think that at some point – I will be able to rent a bigger/better/nicer house for LESS money and since my house is going to be $200k upside down, and I put nothign into it – the most logical and financially reasonable thing to do would be dump it on teh bank and walk.

i really don’t care about what is “right” or what would be the “morally appropriate” thing to do. sad to say it, but if I have to shaft my bank and save my own neck – so be it. it’s money, it was a contract, and it went sour – and unfortuntely for the bank, they were dumb enough to loan me that much money on an asset that just took a dump. I promised to pay, but if I don’t pay, they get to have the house. that’s how it works. it’s all legal.

believe me, if there was a claus that said if my house tripled in value they were entitled to sell my hosue and pocket the proceeds – and it did that – they wouldn’t “feel sorry for me” and let me stay – they’d throw my a$$ out so fast it woudl make my head spin. i’m looking at this STRICTLY from a standpoint of what makes the most financial sense.

the best option woudl to have never bought the house in the first place. i dind’t listen to you guys, did it anyway, so here I am. no point in whining over that now. what’s done is done. you guys were right. i can admit that.

but now that it’s happened – the next question is what is my next option. Keeping or dumping the hosue – to me – is mostly motviated by how upside down the hosue is, how long it will take to recoup that money, and largely – what will it cost me on a monthly basis to replace what I have now.

right now I have what I would consider a very nicely upgraded, nicely loaced, but somewhat “small” house in Harveston. about 1900 sq ft. one story. nicely fixed up. it has all the ‘bells and whistles’ i want in a house.

I pay about $3200-3300 a month when you factor in principal/interest/HOA, etc.

I earn about $140k/year roughly. do the math. even with my tax writeoff – I think I woudl be saving a good $500+/month if I left this house, and rented a bigger/better house that woudl cost me around $2000/month. no HOA, no upkeep – just pay monthly rent.

I could drag out the foreclosure process for a year, pocket about $36000. then paying $2000/month in rent – I’d have a bigger hosue (which my wife wants – we had another baby) – and pay less money.

[23109VC]

all I know is that in the near future, my house will be worth about $200k LESS than what I owe.

so why keep it? with 100% financing – explain to me the “benefit” of keeping it and paying all that money every month on a house leveraged to $350k that is only worth $150k.

I would think that at some point – I will be able to rent a bigger/better/nicer house for LESS money and since my house is going to be $200k upside down, and I put nothign into it – the most logical and financially reasonable thing to do would be dump it on teh bank and walk.

i really don’t care about what is “right” or what would be the “morally appropriate” thing to do. sad to say it, but if I have to shaft my bank and save my own neck – so be it. it’s money, it was a contract, and it went sour – and unfortuntely for the bank, they were dumb enough to loan me that much money on an asset that just took a dump. I promised to pay, but if I don’t pay, they get to have the house. that’s how it works. it’s all legal.

believe me, if there was a claus that said if my house tripled in value they were entitled to sell my hosue and pocket the proceeds – and it did that – they wouldn’t “feel sorry for me” and let me stay – they’d throw my a$$ out so fast it woudl make my head spin. i’m looking at this STRICTLY from a standpoint of what makes the most financial sense.

the best option woudl to have never bought the house in the first place. i dind’t listen to you guys, did it anyway, so here I am. no point in whining over that now. what’s done is done. you guys were right. i can admit that.

but now that it’s happened – the next question is what is my next option. Keeping or dumping the hosue – to me – is mostly motviated by how upside down the hosue is, how long it will take to recoup that money, and largely – what will it cost me on a monthly basis to replace what I have now.

right now I have what I would consider a very nicely upgraded, nicely loaced, but somewhat “small” house in Harveston. about 1900 sq ft. one story. nicely fixed up. it has all the ‘bells and whistles’ i want in a house.

I pay about $3200-3300 a month when you factor in principal/interest/HOA, etc.

I earn about $140k/year roughly. do the math. even with my tax writeoff – I think I woudl be saving a good $500+/month if I left this house, and rented a bigger/better house that woudl cost me around $2000/month. no HOA, no upkeep – just pay monthly rent.

I could drag out the foreclosure process for a year, pocket about $36000. then paying $2000/month in rent – I’d have a bigger hosue (which my wife wants – we had another baby) – and pay less money.

[23109VC]

all I know is that in the near future, my house will be worth about $200k LESS than what I owe.

so why keep it? with 100% financing – explain to me the “benefit” of keeping it and paying all that money every month on a house leveraged to $350k that is only worth $150k.

I would think that at some point – I will be able to rent a bigger/better/nicer house for LESS money and since my house is going to be $200k upside down, and I put nothign into it – the most logical and financially reasonable thing to do would be dump it on teh bank and walk.

i really don’t care about what is “right” or what would be the “morally appropriate” thing to do. sad to say it, but if I have to shaft my bank and save my own neck – so be it. it’s money, it was a contract, and it went sour – and unfortuntely for the bank, they were dumb enough to loan me that much money on an asset that just took a dump. I promised to pay, but if I don’t pay, they get to have the house. that’s how it works. it’s all legal.

believe me, if there was a claus that said if my house tripled in value they were entitled to sell my hosue and pocket the proceeds – and it did that – they wouldn’t “feel sorry for me” and let me stay – they’d throw my a$$ out so fast it woudl make my head spin. i’m looking at this STRICTLY from a standpoint of what makes the most financial sense.

the best option woudl to have never bought the house in the first place. i dind’t listen to you guys, did it anyway, so here I am. no point in whining over that now. what’s done is done. you guys were right. i can admit that.

but now that it’s happened – the next question is what is my next option. Keeping or dumping the hosue – to me – is mostly motviated by how upside down the hosue is, how long it will take to recoup that money, and largely – what will it cost me on a monthly basis to replace what I have now.

right now I have what I would consider a very nicely upgraded, nicely loaced, but somewhat “small” house in Harveston. about 1900 sq ft. one story. nicely fixed up. it has all the ‘bells and whistles’ i want in a house.

I pay about $3200-3300 a month when you factor in principal/interest/HOA, etc.

I earn about $140k/year roughly. do the math. even with my tax writeoff – I think I woudl be saving a good $500+/month if I left this house, and rented a bigger/better house that woudl cost me around $2000/month. no HOA, no upkeep – just pay monthly rent.

I could drag out the foreclosure process for a year, pocket about $36000. then paying $2000/month in rent – I’d have a bigger hosue (which my wife wants – we had another baby) – and pay less money.

[Arraya]

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

That’s right. Kind of a trip when you think about it. Now just think about the huge wave of defaults on mortgages and other debts that is starting. All was created out of thin air from the privately run Federal Reserve and it’s web of commercial banks around it.

A small group of people is going to own everything when this tsunami is done. All from something that is imaginary, created with a keystroke, electrons on a screen. If one wanted to look at this as a huge scam one could. Because the guys who caused this mess are going to own it all in the end and leave us all debt slaves to their imaginary money. Ironically, we will give them things of real value for the fake money they created. Fundamentally our monetary system is modern day wizardry and smoke and mirrors.

Tom Jefferson understood the endgame.

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” — Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[Arraya]

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

That’s right. Kind of a trip when you think about it. Now just think about the huge wave of defaults on mortgages and other debts that is starting. All was created out of thin air from the privately run Federal Reserve and it’s web of commercial banks around it.

A small group of people is going to own everything when this tsunami is done. All from something that is imaginary, created with a keystroke, electrons on a screen. If one wanted to look at this as a huge scam one could. Because the guys who caused this mess are going to own it all in the end and leave us all debt slaves to their imaginary money. Ironically, we will give them things of real value for the fake money they created. Fundamentally our monetary system is modern day wizardry and smoke and mirrors.

Tom Jefferson understood the endgame.

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” — Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[Arraya]

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

That’s right. Kind of a trip when you think about it. Now just think about the huge wave of defaults on mortgages and other debts that is starting. All was created out of thin air from the privately run Federal Reserve and it’s web of commercial banks around it.

A small group of people is going to own everything when this tsunami is done. All from something that is imaginary, created with a keystroke, electrons on a screen. If one wanted to look at this as a huge scam one could. Because the guys who caused this mess are going to own it all in the end and leave us all debt slaves to their imaginary money. Ironically, we will give them things of real value for the fake money they created. Fundamentally our monetary system is modern day wizardry and smoke and mirrors.

Tom Jefferson understood the endgame.

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” — Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[Arraya]

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

That’s right. Kind of a trip when you think about it. Now just think about the huge wave of defaults on mortgages and other debts that is starting. All was created out of thin air from the privately run Federal Reserve and it’s web of commercial banks around it.

A small group of people is going to own everything when this tsunami is done. All from something that is imaginary, created with a keystroke, electrons on a screen. If one wanted to look at this as a huge scam one could. Because the guys who caused this mess are going to own it all in the end and leave us all debt slaves to their imaginary money. Ironically, we will give them things of real value for the fake money they created. Fundamentally our monetary system is modern day wizardry and smoke and mirrors.

Tom Jefferson understood the endgame.

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” — Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)

[SD Realtor]

“What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract.”

Why would this apply only to homeowners facing foreclosure?

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

[SD Realtor]

“What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract.”

Why would this apply only to homeowners facing foreclosure?

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

[SD Realtor]

“What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract.”

Why would this apply only to homeowners facing foreclosure?

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

[SD Realtor]

“What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract.”

Why would this apply only to homeowners facing foreclosure?

Why wouldn’t this apply to every single homeowner because in essence, no lender has “consideration” do they?

[Arraya]

“it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business”

Why not take it a step further. Familiarize yourself with the 1969 case of Daly V some bank.

The case was made that the home was never really the banks because it did not have in legal speak “consideration”. The money was was created out of thin air and was never in the possession of the bank and thus the home was not the property of the bank in legal terms.

http://www.foreclosurefish.com/blog/index.php?id=439

The judge and a representative testifying on behalf of the bank also agreed with Daly’s argument, in effect. The bank’s president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that the money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage, and the money was created out of thin air.

The judge wrote a supporting decision in the case agreeing with Daly, writing “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan [the bank’s president] admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.” Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form of a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration. The bank did not even have the authority to create money out of thin air according to any known law or statute.

This case has been suppressed far more than argued against, and it has not been overturned. What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of debt-jail free card.

