Feeling entitled, homeowners walk away or loot fixtures (Tampa: real estate, foreclosure)

[bentlebee]

TAMPA - The mortgage crisis is causing more than just heartburn for homeowners. It's changing their moral compass.

Homeowners are walking away - even when they can afford their payments. Some loot on the way out the door, carting off light fixtures, appliances, anything of value.


Moderator cut: copyright issues

Feeling entitled, homeowners walk away or loot fixtures

I wonder if the guy in the picture will still smile when the lender files a lawsuit against him and gets awarded with a judgment 5 years from now!!!

That will be so much fun to see him in a picture again....I can wait for that

Many don't get off the hook like that, the banks have years they can wait to file these lawsuits...

[BucFan]

miserable human beings - but not surprised

[bentlebee]

Originally Posted by BucFan

miserable human beings - but not surprised

We had plenty of them in our neighborhood...for years smiling, driving in expensive cars, even getting plastic surgery and not paying their mortgage...no HOA fee either since that goes hand in hand...as long as their cable is working and they can watch their favorite shows and have internet access....

Parasites! I'm glad many have left since the banks seems to be getting active over here..and most of them left in the middle of the night thinking the neighbors are all so stupid...but wake parasites, your neighbors can look on the public records and know that you aren't paying and enjoying it, but later we might enjoy it reading that they go after you while we finally get our values back and did the right thing

[housingcrashsurvivor]

This is not how my mother raised me.

[vaughanwilliams]

Apparently, the lenders don't care enough to prosecute these leeches. I can understand walking away from a mortgage you can't afford, (don't agree with doing that, but understand) but to continue living there or wrecking the home is despicable. So many Americans have absolutely no concept of shame.

[Maggi07]

Wow, that is just amazing to me.

We moved down here with a house sitting empty and unsold in Michigan. We paid every mortgage payment while we marketed it for renters or buyers. The month before it rented we were dipping into the savings we never touch and I was thinking of where I could go and get a second job, just to pay the mortgage on a house we don't live in.

Thank goodness it rented, but we were prepared to do what we needed to do to make sure we followed through on our obligation to repay the money we borrowed.

It's angering to read about people who just walk away when they could easily pay. Talk about entitlement.

[housingcrashsurvivor]

I'm not even sure how I feel about walking away from a mortgage. On the one hand, it looks like a simple business transaction with the house used as collateral. But on the other hand, what is the difference between borrowing money to buy a house, live in it for however long, and then walk away from an obligation to pay. Can I do that at a restaurant, eat my food, and then not pay? How about when I go clothes shopping, wear a new pair of jeans for a few weeks and then return it for a full refund?

Also, what of those who bought with no money down or even who got 110% loans on the house. So basically they were living for free from the get go (or, certainly, subsidized), then they lived for free before vacating, not even paying the mortgage? How about those who ATM'd their houses to death, stealing the equity, buying their vettes with that stolen money and walking away from their obligation to pay. Where was that in the business contract?

An aquaintance of a cousin of mine hasn't paid on their mortgage in about a year. Recently they just returned from a Caribbean cruise. Must be nice to have all that "extra" vacation money. These people ought to be jailed. Shame? They are thieves.

Oh, and I love the argument in the article about how they justify their actions because they feel screwed by the banks, as if had they done well in real estate, they were gonna cut the banks in for some of their house profits, generous lot that they are.

Here's where this is all headed...

More Struggling Borrowers Face Pay Garnishment - NYTimes.com

[d070033]

Hold on folks - its the banks and lenders that talk about this as a 'moral compass' issue and how people should feel obligated to pay their obligations. However when a business walks away from an investment gone bad there is little to no talk about 'moral compass'. They are smart business people because they cut bait rather than 'burden' their shareholders with poorly performing assets on the balance sheet.

