i don''t see anything wrong with housing price going down...

[crown1]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:18:20 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 2/27/2009 2:09:46 AM

Author: crown1




this is not what she wants to hear. she has convinced herself that her business acumen has lead her to the correct action for herself and everyone else be darned.

I can understand it to a degree crown. Many people would not admit that it is every man for himself out there, but that is exactly what they would do.


Asian culture is so different...one based on the group and the whole. American culture is often very much about the individual.


I just read a very sad article yesterday about 3 Chinese mothers suing (using the American way!) all sorts of people for the wrongful death of their 3 children. The children were sent her to study from China. These mothers were trying to find the money to repay members of the community who loaned them the money to send their children to the US. The idea was that if the children succeed, everyone does.


With the death of the children, and with many Chinese families only having one child, hopes of repaying evaporated. And yet, in the midst of their grief, they still struggle to repay their community.

i was raised with the survival of the fittest theory. i still agree with it. i am for personal responsibility and looking out for oneself but not at the expense of others. that is not taking care of oneself it is taking advantage of others. the bank is not the only one left holding the bag as you so correctly stated above.

i take hard times as a challenge to use the skills i have to take care of myself and my family. pp has been known for her no nonsense advice to others and i would have thought she might have come up with a plan for a more positive outcome.

my thought is she was not using her business acumen when she entered into the contract. the 40 year loan with the small down payment says it for me. anybody who did not see this correction coming did not want to. dancing fire has been predicting this as long as i have read this forum.

 

[Beacon]

I congratulate PP for not being fake and for not trying to make excuses such as: my lender coerced me, I didn't read the documents, the devil made me do it. We hear a lot of whiners like that and they make me ill. At least she admits her error.

What is needed and what we will get is a huge reduction in available credit, especially to people who have limited downpayments or any other weakness in their personal balance sheets. And that is fine. They should have reduced access to credit.

This will make prices fall further, no question about it. It will be a long road home.

The exact same thing happened in 1990-92. People walked away from underwater homes on neg am ARMs. Property values plunged. Banks were more conservative for awhile but in recent times, the massive securitization made them lose all caution. The scope and scale of this one is much larger than the 90s. The idiots.

I also hope that the younger generation will learn something from this and that will include the concepts of thrift and deferred gratification. I live here in CA and though I have been here a while I still cannot fathom the absurd materialism, so much of it on borrowed money. I have seen plenty of foolish people tell me about the pool they were going to build, the Mercedes, etc. Those guys all got blown out of their overpriced lifestyle.

I have some friends here who are not like that. They have tons of money, you would never know it, they don't borrow and they don't show off. But most of them moved here from other states. Sigh.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:43:17 AM
Author: crown1



i was raised with the survival of the fittest theory. i still agree with it. i am for personal responsibility and looking out for oneself but not at the expense of others. that is not taking care of oneself it is taking advantage of others. the bank is not the only one left holding the bag as you so correctly stated above.

i take hard times as a challenge to use the skills i have to take care of myself and my family. pp has been known for her no nonsense advice to others and i would have thought she might have come up with a plan for a more positive outcome.

my thought is she was not using her business acumen when she entered into the contract. the 40 year loan with the small down payment says it for me. anybody who did not see this correction coming did not want to. dancing fire has been predicting this as long as i have read this forum.

Well, that''s just it crown, people see things they way the want to. Me, as a renter believes that the market is going to continue tanking EVEN in nicer areas. Buy a house and *poof* all of the sudden, you live in a crash proof area and you really can''t imagine home prices will sink much lower. Denial. That''s why we see home prices still listed the way they are and just SITTING on the market.

I do agree that with PP as savvy as she normally seems to be, it''s hard to see how she could not have seen this coming. Blogs have been predicting it since 2005, and saying it was going to crash in a BIG way, with condos tanking first. I knew it in 2005 when my friends were all telling me to buy a home. And I''m not smart. I just research a lot when I''m about to make a big purchase.

And crown, hate to say it, but PP was smart about the loan given her current situation...if she went in thinking she''d run if it was going to tank, she made the right business decision. Not much going in and lower monthly payments.

 

[crown1]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:19:04 AM
Author: purrfectpear
I can hear it. Sorry but it is about me. I am not going to throw several hundred thousand dollars down the rabbit hole to maintain my popularity at the club house. I don''t have that need. You''re right, you have me pegged. I am all about taking care of myself.