[Arraya]

“it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business”

Why not take it a step further. Familiarize yourself with the 1969 case of Daly V some bank.

The case was made that the home was never really the banks because it did not have in legal speak “consideration”. The money was was created out of thin air and was never in the possession of the bank and thus the home was not the property of the bank in legal terms.

http://www.foreclosurefish.com/blog/index.php?id=439

The judge and a representative testifying on behalf of the bank also agreed with Daly’s argument, in effect. The bank’s president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that the money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage, and the money was created out of thin air.

The judge wrote a supporting decision in the case agreeing with Daly, writing “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan [the bank’s president] admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.” Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form of a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration. The bank did not even have the authority to create money out of thin air according to any known law or statute.

This case has been suppressed far more than argued against, and it has not been overturned. What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of debt-jail free card.

[Arraya]

“it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business”

Why not take it a step further. Familiarize yourself with the 1969 case of Daly V some bank.

The case was made that the home was never really the banks because it did not have in legal speak “consideration”. The money was was created out of thin air and was never in the possession of the bank and thus the home was not the property of the bank in legal terms.

http://www.foreclosurefish.com/blog/index.php?id=439

The judge and a representative testifying on behalf of the bank also agreed with Daly’s argument, in effect. The bank’s president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that the money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage, and the money was created out of thin air.

The judge wrote a supporting decision in the case agreeing with Daly, writing “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan [the bank’s president] admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.” Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form of a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration. The bank did not even have the authority to create money out of thin air according to any known law or statute.

This case has been suppressed far more than argued against, and it has not been overturned. What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of debt-jail free card.

[Arraya]

“it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business”

Why not take it a step further. Familiarize yourself with the 1969 case of Daly V some bank.

The case was made that the home was never really the banks because it did not have in legal speak “consideration”. The money was was created out of thin air and was never in the possession of the bank and thus the home was not the property of the bank in legal terms.

http://www.foreclosurefish.com/blog/index.php?id=439

The judge and a representative testifying on behalf of the bank also agreed with Daly’s argument, in effect. The bank’s president, Mr. Morgan, admitted that the money did not exist until Daly was given the mortgage, and the money was created out of thin air.

The judge wrote a supporting decision in the case agreeing with Daly, writing “The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan [the bank’s president] admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.” Thus, the lending of the money to Daly in the form of a mortgage did not constitute valid consideration. The bank did not even have the authority to create money out of thin air according to any known law or statute.

This case has been suppressed far more than argued against, and it has not been overturned. What this means to homeowners facing foreclosure is that they may not even owe their bank any money, and the lender is trying to take the home to pay an illegal contract. This case is, quite possibly, a get out of debt-jail free card.

[23109VC]

everyone here told me not to buy. i did. shame on me. but I could care less at this point about being “the good guy” and just paying on my loan. in my opnion, that would be the dumb schmuck way to do it.

in this game, being nice nd upstanding gets you nothing. if the tables were turned, and I fell on hard times, and my house was worth twice what I paid, the banks would froth at the mouth to kcik me out, sell it, and pocket the money. now that it’s the reverse, why should I be “mr nice guy” and just take it up the a$$.

housin prices got run up b/c of these frickin banks, and b/c of morons who bought what they coudlnt’ buy. yeah, I bought it. but why should I pay the high inflated price, and when it all collapses, just hold hte bag and take it while everyone else gets a freebie.

in the end, I can just milk it for a year, then walk away. i have some rich relatives who could buy me a house for cash and carry paper. i could just rent for a while and repair my credit. i’m at the point where I honestly don’t care.

if I stay in myh ouse, lose my house, rent a house – given everything going on with the economy, the housing market, I don’t care anymore. i may have gotten caught up in that whole” i’ve got to own a house” thing, and now i’ve snapped out of it and relaize it’s just a box i live in, and as far as I’m concerned, i’m just looking to pay as little as possible for the nicest place to live.

if staying in my house ends up making sense, I’ll do it. but when you have a mortgage amount of approx $350k and your house is worth $200k, staying in the house might actually be the STUPID thing to do. i have a 100% non recourse loan. I can pack up my stuff, walk away, and the bank takes it up the a$$ not me. my credit gets screwed, but i really dont’ care. hal fthe country will have scrwed up credit by the time this is said and done with, maybe more than 50%…

i’m trying to view this from a rational standpoint. i’m envisioning that there is going to come a point where my house price will go so low, that if I were to sit down with a financial planner, economic advisor – and explained my situation they woudl say “dump your house”. that is the SMART thing to do. let the bank eat the loss. rent something else.

it realistically may be that I would be AHEAD financially if I were to let my credit get hit, spend less oney on a rental, and pocket money, repair my creidt, and then rebuy later when prices are more rational. VS suck it up an stay/pay and wait 15 years to see any equity….

i made the bed, I’m lying in it. I’m not blaming others. I’m not a “victim” – but I do feel a sense of frustration that as a hard working productive member of society who got caught up i the “buy the American dream” and boght a home that I COULD afford..I have a big payment but I have a big salary (relative to the general public) I”m sure many of you are far better off than me..I don’t mean it in an arrogant way..just that I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.

now prices are collapsing. and b/c the dumb banks let me in wiht 100% financing, I have the option to just walk and lose no money. just my credit..so at some point, you ahve to seriously consider that option.

if the bank will renegotiate with me and make it worthwhile to stay, great. if not, they can frickin have it.

now I don’t know about temecula guys statements that banks aren’t really giving any one anything. if they say they will convert my 30 yr fixed P&I loan into an interst only..that gets me nothign excpet saving montly monty and effectivel make me like a long term renter…

now if they would actually reduce my principal, just write off part of what I owe, and/or lower my int rate, that would be great. my rates now are only so-so. i have a first at like 6.5 and a second at over 7 i think…crappy rates. i coud probably push hard for them to drop those to very aggressive rates..

but i’m not going to makei t recourse debt. if they want to play that game, i can just tell them to come get the house. in the end, they lose harder than I do. which is why i think an effective negotiator has them over a barrel and can dictate terms.

it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business.

[23109VC]

everyone here told me not to buy. i did. shame on me. but I could care less at this point about being “the good guy” and just paying on my loan. in my opnion, that would be the dumb schmuck way to do it.

in this game, being nice nd upstanding gets you nothing. if the tables were turned, and I fell on hard times, and my house was worth twice what I paid, the banks would froth at the mouth to kcik me out, sell it, and pocket the money. now that it’s the reverse, why should I be “mr nice guy” and just take it up the a$$.

housin prices got run up b/c of these frickin banks, and b/c of morons who bought what they coudlnt’ buy. yeah, I bought it. but why should I pay the high inflated price, and when it all collapses, just hold hte bag and take it while everyone else gets a freebie.

in the end, I can just milk it for a year, then walk away. i have some rich relatives who could buy me a house for cash and carry paper. i could just rent for a while and repair my credit. i’m at the point where I honestly don’t care.

if I stay in myh ouse, lose my house, rent a house – given everything going on with the economy, the housing market, I don’t care anymore. i may have gotten caught up in that whole” i’ve got to own a house” thing, and now i’ve snapped out of it and relaize it’s just a box i live in, and as far as I’m concerned, i’m just looking to pay as little as possible for the nicest place to live.

if staying in my house ends up making sense, I’ll do it. but when you have a mortgage amount of approx $350k and your house is worth $200k, staying in the house might actually be the STUPID thing to do. i have a 100% non recourse loan. I can pack up my stuff, walk away, and the bank takes it up the a$$ not me. my credit gets screwed, but i really dont’ care. hal fthe country will have scrwed up credit by the time this is said and done with, maybe more than 50%…

i’m trying to view this from a rational standpoint. i’m envisioning that there is going to come a point where my house price will go so low, that if I were to sit down with a financial planner, economic advisor – and explained my situation they woudl say “dump your house”. that is the SMART thing to do. let the bank eat the loss. rent something else.

it realistically may be that I would be AHEAD financially if I were to let my credit get hit, spend less oney on a rental, and pocket money, repair my creidt, and then rebuy later when prices are more rational. VS suck it up an stay/pay and wait 15 years to see any equity….

i made the bed, I’m lying in it. I’m not blaming others. I’m not a “victim” – but I do feel a sense of frustration that as a hard working productive member of society who got caught up i the “buy the American dream” and boght a home that I COULD afford..I have a big payment but I have a big salary (relative to the general public) I”m sure many of you are far better off than me..I don’t mean it in an arrogant way..just that I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.

now prices are collapsing. and b/c the dumb banks let me in wiht 100% financing, I have the option to just walk and lose no money. just my credit..so at some point, you ahve to seriously consider that option.

if the bank will renegotiate with me and make it worthwhile to stay, great. if not, they can frickin have it.

now I don’t know about temecula guys statements that banks aren’t really giving any one anything. if they say they will convert my 30 yr fixed P&I loan into an interst only..that gets me nothign excpet saving montly monty and effectivel make me like a long term renter…

now if they would actually reduce my principal, just write off part of what I owe, and/or lower my int rate, that would be great. my rates now are only so-so. i have a first at like 6.5 and a second at over 7 i think…crappy rates. i coud probably push hard for them to drop those to very aggressive rates..

but i’m not going to makei t recourse debt. if they want to play that game, i can just tell them to come get the house. in the end, they lose harder than I do. which is why i think an effective negotiator has them over a barrel and can dictate terms.

it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business.

