Rarely does an article stop me in my tracks, but today when I browsed over to this Las Vegas Sun article, “Whether to walk away: Housing’s moral minefield,” by Brian Eckhouse, I stopped. The comments on the article were actually as interesting as the article itself. Basically, it discussed how the forclosure crisis is affecting homeowners in Las Vegas. More specifically, homeowners like this reader:
By pilauguy
3/22/09 at 3:34 p.m.
“Purchased my home the ‘old-fashioned way’ prior to the boom days: credit/employment/financial verifications…the whole 9 yards. Today my owner/occupied home is under-valued in a neighborhood of foreclosed homes. While there is enough blame to trash around, there seems to be no practical assistance for people like myself. I’m ready to damn’ morality,the right thing and latch on to a ‘ME FIRST’ mentality!”
Author, Mr. Eckhouse, posed many thought provoking questions, “If your mortgage is greater than the value of the house, why pay it? . . . Is your greater responsibility to your family’s financial well being, or keeping your word to the bank? . . . Do I violate personal ethics and walk away from a contract that I signed with my eyes wide open?”
Two readers posted their very practical and very opposite side of the moral spectrum, solutions to the problem:
By James_P_Reza
3/22/09 at 10:17 a.m.
“If the government wants to address the economic downturn that is at least in part caused, and perpetuated, by the speculator-caused housing crisis, and if the government wants to spend billions of taxpayer money to “bailout” portions of the economy, then the government should consider these steps:
1) appraise every single owner-occupied residence in the US
2) provide a new FHA mortgage at that amount to the owner-occupant
3) pay off the difference to the mortgage holder
Housing crisis, done. Is it morally appropriate to bailout homeowners who used their homes as ATMs? No more or less than bailing out banks who made it possible by providing low-doc and no-doc loans - loans from liars to liars.
Moral outrage is everywhere because behavior on all sides has been morally questionable through this whole mess. The point is, we’re already spending money in morally questionable bailouts, so why not spend some where it will do some good? Otherwise, even the morally upstanding will consider the immoral, and then what?”
By jk1313
3/22/09 at 10:26 a.m.
“It would be best for most everybody to get the “deadbeats” out of homes as fast as possible, please, walk-away, the faster you do the faster we get to a bottom.
Now, if one really wants to have fun and games with the banks, play it this way. Don’t pay your mortgage, taxes, insurance, HOA, LID/SID, only utilities. Wait until the lender’s foreclosure sale (not Notice of Default) is going to happen, you must be notified within 30 days of the sale by law, then the day or two prior to the sale file Ch. 7 bankruptcy. All processes are “stayed”, the lender has to basically have a hearing to even begin the foreclosure process again, meanwhile, one is still not paying on the mortgage, HOA, taxes, SID/LID. The Ch. 7 will eliminate the mortgage, and will in addition, give one an extra 7-10 months of free living in the home on the banks dime. The best part is that one can still maintain their credit card and auto payments if the home mortgage is the only debt that one would like to have dismissed. Consult state and fed. bankruptcy laws for complete details on income levels, and protected assets.
If done properly, one can live for free in their home for nearly 18 months. Make sure the lenders and banks know how much they are appreciated.”
Although I do not have to personally make a decision like this myself, I can see both sides of the story. Everyone in Las Vegas, homeowners and renters alike, are being affected by this crisis.
So, dear loyal readers, I am curious, what are your stories and your thoughts?