Please Correct Me If I Am Wrong.

davephx

LoanSafe Member
Jul 21, 2009
5,435
47
48
But, you really make me laugh when you always somehow blame the Republicans. Last time I checked, the Democrats are in control and have been in control in both the House and the Senate.
Huh?

How many times have the Democrats been blocked in the Senate because they can't get required 60 votes only achieved if ALL D's and Liberman vote for vs all the Republicans against.

It was the R's that wasted days insisting on a 1700's provision to read out load all amendments since at that time there were no typewriters much less computers.

R's have admitted they will block anything the D's propose for political purpose to make Obama look bad for the ignorant that will blame Obama for what he can not control

On HAMP in two Congressional hearings D's very upset with servicers and powerless to enforce HAMP. R's say HAMP is a waste of money get the homeowners out and new ones in. Their solution is tax cuts for the rich.

I also consider myself an independant, and use to be a conservative R but not what they are doing today.

D's do not control the Senate only can tie IF all stick together (they don't) against usually 100% R opposition for anything other than Insurance companies, big business and the wealthy.

Since the don't control the Senate their majority in the House is meaningless. It is the Senate that is the problem vs the just say no R's on so many issues that help Main Street.
 

MyHAMP

LoanSafe Member
Oct 5, 2009
2,201
16
38
Florida
Sometimes, HAMP doesn't make sense financially - sometimes, it does. EVEN at a 7% APR and EVEN with a $480K-balloon-payment.;)

Every scenario is unique and if somebody thinks renting always equals saving money, you can be wrong as well.
 

MyHAMP

LoanSafe Member
Oct 5, 2009
2,201
16
38
Florida
Everyone on this forum has their own individual scenario and much more comes into play. Even someone who is deeply underwater on their home may get a good enough deal that it actually makes more sense to stay than to walk away. For example, MyHamp, he got a deal that lowered his payment so much that it's cheaper than rent! Yes, he has a massive balloon payment at the end, but he could choose to walk away THEN if values are still low, and he'll still be further ahead than if he had just walked away now.
Jess, I just noticed your comment..:)
 

msm859

LoanSafe Member
Oct 23, 2009
266
2
0
California
Huh?

How many times have the Democrats been blocked in the Senate because they can't get required 60 votes only achieved if ALL D's and Liberman vote for vs all the Republicans against.

It was the R's that wasted days insisting on a 1700's provision to read out load all amendments since at that time there were no typewriters much less computers.

R's have admitted they will block anything the D's propose for political purpose to make Obama look bad for the ignorant that will blame Obama for what he can not control

On HAMP in two Congressional hearings D's very upset with servicers and powerless to enforce HAMP. R's say HAMP is a waste of money get the homeowners out and new ones in. Their solution is tax cuts for the rich.

I also consider myself an independant, and use to be a conservative R but not what they are doing today.

D's do not control the Senate only can tie IF all stick together (they don't) against usually 100% R opposition for anything other than Insurance companies, big business and the wealthy.

Since the don't control the Senate their majority in the House is meaningless. It is the Senate that is the problem vs the just say no R's on so many issues that help Main Street.
The problem primarily is the Republicans fault. They only want to support the ultra -wealthy. The Democrats are afraid of the boogie man aka filibuster -- Make Them Do It! Instead of bailing out Wall Street they should have bailed out Main Street and let the cure "trickle up". The government is owned by the corporations.
And as to what this administration could be doing is simple -- demand bankruptcy reform.
 

davephx

LoanSafe Member
Jul 21, 2009
5,435
47
48
Actually the Admin did demand bkk reform and mostly the R's defeated it.

Admin/Obama demands trials get converted to permanent in HAMP, is doing all he/Treasury can but with no law from Congress has no power.

Admin can demand all they want but without Congress and some R's what good are the demands?
 

msm859

LoanSafe Member
Oct 23, 2009
266
2
0
California
Actually the Admin did demand bkk reform and mostly the R's defeated it.

Admin/Obama demands trials get converted to permanent in HAMP, is doing all he/Treasury can but with no law from Congress has no power.

