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

To: ourcountryback

Show me in the documents where the value of the house was guaranteed never to go down. The lender is not responsible for the value of the collateral increasing or decreasing.


222 posted on 05/10/2010 3:01:09 PM PDT by clintonh8r (Times Square: A law enforcement success made possible by an intellingence failure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies ]


To: clintonh8r

I guarantee you that if the banks ever thought the collateral would go down and if they had to own the paper themselves...

20% down would be a minimum requirement.


227 posted on 05/10/2010 3:58:45 PM PDT by delapaz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

To: clintonh8r
Show me in the documents where the value of the house was guaranteed never to go down. The lender is not responsible for the value of the collateral increasing or decreasing.

But the lender knows that they're assuming risk in the case of default. They even require borrowers to purchase mortgage insurance to help mitigate that risk!

Default is a cost of doing business. If the banks don't like defaults, they could try a little underwriting for a change.

Look, it's just business. The borrower isn't married to the lender; they're doing business together. Yes, these borrowers made a poor decision to buy in an overvalued market. But the lenders made a poor decision to lend, with the full knowledge that they could be on the hook. It makes no sense to say the borrowers have some moral obligation to bail out the banks' poor decisions as well as their own.

239 posted on 05/11/2010 7:54:40 AM PDT by Crichton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

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