[djrobsd]

Here’s what the law says, California Civil Code… I hate trying to read the law, the laywer-worded laws are so difficult to interpret sometimes. From what I can tell, it says “balance of the purchase price” under a deed of trust. That means, even if you refinance, if they do it as a dead of trust again, and you don’t finance a penny over the original purchase price, you might be protected, but I’m NOT A LAWYER SO DO NOT TAKE THIS AS LEGAL ADVICE, it’s just my interpretation by reading. Perhaps a lawyer could clarify this for all of us?

580b. No deficiency judgment shall lie in any event after a sale of
real property or an estate for years therein for failure of the
purchaser to complete his or her contract of sale, or under a deed of
trust or mortgage given to the vendor to secure payment of the
balance of the purchase price of that real property or estate for
years therein, or under a deed of trust or mortgage on a dwelling for
not more than four families given to a lender to secure repayment of
a loan which was in fact used to pay all or part of the purchase
price of that dwelling occupied, entirely or in part, by the
purchaser.
Where both a chattel mortgage and a deed of trust or mortgage have
been given to secure payment of the balance of the combined purchase
price of both real and personal property, no deficiency judgment
shall lie at any time under any one thereof if no deficiency judgment
would lie under the deed of trust or mortgage on the real property
or estate for years therein.

580c. In all cases where existing deeds of trust or mortgages are
judicially foreclosed, unless a different amount is set up in the
mortgage or deed of trust, and in all cases of mortgages and deeds of
trust executed after this act takes effect, the mortgagor or trustor
may be required to pay only such amount as trustee’s or attorney’s
fees for processing the judicial foreclosure as the court may find
reasonable and also the actual cost of publishing, recording, mailing
and posting notices, litigation guarantee, and litigation cost of
suit.

580d. No judgment shall be rendered for any deficiency upon a note
secured by a deed of trust or mortgage upon real property or an
estate for years therein hereafter executed in any case in which the
real property or estate for years therein has been sold by the
mortgagee or trustee under power of sale contained in the mortgage or
deed of trust.
This section does not apply to any deed of trust, mortgage or
other lien given to secure the payment of bonds or other evidences of
indebtedness authorized or permitted to be issued by the
Commissioner of Corporations, or which is made by a public utility
subject to the Public Utilities Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section
201) of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code).

[djrobsd]

Agree 100% with fat_lazy_union. The ONLY way to go with your stock options when they become worth something is to do a same day sale. Don’t be greedy, don’t hold them expecting the value to go up because it could go down. Lately, most good IPO’s have seen their stock go up 50-100% in the following months beyond their IPO. However, after that, a lot of the investors want to cash out, and then your stock drops down to below your strike price, and you have nothing but a piece of paper.

Stock options suck. Many companies back in the .com days used them instead of salary, so an employee who would normally earn $100,000 per year would get like 100k options and a salary of 50k per year instead. This was great when the market was good, but these days you’ll never see that.

Most technology companies are granting about 750 shares to their lowest level employees (clerks, order processors, receptionists, etc), 1000 shares to jr level sales and marketing positions, 2500-3000 shares to IT workers and programmers, 5000 to entry level managers (supervisors, and managers at the lower end of the payscale), 10,000 to more senior management, 50,000 to VP level management, and 250,000 to the CIO, CFO, CTO, etc.

The reason for this is that the IRS recently changed the tax codes and stock options are now a major liability on a company’s books, so they cost a lot more to grant (even if they are not in the money), whereas before the company could grant all the options they wanted and they didn’t have to expense them until they were actually exercised. It’s something called FAS123R if you’re bored and want to look it up on google. LOL

So, from my example there, usually only the highest up in the company stand to gain from the stock options. They will often times get lower strike prices then the ordinary employees too.

Stock options are designed to make the rich people richer. The average joe doesn’t do too well with stock options these days.

[djrobsd]

Agree 100% with fat_lazy_union. The ONLY way to go with your stock options when they become worth something is to do a same day sale. Don’t be greedy, don’t hold them expecting the value to go up because it could go down. Lately, most good IPO’s have seen their stock go up 50-100% in the following months beyond their IPO. However, after that, a lot of the investors want to cash out, and then your stock drops down to below your strike price, and you have nothing but a piece of paper.

Stock options suck. Many companies back in the .com days used them instead of salary, so an employee who would normally earn $100,000 per year would get like 100k options and a salary of 50k per year instead. This was great when the market was good, but these days you’ll never see that.

Most technology companies are granting about 750 shares to their lowest level employees (clerks, order processors, receptionists, etc), 1000 shares to jr level sales and marketing positions, 2500-3000 shares to IT workers and programmers, 5000 to entry level managers (supervisors, and managers at the lower end of the payscale), 10,000 to more senior management, 50,000 to VP level management, and 250,000 to the CIO, CFO, CTO, etc.