Admin can demand all they want but without Congress and some R's what good are the demands?
sorry Dave, not true:
Obama Says Bailout Bill Should Not Include Bankruptcy Reform

Without bankruptcy reform the HAMP program is doomed to failure.
 

davephx

LoanSafe Member
Jul 21, 2009
5,435
47
48
That article was from 2008 before the situation became much worse. Obama changed his mind in early 2009 with the worsening crisis:

The bankruptcy provision is opposed by the banking industry and most Republicans, who said it would further destabilize home prices. President Barack Obama and a majority of Democrats backed using bankruptcy as a last resort for homeowners facing default or foreclosure in the worst housing meltdown since the Great Depression.
--
President-elect Obama openly supported the cram-down provision. Upon his election, the intense populist anger against banks and lenders appeared to create the perfect environment to pass the measure. However, whatever window there was has apparently closed. The lending industry, despite its weakened position, still conjured up enough influence to soundly defeat the provision twice this year.
 

jewls

LoanSafe Member
Oct 24, 2009
69
0
0
Editorial</NYT_KICKER>
<NYT_HEADLINE version="1.0" type=" ">This Year’s Housing Crisis </NYT_HEADLINE>

<SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/JavaScript>function getSharePasskey() { return 'ex=1420434000&en=4cbe92b943b22c3a&ei=5124';}</SCRIPT><SCRIPT language=JavaScript type=text/JavaScript>function getShareURL() { return encodeURIComponent('http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/opinion/05tue1.html');}function getShareHeadline() { return encodeURIComponent('This Year’s Housing Crisis');}function getShareDescription() { return encodeURIComponent('To prevent further declines in the housing market, the White House should focus on job creation and loan modifications that reduce a mortgage’s principal balance.');}function getShareKeywords() { return encodeURIComponent('Mortgages,Housing and Real Estate,Foreclosures,Editorials,Subprime Mortgage Crisis,Prices (Fares, Fees and Rates),Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan,Barack Obama');}function getShareSection() { return encodeURIComponent('opinion');}function getShareSectionDisplay() { return encodeURIComponent('Editorial');}function getShareSubSection() { return encodeURIComponent('');}function getShareByline() { return encodeURIComponent('');}function getSharePubdate() { return encodeURIComponent('January 5, 2010');}</SCRIPT>



<NYT_BYLINE version="1.0" type=" "></NYT_BYLINE>Published: January 4, 2010
<NYT_TEXT>The financial crisis and Great Recession have their roots in the housing bust. When it comes, a lasting recovery will be evident in a housing rebound. Unfortunately, housing appears to be weakening anew.

Skip to next paragraph Related

Times Topics: Foreclosures | Housing


<!--Article Comments Include-->

Readers' Comments

Share your thoughts.​

Figures released last week show that after four months of gains, home prices flattened in October. At that time, low mortgage rates (courtesy of the Federal Reserve) and a home buyer’s tax credit (courtesy of Congress) were fueling sales. That should have propped up prices. But it was not enough to overcome the drag created by a glut of 3.2 million new and existing unsold single-family homes — about a seven-month supply.
The situation, we fear, will only get worse in months to come. Rates already are starting to rise as lenders brace for the Fed to curtail support for mortgage lending as early as the end of March. The home buyer’s tax credit is scheduled to expire at the end of April. And a new flood of foreclosed homes is ready to hit the market.
It is increasingly clear that the Obama administration’s anti-foreclosure effort — which pressed lenders to reduce interest rates — isn’t doing nearly enough. High unemployment rates also mean that many borrowers who did qualify for aid have been unable to keep up with even reduced monthly payments.
As a result, an estimated 2.4 million foreclosed homes will be added to the existing glut in 2010, driving prices down by another 10 percent or so. That would bring the average decline nationwide to about 40 percent since the peak of the market in 2006.
A renewed price drop could usher in a new grim chapter in the foreclosure crisis. Already an estimated one-third of homeowners with a mortgage — nearly 16 million people — owe more than their homes are worth; in industry parlance, they are “underwater.†If prices drop further, ever more borrowers will sink ever deeper. Research suggests that the greater the loss of home equity, the greater the likelihood that borrowers will decide to turn in the keys and find a cheaper place to rent.
Things didn’t have to get this bad.
The best way to modify an underwater loan is to reduce the principal balance, lowering the monthly payment and restoring equity. But for the most part, lenders have refused to reduce principal because it would force them to take an immediate loss on the loan. Lenders also have vehemently — and successfully — resisted Congressional efforts to change the law so that bankruptcy courts could reduce the mortgage balances for bankrupt borrowers.
The administration decided not to press lenders to grant principal reductions in the flawed belief that simply making payments more affordable would be enough to forestall foreclosures. It hasn’t. The administration also didn’t fight for the bankruptcy fix when it was before Congress last year despite President Obama’s campaign promise to do so.
The economy is hard pressed to function, let alone thrive, when house prices are falling. As home equity erodes, consumer spending falls and foreclosures increase. Lenders lose the ability and willingness to extend credit and employers are disinclined to hire. True economic recovery is all but impossible.
To avert the worst, the White House should alter its loan-modification effort to emphasize principal reduction. Job creation should also be a priority so that rising unemployment does not cause more defaults.
We wish we could proclaim a Happy New Year in housing. But until more is done to help struggling homeowners, the portents are not good.

