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.
Libertarian calling others pompous? The mind boggles.
Yeah, promoting individual responsibility is rather elitist. Just ask either of the mainstream candidates. Oh wait, those elitists are the antonym of personal responsibility.
Quote:
Never have so few with so little made so much noise.
Funny, the libertarians I run into have a whole heck of a lot (mostly wealth). Maybe it's just the folks I roll with
Yeah, promoting individual responsibility is rather elitist. Just ask either of the mainstream candidates. Oh wait, those elitists are the antonym of personal responsibility.
Funny, the libertarians I run into have a whole heck of a lot (mostly wealth). Maybe it's just the folks I roll with
so viewfromthepeak where do you stand politically? mccain, obama, paul kucinich, gravel, schwartzenegger?
I got a call from a client this week. His loan had gotten sold to GMAC. He had never missed a payment and his score is close to 700. He owes around $350K.
They called him to modify the loan based on the values now in his area.
They offered to lower the loan by $102K and lowered the rate by .250% (already a very good rate - 30 year fixed).
He is modifying this next week and is thrilled! He had never called them. They called him and indicated they were trying to securitize their portfolio.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,833,234 times
Reputation: 6438
I had to fight with GMAC for 6 months when they bought my loan. I made the first payment to the original holder of the loan. They then sold the loan to GMAC. GMAC wanted my first loan payment. I told them I had already paid it. They wanted me to prove it. I told them to shove it where the sun don't shine. They threatened to destroy my credit. I threatened legal action. It finally took a certified letter stating I had obtained legal counsel [and a copy of my original (cashed) check] and that I would sue the everliving **** out of them if they didn't stop calling and threatening me and my wife.
I had to pay for the certified letter. Their screwup cost me time and money. GMAC sucks.
(The previous opinion is personal.) BTW - that's great news for your client! WINDFALL BABY!
Yeah, promoting individual responsibility is rather elitist. Just ask either of the mainstream candidates. Oh wait, those elitists are the antonym of personal responsibility.
Funny, the libertarians I run into have a whole heck of a lot (mostly wealth). Maybe it's just the folks I roll with
What ten percent of the vote in odd places like Nevada. Yet half the posters on lists like this?
Empty tin cans filled with a little gravel. Shake em and it makes a lot of noise...but nothing ever comes of it.
Walking away, yep, that's the coward's way. It also shows that the person is really not all that responsible. I mean, you go out, you get credit, then you just walk away without any thought??
I completely disagree with you about foreclosure and bankruptcy. In fact, I wasn't comparing foreclosure with bankruptcy, in fact, my entire post was about walking away from a mortgage, which indeed will haunt you. To think a lender is not going to object to your bankruptcy is just plain old fashioned silly.
Bankruptcy follows you forever, just ask around. I know people who waited years and years (not 5) just to get a credit card after bankruptcy. And yeah, you might get a mortgage, but geez, what kind of loan will that be??
People who just walk away from credit loans need to be shot. I am so freaking sick of idiot's not bothering to take responsibility for their own stupid actions while the rest of us pay. Do not take out a $350K loan when you have 5 children and only one of you work at a car sales lot. OMG.
You can actually get a decent loan after bankruptcy, and even foreclosure, it depends on how diligent the person is during these periods in establishing their credit. If they hit a bad spot but don't fall prey to the depression and misconceptions out there, they can position themselves to buy another home. The Banks ultimately care about risk vs. reward. I've heard discussed, the possibility of preparing while going through bankruptcy, for life after. Getting a secured card during this time period and not attaching it to the bankruptcy can be part of the road to recovery, and there are those who believe it is part of a successful strategy to recovery.
While there are consumers to blame, there's plenty to go around. How many doctors diagnosis' have you challenged lately?
walidm: Maybe I'm slow tonight but I have no idea what you are asking/referring to re: doctors' diagnosis. I don't see the comparison. I do blame the consumer. I blame the person who doesn't bother to do their own research and watch out for themselves, this includes myself. Just because you are ignorant or decide to not bother doing the work and trusting a stranger doesn't mean you shouldn't take responsibility for your actions. Back to the big home loans people shouldn't have, I'd think that this is an obvious answer. Buying a large home you can't afford, or any size home for that matter that you can't afford, is just, well, wrong.
So in typing this out, are you saying that the consumers did not challenge the mortgage brokers' analysis and information they provided? If so, I have definitely challenged a doctor's diagnosis, as the research is there, all you have to do is read it for yourself and make yourself understand the mortgage loan business to make a better decision. Or, you can just be lazy and pretend that the broker is out for your well being and make a totally uninformed decision. I'm no expert on home loans, and before I bought my first home I was clueless. But I made myself understand, one way or another, before making a huge life decision. I listened to the broker, then read the facts, then made a choice.
Maybe I'm off base. Like I said, I wasn't completely sure of your question.
walidm: Maybe I'm slow tonight but I have no idea what you are asking/referring to re: doctors' diagnosis. I don't see the comparison. I do blame the consumer. I blame the person who doesn't bother to do their own research and watch out for themselves, this includes myself. Just because you are ignorant or decide to not bother doing the work and trusting a stranger doesn't mean you shouldn't take responsibility for your actions. Back to the big home loans people shouldn't have, I'd think that this is an obvious answer. Buying a large home you can't afford, or any size home for that matter that you can't afford, is just, well, wrong.
So in typing this out, are you saying that the consumers did not challenge the mortgage brokers' analysis and information they provided? If so, I have definitely challenged a doctor's diagnosis, as the research is there, all you have to do is read it for yourself and make yourself understand the mortgage loan business to make a better decision. Or, you can just be lazy and pretend that the broker is out for your well being and make a totally uninformed decision. I'm no expert on home loans, and before I bought my first home I was clueless. But I made myself understand, one way or another, before making a huge life decision. I listened to the broker, then read the facts, then made a choice.
Maybe I'm off base. Like I said, I wasn't completely sure of your question.
Point is not reasonable. To develop the neccessary skills in 2005 to project that Las vegas real estate was peaking and that effectively all housing buys...but particularly new ones... were suicidal would have required skills not present anywhere in the housing industry anymore in the individual consumer. The primary issue is not that people over bought. It is that the properties were heavily over valued. In those years the choices were to not buy at all or get taken.
Any economically rational person will walk from such a home. The exception would be those with large equities who have to take the loss. But anyone who did not have 25% or more down should certainly think about abandoning the home by one path or another.
And note that none of this was normal market forces. The non-distressed market continues to this day selling at a price point 20% or so higher than the REPOs. The lenders have chosen to dump their stock for their own reasons at prices well below the comps. That tactic results in very fast sale of the lender owned property while substantial slowing the sale of non-distressed property. That is massive market manipulation. It may well be that the massive influx of REPOs will over time force the non-distressed prices lower...though there are areas that are holding there price quite well.
So analyzing this as a matter of personal choice is incorrect. It was mostly a situation driven by greed of those in the lending and related industries.
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.
Alt-A Crisis (Good News)
