Why not fake default to get a lower rate

[Multiplepropertyowner]

What is to stop someone who can afford their mortgage from calling their bank and playing poor to get a lower rate? What kind of due diligence are the banks doing to keep this from happening? Hell, football players renegotiate their contracts all of the time.

P.S. I am aware that there is a moral piece to this question. Please don’t develop carpal tunnel addressing that aspect. I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

[SD Realtor]

The loan workout process requires a pretty comprehensive documentation process. This includes tax returns, w2 statements, hardship letters, asset statements including any and all bank accounts, 401ks, brokerage statements, as well as liability statements to show the hardship.

You can attempt to hold the information back and see how diligent they are tracing your background down. How diligent they are is a question I simply do not know.

SD Realtor

[Multiplepropertyowner]

Thanks SD. I figured that was the case. I wonder if that would be treated as mortgage fraud. I would imagine so.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

Thanks SD. I figured that was the case. I wonder if that would be treated as mortgage fraud. I would imagine so.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

Thanks SD. I figured that was the case. I wonder if that would be treated as mortgage fraud. I would imagine so.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

Thanks SD. I figured that was the case. I wonder if that would be treated as mortgage fraud. I would imagine so.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

Thanks SD. I figured that was the case. I wonder if that would be treated as mortgage fraud. I would imagine so.

[patientrenter]

I heard there were services that provided you with W-2s etc to “help you out”. Paulson and Bair and others have made it clear they really, really, don’t want the loan servicers to go through the borrowers one by one and actually discover and weed out the ones who committed fraud, or can afford to pay. If Paulson and Bair and a lot of other people in charge of setting and enforcing the rules are showing near-desperation in their efforts to ensure lots and lots of voters will get nice deals in workouts, I don’t think the servicers will be allowed to get too fussy. We’ll see.

Patient renter in OC

[SD Realtor]

Not sure how they will handle it pr. Still though, it seems logical that pushing them through the mill one by one with scrutiny is an absolute must. Pushing them through in a boiler room manner like you are implying is what got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem to me that allowing loans to be rewritten (which translates to a hit to the return for the investors) would imply that the investors would demand that in exchange for giving up that return, that a comprehensive wunderwriting process is completed for those same rewritten loans. Just my guess…

The loan workout package is pretty much identical to the short sale package. When my most recent clients tried to get a loan workout done, and the lender in the end refused to rewrite the loan, they did not need to resubmit a short sale package because the entire file was simply forwarded to the asset manager.

SD Realtor

[robyns_song]

It entirely depends on the loan servicer, but from my experience, the practice has always been to go through each borrower and examine their financials like already described.

No doubt that some people “slip through the cracks” but it’s more common for loans to just not get re-worked when there’s a shortage of staff. Successful loan servicing companies are beefing up their staff on loan work-outs to satisfy demand. Remember, the bank’s bottom line is $. Taking a shortage unnecessarily on someone who can make the payments hurts them as much as making a forbearance agreement with someone who still won’t be able to pay.

[robyns_song]

It entirely depends on the loan servicer, but from my experience, the practice has always been to go through each borrower and examine their financials like already described.

No doubt that some people “slip through the cracks” but it’s more common for loans to just not get re-worked when there’s a shortage of staff. Successful loan servicing companies are beefing up their staff on loan work-outs to satisfy demand. Remember, the bank’s bottom line is $. Taking a shortage unnecessarily on someone who can make the payments hurts them as much as making a forbearance agreement with someone who still won’t be able to pay.

[robyns_song]

It entirely depends on the loan servicer, but from my experience, the practice has always been to go through each borrower and examine their financials like already described.

No doubt that some people “slip through the cracks” but it’s more common for loans to just not get re-worked when there’s a shortage of staff. Successful loan servicing companies are beefing up their staff on loan work-outs to satisfy demand. Remember, the bank’s bottom line is $. Taking a shortage unnecessarily on someone who can make the payments hurts them as much as making a forbearance agreement with someone who still won’t be able to pay.

[robyns_song]

It entirely depends on the loan servicer, but from my experience, the practice has always been to go through each borrower and examine their financials like already described.

No doubt that some people “slip through the cracks” but it’s more common for loans to just not get re-worked when there’s a shortage of staff. Successful loan servicing companies are beefing up their staff on loan work-outs to satisfy demand. Remember, the bank’s bottom line is $. Taking a shortage unnecessarily on someone who can make the payments hurts them as much as making a forbearance agreement with someone who still won’t be able to pay.

[robyns_song]

It entirely depends on the loan servicer, but from my experience, the practice has always been to go through each borrower and examine their financials like already described.

No doubt that some people “slip through the cracks” but it’s more common for loans to just not get re-worked when there’s a shortage of staff. Successful loan servicing companies are beefing up their staff on loan work-outs to satisfy demand. Remember, the bank’s bottom line is $. Taking a shortage unnecessarily on someone who can make the payments hurts them as much as making a forbearance agreement with someone who still won’t be able to pay.

[SD Realtor]

Not sure how they will handle it pr. Still though, it seems logical that pushing them through the mill one by one with scrutiny is an absolute must. Pushing them through in a boiler room manner like you are implying is what got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem to me that allowing loans to be rewritten (which translates to a hit to the return for the investors) would imply that the investors would demand that in exchange for giving up that return, that a comprehensive wunderwriting process is completed for those same rewritten loans. Just my guess…

The loan workout package is pretty much identical to the short sale package. When my most recent clients tried to get a loan workout done, and the lender in the end refused to rewrite the loan, they did not need to resubmit a short sale package because the entire file was simply forwarded to the asset manager.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Not sure how they will handle it pr. Still though, it seems logical that pushing them through the mill one by one with scrutiny is an absolute must. Pushing them through in a boiler room manner like you are implying is what got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem to me that allowing loans to be rewritten (which translates to a hit to the return for the investors) would imply that the investors would demand that in exchange for giving up that return, that a comprehensive wunderwriting process is completed for those same rewritten loans. Just my guess…

The loan workout package is pretty much identical to the short sale package. When my most recent clients tried to get a loan workout done, and the lender in the end refused to rewrite the loan, they did not need to resubmit a short sale package because the entire file was simply forwarded to the asset manager.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Not sure how they will handle it pr. Still though, it seems logical that pushing them through the mill one by one with scrutiny is an absolute must. Pushing them through in a boiler room manner like you are implying is what got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem to me that allowing loans to be rewritten (which translates to a hit to the return for the investors) would imply that the investors would demand that in exchange for giving up that return, that a comprehensive wunderwriting process is completed for those same rewritten loans. Just my guess…

The loan workout package is pretty much identical to the short sale package. When my most recent clients tried to get a loan workout done, and the lender in the end refused to rewrite the loan, they did not need to resubmit a short sale package because the entire file was simply forwarded to the asset manager.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Not sure how they will handle it pr. Still though, it seems logical that pushing them through the mill one by one with scrutiny is an absolute must. Pushing them through in a boiler room manner like you are implying is what got them in trouble in the first place. It would seem to me that allowing loans to be rewritten (which translates to a hit to the return for the investors) would imply that the investors would demand that in exchange for giving up that return, that a comprehensive wunderwriting process is completed for those same rewritten loans. Just my guess…

The loan workout package is pretty much identical to the short sale package. When my most recent clients tried to get a loan workout done, and the lender in the end refused to rewrite the loan, they did not need to resubmit a short sale package because the entire file was simply forwarded to the asset manager.