[23109VC]

everyone here told me not to buy. i did. shame on me. but I could care less at this point about being “the good guy” and just paying on my loan. in my opnion, that would be the dumb schmuck way to do it.

in this game, being nice nd upstanding gets you nothing. if the tables were turned, and I fell on hard times, and my house was worth twice what I paid, the banks would froth at the mouth to kcik me out, sell it, and pocket the money. now that it’s the reverse, why should I be “mr nice guy” and just take it up the a$$.

housin prices got run up b/c of these frickin banks, and b/c of morons who bought what they coudlnt’ buy. yeah, I bought it. but why should I pay the high inflated price, and when it all collapses, just hold hte bag and take it while everyone else gets a freebie.

in the end, I can just milk it for a year, then walk away. i have some rich relatives who could buy me a house for cash and carry paper. i could just rent for a while and repair my credit. i’m at the point where I honestly don’t care.

if I stay in myh ouse, lose my house, rent a house – given everything going on with the economy, the housing market, I don’t care anymore. i may have gotten caught up in that whole” i’ve got to own a house” thing, and now i’ve snapped out of it and relaize it’s just a box i live in, and as far as I’m concerned, i’m just looking to pay as little as possible for the nicest place to live.

if staying in my house ends up making sense, I’ll do it. but when you have a mortgage amount of approx $350k and your house is worth $200k, staying in the house might actually be the STUPID thing to do. i have a 100% non recourse loan. I can pack up my stuff, walk away, and the bank takes it up the a$$ not me. my credit gets screwed, but i really dont’ care. hal fthe country will have scrwed up credit by the time this is said and done with, maybe more than 50%…

i’m trying to view this from a rational standpoint. i’m envisioning that there is going to come a point where my house price will go so low, that if I were to sit down with a financial planner, economic advisor – and explained my situation they woudl say “dump your house”. that is the SMART thing to do. let the bank eat the loss. rent something else.

it realistically may be that I would be AHEAD financially if I were to let my credit get hit, spend less oney on a rental, and pocket money, repair my creidt, and then rebuy later when prices are more rational. VS suck it up an stay/pay and wait 15 years to see any equity….

i made the bed, I’m lying in it. I’m not blaming others. I’m not a “victim” – but I do feel a sense of frustration that as a hard working productive member of society who got caught up i the “buy the American dream” and boght a home that I COULD afford..I have a big payment but I have a big salary (relative to the general public) I”m sure many of you are far better off than me..I don’t mean it in an arrogant way..just that I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.

now prices are collapsing. and b/c the dumb banks let me in wiht 100% financing, I have the option to just walk and lose no money. just my credit..so at some point, you ahve to seriously consider that option.

if the bank will renegotiate with me and make it worthwhile to stay, great. if not, they can frickin have it.

now I don’t know about temecula guys statements that banks aren’t really giving any one anything. if they say they will convert my 30 yr fixed P&I loan into an interst only..that gets me nothign excpet saving montly monty and effectivel make me like a long term renter…

now if they would actually reduce my principal, just write off part of what I owe, and/or lower my int rate, that would be great. my rates now are only so-so. i have a first at like 6.5 and a second at over 7 i think…crappy rates. i coud probably push hard for them to drop those to very aggressive rates..

but i’m not going to makei t recourse debt. if they want to play that game, i can just tell them to come get the house. in the end, they lose harder than I do. which is why i think an effective negotiator has them over a barrel and can dictate terms.

it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business.

[23109VC]

everyone here told me not to buy. i did. shame on me. but I could care less at this point about being “the good guy” and just paying on my loan. in my opnion, that would be the dumb schmuck way to do it.

in this game, being nice nd upstanding gets you nothing. if the tables were turned, and I fell on hard times, and my house was worth twice what I paid, the banks would froth at the mouth to kcik me out, sell it, and pocket the money. now that it’s the reverse, why should I be “mr nice guy” and just take it up the a$$.

housin prices got run up b/c of these frickin banks, and b/c of morons who bought what they coudlnt’ buy. yeah, I bought it. but why should I pay the high inflated price, and when it all collapses, just hold hte bag and take it while everyone else gets a freebie.

in the end, I can just milk it for a year, then walk away. i have some rich relatives who could buy me a house for cash and carry paper. i could just rent for a while and repair my credit. i’m at the point where I honestly don’t care.

if I stay in myh ouse, lose my house, rent a house – given everything going on with the economy, the housing market, I don’t care anymore. i may have gotten caught up in that whole” i’ve got to own a house” thing, and now i’ve snapped out of it and relaize it’s just a box i live in, and as far as I’m concerned, i’m just looking to pay as little as possible for the nicest place to live.

if staying in my house ends up making sense, I’ll do it. but when you have a mortgage amount of approx $350k and your house is worth $200k, staying in the house might actually be the STUPID thing to do. i have a 100% non recourse loan. I can pack up my stuff, walk away, and the bank takes it up the a$$ not me. my credit gets screwed, but i really dont’ care. hal fthe country will have scrwed up credit by the time this is said and done with, maybe more than 50%…

i’m trying to view this from a rational standpoint. i’m envisioning that there is going to come a point where my house price will go so low, that if I were to sit down with a financial planner, economic advisor – and explained my situation they woudl say “dump your house”. that is the SMART thing to do. let the bank eat the loss. rent something else.

it realistically may be that I would be AHEAD financially if I were to let my credit get hit, spend less oney on a rental, and pocket money, repair my creidt, and then rebuy later when prices are more rational. VS suck it up an stay/pay and wait 15 years to see any equity….

i made the bed, I’m lying in it. I’m not blaming others. I’m not a “victim” – but I do feel a sense of frustration that as a hard working productive member of society who got caught up i the “buy the American dream” and boght a home that I COULD afford..I have a big payment but I have a big salary (relative to the general public) I”m sure many of you are far better off than me..I don’t mean it in an arrogant way..just that I earn good money and I bought a hosue with a 30 yr fixed that I CAN afford. but the prices were blown out of proportio nby all the morons who bought what they coudl not afford.

now prices are collapsing. and b/c the dumb banks let me in wiht 100% financing, I have the option to just walk and lose no money. just my credit..so at some point, you ahve to seriously consider that option.

if the bank will renegotiate with me and make it worthwhile to stay, great. if not, they can frickin have it.

now I don’t know about temecula guys statements that banks aren’t really giving any one anything. if they say they will convert my 30 yr fixed P&I loan into an interst only..that gets me nothign excpet saving montly monty and effectivel make me like a long term renter…

now if they would actually reduce my principal, just write off part of what I owe, and/or lower my int rate, that would be great. my rates now are only so-so. i have a first at like 6.5 and a second at over 7 i think…crappy rates. i coud probably push hard for them to drop those to very aggressive rates..

but i’m not going to makei t recourse debt. if they want to play that game, i can just tell them to come get the house. in the end, they lose harder than I do. which is why i think an effective negotiator has them over a barrel and can dictate terms.

it’s not about being fair or upstanding anymore. it’s about taking advantage of the situation to do better for yourself – it’s not illegal – it’s business.

[temeculaguy]

23109, you made your own bed, now you have to sleep on it. We spent months trying to talk you out of it, but you didn’t listen then and you aren’t listening now.

The question on the table is why would the bank choose to lose money on the loans they are making money on, why would they solicit a loss on their entire portfolio? My personal question is why would anyone who didn;t need a rework, take one, they are bad for the owner if you have other alternatives.

The other statement that has yet to be refuted is what is so cool about wrecking your credit and then getting a recourse loan and entering into a rework that is designed to never build equity. The same people on here that wouldn’t dream of an I/O loan are jealous that reworks are getting what amounts to a deal with the devil and a lifetime I/O loan, yet the reworks sell half of their future appreciation in addition to a lifetime I/O. People hear the words “principal reduction” and lose their minds, I repeat, that principal amount never goes away, they just reduce it for purposes of determining payment, they still owe it. It’s like taking on a partner, like going halfsies on a house with a relative.

They never reduce your balance, they just base the payment on a reduced amount, so you pay less per month but the original loan amount haunts you forever. You can never take out a heloc, refi, sell or do anything without settling the original debt, fees, etc. It’s just renting with a lifetime overpriced lease.

The system doesn’t drive anyone anywhere, it fools them, just like teaser rates and 0 down fooled them into thinking they could afford more than they could, this fools them into thinking they can keep what they can’t afford, they can live there but they keep nothing when the ride is over. Look at 10 years from now, they will essentially have nothing after they sell, that is not how I define home ownership.

You may feel like the good guy 23109, and you have the opportunity to be that guy, by paying your mortgage and paying for the mistake that YOU made, not the guy across the street, not the government, not the bank, but the mistake that YOU made. Your eyes were wide open, you knew the risks, no unscrupulous lender lied to you.

It’s not the end of the world, people make worse mistakes all the time. How we behave after we make mistakes is what defines us, I’ve screwed up before and I will again but it will be my fault and I will make amends, you need to as well.

BTW-they wont renegotiate with you, you have an “over the table” job with all your income reported. The best they will do is make your payment .37 of your gross income, if you gross 10k a month, that is 3700, and I believe it is P&I, not inclusive of hoa, tax and ins., so unless you are paying more than 4k, they wont help. From memory, you didn’t put 20% down and I can’t remember if you took a fixed rate fully amortized 30 yr. If you have an adjustable or an I/O you can probably get it switched into a 30 yr fixed for nothing, that is where you can negotiate, however, the payment goes up, not down.

[temeculaguy]

23109, you made your own bed, now you have to sleep on it. We spent months trying to talk you out of it, but you didn’t listen then and you aren’t listening now.

The question on the table is why would the bank choose to lose money on the loans they are making money on, why would they solicit a loss on their entire portfolio? My personal question is why would anyone who didn;t need a rework, take one, they are bad for the owner if you have other alternatives.

The other statement that has yet to be refuted is what is so cool about wrecking your credit and then getting a recourse loan and entering into a rework that is designed to never build equity. The same people on here that wouldn’t dream of an I/O loan are jealous that reworks are getting what amounts to a deal with the devil and a lifetime I/O loan, yet the reworks sell half of their future appreciation in addition to a lifetime I/O. People hear the words “principal reduction” and lose their minds, I repeat, that principal amount never goes away, they just reduce it for purposes of determining payment, they still owe it. It’s like taking on a partner, like going halfsies on a house with a relative.

They never reduce your balance, they just base the payment on a reduced amount, so you pay less per month but the original loan amount haunts you forever. You can never take out a heloc, refi, sell or do anything without settling the original debt, fees, etc. It’s just renting with a lifetime overpriced lease.

The system doesn’t drive anyone anywhere, it fools them, just like teaser rates and 0 down fooled them into thinking they could afford more than they could, this fools them into thinking they can keep what they can’t afford, they can live there but they keep nothing when the ride is over. Look at 10 years from now, they will essentially have nothing after they sell, that is not how I define home ownership.