I''m not trying to convince anyone my decision is correct for them. It''s correct for me. I didn''t expect accolades or encouragement. I''m not that silly. I''m just a very open person, entirely comfortable with myself, willing to share some thoughts on why some people are OK with returning a home held in collateral.

you were within your legal right to do as you did and to come here and tell it. the problem i have is that after letting us know you think you outsmarted the system you want to tell us how much you will have in the bank and what you will do in the future. i hope you don''t have to eat those words. that is not a smart comment. i sincerely hope this mess gets straightened out.

i for one am not sure you will have said cash in the bank if a boatload of other people decide to abandon ship and let someone else take it to shore.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:54:11 AM
Author: crown1

Date: 2/27/2009 2:19:04 AM
Author: purrfectpear
I can hear it. Sorry but it is about me. I am not going to throw several hundred thousand dollars down the rabbit hole to maintain my popularity at the club house. I don''t have that need. You''re right, you have me pegged. I am all about taking care of myself.


I''m not trying to convince anyone my decision is correct for them. It''s correct for me. I didn''t expect accolades or encouragement. I''m not that silly. I''m just a very open person, entirely comfortable with myself, willing to share some thoughts on why some people are OK with returning a home held in collateral.

you were within your legal right to do as you did and to come here and tell it. the problem i have is that after letting us know you think you outsmarted the system you want to tell us how much you will have in the bank and what you will do in the future. i hope you don''t have to eat those words. that is not a smart comment. i sincerely hope this mess gets straightened out.

i for one am not sure you will have said cash in the bank if a boatload of other people decide to abandon ship and let someone else take it to shore.

I am not defending PP because this kind of stuff just sh*ts me. But I think she told us she was going to have money in the bank and buy a house in 10 years with cash because that was all a factor in whether she should walk or not. *If* she were able to save the mortgage money every month, then she would be in better shape by walking because she could buy a house again and not need the credit score to be high. She is sharing her rationale.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:50:45 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 2/27/2009 2:43:17 AM
Author: crown1



i was raised with the survival of the fittest theory. i still agree with it. i am for personal responsibility and looking out for oneself but not at the expense of others. that is not taking care of oneself it is taking advantage of others. the bank is not the only one left holding the bag as you so correctly stated above.

i take hard times as a challenge to use the skills i have to take care of myself and my family. pp has been known for her no nonsense advice to others and i would have thought she might have come up with a plan for a more positive outcome.

my thought is she was not using her business acumen when she entered into the contract. the 40 year loan with the small down payment says it for me. anybody who did not see this correction coming did not want to. dancing fire has been predicting this as long as i have read this forum.

Well, that''s just it crown, people see things they way the want to. Me, as a renter believes that the market is going to continue tanking EVEN in nicer areas. Buy a house and *poof* all of the sudden, you live in a crash proof area and you really can''t imagine home prices will sink much lower. Denial. That''s why we see home prices still listed the way they are and just SITTING on the market.

them people are dreamers.

 

[crown1]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:50:45 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 2/27/2009 2:43:17 AM

Author: crown1




i was raised with the survival of the fittest theory. i still agree with it. i am for personal responsibility and looking out for oneself but not at the expense of others. that is not taking care of oneself it is taking advantage of others. the bank is not the only one left holding the bag as you so correctly stated above.


i take hard times as a challenge to use the skills i have to take care of myself and my family. pp has been known for her no nonsense advice to others and i would have thought she might have come up with a plan for a more positive outcome.


my thought is she was not using her business acumen when she entered into the contract. the 40 year loan with the small down payment says it for me. anybody who did not see this correction coming did not want to. dancing fire has been predicting this as long as i have read this forum.

Well, that''s just it crown, people see things they way the want to. Me, as a renter believes that the market is going to continue tanking EVEN in nicer areas. Buy a house and *poof* all of the sudden, you live in a crash proof area and you really can''t imagine home prices will sink much lower. Denial. That''s why we see home prices still listed the way they are and just SITTING on the market.


I do agree that with PP as savvy as she normally seems to be, it''s hard to see how she could not have seen this coming. Blogs have been predicting it since 2005, and saying it was going to crash in a BIG way, with condos tanking first. I knew it in 2005 when my friends were all telling me to buy a home. And I''m not smart. I just research a lot when I''m about to make a big purchase.