SD Realtor

[patientrenter]

I heard there were services that provided you with W-2s etc to “help you out”. Paulson and Bair and others have made it clear they really, really, don’t want the loan servicers to go through the borrowers one by one and actually discover and weed out the ones who committed fraud, or can afford to pay. If Paulson and Bair and a lot of other people in charge of setting and enforcing the rules are showing near-desperation in their efforts to ensure lots and lots of voters will get nice deals in workouts, I don’t think the servicers will be allowed to get too fussy. We’ll see.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

I heard there were services that provided you with W-2s etc to “help you out”. Paulson and Bair and others have made it clear they really, really, don’t want the loan servicers to go through the borrowers one by one and actually discover and weed out the ones who committed fraud, or can afford to pay. If Paulson and Bair and a lot of other people in charge of setting and enforcing the rules are showing near-desperation in their efforts to ensure lots and lots of voters will get nice deals in workouts, I don’t think the servicers will be allowed to get too fussy. We’ll see.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

I heard there were services that provided you with W-2s etc to “help you out”. Paulson and Bair and others have made it clear they really, really, don’t want the loan servicers to go through the borrowers one by one and actually discover and weed out the ones who committed fraud, or can afford to pay. If Paulson and Bair and a lot of other people in charge of setting and enforcing the rules are showing near-desperation in their efforts to ensure lots and lots of voters will get nice deals in workouts, I don’t think the servicers will be allowed to get too fussy. We’ll see.

Patient renter in OC

[patientrenter]

I heard there were services that provided you with W-2s etc to “help you out”. Paulson and Bair and others have made it clear they really, really, don’t want the loan servicers to go through the borrowers one by one and actually discover and weed out the ones who committed fraud, or can afford to pay. If Paulson and Bair and a lot of other people in charge of setting and enforcing the rules are showing near-desperation in their efforts to ensure lots and lots of voters will get nice deals in workouts, I don’t think the servicers will be allowed to get too fussy. We’ll see.

Patient renter in OC

[DaCounselor]

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation, so it will be difficult if not impossible to truly “fake out” the servicer/lender.

That being said, it is conceivable that we may see some changes in the future mod protocol if enough borrowers with ability decide to play chicken with their servicer/lender. As an example, consider a borrower who financed 100% of his $800K home, the home comps at $560K, and he has the ability to continue servicing his $800K mortgage. The borrower gives the servicer/lender an option – either lock me into a low fixed rate and/or write down my loan balance to the comp level, or I will go into default. What will the servicer/lender do if this type of proposition becomes commonplace? I submit that it very well may be in the financial interest of the lender to capitulate as opposed to taking on an REO.

Regarding 80/20 deals, there has already been cyber-chatter regarding those with ability to pay playing chicken with the piggyback lender by simply stopping payments and forcing the lender to react. If the piggyback lender has essentially an unsecured loan due to reduction of home value, why would they foreclose? The implication is that the lender will accept pennies on the dollar in a short-pay deal just to get something. Again, the pre-requisite is that the borrower is geared-up for a game of chicken, is prepared to go into default, and is even prepared to go into default on their first mortgage to create the threat of a complete wipe-out of the piggyback loan.

In the first example above, it will certainly require financial disclosures as the lender needs to confirm ability to pay. In the 80/20 situation, there is arguably no need for financial disclosure, much as the lender would like it, because the proposition is take it or leave it regardless of ability.

I expect many future examples regarding the intracacies of negotiations with servicers/lenders in this regard. We are already seeing templates for how to address particular situations and more of the same to come.

[DaCounselor]

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation, so it will be difficult if not impossible to truly “fake out” the servicer/lender.

That being said, it is conceivable that we may see some changes in the future mod protocol if enough borrowers with ability decide to play chicken with their servicer/lender. As an example, consider a borrower who financed 100% of his $800K home, the home comps at $560K, and he has the ability to continue servicing his $800K mortgage. The borrower gives the servicer/lender an option – either lock me into a low fixed rate and/or write down my loan balance to the comp level, or I will go into default. What will the servicer/lender do if this type of proposition becomes commonplace? I submit that it very well may be in the financial interest of the lender to capitulate as opposed to taking on an REO.

Regarding 80/20 deals, there has already been cyber-chatter regarding those with ability to pay playing chicken with the piggyback lender by simply stopping payments and forcing the lender to react. If the piggyback lender has essentially an unsecured loan due to reduction of home value, why would they foreclose? The implication is that the lender will accept pennies on the dollar in a short-pay deal just to get something. Again, the pre-requisite is that the borrower is geared-up for a game of chicken, is prepared to go into default, and is even prepared to go into default on their first mortgage to create the threat of a complete wipe-out of the piggyback loan.

In the first example above, it will certainly require financial disclosures as the lender needs to confirm ability to pay. In the 80/20 situation, there is arguably no need for financial disclosure, much as the lender would like it, because the proposition is take it or leave it regardless of ability.

I expect many future examples regarding the intracacies of negotiations with servicers/lenders in this regard. We are already seeing templates for how to address particular situations and more of the same to come.

[DaCounselor]

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation, so it will be difficult if not impossible to truly “fake out” the servicer/lender.

That being said, it is conceivable that we may see some changes in the future mod protocol if enough borrowers with ability decide to play chicken with their servicer/lender. As an example, consider a borrower who financed 100% of his $800K home, the home comps at $560K, and he has the ability to continue servicing his $800K mortgage. The borrower gives the servicer/lender an option – either lock me into a low fixed rate and/or write down my loan balance to the comp level, or I will go into default. What will the servicer/lender do if this type of proposition becomes commonplace? I submit that it very well may be in the financial interest of the lender to capitulate as opposed to taking on an REO.

Regarding 80/20 deals, there has already been cyber-chatter regarding those with ability to pay playing chicken with the piggyback lender by simply stopping payments and forcing the lender to react. If the piggyback lender has essentially an unsecured loan due to reduction of home value, why would they foreclose? The implication is that the lender will accept pennies on the dollar in a short-pay deal just to get something. Again, the pre-requisite is that the borrower is geared-up for a game of chicken, is prepared to go into default, and is even prepared to go into default on their first mortgage to create the threat of a complete wipe-out of the piggyback loan.

