Even if I stay and sit on the house until it is worth what I paid for it again, the people who couldn't afford to buy the same house before are now buying it and THEY will triple their money. Do you see how the responsible people get fucked in the deal? That doesn't seem wrong to anyone else?

You expect that shit if you dabble in commodities or the stock market, but buying a home is supposed to be a solid investment. I have never heard any different. I feel like a jerk for having a conventional mortgage I can afford. And God knows I would have fucking killed somebody if I had moved into an apartment instead...

Double post.

(08-25-2011, 09:12 PM)Cracker Wrote: Do you mean buying a house is a bad investment? Because I keep hearing people say that AFTER the fact, I just didn't hear that shit BEFORE all this happened. Hindsight is amazing.

Not at all.

Too many of these fuckers used their houses as ATMs and took out seconds.

"Hey! Look at the price of real estate! Might as well cash in and enjoy it while I can. What the fuck? If I get in trouble, I'll sell the place. Real estate NEVER decreases in value!"

Those, dumbfucks. They were greedy little bastards who had to have it all RIGHT NOW! The home wasn't an investment; it was passive income.

And they should pay for the money they received and then walked away from, without looking back.

I saw someone's financial information today. Did you know there are working people who live off a thousand dollars a month? That is unimaginable to me.

I don't know the answers. I get irritated because idiots made this situation, but then I get to feeling badly for people. There isn't a fair or easy answer ~ we are past that point. Almost FUBAR.

People are a pain in the ass. I almost understand why some people are insular and only care about their own situation. It is draining to worry about everybody else...

(08-25-2011, 11:27 PM)Cracker Wrote: Did you know there are working people who live off a thousand dollars a month? That is unimaginable to me.

Obama loves you. You're white. He now regrets marrying 'all black'.

And there are people who make more and don't work . . . thanks to governmental programs.

Let's not forget the people who are willing to work and have been unemployed for over a year.

Then there's the employed folks who decide they want to abandon their homes because NOW they think they paid too much for it and could do better in a bigger and better house, for less money.

"Did you know there are working people who live off a thousand dollars a month?"

Do you really think I associate with that class of people?

Hahahaha!

Let them eat day old doughnuts.

(08-24-2011, 08:51 PM)Cracker Wrote: I can't decide.

A lady at work was telling me she and her husband were going to buy a bigger house and let the bank take the house they have now. Apparently this is how it works: Sell your house on a Lease/Purchase to any old dumbass that will sign, doesn't matter if they can afford the house or not, you just need the paper. Buy a nicer house because the nicer house is now cheaper than the shitty house you live in right now. Let the company reposses your shitty house as soon as the dumbasses stop paying the lease because your credit will clear up in two years and you now have a nicer house for less money.

At first I thought that was the shittiest thing ever. I told the lady that I though it was probably illegal to do that. She explained her reasoning: She and her husband bought their house in good faith over 12 years ago (around 200K). They have made every single payment on time during those years. The house around the corner just sold for 50K. Why should she pay all that money for the house that she can never sell just because the rest of the country didn't pay their mortgage?

Now I'm torn. I don't blame her. Why should she pay four times the amount for a house because some other piece of shit didn't pay their mortgage?

What do you think? Shitty or smart?

Not gonna be arsed reading all the previous posts, so what I say may have already been said.


As long as she's got kick-ass credit, and a great income..what she's doing shouldnt be a problem. The future lender will obviously look at their income, and make sure they can afford 2 properties (she'll obviously be able to claim the lease/purchase agreement as income). Where I think she's fucking up, is to not be scrupulous as to whom she'll be leasing her house to. Why not be picky (and find a gainfully employed individual, perhaps with a family to support), and let that person make your house payment for you? For that matter, why not try and just rent the existing property?

Her plan will fuck her credit for 10 years...been there, done that...after my divorce. I think she'd be smarter renting that sucker out for what her house payment is (to a responsible renter), and let them build up the equity into her property.

I can't speak for all of us, but I'm pretty sure that the majority of us that own homes have all seen a big decline in property values (albeit, mine decline is nowhere near as bad a drop from 200k to 50k). For me, it's not the price of the home that has declined so much..but the actual value of the lot (according to my tax assessment). I believe my shit has dropped around 18k over the last 2-3 years. Of course, one can't base a true value of a home on a tax assessment..but that is something folks look at when purchasing a home.

If the bitch thinks her credit will clear up in 2 years after a foreclosure...she's fucking stupid.

Right now, at least in my market...it's an owners market for those that rent..as the banks have become very stingy to those they will give loans to.

I don't think what your friend is trying to do is "shitty" per se...but just plain stupid. She's gonna lose 12 years of equity.

(08-26-2011, 04:19 PM)thekid65 Wrote: I don't think what your friend is trying to do is "shitty" per se...but just plain stupid. She's gonna lose 12 years of equity.