The reason for this is that the IRS recently changed the tax codes and stock options are now a major liability on a company’s books, so they cost a lot more to grant (even if they are not in the money), whereas before the company could grant all the options they wanted and they didn’t have to expense them until they were actually exercised. It’s something called FAS123R if you’re bored and want to look it up on google. LOL

So, from my example there, usually only the highest up in the company stand to gain from the stock options. They will often times get lower strike prices then the ordinary employees too.

Stock options are designed to make the rich people richer. The average joe doesn’t do too well with stock options these days.

[djrobsd]

Agree 100% with fat_lazy_union. The ONLY way to go with your stock options when they become worth something is to do a same day sale. Don’t be greedy, don’t hold them expecting the value to go up because it could go down. Lately, most good IPO’s have seen their stock go up 50-100% in the following months beyond their IPO. However, after that, a lot of the investors want to cash out, and then your stock drops down to below your strike price, and you have nothing but a piece of paper.

Stock options suck. Many companies back in the .com days used them instead of salary, so an employee who would normally earn $100,000 per year would get like 100k options and a salary of 50k per year instead. This was great when the market was good, but these days you’ll never see that.

Most technology companies are granting about 750 shares to their lowest level employees (clerks, order processors, receptionists, etc), 1000 shares to jr level sales and marketing positions, 2500-3000 shares to IT workers and programmers, 5000 to entry level managers (supervisors, and managers at the lower end of the payscale), 10,000 to more senior management, 50,000 to VP level management, and 250,000 to the CIO, CFO, CTO, etc.

The reason for this is that the IRS recently changed the tax codes and stock options are now a major liability on a company’s books, so they cost a lot more to grant (even if they are not in the money), whereas before the company could grant all the options they wanted and they didn’t have to expense them until they were actually exercised. It’s something called FAS123R if you’re bored and want to look it up on google. LOL

So, from my example there, usually only the highest up in the company stand to gain from the stock options. They will often times get lower strike prices then the ordinary employees too.

Stock options are designed to make the rich people richer. The average joe doesn’t do too well with stock options these days.

[djrobsd]

Agree 100% with fat_lazy_union. The ONLY way to go with your stock options when they become worth something is to do a same day sale. Don’t be greedy, don’t hold them expecting the value to go up because it could go down. Lately, most good IPO’s have seen their stock go up 50-100% in the following months beyond their IPO. However, after that, a lot of the investors want to cash out, and then your stock drops down to below your strike price, and you have nothing but a piece of paper.

Stock options suck. Many companies back in the .com days used them instead of salary, so an employee who would normally earn $100,000 per year would get like 100k options and a salary of 50k per year instead. This was great when the market was good, but these days you’ll never see that.

Most technology companies are granting about 750 shares to their lowest level employees (clerks, order processors, receptionists, etc), 1000 shares to jr level sales and marketing positions, 2500-3000 shares to IT workers and programmers, 5000 to entry level managers (supervisors, and managers at the lower end of the payscale), 10,000 to more senior management, 50,000 to VP level management, and 250,000 to the CIO, CFO, CTO, etc.

The reason for this is that the IRS recently changed the tax codes and stock options are now a major liability on a company’s books, so they cost a lot more to grant (even if they are not in the money), whereas before the company could grant all the options they wanted and they didn’t have to expense them until they were actually exercised. It’s something called FAS123R if you’re bored and want to look it up on google. LOL

So, from my example there, usually only the highest up in the company stand to gain from the stock options. They will often times get lower strike prices then the ordinary employees too.

Stock options are designed to make the rich people richer. The average joe doesn’t do too well with stock options these days.

[djrobsd]

It seems to me like most of these homes are missing the appliances and even the upper kitchen cabinets. What gives with that? Was the seller that pissed at the bank that they stripped the home, or were they going to remodel it and ran out of money?

Looks like the ones in Poway are all in beautiful areas that are fire hazards.

[djrobsd]

It seems to me like most of these homes are missing the appliances and even the upper kitchen cabinets. What gives with that? Was the seller that pissed at the bank that they stripped the home, or were they going to remodel it and ran out of money?

Looks like the ones in Poway are all in beautiful areas that are fire hazards.

[djrobsd]

It seems to me like most of these homes are missing the appliances and even the upper kitchen cabinets. What gives with that? Was the seller that pissed at the bank that they stripped the home, or were they going to remodel it and ran out of money?

Looks like the ones in Poway are all in beautiful areas that are fire hazards.

[djrobsd]

It seems to me like most of these homes are missing the appliances and even the upper kitchen cabinets. What gives with that? Was the seller that pissed at the bank that they stripped the home, or were they going to remodel it and ran out of money?

Looks like the ones in Poway are all in beautiful areas that are fire hazards.

[djrobsd]

Ray,

You mention an interesting point there. While I’m sure they aren’t just going to force the banks to re-finance buyers at more affordable terms, it’s very likely they will get rid of the debt forgiveness tax. So, what are the odds this will be retroactive to a certain point? Or do you think they will sign it into law effective Jan 1, and anyone who threw the keys back before then are just going to be SOL?