In the first example above, it will certainly require financial disclosures as the lender needs to confirm ability to pay. In the 80/20 situation, there is arguably no need for financial disclosure, much as the lender would like it, because the proposition is take it or leave it regardless of ability.

I expect many future examples regarding the intracacies of negotiations with servicers/lenders in this regard. We are already seeing templates for how to address particular situations and more of the same to come.

[DaCounselor]

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation, so it will be difficult if not impossible to truly “fake out” the servicer/lender.

That being said, it is conceivable that we may see some changes in the future mod protocol if enough borrowers with ability decide to play chicken with their servicer/lender. As an example, consider a borrower who financed 100% of his $800K home, the home comps at $560K, and he has the ability to continue servicing his $800K mortgage. The borrower gives the servicer/lender an option – either lock me into a low fixed rate and/or write down my loan balance to the comp level, or I will go into default. What will the servicer/lender do if this type of proposition becomes commonplace? I submit that it very well may be in the financial interest of the lender to capitulate as opposed to taking on an REO.

Regarding 80/20 deals, there has already been cyber-chatter regarding those with ability to pay playing chicken with the piggyback lender by simply stopping payments and forcing the lender to react. If the piggyback lender has essentially an unsecured loan due to reduction of home value, why would they foreclose? The implication is that the lender will accept pennies on the dollar in a short-pay deal just to get something. Again, the pre-requisite is that the borrower is geared-up for a game of chicken, is prepared to go into default, and is even prepared to go into default on their first mortgage to create the threat of a complete wipe-out of the piggyback loan.

In the first example above, it will certainly require financial disclosures as the lender needs to confirm ability to pay. In the 80/20 situation, there is arguably no need for financial disclosure, much as the lender would like it, because the proposition is take it or leave it regardless of ability.

I expect many future examples regarding the intracacies of negotiations with servicers/lenders in this regard. We are already seeing templates for how to address particular situations and more of the same to come.

[DaCounselor]

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation, so it will be difficult if not impossible to truly “fake out” the servicer/lender.

That being said, it is conceivable that we may see some changes in the future mod protocol if enough borrowers with ability decide to play chicken with their servicer/lender. As an example, consider a borrower who financed 100% of his $800K home, the home comps at $560K, and he has the ability to continue servicing his $800K mortgage. The borrower gives the servicer/lender an option – either lock me into a low fixed rate and/or write down my loan balance to the comp level, or I will go into default. What will the servicer/lender do if this type of proposition becomes commonplace? I submit that it very well may be in the financial interest of the lender to capitulate as opposed to taking on an REO.

Regarding 80/20 deals, there has already been cyber-chatter regarding those with ability to pay playing chicken with the piggyback lender by simply stopping payments and forcing the lender to react. If the piggyback lender has essentially an unsecured loan due to reduction of home value, why would they foreclose? The implication is that the lender will accept pennies on the dollar in a short-pay deal just to get something. Again, the pre-requisite is that the borrower is geared-up for a game of chicken, is prepared to go into default, and is even prepared to go into default on their first mortgage to create the threat of a complete wipe-out of the piggyback loan.

In the first example above, it will certainly require financial disclosures as the lender needs to confirm ability to pay. In the 80/20 situation, there is arguably no need for financial disclosure, much as the lender would like it, because the proposition is take it or leave it regardless of ability.

I expect many future examples regarding the intracacies of negotiations with servicers/lenders in this regard. We are already seeing templates for how to address particular situations and more of the same to come.

[IONEGARM]

I thought the whole purpose of the rapid workout criteria is that they dont reunderwrite the loan. I do think it will encourage defaults but the servicers will be smart and QC SOME of the loans and get a sampling to catch fraud. So it will be a numbers game, you risk a 90+ day serious default on your credit and you might get nothing from it. But then you just walk away (assuming you have a no recourse loan) and take your lumps and give the bank the junk asset.

[SD Realtor]

The purpose of the bailout (of which workouts are a component of) has nothing to do with kind heartedness to homeowners. We have been through this right? It is simply to try to keep some trickle of a return to investors. You cannot do that by a “rapid workout”. All you will do is get another month or two of payment and the homeowner will belly up and default again… and again… and again. In fact it is probably much more of a pain in the butt to rework a loan then it is to simply suck up the short sale or let the property go reo.

For the other post about walking away with the deficiency, as a homeowner if you do indeed have a recourse loan then yes you have to cope with the possibility of that deficiency following you around for a long long time. However you can also get the lender to release you from that deficiency if you negotiate with them even if the loan is a recourse loan.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The purpose of the bailout (of which workouts are a component of) has nothing to do with kind heartedness to homeowners. We have been through this right? It is simply to try to keep some trickle of a return to investors. You cannot do that by a “rapid workout”. All you will do is get another month or two of payment and the homeowner will belly up and default again… and again… and again. In fact it is probably much more of a pain in the butt to rework a loan then it is to simply suck up the short sale or let the property go reo.

For the other post about walking away with the deficiency, as a homeowner if you do indeed have a recourse loan then yes you have to cope with the possibility of that deficiency following you around for a long long time. However you can also get the lender to release you from that deficiency if you negotiate with them even if the loan is a recourse loan.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The purpose of the bailout (of which workouts are a component of) has nothing to do with kind heartedness to homeowners. We have been through this right? It is simply to try to keep some trickle of a return to investors. You cannot do that by a “rapid workout”. All you will do is get another month or two of payment and the homeowner will belly up and default again… and again… and again. In fact it is probably much more of a pain in the butt to rework a loan then it is to simply suck up the short sale or let the property go reo.

For the other post about walking away with the deficiency, as a homeowner if you do indeed have a recourse loan then yes you have to cope with the possibility of that deficiency following you around for a long long time. However you can also get the lender to release you from that deficiency if you negotiate with them even if the loan is a recourse loan.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The purpose of the bailout (of which workouts are a component of) has nothing to do with kind heartedness to homeowners. We have been through this right? It is simply to try to keep some trickle of a return to investors. You cannot do that by a “rapid workout”. All you will do is get another month or two of payment and the homeowner will belly up and default again… and again… and again. In fact it is probably much more of a pain in the butt to rework a loan then it is to simply suck up the short sale or let the property go reo.

For the other post about walking away with the deficiency, as a homeowner if you do indeed have a recourse loan then yes you have to cope with the possibility of that deficiency following you around for a long long time. However you can also get the lender to release you from that deficiency if you negotiate with them even if the loan is a recourse loan.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The purpose of the bailout (of which workouts are a component of) has nothing to do with kind heartedness to homeowners. We have been through this right? It is simply to try to keep some trickle of a return to investors. You cannot do that by a “rapid workout”. All you will do is get another month or two of payment and the homeowner will belly up and default again… and again… and again. In fact it is probably much more of a pain in the butt to rework a loan then it is to simply suck up the short sale or let the property go reo.