You may feel like the good guy 23109, and you have the opportunity to be that guy, by paying your mortgage and paying for the mistake that YOU made, not the guy across the street, not the government, not the bank, but the mistake that YOU made. Your eyes were wide open, you knew the risks, no unscrupulous lender lied to you.

It’s not the end of the world, people make worse mistakes all the time. How we behave after we make mistakes is what defines us, I’ve screwed up before and I will again but it will be my fault and I will make amends, you need to as well.

BTW-they wont renegotiate with you, you have an “over the table” job with all your income reported. The best they will do is make your payment .37 of your gross income, if you gross 10k a month, that is 3700, and I believe it is P&I, not inclusive of hoa, tax and ins., so unless you are paying more than 4k, they wont help. From memory, you didn’t put 20% down and I can’t remember if you took a fixed rate fully amortized 30 yr. If you have an adjustable or an I/O you can probably get it switched into a 30 yr fixed for nothing, that is where you can negotiate, however, the payment goes up, not down.

[temeculaguy]

23109, you made your own bed, now you have to sleep on it. We spent months trying to talk you out of it, but you didn’t listen then and you aren’t listening now.

The question on the table is why would the bank choose to lose money on the loans they are making money on, why would they solicit a loss on their entire portfolio? My personal question is why would anyone who didn;t need a rework, take one, they are bad for the owner if you have other alternatives.

The other statement that has yet to be refuted is what is so cool about wrecking your credit and then getting a recourse loan and entering into a rework that is designed to never build equity. The same people on here that wouldn’t dream of an I/O loan are jealous that reworks are getting what amounts to a deal with the devil and a lifetime I/O loan, yet the reworks sell half of their future appreciation in addition to a lifetime I/O. People hear the words “principal reduction” and lose their minds, I repeat, that principal amount never goes away, they just reduce it for purposes of determining payment, they still owe it. It’s like taking on a partner, like going halfsies on a house with a relative.

They never reduce your balance, they just base the payment on a reduced amount, so you pay less per month but the original loan amount haunts you forever. You can never take out a heloc, refi, sell or do anything without settling the original debt, fees, etc. It’s just renting with a lifetime overpriced lease.

The system doesn’t drive anyone anywhere, it fools them, just like teaser rates and 0 down fooled them into thinking they could afford more than they could, this fools them into thinking they can keep what they can’t afford, they can live there but they keep nothing when the ride is over. Look at 10 years from now, they will essentially have nothing after they sell, that is not how I define home ownership.

You may feel like the good guy 23109, and you have the opportunity to be that guy, by paying your mortgage and paying for the mistake that YOU made, not the guy across the street, not the government, not the bank, but the mistake that YOU made. Your eyes were wide open, you knew the risks, no unscrupulous lender lied to you.

It’s not the end of the world, people make worse mistakes all the time. How we behave after we make mistakes is what defines us, I’ve screwed up before and I will again but it will be my fault and I will make amends, you need to as well.

BTW-they wont renegotiate with you, you have an “over the table” job with all your income reported. The best they will do is make your payment .37 of your gross income, if you gross 10k a month, that is 3700, and I believe it is P&I, not inclusive of hoa, tax and ins., so unless you are paying more than 4k, they wont help. From memory, you didn’t put 20% down and I can’t remember if you took a fixed rate fully amortized 30 yr. If you have an adjustable or an I/O you can probably get it switched into a 30 yr fixed for nothing, that is where you can negotiate, however, the payment goes up, not down.

[temeculaguy]

23109, you made your own bed, now you have to sleep on it. We spent months trying to talk you out of it, but you didn’t listen then and you aren’t listening now.

The question on the table is why would the bank choose to lose money on the loans they are making money on, why would they solicit a loss on their entire portfolio? My personal question is why would anyone who didn;t need a rework, take one, they are bad for the owner if you have other alternatives.

The other statement that has yet to be refuted is what is so cool about wrecking your credit and then getting a recourse loan and entering into a rework that is designed to never build equity. The same people on here that wouldn’t dream of an I/O loan are jealous that reworks are getting what amounts to a deal with the devil and a lifetime I/O loan, yet the reworks sell half of their future appreciation in addition to a lifetime I/O. People hear the words “principal reduction” and lose their minds, I repeat, that principal amount never goes away, they just reduce it for purposes of determining payment, they still owe it. It’s like taking on a partner, like going halfsies on a house with a relative.

They never reduce your balance, they just base the payment on a reduced amount, so you pay less per month but the original loan amount haunts you forever. You can never take out a heloc, refi, sell or do anything without settling the original debt, fees, etc. It’s just renting with a lifetime overpriced lease.

The system doesn’t drive anyone anywhere, it fools them, just like teaser rates and 0 down fooled them into thinking they could afford more than they could, this fools them into thinking they can keep what they can’t afford, they can live there but they keep nothing when the ride is over. Look at 10 years from now, they will essentially have nothing after they sell, that is not how I define home ownership.

You may feel like the good guy 23109, and you have the opportunity to be that guy, by paying your mortgage and paying for the mistake that YOU made, not the guy across the street, not the government, not the bank, but the mistake that YOU made. Your eyes were wide open, you knew the risks, no unscrupulous lender lied to you.

It’s not the end of the world, people make worse mistakes all the time. How we behave after we make mistakes is what defines us, I’ve screwed up before and I will again but it will be my fault and I will make amends, you need to as well.

BTW-they wont renegotiate with you, you have an “over the table” job with all your income reported. The best they will do is make your payment .37 of your gross income, if you gross 10k a month, that is 3700, and I believe it is P&I, not inclusive of hoa, tax and ins., so unless you are paying more than 4k, they wont help. From memory, you didn’t put 20% down and I can’t remember if you took a fixed rate fully amortized 30 yr. If you have an adjustable or an I/O you can probably get it switched into a 30 yr fixed for nothing, that is where you can negotiate, however, the payment goes up, not down.

[fun4vnay2]

[quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..

[Coronita]

[quote=dd123][quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..
[/quote]

I said something like this, but for me it was if you owe $100k, it’s your problem, if you owe something like $10million, it’s the bank problem. But i guess if you multiple the number of people that owe $100k, then it really becomes the bank problem.

[Coronita]

[quote=dd123][quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..
[/quote]

I said something like this, but for me it was if you owe $100k, it’s your problem, if you owe something like $10million, it’s the bank problem. But i guess if you multiple the number of people that owe $100k, then it really becomes the bank problem.

[Coronita]

[quote=dd123][quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..
[/quote]

I said something like this, but for me it was if you owe $100k, it’s your problem, if you owe something like $10million, it’s the bank problem. But i guess if you multiple the number of people that owe $100k, then it really becomes the bank problem.

[Coronita]

[quote=dd123][quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..
[/quote]

I said something like this, but for me it was if you owe $100k, it’s your problem, if you owe something like $10million, it’s the bank problem. But i guess if you multiple the number of people that owe $100k, then it really becomes the bank problem.

[Coronita]

[quote=dd123][quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..
[/quote]

I said something like this, but for me it was if you owe $100k, it’s your problem, if you owe something like $10million, it’s the bank problem. But i guess if you multiple the number of people that owe $100k, then it really becomes the bank problem.

[fun4vnay2]

[quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..

[fun4vnay2]

[quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..

[fun4vnay2]

[quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..

[fun4vnay2]

[quote=23109VC]i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[/quote]

Someone has aptly said so “If you owe bank 10K, it’s your problem but if you owe your back 100K, its the bank problem”
It looks like this saying is becoming reality..

[23109VC]

i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[23109VC]

i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[23109VC]

i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[23109VC]

i believe this. while there could be a catch, such as making the debt recourse, or some other catch – prepayment penalties? whatever it is – the banks are screwed.

i bought my temecula house for $350k thinking it was such a smoking deal. 1900 sq ft. it is a very nice house and I like it, but the house next to me just went into foreclosure/bank owned and the bank is asking $299k and THAT house is 2500sq ft. so more space, far less money. who knows what it will ultimately sell for.. 250-275k?

making my house worth what?? $200k?

why in the hell woudl the bank want to foreclose on me when they KNOW that they have a $350k loan and they can only get maybe $200k PLUS COSTS to foreclose….

if lowering the payments by $1000/month or whatever keeps people in the home – they will do it b/c the alternative is even worse.

i’m one of those people who CAN afford to stay, does pay on time, am responsible, bought a house within my means… and it pisses me off to see idiots who bought a hosue they had no busines buying, aon an ARM, now cry foul and get their loan % rate, principle all whacked to nothing… b/c they were stupid.

that is such BS. so you know what, why not do it too? i am really thinking of not apying my mortgage. what will happen. the bank is’nt going to foreclose on me. they would lose over $150k. they will threaten me, try to scaer me into paying, but ultimately, if i say “f**K you” and I become a jerk who manipulates the system – guess what, they will renegotiate with me, reduce my int rate, reduce my balnce, they will do something to keep me in the house.

it’s a system that drives good responsible people to do things they normally wouldn’t do. but if the “system” is goign to reward losers – then why be a good guy and get royally screwed?

[djc]

Here is some more information. Yes, it simply was a letter and it is stated their loan’s interest would be reduced from 5.7x to 4.xx. All other parts of their original contract remains the same. It is simply an interest rate cut.

They did not call the number provided on the letter, but called the number they had for their bank and couldn’t get much information. Yesterday, they went down to a branch office and spoke to someone at the bank who told them that yes, this is legit, their interest rate is being cut and it will be in effect not this next payment, but the following. Nothing to sign! When asked why this is happening, he stated the bank received loans from the government and they have to use some of the monies for this purpose.

The person really didn’t have much else to offer after an hour of discussions and my friends are still confused. They said that they didn’t want this reduction as they are fearful of recourse (they also subscribe to the ‘no free lunch’ mentality mentioned above) and want things to ‘stay the way they are’. The bank gentleman didn’t know what to do and referred them to the number on the letter.

They are seeing a RE lawyer this week for advice.

—

I agree this whole thing makes no logical sense, but on the other hand, nothing in this industry over the last 3 months DOES make logical sense. For all I know, perhaps receiving the loans from the government has conditions that banks ‘help homeowners stay in their homes’, but didn’t specify any criteria. Perhaps reducing a loan 1% or so on a good standing customer meets that requirement and will keep that revenue stream open, whereas reducing it on someone who is underwater on two loans who will lose the place regardless only gives the bank the useless asset they’ll get anyway.

