Lump Sum Payoff on 2nd ???

**troy818** · 03-24-2009, 10:36 AM

Hi All -

Here is my situation and looking for thoughts or someone that has seen this situation.

Own home in the Los Angeles area, bought in 2002, 300K 1st with CW and 105K 2nd with WAMU/Chase. Both loans were prime loans, Stated Verified.

I have now lost my employment in the financial services industry, VP at a bank, and have yet to find even low level employment that I am willing to take.

I am looking to see if Chase might willing to settle the 2nd for pennies on the dollar. The way I see it is if I keep the 1st current they would have to buy the first that is 125K underwater to even start the foreclosure process.

What they end up with is a 175K valued home, that they paid 400K for and that is if the lender on the 1st will sell them the 1st.

I would think at worst they could get a judgment against me or I file BK it and call it a day they get nothing.

Anyone think that they may want to take what they can get and call it a day ?

Regards,

Troy

**ProfessorShays** · 03-24-2009, 09:16 PM

I doubt it.

Daniel

**troy818** · 03-24-2009, 09:27 PM

Just curious why do you think they would not play ?

I could with reasonable ease wipe them out with a 7 or a 13 ( I have an 80+ paydex Inc that can and has bought real property, cars and has Credit cards ) and other than the tax benefit to them why not take what you can.

The property is in a LLC, with no assets beyond the property

Or why not just let them sit in lingering hell behind the 1st that if I choose to keep current.

No analyst is going to say hey hey we have a 100K second lien on a property worth 175K with a 300K 1st we would have to buy to foreclose, in what world does that make a sound business decision ? Is this AIG ?

Or is this how bad banking has become ?

Regards,

Troy

**ProfessorShays** · 03-24-2009, 09:59 PM

In an earlier post I discussed the problem with getting loan servicers to make decisions. That is because in most instances they either don't know what they are doing, do not understand what they can and cannot do under their servicing agreement with the note owner, or the note owner is not interested in doing anything out of the ordinary, simply wants to get paid, and most importantly will do what it takes (which is generally doing nothing) so they don't face immediate recognition of a loss.

What you suggest makes sense from a loan salvage point of view. Unfortunately what makes sense doesn't seem to be working in this environment.

Daniel

**troy818** · 03-24-2009, 10:14 PM

As we go back and forth,

I do know WAMU originated and Chase now owns the note, had a friend inside check that out for me.

I was just thinking if I could get to a loss mitigation VP or Tax VP they may just look at the deal and rather not have the fight.

I was just hoping 10K plus the write off might look better than just a total write off

Regards,

Troy