For the other post about walking away with the deficiency, as a homeowner if you do indeed have a recourse loan then yes you have to cope with the possibility of that deficiency following you around for a long long time. However you can also get the lender to release you from that deficiency if you negotiate with them even if the loan is a recourse loan.

SD Realtor

[IONEGARM]

I thought the whole purpose of the rapid workout criteria is that they dont reunderwrite the loan. I do think it will encourage defaults but the servicers will be smart and QC SOME of the loans and get a sampling to catch fraud. So it will be a numbers game, you risk a 90+ day serious default on your credit and you might get nothing from it. But then you just walk away (assuming you have a no recourse loan) and take your lumps and give the bank the junk asset.

[IONEGARM]

I thought the whole purpose of the rapid workout criteria is that they dont reunderwrite the loan. I do think it will encourage defaults but the servicers will be smart and QC SOME of the loans and get a sampling to catch fraud. So it will be a numbers game, you risk a 90+ day serious default on your credit and you might get nothing from it. But then you just walk away (assuming you have a no recourse loan) and take your lumps and give the bank the junk asset.

[IONEGARM]

I thought the whole purpose of the rapid workout criteria is that they dont reunderwrite the loan. I do think it will encourage defaults but the servicers will be smart and QC SOME of the loans and get a sampling to catch fraud. So it will be a numbers game, you risk a 90+ day serious default on your credit and you might get nothing from it. But then you just walk away (assuming you have a no recourse loan) and take your lumps and give the bank the junk asset.

[IONEGARM]

I thought the whole purpose of the rapid workout criteria is that they dont reunderwrite the loan. I do think it will encourage defaults but the servicers will be smart and QC SOME of the loans and get a sampling to catch fraud. So it will be a numbers game, you risk a 90+ day serious default on your credit and you might get nothing from it. But then you just walk away (assuming you have a no recourse loan) and take your lumps and give the bank the junk asset.

[SD Realtor]

The loan workout process requires a pretty comprehensive documentation process. This includes tax returns, w2 statements, hardship letters, asset statements including any and all bank accounts, 401ks, brokerage statements, as well as liability statements to show the hardship.

You can attempt to hold the information back and see how diligent they are tracing your background down. How diligent they are is a question I simply do not know.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The loan workout process requires a pretty comprehensive documentation process. This includes tax returns, w2 statements, hardship letters, asset statements including any and all bank accounts, 401ks, brokerage statements, as well as liability statements to show the hardship.

You can attempt to hold the information back and see how diligent they are tracing your background down. How diligent they are is a question I simply do not know.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The loan workout process requires a pretty comprehensive documentation process. This includes tax returns, w2 statements, hardship letters, asset statements including any and all bank accounts, 401ks, brokerage statements, as well as liability statements to show the hardship.

You can attempt to hold the information back and see how diligent they are tracing your background down. How diligent they are is a question I simply do not know.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

The loan workout process requires a pretty comprehensive documentation process. This includes tax returns, w2 statements, hardship letters, asset statements including any and all bank accounts, 401ks, brokerage statements, as well as liability statements to show the hardship.

You can attempt to hold the information back and see how diligent they are tracing your background down. How diligent they are is a question I simply do not know.

SD Realtor

[cr]

I am aware that there is a moral piece to this… I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

Sounds like the problem that got people into the mortgage mess.

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation.

Ironic isn’t it? Only after the mess is made are the rules enforced.

[patientlywaiting]

I was thinking the same thing, especially in regard to short-sales.

If short-sales were too easy to get approved, then everyone whose equity is lower than the loan balance would want one, regardless of their financial situation. Even if you could afford it, you should short-sell to your wife, brother, children, girlfriend, trust fund, or whatever.

In a short-sale, the seller still controls who gets to buy the property.

I guess that if you don’t care about your credit, there’s no harm falling a few months behind and telling your lender that you “can’t afford” the payments anymore. Then see if the lender will give you a deal.

“Affording” a mortgage is nebulous enough that nobody could accuse of mortgage fraud.

[23109VC]

this is such interesting stuff. you can see how this is all going to go downhill.

if someone has an 80/20….and has NO equity…and then just decides to “default” and stop paying… what are the banks really going to do? take the house and sell it at a loss?

if you tell them you can’t afford to pay…will they negotiate with you for new terms?

or negotiate for a new/lower rate? i guess for many peole it will depend HOW bad they are underwater, can they afford to keep the house at the “new” price/rate, and how bad will it FUBAR their credit/do they care?

suppose you bought a house at 500k. now it’s worth 350k. you are 150k upside down. you have a rate that is so so on your first, and sucks on a second. assume they aren’t ARMS but 30 year fixeds… you could call up the lender and just say, the house is worth less, I don’t want to eat the loss, so I’m gonna walk and let you hae the 150k loss. unless you sweeten the pot. just basically extort it out of them.

what are they going to do? if you have never refi-d your house..then you are perfectly able to walk away, mail them the keys, and have no repurcussions, other than your credit being tanked. if you tell the lender, you want the second wiped out, or you want the interest rate reduced…

hell, figure out what their REAL loss will be if you walk, and then extort better terms out of them that are better for YOU but NOT as bad as the defalt scenario, and heck, maye they would take it?

anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???

with the huge number of 100% financed houses…there are PILES of peopel with LITERALLy no equity in a house, and mentally, nothing to lose by walking away. when you put down 20%, walking away hurts b/c you lost your investment. even if the house depreciated a lot and that 20% isn’t really there anymore…it still feels like you are losing your money to walk away from the house. BUT if you ptu down ZERO dollars, and the house has depreciated 150k or more…some large amount, a lot of people EVEN THOUGHT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS may just saw screw it, and walk away. they might rather just eat the foreclosure, and let hte bank have the house and not have the “loss” to deal with. they’ll go rent something, wipe their hands of the house, and figure since i dind’ tput anythign down, i din’d tlose anythign..in fact, many of them might feel that while walking away is morally a bad thing, that they are making the wisest financial move they can as the house is SO UNDERWATER that keeping it is financially unwise….

smart, educated, and financially solvent people may start walking from their houses b/c they think it is the best thing to do… when that starts happening…when you have the ARM resets who should never have bought in the first place walking awawy, you have one problem..but when the people who COULD afford are also walking away..then you’ll have another wave of problems… and if everyone starts doing it, there will be less and less psychological “stress” for getting foreclosed on.. it will be “no big deal” to people if/when it gets so commonplace.

