- This topic has 105 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 15 years ago by
CDMA ENG.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 22, 2009 at 12:58 PM #497315December 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM #496456
SK in CV
Participant[quote=UCGal]I understand how losing one’s job might qualify you for a short sale. [/quote]
Losing a job should have nothing to do with a lender’s decision to allow a short sale. A short sale is typically a strictly business decision by the lender. If a short sale will yield more than a foreclosure and subsequent sale, net of all the costs, it’s a good idea, otherwise not. It is never (at least in my experience) based on the condition of the borrower, solely based on the value of the collateral.
December 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM #496609Participant[quote=UCGal]I understand how losing one’s job might qualify you for a short sale. [/quote]
Losing a job should have nothing to do with a lender’s decision to allow a short sale. A short sale is typically a strictly business decision by the lender. If a short sale will yield more than a foreclosure and subsequent sale, net of all the costs, it’s a good idea, otherwise not. It is never (at least in my experience) based on the condition of the borrower, solely based on the value of the collateral.
December 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM #496989Participant[quote=UCGal]I understand how losing one’s job might qualify you for a short sale. [/quote]
Losing a job should have nothing to do with a lender’s decision to allow a short sale. A short sale is typically a strictly business decision by the lender. If a short sale will yield more than a foreclosure and subsequent sale, net of all the costs, it’s a good idea, otherwise not. It is never (at least in my experience) based on the condition of the borrower, solely based on the value of the collateral.
December 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM #497078Participant[quote=UCGal]I understand how losing one’s job might qualify you for a short sale. [/quote]
Losing a job should have nothing to do with a lender’s decision to allow a short sale. A short sale is typically a strictly business decision by the lender. If a short sale will yield more than a foreclosure and subsequent sale, net of all the costs, it’s a good idea, otherwise not. It is never (at least in my experience) based on the condition of the borrower, solely based on the value of the collateral.
December 22, 2009 at 1:05 PM #497320Participant[quote=UCGal]I understand how losing one’s job might qualify you for a short sale. [/quote]
Losing a job should have nothing to do with a lender’s decision to allow a short sale. A short sale is typically a strictly business decision by the lender. If a short sale will yield more than a foreclosure and subsequent sale, net of all the costs, it’s a good idea, otherwise not. It is never (at least in my experience) based on the condition of the borrower, solely based on the value of the collateral.
December 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM #496466bubba99
ParticipantIt pains me when people try to make a moral issue of mortgage payments. It is not. It is a contract, and foreclosure is a remedy in the contract to either party. The banks use it to relieve themselves of bad property investments (Morgan Stanley in SF), why should individuals be held to a higher ethical standard.
Plus part of the bank bailout consisted of a program to “modify” mortgages. The banks took the money, but have consistently failed to modify a significant number of mortgages.
The only moral issue is to ones family, to make the best financial decission for them, not just the bank.
December 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM #496619ParticipantIt pains me when people try to make a moral issue of mortgage payments. It is not. It is a contract, and foreclosure is a remedy in the contract to either party. The banks use it to relieve themselves of bad property investments (Morgan Stanley in SF), why should individuals be held to a higher ethical standard.
Plus part of the bank bailout consisted of a program to “modify” mortgages. The banks took the money, but have consistently failed to modify a significant number of mortgages.
The only moral issue is to ones family, to make the best financial decission for them, not just the bank.
December 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM #496999ParticipantIt pains me when people try to make a moral issue of mortgage payments. It is not. It is a contract, and foreclosure is a remedy in the contract to either party. The banks use it to relieve themselves of bad property investments (Morgan Stanley in SF), why should individuals be held to a higher ethical standard.
Plus part of the bank bailout consisted of a program to “modify” mortgages. The banks took the money, but have consistently failed to modify a significant number of mortgages.
The only moral issue is to ones family, to make the best financial decission for them, not just the bank.
December 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM #497087ParticipantIt pains me when people try to make a moral issue of mortgage payments. It is not. It is a contract, and foreclosure is a remedy in the contract to either party. The banks use it to relieve themselves of bad property investments (Morgan Stanley in SF), why should individuals be held to a higher ethical standard.
Plus part of the bank bailout consisted of a program to “modify” mortgages. The banks took the money, but have consistently failed to modify a significant number of mortgages.
The only moral issue is to ones family, to make the best financial decission for them, not just the bank.
December 22, 2009 at 1:11 PM #497331ParticipantIt pains me when people try to make a moral issue of mortgage payments. It is not. It is a contract, and foreclosure is a remedy in the contract to either party. The banks use it to relieve themselves of bad property investments (Morgan Stanley in SF), why should individuals be held to a higher ethical standard.
Plus part of the bank bailout consisted of a program to “modify” mortgages. The banks took the money, but have consistently failed to modify a significant number of mortgages.
The only moral issue is to ones family, to make the best financial decission for them, not just the bank.
December 22, 2009 at 1:19 PM #496471PatentGuy
ParticipantSpot on creechrr.
We are entitled to free education, free healthcare, a good paying job that is not demanding or stressful or dirty, and which leaves us plenty of spare time for fun stuff, exotic vacations, and all of the creature comforts. Or, if such good paying job does not exist, we are still entitled to the same compensation and benefits since, of course, this is somebody else’s fault for not providing me with this job.
We are entitled to not be put out or put upon. We are entitled to unlimited Mulligans and free drops onto the fairway of every wrongful lie. Everyone gets a trophy for trying.
We are entitled to not be offended based on our own personal whims on what we decide is offensive.
To each according to their entitlements; from each according to what the government can get its hands on.
December 22, 2009 at 1:19 PM #496624ParticipantSpot on creechrr.
We are entitled to free education, free healthcare, a good paying job that is not demanding or stressful or dirty, and which leaves us plenty of spare time for fun stuff, exotic vacations, and all of the creature comforts. Or, if such good paying job does not exist, we are still entitled to the same compensation and benefits since, of course, this is somebody else’s fault for not providing me with this job.
We are entitled to not be put out or put upon. We are entitled to unlimited Mulligans and free drops onto the fairway of every wrongful lie. Everyone gets a trophy for trying.
We are entitled to not be offended based on our own personal whims on what we decide is offensive.
To each according to their entitlements; from each according to what the government can get its hands on.
December 22, 2009 at 1:19 PM #497004ParticipantSpot on creechrr.
We are entitled to free education, free healthcare, a good paying job that is not demanding or stressful or dirty, and which leaves us plenty of spare time for fun stuff, exotic vacations, and all of the creature comforts. Or, if such good paying job does not exist, we are still entitled to the same compensation and benefits since, of course, this is somebody else’s fault for not providing me with this job.
We are entitled to not be put out or put upon. We are entitled to unlimited Mulligans and free drops onto the fairway of every wrongful lie. Everyone gets a trophy for trying.
We are entitled to not be offended based on our own personal whims on what we decide is offensive.
To each according to their entitlements; from each according to what the government can get its hands on.
December 22, 2009 at 1:19 PM #497092ParticipantSpot on creechrr.
We are entitled to free education, free healthcare, a good paying job that is not demanding or stressful or dirty, and which leaves us plenty of spare time for fun stuff, exotic vacations, and all of the creature comforts. Or, if such good paying job does not exist, we are still entitled to the same compensation and benefits since, of course, this is somebody else’s fault for not providing me with this job.
We are entitled to not be put out or put upon. We are entitled to unlimited Mulligans and free drops onto the fairway of every wrongful lie. Everyone gets a trophy for trying.
We are entitled to not be offended based on our own personal whims on what we decide is offensive.
To each according to their entitlements; from each according to what the government can get its hands on.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.