And crown, hate to say it, but PP was smart about the loan given her current situation...if she went in thinking she''d run if it was going to tank, she made the right business decision. Not much going in and lower monthly payments.

i do understand that the small down and the smaller payments were to her advantage in this situation. i was looking at this as i would, not the easiest way to get out but how to best pay the thing off before i was 80. i should have realized not everyone has those goals.

but the whole thing is moot since she has done what she had the right to do. i have been this vocal because many may be reading and i would hate for us to start finding this good business practice.

 

[purrfectpear]

Well actually Crown, other than this major misstep I''m pretty conservative financially. I keep 12 months salary in liquid savings at all times. No one is unemployable for an entire year. Not if they are willing to work...not necessarily at the same salary they once had, but a job, ya know? Cross fingers I don''t get laid off, but between savings and unemployment I''m good to go for aproximately 2 years without any sort of job. I may have been a complete boob about the LA RE market, but I do plan for emergencies. I''ve been laid off before and the last time I took a 40% cut in salary. I''m not too proud to take a temp reduction to stay afloat.

I thought I did research the RE market. For every prediction about a crash, there were posts that defined crash as stagnation. I''m a frequent poster on Fatwallet and there were a few peeps who said things would stop the crazy appreciation. I listened and thought that made sense. No one said homes would be underwater more than 100%. No one said anything about 50% either

Honestly I would have listened. I didn''t buy the condo with the idea to flip or reap massive appreciation. I bought it to live in. I planned to be here until I retired (I know the 40 yr. loan sounds crazy but I knew my pension, SS and savings would cover the payment even if I didn''t refi). I didn''t plan to sell, much less walk away. I had a 800 FICO for years. This was my only screw up and yep, I was a blind fool. I thought I asked all the right questions. I knew I was buying high and might lose a little ground for a year or two. In the midwest (where I''ve bought and sold 3 homes) this would NOT have happened. I just spent last year on an assignment in Kansas. RE has dropped in Wichita at most 15%. I don''t even think it''s dropped that much, since it never really appreciates either. It''s been stagnant for the last 10 years. That was my only experience. I was prepared for a small loss because I thought of my home as a place to live, not an investment.

I regret being part of the problem. I''m just too pragmatic to throw that much money away.

 

[crown1]

Date: 2/27/2009 3:03:32 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 2/27/2009 2:54:11 AM

Author: crown1

Date: 2/27/2009 2:19:04 AM

Author: purrfectpear

I can hear it. Sorry but it is about me. I am not going to throw several hundred thousand dollars down the rabbit hole to maintain my popularity at the club house. I don''t have that need. You''re right, you have me pegged. I am all about taking care of myself.



I''m not trying to convince anyone my decision is correct for them. It''s correct for me. I didn''t expect accolades or encouragement. I''m not that silly. I''m just a very open person, entirely comfortable with myself, willing to share some thoughts on why some people are OK with returning a home held in collateral.

you were within your legal right to do as you did and to come here and tell it. the problem i have is that after letting us know you think you outsmarted the system you want to tell us how much you will have in the bank and what you will do in the future. i hope you don''t have to eat those words. that is not a smart comment. i sincerely hope this mess gets straightened out.


i for one am not sure you will have said cash in the bank if a boatload of other people decide to abandon ship and let someone else take it to shore.

I am not defending PP because this kind of stuff just sh*ts me. But I think she told us she was going to have money in the bank and buy a house in 10 years with cash because that was all a factor in whether she should walk or not. *If* she were able to save the mortgage money every month, then she would be in better shape by walking because she could buy a house again and not need the credit score to be high. She is sharing her rationale.

oh, i understood her rationale. i think she was straight forward with it. i just don''t agree.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 2/27/2009 3:19:59 AM
Author: purrfectpear
Well actually Crown, other than this major misstep I''m pretty conservative financially. I keep 12 months salary in liquid savings at all times. No one is unemployable for an entire year. Not if they are willing to work...not necessarily at the same salary they once had, but a job, ya know? Cross fingers I don''t get laid off, but between savings and unemployment I''m good to go for aproximately 2 years without any sort of job. I may have been a complete boob about the LA RE market, but I do plan for emergencies. I''ve been laid off before and the last time I took a 40% cut in salary. I''m not too proud to take a temp reduction to stay afloat.

