Trash the kitchen?

[UCGal]

What about spraypainting the cabinets and floors. Legal, but not ethical, IMO.

[briansd1]

I believe in living by the letter of contracts.

But I don’t believe in being destructive, especially when being destructive does not bring any benefit to me.

For example, when I leave my hotel room, I turn off all the lights and the A/C. I don’t believe in being destructive and causing other people to lose money when there’s no benefit to anyone.

Now, living for free in the house as long a possible and stringing along the bank would be very beneficial to the homeowner. That, I would recommend. The bank took the risk, they always knew that default was a possibility. And they can always exercise their right to foreclose promptly.

[briansd1]

I believe in living by the letter of contracts.

But I don’t believe in being destructive, especially when being destructive does not bring any benefit to me.

For example, when I leave my hotel room, I turn off all the lights and the A/C. I don’t believe in being destructive and causing other people to lose money when there’s no benefit to anyone.

Now, living for free in the house as long a possible and stringing along the bank would be very beneficial to the homeowner. That, I would recommend. The bank took the risk, they always knew that default was a possibility. And they can always exercise their right to foreclose promptly.

[briansd1]

I believe in living by the letter of contracts.

But I don’t believe in being destructive, especially when being destructive does not bring any benefit to me.

For example, when I leave my hotel room, I turn off all the lights and the A/C. I don’t believe in being destructive and causing other people to lose money when there’s no benefit to anyone.

Now, living for free in the house as long a possible and stringing along the bank would be very beneficial to the homeowner. That, I would recommend. The bank took the risk, they always knew that default was a possibility. And they can always exercise their right to foreclose promptly.

[briansd1]

I believe in living by the letter of contracts.

But I don’t believe in being destructive, especially when being destructive does not bring any benefit to me.

For example, when I leave my hotel room, I turn off all the lights and the A/C. I don’t believe in being destructive and causing other people to lose money when there’s no benefit to anyone.

Now, living for free in the house as long a possible and stringing along the bank would be very beneficial to the homeowner. That, I would recommend. The bank took the risk, they always knew that default was a possibility. And they can always exercise their right to foreclose promptly.

[briansd1]

I believe in living by the letter of contracts.

But I don’t believe in being destructive, especially when being destructive does not bring any benefit to me.

For example, when I leave my hotel room, I turn off all the lights and the A/C. I don’t believe in being destructive and causing other people to lose money when there’s no benefit to anyone.

Now, living for free in the house as long a possible and stringing along the bank would be very beneficial to the homeowner. That, I would recommend. The bank took the risk, they always knew that default was a possibility. And they can always exercise their right to foreclose promptly.

[XBoxBoy]

Two comments:

1) You reap what you sow
2) Your friend is an extortionist.

The first comment is for the banks and the attitudes that have become common in our society. It’s fascinating to me that so many people argue that if the bank will lose less money on a deal they should take it. What about the example you set? What about the people that hear of this and will want that deal also?

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, market places demand that we hold people accountable and punish them for irresponsible decisions. If we don’t then the market will punish us collectively. (See current financial crisis if you’re having a hard time with that last sentence.)

And here’s the tremendous irony, experts from everywhere are collectively arguing that we need to put aside the need to hold people and companies responsible for the public good! Yet examples abound of how you fail to hold one person or one company accountable and this only makes the situation worse.

So the way I see it, banks offering to change the terms of the loan and failing to foreclose are only making the situation worse. (As your story so aptly demonstrates when your friend is advising others to follow in his footsteps.) And so it is, you do reap what you sow.

As to your friend. There really is no other word for what he’s proposing regarding the kitchen. It’s extortion, plain and simple. He probably has rationalized to himself that it’s okay because the bank doesn’t really care. True, banks don’t have feelings, they are companies, not people. But he’s still demanding payment for not destroying something that belongs to someone else. And that my friends is extortion.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Two comments:

1) You reap what you sow
2) Your friend is an extortionist.

The first comment is for the banks and the attitudes that have become common in our society. It’s fascinating to me that so many people argue that if the bank will lose less money on a deal they should take it. What about the example you set? What about the people that hear of this and will want that deal also?

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, market places demand that we hold people accountable and punish them for irresponsible decisions. If we don’t then the market will punish us collectively. (See current financial crisis if you’re having a hard time with that last sentence.)

And here’s the tremendous irony, experts from everywhere are collectively arguing that we need to put aside the need to hold people and companies responsible for the public good! Yet examples abound of how you fail to hold one person or one company accountable and this only makes the situation worse.

So the way I see it, banks offering to change the terms of the loan and failing to foreclose are only making the situation worse. (As your story so aptly demonstrates when your friend is advising others to follow in his footsteps.) And so it is, you do reap what you sow.

