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.
You can take potshots and suggest that those who don't agree with you are unreasonble but I beg to differ.
What do you say about the unemployed people out there who are renters? People who didn't buy (or overbuy) but saved what they could, lost their job and are following in the footsteps of NYMD going through savings and circling the drain. Do they deserve relief of some kind as well or are homeowners a class of people that are protected from the downside and to hell with everyone else?
I feel for NYMD. It must absolutely suck to be in their situation. But again, when they were living in paid for housing, the local school wasn't the one they wanted, so the option of staying in the paid for housing was tossed and they chose to increase their monthly liabilities in the form of a house rental in an area that they want to live in.
As I remember it, NYMD is renting their home currently but the rent is not covering the entire mortgage payment so they are not maintaining two full households.
Wow, are you the one who sent her a rude PM? Whatever their situation, I am sure if they could sell their house, all would be fine. It's my understanding that this is what is holding everything up. And the fact that her neighborhood has foreclosures is killing their chances of selling for enough to get their down payment out. So why so critical? Carma is a funny thing, be careful, it might come your way if you continue to berate others for decisions that work for them. I still say they deserve help. I didn't say they should have the mortgage forgiven, but re-financing or extending the loan would sure help! And the pot shots aren't' because someone doesn't agree with me, they are saved for the judgmental, critical posters, who seem to have no compasion for ones situation.
You can take potshots and suggest that those who don't agree with you are unreasonble but I beg to differ.
What do you say about the unemployed people out there who are renters? People who didn't buy (or overbuy) but saved what they could, lost their job and are following in the footsteps of NYMD going through savings and circling the drain. Do they deserve relief of some kind as well or are homeowners a class of people that are protected from the downside and to hell with everyone else?
I feel for NYMD. It must absolutely suck to be in their situation. But again, when they were living in paid for housing, the local school wasn't the one they wanted, so the option of staying in the paid for housing was tossed and they chose to increase their monthly liabilities in the form of a house rental in an area that they want to live in.
As I remember it, NYMD is renting their home currently but the rent is not covering the entire mortgage payment so they are not maintaining two full households.
Just so that you are aware... our paid for corporate housing would have come to an end, it was not unlimited. We would have had to find our own housing at some point,whether it was sooner or later. So, we chose sooner.... we found a home in which the owner was willing to rent (which also wasn't easy...not many owners really want to rent out their home ,they want it sold) and yes, we were picky about the school district and we have a right to be that way.
This was a relo and we wanted to be sure that we were able to find something in the school district in which we wanted to be in vs. having to again , take our children out of another school as we already have done when moving to begin with...
There are so many factors that people face with relo's and I am not sure if you have ever had to uproot your family in this type of situation,but trying to be sure that we are looking out for their best interest and still make sound financial decisions is not an easy task.
Yes, we do have tenants currently in our home in which we are trying to sell, they just could not afford what we wanted in rent to cover our full mortgage there, so we thought it was best to have them rent from us, vs.paying for 2 homes and having our home sit vacant.
Again, a personal decision we had to make, but we weren't getting any activity on the home and felt this was our best option.
We truly had no idea how bad the market was about to get and certainly had no idea the number of foreclosures that would begin to show up after moving away...
I think I have hashed this over enough and obviously everyone has their own opinions,which is fine. I can't say that everyone completely understands what is going on here, but for those that get it,again,thanks so much for your kind words and hopefully, things will work out. For now, we really kind of feel as though our options are drained... not really sure what we will do, but we will keep the faith that something good will come of it.
Just so that you are aware... our paid for corporate housing would have come to an end, it was not unlimited. We would have had to find our own housing at some point,whether it was sooner or later. So, we chose sooner.... we found a home in which the owner was willing to rent (which also wasn't easy...not many owners really want to rent out their home ,they want it sold) and yes, we were picky about the school district and we have a right to be that way.
This was a relo and we wanted to be sure that we were able to find something in the school district in which we wanted to be in vs. having to again , take our children out of another school as we already have done when moving to begin with...
There are so many factors that people face with relo's and I am not sure if you have ever had to uproot your family in this type of situation,but trying to be sure that we are looking out for their best interest and still make sound financial decisions is not an easy task.
Yes, we do have tenants currently in our home in which we are trying to sell, they just could not afford what we wanted in rent to cover our full mortgage there, so we thought it was best to have them rent from us, vs.paying for 2 homes and having our home sit vacant.
Again, a personal decision we had to make, but we weren't getting any activity on the home and felt this was our best option.
We truly had no idea how bad the market was about to get and certainly had no idea the number of foreclosures that would begin to show up after moving away...
I think I have hashed this over enough and obviously everyone has their own opinions,which is fine. I can't say that everyone completely understands what is going on here, but for those that get it,again,thanks so much for your kind words and hopefully, things will work out. For now, we really kind of feel as though our options are drained... not really sure what we will do, but we will keep the faith that something good will come of it.
Here's an interesting article, that you may want to consider. You may want to click on the consult an attorney article too within it. No harm in talking to one, even if you decide to hang on. But at least you have another option to consider. There's excellent information in this.
"However, the sad reality is that "misguided morality" perpetuates the problem. The quicker homes fall and the quicker bad debts are written off and the quicker that we kill one-sided morality the better off we will all be."
