Comments on: How Do You Spell Mortgage Relief? How About B-A-N-K-R-U-P-T-C-Y http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/03/04/spell-mortgage-relief-bankruptcy/ Learn, Network, Invest Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:51:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Thomashttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/03/04/spell-mortgage-relief-bankruptcy/#comment-81095 Thomas Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:17:09 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=4374#comment-81095 Sometimes Bankruptcy is the best answer. It allows you to have a fresh start and look at things in a more realistic manner. Sometimes Bankruptcy is the best answer. It allows you to have a fresh start and look at things in a more realistic manner.

]]> By: lance shutterhttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/03/04/spell-mortgage-relief-bankruptcy/#comment-64325 lance shutter Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:45:10 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=4374#comment-64325 The banks (government) are really missing the mark. The majority of homes are owned by people who do not have credit scores at or above 750. The majority are in the reality zone of between 600 and 750 including those in foreclosure. Solid bill paying people who for reasons most of us recignize missed a credit card payment or were late once or twice. And since there is no remedy once it occurs they are not able to refi at a workable rate. This should be the focus not those that over bought or tried to cash in (or out). That and fixing usuary laws on credit cards is the solution. The banks (government) are really missing the mark. The majority of homes are owned by people who do not have credit scores at or above 750. The majority are in the reality zone of between 600 and 750 including those in foreclosure. Solid bill paying people who for reasons most of us recignize missed a credit card payment or were late once or twice. And since there is no remedy once it occurs they are not able to refi at a workable rate. This should be the focus not those that over bought or tried to cash in (or out). That and fixing usuary laws on credit cards is the solution.

]]> By: BikerJimhttp://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2009/03/04/spell-mortgage-relief-bankruptcy/#comment-64324 BikerJim Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:02:22 +0000 http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/?p=4374#comment-64324 Charles and others, I've been doing some reading about the pending changes in bankruptcy judicial powers, basically looking into the judges ability to change mortgage terms. While I understand the political hay this will make for those law makers backing it, I think it will be a disaster in the short and long run. Sure, Joe Homeowner who owes $100k on a house now worth $85k, and paying 9% interest will be happy to get a new balance at $85k, and only pay 5% interest. Who loses there? The lender? that's not a big deal, after all, mortgage lenders are large institutions and they caused this mess anyway, right? Why allow them to expect the loan to perform as written and make an unconscionable(sp?) profit?Thing is, what if.....and this is what scares me personally. Same Joe Homeowner situation, house worth $85k now, $100k at 8% owed against it by Joe. Thing is, this house was sold by Bob Investor, who carried a mortgage, and wrapped it around an existing mortgage he had when he bought the place. What happens when Joe Homeowner goes to BK court, and the judge lowers his loan balance to $85k, and drops the rate to 5%, when Bob, the investor who holds that paper, has a loan for $80k against the house, under Joe's, and is paying 7.5%?Then who loses? Sure, some will say, "but these changes were meant to deal with institutional lenders and their loans?" Why? will this be clarified? What if the investor sells houses, holds paper, and does so under a corp, or LLC, is he now an 'institution', and held to the same standard.What happened to, you agreed to pay or give up the collateral, so do one or the other?Anyway, my thoughts, anyone else thinking along the same lines?Jim a/k/a The Biker Who Buys Houses My Blog: www.REmentors.com<abbr><em>BikerJim’s last blog post: <a href="http://rementors.com/just-a-random-post/" rel="nofollow">Just a random post</a></em></abbr> Charles and others,
I’ve been doing some reading about the pending changes in bankruptcy judicial powers, basically looking into the judges ability to change mortgage terms.
While I understand the political hay this will make for those law makers backing it, I think it will be a disaster in the short and long run.
Sure, Joe Homeowner who owes $100k on a house now worth $85k, and paying 9% interest will be happy to get a new balance at $85k, and only pay 5% interest.
Who loses there? The lender? that’s not a big deal, after all, mortgage lenders are large institutions and they caused this mess anyway, right?
Why allow them to expect the loan to perform as written and make an unconscionable(sp?) profit?

Thing is, what if…..and this is what scares me personally.
Same Joe Homeowner situation, house worth $85k now, $100k at 8% owed against it by Joe.
Thing is, this house was sold by Bob Investor, who carried a mortgage, and wrapped it around an existing mortgage he had when he bought the place.
What happens when Joe Homeowner goes to BK court, and the judge lowers his loan balance to $85k, and drops the rate to 5%, when Bob, the investor who holds that paper, has a loan for $80k against the house, under Joe’s, and is paying 7.5%?

Then who loses?
Sure, some will say, “but these changes were meant to deal with institutional lenders and their loans?”
Why?
will this be clarified?
What if the investor sells houses, holds paper, and does so under a corp, or LLC, is he now an ‘institution’, and held to the same standard.

What happened to, you agreed to pay or give up the collateral, so do one or the other?

Anyway, my thoughts, anyone else thinking along the same lines?

Jim
a/k/a The Biker Who Buys Houses
My Blog: http://www.REmentors.com

BikerJim’s last blog post: Just a random post

]]>