Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Walking away from a mortgage might make sense
San Jose Mercury News ^ | September 26, 2010 | LINDSAY A. OWENS

Posted on 09/26/2010 7:41:50 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

Millions of middle-income home- owners are struggling to pay down bloated, underwater mortgages while wealthier Americans are simply mailing in the keys to the mansion and calling it a day.

It's time for average Americans to start seeing their mortgage papers for what they are: records of financial transactions, not moral documents.

In a free-market society, an individual homeowner is not responsible for the strength of the nation's housing market. If anything, walkers may stimulate the economy, by spending a portion of the money they were sending to the banks each month.

Take a look at your finances and decide for yourself whether homeownership makes sense. A better decision for the future of your family may be to rent, pay off your credit cards, and put the savings in a college fund for your children or grandchildren.

Walk away from your house if it will be better for you to rent. And remember, walking away now doesn't mean that homeownership may not work for you later.

(Excerpt) Read more at mercurynews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: 2manycrooks; crookedborrowers; failure; foreclosure; obamanomics; socialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-236 next last
To: Oldeconomybuyer
...middle-income home- owners are struggling to pay down bloated, underwater mortgages while wealthier Americans are simply mailing in the keys to the mansion and calling it a day.

Nothing like a little class envy to push a liberal agenda... Wealthier Americans aren't going to 'mail back the keys' and lose their good credit rating.

The left hates the middle class - the only reason to try to pit them against those in the upper classes is to undermine the banking system and throw the whole country into chaos. And we all know how Obama would use that disaster...

81 posted on 09/26/2010 8:58:44 AM PDT by GOPJ (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2589165/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: svcw
Ok, you walk away from a $1,500 mortgage payment so you can rent a $1,500 a month apartment?

Okay, out here in CA most of them walk away from a $3000 mortgage payment on a 3 bdrm 2 ba to a $1500 rent payment on a 5 bdrm 3 ba (or something similar...)

82 posted on 09/26/2010 8:59:18 AM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie

Business is business, and if you service a population in need you’ll make money. If you listen to cranks and follow rules from 5-10years before you’ll be broke or miss the opportunity for growth.


83 posted on 09/26/2010 8:59:38 AM PDT by Porterville ( I have come here to chew bubble gum and kick ass, and I'm all out of bubble gum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: allmost

If your home doubled in value over a five year period, would you feel the profit was yours? Of course. But you decide if it declines in value you should be able to walk away?


84 posted on 09/26/2010 9:00:19 AM PDT by GOPJ (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2589165/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mouton

We live in a District that has MUD taxes. I called them to see when they would be paid off for my district and was told that it all depends on how many don’t pay. Redistribution of taxes?


85 posted on 09/26/2010 9:00:38 AM PDT by Grams A (The Sun will rise in the East in the morning and God is still on his throne.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Foreclosures in U.S. Hit All-Time High

"U.S. homes lost to foreclosures have hit an all time high in August. According to RealtyTrac Inc. the number of home repossessions is up 3 percent from July, bringing the total to 95,364 properties, an increase of 25 percent from August 2009."

"At least 2.3 million homes have been repossessed by lenders since the recession began in December 2007, according to RealtyTrac. The firm forecasts that more than 1 million American households are likely to lose their homes to foreclosure in 2010."

"Of more than 25,000 calls from January to June 2010, 41 percent were related to moving. Of those, 77 percent sought help finding an apartment, and two-thirds of those seeking apartments said it was "foreclosure related."

"People are calling us at the point where they don't have alternatives," says ComPsych CEO Richard Chaifetz. "We have sent people with no money to shelters. Their credit is terrible, and we have to buy them time. We've gotten calls from people that have been thrown out on the street, and that's when they call."

Is it "moral" to throw people out of their homes if they can't pay?

86 posted on 09/26/2010 9:04:47 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

“If your home doubled in value over a five year period, would you feel the profit was yours? Of course. But you decide if it declines in value you should be able to walk away?”

The fact that the banks took no risk on contracting the mortgage means that there is NO contract. TARP and gaming mortgage insurance killed any contractual obligation.

The banks could give loans w/o concern of actual value knowing they’d be covered by both receiving 150% of actual value after default. Give loans for properties 3 times the actual value, say 600,000.... the actual value is 200,000... insurance covers 80% of intial loan 480,000... bank walks with pockets full of cash... TARP... and interest payments.


87 posted on 09/26/2010 9:05:59 AM PDT by Porterville ( I have come here to chew bubble gum and kick ass, and I'm all out of bubble gum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ

That is one freedom still left. If you want to move am I supposed to judge and/or attempt to stop you? Regardless of your reasons the answer is no. It’s ugly in housing right now in most places.


88 posted on 09/26/2010 9:11:13 AM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
There are hundreds of ghost towns across the country, where someone once struck gold, silver, coal, or some other economically viable activity occurred, that drew people to the area for jobs and to live.

While the area boomed, people bought or rented houses or rooms, paying whatever the "going rate" was for housing, food, hardware, etc., usually much higher than the "going rate" for the same in less booming areas.

Eventually, the economic viability of the area declined, driving down the "going rate" for everything, and driving out the people who had come there for jobs. Without the jobs, the homes were worthless. No one else came in to buy them at any price. People left town without paying the hotel, the hardware store, the blacksmith, etc., unless they had paid up front.

The government didn't step in to reimburse anyone for their losses. Some people made much money; others made little or none. Then the town went bust. People just left.