I don't think they have any equity if their house has lost at least half of its value. She said it's throwing good money after bad.

I think if you rent it out you have to do repairs but if you lease, you aren't responsible. Not sure.

(08-26-2011, 04:19 PM)thekid65 Wrote: If the bitch thinks her credit will clear up in 2 years after a foreclosure...she's fucking stupid.

Nope. Hard to believe . . . isn't it?

Bankruptcy? 1 ¹⁄₂ to 3 years in most cases, these days. File a petition and it's basically 'rubber stamped'. Approved credit card offers within a month.

I view these people as having no integrity and lacking personal responsibility. They were living on the edge when they purchased or they failed to modify their lifestyle when times got tough.

Then they play 'victim'. Nothing more than white trash with a hint of equity. If I was an employer, I'd NEVER hire them.

It's the lack of personal responsibility thing, that gets me.

Nothing would ever be their fault.

True, if you rent to someone, you're typically responsible for general breakdowns...but general maintenance would/should be up to the renter (at least that's how it worked in the contract for the house I last rented). It was pretty much a "you break it, you fix it" type deal...and we were responsible for general maintenance of the property. An owner can draw up any type of contract he/she so pleases.

Sure, equity in the type of loss you are describing (3/4 value) may not be much now...but one has to assume, with a typical 30 year loan...that in the long run the property values will rebound. And if by chance they only have a 15 year loan, they'd be fucking fools to bail with only 3 years left.

Edit: I'm defo no genius when it comes to shit like this, but I am an expert when it comes to having your credit fucked for a lot more than 2 years if your property is foreclosed on.

(08-26-2011, 04:45 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Nope. Hard to believe . . . isn't it?

Bankruptcy? 1 ¹⁄₂ to 3 years in most cases, these days. File a petition and it's basically 'rubber stamped'. Approved credit card offers within a month.

I view these people as having no integrity and lacking personal responsibility. They were living on the edge when they purchased or they failed to modify their lifestyle when times got tough.

Then they play 'victim'. Nothing more than white trash with a hint of equity. If I was an employer, I'd NEVER hire them.

It's the lack of personal responsibility thing, that gets me.

Nothing would ever be their fault.

I don't think it's that they are irresponsible, I just think they decided to upgrade while all the white trash and hoodrats were buying in her neighborhood at hurricane sale prices.

They can afford the house they have now but they want a BETTER house. I honestly see their point. Why shouldn't they benefit if they have been responsible for 12 years? Why continue paying quadruple for a house that has lost value. I don't see the housing crisis as their fault.

(08-26-2011, 04:49 PM)thekid65 Wrote: And if by chance they only have a 15 year loan, they'd be fucking fools to bail with only 3 years left.

Did you notice . . . nowhere in the story was there any hint of trying to negotiate or modify the loan?

For that matter, no mention of the type of loan.

Odd.

(08-26-2011, 04:49 PM)thekid65 Wrote: Sure, equity in the type of loss you are describing (3/4 value) may not be much now...but one has to assume, with a typical 30 year loan...that in the long run the property values will rebound. And if by chance they only have a 15 year loan, they'd be fucking fools to bail with only 3 years left.

Edit: I'm defo no genius when it comes to shit like this, but I am an expert when it comes to having your credit fucked for a lot more than 2 years if your property is foreclosed on.

NINJA loans can be for 35 or 40 years.

I'm not hating the lady for upgrading. Let her and her husband have their slice of the American Dream at bargain basement prices.

(08-26-2011, 04:52 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(08-26-2011, 04:49 PM)thekid65 Wrote: And if by chance they only have a 15 year loan, they'd be fucking fools to bail with only 3 years left.

Did you notice . . . nowhere in the story was there any hint of trying to negotiate or modify the loan?

For that matter, no mention of the type of loan.

Odd.

Why would they modify? They want to get a bigger, nicer house for half of what they still owe on the house they have now. THEY didn't lose their house, a bunch of their neighbors did. Now the neighborhood is half ghetto.

What part irritates you? They are trading up. They just aren't too concerned if whomever they lease to keeps up the payments.

(08-26-2011, 04:50 PM)Cracker Wrote: They can afford the house they have now but they want a BETTER house. I honestly see their point.

Let's cut the bullshit.

They want a better house. Period. Like they did twelve years ago.

Justify all you want. Spin tales of woe. Blame the 'housing bubble'.

They're pissed and they want more. They signed a contract and now they don't want to honor the terms.

It's really quite simple and telling of their character.

(08-26-2011, 04:39 PM)Cracker Wrote:

(08-26-2011, 04:19 PM)thekid65 Wrote: I don't think what your friend is trying to do is "shitty" per se...but just plain stupid. She's gonna lose 12 years of equity.

I don't think they have any equity if their house has lost at least half of its value. She said it's throwing good money after bad.
I think if you rent it out you have to do repairs but if you lease, you aren't responsible. Not sure.