Editorial - This Year’s Housing Crisis - NYTimes.com
 

davephx

LoanSafe Member
Jul 21, 2009
5,435
47
48
Even without principal reductions just getting trial mods with lower interest rates made into final would help a great deal and that is what Obama has been pushing to hard for. Existing fully funded HAMP under TARP, if directives would just be followed.

Regarding BKK he didn't fight hard for it but did support it both times brought up in 2009 in Congress. He knew the opposition and is more relying on making HAMP successful with limits on what he can do. I'd rather have HAMP as it is suppose to be that have to file Chap 13 for a 2nd cram-down .. or get best get the great 2MP program to work.
 

anna17

LoanSafe Member
Nov 11, 2009
21
3
3
I propose a phrase other than "emotionally attached to one's home." Bringing emotions into the mix implies that someone isn't using their brain and evaluating all the pros and cons. I'm as much of a bean-counter as anyone, but in my case the "beans" aren't just dollars and sense.

Leaving one's home and moving to a new residence, changing familiar daily life, possibly changing schools, can be a huge upheaval. In some families, for whatever reason, that degree of upheaval can have very negative consequences. Some things can't be measured in money.

I describe myself as someone who "values the non-financial aspects of my home."
 

GottaMakeThisWork

LoanSafe Member
Sep 9, 2009
343
1
18
Michigan
I propose a phrase other than "emotionally attached to one's home." Bringing emotions into the mix implies that someone isn't using their brain and evaluating all the pros and cons. I'm as much of a bean-counter as anyone, but in my case the "beans" aren't just dollars and sense.

Leaving one's home and moving to a new residence, changing familiar daily life, possibly changing schools, can be a huge upheaval. In some families, for whatever reason, that degree of upheaval can have very negative consequences. Some things can't be measured in money.

I describe myself as someone who "values the non-financial aspects of my home."
Yes, emotionally attached means exactly what you said. Emotionally driven decisions by consumers is the CRUX of all the greatest marketing techniques and propaganda initiated by the banking industry and perpetuated by the media. It is how they get you to spend more money than you wisely should, and in some of the cases wayyy more than you should, simply because they know that you are someone who "values the non-financial aspects of my home." You can spin it anyway you like to say it as nice as you can. Everyone has to deal with things the best way that they can. The truth is not always pretty and in a lot of cases darn right a nightmare...like it is for me. I dread to think about the upheaval of my home to somewhere else, but it is a means to a better life because I am not going to be a slave to the walls that I have called home.

I have a friend who built a beautiful 4000 sq foot home 15 years ago and the market value a few years ago was over $500K. The homes in his neighborhood now are around $220k to $250k. He was forced into early retirement by Chrysler. His payment was $3200 a month which while he was working was quite easy to afford. And here's no surprise, he was able to get a mod for $2400 and he too thought that it would take too much to move his family and thought it was a good deal. Well somehow he came across a condo 3 miles away that backed up to a golf course with a beautiful view. It has a 2 car attached garage, 2500 sq feet, 4 bedrooms, 3 baths and a walk out. He got that on a 2 year lease with the option to buy for $1500 a month and a purchase price of $150k in 2 years. This condo was built 3 years ago and purchased for $330k. He's been there for not quite a year, and has been on 3 vacations and bought a brand new car and some new furniture. He said he was so damn happy he took this deal because he was struggling desperately with those 'emotional' decisions. Now will that happen for me? I hope so!

Now I must say that each individual circumstance is different in how much they are underwater and the payment terms that they received. I mean if I could get a 2% interest rate and forbearance of principal on the negative equity to the end of the loan in 40 years....well yeah that sounds like a deal. I could comfortably live and sock away money and enjoy my life at the same time. But if they modify only to give me a little breathing room for now, I have to worry about the QUALITY of life for myself and my family over non-financial aspects of keeping my home.