We’ll see how it goes, my neighbor just reduced her place to 339k and I owe 345k on mine, so it’s not looking to good.

[djrobsd]

Ray,

You mention an interesting point there. While I’m sure they aren’t just going to force the banks to re-finance buyers at more affordable terms, it’s very likely they will get rid of the debt forgiveness tax. So, what are the odds this will be retroactive to a certain point? Or do you think they will sign it into law effective Jan 1, and anyone who threw the keys back before then are just going to be SOL?

We’ll see how it goes, my neighbor just reduced her place to 339k and I owe 345k on mine, so it’s not looking to good.

[djrobsd]

Ray,

You mention an interesting point there. While I’m sure they aren’t just going to force the banks to re-finance buyers at more affordable terms, it’s very likely they will get rid of the debt forgiveness tax. So, what are the odds this will be retroactive to a certain point? Or do you think they will sign it into law effective Jan 1, and anyone who threw the keys back before then are just going to be SOL?

We’ll see how it goes, my neighbor just reduced her place to 339k and I owe 345k on mine, so it’s not looking to good.

[djrobsd]

Ray,

You mention an interesting point there. While I’m sure they aren’t just going to force the banks to re-finance buyers at more affordable terms, it’s very likely they will get rid of the debt forgiveness tax. So, what are the odds this will be retroactive to a certain point? Or do you think they will sign it into law effective Jan 1, and anyone who threw the keys back before then are just going to be SOL?

We’ll see how it goes, my neighbor just reduced her place to 339k and I owe 345k on mine, so it’s not looking to good.

[djrobsd]

For the record “Cashing out a 401k” is not an option the IRS affords us here in America. There are severe penalties for doing so, and you see pennies on the dollar when it’s all said and done. Also for the record, I haven’t put any money into my 401k since I bought the house, I shifted all my investment dollars into the house which was obviously a bad investment, and an important lesson has been learned here. Even if I did cash out my 401k, that would only delay the pain another 3-6 months, and wouldn’t make that much difference at the end of the day.

A home is a HOME not an INVESTMENT. The mistake I made was I got caught into the buy now mentality that millions of other Americans got caught into back in 2004 when the real estate market was sky rocketing, and even though I was perfectly content in my $1500 a month luxury apartment with a pool, jacuzzi, work out room, and all the amenities, I couldn’t resist the evil temptation of “Sweet equity”. Had I thought of it apples to apples between the apartment and the house I bought, I would have taken the apartment any day of the week both for lack of having to do any maintenance and for all the on-site amenities that a gated new apartment community affords. And my loan officer and my realtor were coaching me all the way along making statements like “I know this payment will adjust in 3 years, but the market is so hot you’ll be able to sell or refinance before then”… Yep, we’ve heard all this before.

I made the mistake, and so now I have to live with it. Can you blame me for at least trying to work with my lender and trying to keep the house instead of just walking away from it and making it someone else’s problem? I’m trying to do other people who are also struggling a favor and sharing my experience with them so they know what they’re up against if they decide to try to do the same thing. I didn’t have to spend my time posting on here but I did so as a service to others. Sometimes I wonder if all you folks on here that say throw in the keys are the same ones that go buy these properties at real estate auctions!

[djrobsd]

For the record “Cashing out a 401k” is not an option the IRS affords us here in America. There are severe penalties for doing so, and you see pennies on the dollar when it’s all said and done. Also for the record, I haven’t put any money into my 401k since I bought the house, I shifted all my investment dollars into the house which was obviously a bad investment, and an important lesson has been learned here. Even if I did cash out my 401k, that would only delay the pain another 3-6 months, and wouldn’t make that much difference at the end of the day.

A home is a HOME not an INVESTMENT. The mistake I made was I got caught into the buy now mentality that millions of other Americans got caught into back in 2004 when the real estate market was sky rocketing, and even though I was perfectly content in my $1500 a month luxury apartment with a pool, jacuzzi, work out room, and all the amenities, I couldn’t resist the evil temptation of “Sweet equity”. Had I thought of it apples to apples between the apartment and the house I bought, I would have taken the apartment any day of the week both for lack of having to do any maintenance and for all the on-site amenities that a gated new apartment community affords. And my loan officer and my realtor were coaching me all the way along making statements like “I know this payment will adjust in 3 years, but the market is so hot you’ll be able to sell or refinance before then”… Yep, we’ve heard all this before.

I made the mistake, and so now I have to live with it. Can you blame me for at least trying to work with my lender and trying to keep the house instead of just walking away from it and making it someone else’s problem? I’m trying to do other people who are also struggling a favor and sharing my experience with them so they know what they’re up against if they decide to try to do the same thing. I didn’t have to spend my time posting on here but I did so as a service to others. Sometimes I wonder if all you folks on here that say throw in the keys are the same ones that go buy these properties at real estate auctions!

[Author]

Posts