U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2008, 06:37 AM
 
Location: Beautiful East TN!!
7,281 posts, read 19,070,659 times
Reputation: 2753

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NewToCA View Post
I don't care for the Hope for Homeowners Program, from what I have read so far. It appears that we have created a double gift for those homeowners who got in over their heads. We give them a tax-free "gift" in lowering their outstanding balance to a max of 95% of current value, and a second "gift" in lower monthly payments due to the new lower loan balance.

And if they sell the home 10 years later and recoup the entire original purchase price, gets who gets to keep all of the profits?
In the original HOPE program, if the homeowner sold the house 50% of any equity had to go back to the government which was split between gov and the bank that wrote down the principle. However I saw in the proposal that did not pass they were amending that to be 100% of equity would go to the gov that bought the mortgage from the bank. This would essentially mean the homeowner would then become a renter from the government. Their payments would be lowered so they could continue to live in the house and their credit is saved but they would not get any equity out of the house when they sold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-01-2008, 07:55 AM
 
Location: Sacramento
13,784 posts, read 23,827,553 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbmouse View Post
In the original HOPE program, if the homeowner sold the house 50% of any equity had to go back to the government which was split between gov and the bank that wrote down the principle. However I saw in the proposal that did not pass they were amending that to be 100% of equity would go to the gov that bought the mortgage from the bank. This would essentially mean the homeowner would then become a renter from the government. Their payments would be lowered so they could continue to live in the house and their credit is saved but they would not get any equity out of the house when they sold.
The only provision I have seen is the one that brings the equity down to 50% after the 5th year:

TheInformedHomebuyer.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Beautiful East TN!!
7,281 posts, read 19,070,659 times
Reputation: 2753
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewToCA View Post
The only provision I have seen is the one that brings the equity down to 50% after the 5th year:

TheInformedHomebuyer.org
That was the original HOPE and as it stands. In the proposal (which was turned down so don't know if it will actually be included in the next proposal or not) it had proposed an amendment to that program to be 100% equity.
http://www.politisite.com/act.pdf (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 35,232,981 times
Reputation: 4899
More than 95% of residential mortgage loans are current - it is a relatively small percentage that find themselves in default.

Lenders do not want property back. They are, and always have been, willing to try to work out something so that there is no foreclosure. The biggest problem though is the borrower - more often than not, when they get into a situation where they are going to miss a payment - they do not contact the lender - they bury their heads in the sand - in other words, THEY DO NOT COMMUNICATE with the lender -

As soon as you know you are going to have a problem - contact the lender - you actually might be surprised what they can, and will, do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 09:09 AM
 
Location: the matrix
212 posts, read 261,487 times
Reputation: 52
That might help in some cases.

The bailout is not really for mortgages and homeowners. The bailout is for mortgage-backed
securities and related derivatives, many imaginary. The big time speculators, lost big time! Now
they want us, the taxpayer, to cover their losses!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-01-2008, 05:33 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,968 posts, read 14,268,565 times
Reputation: 16149
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
I'm not sure I'd want to penalize a family who bought a life-long family home, and then at retirement age needed to move for obvious reasons. They are clearly not selling thier home with profit motive, but merely to secure a home that meets with changing life circumstances. By making pay back the assistance when they become pensioners would simply place the same old burden back onto them when they can least afford it. I think it would be reasonable to excuse the obligation five years after the mortgage is fully paid, or at age 65, whichever comes first.
I find that to be a false argument.

Anyone who bought a home within 500 miles of me 30 years ago would be realizing a profit of 200% to 300%. There's no excuse why they shouldn't be paying cash for a home, and still have money left over, or paying cash for condo with a significant amount of money left over, or making a down-payment on a home so large as to make the mortgage significantly less than one could possibly pay renting a similar apartment or condo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2008, 08:13 PM
 
1,617 posts, read 2,467,780 times
Reputation: 1352
I think you are right...picture him being like Rumplestilskin hopping up and down; I think your idea about modifying mortgage payments has some real wisdom to it...people will be less likely to lose their homes; the Banks would still have money coming in; perhaps the mortgages can be modified for say 5 years...takes some pressure off of the consumer; if someone is able to pay more, no prepayment penalty (although there is no prepayment penalty in VT); people will be less frightened and that's important. I got an email from a former high school classmate of mine; one of his best friends and a mentor to him, killed himself last night because he 'lost everything'...I would think others will do the same which is horrible, just horrible...the governor of MA several months ago ordered a moratorium on all foreclosures for three months so people could breath and try to work something out; why not write to our governors and have him/her enforce an executive order ordering all lenders to renegotiate all mortgages that are behind regardless of the person's credit...I think whenever there can be a 'win-win' situation, everyone can be satisifed...thoughts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-03-2008, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
6,221 posts, read 3,525,484 times
Reputation: 3831
[quote=Alt Dach;5496280]
Quote:
Originally Posted by sickofnyc View Post
That seems the correct way to get the money flowing back into the banks.
They are making this so complicated to screw us once again. You build any economy bottom up, not top down. Bush is telling us to be afraid...he's always been a fear monger. He is the total opposite of FDR and his message of nothing to fear but fear itself.

I wouldn't trust a cockroach in the hands of Paulson or any other Bush Crime Family appointee, let alone The U.S. Treasury.

This will go down in histroy as the biggest heist ever![

We should be so lucky, there are MANY more bail/hand-outs on the
way.Sub-prime is a small part of derivitive scam.
ABSOLUTELY! It's the derivative scams that are hurting the banks and investors. But hey, let's blame it all on Fannie and Freddie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2008, 07:01 PM
cat
 
70 posts, read 261,509 times
Reputation: 46
If a homeowner lets their home go into forclosure can the lender hound the homeowner for any charges it cost the lenders to take the property back and resell it? Someone told me they can but Ive never heard of this before. I always thought that if you let yourself be forclosed on, and after the 6 months are up, it becomes the lenders property at no cost to the owners...
CAT
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-11-2008, 09:20 PM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 7,868,642 times
Reputation: 3376
I wouldn't mind if the homeowners simply had their Adjustable Rate Mortgages (ARM) converted to a FIXED rate, at whatever the initial interest rate was when they made their first mortgage payment.

That way, they can simply pay whatever monthly mortgage amount they first started with.

I don't think it's fair that the principle amount of the mortgage be re-calculated down to the home's current fair market value.

If I purchased a stock which is currently worth 50% of what I paid for it, I don't expect the government to bail me out on my loss.

People who buy a house know what they are buying. They know their own financial situation, and what they can and can not afford.

Taxpayers should not have to bail out homeowners who paid too much for their homes!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:27 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top