Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually, I hadn't thought ahead to future markets in order to make a profit. My intentions are:
1. to help provide a possible solution for lenders (believe it or not) that will help mitigate THEIR losses, stemming foreclosures, re-establishing stable market values, and improving liquidity in the housing market, even though they have been the primary cause of this horrible crisis.
2. If I can benefit, cool. If I don't cool, anyhow. I can afford my house and I am comfortable. This is not about me, it is about solving a problem.
I think that those of you making accusations need to sit back and reflect why you are angry and making unwarranted assumptions. Is there something in your housing situation that you are upset about? Do you think that banks are the victims here?
Frankly, I am surprised that someone hasn't started a class action lawsuit against them. We hire lawyers because they are professionals and know the law. We rely on them to give us the best legal advice. When they do something that ends up harming us as a result of their own self interest, this is called malpractice. When doctors do something that is negligent and ends up harming us, that is called malpractice. But when lending institutions virtually destroy an economy of an entire country/world for their own greed, where is their malpractice??!! Banks are not the victims, they have been the perpetrators, however, the economic health of the country is more important at the moment and something has to be done to stop the direction things are going in. Regardless of what you think my intentions are, the bottom line is that my plan could help turn it around by people who can help, mainly creditworthy upside-down homeowners (who are upside-down by the hand of unscrupulous banking practices, by the way!).
I think your indignity is misplaced. Everyone is angry right now, but I think it needs to be directed where it belongs rather than sniping at people who you don't even know and assume the worst about them. I say what I say, and I mean what I mean. No ulterior motives here. I wonder why one would even think there were. Would it be different if I was independently wealthy, owned my home free and clear, and not upside-down on my loan, but came up with this same idea? Think about that. Take me out of the equation and just look at it objectively.
actually, i hadn't thought ahead to future markets in order to make a profit. My intentions are:
1. To help provide a possible solution for lenders (believe it or not) that will help mitigate their losses, stemming foreclosures, re-establishing stable market values, and improving liquidity in the housing market, even though they have been the primary cause of this horrible crisis. I don't disagree at all that banks are mostly responsible for the current mess thanks to their ill-advised and frankly irresponsible lending policies. However, I think the banks will be making far more money long term from the responsible A+ borrower you describe keeping a $375k mortgage than by offering same borrower a $25k mortgage and by taking on from that borrower an open-ended $25k loss!!!! And another property that might not sell.
2. If i can benefit, cool. If i don't cool, anyhow. I can afford my house and i am comfortable. This is not about me, it is about solving a problem.
I think that those of you making accusations need to sit back and reflect why you are angry and making unwarranted assumptions. Is there something in your housing situation that you are upset about? Do you think that banks are the victims here? Believe me there's nothing about my housing situation that upsets me I own a gorgeous house in the States (currently on a 20% LTV) and which I bought well below market value. I sold in London at the peak of the market. I own rental property outright in the UK that has generated and continues to generate income pretty much since I bought it. And no, I don't feel banks are the victims. The real victims are the people that are unable to keep up their repayments through no fault of their own - the people who didn't overstretch themselves but unwittingly bought at a bad time and were made unemployed and could not find another job.
frankly, i am surprised that someone hasn't started a class action lawsuit against them. We hire lawyers because they are professionals and know the law. We rely on them to give us the best legal advice. When they do something that ends up harming us as a result of their own self interest, this is called malpractice. When doctors do something that is negligent and ends up harming us, that is called malpractice. But when lending institutions virtually destroy an economy of an entire country/world for their own greed, where is their malpractice??!! Banks are not the victims, Agreed they have been the perpetrators, however, the economic health of the country is more important at the moment and something has to be done to stop the direction things are going in. Regardless of what you think my intentions are, the bottom line is that my plan could help turn it around by people who can help, mainly creditworthy upside-down homeowners (who are upside-down by the hand of unscrupulous banking practices, by the way!) Or who perhaps were naive enough to think that house prices only went up ???. Or who decided to borrow too much in the first place? Or remortgaged to buy new cars/boats/rv's/etc etc??
