Bank of America Getting Into the Landlord Business

Bank of America Getting Into the Landlord Business


Well if you get a "special" invitation from Bank of America,
it could be they want your deed and simply forgive your mortgage debt !!

And, they might even ask you to rent without moving !!

Sounds too good to be true, but they ARE going to be offering that deal.

But only by "invitation" and only in very select markets.


Published: Thursday, 22 Mar 2012 | 10:05 PM ET -- CNBC

Bank of America, the nation's second-largest lender, is launching a pilot program this week that will offer a limited number of customers behind on their mortgages to transition from owner to renter.

The bank, which was saddled with thousands of delinquent loans when it took over mortgage giant Countrywide, says that beginning this week "in targeted hard-hit markets," it will offer a limited number of mortgage customers who are facing foreclosure an opportunity to remain in their homes, and transition to tenant status. The program is called “Mortgage to Lease.”

“This pilot will help determine whether conversion from homeownership to rental is something our customers, the community and investors will support," said Ron Sturzenegger, Legacy Asset Servicing executive at Bank of America in a statement. "This program may have the potential to further round out the broad set of solutions we offer our customers in need of assistance.”...

Mortgage to Lease ?


Perhaps tempting.......

but I bet there's an agenda.

Maybe like letting big time real estate trusts end up owning

homes for rent.

Agenda21 anyone ?

A Bank of America spokesman tells CNBC, "We'll own the properties only in the pilot and only initially. If a decision is made to roll out a full program, Bank of America would not be in the ownership position at all."

Hey xuenchen,

You can bet first, this is a last ditch effort (without a sincere attempt to help homeowners) for the bank to delay the foreclosure of these homes long enough to peddle them to investors.

I have read at length about this deal since I first heard about it and called two of my golf banker buddies and a couple of my realtor friends who confirmed the same.

General comments by my friends, including my input:

Banks can't set on the amount of current foreclosures any longer (this does not include the foreclosures estimated to hit the market over the next two or three years) and maintain the current financial stability requirements set by the governement.

Banks have recognized that if they continue to pass foreclosures out into the already failed market, it will knock the bottom out of 'all' home prices.

In saying this I mean, according to my four friends, the realtors and banks have attempted to segment the housing market into "losers" and "stabilized" categories. In this, there is a market segment in which they have been able to leverage some houses to hold a greater deal of their previous value, while letting the chosen losers wallow in the muck of the housing failure.

I feel no pity.

The greed of the financial industry (and the wealthy elitist) caused this depression.

Agenda 21.... That is an interesting direction to think in for this. I suppose if this is seen as more of a marketing trial than some "special" invitation only program, then it's a scary thought. If done on a wide scale, people who have no equity or are upside down (a huge %) would jump on it. That would certainly move to reverse the last thing that really makes America special. The widespread ownership of property by average, normal people.

If that is taken from us, we are nothing more than Serfs or Subjects to the 'King' of the day. Oh how things have changed.

I dont think the government likes houses staying in the family, the parents or grandparents having earnt the real money to buy the house and "free loading" children get to inherit it (usually at a massive taxable inheritance cost too).

Im pretty sure this is just another way to take more of our money for longer and in particular from our children for as long as possible.

Fannie Mae and Wells Fargo have been doing this for year. The previous owner can lease or rent the property but the home must stay in showing condition so potential buys can walk through. Then when some one buys the home its up to the new owner to do the eviction or continue to rent the home the the tenants.

Iv never done any of these option for BOA but do them monthly for Fannie and Wells they have 3 options rent, lease or relocation assistance or known as Cash for keys.

Ah! Socialism at its best.
The government owns everything and you can simply pay them to borrow their belongings for a while.

reply to post by xuenchen
I have less of a problem with B of A handling leases than the government buying out all the mortgages.

Just my personal opinion.

There should be a clause in the purchase where the investor, "unless purchasing it as a family home" will allow the renters to continue under the current contract for ????? years?

reply to post by OldCurmudgeon


I expect that they do, and thats what they want.

"dont pay us HUGE interest rates for 20 years, nahh, pay us a little bit, never own your home, so we can milk your family for ever." totally what they are going for.

Originally posted by OldCurmudgeon
There should be a clause in the purchase where the investor, "unless purchasing it as a family home" will allow the renters to continue under the current contract for ????? years?

It looks like BoA will do something like that....

it is an advantage for both sides....

that is *IF* the "renter" can afford to keep paying and never defaults on the rent.

I bet that's why it's "invitation" only for now....

The bank can know if you are able to pay rent.

from the CNBC article:

"Pilot participants will transfer title to their properties to the bank and have their outstanding mortgage debt forgiven. In exchange, they may lease their home for up to three years at or below the current market rental rate," according to a statement. The rent will be less than the mortgage payment and the (former) homeowner will have no financial obligations to the property, like taxes and insurance.

Thank god the bailout kept all this from happening.

Originally posted by Biigs
reply to post by OldCurmudgeon

 

I expect that they do, and thats what they want.

"dont pay us HUGE interest rates for 20 years, nahh, pay us a little bit, never own your home, so we can milk your family for ever." totally what they are going for.

Your point I would not doubt Biigs... cept I did read where in their announcement they wanted to sell the homes in batches to investors within three years... could they be lying? lol... is the pope catholic... lol

I don't really understand some of the comments on this thread.

