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.
He could have continued paying his mortgage, per his loan agreement.
Why is the the bank expected to ignore good business practice, and he gets a pass? He's the one that couldn't pay his mortgage.
Okay, how about this one.
You get a 30 mortgage and 15 years down the road the house is too small so you want to buy a larger one, you have buyers all set for the old house and they have their financing all arraigned too, but the bank tells you NO we will not transfer the title.
You get a 30 mortgage and 15 years down the road the house is too small so you want to buy a larger one, you have buyers all set for the old house and they have their financing all arraigned too, but the bank tells you NO we will not transfer the title.
No bank will say "NO" if the bank get's the entire loan paid off, you forget "conveniently" to mention that you are trying to say "short sale deal" in which the bank can refuse because they want the full amount, specially when there is a mortgage insurance which will pay the mortgage in full to the bank.
The bank in that case makes a smart decision instead of letting money go down the drain.
The seller won't be happy and complain and whine about it, but when you tell a story, please provide all the facts!
Looking back at my long post, on a different day, I see that I did mix-up the time line. For which I do apologize to all of you.
It was a very frustrating and an emotional time for us. In that post I tried to be brief, and in so doing I misspoke.
We lost rental income.
We began using our savings to make monthly payments. We hoped that we could find replacement renters.
Months wore on, and no renters appeared. Lowering and lowering rent made no difference. There was simply a housing surplus.
We did not attempt to set rent levels at zero. I suspect it may have gotten us tenants, of the homeless. But it would not have allowed us to continue making mortgage payments.
We ran out of savings and fell behind in payments. We started talking to the banks [both primary and secondary note holders].
We got the figures from the banks, as to exactly how much was needed to satisfy their notes, and we put it on the market. [it was listed as: 'as is' and 'pay-off the notes plus realtor commission']
We had no savings. We were living paycheck to paycheck.
The realtor did not want to handle the property as it was not 'prepped' for market. The previous tenants had not entirely moved out, the place was a mess. Time dragged on. The tenants became homeless, we just wanted to wash our hands of the property, finally the realtor agreed to list it.
It was re-assessed, the amount needed to pay off the notes was far less then the assessed value.
Then primary mortgage holder had already began their process of whatever, as we were behind in payments, they knew we were trying to sell the property.
It was not in my mind to declare bankruptcy, I did not want to walk away owing anyone anything. Just to settle our debt and be done with it.
The primary mortgage holder was in contact with me daily, they wanted all sorts of forms filled-out and signed, attempts at re-financing, and blah blah. As a pensioner I simply do not have the income level needed to carry that kind of note by myself without tenant income.
We got three offers from prospective buyers; and the bank refused the sell.
It was after that, that I got transferred to talking with an office from the bank that deals with the bank assuming ownership. That office told me to get off the property and mail them the keys. Signing the deed over to them, would also speed up the process. So I did.
It was after that when they sued me. They wanted the outstanding principle, plus all legal fees, plus the property.
Our savings was gone. The secondary note holder had held off their process of foreclosing until that time. So they insisted that we fill-out their forms, and try to refinance their loan.
Of course it is my 'fault' for still having mortgages on the property.
It is my 'fault' for having purchased the property in the first place.
During my career, we collected an assortment of four properties. When I retired, we sold off everything but one property. At the time, it seemed prudent and obvious that this one property was in the most prosperous location, and had the best tenants. Looking back, when the economy collapsed, if we had held any of those properties, they would have each fell in the same process. I still think that we made the best decision that we could have made, knowing what we knew at the time. [ie, selling the other properties and holding this one]. If I had a good crystal ball. I could have foreseen the collapse, and sold this property at the peak of the market.
Others in this thread seem to be saying that they had perfect crystal balls. I simply never had one of those.
It has now been a year since our bankruptcy was 'discharged'. I hope that one day the banks stop pestering us.
Why do homeowners facing foreclosures blame the banks?