My word for what your friend is doing is "sleazy." If somebody I knew was doing that, I would just kind of distance myself from the friendship. Is it "smart", maybe from a pure financial perspective, but sleazy just the same. Like a lawyer...

Which brings me to legal advice, I hope your co-worker/friend is being advised by somebody familiar with the legal ramifications of their idea.

As for loosing 12 years of equity. It is an unfortunate fact that many homes have lost equity in the US, so the concept of having equity in a house is now just a fallacy.

Cracker, I think you are right about the difference between a rental agreement and a lease. If you rent your property, you are required to make repairs. In a lease, the "leaseholder" is responsible for repairs and can also make certain renovations.

edit to add: Fuck you grammar police...

It's kinda like if your wife gets really, really fat. You divorce before the big-time-alimony kicks in and get a better model for half the price because she doesn't eat nearly as much...

(08-26-2011, 04:56 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(08-26-2011, 04:50 PM)Cracker Wrote: They can afford the house they have now but they want a BETTER house. I honestly see their point.

Let's cut the bullshit.

They want a better house. Period. Like they did twelve years ago.

Justify all you want. Spin tales of woe. Blame the 'housing bubble'.

They're pissed and they want more. They signed a contract and now they don't want to honor the terms.

It's really quite simple and telling of their character.

I have to disagree. If the terms would have mentioned that the industry was making shit loans and the house would be losing ³⁄₄ of it's value in less than 15 years, I'm sure they wouldn't have signed it.

The housing bubble IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE PEOPLE PAYING THEIR MORTGAGE ON TIME. It isn't. Why should the fuckers get the benefit and fuck the people who do what they are supposed to do.

If they could sell their house for even what they paid, no profit, I'm sure they would. BUT THEY CAN'T because of no fault of their own.

I think it's stupid to keep paying on a house that you will be lucky to break even on in ten or twenty years when you could make a shitload on another house.

What would you advise a client? Keep paying on a house and throwing money away when you could be building equity?

(08-26-2011, 04:56 PM)BlueTiki Wrote:

(08-26-2011, 04:50 PM)Cracker Wrote: They can afford the house they have now but they want a BETTER house. I honestly see their point.

Let's cut the bullshit.

They want a better house. Period. Like they did twelve years ago.

Justify all you want. Spin tales of woe. Blame the 'housing bubble'.

They're pissed and they want more. They signed a contract and now they don't want to honor the terms.

It's really quite simple and telling of their character.

I have to disagree. If the terms would have mentioned that the industry was making shit loans and the house would be losing ³⁄₄ of its value in less than 15 years, I'm sure they wouldn't have signed it.

The housing bubble IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE PEOPLE PAYING THEIR MORTGAGE ON TIME. It isn't. Why should the fuckers get the benefit and fuck the people who do what they are supposed to do.

If they could sell their house for even what they paid, no profit, I'm sure they would. BUT THEY CAN'T because of no fault of their own.

I think it's stupid to keep paying on a house that you will be lucky to break even on in ten or twenty years when you could make a shitload on another house.

What would you advise a client? Keep paying on a house and throwing money away when you could be building equity?

It's like the old white people that live next door to a housing project. Move already. White flight and all that. It is a Georgia tradition.

(08-26-2011, 04:45 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Nope. Hard to believe . . . isn't it?

Bankruptcy? 1 ¹⁄₂ to 3 years in most cases, these days. File a petition and it's basically 'rubber stamped'. Approved credit card offers within a month.

I view these people as having no integrity and lacking personal responsibility. They were living on the edge when they purchased or they failed to modify their lifestyle when times got tough.

Then they play 'victim'. Nothing more than white trash with a hint of equity. If I was an employer, I'd NEVER hire them.

It's the lack of personal responsibility thing, that gets me.

Nothing would ever be their fault.

Sorry, I didnt see this post prior to my last response. From what I understand with the new laws in place, filing bankruptcy (which is what I did after my divorce, and let the bank foreclose on my house) is nowhere near as easy as it used to be. Most are forced into a chapter 7, as opposed to a 13.

Agreed though...that we've become a "nothing is their fault" society. It's sickening...there's an excuse for everything..and Uncle Sam (read Obama) will be there to help you out.

What's your expertise in determining credit worthiness? I simply can't believe that one is deemed "credit worthy" (except by the CC companies that charge you 30% interest) less than 3 years after a foreclosure.

(08-26-2011, 04:59 PM)Cracker Wrote: It's kinda like if your wife gets really, really fat. You divorce before the big-time-alimony kicks in and get a better model for half the price because she doesn't eat nearly as much...

This is why people make bad financial decisions . . . fucked-up logic.

You divorce her while she is thin and will possibly be snatched-up by another, so you won't be required to pay alimony.

If you wait till she's fat and dump her, it shows your true character and again, not willing to honor a 'contract'.