Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Rt.66
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Now we all know you are full of it. I have concrete proof of a 2nd that negotiated a short payoff outside of a short sale and you cant accept that you are wrong. It was not a short sale or foreclosure when they negotiated the short payoff on the 2nd. They resolved their 2nd for pennies on the dollar. It was done! They had a pass as you say. They had the option to stay with a de facto principal reduction but chose not to. They did not lose the home, they sold the home by choice.
I have the documentation because a sale was ultimately involved. There are other cases of the 2nd getting settled and the 1st modifying by my associate which I dont have access to because they arent my clients but I have seen many of them.
I have seen letters sent to borrowers offering these kinds of payoffs without the borrower even asking for one. I had a client that owed $105K on a 2nd who stopped paying it. They got a Xmas letter last Dec saying send us $6,000 and you are done…d….o…n…e…DONE!!!
You asked for proof, I have it ready to send to you but you cant admit you are wrong. It must really suck to be you. Good Bye asswipe…[/quote]
How convenient that your example was a short sale but you “say” they could have chosen to keep the house. If they could have kept the home or if they sold the home by “choice” why the need for a short sale? WTF?
You have a very loose definition of proof. As always with you we are left being asked to trust what you say is true, that’s not going to happen, and each post you make exemplifies why.
Dude this is not a difficult concept to grasp. I do not want your word or opinion, I want a real source. No more “I’ve seen with my own eyes” BS, please. No “it’s a short sale but did not have to be”, how believable is that? No “I’ve seen it but it’s in someone else’s office”. Shit how hard is this?
I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything. That’s pretty telling and if your story had even the remotest relationship with truth and was happening in appreciable numbers you’d think there would be something out there.
That Xmas letter fable reeks of BS.
Is anyone buying this crap from this guy?
Hey, I have seen with my own eyes documentation showing that all the top banks have policies to never allow a debtor to remain in a home long term if they are not meeting obligations to a second mortgage holder. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and by your standards that’s proof it’s true!
I would post it right now but its locked in the CEOs office.
I guess I’ll argue like you and see how many people give me a pass.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Now we all know you are full of it. I have concrete proof of a 2nd that negotiated a short payoff outside of a short sale and you cant accept that you are wrong. It was not a short sale or foreclosure when they negotiated the short payoff on the 2nd. They resolved their 2nd for pennies on the dollar. It was done! They had a pass as you say. They had the option to stay with a de facto principal reduction but chose not to. They did not lose the home, they sold the home by choice.
I have the documentation because a sale was ultimately involved. There are other cases of the 2nd getting settled and the 1st modifying by my associate which I dont have access to because they arent my clients but I have seen many of them.
I have seen letters sent to borrowers offering these kinds of payoffs without the borrower even asking for one. I had a client that owed $105K on a 2nd who stopped paying it. They got a Xmas letter last Dec saying send us $6,000 and you are done…d….o…n…e…DONE!!!
You asked for proof, I have it ready to send to you but you cant admit you are wrong. It must really suck to be you. Good Bye asswipe…[/quote]
How convenient that your example was a short sale but you “say” they could have chosen to keep the house. If they could have kept the home or if they sold the home by “choice” why the need for a short sale? WTF?
You have a very loose definition of proof. As always with you we are left being asked to trust what you say is true, that’s not going to happen, and each post you make exemplifies why.
Dude this is not a difficult concept to grasp. I do not want your word or opinion, I want a real source. No more “I’ve seen with my own eyes” BS, please. No “it’s a short sale but did not have to be”, how believable is that? No “I’ve seen it but it’s in someone else’s office”. Shit how hard is this?
I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything. That’s pretty telling and if your story had even the remotest relationship with truth and was happening in appreciable numbers you’d think there would be something out there.
That Xmas letter fable reeks of BS.
Is anyone buying this crap from this guy?
Hey, I have seen with my own eyes documentation showing that all the top banks have policies to never allow a debtor to remain in a home long term if they are not meeting obligations to a second mortgage holder. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and by your standards that’s proof it’s true!