I thought I did research the RE market. For every prediction about a crash, there were posts that defined crash as stagnation. I''m a frequent poster on Fatwallet and there were a few peeps who said things would stop the crazy appreciation. I listened and thought that made sense. No one said homes would be underwater more than 100%. No one said anything about 50% either

Honestly I would have listened. I didn''t buy the condo with the idea to flip or reap massive appreciation. I bought it to live in. I planned to be here until I retired (I know the 40 yr. loan sounds crazy but I knew my pension, SS and savings would cover the payment even if I didn''t refi). I didn''t plan to sell, much less walk away. I had a 800 FICO for years. This was my only screw up and yep, I was a blind fool. I thought I asked all the right questions. I knew I was buying high and might lose a little ground for a year or two. In the midwest (where I''ve bought and sold 3 homes) this would NOT have happened. I just spent last year on an assignment in Kansas. RE has dropped in Wichita at most 15%. I don''t even think it''s dropped that much, since it never really appreciates either. It''s been stagnant for the last 10 years. That was my only experience. I was prepared for a small loss because I thought of my home as a place to live, not an investment.

I regret being part of the problem. I''m just too pragmatic to throw that much money away.

I do appreciate your honesty PP, if only because I find it fascinating and am thinking of buying a home in the next year or two - something to think about. Your dilemma could have easily been mine.

 

[cara]

Just to be clear, I wasn''t posting to condemn PP for her actions. But she did say that she didn''t see how others were negatively affected by her actions, which was what my post was addressing.

I''m not sure that she is required morally to keep paying her mortgage just to keep the housing market from getting one more cheap house on the block, or to spare her lenders from their stupidity. She lives in a state which gives her the choice of paying her mortgage or turning in the title. Her lenders were supposed to act more conservatively than lenders in other states to cover their butt, because they were operating in a legal environment that does not allow them to pursue PP for the balance of the loan beyond the property itself. Drunk on the heady housing bubble, they clearly did not act conservatively enough for the legal environment and real estate market they were operating in. The contract she entered into puts a certain risk on the lender, and I don''t think that she is required to assume that risk and keep paying her loan just to be a good person. In contrast, she would be required to keep paying a car loan or a loan on a 5 ct diamond, even if they depreciated significantly, because the law would usually allow the lender to pursue her for the remaining debt beyond the collateral.

So, while PP is entitled to bail, that doesn''t mean that her exercising her contractual option and walking away woln''t negatively affect others. Combined with the 1000s of others walking way, or being forced out of other homes cause they signed up for stupider loans, the net effect is not for the common good.

I guess I view it a bit like getting in line to withdraw money during a bank run, pre-FDIC. Is one morally obligated to keep one''s money in the back for the greater good, while everyone else is withdrawing? Sure, taking your money out increases the potential for the back to sieze up, but are you personally obligated to assume the risk of being wiped out just for the greater good of not increasing the pressure on the bank during a run? (Makes the FDIC seem like a brilliant idea.)

 

[tradergirl]

Regardless of one's personal opinion as to PP's "business decision," it is precisely that sort of behavior that is giving the Rick Santellis of the world incredible purchase on the issue in the minds of many Americans. This is why the House had to delay the vote yesterday on the so called "housing bill."

I also saw this coming a long time ago, as early as 1998. As in all things, timing is everything.

 

[steph72276]

I think PP''s situation out in California is a lot different from those in other parts of the country. I live in Florida (another foreclosure hotspot), and bought our house exactly a year ago and it has dropped by about $50k, so basically our downpayment down the drain if we sold. 50k is a big loss to swallow, but I believe the market will recover and I will be able to at least get some of that back in a few years...however, if I was underwater by $200k and didn''t see a way that it would ever come back to that level, I can''t say I wouldn''t have done the same thing. I''m just glad I wasn''t in that position to have to make the choice, but I do see where she is coming from that she was just throwing money away every month on a depreciating asset that would probably never get back up to a break-even point.

 

[Dancing Fire]

in this case PP couldn''t lose...
with little or no money down,if the house value goes up in value she gains equity,if the house goes down in value,she walks.

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 2/27/2009 12:34:11 PM
Author: Dancing Fire
in this case PP couldn''t lose...
with little or no money down,if the house value goes up in value she gains equity,if the house goes down in value,she walks.