As to your friend. There really is no other word for what he’s proposing regarding the kitchen. It’s extortion, plain and simple. He probably has rationalized to himself that it’s okay because the bank doesn’t really care. True, banks don’t have feelings, they are companies, not people. But he’s still demanding payment for not destroying something that belongs to someone else. And that my friends is extortion.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Two comments:

1) You reap what you sow
2) Your friend is an extortionist.

The first comment is for the banks and the attitudes that have become common in our society. It’s fascinating to me that so many people argue that if the bank will lose less money on a deal they should take it. What about the example you set? What about the people that hear of this and will want that deal also?

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, market places demand that we hold people accountable and punish them for irresponsible decisions. If we don’t then the market will punish us collectively. (See current financial crisis if you’re having a hard time with that last sentence.)

And here’s the tremendous irony, experts from everywhere are collectively arguing that we need to put aside the need to hold people and companies responsible for the public good! Yet examples abound of how you fail to hold one person or one company accountable and this only makes the situation worse.

So the way I see it, banks offering to change the terms of the loan and failing to foreclose are only making the situation worse. (As your story so aptly demonstrates when your friend is advising others to follow in his footsteps.) And so it is, you do reap what you sow.

As to your friend. There really is no other word for what he’s proposing regarding the kitchen. It’s extortion, plain and simple. He probably has rationalized to himself that it’s okay because the bank doesn’t really care. True, banks don’t have feelings, they are companies, not people. But he’s still demanding payment for not destroying something that belongs to someone else. And that my friends is extortion.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Two comments:

1) You reap what you sow
2) Your friend is an extortionist.

The first comment is for the banks and the attitudes that have become common in our society. It’s fascinating to me that so many people argue that if the bank will lose less money on a deal they should take it. What about the example you set? What about the people that hear of this and will want that deal also?

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, market places demand that we hold people accountable and punish them for irresponsible decisions. If we don’t then the market will punish us collectively. (See current financial crisis if you’re having a hard time with that last sentence.)

And here’s the tremendous irony, experts from everywhere are collectively arguing that we need to put aside the need to hold people and companies responsible for the public good! Yet examples abound of how you fail to hold one person or one company accountable and this only makes the situation worse.

So the way I see it, banks offering to change the terms of the loan and failing to foreclose are only making the situation worse. (As your story so aptly demonstrates when your friend is advising others to follow in his footsteps.) And so it is, you do reap what you sow.

As to your friend. There really is no other word for what he’s proposing regarding the kitchen. It’s extortion, plain and simple. He probably has rationalized to himself that it’s okay because the bank doesn’t really care. True, banks don’t have feelings, they are companies, not people. But he’s still demanding payment for not destroying something that belongs to someone else. And that my friends is extortion.

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

Two comments:

1) You reap what you sow
2) Your friend is an extortionist.

The first comment is for the banks and the attitudes that have become common in our society. It’s fascinating to me that so many people argue that if the bank will lose less money on a deal they should take it. What about the example you set? What about the people that hear of this and will want that deal also?

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, market places demand that we hold people accountable and punish them for irresponsible decisions. If we don’t then the market will punish us collectively. (See current financial crisis if you’re having a hard time with that last sentence.)

And here’s the tremendous irony, experts from everywhere are collectively arguing that we need to put aside the need to hold people and companies responsible for the public good! Yet examples abound of how you fail to hold one person or one company accountable and this only makes the situation worse.

So the way I see it, banks offering to change the terms of the loan and failing to foreclose are only making the situation worse. (As your story so aptly demonstrates when your friend is advising others to follow in his footsteps.) And so it is, you do reap what you sow.

As to your friend. There really is no other word for what he’s proposing regarding the kitchen. It’s extortion, plain and simple. He probably has rationalized to himself that it’s okay because the bank doesn’t really care. True, banks don’t have feelings, they are companies, not people. But he’s still demanding payment for not destroying something that belongs to someone else. And that my friends is extortion.

XBoxBoy

[jameswenn]

In the end, both parties are going to get what they deserve. Bank/lender/investor gets a nice loss for the lender’s poor underwriting, and your friend gets a tarnished credit record.

[jameswenn]

In the end, both parties are going to get what they deserve. Bank/lender/investor gets a nice loss for the lender’s poor underwriting, and your friend gets a tarnished credit record.

[jameswenn]

In the end, both parties are going to get what they deserve. Bank/lender/investor gets a nice loss for the lender’s poor underwriting, and your friend gets a tarnished credit record.

[jameswenn]

In the end, both parties are going to get what they deserve. Bank/lender/investor gets a nice loss for the lender’s poor underwriting, and your friend gets a tarnished credit record.

[Author]

Posts