For the same reason people defend massive out of wedlock births, bogus claims of racism, launch lawsuits over hot coffee, cheer on ridiculous regulations on food, and happily cheat on their spouses.
We have jettisoned Personal Responsibility from our national psyche and replaced it with Mass Victimization. And it was not good enough to jettison it. We then berated and demeaned the entire concept of Personal Responsibility and took a crap on its affiliates, common sense, rugged individualism, and personal freedom.
Look what it has done so far. Can you imagine the status quo in another 20 years?
And we, all of us victims, will be sitting there shocked and asking, who did this to us? The answer is of course, we did this to ourselves. With inexplicable, yet unbridaled enthusiasm.
Looking back at my long post, on a different day, I see that I did mix-up the time line. For which I do apologize to all of you.
It has now been a year since our bankruptcy was 'discharged'. I hope that one day the banks stop pestering us.
Thanks for the clarification of your situation. It was quite puzzling before.
If the bank (s) are still hassling you AFTER a bankruptcy go over your paperwork and make sure you know what kind of bankruptcy you received from the court. Unless you filed a Title 7 (total liquidation) - you've arranged a repayment period of 3-5 years on debts owed. If you had a second mortgage it could fall into this category.
Advice - I wouldn't put yourself "out there" to be reached via phone
(get rid of your landline) or to every letter etc. If you know you've had this debt discharged in a bankruptcy court - just copy your final judgment minus pertinent private info and send it to whoever is hassling you via mail. Often times judgments are passed around from collection agencies who get "lists" and they don't know their ass from their elbow. I'd avoid any and all
phone/verbal contact - it serves no purpose from a legal point of view.
While those on the Hill thought Banks were "too big to fail" I have an opposite approach - Homeowners, collectively, are too
important to be abused....too smart to be a kicking post, and too wise to
loose sleep over it - remember, a Bank never does.
Take care Oh, and just telling a bank to just **** off is also a good
stress reliever. I mean - what are they going to do.... take your house
Last edited by pollyrobin; 09-29-2011 at 08:16 AM..
We got the figures from the banks, as to exactly how much was needed to satisfy their notes, and we put it on the market. [it was listed as: 'as is' and 'pay-off the notes plus realtor commission']
We got three offers from prospective buyers; and the bank refused the sell.
Hey beekeeper,
I've bought and sold countless houses in this exact scenario for the past 10 years, yet your situation baffles me. If you don't mind, I have a few questions out of personal curiosity.
Did you have a full payoff quote in hand from your bank? (Including principal, interest, and legal fees) Or, did the bank simply give an amount "they would accept" as payment for the property?
Why did you guys ask the bank to approve your buyers' offers? Bank approval is only needed for short sales (or if the property has already gone to auction) so either: 1) you needed a discount on the interest and legal fees owed above the principal balance, or 2) someone made a huge mistake in unnecessarily asking the bank for permission since you already had a full payoff quote in hand from the bank.
Once you found your buyers, if you were able to pay the loans off in full, why didn't your Realtor simply setup a closing with a title company? A situation with a full payoff quote in hand usually has instructions for the title company to submit the payoff funds, especially for all major banks. There isn't even a need to call the bank except to update the payoff quote if it expired or to verify funds were received after the closing.
I'm not doubting your story, I'm genuinely curious since I've dealt with a lot of idiocy from banks. But, there does seem to be something missing here and your story sounds like a short sale. Either someone who helped you is an idiot or a discount was needed on the interest and legal fees above the principal balance.
Last edited by Freedom123; 09-29-2011 at 10:45 AM..
And as far as short sales and banks go, its all true. Very hard to get approval. We're attempting to buy a house in Orange County Ca., but its probably not gonna happen. Our 3rd attempt.
The banks would rather foreclose. Greed. Pure and simple.
Looking back at my long post, on a different day, I see that I did mix-up the time line. For which I do apologize to all of you.
It was a very frustrating and an emotional time for us. In that post I tried to be brief, and in so doing I misspoke.