The way I see it, a home is a building, nothing more than an investment of money for the benefit of your family. If the investment falters there is a decision to be made, but certainly if for the financial health of your family and long term fiscal health you need to walk away then you have to walk away. Its not something I would personally do, but lets not dress this thing in colors that its not. A house is a financial investment that you happen to live in - if it does not fit within the portfolio then move it.

[The716]

Originally Posted by bentlebee

We had plenty of them in our neighborhood...for years smiling, driving in expensive cars, even getting plastic surgery and not paying their mortgage...no HOA fee either since that goes hand in hand...as long as their cable is working and they can watch their favorite shows and have internet access....

Parasites! I'm glad many have left since the banks seems to be getting active over here..and most of them left in the middle of the night thinking the neighbors are all so stupid...but wake parasites, your neighbors can look on the public records and know that you aren't paying and enjoying it, but later we might enjoy it reading that they go after you while we finally get our values back and did the right thing

I'll bet you are a pretty neat guy to hang around with... cool stuff. I like to hang with winners...

[housingcrashsurvivor]

Originally Posted by d070033

Hold on folks - its the banks and lenders that talk about this as a 'moral compass' issue and how people should feel obligated to pay their obligations. However when a business walks away from an investment gone bad there is little to no talk about 'moral compass'. They are smart business people because they cut bait rather than 'burden' their shareholders with poorly performing assets on the balance sheet.

The way I see it, a home is a building, nothing more than an investment of money for the benefit of your family. If the investment falters there is a decision to be made, but certainly if for the financial health of your family and long term fiscal health you need to walk away then you have to walk away. Its not something I would personally do, but lets not dress this thing in colors that its not. A house is a financial investment that you happen to live in - if it does not fit within the portfolio then move it.

No, it is not just the banks talking about moral compass. I am not defending banks and I think they have huge responsibility in all this. But borrow $100k from your father-in-law to buy a condo and then walk without paying him back and see how that plays out for your family.

That a business might sell a failing asset at a loss is one thing as it is taking a loss and it gets to write that off. Individuals also get to write off capital losses when we sell at a loss. Selling at a loss is not walking way.

That a business would walk away from an obligation to pay what it owes (& I realize they sometimes do that) is no less reprehensible than an individual doing it, so I'm not buying your argument of what you think is good for the goose which to me just smells foul. Say you go online and buy an item from a company, but the company doesn't deliver or delivers the wrong item or it is broken in the box or whatever and the company refuses to pay you back your money. Would you say, that's ok, because my brother-in-law never pays me back either? Hey, what's good for the goose.

Concerning mortgages, in nonrecourse states, walking is understood in the contract. The house is the only collateral and so then the bank is taking a chance on giving you a loan, thinking it will profit from interest payments.

But when we sign contracts in recourse states, then it is understood that while the house is still collateral, there is also an obligation to pay back the money borrowed. Same as if I borrowed money to open a business: just because the business fails doesn't let me off the hook of having to pay back the money I borrowed. Try that with a loan shark and see if he'll let you, um, walk.

Recourse debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recourse debt is a debt that is not backed by collateral from the borrower. Also known as a recourse loan, this type of debt allows the lender to collect from the debtor and the debtor's assets in the case of default as opposed to foreclosing on a particular property or asset as with a home loan or auto loan. Nonpayment of recourse debt allows the lender the right to collect assets or pursue legal action.[1] While mortgages in the US are typically nonrecourse debt, a foreclosure or bankruptcy can trigger the loan to become recourse debt at the request of the lending institution.[2


Nonrecourse debt - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nonrecourse debt or a nonrecourse loan is a secured loan (debt) that is secured by a pledge of collateral, typically real property, but for which the borrower is not personally liable. If the borrower defaults, the lender/issuer can seize the collateral, but the lender's recovery is limited to the collateral. If the property is insufficient to cover the outstanding loan balance (for example, if real estate prices have dropped), the difference between the value of the collateral and the loan value becomes a loss for the lender.[1] Thus, non-recourse debt is typically limited to 50% or 60% loan-to-value ratios, so that the property itself provides "overcollateralization" of the loan.