Well I know that now. When I bought I had no idea that walking away was an option, just as I had no idea that housing could depreciate by more than half. There was no "Plan B" hiding in the back of my mind. See post above where I explain that I thought CA real estate worked just like RE in the rest of the country only more expensive. I thought a bubble burst was a loss of maybe 10 or 15% equity, and then a few years of stagnation.

Be that as it may though, you''re correct DF, I don''t plan to be the big loser in this craptacular thing called California "market value".

 

[TravelingGal]

PP, I''m genuinely curious, and since you say you''re open about this, hopefully I am not overstepping my bounds by asking...

I am assuming you did not get behind in your payments. You just decided at some point not to pay your mortgage anymore and move. When you called the bank, what do they say to someone in your situation?

 

[Beacon]

Yes it would be interesting to know PP. Not that we want to print a blueprint for how to do this, but I am curious as to you procedure.

Did you deliver the deed in lieu of forclosure?

 

[purrfectpear]

I called the lendor''s phone number and was soon speaking to a call center in India. They insisted there was no number the could give me in the states. I was quite honest and told them I wouldn''t be doing any hardship paperwork, loan mods, or anything else. I said that they should proceed with foreclosure as soon as possible and I''d be happy to move out leaving everything broom clean. The phone person was quite perplexed. I don''t think she believed me?

So after not making payments for four months, I get this package in the mail for an unsolicited loan mod. Interest only for 60 months with the arrearage tacked on the loan. I called them back and said thanks, but you need to process your foreclosure. I''m living here rent free. Don''t you want to end this rapidly to cut your losses?

Finally after 6 months I got the first notice of "intent to foreclose". Thirty days from now I should get a notice of pending auction. Thirty days after that I might get a notice to vacate. Things are so backed up in California that all foreclosures are taking anywhere from a speedy 6 months, to some dragging out for 12 months. Lenders are so worried about people trashing the foreclosed property that they routinely PAY you another $2K or more to leave things in decent shape. No, I''m not one of the people accepting "cash for keys". That really would be adding insult to injury. I offered to help the lendor speed things up by signing away any "rights" I might have, but was told it doesn''t work that way. In the mean time I just bank the loan amount. I''ll happily move as soon as they say they''re ready to take over. I''m still paying HOA dues as I don''t want the HOA to suffer (if they liened the property it would be secondary to the lendor and they''d never recover the dues). Once the lendor is the owner of record, then they ARE required to pay the HOA from then forward.

That''s one of the reasons that I poo-poo the sob stories on TV of evictions. Dudes, you had a minimum of 6 months of rent free living...you couldn''t save some of it to move?

 

[Harriet]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:45:34 AM
Author: Beacon
I congratulate PP for not being fake and for not trying to make excuses such as: my lender coerced me, I didn''t read the documents, the devil made me do it. We hear a lot of whiners like that and they make me ill. At least she admits her error.

Ditto.

That darn repeal kept me awake last night!

 

[purrfectpear]

Doh, It''s lender not lendor. I can spell

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:47:01 PM
Author: purrfectpear
Doh, It''s lender not lendor. I can spell

Maybe the lender was so dodgy, spelling wouldn''t even matter at that point?

 

[tradergirl]

"So after not making payments for four months, I get this package in the mail for an unsolicited loan mod. Interest only for 60 months with the arrearage tacked on the loan. I called them back and said thanks, but you need to process your foreclosure. I''m living here rent free. Don''t you want to end this rapidly to cut your losses?"

Ha. We called this "jingle mail" on the blog; ie. throw the keys in an envelope and mail back to lender.

 

[purrfectpear]

I would but I''m legally responsible for this place until the foreclosure is recorded, so I don''t want to have it sit vacant. I''m still paying taxes, insurance, and HOA dues. I''ll wait till I get the notice to vacate. I just thought if I waived some rights on paper they could speed it up, but apparently there are state or federal rules they have to follow procedurally.

It does go to show that the people you see on TV crying about how their lenders won''t "work with them" are probably lying. I didn''t seek a mod, I even told them I wasn''t interested in a mod, and they STILL sent me mod paperwork. If I wanted to stay all I had to do was sign it and send it back. I think there are some fibbers crying on TV. Lenders won''t "work" with you if by working you mean a reduction in principal, but they''ll do what they can to lower your interest and reset your loan if you want to avoid a foreclosure.

