Posted on 10/14/2014 10:06:40 AM PDT by Olog-hai
My fear is that this nation would elect Hitler himself on a promise to punish these banks.
They pretty much have.
how about this. You get the loan/mortgage, you make the payments agreed to.
If you can’t make the payments anymore, the bank gets the house. All the “I keep my promises” is feel good BS.
Every other entity gets an out. So does the “sap” (sarc) homeowner.
And you are right. The banks/Wall St destroyed it all. I could care less about their balance sheets which can change at the whim of lobbied (bought) government.
Summary: Can’t pay the loan, house goes to the one who holds the note.
0 down 2% interest for 5 years
Here’s an outline on how its done in court to not pay for consumer debt anyhow.
http://hanavee.hubpages.com/hub/You-Can-Beat-Credit-Card-Debt-Collectors
Oh well. If you sign a contract don’t be surprised when the other party tries to prevent you from squirming out of your end of it.
no, it is NOT reality.
Reality is, no one was dragged kicking and screaming into a loan office and forced to sign a mortgage.
These supposedly thinking individuals KNOWINGLY signed a note much bigger than they could hope to repay, a note offered to them because of the reasons you gave.
The borrowers chose unwisely.
Even while they squirm out of theirs? They’re “too big to fail”, by the libs.
Great way to give the liberal government all sorts of excuses. The lender gets to enslave the borrower and reverse the Thirteenth Amendment.
MOst of these banks were made whole by the PMI insurance the note takers held... so the bank is often not out a dime but still goes after the note originator.
Its a scam, but a legal one....
The original bailout that was T.A.R.P. (Troubled Asset Relief Program) was signed by Bush'43 on 10/3/2008 to buy "troubled assets," defined as "(A) residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008, the purchase of which the Secretary determines promotes financial market stability; and (B) any other financial instrument that the Secretary, after consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, determines the purchase of which is necessary to promote financial market stability, but only upon transmittal of such determination, in writing, to the appropriate committees of Congress."
Of course, within the year after Obama's election, it became the font of crony capitalism under the guise of ending the "too big to fail" regime of Money Center Banks and Wall Street trading houses. In the 6 years since, no bank or trading house has been shrunk but all have paid fines of billions to the US Treasury as well as TARP repayments (tongue-in-cheek!) Meanwhile the owners and managers of these institutions have made LARGE campaign contributions to worthy politicians, what a shock!
SO why should not the individual be able to negotiate with these same institutions that so willingly play the game for OUR $Billions?
Should have read the contract or had an attorney read it for you. If there was anything shady in it then you should’t have signed it.
The terms of the document are clearly stated within the document. Obviously. If someone is fraudulently induced, that’s a different story. Otherwise, under what conditions would anybody be “desperate” to borrow money to purchase or refinance a piece of real estate? Nothing in the Declaration or the Constitution or any of its amendments absolves a citizen of being responsible for his lawfully incurred debts. Relief is provided under bankruptcy, but these same “desperate” people are frequently the same ones who refuse to seek legal protection in bankruptcy...perhaps because they’re concerned that their fraudulent mortgage applications (a federal crime)might be brought into evidence.
PMI coverage is limited, just like most forms of insurance. A lender is rarely made whole by it.
Sure, everyone could have done that. Just make the system more legalistic, the way the libs like it.
Nobody was twisting the borrowers’ arms, but the lenders’ arms were definitely being twisted by the government.
I am telling you by law, a bank can be made 100% whole by PMI and still go after a borrower for a deficiency judgement. The PMI payment to the bank is not taken into consideration.
Not everyone in this situation is dishonorable. Don't assume that these people just walked away; foreclosure means you have no choice, you are no longer the homeowner and are kicked out.
There area many people who bought houses they could easily afford, kept adequate savings, lived prudently, and paid faithfully on their mortgages, but fell behind due to job loss, catastrophic illness, divorce, etc. If the lender forecloses and takes the house, you will have a devil of a time renting another house, shack, apartment, or duck blind because the foreclosure and attendant problems have ruined your credit and left you without funds.
Didn’t the lenders get subsidized by the feds to cover for the losses they endured during the housing bust? If anyone should get the money, we taxpayers should!
Indeed. I did not suppose that FReepers forgot about “too big to fail” so quickly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.