[boomstick]

Depends on the state. In some states, the lender's recourse is limited to the property, but in many others the difference between the outstanding principal and the liquidation value of the property remains a debt of the borrower.

In the old days, when property value only went up, most banks wouldn't bother to chase down the borrower because the residual debt wasn't large enough to warrant the additional cost.

These days, however, more banks are making continued additional payments a condition of short-sale agreements, and are hunting down deadbeat borrowers who leave the keys in the mailbox.

[240B]

I am by means an expert on such thing but I find you comment interesting.

I can see it. But can a challenge be brought that when the loan was made, both parties agreed that the home is worth $X and both parties agreed that the home is in lieu of $X?

Maybe it depends on how the contract is worded.

For example a repo guy may take your car but you don’t get sued on top of that or do you?

I am interested in what you have to say.