Whoever gets the blame for this modern-day, nationwide bust, the results will be the same. People will leave where they can't survive, and go where they might have a better chance. And no amount of additional government interference will squeeze more blood out of a turnip.

89 posted on 09/26/2010 9:14:08 AM PDT by meadsjn (Sarah 2012, or sooner)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Nothing like a little class envy to push a liberal agenda... Wealthier Americans aren't going to 'mail back the keys' and lose their good credit rating.

Actually, the author is correct. The more money a person has, the more likely they are to walk away from an underwater mortgage. I think it is because they are more like to view it as a simple business deal, and they also have the financial resouces to ride out any temporary credit hit they take.

90 posted on 09/26/2010 9:15:10 AM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: allmost
It’s ugly in housing right now in most places.

At the top of the market, Zillow had my home valued a little over $500,000. Today I'd be lucky to get $300,000. I know it's an ugly market - and worse in Florida.

91 posted on 09/26/2010 9:19:18 AM PDT by GOPJ (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2589165/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
People have bought cars and been underwater on them right away for decades. No one ever advised that they walk away from the financing when that happens. I don't know why it is suddenly different with houses. Live in them, pay the mortgage, don't worry about the transitory value, worry about whether you are saving money by owning instead of renting.

If you lose your job, and can't make the payments, that's different. You are not walking away, the bank is taking it back.

92 posted on 09/26/2010 9:19:34 AM PDT by Defiant (Liberals care more about the Koran than they did about Terri Schiavo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porterville

You are spot on!


93 posted on 09/26/2010 9:20:23 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Porterville

You didn’t ask how I felt about hanging the bankers (and the dems who passed this corrupt but favorable legislation for them ) by their thumbs for a thousand years...


94 posted on 09/26/2010 9:21:54 AM PDT by GOPJ (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2589165/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Huck
Morality in business? A contract has terms, including penalties. That’s called making a deal. If you incur penalties, you haven’t broken any moral code. You’ve incurred penalties that were part of the agreement. A bank knows their is risk of default in a mortgage loan. I am sure they charge enough to cover the risk. A person should do what is in their best interests, as long as it’s legal.

Exactly. No one expects you to perform a contract when it's more rational to pay damages, or to pay those damages until and unless compelled to do so.
95 posted on 09/26/2010 9:23:19 AM PDT by only1percent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Defiant
If you lose your job, and can't make the payments, that's different. You are not walking away, the bank is taking it back.

Why do you think there is the highest rate ever in foreclosures? People are walking away because they can't pay the mortgage. The author is saying that rather than cash in your 401Ks, use your credit card, and borrow from friends and neighbors to hang on to a house you may lose eventually, walk away now so you have some kind of future.

The banks are kicking people out of their houses because a deal is a deal.

96 posted on 09/26/2010 9:25:07 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ICCtheWay; Mojave
Consequences of a Foreclosure or Walking on a mortgage - the IRS Regs. considers relief of debt as income... Under a foreclosure or walking away a 1099 is likely to be issued by the mortgage for the unpaid balance of the mortgage - this could be a huge amount - say $100,000 or whatever... You are then obligated to pay Federal Income Tax on that amount as added to your income for that tax year.

That's no longer true. The "Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act of 2007" excludes such "imputed income" from being taxed. (The exclusion runs through 2012 but may be extended.) And California passed a similar exclusion for state taxes earlier this year. Other states may vary.

So the consequences of a foreclosure or short sale mainly consist of the damage to your credit report. Financially, it can make good sense for someone who is paying two or three thousand dollars a month on an underwater mortgage (and therefore can't refinance to a lower interest rate) to walk away and rent a comparable house at half the cost.

As for the morality of doing so, a mortgage is a "secured" loan, in which a person made a deal with the lender to pay off the loan under the agreed terms or else the lender would repossess the property. Both sides were taking a risk, and both sides accepted the potential consequences (losing the house, and losing money on the loan) if things went bad. Why should we expect the homeowner to have a moral obligation to pay off the loan no matter what, so that the lender doesn't lose money no matter what?

The mortgage lender could have made less risky loans (e.g., required 20% or more equity instead of loaning 100% of inflated appraisals) to borrowers with better credit and adequate assets and income. But instead many lenders offered sub-prime loan deals which they turned around and sold to Fannie May or into the market where the deals were sliced and diced into tranches. Now whoever owns the defaulting mortgage can have the house instead of the loan payments; that's the risk they accepted in hopes of making a higher return than prudent lending would normally justify.

97 posted on 09/26/2010 9:26:22 AM PDT by dpwiener
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GOPJ
Florida's been bad for a few years now. I did some on-sight research for a friend in the panhandle. I drove through towns where over half of the entire town was for sale. It's going to take awhile for things to settle there.
98 posted on 09/26/2010 9:28:39 AM PDT by allmost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
Ok, I was just using myself as an example. I am in Santa Barbara. Just bought a condo (1380 sq ft) and my mortgage/HOA/property taxes, utilities included are $1975. To rent a comparable apartment my rent would be $3250 plus utilities.
I really do not know where you can rent a 5/3 house for $1500 in CA.
99 posted on 09/26/2010 9:31:25 AM PDT by svcw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
the federal government passed a law exempting debt forgiven as a result of foreclosure at least through 2012

Cite, please.

100 posted on 09/26/2010 9:33:10 AM PDT by Mojave (Ignorant and stoned - Obama's natural constituency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 221-236 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson