Bank of America just gave ME attitude!!

page: 11
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by proximo

This is a microcosm of why this country is in deep deep trouble - because guess what - it is becoming very obvious it does not pay to be responsible - and without the responsible people you will never be able to get a loan with what you consider remotely reasonable rates again. Do you know what that leads to - massive corruption and theft on a huge scale. This blame everyone else but myself is destroying us, and will make us a third world nation unless something changes quick.


Well, I have to tell you, I am I neither irresponsible, nor stupid.

Did I see that we were in a housing bubble in 2005? No, other wise I would not have bought the house. But I work in health care, not real estate. Even my mother, who used to be a real estate agent in the 70's did not realize we were in a bubble. In fact, she was the one who was pushing me to buy a house....I didn't particularly want one, but she said as fast as the home values were going up, I needed to buy one now, before I could no longer afford a house. Plus, MY real estate agent (who I paid to tell me the truth, who had been in the business for over 20 years) either did not tell me their honest opinions, or THEY were fooled, too.

And hard to believe, I am not irresponsible. I have been the most responsibile person my entire life, even when I fell on incredibly hard times. Seriously, my credit score is 808... if that doesn't tell you how resonsible I am, it should.

I was ready to stick this crisis out. If my house value had only fallen by 10k, I'd stay. If it had only falled by 20k, I'd stay. If it had only fallen by 30k. I'd stay. So far, it's falled by over 80k. THAT is NOT "normal risk." That is beyond normal risk. These are extenuating circumstances.

I did not take out a bad loan. I took out a good loan. My only problem was the fact that I bought in 2005. The economists have been warning the public that soon, this crisis was going to start affecting people who had GOOD loans and good credit. Well, that time is now.

Why should I keep paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in intereest a house that is now worth half of what I paid for it?

I understand your anger, though, becauase months ago, I was angry at all the people who were walking away. Then I saw how many people it was....and I realized.....it was beyond their control.

In my entire life, I have never ever ever taken any form of government assistance. I have never had to get a loan modified. I have always paid off my car loans early. I paid off my school loan early.

I know you don't believe me, but I have been the model citizen till now.

Does it kill me to do this? I've been torn up inside for months over this. But I am finally now at peace with my decision. Does it help that Bank of America has been a jerk to me every time I have dealt with them? Yes....it helps to justify it in my mind, I suppose.

But the government seems to be saying, "Hey, go ahead and walk away." They passed the mortgage debt relief act, which means I don't have to pay taxes on the difference. They recently made the foreclosure credit problems last only 5 years instead of 7, and they are now working on making it affect your credit for only 3 years. Even if it stays at 5 years, I can live with bad credit for 5 years.

The economists are saying that there will be millions more of foreclosures in 2010. Millions.

I think this is only the beginning of people with good credit and good loans walking away because our home values have gone down so far.




[edit on 10-9-2009 by nikiano]




posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by nikiano

edit to ask: so, if I just stop paying my mortgage, what do I tell them when they call me up on October 2nd and ask where my mortgage payment is? Do I tell them they have to foreclose on me? Do I tell them I'm not paying because my home value has fallen? Anyone know?



Tell them you simply can't afford to make the payments. Don't tell them it has anything to do with the value or your plans to leave. The probably will not even call you but they will mail you a 'notice of default' after 90 days.

edit: THEN you'll start to see some action from BoA about helping you with a loan modification. So you may even end up getting what you want either way.

[edit on 9/10/2009 by mythatsabigprobe]



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by proximo
 


I think you are placing the blame on the wrong people; the banks/lenders are the ones who acted so irresponsibly that it is causing good people who didn't lie on their apps. to pay double or even more for a house in developments that are advertising half price sales.

So what is happening with all this bail out money that was supposed to be used to help people get their mortgages brought in line with more actual values? The OP tried to get some help but they hung up on him.

I heard a lady who works for the Govt. on NPR the other day say there are only 3 of them in that entire office, one of the offices that is supposed to handle these loan revaluations. She said it is at the point they just stare at the phones while they ring.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bombeni
reply to post by proximo
 


I think you are placing the blame on the wrong people; the banks/lenders are the ones who acted so irresponsibly that it is causing good people who didn't lie on their apps. to pay double or even more for a house in developments that are advertising half price sales.

So what is happening with all this bail out money that was supposed to be used to help people get their mortgages brought in line with more actual values? The OP tried to get some help but they hung up on him.

I heard a lady who works for the Govt. on NPR the other day say there are only 3 of them in that entire office, one of the offices that is supposed to handle these loan revaluations. She said it is at the point they just stare at the phones while they ring.


I do not say the only ones to blame are the consumers, but they absolutly deserve some blame after all it takes two parties to make a contract, and no I do not buy the ignorance defense.

It is only the biggest purchase the average person ever makes, you should be real careful before commiting to it. Some advice also - never ever take a the advice of someone who stands to benefit from your purchase on whether it is a good time to buy. What do you expect them to say, no - I dont want the commision? Let's be honest 95% of people are to selfish and greedy to ever give you thier real opinion in that situation.

The lenders absolutely share some blame, yet they got bailed out by being extreemly reckless instead of being forced to fail like they would in an econonmy functioning properly.

Believe me I am mad with everyone to blame in this debacle the borrowers , lenders, and government for letting this crap go on, they are all getting off with no consequeces.

Now nikiano this idea that you have "lost" 80k is BS. You have not lost anything - how much equity could you really have after 4 years - well none obviously with the price drop, but even if it hadn't you would have very little. No you are mad because the house has not gone up in value like you planned and you realize you could now get a better deal if you had waited - but you didn't. It is a contract and you are trying to rationalize your way out of it.

You are not entitled to make money on your home purchase - do you think you are the first one who has ever had an investment not work our for them, REALLY? Losses of value on an investment are not allowed - or is that just for you? See what really makes me mad about your situation is it sounds like you can afford your payments, but see an easy way to excuse yourself of a large undesirable debt.

No doubt people are walking away everywhere, and you can get away with it - that does not make it right.

Do you really think companies and people should be able to void contracts whenever they can get a better deal without consequence?
That leads to chaos - and your right its only going to get worse thats why I believe this is only the begining of a new great depression.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Bankers are in the same league as big pharma, the oil companies, wall street, giant corporations and of course our best friend of all...Big Brother.

This is what happens when you bail out big, giant corporations instead of the little guys that fund and support those corporations aka all of us. The only change that has come to this country is the amount of change in the CEO's pockets has increased tenfold.



posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by proximo

Now nikiano this idea that you have "lost" 80k is BS. You have not lost anything - how much equity could you really have after 4 years - well none obviously with the price drop, but even if it hadn't you would have very little.


I never said I lost 80k. I said my home value has lost 80k, and if i continued to pay my mortgage every month, at the end of 30 years I would have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in interest (extra) on a house that was not worth it. It would be throwing money down the drain. Maybe you're willing to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars above and beyond what the house is worth just to keep a contract that should have been proclaimed "null and void" after my mortgage lender (Countrywide) went bankrupt, but I'm not.

Listen, to use an a sports analogy:

I was playing by the rules when I bought my house. I did not lie on my loan application. I had a job. I got a fixed rate interest. I bought a house I could afford.

Then, the corrupt lending practices caught up with the banks, and the housing crisis hit.
Banks started to collapse. My mortgage lender (Countrywide) went bankrupt and collapsed. At that point, the referee (the government) should have suspended the game due to "rain" or "adverse playing conditions." But they didn't. They let the game continue on, in adverse and dangerous conditions.

The storm got worse, the housing crisis got worse, and then the Bailouts happened. Banks were given trillions, but they refused to modify loans as instructed. This worsened the foreclosure problem all over the country, my neighbors foreclosed, and all of a sudden, my home value has gone down by 80k.

By then, the field of play had changed. No longer was I paying on a mortgage for a house worth 160k, but worth 80k. If my house value had stayed anywhere near my original purchase price plus or minus 10-30k, I would have kept playing the game. But to fall 50%...well, the playing field has just been drastically changed.

The objective of the game also changed. Home ownership used to be about giving people a place to live, plus a tax shelter, and as a bonus, homeowners usually got to make a bit of money at the end of paying the mortage after 30 years. Now, however, mortgages are bundled and sold as securities to be traded on the stock market. Now it seems, the objective of the banks is to not only make a profit, but to write as many loans as they can and sell of the mortages as fast as possible to investors, so the banks and the investors can become filthy rich. Not just rich, but filthy rich.

Also, the players of the game changed. When the other "team" (Countrywide) could no longer play, instead of stopping the game (nullifying the loan) the referree (government) let another team come in and play for them! They awarded MY home loan to another bank, Bank of America....a non-sportsman like team with a history of cheating. I approved the game roster before the game with a certain set of players, then they changed the player roster!! If this was a sports event, that would be illegal.

If the playing field of the game had not changed, I'd still be playing the game.

If the objective of the game had not changed, I'd still be playing the game.

If the players had stayed the same, I'd still be playing the game.

If the referee had been honest and impartial, I'd still be playing the game.

But the game changed completely....so I threw in the towel before I got beat to a pulp.





[edit on 11-9-2009 by nikiano]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by proximo
No doubt people are walking away everywhere, and you can get away with it - that does not make it right.

Do you really think companies and people should be able to void contracts whenever they can get a better deal without consequence?


No contract is being voided. The whole essence of a mortgage boils down to a debt secured by property. The borrower has two options, pay the debt under the terms agreed or surrender the property to the lender. This is option number 2 and fulfills the obligations of the contract.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


Option 2 is not always sufficient. You still have an obligation to pay the total amount of the debt! Therefore, in today's market, surrendering the property will probably only cover a portion of the debt!

In many cases, foreclosure is followed shortly by bankruptcy to clear the remaining debt. Some lenders are being lenient and accepting "short sales," but some are being a**holes!!

Still, some don't have a clue how to proceed. Banks are dissolving and other banks are absorbing the assets while the FDIC takes the liabilities. Things are a big murky mess right now, and there is a great chance you could stop paying your mortgage and never hear a word about it!!



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


Option 2 is not always sufficient. You still have an obligation to pay the total amount of the debt! Therefore, in today's market, surrendering the property will probably only cover a portion of the debt!


In a non-recourse mortgage contract (as in niki's case) there is no obligation to pay the total amount. The bank receives the property after conducting a foreclosure, they pay the costs of that and accept any loss on the value of the property. That's the risk they assumed in exchange for the potential profit - capitalism.

Niki can use the bank's reluctance to take that loss to her advantage and stay in the property basically cost free (she needs to keep paying insurance and taxes or she could be liable to the state or for damages to the property) until the bank finally gets around to foreclosing.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I'm in agreement with mythatsabigprobe. The terms of the contract spell out what happens when niki stops paying-ie the bank gets the house. In a non-recourse situation the bank eats the loss, niki's credit hits the crapper but she moves on without that debt. I'm hearing of people living 6, 12, even 18 months in a place before being made to leave. That's plenty of time to take what you were paying on your mortgage and save up enough to pay for an apartment or rental a year or two up front (not a bad Idea to prepay a year lease if you just had a foreclosure hit your credit).

The reason so many people are allowed to stay in these homes after default is that the banks(or servicers or MBS investorys) still have these loans on their books at nearly full value. Also when foreclosures go up for auction on courthouse steps the banks that hold the notes are bidding the loan value to keep from having to book a loss on their portfolio.

There is no moral component to breaching a mortgage contract. It's just business. Banks, governments and other corporations have no problems screwing their creditors. Just ask GM bondholders about that.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nikiano



No, you won't pay anymore. The banks already got their bailout. PLUS, they will get my house when I walk away. Then, they can sell it.

Who suffers in the future? My neighbors.

How do I know? Because I suffered when MY neighbors walked away from their homes in my neighborhood, because that is what brought my house value down.

So, after I leave, MY neighbors will not like me. And they will walk away. And after that, THEIR neighbors will not like them. Then THEY will walk away.

The banks knew this was coming in California and Arizona and Florida.
(Even the guy on the phone tonight said "Yeah, we knew this would happen in those 4 states.") But they're not trying to stop it.




Your neighbors will not walk away - they will more likely stay and actually full-fill their obligations concerning a contract they agreed to. SOME would NEVER walk away from a contractual agreement. No one should. Its lacking in and of character.


You were warned - all of you bubble buyers... we warned ALL of you. You didnt listen. You did what you wanted to! You got a house you couldnt afford or even come close to qualifying for at ANY other time - IF NOT FOR banks throwing money at ANYONE that was actually willing to buy then lol.

Otherwise, if not for the banks giving loans to people that couldnt pay them... many of us wouldnt be with a house payment today... you probably wouldnt have gotten financed - truth be told and to make a long story short.

You got your dream, pay the team.


[edit on 11-9-2009 by Little One]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 


I am sorry but the OP is what is wrong with America today, those who blame everyone else on their own problems. They blame the government and the banks for the situation they are in for the devaluing of their house yet ignore the fact that they are going to lower the home values even more for their neighbors. Many of the foreclosures that have devalued current home prices are a result of others doing the exact same thing walking away from properties they could afford to pay.

Now by walking away they are going to add to the foreclosure mess even more and devalue further properties in the area. The governments loan modification program had specific guidelines that had to be met to be inacted. If the principle is not greater than 33% of your monthly income you do not qualify. This means you are in a house that is priced right for your income and you should suck it up and pay it.