[DaCounselor]

“anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???”
_________________________________

Using the 80/20 financing example, if the comps are 20% less than the purchase price, the piggyback lender is essentially unsecured. They are actually looking at a total loss at a value drop of less than 20% due to carrying and foreclosure costs. So how will a piggyback lender in such a valuation scenario (which I think we have already reached and exceeded in some areas) react to a borrower who simply stops paying them?

I see three choices – 1) foreclose and get $0 (or even take a further loss) after paying off the 1st and costs; 2) do nothing and hope values go back up; or 3) negotiate a short pay and take what you can get.

#1 simply makes no sense. Not going to happen.

#2 is a possibility but it becomes a completely non-performing loan for who knows how long?

#3 seems to be the most likely result. Take what you can get and write off the rest.

If it plays out this way, the borrower with ability in his $800K (purchase price) home forks over maybe $10K – $15K to the piggyback lender and wipes out a $160K 2nd. Now he’s got a first of $640K that he can already afford and he’s freed up $1K/month cash by wiping out the piggyback. Not a bad end result. Assume he was upside-down 25% – now he’s only upside-down 5%, can easily afford his mortgage and he has an extra $1K/month to play with. And of course the piggyback lender will not report him as delinquent once the deal is done so there is a minimal if any credit hit.

Piggybacks are going to get creamed.

[DaCounselor]

“anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???”
_________________________________

Using the 80/20 financing example, if the comps are 20% less than the purchase price, the piggyback lender is essentially unsecured. They are actually looking at a total loss at a value drop of less than 20% due to carrying and foreclosure costs. So how will a piggyback lender in such a valuation scenario (which I think we have already reached and exceeded in some areas) react to a borrower who simply stops paying them?

I see three choices – 1) foreclose and get $0 (or even take a further loss) after paying off the 1st and costs; 2) do nothing and hope values go back up; or 3) negotiate a short pay and take what you can get.

#1 simply makes no sense. Not going to happen.

#2 is a possibility but it becomes a completely non-performing loan for who knows how long?

#3 seems to be the most likely result. Take what you can get and write off the rest.

If it plays out this way, the borrower with ability in his $800K (purchase price) home forks over maybe $10K – $15K to the piggyback lender and wipes out a $160K 2nd. Now he’s got a first of $640K that he can already afford and he’s freed up $1K/month cash by wiping out the piggyback. Not a bad end result. Assume he was upside-down 25% – now he’s only upside-down 5%, can easily afford his mortgage and he has an extra $1K/month to play with. And of course the piggyback lender will not report him as delinquent once the deal is done so there is a minimal if any credit hit.

Piggybacks are going to get creamed.

[DaCounselor]

“anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???”
_________________________________

Using the 80/20 financing example, if the comps are 20% less than the purchase price, the piggyback lender is essentially unsecured. They are actually looking at a total loss at a value drop of less than 20% due to carrying and foreclosure costs. So how will a piggyback lender in such a valuation scenario (which I think we have already reached and exceeded in some areas) react to a borrower who simply stops paying them?

I see three choices – 1) foreclose and get $0 (or even take a further loss) after paying off the 1st and costs; 2) do nothing and hope values go back up; or 3) negotiate a short pay and take what you can get.

#1 simply makes no sense. Not going to happen.

#2 is a possibility but it becomes a completely non-performing loan for who knows how long?

#3 seems to be the most likely result. Take what you can get and write off the rest.

If it plays out this way, the borrower with ability in his $800K (purchase price) home forks over maybe $10K – $15K to the piggyback lender and wipes out a $160K 2nd. Now he’s got a first of $640K that he can already afford and he’s freed up $1K/month cash by wiping out the piggyback. Not a bad end result. Assume he was upside-down 25% – now he’s only upside-down 5%, can easily afford his mortgage and he has an extra $1K/month to play with. And of course the piggyback lender will not report him as delinquent once the deal is done so there is a minimal if any credit hit.

Piggybacks are going to get creamed.

[DaCounselor]

“anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???”
_________________________________

Using the 80/20 financing example, if the comps are 20% less than the purchase price, the piggyback lender is essentially unsecured. They are actually looking at a total loss at a value drop of less than 20% due to carrying and foreclosure costs. So how will a piggyback lender in such a valuation scenario (which I think we have already reached and exceeded in some areas) react to a borrower who simply stops paying them?

I see three choices – 1) foreclose and get $0 (or even take a further loss) after paying off the 1st and costs; 2) do nothing and hope values go back up; or 3) negotiate a short pay and take what you can get.

#1 simply makes no sense. Not going to happen.

#2 is a possibility but it becomes a completely non-performing loan for who knows how long?

#3 seems to be the most likely result. Take what you can get and write off the rest.

If it plays out this way, the borrower with ability in his $800K (purchase price) home forks over maybe $10K – $15K to the piggyback lender and wipes out a $160K 2nd. Now he’s got a first of $640K that he can already afford and he’s freed up $1K/month cash by wiping out the piggyback. Not a bad end result. Assume he was upside-down 25% – now he’s only upside-down 5%, can easily afford his mortgage and he has an extra $1K/month to play with. And of course the piggyback lender will not report him as delinquent once the deal is done so there is a minimal if any credit hit.

Piggybacks are going to get creamed.

[DaCounselor]

“anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???”
_________________________________

Using the 80/20 financing example, if the comps are 20% less than the purchase price, the piggyback lender is essentially unsecured. They are actually looking at a total loss at a value drop of less than 20% due to carrying and foreclosure costs. So how will a piggyback lender in such a valuation scenario (which I think we have already reached and exceeded in some areas) react to a borrower who simply stops paying them?

I see three choices – 1) foreclose and get $0 (or even take a further loss) after paying off the 1st and costs; 2) do nothing and hope values go back up; or 3) negotiate a short pay and take what you can get.

#1 simply makes no sense. Not going to happen.

#2 is a possibility but it becomes a completely non-performing loan for who knows how long?

#3 seems to be the most likely result. Take what you can get and write off the rest.

If it plays out this way, the borrower with ability in his $800K (purchase price) home forks over maybe $10K – $15K to the piggyback lender and wipes out a $160K 2nd. Now he’s got a first of $640K that he can already afford and he’s freed up $1K/month cash by wiping out the piggyback. Not a bad end result. Assume he was upside-down 25% – now he’s only upside-down 5%, can easily afford his mortgage and he has an extra $1K/month to play with. And of course the piggyback lender will not report him as delinquent once the deal is done so there is a minimal if any credit hit.

Piggybacks are going to get creamed.

