Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obviously that's not the intention... It's about investigating full disclosure on the foreclosure process... Propping up values is a side effect...
full disclosure??????
you fail to pay your loan (contract)...you get foreclosed on...whether your loan is 100 dollars or 1 million dollars
the problem is keeping a 100k house proper up at a 200k level....what happens in a few months when the market gets inidated with inventory???.....a second housing crash???? is that what the dumbocrats want?????
you fail to pay your loan (contract)...you get foreclosed on...whether your loan is 100 dollars or 1 million dollars
the problem is keeping a 100k house proper up at a 200k level....what happens in a few months when the market gets inidated with inventory???.....a second housing crash???? is that what the dumbocrats want?????
No... The RepubliKlans want to steal your house... FAST...
So tell me who authorized these bad loans... to people who obviously wouldn't qualify for such loans...
It's called predatory lending... I remember when mortgage approval was a long drawn out process...
G. W. Bush encouraged all this speed lending and applauded it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by aspiesmom
Spot on! I have a friend in the market to buy for the first time (in this state) in her late '50's. I advise her to run from the words "variable rate" (and all its synonyms) no matter how good the "rate" part sounds.
I started working in the mortgage industry back in the late 90's. When I first got into the business I was shocked by the sub-prime loans that we were able to write. Basically, if you had a pulse you could get a mortgage. Do we need a reminder of who was in office back then?
I started working in the mortgage industry back in the late 90's. When I first got into the business I was shocked by the sub-prime loans that we were able to write. Basically, if you had a pulse you could get a mortgage. Do we need a reminder of who was in office back then?
ROFLMMFAO at "spot on".....but that figures
It was a process by the Big Banks to buy back that property cheap after foreclosing on them...
Any middle class American who defends the Republican Party is setting themselves up for a letdown and betrayal...
As far as I'm concerned both Democrat and Republicans have betrayed us all. Both have lost the moral authority to govern us. The same bird with two heads. I would hang my head in shame if I belonged to either party.
As far as I'm concerned both Democrat and Republicans have betrayed us all. Both have lost the moral authority to govern us. The same bird with two heads. I would hang my head in shame if I belonged to either party.
I don't belong to either party neither... as an Independent I'm watching a recovery being stalled by the right for political purposes...
It was a process by the Big Banks to buy back that property cheap after foreclosing on them...
Do you actually believe that? That statement couldn't possibly be further from correct. Banks are in the business of lending money- not owning property. The last thing any lender wants to do is foreclose on a property. More often than not banks lose money when they foreclose. After they get done paying attornies, filing paperwork, bringing property taxes current, and finally get the owner who is in default out the door and etc etc etc they then get to auction off the property. When all is said and done they are usually lucky if they break even. Some states are deficiency balance states which means if you owe 100K on the home and the bank has to spend 20K to sell it and then auctions it off for 80K you still owe them the difference. Obviously you can't get blood from a stone and more often than not the bank ends up on the losing end of the deal.
Last edited by Rick Roma; 10-13-2010 at 03:31 PM..
Do you actually believe that? That statement couldn't possibly be further from correct. Banks are in the business of lending money- not owning property. The last thing any lender wants to do is foreclose on a property. More often than not banks lose money when they foreclose. After they get done paying attornies, filing paperwork, bring property taxes current, and finally get the owner who is in default out the door and etc etc etc they then get to auction off the property. When all is said and done they are usually lucky if they break even. Some states are deficiency balance states which means if you owe 100K on the home and the bank has to spend 20K to sell it and then auctions it off for 80K you still owe them the difference. Obviously you can't get blood from a stone and more often than not the bank ends up on the losing end of the deal.
You're too naive... You'd throw away your history books if you knew the truth...
Thanks for posting here. I enjoy comedy. We're talking about mortgage lending and the foreclosure process you post a google video about national debt.
Do you undersdtand how mortgage lending works?
Borrower buys a 300K home with a 5% down payment
Bank takes borrower's 15K downpayment and cuts a check to the seller for 300K
Borrower defaults
Bank forecloses
Before they can auction the property they spend 15K bringing property taxes current, paying attornies, conducting a title 5 inspection, paying state recording fees, making neccessary repairs, and etc etc etc.
They auction the home for 300K (and that's a stretch in any foreclosure scenario)
How is the bank the winner here?
BTW: my experience is based on working ten years in the mortgage industry. Yours is based on some nitwit's google video.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.