I do understand what you are saying though, but I think that if this way of thinking takes a higher precedence over the best financial decision for you, sooner or later buyers remorse will set in and it still won't be a happy home.
 

anna17

LoanSafe Member
Nov 11, 2009
21
3
3
I hear ya, Gotta, and I think we can agree that everyone must weigh many factors when they decide whether to stay or go. Certainly, the financial aspect is a big one. And you are correct in pointing out that strained finances can lead to other problems. All I'm saying is that there are considerations other than financial, and giving weight to those factors doesn't mean you're being "emotional." It means you are prudently looking at the big picture.

If the quality of your life is being grossly affected by financial strain, that is definitely an indication that change is in order. It's all about quality of life, and we all have to make our own decisions about what's best for us.
 

tiredofwellsf

LoanSafe Member
Nov 1, 2009
20
1
0
2 years ago when our mortgage woes began, I, like Dave, was so emotionally attached to my home, neighbors, etc... My 3 kids were brought home from the hospital in this house, we had a lot of emotions invested. Then our neighbors walked away, abandoned house #1, then the people across the street walked away, abanded house #2, soon we are one of few left who aren't renting or section 8. Here in Ga this was a 200k neighborhood, middle class, the house down the street just sold for 85K. Our once quaint, lovely little neighborhood has now turned into a haven for "hooligans". Just the other night, a car parked directly at the end of our driveway, blocked our cars in while 2 men sat in the car and 2 got out for a smoke and walked back and forth in front of our house for about and hour. This was 2 am. So being VERY attached, it has become unsafe. We are walking after several mods, forbearances and a ss attempt. Sometimes we need to use our head rather than our hearts.
And I, for one, am putting my trust in God to get our country out of this mess, not the government. The gov't has failed me many times, Rep. and Dem.. I have no faith in them.
 

GottaMakeThisWork

LoanSafe Member
Sep 9, 2009
343
1
18
Michigan
2 years ago when our mortgage woes began, I, like Dave, was so emotionally attached to my home, neighbors, etc... My 3 kids were brought home from the hospital in this house, we had a lot of emotions invested. Then our neighbors walked away, abandoned house #1, then the people across the street walked away, abanded house #2, soon we are one of few left who aren't renting or section 8. Here in Ga this was a 200k neighborhood, middle class, the house down the street just sold for 85K. Our once quaint, lovely little neighborhood has now turned into a haven for "hooligans". Just the other night, a car parked directly at the end of our driveway, blocked our cars in while 2 men sat in the car and 2 got out for a smoke and walked back and forth in front of our house for about and hour. This was 2 am. So being VERY attached, it has become unsafe. We are walking after several mods, forbearances and a ss attempt. Sometimes we need to use our head rather than our hearts.
And I, for one, am putting my trust in God to get our country out of this mess, not the government. The gov't has failed me many times, Rep. and Dem.. I have no faith in them.
Absolutely that is another thing to think about. When the value has sunk so tremendously low that it brings around the folks who hang out in the late night hours, that is a clear sign it is time to go. The value of your home has a direct correlation to the inhabitants in your neighborhood.
 

MyHAMP

LoanSafe Member
Oct 5, 2009
2,201
16
38
Florida
Absolutely that is another thing to think about. When the value has sunk so tremendously low that it brings around the folks who hang out in the late night hours, that is a clear sign it is time to go. The value of your home has a direct correlation to the inhabitants in your neighborhood.
That leaves the question if you can afford to move in a better area - without the money. Those folks either move close to you or you move close to them...;)
 

tiredofwellsf

LoanSafe Member
Nov 1, 2009
20
1
0
That leaves the question if you can afford to move in a better area - without the money. Those folks either move close to you or you move close to them...;)
Well our situation was a bit different. We can afford our mortgage. We can actually afford it if they want to INCREASE monthly payments. Wells Fargo has been screwing with us for 2 years. They are fully aware we CAN pay, but keep giving us loan mod after loan mod. We want something perm.. After every 3rd mod payment they want us to apply for another one. We apply, wait 2-3 months, get notice to foreclose, get approved for mod, pay 3 mod payments, etc, etc......I wish them luck selling this house in this neighborhood. Anyone in our town will tell you, "Yea, I remember when your neighborhood was a good one!"