I'd love to be on the payroll of a mortgage company.
Sole job: bother the shit out of lowlife douchebags like these people.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37444899...new_york_times
Printable View
I'd love to be on the payroll of a mortgage company.
Sole job: bother the shit out of lowlife douchebags like these people.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37444899...new_york_times
I don't understand this, and I hear about it all the time. When you buy a house, can you get a loan where your payments remain the same? If so, then it doesn't matter what your house is worth. It should only matter what your house is worth if you are selling it.
For example: I bought my car for $6,300 on a 36 month loan less than 3 years ago. I've actually paid my car off now (early), but I'm sure that the value of my car depreciated a little bit quicker than I was able to pay off the loan in the first year or so. Technically I was probably paying on a car that was worth less than I owed on it, but it didn't matter because having a car at all was worth FAR more than the difference between the loan amount and value of the car. Now that my loan has been paid, and even though my car is worth next to nothing, I'm still in the positive. I never would have made it to this position if I just stopped paying for my car. Plus, it never mattered what the car was worth to anyone else because I never tried to sell it. Having a reliable vehicle to drive to work in every was of more value to me than not being a little upside down on a vehicle.
I can not for the life of me understand how people don't understand the value of their homes. There are very few instances where the value of your home matters when you are not selling it. I would gladly pay on the amount that I purchased the home for if it meant keeping my place. People are so short sighted. Your home was obviously worth that point at some time, so it is possible that it will be worth that much again.
I sort of understand but don't approve. We all were told again and again that houses were investments. BS! It's a place to live and all of us who buy more house than we really need are suckers.
If I lost my job or something else awful happened I could see not paying but until then it would be dishonorable to not pay.
Steve
That is something I've never understood as well. A family of 3 or even 4 "needing" a 6 bedroom house with a full basement, 3 car garage, etc where the main "breadwinner" barely pulls down enough to keep clothes on his/her children and food in their mouth?...
Maybe I was just raised differently....
read the article.
it talks about the things they spent the money on their refinances on.
If I owned a mortgage company I'd be burning the houses down.
Oh I know. The attitude of all the people who decide to go this route just kills me.
If there were possible murder charges, then it would be Aggravated Arson.
First you kick the deadbeats out. Then tear it down. http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktl...,4154575.story
It actually is kind of horrifying to build it and tear it down. Of course, a lot of people didn't see this economy coming.
Maybe the local fire department would burn it down as a training exercise.
Steve
I am not appy I get to pay for these freeloaders, which is how it works for the rest of us. They made poor choices and continue to do so and those of us who live within our means pick up the bill.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
Can someone explain exactly how tax payers are picking up this burden? It's not that I'm not open to the idea of tax payers having to pick up costs for things, but I'm very skeptical. People tend to throw the idea of tax payers paying for all kinds of things around pretty loosely.
If you don't pay your car loan, your car gets repossessed and sold to someone else. I don't see where the taxpayer enters the equation here, or in this example of home owners not paying their mortgage.
That whole bank bail out thingie?? the Fannie Mae/ Freddy Mac bailouts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
Someone's sarcasm meter is either not turned on .. or in need of MAJOR adjustment this morning ....Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
lol gosh now that I look at it that way I guess I'll never own a mortgage company.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
btw great song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5sIXUbMgF0
We dont know anyone around here who started his house on fire, now do we?
i guess we do.
oh, well
Did they claim that was a direct result of people not paying their mortgages? I don't remember. Well, now that I think about it, it must have been because the whole issue was putting people into homes when they couldn't afford them. The Bailout is a great example, but is that the only time there is a direct correlation?Quote:
Originally Posted by clublights
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
are you a former firefighter because they canned you for being too uptight and driving your coworkers crazy?
cry harder and you can quench the flames of my arson with your tears.
Do they build houses here far enough apart that you could burn one down without taking out all your neighbors, too? :D
Other then maybe bankruptcy .. tho I admittedly don't understand how that works out exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
I'm sure ( at least in my heart LOL ) that there have been other " federal programs" in the past to " help out " failing homeowners.
