Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

"Walking Away"

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

"Walking Away"

Unread postby mattduke » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 18:27:37

Ok, dumb question time.

Will somebody please explain the concept of "walking away" from a mortgaged home to me? Is there a standard clause in home loans that allows you to choose not to repay your obligation and forfeit the house? How is it possible that after borrowing money, you are not obligated to repay it? The entire internet seems to take "walking away" as an option for upside down borrowers. I guess I always thought that the purpose of collateral was that, in the event you were slow in your payments, the bank could recover some property. But how does that let you off the hook for owing the money in the case where the collateral is not worth the debt? Is there a law that says you are not obligated to repay the money you have borrowed?
User avatar
mattduke
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri 28 Oct 2005, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby Twilight » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 18:56:32

It is a good question, I would like some clarification too. I read different kinds of stories, in some places people are chased for the full loan amount, in other places the banks are stuck with the property and apparently cannot take it further. But I do not know how true this is. It is not true of the UK; in the event of a sale or default with negative equity you are "encouraged" to work it out with the bank, which depending on your circumstances may or may not be understanding. They have to take individual circumstances into account rather than applying a blanket policy though, otherwise the regulators get angry. The bank may be prepared to write off the difference, but it can chase you too. It is at their discretion really, and comes down to whether it is worth it or not. If you are capable of making the payments with ease, they could try to go for the lot, which could end in bankruptcy unless you have a lot of stuff to seize.
Twilight
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Fri 02 Mar 2007, 04:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby mos6507 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:01:39

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mattduke', '
')Will somebody please explain the concept of "walking away" from a mortgaged home to me?


I think walking away just means you stop paying the mortgage, abandon the property, and the house just goes into foreclosure by default and your credit rating goes into the toilet.
mos6507
 

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby jlw61 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:18:02

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', '.').. in some places people are chased for the full loan amount, in other places the banks are stuck with the property and apparently cannot take it further.


One of the interesting things about the United States is that each state has different lending laws beyond the federal. In some cases it could be possible to simply "walk away" to another state making it difficult to be chased due to different laws.

In some states, if the house value falls below the mortgage value, they can foreclose on the loan. In others such tom-foolery is not allowed.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', 'T')he bank may be prepared to write off the difference, but it can chase you too. It is at their discretion really, and comes down to whether it is worth it or not.


And this is the crux of it. If I was suckered into a sub-prime loan, that typically means I have very little money beyond my last paycheck and probably way more debt than just the house. Credit companies would probably own the other part of my soul.

So lets say I live in California, lose my home because they foreclosed on me simply because my house value fell below what I owed (yet I never missed a payment). Perhaps then I'll move to Virginia (or Canada) or wherever the heck I want because I don't care any more and I can try to find work elsewhere. In the mean time have fun following me to recover your money from any judgement.

Now the bad news... since our beloved leader was elected, it is easier (though not a cake walk by any means) to track people to other states via information that is now legally shared between states and the feds. 15 years ago it was often times impossible to track dead-beats once they cross the state line unless you had good information on where they went.

Dead-beats.... sorry, that word is too harsh for the foolish borowers sucked into this debt trap. IMHO any bank that participated in the sub-prime mess has no business being in business and the people who put those loans out there deserve whatever pain we can heap upon them. Here in central Virginia, many banks were too conservative to get involved in the sub-prime scam and the effects of this entire mess tend to be more peripheral for us.

And yes, yes... many of the bankers will feel little pain as the feds simply write more checks to be paid by future generations...

I wonder how the common roman citizen felt as they watched their empire crumble to dust. The fault is ours, the common citizen What's ironic is we have the ability, every four years, to stop it, but not the brains.
Last edited by jlw61 on Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:35:32, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
jlw61
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon 03 Sep 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Sunny Virginia, USA

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby joeltrout » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:20:36

Walking away is fine if you don't have any equity in the house. If you do have equity in the house then you are basically flushing all that money down the drain and ruining your credit at the same time. Trying to sell the house is your best option but in some places, California & Florida, that might not be an option because the market is flooded with vacant houses.

