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.
I remember being told how I qualified for a lot more than I ended up buying.
This is a good point. We were also told we could spend about twice what we did. On paper, sure, we could afford it, but when you add in the bills that they don't consider when looking at your income and expenses, there is no way we could have afforded much more than we bought. Some people are not as bright as we are and thought, well, if they say I'm qualified for it, that must mean I can afford it! I blame them for not doing their homework but I also blame the mortgage lenders who just pushed and pushed. More than that, I blame the gov't for pushing lenders to push the prospective homeowners. There is enough blame to go around for all of us. It's a lesson in why we need to let the free market work its magic.
ETA: I am also with you on the upgrades, too. We spent probably $25k after we bought our house to redo the kitchen, put up energy efficient windows, etc. and we have nothing to show for it b/c we are so deep underwater now. We will be lucky to recoup our costs within the next 10 years.
Last edited by andrea3821; 07-07-2011 at 01:17 PM..
I don't owe anything on my home (see, I was one of these people who did not overbuy or use my house like an ATM) and I won't be answering anymore of your repetitive questions going forward. You beat the same drum in every thread thinking somehow you are going to "win"
What is all this nonsense about "using the house like an ATM"? Not everyone who refinances gets cash out (that was not our plan, we were just in search of a lower interest rate), and I would venture a guess that most people who are underwater do not have a second mortgage. The housing bubble burst, that's the fact of the matter. Everyone who owns a home is now suffering, even people who bought a year or 6 months ago. Prices continue to fall, there's no debating that. You should get off your high horse and understand that crap happens that is beyond people's control and not everyone can afford to just ride it out.
The fact is I had other things going on at the time which precluded me from selling at the peak. And I do blame the losers who took out more than they could pay for, the banks, the realtors, and people like you who want to see them get a free pass.
Again, done with your constant repetitive questions you think are so tricky which have no bearing on the topic.
So then, you get a free pass so you can whine about not selling at the right time, but others who have fought tooth and nail to keep their property (like me, see my story above) don't have a leg to stand on?
Oh, gee, should I blame myself that the lending standards were loose, that people overbought, that realtors pushed mortgages on people who could not afford them? Just who do you think is responsible? It wasn't me who caused this crash.
And it's really NONE of your business as to why I did not sell at the peak. Furthermore, it's absurd to sit around and even pose the question. Gee, did I miss something in the news? "We are now at the peak, time to sell" was everywhere in the headlines. Do you honestly think if this information had been available people would have bought at the peak?
And don't you dare pretend that you had this special knowledge as it's quite evident in your posts that you would not be in the know.
And enough of this. You like to argue just to hear yourself talk. Welcome to my ignore list.
Again, what have you to say about my situation? We did not overbuy, we could afford the property, we did not take advantage of lax lending standards, etc. GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE. And if it's none of our business why you didn't sell, it's none of your business the reasons some people walk away. Got it?
What is the difference? Best usually refers to the choice that serves the overall interest of the person, you say best, I say worse as the result of such is immorally irresponsible and has many problems that result from such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
Credit ratings can be repaired. I've helped people remove negative marks on their credit ranging from simple credit card charge offs to repossessions and foreclosures. The tools are there to anyone who seeks them out.
Yes, over time a person can repair their credit. This as I said takes a lot of time and until that full time elapses, the record of all those bad marks are there to be evaluated as to someones responsible nature.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
Also there is pending legislation in various jurisdictions that would severely restrict the ability of employers to run credit checks.
Legislation that many responsible people are highly against and are fighting against, including me. Credit ratings are a thorn for those who are financially irresponsible. Those who fall on hard times and it damages it, have means to repair and mitigate before too much damage is done. Those special cases where it is out of the persons hands completely and not subject to any control of the decisions they make are not common and to which the circumstance of such is plenty support for the reasoning as to it happening and can be explained in a job position.
Credit checks are done at the last stages of a hiring process, not on the initial, so most will have the ability to explain such (and often will be questioned as such in that later stage interview) to reason it.
Blocking them simply gives the irresponsible more power and takes the rightful advantage of those who are responsible away. That is, it interferes with the free market. If you do business publicly such as a credit rating establishes, then you have no reasonable grounds to demand that a business or any other public contractual means be removed from evaluating such.
Though this is a completely different argument, the point is... the issue is pending as you say, so counting on such would be just as irresponsible as gambling on that over priced bloated home to increase in price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David
Bankruptcies can be removed also, though admittedly harder. Even without removing them, recovery is not hard. Someone who properly manages their post bankruptcy credit file can be approved for decent rate loans for cars and such within 2 years or less and often for homes in 3-5 years.
Yes, it can be removed from public records after 10 years usually, yet that is not the point. A business can ask if you have "ever" filed for it and if one does lie about such, they have committed fraud be it contractual or that of legal fraud if the business or entity is able to obtain and prove past filing.
The point is, what you suggest is that it is "best" when it comes with a lot of baggage to improve the rating, remove records, and then lie about it on applications to which you are asked.
Personally, I see people doing such as being just as irresponsible as they were in their management and purchase of their property in the first place.
There are so many options to dealing with the issue outside of taking that road.
I see buying a home as nothing more than a gamble if you are trying to make money off of it. Those that bought homes happlily accepted their home rising in value (some took out equity lines of credit etc) but cannot fathom the thought that their gamble didn't pay off (home losing value). There is never a guarantee that you will make money on your home OR that it will hold its current value. It just so happened that for a long time people did make money off of them. Tides have shifted and the homes aren't worth what they paid for them. Too bad. If you are willing to take the equity you ought to be willing to take the loss. That is why I have a problem with walking away from ones obligations.
Yep, buying a home in the past was never about a profitable return. Sure, we knew in most reasonable cases that real estate increases in value, but this was over a long term. People started treating homes as if they were a fad market for fast trade and turn over. These schemes only benefit those who get in and out early. It is more of a ponzi scheme in that respect.
I watched house prices triple in my area before I moved out of CA. As they rose to those levels, I would tell people it was stupid to buy property here, that you are buying based on fad value and the home prices WILL drop when people realize the market can not sustain this bubble. I worked in a financial institution at the time and the mortgage lender team scoffed at me, told me those home prices would never go down, only up.
So now all these people are out there who would not listen to reason, did not think to even consider that their homes were not worth that value and these people now want a take me back. Typical of irresponsible people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jillz
Bad circumstances happen to people and I understand that some just cannot afford their home any longer. If foreclosure (short selling whathaveyou) is what you HAVE to do it is what it is. If you are walking away because you owe more than it is worth, too bad, suck it up, accept the consequences of buying when the value of your home was inflated.
Yep, they were completely happy with the idea that they could buy a home and have it double in price. People were all for them shooting up and excusing my mention that they were over priced and not worth it. They kept saying "It is worth what someone is willing to pay!" which was the biggest load of garbage because as you pointed out, the price was only "worth" it to them when they thought they would make a bunch of money on the home.
I agree, these people need to suck it up. There were many of us out there that saved, acted responsible, and refused to pay such idiotic prices for these homes and now we are supposed to feel sorry for these people and allow them to get out of their responsibilities? It is insulting to say the least and these people need to suffer their decisions and be held fully to them like every responsible person does when they make a bad investment.
Sorry, but this is laughable coming from any liberal.
Yea, cuz we all know that Conservatives are responsible.
Anyway, NO i wouldn't walk away from a house because it's upside down. I signed a deal, and i'll live with it. What others do isn't my concern.
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.