Or perhaps the banks are rewarding those who took out fixed loans they could afford.

[TheBreeze]

Just be aware that if you walk away, you are not sticking it to either the bank or the man or the man at the bank. No, at this point you are just sticking it to the taxpayer. So please stop with the BS argument that you are some valiant little soldier who was brave enough to take on the evil bank.

The bank has borrowed from the Fed (taxpayer) in order to provide you with a house and now if you don’t pay that money back, it is the taxpayer who will take the hit. So the only people you are sticking it to are people like the honest taxpayers on this board who consistently pay their bills.

Tell your wife to kick you in the balls for me.

[JustLurking]

I can’t believe that I actually agree with TheBreeze about anything!

This is what bothers me about your rationalization, and everyone else’s who is in your situation – YOU made a bad financial decision and if you walk away, you are asking ME to pay for that bad decision. That makes me very angry.

You (and everyone else walks away) make the argument that you need to think about what is best for your family. What you don’t say is “I am going to do what is best for my family and I don’t care if it screws your family”. But whether you realize it or not, that is exactly what you are saying.

[peterb]

Everybody needs a quick primer in reality. Incidentally, I think this thread got a major hyjack.
Anywho, it was your congress people that voted for this stupid failout, despite people being 99 to 1 against it. And it was for the banks anyway. You think anyone on Wallstreet or Washington gives a flying f*ck about you? Actually, I take that back, they do care about you, because you’re the one’s who actually work and they need someone to fleece that’s working. Getting angry at someone that’s trying to optimize their position in this cluster is misguided at best. Look to Washington and Sacto for your real problems.

[peterb]

Everybody needs a quick primer in reality. Incidentally, I think this thread got a major hyjack.
Anywho, it was your congress people that voted for this stupid failout, despite people being 99 to 1 against it. And it was for the banks anyway. You think anyone on Wallstreet or Washington gives a flying f*ck about you? Actually, I take that back, they do care about you, because you’re the one’s who actually work and they need someone to fleece that’s working. Getting angry at someone that’s trying to optimize their position in this cluster is misguided at best. Look to Washington and Sacto for your real problems.

[peterb]

Everybody needs a quick primer in reality. Incidentally, I think this thread got a major hyjack.
Anywho, it was your congress people that voted for this stupid failout, despite people being 99 to 1 against it. And it was for the banks anyway. You think anyone on Wallstreet or Washington gives a flying f*ck about you? Actually, I take that back, they do care about you, because you’re the one’s who actually work and they need someone to fleece that’s working. Getting angry at someone that’s trying to optimize their position in this cluster is misguided at best. Look to Washington and Sacto for your real problems.

[peterb]

Everybody needs a quick primer in reality. Incidentally, I think this thread got a major hyjack.
Anywho, it was your congress people that voted for this stupid failout, despite people being 99 to 1 against it. And it was for the banks anyway. You think anyone on Wallstreet or Washington gives a flying f*ck about you? Actually, I take that back, they do care about you, because you’re the one’s who actually work and they need someone to fleece that’s working. Getting angry at someone that’s trying to optimize their position in this cluster is misguided at best. Look to Washington and Sacto for your real problems.

[peterb]

Everybody needs a quick primer in reality. Incidentally, I think this thread got a major hyjack.
Anywho, it was your congress people that voted for this stupid failout, despite people being 99 to 1 against it. And it was for the banks anyway. You think anyone on Wallstreet or Washington gives a flying f*ck about you? Actually, I take that back, they do care about you, because you’re the one’s who actually work and they need someone to fleece that’s working. Getting angry at someone that’s trying to optimize their position in this cluster is misguided at best. Look to Washington and Sacto for your real problems.

[JustLurking]

I can’t believe that I actually agree with TheBreeze about anything!

This is what bothers me about your rationalization, and everyone else’s who is in your situation – YOU made a bad financial decision and if you walk away, you are asking ME to pay for that bad decision. That makes me very angry.

You (and everyone else walks away) make the argument that you need to think about what is best for your family. What you don’t say is “I am going to do what is best for my family and I don’t care if it screws your family”. But whether you realize it or not, that is exactly what you are saying.

[JustLurking]

I can’t believe that I actually agree with TheBreeze about anything!

This is what bothers me about your rationalization, and everyone else’s who is in your situation – YOU made a bad financial decision and if you walk away, you are asking ME to pay for that bad decision. That makes me very angry.

You (and everyone else walks away) make the argument that you need to think about what is best for your family. What you don’t say is “I am going to do what is best for my family and I don’t care if it screws your family”. But whether you realize it or not, that is exactly what you are saying.

[JustLurking]

I can’t believe that I actually agree with TheBreeze about anything!

This is what bothers me about your rationalization, and everyone else’s who is in your situation – YOU made a bad financial decision and if you walk away, you are asking ME to pay for that bad decision. That makes me very angry.

You (and everyone else walks away) make the argument that you need to think about what is best for your family. What you don’t say is “I am going to do what is best for my family and I don’t care if it screws your family”. But whether you realize it or not, that is exactly what you are saying.

[JustLurking]

I can’t believe that I actually agree with TheBreeze about anything!

This is what bothers me about your rationalization, and everyone else’s who is in your situation – YOU made a bad financial decision and if you walk away, you are asking ME to pay for that bad decision. That makes me very angry.

You (and everyone else walks away) make the argument that you need to think about what is best for your family. What you don’t say is “I am going to do what is best for my family and I don’t care if it screws your family”. But whether you realize it or not, that is exactly what you are saying.

[TheBreeze]

Just be aware that if you walk away, you are not sticking it to either the bank or the man or the man at the bank. No, at this point you are just sticking it to the taxpayer. So please stop with the BS argument that you are some valiant little soldier who was brave enough to take on the evil bank.

The bank has borrowed from the Fed (taxpayer) in order to provide you with a house and now if you don’t pay that money back, it is the taxpayer who will take the hit. So the only people you are sticking it to are people like the honest taxpayers on this board who consistently pay their bills.

Tell your wife to kick you in the balls for me.

[TheBreeze]

Just be aware that if you walk away, you are not sticking it to either the bank or the man or the man at the bank. No, at this point you are just sticking it to the taxpayer. So please stop with the BS argument that you are some valiant little soldier who was brave enough to take on the evil bank.

The bank has borrowed from the Fed (taxpayer) in order to provide you with a house and now if you don’t pay that money back, it is the taxpayer who will take the hit. So the only people you are sticking it to are people like the honest taxpayers on this board who consistently pay their bills.

Tell your wife to kick you in the balls for me.

[TheBreeze]

Just be aware that if you walk away, you are not sticking it to either the bank or the man or the man at the bank. No, at this point you are just sticking it to the taxpayer. So please stop with the BS argument that you are some valiant little soldier who was brave enough to take on the evil bank.

The bank has borrowed from the Fed (taxpayer) in order to provide you with a house and now if you don’t pay that money back, it is the taxpayer who will take the hit. So the only people you are sticking it to are people like the honest taxpayers on this board who consistently pay their bills.

Tell your wife to kick you in the balls for me.

[TheBreeze]

Just be aware that if you walk away, you are not sticking it to either the bank or the man or the man at the bank. No, at this point you are just sticking it to the taxpayer. So please stop with the BS argument that you are some valiant little soldier who was brave enough to take on the evil bank.

The bank has borrowed from the Fed (taxpayer) in order to provide you with a house and now if you don’t pay that money back, it is the taxpayer who will take the hit. So the only people you are sticking it to are people like the honest taxpayers on this board who consistently pay their bills.

Tell your wife to kick you in the balls for me.

[djc]

Here is some more information. Yes, it simply was a letter and it is stated their loan’s interest would be reduced from 5.7x to 4.xx. All other parts of their original contract remains the same. It is simply an interest rate cut.

They did not call the number provided on the letter, but called the number they had for their bank and couldn’t get much information. Yesterday, they went down to a branch office and spoke to someone at the bank who told them that yes, this is legit, their interest rate is being cut and it will be in effect not this next payment, but the following. Nothing to sign! When asked why this is happening, he stated the bank received loans from the government and they have to use some of the monies for this purpose.

The person really didn’t have much else to offer after an hour of discussions and my friends are still confused. They said that they didn’t want this reduction as they are fearful of recourse (they also subscribe to the ‘no free lunch’ mentality mentioned above) and want things to ‘stay the way they are’. The bank gentleman didn’t know what to do and referred them to the number on the letter.

They are seeing a RE lawyer this week for advice.

—

I agree this whole thing makes no logical sense, but on the other hand, nothing in this industry over the last 3 months DOES make logical sense. For all I know, perhaps receiving the loans from the government has conditions that banks ‘help homeowners stay in their homes’, but didn’t specify any criteria. Perhaps reducing a loan 1% or so on a good standing customer meets that requirement and will keep that revenue stream open, whereas reducing it on someone who is underwater on two loans who will lose the place regardless only gives the bank the useless asset they’ll get anyway.

Or perhaps the banks are rewarding those who took out fixed loans they could afford.

[djc]

Here is some more information. Yes, it simply was a letter and it is stated their loan’s interest would be reduced from 5.7x to 4.xx. All other parts of their original contract remains the same. It is simply an interest rate cut.

They did not call the number provided on the letter, but called the number they had for their bank and couldn’t get much information. Yesterday, they went down to a branch office and spoke to someone at the bank who told them that yes, this is legit, their interest rate is being cut and it will be in effect not this next payment, but the following. Nothing to sign! When asked why this is happening, he stated the bank received loans from the government and they have to use some of the monies for this purpose.

The person really didn’t have much else to offer after an hour of discussions and my friends are still confused. They said that they didn’t want this reduction as they are fearful of recourse (they also subscribe to the ‘no free lunch’ mentality mentioned above) and want things to ‘stay the way they are’. The bank gentleman didn’t know what to do and referred them to the number on the letter.

They are seeing a RE lawyer this week for advice.

—

I agree this whole thing makes no logical sense, but on the other hand, nothing in this industry over the last 3 months DOES make logical sense. For all I know, perhaps receiving the loans from the government has conditions that banks ‘help homeowners stay in their homes’, but didn’t specify any criteria. Perhaps reducing a loan 1% or so on a good standing customer meets that requirement and will keep that revenue stream open, whereas reducing it on someone who is underwater on two loans who will lose the place regardless only gives the bank the useless asset they’ll get anyway.

