Deed in lieu advice?

[countrywideh8r]

Hello forum,

My house finally has an auction date of December 28th, 2009. I tried calling the people that hold my loan to ask for a deed in lieu (DIL) but they are refusing to work with me.

I have to prove hardship (which I don't have) and had to have had the house on the market for 90 days before they'll even consider it.

This is absolutely insane... I'm offering to give the house back peacefully right now in good condition, with the keys, garage door openers, etc. Would they seriously be willing to take a massive loss by auctioning the house just to prove a point?

Does anyone have any suggestions or know if it's possible to start the DIL process? I just want to be done with this house. I don't want to wait another 2 months so I was hoping they would take it back. I explained my situation and the person just said to wait till the auction date...

[knownick]

Don't waste your breath.

Common sense doesn't apply to these institutions. They have a process to follow and they will not deviate from it. Deed in lieus are a mirage. Nobody gets them.

[homesweethome]

You should just use this time to live rent free, 3 days before the sale date have NACA file papers for a trial mod, that stops the sale. Thats another good 3 to 4 months rent free. Then when your first mod payment is due don't pay it. They will continue the sale within 10 days, then take the cash for keys and have a nice life. Thats what the bank is teaching us to do with all their loopholes, make them work in your favor.

[NewDad]

You know, I'm in a similar (not identical) boat. I've started the process of telling them I'm offering a DIL, not applying for one. My plan is to keep taking it up the ladder of "You know this will save your company money, right?" until I get results.

Remember, having to have a hardship is a bank policy, not a law. Having to be on the market 90 days is also policy, not law. Policy can be changed, but not by the first guy to answer the phone.

Folks keep calling DIL a mirage. I'm not quitting. Somewhere up the chain, someone has a brain in their head and will take the deal.

[two cents]

Originally Posted by NewDad

You know, I'm in a similar (not identical) boat. I've started the process of telling them I'm offering a DIL, not applying for one. My plan is to keep taking it up the ladder of "You know this will save your company money, right?" until I get results.

Remember, having to have a hardship is a bank policy, not a law. Having to be on the market 90 days is also policy, not law. Policy can be changed, but not by the first guy to answer the phone.

Folks keep calling DIL a mirage. I'm not quitting. Somewhere up the chain, someone has a brain in their head and will take the deal.

Good luck finding someone up the chain that will care.

I wonder what they would do if you would just quit claim the house back to them?

If it is a non-recourse note, I don't think they can come after you and since they now have title, I don't think they can foreclose.

Hopefully, the professor will chime in and give us his thoughts.

[Under_H20]

Originally Posted by two cents

Good luck finding someone up the chain that will care.

I wonder what they would do if you would just quit claim the house back to them?

If it is a non-recourse note, I don't think they can come after you and since they now have title, I don't think they can foreclose.

Hopefully, the professor will chime in and give us his thoughts.

For a quit claim, wouldn't you need both parties to sign off?

[NewDad]

Originally Posted by Under_H20

For a quit claim, wouldn't you need both parties to sign off?

Not so much as that you'd need the other party to sign off on the debt. They'd be happy to have the house free and clear.

[FormerBofAVictim]

Originally Posted by countrywideh8r

Hello forum,

My house finally has an auction date of December 28th, 2009. I tried calling the people that hold my loan to ask for a deed in lieu (DIL) but they are refusing to work with me.

I have to prove hardship (which I don't have) and had to have had the house on the market for 90 days before they'll even consider it.

This is absolutely insane... I'm offering to give the house back peacefully right now in good condition, with the keys, garage door openers, etc. Would they seriously be willing to take a massive loss by auctioning the house just to prove a point?

Does anyone have any suggestions or know if it's possible to start the DIL process? I just want to be done with this house. I don't want to wait another 2 months so I was hoping they would take it back. I explained my situation and the person just said to wait till the auction date...

Banks don't ever agree to DIL. They rarely agree to a real short sale anymore.

They will sometimes agree to allow you to sell your house at a loss and then they have up to 8 years (Depends on your state) in which they can pursue the deficiency from you anyway.

Wouldn't it be interesting if people stopped agreeing to short sales?

[HopingtoFind]

Foreclosure is much cleaner process for the lenders then DIL. With foreclosure they don't have to deal with title issues. I wouldn't worry about getting a DIL especially in non-recourse state. It is marginally better then foreclosure as far as credit anyway.

[two cents]

Originally Posted by NewDad

Not so much as that you'd need the other party to sign off on the debt. They'd be happy to have the house free and clear.

but if it is a non-recourse loan they can't come after you for the debt as their only recourse is the property.

so, am I missing something?

[NewDad]

Yes, but giving them the property under terms of a new agreement (the QCD) would likely affect the original agreement (mortgage).

Or, more likely, the QCD would be unenforceable because of the prior agreement "speaking" for the property. Not a lawyer, but if QCDs worked for this, everyone would be doing them, and I've never seen it.

[two cents]

Originally Posted by NewDad

Yes, but giving them the property under terms of a new agreement (the QCD) would likely affect the original agreement (mortgage).

Or, more likely, the QCD would be unenforceable because of the prior agreement "speaking" for the property. Not a lawyer, but if QCDs worked for this, everyone would be doing them, and I've never seen it.

yea, that is why I didn't know if the idea was nutty or not - but have to admit it would be interesting to see how a servicer would react.

Would it cause them to be more likely to accept a dil (with an agreement waiving the deed) or would they be more likely to do a modification?

[knownick]

I believe quitclaim deeds by nature only transfer any interest/ownership to the extent that you actually possess. An example I remember reading is that I could go file a quitclaim deed releasing my interest in the Washington Monument to my brother, but that doesn't mean he actually gets anything because I have no real interest/ownership.

Seems this case would be the same. Since the property is secured by a deed of trust/trustee, quitclaiming it back to them doesn't really accomplish anything. It certainly does nothing to the loans and may end up complicating the process to the point that the bank has to resort to a judicial foreclosure to clean it all up.

But I don't really know. I'm not a lawyer.