[23109VC]

this is such interesting stuff. you can see how this is all going to go downhill.

if someone has an 80/20….and has NO equity…and then just decides to “default” and stop paying… what are the banks really going to do? take the house and sell it at a loss?

if you tell them you can’t afford to pay…will they negotiate with you for new terms?

or negotiate for a new/lower rate? i guess for many peole it will depend HOW bad they are underwater, can they afford to keep the house at the “new” price/rate, and how bad will it FUBAR their credit/do they care?

suppose you bought a house at 500k. now it’s worth 350k. you are 150k upside down. you have a rate that is so so on your first, and sucks on a second. assume they aren’t ARMS but 30 year fixeds… you could call up the lender and just say, the house is worth less, I don’t want to eat the loss, so I’m gonna walk and let you hae the 150k loss. unless you sweeten the pot. just basically extort it out of them.

what are they going to do? if you have never refi-d your house..then you are perfectly able to walk away, mail them the keys, and have no repurcussions, other than your credit being tanked. if you tell the lender, you want the second wiped out, or you want the interest rate reduced…

hell, figure out what their REAL loss will be if you walk, and then extort better terms out of them that are better for YOU but NOT as bad as the defalt scenario, and heck, maye they would take it?

anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???

with the huge number of 100% financed houses…there are PILES of peopel with LITERALLy no equity in a house, and mentally, nothing to lose by walking away. when you put down 20%, walking away hurts b/c you lost your investment. even if the house depreciated a lot and that 20% isn’t really there anymore…it still feels like you are losing your money to walk away from the house. BUT if you ptu down ZERO dollars, and the house has depreciated 150k or more…some large amount, a lot of people EVEN THOUGHT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS may just saw screw it, and walk away. they might rather just eat the foreclosure, and let hte bank have the house and not have the “loss” to deal with. they’ll go rent something, wipe their hands of the house, and figure since i dind’ tput anythign down, i din’d tlose anythign..in fact, many of them might feel that while walking away is morally a bad thing, that they are making the wisest financial move they can as the house is SO UNDERWATER that keeping it is financially unwise….

smart, educated, and financially solvent people may start walking from their houses b/c they think it is the best thing to do… when that starts happening…when you have the ARM resets who should never have bought in the first place walking awawy, you have one problem..but when the people who COULD afford are also walking away..then you’ll have another wave of problems… and if everyone starts doing it, there will be less and less psychological “stress” for getting foreclosed on.. it will be “no big deal” to people if/when it gets so commonplace.

[23109VC]

this is such interesting stuff. you can see how this is all going to go downhill.

if someone has an 80/20….and has NO equity…and then just decides to “default” and stop paying… what are the banks really going to do? take the house and sell it at a loss?

if you tell them you can’t afford to pay…will they negotiate with you for new terms?

or negotiate for a new/lower rate? i guess for many peole it will depend HOW bad they are underwater, can they afford to keep the house at the “new” price/rate, and how bad will it FUBAR their credit/do they care?

suppose you bought a house at 500k. now it’s worth 350k. you are 150k upside down. you have a rate that is so so on your first, and sucks on a second. assume they aren’t ARMS but 30 year fixeds… you could call up the lender and just say, the house is worth less, I don’t want to eat the loss, so I’m gonna walk and let you hae the 150k loss. unless you sweeten the pot. just basically extort it out of them.

what are they going to do? if you have never refi-d your house..then you are perfectly able to walk away, mail them the keys, and have no repurcussions, other than your credit being tanked. if you tell the lender, you want the second wiped out, or you want the interest rate reduced…

hell, figure out what their REAL loss will be if you walk, and then extort better terms out of them that are better for YOU but NOT as bad as the defalt scenario, and heck, maye they would take it?

anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???

with the huge number of 100% financed houses…there are PILES of peopel with LITERALLy no equity in a house, and mentally, nothing to lose by walking away. when you put down 20%, walking away hurts b/c you lost your investment. even if the house depreciated a lot and that 20% isn’t really there anymore…it still feels like you are losing your money to walk away from the house. BUT if you ptu down ZERO dollars, and the house has depreciated 150k or more…some large amount, a lot of people EVEN THOUGHT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS may just saw screw it, and walk away. they might rather just eat the foreclosure, and let hte bank have the house and not have the “loss” to deal with. they’ll go rent something, wipe their hands of the house, and figure since i dind’ tput anythign down, i din’d tlose anythign..in fact, many of them might feel that while walking away is morally a bad thing, that they are making the wisest financial move they can as the house is SO UNDERWATER that keeping it is financially unwise….

smart, educated, and financially solvent people may start walking from their houses b/c they think it is the best thing to do… when that starts happening…when you have the ARM resets who should never have bought in the first place walking awawy, you have one problem..but when the people who COULD afford are also walking away..then you’ll have another wave of problems… and if everyone starts doing it, there will be less and less psychological “stress” for getting foreclosed on.. it will be “no big deal” to people if/when it gets so commonplace.

[23109VC]

this is such interesting stuff. you can see how this is all going to go downhill.

if someone has an 80/20….and has NO equity…and then just decides to “default” and stop paying… what are the banks really going to do? take the house and sell it at a loss?

if you tell them you can’t afford to pay…will they negotiate with you for new terms?

or negotiate for a new/lower rate? i guess for many peole it will depend HOW bad they are underwater, can they afford to keep the house at the “new” price/rate, and how bad will it FUBAR their credit/do they care?

suppose you bought a house at 500k. now it’s worth 350k. you are 150k upside down. you have a rate that is so so on your first, and sucks on a second. assume they aren’t ARMS but 30 year fixeds… you could call up the lender and just say, the house is worth less, I don’t want to eat the loss, so I’m gonna walk and let you hae the 150k loss. unless you sweeten the pot. just basically extort it out of them.

what are they going to do? if you have never refi-d your house..then you are perfectly able to walk away, mail them the keys, and have no repurcussions, other than your credit being tanked. if you tell the lender, you want the second wiped out, or you want the interest rate reduced…

hell, figure out what their REAL loss will be if you walk, and then extort better terms out of them that are better for YOU but NOT as bad as the defalt scenario, and heck, maye they would take it?

anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???

with the huge number of 100% financed houses…there are PILES of peopel with LITERALLy no equity in a house, and mentally, nothing to lose by walking away. when you put down 20%, walking away hurts b/c you lost your investment. even if the house depreciated a lot and that 20% isn’t really there anymore…it still feels like you are losing your money to walk away from the house. BUT if you ptu down ZERO dollars, and the house has depreciated 150k or more…some large amount, a lot of people EVEN THOUGHT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS may just saw screw it, and walk away. they might rather just eat the foreclosure, and let hte bank have the house and not have the “loss” to deal with. they’ll go rent something, wipe their hands of the house, and figure since i dind’ tput anythign down, i din’d tlose anythign..in fact, many of them might feel that while walking away is morally a bad thing, that they are making the wisest financial move they can as the house is SO UNDERWATER that keeping it is financially unwise….

smart, educated, and financially solvent people may start walking from their houses b/c they think it is the best thing to do… when that starts happening…when you have the ARM resets who should never have bought in the first place walking awawy, you have one problem..but when the people who COULD afford are also walking away..then you’ll have another wave of problems… and if everyone starts doing it, there will be less and less psychological “stress” for getting foreclosed on.. it will be “no big deal” to people if/when it gets so commonplace.