Obviously people would like to see the lender reappraise at market value and write down the loan. It would be a better option for the lender than ending up with the property, because they''ll end up with market value anyway, but so far no lenders have been willing to do that. I can see their reluctance but what is the difference whether they offer today''s value to the current homeowner, or spend the money on foreclosure procedures, listing, auctioning, and selling at today''s value to a new owner? Seems like it would be cheaper to write down the loans? Who knows, maybe that will be the next move lenders make.

I''m mentally already out of here and looking forward to renting w/o HOA dues, so it''s too late for me anyway.

 

[Mara]

pp said:
"Landlords could care less since I can give them any deposit they ask for. Cash talks."

_____

My girlfriend is a landlord who is in the midst of renting out a condo and she had a lady who has a foreclosure going on apply. When she saw the foreclosure, she said 'she doesn't pay her mortgage, why would she pay my rent, how could I trust her?' .... I would venture to say that a fair amount of landlords would think this way. Their rental is an investment as well, pp might be a bad investment to them based on previous actions, esp if the landlord has more renter options to choose from. Of course there is always the exception.. and money does talk.

It's amazing to me what people are doing in this market. It boggles the mind that people in foreclosures trash the houses before they walk away from them. They are defaulting, and they are pushing salt into the wound? We had a foreclosure in our complex where the guy also took out a HELOC for his broker business so he was something like 100k extra in the hole. He just walked away and let the house go to foreclosure and moved to San Diego. After apparently putting some holes in the walls and chopping up the granite countertops.

So he got to live in the house for 5 years, $100k in his biz, and that was that. Who knows what he is doing, but I was amazed that there are no real repurcussions for him other than a foreclosure on his credit for 7 (10?) years.

 

[zhuzhu]

Another thing to consider for the ruined credit is your employability.
Employers do check your FICO score before hiring, and they will make a judgment against you as a potential employee.

 

[KimberlyH]

Date: 2/27/2009 9:32:11 PM
Author: Mara
It''s amazing to me what people are doing...

Just a big fat ditto.

 

[Beacon]

Most of the professionally run apartment complexes I know about are still taking a pretty firm line on credit and do not want to rent to poor credits unless there is absolutely no other choice. Right now there are increased vacancies as people get room mates, go to live with family or seek other cheaper units. So maybe a person can put enough deposit down and get a rental even with bad credit. But it is not guaranteed.

If I were an individual renting out a condo I would be very tough on credit and especially foreclosure. People who have been through the legal work of foreclosure might be very difficult people, hard to evict, start lawsuits, etc. I would shy away and so far, most pros are too.

 

[purrfectpear]

Not when you could hand them one year's rent up front. Interest on savings is so low that I don't mind letting them hold the money. Plus I've been with my company for 15 years now, previous homeowner with 3 paid mortgages, 37 years of perfect credit history (with this exception) yadda, yadda. I've already talked to several rental companies. Not a problem.

I can see how it could be a problem for someone who might have several late payments to several creditors, younger, new job, lower salary.

There are some areas of CA (Lancaster/Palmdale for example) where 7 out of 10 homes are in foreclosure. Landlords can't afford to search for the needle in the haystack anymore.

Here are some recent stats:
At the county level, foreclosure resales ranged from 46.0 percent of January resales in Orange County to 71.2 percent in Riverside County. In Los Angeles foreclosure resales were 51.9 percent of resales; in San Diego 55 percent; San Bernardino 67.3 percent and in Ventura County 49.1 percent.

 

[DivaDiamond007]

Date: 2/27/2009 2:19:04 AM
Author: purrfectpear
I can hear it. Sorry but it is about me. I am not going to throw several hundred thousand dollars down the rabbit hole to maintain my popularity at the club house. I don''t have that need. You''re right, you have me pegged. I am all about taking care of myself.

I''m not trying to convince anyone my decision is correct for them. It''s correct for me. I didn''t expect accolades or encouragement. I''m not that silly. I''m just a very open person, entirely comfortable with myself, willing to share some thoughts on why some people are OK with returning a home held in collateral.