I mean, is the bank trying to implement a program to mitigate losses and cover their own rear, sure; but what is the alternative? These homes are at risk of imminent foreclosure; which means the banks would take the home from the families anyway and kick them to the street, at least with this program those families will still have a roof over their head for a while, at least long enough to find another place to live and not end up homeless.

So, I would say in this case; though the banks are trying to save their own necks, at the same time it's a case of the old proverb; "that sometimes the sun shines even on a dogs rear." After all though it helps the banks it also helps the people. First, it helps the families who are about to be foreclosed on from getting kicked to the street, at least for awhile and it also helps the people who currently own homes in this crappy real estate market, because if the banks don't stagger the foreclosing and dumping of houses on the already gutted market, it will just continue the downward spiral and it will be current home owners who will take it on the chin along with the banks.

I am not excusing the actions of the banks that led to this, just don't understand all the rage at this program.

The scary though is that this might actually take off very well, i dont think its a secret the average consumer cares much for the childrens futures.

50-100 years ago it was ALL ABOUT making sure your kids could live better than you, we seem to have not only stopped this but the balance is now shifting backward, these selfish generations dont care about tomorrow as long as todays cheaper.

Well isn't this awesome, we are going back in time here. What we have here is sharecroppers - just change the company store to BoA.

I don't like this deal at all - no one will own their home. People should just tell the banks to pound sand let them eat these mortgages. Don't want the government to take care of this either, let the banks fail.

I wish to make a public apology, to my wife, my children, my friends and anyone else who I advised regarding 'whether to let the banks and other financial institutions fail a few years back'.

I told everyone that the US could not allow this failure, regardless of cost and consequence.

My apologizes, I WAS WRONG, we could be little worse off today had we have let the rat bastiges fail completey.

Again, everyone please accept my apology, I was WRONG.

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Well isn't this awesome, we are going back in time here. What we have here is sharecroppers - just change the company store to BoA.

I don't like this deal at all - no one will own their home. People should just tell the banks to pound sand let them eat these mortgages. Don't want the government to take care of this either, let the banks fail.

Sharecroppers? No one will own their own home, seriously? Exaggerate much?

For one this is a program by one bank. Two, it only effects people who are already at risk of foreclosure; in other words these people would lose their houses anyway without this program. It's not the sharecropping or feudal system, AT ALL! Maybe, you should actually study those systems and you may see how wrong the comparison is.

And as, far as no one being able to own their own homes, that is ludicrous. People can and will still actually be able to buy homes, people will probably not enter into mortgages they can't pay though.

That is what most of you all seem to be missing, this actually helps the people at risk of imminent foreclosure, from getting thrown out on the streets, for up to three years! That is actually good.

And yes I know the banks caused this mess, but this program actually, far from being nefarious looks like a win, win to me; a win for the people and the banks.

I think I am starting to realize why so many people are raging...you think the banks should just give people homes for free....well that's not going to happen.

Anyway, I am out of this thread have fun raging.

Cue more anti bank ranting in 3...2...1.

reply to post by prisoneronashipoffools


No, this is not a good idea at all.
This is all about BOA.
If the people were thrown out on the street, then the house would deteriorate and the banks would loose money.
This also keeps the average price of houses inflated, when the prices should be dropping.
Wages have been stagnating for most American's and in order to keep up with the historic 2 to 3X annual income for a house, prices need to drop.

This is nothing more than serfdom.

Originally posted by prisoneronashipoffools

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Well isn't this awesome, we are going back in time here. What we have here is sharecroppers - just change the company store to BoA.

I don't like this deal at all - no one will own their home. People should just tell the banks to pound sand let them eat these mortgages. Don't want the government to take care of this either, let the banks fail.

Sharecroppers? No one will own their own home, seriously? Exaggerate much?

For one this is a program by one bank. Two, it only effects people who are already at risk of foreclosure; in other words these people would lose their houses anyway without this program. It's not the sharecropping or feudal system, AT ALL! Maybe, you should actually study those systems and you may see how wrong the comparison is.

And as, far as no one being able to own their own homes, that is ludicrous. People can and will still actually be able to buy homes, people will probably not enter into mortgages they can't pay though.

That is what most of you all seem to be missing, this actually helps the people at risk of imminent foreclosure, from getting thrown out on the streets, for up to three years! That is actually good.

And yes I know the banks caused this mess, but this program actually, far from being nefarious looks like a win, win to me; a win for the people and the banks.

I think I am starting to realize why so many people are raging...you think the banks should just give people homes for free....well that's not going to happen.

Anyway, I am out of this thread have fun raging.

Cue more anti bank ranting in 3...2...1.

edit on 24-3-2012 by prisoneronashipoffools because: typos

Hey Prisoner... the one thing you seem to miss here is, regardless of helping anyone else, this still enables the same 'crooks' to stay in business and find another way to screw people.

This btw is the same crap which happened in the Savings and Loans Crisis. All the banks booooed and said, We'd never do that'... and what was it... the S n Ls loaned 125% the current value of a property... gee, does that sound better than the banks loaning 400% the real value.

Read my apology above... we should have let them all fail...

This thread jogged my memory about a thread that I had done a good while back about the foreclosure crisis in relation to sustainable cities. Not only can the banks rent out homes, but they can also choose to bulldoze and rebuild however they see fit.

Here is the thread for those who are interested.
www.abovetopsecret.com...