Ain't My Problem...Nor Is It My Government's
Talking about a sense of entitlement. Let me get this straight, a potential homebuyer with poor credit, inquires about buying a home from a sub-prime lender. The lender in turn approves a no money down, no points and of course the disadvantage of having bad credit, gives an interest rate at or around 8 - 11 % fixed! with an additional loan attached that is adjustable. The applicant, wanting to get into a home at all cost, signs the documentation knowing that if the interest goes up, that their mortage note that started off at $300 or $400 dollars more than what they comfortable with is going to double or triple.
Whose fault is it? The mortgage lender or the consumer? Probably both, but blame goes to the consumer more than the lender. Yeah, the lender or it's representative could have advised the consumer that the home they are seeking and dreamed about could be a temporary thing if the rate goes up or if the consumer is unable to refinance to a lower rate. Morally if the lender is not looking at the bottom line they could advise of this potential pitfall. Then again, the lender is not responsible if the buyer is seeking and dead set to get in a six bedroom, three bath, 28 or 32oo sq. foot home, starting at $350 to $400, 000 dollars at a monthly mortgage note at $2800 or $3200. As far as the consumer is concerned, they are living large on borrowed time and a ticking interest rate bomb waiting for the inevitable. And in this case, the inevitable has happened, home loans and refinance loans that were on adjustable rates have either increased or failed to drop, leaving home owners, who received sub-primed loans at an already high interest rate having to pay more.
Nevertheless, they can't afford the loans and struggle to meet timely note payments. Eventually the bank issues an foreclosure notice and the dream of owning and staying in their house is over.
Again, who is the blame, the owner or lender?
Buying a home is the biggest investment any american can make. The home is actually your power. It can provide cash in time of need, it allows for improvements to better your chances of a good sell if you plan to move. It gives you a huge overhead, if done correctly, of financial freedom. Folks who buy homes to just floss, need to know that it doesn't matter if the house is being held up on scotch tape and super glue, the land they are sitting on is worth something. The lenders know it and so does any realtor. Most realtors know if a certain area is a gold mine or that certain areas are money makers. Buyers should always be cognizant of where they are buying and damn sure that the property they are buying is within their reach.
Unfortunately, thousands of buyers failed to protect their biggest investment, from day one. The buyer surrendered their power to say no, because the house was in a posh area with a helluva scenic view and over achieving schools. They failed to live within their means and quite frankly who can blame them. Everyone wants something to call their own, but for whatever reason, irresponsibility in paying bills on time or whatever excuse has been disqualified. Folks who get sub-prime loans got them for a reason. They are consumers with questionable financial past, with incomes and it's the business of the lender to make as much money off that consumer.
Who's fault is it?
Is the fault of the lender, who is in the business to service the potential homebuyer, with a home loan that the potential buyer is so happy to get. Or is it the fault of the homebuyer, who fails to make payments at the initial rate they were given.
Let's get this out, no one is entitled to live in a house. You are not entitled to get a home, cause you're american. Now having said that, if you choose to risk your life and your financial stability in getting a home loan at an adjustable rate. Sorry, you picked and signed for your poison. You and only you should walk down your walkway with the last box from your now foreclosed house. Mr. and Mrs. Jones and Johnson living to your right and left should not have their tax dollars spent to bail you out. It's not their fault, nor is it the governments.
LA Times Article: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bailout30mar30,0,4891093.story?coll=la-home-headlines
SYMPATHIC POLITICIANS NEED TO CONCENTRATE ON OTHER ISSUES AT HAND
"We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of Americans lose their homes,"
- Barack Obama
Why not? Barack Obama just provided a good sound bite to boast his presidential bid. Memo to Senator Obama, it's not your money and this isn't a game of "monopoly," where you're the banker. It's not within the scope of the federal government to bail out anyone who fails to perform.
Whose fault is it? The mortgage lender or the consumer? Probably both, but blame goes to the consumer more than the lender. Yeah, the lender or it's representative could have advised the consumer that the home they are seeking and dreamed about could be a temporary thing if the rate goes up or if the consumer is unable to refinance to a lower rate. Morally if the lender is not looking at the bottom line they could advise of this potential pitfall. Then again, the lender is not responsible if the buyer is seeking and dead set to get in a six bedroom, three bath, 28 or 32oo sq. foot home, starting at $350 to $400, 000 dollars at a monthly mortgage note at $2800 or $3200. As far as the consumer is concerned, they are living large on borrowed time and a ticking interest rate bomb waiting for the inevitable. And in this case, the inevitable has happened, home loans and refinance loans that were on adjustable rates have either increased or failed to drop, leaving home owners, who received sub-primed loans at an already high interest rate having to pay more.
Nevertheless, they can't afford the loans and struggle to meet timely note payments. Eventually the bank issues an foreclosure notice and the dream of owning and staying in their house is over.
Again, who is the blame, the owner or lender?
Buying a home is the biggest investment any american can make. The home is actually your power. It can provide cash in time of need, it allows for improvements to better your chances of a good sell if you plan to move. It gives you a huge overhead, if done correctly, of financial freedom. Folks who buy homes to just floss, need to know that it doesn't matter if the house is being held up on scotch tape and super glue, the land they are sitting on is worth something. The lenders know it and so does any realtor. Most realtors know if a certain area is a gold mine or that certain areas are money makers. Buyers should always be cognizant of where they are buying and damn sure that the property they are buying is within their reach.
Unfortunately, thousands of buyers failed to protect their biggest investment, from day one. The buyer surrendered their power to say no, because the house was in a posh area with a helluva scenic view and over achieving schools. They failed to live within their means and quite frankly who can blame them. Everyone wants something to call their own, but for whatever reason, irresponsibility in paying bills on time or whatever excuse has been disqualified. Folks who get sub-prime loans got them for a reason. They are consumers with questionable financial past, with incomes and it's the business of the lender to make as much money off that consumer.
Who's fault is it?
Is the fault of the lender, who is in the business to service the potential homebuyer, with a home loan that the potential buyer is so happy to get. Or is it the fault of the homebuyer, who fails to make payments at the initial rate they were given.
Let's get this out, no one is entitled to live in a house. You are not entitled to get a home, cause you're american. Now having said that, if you choose to risk your life and your financial stability in getting a home loan at an adjustable rate. Sorry, you picked and signed for your poison. You and only you should walk down your walkway with the last box from your now foreclosed house. Mr. and Mrs. Jones and Johnson living to your right and left should not have their tax dollars spent to bail you out. It's not their fault, nor is it the governments.
LA Times Article: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-bailout30mar30,0,4891093.story?coll=la-home-headlines
SYMPATHIC POLITICIANS NEED TO CONCENTRATE ON OTHER ISSUES AT HAND
"We cannot sit on the sidelines while increasing numbers of Americans lose their homes,"
- Barack Obama
Why not? Barack Obama just provided a good sound bite to boast his presidential bid. Memo to Senator Obama, it's not your money and this isn't a game of "monopoly," where you're the banker. It's not within the scope of the federal government to bail out anyone who fails to perform.
posted by J.C. "Fanz23" Lewis, Jr | 9:54 AM
<< Home