Banks only have to sell the house to cover the rest of your mortgage. Right now they are not looking to make a profit. They want to get rid of houses so they can clear their books. I have seen houses that are worth over $750,000 here in Los Angeles go to auction with beginning bids starting at $100,000 because that is all the bank needed to cover the remaining mortgage the previous homeowner left. Obviously they get bid up by investors but usually are far cheaper than buying the house from a homeowner. I bought my house for $120,000 less than what the previous owner bought it for then foreclosed.

joeltrout
joeltrout
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby joeltrout » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:27:48

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jlw61', 'D')ead-beats.... sorry, that word is too harsh for the foolish borowers sucked into this debt trap. IMHO any bank that participated in the sub-prime mess has no business being in business and the people who put those loans out there deserve whatever pain we can heap upon them.


The people that bought ARMs should have known better unless they were just plain dead-beats and the mortgage companies that offered them DID know better.

If homeowners spent any time researching home buying on the internet or through books then they would have known to stay away from ARMs. I bought my first house early last year(before the subprime mess was MSM) and knew that ARMs were the devil because I did some research.

The problem is everyone wants more than they can afford and what they can afford they don't appreciate. Stop being so greedy America!!!

joeltrout
joeltrout
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby Twilight » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:31:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joeltrout', 'W')alking away is fine if you don't have any equity in the house. If you do have equity in the house then you are basically flushing all that money down the drain and ruining your credit at the same time.

I agree, the thing is the system is split down the middle. Probably half have full ownership or have paid off most of their mortgage, they aren't going anywhere right now unless something really bad happens to their health. But a large part of the other half is going to owe more than their house is worth by the time this is done. That's probably everyone who bought in the last 5 years without putting down a substantial cash deposit. That's a lot of people.
Twilight
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Fri 02 Mar 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby NWMossBack » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:32:42

Another interesting wrinkle is that the IRS will come after you for any difference in what the house sells for in foreclosure, and what you paid for it.

So if you bought a house at the peak of the market for $500k, then walk away when the market value drops to $400k, and the loan is foreclosed and the house sells at auction for $350k, the federal government will consider the $150k to be a "gift" from your mortgage company, and you will owe taxes on it!

I have also read that you may be liable for some legal fees incurred by the mortgage company. You have to read ALL the fine print in your mortgage agreement.
User avatar
NWMossBack
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed 24 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Pacific NW USA

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby joeltrout » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:45:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NWMossBack', 'I') have also read that you may be liable for some legal fees incurred by the mortgage company. You have to read ALL the fine print in your mortgage agreement.


Pretty soon you will need a lawyer with you at closing instead of just your realtor.

The fine print will hurt people but those that used ARMs knew their rate would adjust. I know some people were told you can refinance in a couple of years. That was misguiding but still the homebuyer signed the papers.

If lenders did not tell the homebuyer their mortgage would adjust then that would be grounds for a valid lawsuit but we haven't seen much, if any of that. Right now it is just people that are mad because their house didn't appreciate like they planned and they can't refi their house because it is worth less then their loan amount.

A good helping of common sense would have been benefical to a lot of people. You can stretch yourself now and hope the future will turn out in your favor.

joeltrout
joeltrout
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby jlw61 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:46:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NWMossBack', 'S')o if you bought a house at the peak of the market for $500k, then walk away when the market value drops to $400k, and the loan is foreclosed and the house sells at auction for $350k, the federal government will consider the $150k to be a "gift" from your mortgage company, and you will owe taxes on it!


That can only happen if the loan is written off or forgiven and I believe its not that simple, but the idea is correct. Under the right conditions you could owe taxes for what I like to call the "but you could have made it!" amount.

And yes, the foreclosure fees, fines and taxes are usually added to your debt whle the bank gets to write it all off.
User avatar
jlw61
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon 03 Sep 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Sunny Virginia, USA
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby seahorse2 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:53:39

As was said earlier, "walking away" is not a legal term, its not in the mortgage documents, its a practical solution. It just means the debtor decided to call it quits, quit making payments, and leave. People do that all the time with all kinds of debts like cars, credit cards etc., what has all the bankers dumbfounded is they never thought it would happen to them. The home used to be the castle, and bc of this long held belief, bankers started allowing people to buy houses with "liar loans." Well, surprise surprise that liars don't have any qualms about walking away from a bad investment, and as the banks are finding out in the foreclosure process, those "liars" don't have any personal credit to begin with, no assets, and thus, its not worth pursuing a personal judgment against them.