If you want to walk away walk away but dont go screaming to a message board that you were wronged in some way by the government or the bank. No one forced you to sign the note that you signed a promissary to pay back.

And yes I agree with many of the posters that BoA is a parasite but in this case they have held up their end of the bargin, they paid the required sum to the seller the price you agreed to pay nothing more nothing less.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by elevatedone
 


These banks were given this bailout money specifically on the conditions to keep people in their homes.

So yes, he made a contract on the house, but the banks made a contract with the government to keep people in their homes to help the economy.

That being said,

The arrangements made were for people who are on foreclosure, or brink of eviction. Not for people who can still make payments.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:49 PM
link   
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, I hope it can somehow be turned around. Here's my little story about BofA:

I had a visa w/ a low interest rate because I transferred a balance to them. They said I was late a payment, but I wasn't because I did it online before it was due, so I was insisting w/ them to keep my apr at the low rate. They said I was late previously during the holidays (that was true, but it was before I transferred over) so the rate goes up. I was as mad as you. I told the gal, listen my parents are disgusted w/ BofA and they own quite a bit of stock in your co.- she's been talking of selling, and I'm going to tell her to sell... I know it sounds silly, but I was mad.

So it turns out the next day, big brother calls my parents to talk to them about their stocks and why they are not happy! I am a married woman with a different last name than my parents! What the heck?! It is time to longer call conspiracy what others call conspiracy.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Or we could look at this another way -

if you are a senior and you have a cheaper place to rent and can use the cash that you would give to BofA to ensure that you don't need to rely on government programs... well, then that's a positive.

on the other hand, I think there are 3 big questions one should consider before walking away:

- Do I like my house. Am I happy inside it's walls? The pretend numbers up and down aside. The material house as a whole, is it a pleasure of mine?

- Do I want to give up any equity I have in the house and hand it over to the bank as a gift. does my bank deserve my generosity? Right now I have a place to live and I can afford the payments. And by not walking away I like that the bank is not getting a free lunch from me.

- What is going to happen in the next few months? Is the dollar going to have serious issues? Are the banks going to have serious issues? if tshtf would I like to still be in my house? One of gazillions of others and lost in the shuffle but with possession as 9/10th of the law incase there is a large scale renegotiation.

Your house may have lost 40% but that's not the issue really because you're still in it and you can afford it. The issue is what if it loses another 40%.

You have subconsciously decided to ride it out this far. The reasons that kept you in it this long are what's interesting. If they are personal contentment that's all you need to know.

If you are affected by the surrounding properties - if they are vacant and will change your quality of life. If you planned on selling for funding your retirement. Then the only reasons to stay are if there is going to be a major shift in the national situation that equalizes and stabilizes neighborhoods again. I'd wait it out for a few months - if the US gets through this fall and winter, it's a very good sign. If it doesn't do well, at least you're still home and everyone's house has crashed just like yours. misery loves company



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
The homeowners who are getting screwed in this situation are the ones who put hefty downpayments when they purchased the home. Unlike the majority of the 0%'s out there, or the no income verifications loans(liars loans) that people lost nothing other then their credit if they walked away.

The people who saved and put 20%+ down, lost their value, lost their down payment, and have incentive to keep their house need the help. They deserve the buy downs do to the unscrupulous banks lending money in crazy products to people who couldn't afford a home, bought on speculation, or bought multiple houses.

I called B of A the other day to discuss the Making Homes Affordable progam, and to see exactly where the government money is going, to the tune of 800 billion.

I asked if they were buying down the principal with the money the banks have been given.

The answer was(after 10 minutes of checking), absolutely no. We NEVER buy down principal.

My next question was, how is the money that was given to B of A helping the home owner. How much does it cost to help each person in distress, and how is it costing B of A?

I also asked, if B of A chooses to modify the loan, and essentially just make LESS money on the property by lowering the interest rate, are they being paid the difference in the interest rate change by the government.

The loan modification department claimed they didnt know how the money was being spent, and they didn't have the answer to that particular question. I asked who did have an answer, and they didn't know that either.

Amazing.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Has BOA offered to add 10 years to your mortgage?
that is what they and other banks in South Florida are doing under the loan modification programs. You stay in your house, your payments are lower, but you're paying longer.

Actually isn't a bad thing for those who weren't speculating and flipping houses and are in the houses they want to be in. There is always the possibility that house values will rise again in the next 10-15 years and you'll probably be able to sell out then without much loss.

