Foreclosures and Irresponsible Home THIEVES

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Except that the house doesn't belong to the bank until the mortgage is paid in full. You're starting with a false premise.

Legally, the house belongs to the owner/borrower, whose name is on the deed. The bank has a secured loan, with the real property as the security. If the owner/borrower defaults on the loan, the bank has the right under the terms of the loan to initiate legal proceedings to take possession of the property (which wouldn't be necessary if the bank already owned the property) and have the property sold in order to satisfy the loan. But despite the fact that people say it all the time, the bank does not own the property unless and until it forecloses. Hence, no stealing.

Call them deadbeats, call them defaulters, call them useless. But thieves simply doesn't fit because they, not the bank, own the property.

Meanwhile, what Dr. Phil said.

Everything you said.

I don't have an outside solution as I think mostly this is all going to work itself out through some people getting modifications and others losing their homes. I don't think there's any reason to froth at the mouth over other people's choices.

[StargazerLily]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Except that the house doesn't belong to the bank until the mortgage is paid in full. You're starting with a false premise.

Legally, the house belongs to the owner/borrower, whose name is on the deed. The bank has a secured loan, with the real property as the security. If the owner/borrower defaults on the loan, the bank has the right under the terms of the loan to initiate legal proceedings to take possession of the property (which wouldn't be necessary if the bank already owned the property) and have the property sold in order to satisfy the loan. But despite the fact that people say it all the time, the bank does not own the property unless and until it forecloses. Hence, no stealing.

Call them deadbeats, call them defaulters, call them useless. But thieves simply doesn't fit because they, not the bank, own the property.

Meanwhile, what Dr. Phil said.

Okay, I understand. Yes. They are useless deadbeat losers.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

I don't have an outside solution as I think mostly this is all going to work itself out through some people getting modifications and others losing their homes. I don't think there's any reason to froth at the mouth over other people's choices.

Have you been talking about foreclosures in general or people who stay in their homes without paying on them?

[DrPhil]

How common is it for people to stay in their homes without paying on them? It's a relative rarity.

That's clearly a problem and takes some HUGE cajones to even attempt. Wouldn't the police remove the people?

"Call the po-po, ho" ~ Madea

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Have you been talking about foreclosures in general or people who stay in their homes without paying on them?

Just now, foreclosures in general, throughout the thread, people who cease paying their mortgages and wait until they're evicted to leave, no matter where they eat.

I do not get the outright personal affront that has been exhibited throughout this thread. It's very much a "how dare they when I'm working my ass off" conversation and I just do not think that makes any sense.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

How common is it for people to stay in their homes without paying on them? It's a relative rarity.

That's clearly a problem and takes some HUGE cajones to even attempt. Wouldn't the police remove the people?

"Call the po-po, ho" ~ Madea

I'm all turned around now because I thought that's what the article was referring to.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

It's very much a "how dare they when I'm working my ass off" conversation and I just do not think that makes any sense.

I know people don't live their lives the way I do. My problem is that these people are effectively squatting which affects the bank which in turn affects rates/eligibility for everyone else.

Anyway, with foreclosures continuing to be a veritable epidemic, why are banks being stupid? Wouldn't it be better to rent the home back to the former owners for a then-fair market rate with the understanding that the house could be sold out from under them at any point?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I'm all turned around now because I thought that's what the article was referring to.


I know people don't live their lives the way I do. My problem is that these people are effectively squatting which affects the bank which in turn affects rates/eligibility for everyone else.

Anyway, with foreclosures continuing to be a veritable epidemic, why are banks being stupid? Wouldn't it be better to rent the home back to the former owners for a then-fair market rate with the understanding that the house could be sold out from under them at any point?

That's logical, the outright RAGE at the beginning of this thread was not.

If they cannot pay, they cannot pay, and squatting or not they're going to affect the banks their rates the same way. With the fed keeping Prime low, it's going to make rates pretty good for the near future. As far as eligibility it was the bust that affected that and probably for the better since prior to that it was being handled haphazardly.

Banks don't have the resources to be landlords, they avoid it like the plague.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

That's logical, the outright RAGE at the beginning of this thread was not.

I don't cosign on anyone else's rage and I myself am not outraged.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

How common is it for people to stay in their homes without paying on them? It's a relative rarity.

That's clearly a problem and takes some HUGE cajones to even attempt. Wouldn't the police remove the people?

"Call the po-po, ho" ~ Madea

Yes, the police do remove people. I know of a case where a family was renting a house and, unbeknownst to them, their landlord was not paying the mortgage, even though they were paying their rent. The police department showed up at midnight on the day that the bank was taking possession and told the people they had to leave immediately, with whatever possessions they could get out right away. The family living there had kids, etc. It was a horrible mess.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by StargazerLily

Okay, I understand. Yes. They are useless deadbeat losers.

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I don't cosign on anyone else's rage and I myself am not outraged.

But. But.

IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED
YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

[srmom]

How common is it for people to stay in their homes without paying on them? It's a relative rarity

In south Florida it is very common. The bank my son works for won't start foreclosure proceedings for up to 12 months after the last payment was recieved. They try to work with the deadbeat, errr homeowner (JK) to modify or restructure the loan, but homeowners are catching on that they aren't going to be forcibly removed so they are staying (essentially) squatting for months to get the bank to make better offers.

It's not against the law, they are just using the system for their best benefit. Just as there are many honorable people who've just gotten in over their head, there are dishonorable people who are gaming the system as it stands and will continue to do so until the game changes.

The banks do not want to take ownership of those homes.

[DTD Alum]

I actually work in real estate and am in frequent contact with people whose homes are underwater. Many of them attempt short-sales. The thing is that you cannot paint them all with the same brush.

Many of the people doing short-sales and being foreclosed on were people with a conventional, reasonable mortgage who had never missed a payment, but suffered horrible luck...perhaps a loss of a job combined with a huge medical bill. I really feel for those.

On the other hand, there are many families who were, to put it bluntly, wildly irresponsible. They took a liar's loan or a loan with a balloon payments, bought a house they would NEVER be able to afford otherwise, and then on top of that decided to take out a home equity line of credit and use their already poor investment as an ATM for Mastro's and the Bahamas! Some fault lies with the banks for even offering such absurd loans, but a lot of fault has to lie with those homeowners. I'm sorry. They make a horrifically risky and greedy financial decision and now, of course, there are consequences.

So some are unfortunate victims of the economy, and some are wildly irresponsible...and neither side has an outright majority. There are plenty of both.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

But. But.

IF YOU'RE NOT OUTRAGED
YOU'RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION.

My proclivity to hyperbolize is often mistaken for emotion, but usually I'm just talking mess.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

LOL. I can't be mad at the people who are mad at it, as long as they don't assume their anger is contagious.

lol @ your signature

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

My proclivity to hyperbolize is often mistaken for emotion, but usually I'm just talking mess.

I just couldn't resist quoting my favorite over-the-top bumpersticker.