Repossessions and foreclosures are extremely expensive for the lender. For instance, a lender is owed $250,000 on a mortgage, it costs $50,000 to foreclose and evict the former "homeowners", and because of market conditions, the house sells for $135,000 at auction. The lender is out a very real $165,000. If the .gov bails them out because those expenses(x1000's), guess who gets the bill? If the lenders recover their losses through higher rates and fees, again, who gets to pay the bill? Yeah. You, me, and the rest of us who actually honor our debts. [Bang]Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
^^^ THIS is another of the major things that is wrong with America today. These people made a choice to buy a home but they didn't like the fact that they'd have to give up some of the luxuries of life (steak at a restaurant? Airboat? Casino? - Aside from an occasional steak at a restaurant, these are things I can't afford so I don't get to enjoy them).Quote:
Originally Posted by msnbc
Let's see, YOU signed a contract saying that YOU'd pay YOUR mortgage. YOU ran into hard times and are now failing to live up to YOUR obligations. So, that somehow makes THEM "crooks"? I just don't get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by msnbc
There is an attitude that is getting more prevalent where people are claiming "It's their [the lender's] fault. They should have known I was a bad risk." Like so many other folks who borrow money, these folks took out a second mortgage against the supposed value of their home so that they could blow it on other stuff. When their home was no longer worth anything near what they owed they claim that it's the lenders fault?! Really? I mean, really?! Their $1837/month payment (owing $280k) tells me that they enjoy living high on the hog and want luxuries but don't want to have to pay for them.
How about the mother of the guy covered in this story move in with the couple - since she's in foreclosure as well. She can have a room in their home and put the money she can afford into the pot with their money and they can actually make payments on one of the two homes.
You were; and so was I. We were raised to honor our obligations.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBear
Wow, nobody saw the part where their house depreciated in half, they went to the bank and the bank told them to shut up and color?
House went from $280,000 to $140,000 in value.
They can't make the payments and the bank won't refinance.
They are making payments on something worthless so decide to let the Fn bank take it in the shorts and use the money instead to get their company back on track. I think it was a sound idea. The bank took no burden of the economical downtrend and put the family at financial terminal prospect as much as the family is now putting the bank at financial risk. Ultimately, the family here had nothing to lose because they had lost it all anyway. The bank still had investment to lose and chose to take an all-or-nothing approach to their investment. The family called their bluff.
I don't see the problem here. Oh... They went to outback and went boating. Ya, that's huge.
Friday, I see a problem here.
This couple took the risk of buying the house for what they paid. they just as easily could have blamed the seller of the home and said "we're not going to give you that much for the home", but they didn't. They paid the asking price - some time home prices go up, some times they go down. Their home price went down - they lost, but (as Irving said), the value of the home is irrelevant unless they are going to sell it- or try to get another loan against it (which is probably exactly what happened).
If I agree to pay $45k+ on a loan for an Hummer H2, then it's only worth $25k as soon as I drive it off of the lot, that isn't the lenders fault - or the sellers... If I total the Hummer a month later and the insurance company only pays me $25k for the Hummer (meaning that I still owe $20k on a totalled vehicle), do I have the right to say "Naw, I'm not gonna pay it"? Heck NO! I agree to pay the amount I borrowed. PERIOD.
Anything less and I should be taken to court and sent to jail for theft.
15 or so years ago, went to the locally owned bank for a first time home loan, they run the numbers, tell the wife and I we can afford $250,000 home... Ok yeah, thanks, but no. We bought something "real" for $70,000 and fixed it up. Borrowed against it a few times as it appreciated in value, to fix it up more, not to buy cars and boats. Now we're technically upside down (or even) in this market and nobody will talk to us about re-finance to knock off some years or get a better rate that everyone else is getting who are in over their heads. Doesn't make sense to me. I guess since my credit is top notch, they figure I'm no money to them. Bust my butt to do the right thing and get screwed...
Frustrating to see people way over their heads in the first place, and getting all the help they need or living free and clear while it all gets tossed around in the courts or eventually going to bankruptcy and sticking the lenders with the bill.
rant over.
While there's certainly a problem with personal responsibility in this country, the banks are crooked and deserve their fair share of the blame. For example, my parents hit some hard times recently and tried to get their loan modified. After faxing duplicates and triplicates of everything, hearing "We've got everything" from the bank, then having to fax more shit (on a daily basis), they finally got a letter saying their loan modification was denied because of lack of information...When my mum called the bank to attempt to find out wtf happened they hung up on her.