Many of these banks are only pursuing judgments "in rem" instead of "in personam" meaning, only pursuing a judgment against the property and not against the person and the property. They are doing this bc its simply not worth the extra legal expense to pursue liars that have nothing to begin with. Everything hinged upon this age old American belief that the home is the castle, but that was only true with Americans willing to document their income and put 20% down on a home, putting a stake down so to speak. The banks have no one to blame but themselves.
User avatar
seahorse2
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2042
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby seahorse2 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 19:56:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nother interesting wrinkle is that the IRS will come after you for any difference in what the house sells for in foreclosure, and what you paid for it.


This is only true if the debt is forgiven by the obligee (bank). It is then basically considered a gift of money. If its not forgiven, there is no tax consequence to it.
User avatar
seahorse2
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2042
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby Tyler_JC » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 20:40:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('seahorse2', 'A')s was said earlier, "walking away" is not a legal term, its not in the mortgage documents, its a practical solution. It just means the debtor decided to call it quits, quit making payments, and leave. People do that all the time with all kinds of debts like cars, credit cards etc., what has all the bankers dumbfounded is they never thought it would happen to them. The home used to be the castle, and bc of this long held belief, bankers started allowing people to buy houses with "liar loans." Well, surprise surprise that liars don't have any qualms about walking away from a bad investment, and as the banks are finding out in the foreclosure process, those "liars" don't have any personal credit to begin with, no assets, and thus, its not worth pursuing a personal judgment against them.

Many of these banks are only pursuing judgments "in rem" instead of "in personam" meaning, only pursuing a judgment against the property and not against the person and the property. They are doing this bc its simply not worth the extra legal expense to pursue liars that have nothing to begin with. Everything hinged upon this age old American belief that the home is the castle, but that was only true with Americans willing to document their income and put 20% down on a home, putting a stake down so to speak. The banks have no one to blame but themselves.


Walk away if you want, but if the home sells for less in foreclosure than the mortgage...

You owe the difference and it could be huge.

Do you really want to be homeless and tens of thousands of dollars in debt?

Talking to your creditors is better than defaulting and running away.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby joeltrout » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:04:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'D')o you really want to be homeless and tens of thousands of dollars in debt?

Talking to your creditors is better than defaulting and running away.


Good advice. If you do run don't expect to qualify for a loan for several years. You can run but your credit score doesn't.

For all those people that did run, good luck trying to buy a house ine the next 5 years. Now that lending standards are tightening people who have a good credit score find it hard to borrow without at least 10 or 20% down.

In expensive areas such as SoCal, NYC, Chicago, etc... first-time homebuyers are screwed. Who has $100,000 for a downpayment on a small house/condo in relatively "cheap" areas of major cities.

joeltrout
joeltrout
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby korosten » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:16:58

Unfortunately I know the law very well - because I am part of this mess. No, I do not have an ARM, in fact I have a great mortgage.

But, we are moving away and we haven't been able to sell the house for almost a year! Renting is not an option (too expensive and we are moving out of the country), so what should someone like us do?

I talked to a lawyer, and he said there are many people like us. People who can pay, but want to move, and can't sell their home.

In California, you can walk away without a deficiency if you didn't refinance. Unfortunately we did, and nobody told us that we would lose this protection! So in our case, the house price has tanked well below what we owe the bank. We are still trying to sell, but it looks grim.

So chances are that we will either have to continue to pay our second mortgage for 30 years(!) while not owning this home anymore (what a loss!), or else risk a deficiency judgement.

So of course I wonder if they would track us down abroad as well if we stopped paying. Does anyone know :-)?

Chantal
korosten
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Sat 09 Jun 2007, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby Twilight » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:25:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('korosten', 'S')o of course I wonder if they would track us down abroad as well if we stopped paying. Does anyone know :-)?

I don't know about mortgages, but a friend told me a story about someone they knew defaulting on a loan in protest when they moved to the far east. It wasn't long before they got flagged up as a credit risk over there. Banks talk to each other via credit reference agencies, and some are part of a multinational group to start with.

