Can’t agree with you here. The man said he owed 160 and had an offer at 170 but the bank refused to allow it thinking they could get more.
I would have done the same thing. I still would pay the difference between what the land gets and what is owed.
If you want to be a sucker, that’s your call.
>> The man said he owed 160 and had an offer at 170 but the bank refused to allow it thinking they could get more.
Bank approval is not necessary for home sale above the amount owed. Take the check, and pay off the mortgage. It isn’t a short-sale, no approval needed.
If the offer was, in fact, for less than the amount owed, the bank has every right to tell him to hit the bricks.
>> I would have done the same thing. I still would pay the difference between what the land gets and what is owed.
You’d rather pay the bank the difference between the mortgage and the empty lot, than the difference between the mortgage and the lot + house? Why would you WANT to pay more?
SnakeDoc
I believe the house was collateral against his business loans as well as the mortgage. It is common to use home equity as collateral for business loans. The bank would have used the proceeds beyond the mortgage to cover business loans.
Purposefully destroying a collateral asset to keep from paying a debt is most likely fraud, and a felony. He’s in trouble. Jail time is a definite possibility.
Beyond that, it appears he had some federal tax problems as well. The feds could make the case that he was willfully destroying property to evade paying federal taxes as well. We all know how Al Capone made out on that one.
the govt rats have given away trillions to suspect bankers and yet this poor schmuk couldn’t get his bank to take $10,000 more than what he owed......I don’t blame him at all.....