i think your indignity is misplaced. I'm simply calling this proposal as I see it everyone is angry right now, but i think it needs to be directed where it belongs rather than sniping at people who you don't even know and assume the worst about them. Nowhere have I said that "the banks are not to blame"I'd say that they are hugely to blame. But what I'm looking at here is your proposed solution. Still i say what i say, and i mean what i mean. Likewise!!! no ulterior motives here. I wonder why one would even think there were. Just looking at your idea objectively, and trying to guess how a bank might look at it. Would it be different if i was independently wealthy, owned my home free and clear, and not upside-down on my loan, but came up with this same idea? In this situation maybe I would not assume the homeowner in your example was trying to palm off a paper loss to someone else think about that. Take me out of the equation and just look at it objectively. I did
Being upside down is not a new phenomina, especially in coastal areas.
Markets took about a full decade to recover from the last local busts in California and the NYC tristate area. For the most part, the majority of homeowners, in this situation, sucked it up and stayed put, depite being unable to refinance because their homes would no longer appraise.
And no doubt about it, staying put, was not convenient for a lot of people but they did so because it was the right thing to do and they valued their credit.
This go around is different and some of those who find themselves in an upside-down situation persist in the belief that someone else should pay for their misfortune.
Sticking it to the bank is sticking it to the people.
Increasing proerty values and trading up is not a constitutional right.
I can appreciate that. I really am not doing this entirely in my own self interest, or maybe a better way to say that is that it is not my primary objective here, it would be a something I might participate in if I located a house I liked better than my own, IF the lending industry were to adopt a program like this. The more important objective is to try and turn this market around before it gets much worse (which is currently predicted).
Well as I said before, maybe I'm missing some crucial factor here - if so please enlighten me
I can't enlighten you because I don't even understand what you are saying, and you are implying something that I am not saying, or thinking, or planning, or have even considered. Again, I say take ME and what you think I might be up to out of the equation.
I can't enlighten you because I don't even understand what you are saying, and you are implying something that I am not saying, or thinking, or planning, or have even considered. Again, I say take ME and what you think I might be up to out of the equation.
I've pointed out what I perceive to be the potential drawbacks/stumbling blocks in the whole hypothetical "trading up" scenario/solution you describe.
If you feel that I've misunderstood the process and that the comments I made were invalid then please feel free to point out where and why you feel I'm off target
The idea itself just seems to me to be something that benefits the homeowner solely and would not hold any long term benefit for the bank -don't get me wrong, I'm the first to agree that the stupid banks were largely to blame for this whole freaking mess in the first place but, whether we see it as fair or not, I just can't see them adopting something like this that, (as I perceive it) would probably lose them money in the long term.
I've pointed out what I perceive to be the potential drawbacks/stumbling blocks in the whole hypothetical "trading up" scenario/solution you describe.
If you feel that I've misunderstood the process and that the comments I made were invalid then please feel free to point out where and why you feel I'm off target
The idea itself just seems to me to be something that benefits the homeowner solely and would not hold any long term benefit for the bank -don't get me wrong, I'm the first to agree that the stupid banks were largely to blame for this whole freaking mess in the first place but, whether we see it as fair or not, I just can't see them adopting something like this that, (as I perceive it) would probably lose them money in the long term.
If you haven't read the actual proposal itself and are just going by what has been posted in this forum, I encourage you to go here Resolving the Housing Crisis: A Proposal (http://www.onereallygoodagent.com/proposal.htm - broken link). Perhaps you can better understand it from the actual proposal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I own a gorgeous house in the States (currently on a 20% LTV) and which I bought well below market value. I sold in London at the peak of the market. I own rental property outright in the UK that has generated and continues to generate income pretty much since I bought it. And no, I don't feel banks are the victims. The real victims are the people that are unable to keep up their repayments through no fault of their own - the people who didn't overstretch themselves but unwittingly bought at a bad time and were made unemployed and could not find another job. 
think about that. Take me out of the equation and just look at it objectively. I did 
Ok