I think in years to come if enough people flee overseas to make it worthwhile, debt collection agencies will just open up an office in that country. I know someone licking their lips in anticipation at the opportunities that could open up. Might not happen, but you wouldn't want that sort of surprise five years down the line, not in a strange country.
Twilight
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Fri 02 Mar 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby mattduke » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:35:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n most jurisdictions, a lender may foreclose the mortgaged property if certain conditions - principally, non-payment of the mortgage loan - obtain. Subject to local legal requirements, the property may then be sold. Any amounts received from the sale (net of costs) are applied to the original debt. In some jurisdictions, mortgage loans are non-recourse loans: if the funds recouped from sale of the mortgaged property are insufficient to cover the outstanding debt, the lender may not have recourse to the borrower after foreclosure. In other jurisdictions, the borrower remains responsible for any remaining debt.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_loan
User avatar
mattduke
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3591
Joined: Fri 28 Oct 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby Cloud9 » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:48:31

The bank will file a 1099 on the part of the note they forgive. It gives them a tax write off. IRS can go after you. The only thing that stops the process is to file bankruptcy.
User avatar
Cloud9
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2961
Joined: Wed 26 Jul 2006, 03:00:00

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby seahorse » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 21:57:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')alk away if you want, but if the home sells for less in foreclosure than the mortgage...

You owe the difference and it could be huge.

Do you really want to be homeless and tens of thousands of dollars in debt?

Talking to your creditors is better than defaulting and running away.


Tyler, you're not making any sense. If a person can't pay the debt, they have only two options: (1) Bankrutpcy or (2) "walking away" and let them try to collect a worthless paper judgment.

If the debtor files bankruptcy, Chapter 7 usually, all the above are wiped out.

If the debtor chooses to walk away (usually bc they can't even afford the $700 for the attorney to file bankrupty), they walk away and just let the debt holder try to collect - good luck.

The choice then becomes the mortgage holder, or the credit card company, or who ever else has a debt, Chrysler for example, to decide if they want to sue or not. That decision to sue comes down to, is it worth the time and money to try to collect? Usually, no. Lots of bad debt being written off these days. In the case of mortgage companies, they will foreclose against the home because it will always have some value; however, pursuing a personal judgment against the debtor is usually not worth it. The old adage, you can't get blood out of a turnip. So true so true.

I'm telling you from the f---- trenches the mortgage companies, more times than not, are not pursuing personal judgments bc its not worth it. Its not a question of principle, its all about dollars and cents, cutting losses as much as possible. Don't throw good money after bad chasing an uncollectible judgment. By the time a mortgage goes to foreclosure, the mortgage company has already run a credit check on the person and seen its not worth pursuing. Further, to pursue a personal judgment would push the debtor into bankruptcy anyway, and thus would be a waste of time. Last, pursuing a personal judgment means the mortgage company can't use a nonjudicial foreclosure process, meaning it will take a much longer time to get the property back. Further still, when a debtor is sued personally, they get pissed and kick the crap out of the property. In many cases, the mortgage companies are even agreeing to pay small fees to the debtor just to get them to move out ASAP without kicking the crap out of the property.

Sure, it will affect the credit rating of the deadbeat, but by the time the debtor is at a point where they can't pay payments, their credit rating is shot anyway, they don't give a crap. They will rent somewhere, because there is a ton of rentals on the frickin market, usually unsold homes bc the market has tanked.

Now, don't give me any moral argument about the moral obligation to repay one's debts, those morals went right out the window with the morality of the banks issuing "liar loans" and issuing credit cards to frickin college students without jobs blah blah blah.

There is no morality out there anymore, only greed and everyone doing what's in their own best interest. Everyone is paying for that now.
Last edited by seahorse on Tue 22 Jan 2008, 22:09:16, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
seahorse
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 2275
Joined: Fri 15 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Arkansas
Top

Re: "Walking Away"

Unread postby cube » Tue 22 Jan 2008, 22:06:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('korosten', '.')...
So of course I wonder if they would track us down abroad as well if we stopped paying. Does anyone know :-)?

Chantal
That's a really good question. There is one way to find out for sure if you REALLY want to know. :P
Image
-------------------------
add on: All joking aside. I'm not an expert but I honestly believe it is best to work within the legal system. The law is the law. "Walking away" is illegal and therefore would technically make you a fugitive. Furthermore the USA has legal agreements with just about every country on this planet save for (Iran and North Korea) therefore there really is very few places to hide on this planet if you break the law in the USA.
Last edited by cube on Tue 22 Jan 2008, 22:28:49, edited 1 time in total.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Next

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests

cron