Or perhaps the banks are rewarding those who took out fixed loans they could afford.

[djc]

Here is some more information. Yes, it simply was a letter and it is stated their loan’s interest would be reduced from 5.7x to 4.xx. All other parts of their original contract remains the same. It is simply an interest rate cut.

They did not call the number provided on the letter, but called the number they had for their bank and couldn’t get much information. Yesterday, they went down to a branch office and spoke to someone at the bank who told them that yes, this is legit, their interest rate is being cut and it will be in effect not this next payment, but the following. Nothing to sign! When asked why this is happening, he stated the bank received loans from the government and they have to use some of the monies for this purpose.

The person really didn’t have much else to offer after an hour of discussions and my friends are still confused. They said that they didn’t want this reduction as they are fearful of recourse (they also subscribe to the ‘no free lunch’ mentality mentioned above) and want things to ‘stay the way they are’. The bank gentleman didn’t know what to do and referred them to the number on the letter.

They are seeing a RE lawyer this week for advice.

—

I agree this whole thing makes no logical sense, but on the other hand, nothing in this industry over the last 3 months DOES make logical sense. For all I know, perhaps receiving the loans from the government has conditions that banks ‘help homeowners stay in their homes’, but didn’t specify any criteria. Perhaps reducing a loan 1% or so on a good standing customer meets that requirement and will keep that revenue stream open, whereas reducing it on someone who is underwater on two loans who will lose the place regardless only gives the bank the useless asset they’ll get anyway.

Or perhaps the banks are rewarding those who took out fixed loans they could afford.

[djc]

Here is some more information. Yes, it simply was a letter and it is stated their loan’s interest would be reduced from 5.7x to 4.xx. All other parts of their original contract remains the same. It is simply an interest rate cut.

They did not call the number provided on the letter, but called the number they had for their bank and couldn’t get much information. Yesterday, they went down to a branch office and spoke to someone at the bank who told them that yes, this is legit, their interest rate is being cut and it will be in effect not this next payment, but the following. Nothing to sign! When asked why this is happening, he stated the bank received loans from the government and they have to use some of the monies for this purpose.

The person really didn’t have much else to offer after an hour of discussions and my friends are still confused. They said that they didn’t want this reduction as they are fearful of recourse (they also subscribe to the ‘no free lunch’ mentality mentioned above) and want things to ‘stay the way they are’. The bank gentleman didn’t know what to do and referred them to the number on the letter.

They are seeing a RE lawyer this week for advice.

—

I agree this whole thing makes no logical sense, but on the other hand, nothing in this industry over the last 3 months DOES make logical sense. For all I know, perhaps receiving the loans from the government has conditions that banks ‘help homeowners stay in their homes’, but didn’t specify any criteria. Perhaps reducing a loan 1% or so on a good standing customer meets that requirement and will keep that revenue stream open, whereas reducing it on someone who is underwater on two loans who will lose the place regardless only gives the bank the useless asset they’ll get anyway.

Or perhaps the banks are rewarding those who took out fixed loans they could afford.

[murf2222]

23109, Am I really understanding your situation correctly?

You have a managable payment and knew of the volatile market going in. So whats the problem with honoring your contract? True, you don’t have as much *house-for-the-money* as what your neighbor can buy right now, but so what?

The fact is you make a good salary and can comfortably afford the payment on the contract you willingly signed. SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

I would feel sorry for you if perhaps you lost your job and could no longer afford the payment, but that is not the case here.

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

Murf2222

[scaredyclassic]

These sorts of nasty comments are uncalled for. He is honoring the contract. The contract apparently allows for walking away. But even if it didn’t, even if he were breaching the contract, well, to say that breaching a contract is indicative of a lack of morality ethics or pride is, well, kind of just wrong.

Indeed, in contracts class at most any law school you might pass through, most professors will touch on the subject of efficient breach and the policy issues involved. Since contracts and exchanges are supposed to maximize utility and happiness, we as a society don’t want people locked into contracts and would prefer that they breach them when the breach results in greater utility all around.

there can be penalties for breach, and that’s certainly part of making sure the breach is efficient, so long as everyone understands and agrees on the penalties if any at the outset. or the contract could allow for breach by either party at any time. Like an employment contract could say, hey, you can quit any time, we can fire you any time. That would be arguably be more efficient in some cases, since the employer could get rid of a deadbeat and the employee could move on to greener pastures.

Maybe the easiest example to see is marriage. We prefer miserable people to get divorced. it’s less eficient for society if wives stay witht heir abusers, or men stay with women who won’t have sex with them. Better to breach the contract so that both parties can maximize their happines. Honoring the contract for its own sake probably doesn’t make us a more moral, ethical or prouder society. Ideally, it would be nice if the parties wanted to honor the contract, but would you yell at some woman who was breaching her marriage contract that she has no pride because she was breaking her marriage contract and dumping the dude who beat and raped her every night? so, grow up…don’t berate a guy for the efficient breach of his contract.

[scaredyclassic]

These sorts of nasty comments are uncalled for. He is honoring the contract. The contract apparently allows for walking away. But even if it didn’t, even if he were breaching the contract, well, to say that breaching a contract is indicative of a lack of morality ethics or pride is, well, kind of just wrong.

Indeed, in contracts class at most any law school you might pass through, most professors will touch on the subject of efficient breach and the policy issues involved. Since contracts and exchanges are supposed to maximize utility and happiness, we as a society don’t want people locked into contracts and would prefer that they breach them when the breach results in greater utility all around.

there can be penalties for breach, and that’s certainly part of making sure the breach is efficient, so long as everyone understands and agrees on the penalties if any at the outset. or the contract could allow for breach by either party at any time. Like an employment contract could say, hey, you can quit any time, we can fire you any time. That would be arguably be more efficient in some cases, since the employer could get rid of a deadbeat and the employee could move on to greener pastures.

Maybe the easiest example to see is marriage. We prefer miserable people to get divorced. it’s less eficient for society if wives stay witht heir abusers, or men stay with women who won’t have sex with them. Better to breach the contract so that both parties can maximize their happines. Honoring the contract for its own sake probably doesn’t make us a more moral, ethical or prouder society. Ideally, it would be nice if the parties wanted to honor the contract, but would you yell at some woman who was breaching her marriage contract that she has no pride because she was breaking her marriage contract and dumping the dude who beat and raped her every night? so, grow up…don’t berate a guy for the efficient breach of his contract.

[scaredyclassic]

These sorts of nasty comments are uncalled for. He is honoring the contract. The contract apparently allows for walking away. But even if it didn’t, even if he were breaching the contract, well, to say that breaching a contract is indicative of a lack of morality ethics or pride is, well, kind of just wrong.

Indeed, in contracts class at most any law school you might pass through, most professors will touch on the subject of efficient breach and the policy issues involved. Since contracts and exchanges are supposed to maximize utility and happiness, we as a society don’t want people locked into contracts and would prefer that they breach them when the breach results in greater utility all around.

there can be penalties for breach, and that’s certainly part of making sure the breach is efficient, so long as everyone understands and agrees on the penalties if any at the outset. or the contract could allow for breach by either party at any time. Like an employment contract could say, hey, you can quit any time, we can fire you any time. That would be arguably be more efficient in some cases, since the employer could get rid of a deadbeat and the employee could move on to greener pastures.

Maybe the easiest example to see is marriage. We prefer miserable people to get divorced. it’s less eficient for society if wives stay witht heir abusers, or men stay with women who won’t have sex with them. Better to breach the contract so that both parties can maximize their happines. Honoring the contract for its own sake probably doesn’t make us a more moral, ethical or prouder society. Ideally, it would be nice if the parties wanted to honor the contract, but would you yell at some woman who was breaching her marriage contract that she has no pride because she was breaking her marriage contract and dumping the dude who beat and raped her every night? so, grow up…don’t berate a guy for the efficient breach of his contract.

[scaredyclassic]

These sorts of nasty comments are uncalled for. He is honoring the contract. The contract apparently allows for walking away. But even if it didn’t, even if he were breaching the contract, well, to say that breaching a contract is indicative of a lack of morality ethics or pride is, well, kind of just wrong.

Indeed, in contracts class at most any law school you might pass through, most professors will touch on the subject of efficient breach and the policy issues involved. Since contracts and exchanges are supposed to maximize utility and happiness, we as a society don’t want people locked into contracts and would prefer that they breach them when the breach results in greater utility all around.

there can be penalties for breach, and that’s certainly part of making sure the breach is efficient, so long as everyone understands and agrees on the penalties if any at the outset. or the contract could allow for breach by either party at any time. Like an employment contract could say, hey, you can quit any time, we can fire you any time. That would be arguably be more efficient in some cases, since the employer could get rid of a deadbeat and the employee could move on to greener pastures.

Maybe the easiest example to see is marriage. We prefer miserable people to get divorced. it’s less eficient for society if wives stay witht heir abusers, or men stay with women who won’t have sex with them. Better to breach the contract so that both parties can maximize their happines. Honoring the contract for its own sake probably doesn’t make us a more moral, ethical or prouder society. Ideally, it would be nice if the parties wanted to honor the contract, but would you yell at some woman who was breaching her marriage contract that she has no pride because she was breaking her marriage contract and dumping the dude who beat and raped her every night? so, grow up…don’t berate a guy for the efficient breach of his contract.

[scaredyclassic]

These sorts of nasty comments are uncalled for. He is honoring the contract. The contract apparently allows for walking away. But even if it didn’t, even if he were breaching the contract, well, to say that breaching a contract is indicative of a lack of morality ethics or pride is, well, kind of just wrong.

Indeed, in contracts class at most any law school you might pass through, most professors will touch on the subject of efficient breach and the policy issues involved. Since contracts and exchanges are supposed to maximize utility and happiness, we as a society don’t want people locked into contracts and would prefer that they breach them when the breach results in greater utility all around.

there can be penalties for breach, and that’s certainly part of making sure the breach is efficient, so long as everyone understands and agrees on the penalties if any at the outset. or the contract could allow for breach by either party at any time. Like an employment contract could say, hey, you can quit any time, we can fire you any time. That would be arguably be more efficient in some cases, since the employer could get rid of a deadbeat and the employee could move on to greener pastures.