That was uncalled for man. Joking about arson is one thing but being an asshat to a retired firefighter is something else entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Elhuero
Oh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte Stryke
I forgot about him.Quote:
Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck
Not that I'm aware of.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart
OuchQuote:
Originally Posted by Elhuero
Um, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertB
+10000. Current market value has nothing to do with the arguement.Quote:
Originally Posted by theGinsue
Rgr that... I'm sick of being screwed. I have debts and and doing my dangdest to repay them. I talk to my creditors and say, "Hey, I can't afford the $800 bill cause I'm also paying on student loans, etc. Would you mind increasing the term period and I'll pay you $500 a month until PIF'ed?" Them: "No can do Mr. Bear. If you're late on a payment then we charge another $40K in interest and yadda, yadda..." Me: "....FFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!" (Not really).Quote:
Originally Posted by gnihcraes
I've caught myself recently even asking if I should do "the right thing" or the "thing I can get away with get what I want". Scary slope.
Antithesis: But if no one else does.... lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by theGinsue
There is a huge difference between $20k and $280k when it comes to financial destitution. The risk isn't an all or nothing scenario.Quote:
Originally Posted by theGinsue
I'm all for paying your bills and doing the right thing, but there's another side to this coin. The bank has just as much claim to the dilemma and just as much financial liability. Neither the bank nor the family intended for this loan to result in the current dilemma, but they both took risk in lending and borrowing. Yet the family, according to many in this thread, are completely liable and the bank has no reason nor fault. Not so. If the bank would have refinanced the morgage to a workable level, they would have lost profit, but not as much as they currently are going to now with no money coming in and the prospect of having court costs, eviction costs, and reselling the house. It's a lose-lose prospect for the bank and the family. They did what they needed to re-establish their financial stability, and only took this path after the bank stone-walled.
This sounds a lot like civil-disobedience to me. The family had nothing to lose as everything was lost already.
I'm not condoning mass morgage non-payment here. I'm analyzing the specific situation and placing myself in the families shoes and then the banks. I believe the bank made a very bad call in not trying to work with the family and taking a hardline approach to the matter. It will cost both of them and there were other options.
What other option did the family have when they decided to stop paying their morgage? Should they have sold everything, closed down their business and then what, get a job at McDonalds and try to pay $1800+ morgage a month? They would have failed to make the payments there too. Should they just pack up their stuff and move leaving the title on the floor for the bank? Is that the right thing to demand by the bank? Financially, how does anyone benefit from this. You now have a destitute family living off of food stamps and unemployment that can't sell any of their posessions because everyone else is not making it financially, so they just keep living off of state/federal support. It makes zero sense laying all the blame at the feet of the family in this situation. There were viable options for compromise that benefitted everyone in the long run, and the bank drove that decision.
There are ALWAYS three truths to any matter; pro, con, and what's untimately decided by a higher authority. Some of you haven't looked at the con in this one. You are solely focused on the Pro.
All I really know here (looking back at the picture at hte top of the article) is that they could probably get a few steaks outa that dog.
Hey, I'm just sayin' is all...
Seriously? We're supposed to feel sorry for them for this?Quote:
One reason the house is worth so much less than the debt is because of the real estate crash. But the couple also refinanced at the height of the market, taking out cash to buy a truck they used as a contest prize for their hired animal trappers.
My wife and I took a hit of almost 60% on the assessed value of our home last year. Does this mean it's worth any less to US? No. We continue to pay the mortgage (actually over pay by about $300 every month, should be paid off in another 12 years or so), confident that the market will eventually rebound(and hopefully stabilize at a realistic level). Regardless, we choose to meet our obligations. In the end, these homeowners can't really blame the banks. Anyone who counts on the continued growth of an obviously overinflated market is an idiot. The terms of the loans were spelled out in excruciating detail on the loan paperwork. If they failed to read before they inked the bottom line, that's their fault. Businesses fail every day, even in the best of times. This is not an excuse to walk away from one's obligations. Imagine if they owed $200K in back taxes, what would happen if they chose to "walk away"?
Again, why should those of us that make the correct decisions be required to pay for the poor decisions that others make?
What little fuckheads. "It's the banks fault for getting us into this mess"
Not really. Read the contract, it's an important one so knowing what is in it might be beneficial to you. Also I hope your fucking plane crashes.