I would post it right now but its locked in the CEOs office.
I guess I’ll argue like you and see how many people give me a pass.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Now we all know you are full of it. I have concrete proof of a 2nd that negotiated a short payoff outside of a short sale and you cant accept that you are wrong. It was not a short sale or foreclosure when they negotiated the short payoff on the 2nd. They resolved their 2nd for pennies on the dollar. It was done! They had a pass as you say. They had the option to stay with a de facto principal reduction but chose not to. They did not lose the home, they sold the home by choice.
I have the documentation because a sale was ultimately involved. There are other cases of the 2nd getting settled and the 1st modifying by my associate which I dont have access to because they arent my clients but I have seen many of them.
I have seen letters sent to borrowers offering these kinds of payoffs without the borrower even asking for one. I had a client that owed $105K on a 2nd who stopped paying it. They got a Xmas letter last Dec saying send us $6,000 and you are done…d….o…n…e…DONE!!!
You asked for proof, I have it ready to send to you but you cant admit you are wrong. It must really suck to be you. Good Bye asswipe…[/quote]
How convenient that your example was a short sale but you “say” they could have chosen to keep the house. If they could have kept the home or if they sold the home by “choice” why the need for a short sale? WTF?
You have a very loose definition of proof. As always with you we are left being asked to trust what you say is true, that’s not going to happen, and each post you make exemplifies why.
Dude this is not a difficult concept to grasp. I do not want your word or opinion, I want a real source. No more “I’ve seen with my own eyes” BS, please. No “it’s a short sale but did not have to be”, how believable is that? No “I’ve seen it but it’s in someone else’s office”. Shit how hard is this?
I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything. That’s pretty telling and if your story had even the remotest relationship with truth and was happening in appreciable numbers you’d think there would be something out there.
That Xmas letter fable reeks of BS.
Is anyone buying this crap from this guy?
Hey, I have seen with my own eyes documentation showing that all the top banks have policies to never allow a debtor to remain in a home long term if they are not meeting obligations to a second mortgage holder. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and by your standards that’s proof it’s true!
I would post it right now but its locked in the CEOs office.
I guess I’ll argue like you and see how many people give me a pass.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Now we all know you are full of it. I have concrete proof of a 2nd that negotiated a short payoff outside of a short sale and you cant accept that you are wrong. It was not a short sale or foreclosure when they negotiated the short payoff on the 2nd. They resolved their 2nd for pennies on the dollar. It was done! They had a pass as you say. They had the option to stay with a de facto principal reduction but chose not to. They did not lose the home, they sold the home by choice.
I have the documentation because a sale was ultimately involved. There are other cases of the 2nd getting settled and the 1st modifying by my associate which I dont have access to because they arent my clients but I have seen many of them.
I have seen letters sent to borrowers offering these kinds of payoffs without the borrower even asking for one. I had a client that owed $105K on a 2nd who stopped paying it. They got a Xmas letter last Dec saying send us $6,000 and you are done…d….o…n…e…DONE!!!
You asked for proof, I have it ready to send to you but you cant admit you are wrong. It must really suck to be you. Good Bye asswipe…[/quote]
How convenient that your example was a short sale but you “say” they could have chosen to keep the house. If they could have kept the home or if they sold the home by “choice” why the need for a short sale? WTF?
You have a very loose definition of proof. As always with you we are left being asked to trust what you say is true, that’s not going to happen, and each post you make exemplifies why.
Dude this is not a difficult concept to grasp. I do not want your word or opinion, I want a real source. No more “I’ve seen with my own eyes” BS, please. No “it’s a short sale but did not have to be”, how believable is that? No “I’ve seen it but it’s in someone else’s office”. Shit how hard is this?
I’ve searched the internet and can’t find anything to support your story. Not saying it isn’t there but I sure have tried and can’t find anything. That’s pretty telling and if your story had even the remotest relationship with truth and was happening in appreciable numbers you’d think there would be something out there.