[23109VC]

this is such interesting stuff. you can see how this is all going to go downhill.

if someone has an 80/20….and has NO equity…and then just decides to “default” and stop paying… what are the banks really going to do? take the house and sell it at a loss?

if you tell them you can’t afford to pay…will they negotiate with you for new terms?

or negotiate for a new/lower rate? i guess for many peole it will depend HOW bad they are underwater, can they afford to keep the house at the “new” price/rate, and how bad will it FUBAR their credit/do they care?

suppose you bought a house at 500k. now it’s worth 350k. you are 150k upside down. you have a rate that is so so on your first, and sucks on a second. assume they aren’t ARMS but 30 year fixeds… you could call up the lender and just say, the house is worth less, I don’t want to eat the loss, so I’m gonna walk and let you hae the 150k loss. unless you sweeten the pot. just basically extort it out of them.

what are they going to do? if you have never refi-d your house..then you are perfectly able to walk away, mail them the keys, and have no repurcussions, other than your credit being tanked. if you tell the lender, you want the second wiped out, or you want the interest rate reduced…

hell, figure out what their REAL loss will be if you walk, and then extort better terms out of them that are better for YOU but NOT as bad as the defalt scenario, and heck, maye they would take it?

anyone think that the banks would concede to this kind of commando/in your face/I’m gonna screw you if you don’t sweeten the pot kind of attitude or would they say F you, get out, we’ll just foreclose..even though they will take a bath if they foreclose on the house???

with the huge number of 100% financed houses…there are PILES of peopel with LITERALLy no equity in a house, and mentally, nothing to lose by walking away. when you put down 20%, walking away hurts b/c you lost your investment. even if the house depreciated a lot and that 20% isn’t really there anymore…it still feels like you are losing your money to walk away from the house. BUT if you ptu down ZERO dollars, and the house has depreciated 150k or more…some large amount, a lot of people EVEN THOUGHT THEY ARE FINANCIALLY ABLE TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS may just saw screw it, and walk away. they might rather just eat the foreclosure, and let hte bank have the house and not have the “loss” to deal with. they’ll go rent something, wipe their hands of the house, and figure since i dind’ tput anythign down, i din’d tlose anythign..in fact, many of them might feel that while walking away is morally a bad thing, that they are making the wisest financial move they can as the house is SO UNDERWATER that keeping it is financially unwise….

smart, educated, and financially solvent people may start walking from their houses b/c they think it is the best thing to do… when that starts happening…when you have the ARM resets who should never have bought in the first place walking awawy, you have one problem..but when the people who COULD afford are also walking away..then you’ll have another wave of problems… and if everyone starts doing it, there will be less and less psychological “stress” for getting foreclosed on.. it will be “no big deal” to people if/when it gets so commonplace.

[patientlywaiting]

I was thinking the same thing, especially in regard to short-sales.

If short-sales were too easy to get approved, then everyone whose equity is lower than the loan balance would want one, regardless of their financial situation. Even if you could afford it, you should short-sell to your wife, brother, children, girlfriend, trust fund, or whatever.

In a short-sale, the seller still controls who gets to buy the property.

I guess that if you don’t care about your credit, there’s no harm falling a few months behind and telling your lender that you “can’t afford” the payments anymore. Then see if the lender will give you a deal.

“Affording” a mortgage is nebulous enough that nobody could accuse of mortgage fraud.

[patientlywaiting]

I was thinking the same thing, especially in regard to short-sales.

If short-sales were too easy to get approved, then everyone whose equity is lower than the loan balance would want one, regardless of their financial situation. Even if you could afford it, you should short-sell to your wife, brother, children, girlfriend, trust fund, or whatever.

In a short-sale, the seller still controls who gets to buy the property.

I guess that if you don’t care about your credit, there’s no harm falling a few months behind and telling your lender that you “can’t afford” the payments anymore. Then see if the lender will give you a deal.

“Affording” a mortgage is nebulous enough that nobody could accuse of mortgage fraud.

[patientlywaiting]

I was thinking the same thing, especially in regard to short-sales.

If short-sales were too easy to get approved, then everyone whose equity is lower than the loan balance would want one, regardless of their financial situation. Even if you could afford it, you should short-sell to your wife, brother, children, girlfriend, trust fund, or whatever.

In a short-sale, the seller still controls who gets to buy the property.

I guess that if you don’t care about your credit, there’s no harm falling a few months behind and telling your lender that you “can’t afford” the payments anymore. Then see if the lender will give you a deal.

“Affording” a mortgage is nebulous enough that nobody could accuse of mortgage fraud.

[patientlywaiting]

I was thinking the same thing, especially in regard to short-sales.

If short-sales were too easy to get approved, then everyone whose equity is lower than the loan balance would want one, regardless of their financial situation. Even if you could afford it, you should short-sell to your wife, brother, children, girlfriend, trust fund, or whatever.

In a short-sale, the seller still controls who gets to buy the property.

I guess that if you don’t care about your credit, there’s no harm falling a few months behind and telling your lender that you “can’t afford” the payments anymore. Then see if the lender will give you a deal.

“Affording” a mortgage is nebulous enough that nobody could accuse of mortgage fraud.

[cr]

I am aware that there is a moral piece to this… I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

Sounds like the problem that got people into the mortgage mess.

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation.

Ironic isn’t it? Only after the mess is made are the rules enforced.

[cr]

I am aware that there is a moral piece to this… I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

Sounds like the problem that got people into the mortgage mess.

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation.

Ironic isn’t it? Only after the mess is made are the rules enforced.

[cr]

I am aware that there is a moral piece to this… I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

Sounds like the problem that got people into the mortgage mess.

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation.

Ironic isn’t it? Only after the mess is made are the rules enforced.

[cr]

I am aware that there is a moral piece to this… I am only concerned with the business side of the equation.

Sounds like the problem that got people into the mortgage mess.

Ditto what SDR said. You are not likely to get a loan mod at this time without full documentation.

Ironic isn’t it? Only after the mess is made are the rules enforced.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

How can a person just walk away without owing the negative balance? Does the new BK laws not effect this? Anyone got an answer? If that is true, the banks are screwed.

[contraman]

Multipropert,

They can walk away because it is in the documents they signed that they have the right to do so. I see them all the time. Like I said before, it is not YOUR HOUSE it is the banks until you pay them in full.