We lost rental income.
We began using our savings to make monthly payments. We hoped that we could find replacement renters.
Months wore on, and no renters appeared. Lowering and lowering rent made no difference. There was simply a housing surplus.
We did not attempt to set rent levels at zero. I suspect it may have gotten us tenants, of the homeless. But it would not have allowed us to continue making mortgage payments.
We ran out of savings and fell behind in payments. We started talking to the banks [both primary and secondary note holders].
We got the figures from the banks, as to exactly how much was needed to satisfy their notes, and we put it on the market. [it was listed as: 'as is' and 'pay-off the notes plus realtor commission']
We had no savings. We were living paycheck to paycheck.
The realtor did not want to handle the property as it was not 'prepped' for market. The previous tenants had not entirely moved out, the place was a mess. Time dragged on. The tenants became homeless, we just wanted to wash our hands of the property, finally the realtor agreed to list it.
It was re-assessed, the amount needed to pay off the notes was far less then the assessed value.
Then primary mortgage holder had already began their process of whatever, as we were behind in payments, they knew we were trying to sell the property.
It was not in my mind to declare bankruptcy, I did not want to walk away owing anyone anything. Just to settle our debt and be done with it.
The primary mortgage holder was in contact with me daily, they wanted all sorts of forms filled-out and signed, attempts at re-financing, and blah blah. As a pensioner I simply do not have the income level needed to carry that kind of note by myself without tenant income.
We got three offers from prospective buyers; and the bank refused the sell.
It was after that, that I got transferred to talking with an office from the bank that deals with the bank assuming ownership. That office told me to get off the property and mail them the keys. Signing the deed over to them, would also speed up the process. So I did.
It was after that when they sued me. They wanted the outstanding principle, plus all legal fees, plus the property.
Our savings was gone. The secondary note holder had held off their process of foreclosing until that time. So they insisted that we fill-out their forms, and try to refinance their loan.
Of course it is my 'fault' for still having mortgages on the property.
It is my 'fault' for having purchased the property in the first place.
During my career, we collected an assortment of four properties. When I retired, we sold off everything but one property. At the time, it seemed prudent and obvious that this one property was in the most prosperous location, and had the best tenants. Looking back, when the economy collapsed, if we had held any of those properties, they would have each fell in the same process. I still think that we made the best decision that we could have made, knowing what we knew at the time. [ie, selling the other properties and holding this one]. If I had a good crystal ball. I could have foreseen the collapse, and sold this property at the peak of the market.
Others in this thread seem to be saying that they had perfect crystal balls. I simply never had one of those.
It has now been a year since our bankruptcy was 'discharged'. I hope that one day the banks stop pestering us.
Gadzooks! That is exactly what I attempted to address in my earlier post using tact and diplomacy, now the gloves are off!
No crystal ball needed when purchasing rental based equities; here's the easy formula; #1 mortgage payments for such properties should never exceed your income potential to pay! #2 set your exposure limit at a very limited rental occupancy rate so as to ensure you don't get blindsided by things like a refinery being built right next door making your rental property a pig's nightmare. #3 When real estate prices rise accordingly with the onslaught of Casino's in your area DON'T think in terms of the long haul but rather consider your option of realizing on your investment to capitalize for OTHER uses; ergo sell the one that has the least attachments and use the gains to pay down the potential "biggy" to make it more easily carried.
"Crystal ball" implies we had advance knowledge, but this is all information you've provided that YOU were privy to from the get-go!
Sure you can say you didn't know the economy was going to downturn but reasonable people will respond "the economy has experienced downturns in every decade or so" and you coasted for 19 years on a business deal that had you "overexposed" out of the gate!
Don't ever do that again; allright? There; you've been advised and can't claim not having a crystal ball the next time you attempt to carry debt that is more than you could, should/would have been told not to carry if you had asked the right people.
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.
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.
Oh, and just telling a bank to just **** off is also a good
