The guy never missed a payment. http://www.wlwt.com/news/22600154/detail.html [video=youtube;uV3Yua4KioQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV3Yua4KioQ[/video] There needs to be some sort of laws where banks can't do this.
What a dumbass. Not quite at the level of the dumbass who flew his plane into the building in Austin, but getting there. This guy, at least, has the opportunity to advance to round 2 of Who Wants To Be A Dumbass? barfo
Bulldozed his equitity... what a dumb ass. Now he still owes the IRS and he still have to pay for the house he bulldozed. Brilliant.
I would imagine the bank will not forclose and just make him continue to pay the mortage and taxes. That guy basically threw away his ability to ever make any money legally in this country... and least that he gets to keep.
I also believe it is illegal for a bank to refuse a payment. If you have an agreement in place, I don't think they can refuse a payment.
If someone has a lien on your property you can't *sell* it unless it satisfies the lien. The amount of the lien may have been higher than what he owed... but I believe if he used the house as collateral they can go after the whole value... not just what he owed. Did he think he could sell his house to a friend for $170,000 when it was worth $300K just to keep the lien holder getting their money? The bank would have gladly taken a $170K check if he sent it to them =) but he can't just think he'd sell it to his friend for that and keep anyone else from getting it. Remember... it wasn't the bank that forced the foreclosure... it was the lienholder... the IRS I think.
He may have been offered $170K but his mortgage is $300K. What equity? My realtor friends tell me that when many homes that are foreclosed on, the banks find the former owners have dumped bags of concrete down the toilets and sinks and that sort of thing. This story is nothing new, just a bit over the top ;-) I don't feel sorry for the taxpayer here, we're not really footing the bill because the banks are making out like bandits. They're not only getting their bad assets paid off by the feds, they're able to collect mortgage income on short sales and that sort of thing.
Even if you house is foreclosed on... bank takes is sells it but it doesn't cover the orginal loan amount (happening a lot right now)... you win the lottery or somehow get more money... the bank can still go after your money for the difference between what you owed and they sold it for. Ruining the house only increases the odds that they can do that.
Only in recourse states. Denny the taxpayer is definitely footing the bill for this. The banks have wiped their hands clean from most of these properties by selling MBS to the FED or keeping them off their books with mark to fantasy accounting. Bernake and his cronies have gambled the growth of the economy on asset appreciation.
I've seen a lot of this stuff over the last couple years. Probably seen over a hundred homes pretty much destroyed to the point of being too costly to repair. They fall into 2 general catagories. 1. Physical damage done out of frustration and revenge, usually on lower-end homes (the family's only financial asset and hope of survival). I don't condone it, but I understand it. In most cases, lives have been destroyed, marriages dissolved, kids torn away from their friends and schools. These homes are eerie to view. You can feel the pain and heartbreak. It's like they're haunted. 2. New homes by builders who strip anything they can use on another home, cabinets, countertops, tile or hardwood floors, plumbing fixtures, doors, windows, fences... Banks don't care, the bailout completely subsidizes a 20% loss as long as they have taken the property back. It is against their "interest" to do a short-sale as there is only a $5k incentive or something like that for them. A simple flip-flop of that formula would be the best cure for the problem, and home prices would stabilize quite quickly.
If I wanted to send a message, I'd bulldoze my loan officer's home. It's all about the personal touch.
My thought is. If the banks are so tight on loans, the housing industry sucks, and the lack of people getting a loan due to bad credit, why are these banks pushing it further when this guy has obviously not missed a payment. Why be so cutthroat when hes giving the bank money?
Here's how I read it. He screwed his brother in business dealings, his brother sued and won. He didn't pay the judgment, so his brother went back to court and got the government to enforce it, which they did by putting liens on his commercial property. His commercial property was bought with a loan from the bank, for which he put up his house as collateral. Since the bank wasn't getting payments on the commercial property anymore, they went after his house to pay what he owed on the commercial property. I'm not sure if that's 100% accurate, I don't have any experience in this particular slice of life, but the important part, I think, is that he lost the house because he put it up as collateral on another loan which he didn't pay or wasn't able to pay. Moral: don't bet something you can't afford to lose. And if you do lose, don't be such a dumbass about it that people make fun of you on the internets. barfo
So, the better choice was for him to bulldoze his commercial property but instead he was dumbass and leveled his residential instead.