That Xmas letter fable reeks of BS.
Is anyone buying this crap from this guy?
Hey, I have seen with my own eyes documentation showing that all the top banks have policies to never allow a debtor to remain in a home long term if they are not meeting obligations to a second mortgage holder. I’ve seen it with my own eyes and by your standards that’s proof it’s true!
I would post it right now but its locked in the CEOs office.
I guess I’ll argue like you and see how many people give me a pass.
Participant[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.
Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.
More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]
No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:
1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.
The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.
Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?
I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?
I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.
Participant[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.
Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.
More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]
No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:
1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.
The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.
Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?
I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?
I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.
Participant[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.
Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.
More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]
No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:
1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.
The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.
Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?
I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?
I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.
Participant[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.
Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.
More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]
No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:
1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.
The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.
Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?
I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?
I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.
Participant[quote=sdcellar]It’s certainly not unheard of for debt to be settled at ten cents on the dollar, so to suggest that such a thing is ludicrous is, well, ludicrous.
Not saying that it’s easy or happens all the time, and I certainly have no idea how often it’s applied to mortgage debt, but it does happen in general.
More importantly, I don’t think every single last underwater homeowner is as eager to walk away from their home you might think.[/quote]
No one said debt is never settled. Of course it is. We are talking about a specific kind of debt, lien secured 2nds, and whether or not the statement below is accurate or truthful:
1. The pre-foreclosure data looks much worse than it actually is. That’s because this data includes defaults on second mortgages. Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments. So, a significant percentage of the properties that are in default will not end up as REOs.
The data you will find on this subject suggests that seconds are being modified along with firsts, (very little in CA though) not disregarded or extinguished.
Maybe you would like to offer the documentation of this phenomenon the realtor has failed to supply?
I’m not saying that second holders also don’t very often end up with nothing or through a foreclosure sale get a fraction of what’s owed them. I’m saying they are not doing/allowing what the realtor describes in any kind of numbers. Do I really need to explain this?
I am asking for proof, any proof, any story that shows foreclosures or short sales before a foreclosure, are being PREVENTED (other than maybe short term) by people negotiating with the primary and ignoring second mortgage holders.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]
You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.
They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.
Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.
The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.
Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”
——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]
You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.
They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.
Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.
The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.
Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”
——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]
You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.
They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.
Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.
The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.
Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”
——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]
You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.
They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.
Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.
The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.
Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”
——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Hey dumbass. I found one to shut you up once and for all. Send me your email via private messages and I will send you a copy of letter from a lender where the seller negotiated a short payoff of a refinanced recourse $90,000 2nd for about $7400 cash in March. I will also include the tax records showing the amount of the loans. We had to get that settled before selling the house. Once we got that settled we closed the short sale the next month with the 1st lender which was non-recourse. They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage and gotten it modified but were getting divorced so neither wanted to stay.[/quote]
You said these fantasies were PREVENTING foreclosures and you give an example of a short-sale. A short sale is NOT “people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments”.
They lost the home; they did not get a pass on a second while keeping the home off the distressed sale market like you suggest. One of my points was that if the second takes a loss then they will make sure the debtor does too (no free lunch). In this case THEY LOST THE HOME.
Nice try and it seems to have fooled some but it’s a completely different argument. I never said seconds were not taking losses in short sales/foreclosures. I’m sure they are taking losses in most or all of THOSE cases.
The example you provide is just an example of MORE short sale/foreclosure inventory not a reduction to it.
Let’s have just one example of “Many people intentionally defaulted on the 2nd mortgages only, knowing that the junior lien holders don’t have the legal right to kick them out. At the same time, these same people negotiate with the primary mortgage lender to lower their mortgage payments.”
——
SDRealtor Said:
“They could have stayed if they wanted with only a 1st mortgage”BS! So now you can arrange a distressed short sale with a bank then decide to keep the new lower mortgage amount and home for yourself? Wow, there won’t be one mortgage in CA that does not go through that process once word of this gets out.
-
AuthorPosts