Purrfectpear - I''d like to thank you for sharing your story here on PS, even though it''s obviously not a popular choice. I support your decision 100% because sometimes you just need to take care of yourself and not worry about what others might think of you. I am sorry that you are going through a rough financial patch.

For those criticizing Purrfecpear, I''d like to know what you''d do in her shoes. It''s easy to pass judgment on someone when you''re not in the same situation, and especially since it seems that many of the posters in this forum are comfortable in their finances. Please remember before passing judgment (on anyone) that not everyone here enjoys that luxury (i.e. ME).

She''s obviously put a lot of thought into her decision and what''s done is done. A foreclosure on her credit report is certainly not good, but it''s also not the worst case scenario either. She''ll take a hit on her score, but the effect will be short term at best.

In my area of the country (Northwest Ohio) I don''t think we''ve seen rock bottom just yet. There will be another wave of foreclosures/bankruptcies when the rates adjust again on the ARMs and if/when the "Big 3" fail. Automotive jobs are huge in this area so there will be many "victims of circumstance" that end up in foreclosure or in my office seeking bankruptcy advice. Also, like I stated in my first post in this thread, the housing prices here are still outpacing income so I think that''s something that will have to change before things start to level out over in my neck of the woods.

I''ve been thinking a lot about what has happened in our country relating to this lending crises and I really think that mortgage lending should become standardized across the board. If you make $X then you qualify for $X. If your credit score is X then your interest rate is X%. If you put X% down then you can qualify for a larger principal amount on the loan, also depending on your income and credit score. That way there''s no confusion as to the terms of the loan on either end. Just an idea.

 

[zhuzhu]

Date: 2/27/2009 11:00:07 PM
Author: DivaDiamond007

Date: 2/27/2009 2:19:04 AM

Author: purrfectpear

I can hear it. Sorry but it is about me. I am not going to throw several hundred thousand dollars down the rabbit hole to maintain my popularity at the club house. I don't have that need. You're right, you have me pegged. I am all about taking care of myself.


I'm not trying to convince anyone my decision is correct for them. It's correct for me. I didn't expect accolades or encouragement. I'm not that silly. I'm just a very open person, entirely comfortable with myself, willing to share some thoughts on why some people are OK with returning a home held in collateral.

Purrfectpear - I'd like to thank you for sharing your story here on PS, even though it's obviously not a popular choice. I support your decision 100% because sometimes you just need to take care of yourself and not worry about what others might think of you. I am sorry that you are going through a rough financial patch.



For those criticizing Purrfecpear, I'd like to know what you'd do in her shoes. It's easy to pass judgment on someone when you're not in the same situation, and especially since it seems that many of the posters in this forum are comfortable in their finances. Please remember before passing judgment (on anyone) that not everyone here enjoys that luxury (i.e. ME).


She's obviously put a lot of thought into her decision and what's done is done. A foreclosure on her credit report is certainly not good, but it's also not the worst case scenario either. She'll take a hit on her score, but the effect will be short term at best.


In my area of the country (Northwest Ohio) I don't think we've seen rock bottom just yet. There will be another wave of foreclosures/bankruptcies when the rates adjust again on the ARMs and if/when the 'Big 3' fail. Automotive jobs are huge in this area so there will be many 'victims of circumstance' that end up in foreclosure or in my office seeking bankruptcy advice. Also, like I stated in my first post in this thread, the housing prices here are still outpacing income so I think that's something that will have to change before things start to level out over in my neck of the woods.


I've been thinking a lot about what has happened in our country relating to this lending crises and I really think that mortgage lending should become standardized across the board. If you make $X then you qualify for $X. If your credit score is X then your interest rate is X%. If you put X% down then you can qualify for a larger principal amount on the loan, also depending on your income and credit score. That way there's no confusion as to the terms of the loan on either end. Just an idea.

PP is not a "victim of circumstance". She CAN afford her mortgage. She chose NOT to because she does not feel like paying more for her home than what her home is currently appraised for. She is not the victim of the economic crisis, but her decision could very well contribute to the continued downward spiral of the economy.

I have plenty of sympathy for people who HAVE TO foreclose because of layoffs and illness, but for those who simply chose to back out from their mortgage commitment because "the situation does not suit them financially", it is not really good enough of an excuse in my book. If she can live well with her decision, good for her; but to ask others who are going to be affected (which is all of us, you included) because of her action not to "judge", is a little ironic.