Maybe the easiest example to see is marriage. We prefer miserable people to get divorced. it’s less eficient for society if wives stay witht heir abusers, or men stay with women who won’t have sex with them. Better to breach the contract so that both parties can maximize their happines. Honoring the contract for its own sake probably doesn’t make us a more moral, ethical or prouder society. Ideally, it would be nice if the parties wanted to honor the contract, but would you yell at some woman who was breaching her marriage contract that she has no pride because she was breaking her marriage contract and dumping the dude who beat and raped her every night? so, grow up…don’t berate a guy for the efficient breach of his contract.

[Arraya]

SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

He is. His commitment is to make his payment or give the house back. He is opting for the latter.

I encourage everybody in a similar situation to do the same. Corporations do this all the time all over the world. Why should they be allowed out of a bad deal and not the average person?

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

I guess the USG should be in jail then. Morals and ethics are not part of the equation. There is no such thing in a business contract. And pride, well that is for fools. But don’t you worry, that money he is defaulting on is not even real. It was created out of thin air and the bank gets the house and he gets bad credit. So who really gets the bad deal? The bank gets something for nothing. Who is the unethical in this equation?

I’m sure people like you will be cheering the way for the irresponsible to be put in jail in the very near future. You would make a good nazi, surely. Maybe we should bring back slavery and child labor which was around the same time as debtor prisons.

[scaredyclassic]

why should just the debtor go to prison? the debtor’s immoral behavior completley benefitted his family. they were living in the house. debtor’s prison shouldn’t just be for the debtor, but for every person who directly benefitted from the debt. everyone in the family should go to prison. otherwise, the kids and spouse who claim to be “innocnet” would be getting away scot-free. what kind of lesson is that teaching others? if you hang around with criminals, that is, debtors who cannot pay, expect repercussions. don’t do the crime or live with the deadbeat if you cannot do the time.

[scaredyclassic]

why should just the debtor go to prison? the debtor’s immoral behavior completley benefitted his family. they were living in the house. debtor’s prison shouldn’t just be for the debtor, but for every person who directly benefitted from the debt. everyone in the family should go to prison. otherwise, the kids and spouse who claim to be “innocnet” would be getting away scot-free. what kind of lesson is that teaching others? if you hang around with criminals, that is, debtors who cannot pay, expect repercussions. don’t do the crime or live with the deadbeat if you cannot do the time.

[scaredyclassic]

why should just the debtor go to prison? the debtor’s immoral behavior completley benefitted his family. they were living in the house. debtor’s prison shouldn’t just be for the debtor, but for every person who directly benefitted from the debt. everyone in the family should go to prison. otherwise, the kids and spouse who claim to be “innocnet” would be getting away scot-free. what kind of lesson is that teaching others? if you hang around with criminals, that is, debtors who cannot pay, expect repercussions. don’t do the crime or live with the deadbeat if you cannot do the time.

[scaredyclassic]

why should just the debtor go to prison? the debtor’s immoral behavior completley benefitted his family. they were living in the house. debtor’s prison shouldn’t just be for the debtor, but for every person who directly benefitted from the debt. everyone in the family should go to prison. otherwise, the kids and spouse who claim to be “innocnet” would be getting away scot-free. what kind of lesson is that teaching others? if you hang around with criminals, that is, debtors who cannot pay, expect repercussions. don’t do the crime or live with the deadbeat if you cannot do the time.

[scaredyclassic]

why should just the debtor go to prison? the debtor’s immoral behavior completley benefitted his family. they were living in the house. debtor’s prison shouldn’t just be for the debtor, but for every person who directly benefitted from the debt. everyone in the family should go to prison. otherwise, the kids and spouse who claim to be “innocnet” would be getting away scot-free. what kind of lesson is that teaching others? if you hang around with criminals, that is, debtors who cannot pay, expect repercussions. don’t do the crime or live with the deadbeat if you cannot do the time.

[Arraya]

SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

He is. His commitment is to make his payment or give the house back. He is opting for the latter.

I encourage everybody in a similar situation to do the same. Corporations do this all the time all over the world. Why should they be allowed out of a bad deal and not the average person?

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

I guess the USG should be in jail then. Morals and ethics are not part of the equation. There is no such thing in a business contract. And pride, well that is for fools. But don’t you worry, that money he is defaulting on is not even real. It was created out of thin air and the bank gets the house and he gets bad credit. So who really gets the bad deal? The bank gets something for nothing. Who is the unethical in this equation?

I’m sure people like you will be cheering the way for the irresponsible to be put in jail in the very near future. You would make a good nazi, surely. Maybe we should bring back slavery and child labor which was around the same time as debtor prisons.

[Arraya]

SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

He is. His commitment is to make his payment or give the house back. He is opting for the latter.

I encourage everybody in a similar situation to do the same. Corporations do this all the time all over the world. Why should they be allowed out of a bad deal and not the average person?

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

I guess the USG should be in jail then. Morals and ethics are not part of the equation. There is no such thing in a business contract. And pride, well that is for fools. But don’t you worry, that money he is defaulting on is not even real. It was created out of thin air and the bank gets the house and he gets bad credit. So who really gets the bad deal? The bank gets something for nothing. Who is the unethical in this equation?

I’m sure people like you will be cheering the way for the irresponsible to be put in jail in the very near future. You would make a good nazi, surely. Maybe we should bring back slavery and child labor which was around the same time as debtor prisons.

[Arraya]

SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

He is. His commitment is to make his payment or give the house back. He is opting for the latter.

I encourage everybody in a similar situation to do the same. Corporations do this all the time all over the world. Why should they be allowed out of a bad deal and not the average person?

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

I guess the USG should be in jail then. Morals and ethics are not part of the equation. There is no such thing in a business contract. And pride, well that is for fools. But don’t you worry, that money he is defaulting on is not even real. It was created out of thin air and the bank gets the house and he gets bad credit. So who really gets the bad deal? The bank gets something for nothing. Who is the unethical in this equation?

I’m sure people like you will be cheering the way for the irresponsible to be put in jail in the very near future. You would make a good nazi, surely. Maybe we should bring back slavery and child labor which was around the same time as debtor prisons.

[Arraya]

SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

He is. His commitment is to make his payment or give the house back. He is opting for the latter.

I encourage everybody in a similar situation to do the same. Corporations do this all the time all over the world. Why should they be allowed out of a bad deal and not the average person?

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

I guess the USG should be in jail then. Morals and ethics are not part of the equation. There is no such thing in a business contract. And pride, well that is for fools. But don’t you worry, that money he is defaulting on is not even real. It was created out of thin air and the bank gets the house and he gets bad credit. So who really gets the bad deal? The bank gets something for nothing. Who is the unethical in this equation?

I’m sure people like you will be cheering the way for the irresponsible to be put in jail in the very near future. You would make a good nazi, surely. Maybe we should bring back slavery and child labor which was around the same time as debtor prisons.

[murf2222]

23109, Am I really understanding your situation correctly?

You have a managable payment and knew of the volatile market going in. So whats the problem with honoring your contract? True, you don’t have as much *house-for-the-money* as what your neighbor can buy right now, but so what?

The fact is you make a good salary and can comfortably afford the payment on the contract you willingly signed. SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

I would feel sorry for you if perhaps you lost your job and could no longer afford the payment, but that is not the case here.

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

Murf2222

[murf2222]

23109, Am I really understanding your situation correctly?

You have a managable payment and knew of the volatile market going in. So whats the problem with honoring your contract? True, you don’t have as much *house-for-the-money* as what your neighbor can buy right now, but so what?

The fact is you make a good salary and can comfortably afford the payment on the contract you willingly signed. SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

I would feel sorry for you if perhaps you lost your job and could no longer afford the payment, but that is not the case here.

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

Murf2222

[murf2222]

23109, Am I really understanding your situation correctly?

You have a managable payment and knew of the volatile market going in. So whats the problem with honoring your contract? True, you don’t have as much *house-for-the-money* as what your neighbor can buy right now, but so what?

The fact is you make a good salary and can comfortably afford the payment on the contract you willingly signed. SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

I would feel sorry for you if perhaps you lost your job and could no longer afford the payment, but that is not the case here.

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

Murf2222

[murf2222]

23109, Am I really understanding your situation correctly?

You have a managable payment and knew of the volatile market going in. So whats the problem with honoring your contract? True, you don’t have as much *house-for-the-money* as what your neighbor can buy right now, but so what?

The fact is you make a good salary and can comfortably afford the payment on the contract you willingly signed. SUCK IT UP AND HONOR YOUR COMMITMENT YOU LOSER!

I would feel sorry for you if perhaps you lost your job and could no longer afford the payment, but that is not the case here.

There once was such a thing as *debtors prisons*………perhaps we need them again since words like Morality, ethics and pride don’t resonate with people like you.

Murf2222

[murf2222]

I guess I just live in a black/white world then, because if I borrow money from someone I feel MORALLY and ETHICALLY obligated to pay them back!

I could give a rat’s ass is it’s borrowed from a friend, relative OR A BANK. As long as I did my due diligence and was not hood-winked into signing a crooked deal then I will due everything in my power to honor my contract.

My *electronic-reputation* (i.e. credit score) is something that I am very proud of. Are you proud of yours………. Arraya and Scardycat? Based on your comments I am guessing NO.

Murf2222

p.s.
temeculaguy wrote…….. “I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.”

Haha…….I think you pegged him dead on temecula guy!

[temeculaguy]

I try. I don’t dislike 23109, in fact I’ve been writing back and forth to him over the past year or two I feel like I practically know him, I see in him a lot of what I see in some of my friends and sometimes myself, I hate it when someone holds up a mirror as much as the next guy. I actually think I was exactly like him when I was his age and i didn’t listen either. If I made a list of the ten bad financial decisions I have made in my life, they all started with the phrase “well, the wife wanted ….” then fill in the blank.