You betcha. This was common in prior localized downturns. It was also common for folk to stay put in homes that were too small ( based upon their own definition of small) when they could not sell for what they owed. Moms returned to work. Dads took second jobs. People did whatever they could to honor their promise to repay. They did not expect a loan modification. The concept of short sale was rarely employed. And foreclosure and bankruptcy were the very last options and usually reserved for those in extreme situations.
The culture has changed in the past 20+ years.
I think that for many people these options are no longer tenable. If both husband and wife have used both their incomes to get the loan then if one becomes unemployed the house is in danger.
20 years ago there was less of that and there were fewer people who had ARMS and all those crazy sorts of mortgages. With a fixed rate based on one income then the amount needed to keep the house is likely to be more manageable than if you use both incomes. 20 years ago there was less ability to use your home like a piggy bank and increase your monthly morgage.
I mean if mom is working and dad is working then who is taking care of the kids while one or both of them have second jobs? If the ARM resets at the wrong time then a situation that is manageable can become unmanageable. Heck, that $400 a month increase that I read about in that other thread would be enough to cause most of the people I know to loose their house.
If housing values drop a 20% down payment provides a cushion should you need to sell for less than you bought. 20 years ago housing cost made up less of the budget and there was a bit more breathing room.
-------"fewer people who had ARMS and all those crazy set of mortgages "----
I wonder if people even read what they sign anymore.
If they did, they must not know the definition of --adjustable rate-- mortgage.
If you can't afford a mortgage payment if interest rates go up---get a fixed rate mortgage
If you don't qualify for a fixed rate----------don't buy.
I think a lot of folk deluded themselves that by the time their ARM reset their home would be worth substantially more given the then current double digit annual appreciation factor. If this has been the case, it would have allowed them the opportunity to refinance and perhaps enabled some of them take some " hard earned" equity out of the transaction, too.
It's mania mentality. It drove the economy for a blip in time.
I think that for many people these options are no longer tenable. If both husband and wife have used both their incomes to get the loan then if one becomes unemployed the house is in danger.
20 years ago there was less of that and there were fewer people who had ARMS and all those crazy sorts of mortgages. With a fixed rate based on one income then the amount needed to keep the house is likely to be more manageable than if you use both incomes. 20 years ago there was less ability to use your home like a piggy bank and increase your monthly morgage.
I mean if mom is working and dad is working then who is taking care of the kids while one or both of them have second jobs? If the ARM resets at the wrong time then a situation that is manageable can become unmanageable. Heck, that $400 a month increase that I read about in that other thread would be enough to cause most of the people I know to loose their house.
If housing values drop a 20% down payment provides a cushion should you need to sell for less than you bought. 20 years ago housing cost made up less of the budget and there was a bit more breathing room.
A lot has changed in 20 years.
I am holding that it's the overall culture that has changed. All of the mortgage products that were used during the bubble have been around for a long, long time. 20 or more years ago, most folk were leary of ARMS for the obvious reasons....fear of the unknown when the reset occurs.
100% financing and low/no doc loans have been around a long time too. The interest rates associated with them precluded most from taking on debt they could not afford to repay. People did not as easily delude themselves into believing their home value would increase sufficiently to enable them to refi.
20 or more years ago, more people were living within their means and when necessary, doing without. Somehow, families managed to live their lives without the the technologies that are now rather common in most households. Family members did not posess their own cell phones, land lines, DSL connections, premium cable, DVDs, lap tops and the plethora of other technologies/social networking stuff that now has been deemed necessary to sustain our lives. And let's not even go to the black hole of what is spent on coffee.
Living beyond our means created and sustained jobs. The more it becomes necessary for people to live within their means, the greater the number facing sustained unemployment. It's a catch 22.
I
Family members did not posess their own cell phones, land lines, DSL connections, premium cable, DVDs, lap tops and the plethora of other technologies/social networking stuff that now has been deemed necessary to sustain our lives.
Obviously people didn't have that stuff 20 years or more ago, becuase they didn't EXIST then.
That's the key, you HAD EQUITY! Do you think most of these people who are struggling so much have ANY equity or even close to breaking even where they could just get out for a few grand? Many of these people struggling are 100K or more under. Most people don't have that kind of cash to bring.
To turn it around suppose you did have 100K and that was your life savings (and saved it for years and years), would ALL of you including the ones who think these people are scumbags, would you give that 100k to a lender who IS ALSO responsible for this mess?
I don't know what we would have done. Every situation is different. Some people I have sympathy for, some I do not. My sister and BIL bought a condo in 2005 in an already expensive market (so cal). They weren't trying to make a huge profit, or buy a huge mcmansion. They were just trying to get into the market, hopefully gain some equity, and sell in a few years to buy a house and start a family. Now they are upside down. They can make their monthly payment, so they do. They have tried to refinance and can't. I feel bad for them because I don't feel like they were being irresponsible. On the other hand, my friends who I mentioned in a PP, who spent $750K on a 3600 sf house then decided they couldn't afford it, I have no sympathy for. I feel like they and people like them are responsible, along with the banks, for this mess. These are college educated people. They should have known better.
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.