From my understanding, and anyone can chime in here, the new BK laws protect the Credit Card companies but you can still BK out of a deficiency judgment from a bank. I have a few friends who are doing it now…..

SD Realtor makes a good point. It is very important to get them to agree to things in a contract when you are going through the foreclosure process. I do know that if they do not do a “judicial foreclosure” they waive the right to bring a deficiency judgment against you later. You can’t foreclose twice on someone…

As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.

Watch the movie “maxed out” when you get a chance.

Sincerely, Contraman

[SD Realtor]

Contra all of your recent posts have been dead on with the actual events I have been working on in the field. Same with your posts Counselor.

and finally…

“As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.”

my two cents here is that whoever follows George will do the exact same thing. There really is not much of a choice.

SD Realtor

[contraman]

SDR,

You are correct concerning the next President. The only person I feel could make a difference is Ron Paul by changing the “system” itself from the ground up. Unfortunately, many people follow the crowds and polls and don’t want to take on that type of change….we’ll see what happens.

Either way, until the RE fundamentals make sense here.. I think the wise decision is to hang out on the sidelines….

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

SDR,

You are correct concerning the next President. The only person I feel could make a difference is Ron Paul by changing the “system” itself from the ground up. Unfortunately, many people follow the crowds and polls and don’t want to take on that type of change….we’ll see what happens.

Either way, until the RE fundamentals make sense here.. I think the wise decision is to hang out on the sidelines….

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

SDR,

You are correct concerning the next President. The only person I feel could make a difference is Ron Paul by changing the “system” itself from the ground up. Unfortunately, many people follow the crowds and polls and don’t want to take on that type of change….we’ll see what happens.

Either way, until the RE fundamentals make sense here.. I think the wise decision is to hang out on the sidelines….

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

SDR,

You are correct concerning the next President. The only person I feel could make a difference is Ron Paul by changing the “system” itself from the ground up. Unfortunately, many people follow the crowds and polls and don’t want to take on that type of change….we’ll see what happens.

Either way, until the RE fundamentals make sense here.. I think the wise decision is to hang out on the sidelines….

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

SDR,

You are correct concerning the next President. The only person I feel could make a difference is Ron Paul by changing the “system” itself from the ground up. Unfortunately, many people follow the crowds and polls and don’t want to take on that type of change….we’ll see what happens.

Either way, until the RE fundamentals make sense here.. I think the wise decision is to hang out on the sidelines….

Sincerely, Contraman

[SD Realtor]

Contra all of your recent posts have been dead on with the actual events I have been working on in the field. Same with your posts Counselor.

and finally…

“As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.”

my two cents here is that whoever follows George will do the exact same thing. There really is not much of a choice.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Contra all of your recent posts have been dead on with the actual events I have been working on in the field. Same with your posts Counselor.

and finally…

“As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.”

my two cents here is that whoever follows George will do the exact same thing. There really is not much of a choice.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Contra all of your recent posts have been dead on with the actual events I have been working on in the field. Same with your posts Counselor.

and finally…

“As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.”

my two cents here is that whoever follows George will do the exact same thing. There really is not much of a choice.

SD Realtor

[SD Realtor]

Contra all of your recent posts have been dead on with the actual events I have been working on in the field. Same with your posts Counselor.

and finally…

“As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.”

my two cents here is that whoever follows George will do the exact same thing. There really is not much of a choice.

SD Realtor

[contraman]

Multipropert,

They can walk away because it is in the documents they signed that they have the right to do so. I see them all the time. Like I said before, it is not YOUR HOUSE it is the banks until you pay them in full.

From my understanding, and anyone can chime in here, the new BK laws protect the Credit Card companies but you can still BK out of a deficiency judgment from a bank. I have a few friends who are doing it now…..

SD Realtor makes a good point. It is very important to get them to agree to things in a contract when you are going through the foreclosure process. I do know that if they do not do a “judicial foreclosure” they waive the right to bring a deficiency judgment against you later. You can’t foreclose twice on someone…

As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.

Watch the movie “maxed out” when you get a chance.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Multipropert,

They can walk away because it is in the documents they signed that they have the right to do so. I see them all the time. Like I said before, it is not YOUR HOUSE it is the banks until you pay them in full.

From my understanding, and anyone can chime in here, the new BK laws protect the Credit Card companies but you can still BK out of a deficiency judgment from a bank. I have a few friends who are doing it now…..

SD Realtor makes a good point. It is very important to get them to agree to things in a contract when you are going through the foreclosure process. I do know that if they do not do a “judicial foreclosure” they waive the right to bring a deficiency judgment against you later. You can’t foreclose twice on someone…

As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.

Watch the movie “maxed out” when you get a chance.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Multipropert,

They can walk away because it is in the documents they signed that they have the right to do so. I see them all the time. Like I said before, it is not YOUR HOUSE it is the banks until you pay them in full.

From my understanding, and anyone can chime in here, the new BK laws protect the Credit Card companies but you can still BK out of a deficiency judgment from a bank. I have a few friends who are doing it now…..

SD Realtor makes a good point. It is very important to get them to agree to things in a contract when you are going through the foreclosure process. I do know that if they do not do a “judicial foreclosure” they waive the right to bring a deficiency judgment against you later. You can’t foreclose twice on someone…

As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.

Watch the movie “maxed out” when you get a chance.

Sincerely, Contraman

[contraman]

Multipropert,

They can walk away because it is in the documents they signed that they have the right to do so. I see them all the time. Like I said before, it is not YOUR HOUSE it is the banks until you pay them in full.

From my understanding, and anyone can chime in here, the new BK laws protect the Credit Card companies but you can still BK out of a deficiency judgment from a bank. I have a few friends who are doing it now…..

SD Realtor makes a good point. It is very important to get them to agree to things in a contract when you are going through the foreclosure process. I do know that if they do not do a “judicial foreclosure” they waive the right to bring a deficiency judgment against you later. You can’t foreclose twice on someone…

As far as the banks being screwed (long term), not a chance, they are the bedrock of our economy. Benny will print money for them to lend from here to the end of time…..and Georgie will pass all these laws and acts to protect them from utter failure.

Watch the movie “maxed out” when you get a chance.

Sincerely, Contraman

[Multiplepropertyowner]

How can a person just walk away without owing the negative balance? Does the new BK laws not effect this? Anyone got an answer? If that is true, the banks are screwed.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

How can a person just walk away without owing the negative balance? Does the new BK laws not effect this? Anyone got an answer? If that is true, the banks are screwed.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

How can a person just walk away without owing the negative balance? Does the new BK laws not effect this? Anyone got an answer? If that is true, the banks are screwed.

[Multiplepropertyowner]

How can a person just walk away without owing the negative balance? Does the new BK laws not effect this? Anyone got an answer? If that is true, the banks are screwed.

[Author]

Posts