While I suggest things and throw data at 23109, he actually teaches me more than I teach him. These discussions constantly remind me that divorce is cheaper in the long run. Had I remarried and been married in 2006 or 2007 I would have bought another house, by not having any committee votes and making decisions on my own, I’m up about 200k right now, that’s about $500 a day savings, over 18 months. I think I’ll stick with intermittent somewhat crazy girlfriends, they have no voting rights, the variety is nice, thanks 23109, I feel better already.

Dude, you know I’m just kidding with you but there is something serious about being honest with yourself and telling the wife “no” once in a while can be a good thing. I should remind you that I posted a hillarious deal back when you were buying and I said you needed to make her a deal in writing that for every 20k or 30k in value drop she would be required to perform some weekly sexual favor that she was opposed to, I said to make a list and place the most objectionable acts further down the value ladder. I called it the “can’t lose” arrangement. If the house goes up in value, you make money, if it goes down 50% in value, you get to pick which one of her friends. I hope you made that list. Sorry, still kidding, but I did post that more than a year ago and highly suggest it’s use even today for others.

[peterb]

23109, listen to your wife. You’ll be getting a win-win from it. Bail on the upside down mistake, get the place she wants. Not often life gives us such attractive options.

[peterb]

23109, listen to your wife. You’ll be getting a win-win from it. Bail on the upside down mistake, get the place she wants. Not often life gives us such attractive options.

[peterb]

23109, listen to your wife. You’ll be getting a win-win from it. Bail on the upside down mistake, get the place she wants. Not often life gives us such attractive options.

[peterb]

23109, listen to your wife. You’ll be getting a win-win from it. Bail on the upside down mistake, get the place she wants. Not often life gives us such attractive options.

[peterb]

23109, listen to your wife. You’ll be getting a win-win from it. Bail on the upside down mistake, get the place she wants. Not often life gives us such attractive options.

[temeculaguy]

I try. I don’t dislike 23109, in fact I’ve been writing back and forth to him over the past year or two I feel like I practically know him, I see in him a lot of what I see in some of my friends and sometimes myself, I hate it when someone holds up a mirror as much as the next guy. I actually think I was exactly like him when I was his age and i didn’t listen either. If I made a list of the ten bad financial decisions I have made in my life, they all started with the phrase “well, the wife wanted ….” then fill in the blank.

While I suggest things and throw data at 23109, he actually teaches me more than I teach him. These discussions constantly remind me that divorce is cheaper in the long run. Had I remarried and been married in 2006 or 2007 I would have bought another house, by not having any committee votes and making decisions on my own, I’m up about 200k right now, that’s about $500 a day savings, over 18 months. I think I’ll stick with intermittent somewhat crazy girlfriends, they have no voting rights, the variety is nice, thanks 23109, I feel better already.

Dude, you know I’m just kidding with you but there is something serious about being honest with yourself and telling the wife “no” once in a while can be a good thing. I should remind you that I posted a hillarious deal back when you were buying and I said you needed to make her a deal in writing that for every 20k or 30k in value drop she would be required to perform some weekly sexual favor that she was opposed to, I said to make a list and place the most objectionable acts further down the value ladder. I called it the “can’t lose” arrangement. If the house goes up in value, you make money, if it goes down 50% in value, you get to pick which one of her friends. I hope you made that list. Sorry, still kidding, but I did post that more than a year ago and highly suggest it’s use even today for others.

[temeculaguy]

I try. I don’t dislike 23109, in fact I’ve been writing back and forth to him over the past year or two I feel like I practically know him, I see in him a lot of what I see in some of my friends and sometimes myself, I hate it when someone holds up a mirror as much as the next guy. I actually think I was exactly like him when I was his age and i didn’t listen either. If I made a list of the ten bad financial decisions I have made in my life, they all started with the phrase “well, the wife wanted ….” then fill in the blank.

While I suggest things and throw data at 23109, he actually teaches me more than I teach him. These discussions constantly remind me that divorce is cheaper in the long run. Had I remarried and been married in 2006 or 2007 I would have bought another house, by not having any committee votes and making decisions on my own, I’m up about 200k right now, that’s about $500 a day savings, over 18 months. I think I’ll stick with intermittent somewhat crazy girlfriends, they have no voting rights, the variety is nice, thanks 23109, I feel better already.

Dude, you know I’m just kidding with you but there is something serious about being honest with yourself and telling the wife “no” once in a while can be a good thing. I should remind you that I posted a hillarious deal back when you were buying and I said you needed to make her a deal in writing that for every 20k or 30k in value drop she would be required to perform some weekly sexual favor that she was opposed to, I said to make a list and place the most objectionable acts further down the value ladder. I called it the “can’t lose” arrangement. If the house goes up in value, you make money, if it goes down 50% in value, you get to pick which one of her friends. I hope you made that list. Sorry, still kidding, but I did post that more than a year ago and highly suggest it’s use even today for others.

[temeculaguy]

I try. I don’t dislike 23109, in fact I’ve been writing back and forth to him over the past year or two I feel like I practically know him, I see in him a lot of what I see in some of my friends and sometimes myself, I hate it when someone holds up a mirror as much as the next guy. I actually think I was exactly like him when I was his age and i didn’t listen either. If I made a list of the ten bad financial decisions I have made in my life, they all started with the phrase “well, the wife wanted ….” then fill in the blank.

While I suggest things and throw data at 23109, he actually teaches me more than I teach him. These discussions constantly remind me that divorce is cheaper in the long run. Had I remarried and been married in 2006 or 2007 I would have bought another house, by not having any committee votes and making decisions on my own, I’m up about 200k right now, that’s about $500 a day savings, over 18 months. I think I’ll stick with intermittent somewhat crazy girlfriends, they have no voting rights, the variety is nice, thanks 23109, I feel better already.

Dude, you know I’m just kidding with you but there is something serious about being honest with yourself and telling the wife “no” once in a while can be a good thing. I should remind you that I posted a hillarious deal back when you were buying and I said you needed to make her a deal in writing that for every 20k or 30k in value drop she would be required to perform some weekly sexual favor that she was opposed to, I said to make a list and place the most objectionable acts further down the value ladder. I called it the “can’t lose” arrangement. If the house goes up in value, you make money, if it goes down 50% in value, you get to pick which one of her friends. I hope you made that list. Sorry, still kidding, but I did post that more than a year ago and highly suggest it’s use even today for others.

[temeculaguy]

I try. I don’t dislike 23109, in fact I’ve been writing back and forth to him over the past year or two I feel like I practically know him, I see in him a lot of what I see in some of my friends and sometimes myself, I hate it when someone holds up a mirror as much as the next guy. I actually think I was exactly like him when I was his age and i didn’t listen either. If I made a list of the ten bad financial decisions I have made in my life, they all started with the phrase “well, the wife wanted ….” then fill in the blank.

While I suggest things and throw data at 23109, he actually teaches me more than I teach him. These discussions constantly remind me that divorce is cheaper in the long run. Had I remarried and been married in 2006 or 2007 I would have bought another house, by not having any committee votes and making decisions on my own, I’m up about 200k right now, that’s about $500 a day savings, over 18 months. I think I’ll stick with intermittent somewhat crazy girlfriends, they have no voting rights, the variety is nice, thanks 23109, I feel better already.

Dude, you know I’m just kidding with you but there is something serious about being honest with yourself and telling the wife “no” once in a while can be a good thing. I should remind you that I posted a hillarious deal back when you were buying and I said you needed to make her a deal in writing that for every 20k or 30k in value drop she would be required to perform some weekly sexual favor that she was opposed to, I said to make a list and place the most objectionable acts further down the value ladder. I called it the “can’t lose” arrangement. If the house goes up in value, you make money, if it goes down 50% in value, you get to pick which one of her friends. I hope you made that list. Sorry, still kidding, but I did post that more than a year ago and highly suggest it’s use even today for others.

[murf2222]

I guess I just live in a black/white world then, because if I borrow money from someone I feel MORALLY and ETHICALLY obligated to pay them back!

I could give a rat’s ass is it’s borrowed from a friend, relative OR A BANK. As long as I did my due diligence and was not hood-winked into signing a crooked deal then I will due everything in my power to honor my contract.

My *electronic-reputation* (i.e. credit score) is something that I am very proud of. Are you proud of yours………. Arraya and Scardycat? Based on your comments I am guessing NO.

Murf2222

p.s.
temeculaguy wrote…….. “I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.”

Haha…….I think you pegged him dead on temecula guy!

[murf2222]

I guess I just live in a black/white world then, because if I borrow money from someone I feel MORALLY and ETHICALLY obligated to pay them back!

I could give a rat’s ass is it’s borrowed from a friend, relative OR A BANK. As long as I did my due diligence and was not hood-winked into signing a crooked deal then I will due everything in my power to honor my contract.

My *electronic-reputation* (i.e. credit score) is something that I am very proud of. Are you proud of yours………. Arraya and Scardycat? Based on your comments I am guessing NO.

Murf2222

p.s.
temeculaguy wrote…….. “I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.”

Haha…….I think you pegged him dead on temecula guy!

[murf2222]

I guess I just live in a black/white world then, because if I borrow money from someone I feel MORALLY and ETHICALLY obligated to pay them back!

I could give a rat’s ass is it’s borrowed from a friend, relative OR A BANK. As long as I did my due diligence and was not hood-winked into signing a crooked deal then I will due everything in my power to honor my contract.

My *electronic-reputation* (i.e. credit score) is something that I am very proud of. Are you proud of yours………. Arraya and Scardycat? Based on your comments I am guessing NO.

Murf2222

p.s.
temeculaguy wrote…….. “I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.”

Haha…….I think you pegged him dead on temecula guy!

[murf2222]

I guess I just live in a black/white world then, because if I borrow money from someone I feel MORALLY and ETHICALLY obligated to pay them back!

I could give a rat’s ass is it’s borrowed from a friend, relative OR A BANK. As long as I did my due diligence and was not hood-winked into signing a crooked deal then I will due everything in my power to honor my contract.

My *electronic-reputation* (i.e. credit score) is something that I am very proud of. Are you proud of yours………. Arraya and Scardycat? Based on your comments I am guessing NO.

Murf2222

p.s.
temeculaguy wrote…….. “I’ll say it again, I doubt this or any other advice will resonate because your wife wants a bigger place and in the end the numbers will crunch into what she wants.”

Haha…….I think you pegged him dead on temecula guy!

[Author]

Posts