House Values mean nothing unless you are using it as collateral for other debts.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Good2Go
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, I hope it can somehow be turned around. Here's my little story about BofA:

I had a visa w/ a low interest rate because I transferred a balance to them. They said I was late a payment, but I wasn't because I did it online before it was due, so I was insisting w/ them to keep my apr at the low rate. They said I was late previously during the holidays (that was true, but it was before I transferred over) so the rate goes up. I was as mad as you. I told the gal, listen my parents are disgusted w/ BofA and they own quite a bit of stock in your co.- she's been talking of selling, and I'm going to tell her to sell... I know it sounds silly, but I was mad.

So it turns out the next day, big brother calls my parents to talk to them about their stocks and why they are not happy! I am a married woman with a different last name than my parents! What the heck?! It is time to longer call conspiracy what others call conspiracy.


Wow....THAT is scary!!



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by NGBeav
 





I am sorry but the OP is what is wrong with America today, those who blame everyone else on their own problems. They blame the government and the banks for the situation they are in for the devaluing of their house yet ignore the fact that they are going to lower the home values even more for their neighbors. Many of the foreclosures that have devalued current home prices are a result of others doing the exact same thing walking away from properties they could afford to pay.


WRONG!!! The banks loaned nonexistent "money" that was "created" at the time of the loan. Banks collect "wealth" that is your labor as interest on fiat money they created out of nothing. With fractional banking a loan of $100,000 was backed by at most $3000 of customer deposits if it was made in the last few years. That means the real principle was paid off in 5 months and the rest is 100% profit for the bank! I suggest you read up on the FED and fractional banking before you defend the monsters who have raped the country and its citizens.




Another interesting thing about this is that when the bank loans you money which it created out of nothing, it costed nothing to make it, it wants something from you. It wants you to sign on the dotted line and pledge your house, your car, your inventory, your assets so that in case for any reason you cannot continue to make your payments they get your marbles, they get all of your assets. They're not going to lose anything on this. Whether it's expansion or contraction, inflation or deflation the banks are covered and we like sheep go right along with it because we haven't figured it out, we don't know that this is a scam. Of course we have no choice either right now because it's all enforced by law. We have no escape. We have no choice but it's even better that we don't understand it because we can't complain about it either. There you have it....

In ancient times usury was defined as interest on a loan, any interest on any loan. In modern times that has been redefined to mean excessive interest on a loan. Moderate interest seems logical to us in recognition of the fact that if we work hard for our money, we save it and surrender its use for a period of time being a sacrifice on our part and then loan it to somebody else for their venture, we're entitled to a reasonable return on that sacrifice. A reasonable interest rate is a concept that very few people have problems with, it seems logical and fair.

But what is this thing called excessive interest? Thomas Edison said, "People who will not turn a shovel-full of dirt on the project nor contribute a pound of materials will collect more money than will the people who will supply all the materials and do all the work." I wondered when I read that if Tom was exaggerating so I got my calculator out. I assumed that there was going to be a $100,000 house built. I assumed that $30,000 would have to go for land, architect's fees and permits and that kind of thing. $70,000 would go for the actual construction of the house, building materials and labor. I assumed that the buyer would go to the bank and put 20% down and then borrow the balance at 10% over 30 years. I punched in the numbers and discovered that the borrower will pay to the bank in interest $172,741 compared to $70,000 paid for the construction of the house. In other words, about 2 1/2 times as much money will be paid to the bank in interest than will be paid to those who provide all the labor and all the materials. And you may say to yourself, yes but that's fair, after all a 30 year loan is a long loan and people work for their money and sacrifice its use and loan it and so forth and deserve to be compensated. No. Not this money. Nobody worked for this money, nobody saved this money. There was no sacrifice of any kind for this money. This money was created out of nothing and I suggest that $172,741 interest on nothing is excessive!

A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by NGBeav
reply to post by nikiano
 


I am sorry but the OP is what is wrong with America today...



Really? The Secretary of the Treasury cheats on his taxes.

I think the government is what's wrong with this country today.

If the government would have regulated the markets like they were supposed to be doing, instead of looking the other way while all their buddies on Wall Street were getting filthy rich, the housing crisis wouldn't have happened, and my home value wouldn't have tanked by 50%.

I did nothing wrong, therefore, I shouldn't have to pay $188,700 in interest (not to even mention the $160,000 in principal!) over 30 years, just because the government is corrupt, and sided with the investors and the bankers, rather than the homeowners.


[edit on 11-9-2009 by nikiano]

[edit on 11-9-2009 by nikiano]





new topics
top topics
 
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join