Browsing this Thread:
3 Anonymous Users
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
 
|
The author, in the comments on the article:
"I teach swimming and I have always found it interesting that when a person is truly afraid in the water their instincts will take over and make them do all the things that will actually lead toward drowning. I look back at the choices we made and I have to think that this is precisely what happened to us." I hope Gabby realizes that the backlash has really improved her column - this one actually had useful content focusing on how to get out of a financial hole, rather than focusing on "Oh, this hole...how dark and damp it is, and I had to fire my maid, woe is me." There was a lot of self flagellation in past columns but then the next column would be about making the same set of mistakes. Hopefully Gabby can learn to not only be a better columnist because of this, but also to maybe learn to "fake it till she makes it" regarding being financially responsible. I do think the helpless persona in the columns reflected some counterproductive attitudes and actions on her part, and so maybe the more assertive tone will be reflected in her "real life" as well. One can only hope.
Posted on: 2011/8/19 13:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
 |
Foreclosed: Live and Learn, or a Hard Knocks Survival Guide For the Financially Challenged
By Gabby Creery ? Aug 17th, 2011 One recent morning my sleepy-eyed husband rolled out of bed at the crack of dawn half-awake, half-asleep to walk our impatient dog. The poor guy was completely unaware that he was in for a rather rude awakening. Our neighbor cheerfully greeted my husband and our pooch at our gate with a copy of a local paper as the two emerged from the house for their morning jaunt (still in PJs). ?Have you seen the paper?? our neighbor inquired. ?No,? he yawned back as he tried to control our dog, who was tugging desperately at her leash eager for her walk and morning relief. Our neighbor smiled as he brandished the paper with a flourish. ?Well then you better take a look,? he said, handing my husband the ?news.? The cover definitely woke him up! There I was, staring back at him in living color from the front page of the newspaper. The headline read: ?Jersey City family feels the pain of a seemingly endless foreclosure process.? While he knew that I had been interviewed for the article, neither of us ever guessed that it would land on the front page. The article was not at all well received, and as I try to write this all the negative comments are still ringing in my head. For me, this kind of feels like trying to write with an angry mob waving torches with pitchforks raised and pointed at my backside. Or at the very least, like trying to type while a cranky professor stands over my shoulder watching and waiting for me to make a mistake. (Hint: I?m going to make a mistake, because that?s what I do. I fall down and I scramble to get back up.) The interesting thing about all the commentary is that on the whole I AGREE WITH IT! We were just plain stupid and na?ve; we made huge mistakes and the consequences have been high. I am trying my best to play catch-up now and despite a few misses I?ve made some headway into all of this. I am not an expert in foreclosure by any sense of the word, but I have managed to learn a lot through this whole experience. The rest of the article is at http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... he-finacially-challenged/ I liked this one a whole lot better. She comes off far more mature and self-aware but with a whole lot less narcissism.
Posted on: 2011/8/18 14:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
This thread reminds me of that scene in Casino where they beat Joe Pesci and his brother to death with baseball bats.
Posted on: 2011/8/9 4:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Mr. President. it's the bees and spiders again! They stole my food stamps and sold them to the rats, and I tried to get down to my car for to honk the horn for help, but the snakes is guardin' it for the cockroaches! I go back upstairs, but the spiders has jammed the police lock! I ain't been inside for a week, and I know my that wife is sleepin' with the bees!
Posted on: 2011/8/9 3:38
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Because public schools can't so readily "counsel" students out of their school for performance???
Quote:
Posted on: 2011/8/9 1:31
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Charter schools do not cost the taxpayers any additional money. If anything, the residents of JC do not pay their fair share of taxes for their schools since the majority of the money that is spent is coming from the Abbott state financial aid.
Posted on: 2011/8/9 1:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Why is it necessary to think of charter schools as anything other than another variety of public school? The curriculum has to follow state guidelines and standards, teachers have to be state-certified, some of them are even - gasp! - unionized! Charter schools are just public schools with a different governance structure -- at 60% of the cost. The rest of the per pupil money goes to the district.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 23:47
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
All right, I'm sorry, I just had to blow off some steam from a conversation I heard on the morning commute about peoples' kids going to charter schools. I linked it in with people mentioning earlier in this thread that people like Ms. Creery not paying their mortgage cost the banks money and supposedly cost all us taxpayers' money in the bank bailouts. Again, I'm sorry to get off topic. I'll write to my assemblyman, Ruben Ramos, instead but since his kids go to a charter school I probably won't get too far. Maybe a letter to Senator Brian Stack instead, don't know where he stands on the issue.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 23:21
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
caj11 free associating Gabbies troubles somehow being at taxpayer expense to his taxes going up and somehow charters are costing him more. About as logical as any discussion regarding charters.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 21:29
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'm still scratching my head how this conversation took a left and ended up in charter school funding.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 21:05
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
|
Quote:
1. All well and good, but in Jersey City that 90% is, in many/most cases very close to 50%. And it doesn't take into account the facilities burden that charters carry. 2. As it should, especially in light of number 1. 3. That would make sense if people were opening charter schools for each kid. When you take several thousand kids out of the "public" system, you have ample opportunity to rightsize the staff. The savings should absolutely be proportional once you've passed a certain tipping point. The adjustments may not always happen in real time, but year to year there is no reason why they shouldn't. 4. Hearsay.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 19:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Lets take the Charter discussion to the charter thread
http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewt ... id=274373#forumpost274373]
Posted on: 2011/8/8 19:32
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2005/6/8 3:24 Last Login : 2022/11/28 0:04 From New Urbanist Area
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1429
|
We are going well off topic, but maybe that's a good thing given the prior topic of discussion....
1) Charter schools are supposed to, by law, receive 90% of the per student funding that the district is spending. However, this does not take numerous adjustments into account. The result is that in wealthy non-Abbot districts the 90% is close to or exactly at 90%, where as in Jersey City the amount per school varies greatly. Some of the "adjustments" follow the student: such as reduced or free school lunch, special ed, etc. So a charter school that has those students will receive additional funding and will be closer to the 90%. 2) The money that goes to the charters comes from the districts. 3) One could say, as I have seen here, that the district should be happy for every student that enrolls in a charter school because it takes the student off their rolls but they don't lose all the money. That makes sense to an extent, but you can't fire 1/10th of a teacher, or 1/8th of an administrator, or 1/7th of a cleaner. Some of the district's costs remain fixed, and others will not be reduced unless the number of charters is so high that you will be actually laying off large amounts of teachers, closing schools, etc. 4) And finally, not every charter school student is removed from the public school. Some students are students that would otherwise be in private school or perhaps move. The Christie administration supports proposals to allow existing private schools to convert to charters. In one sense, of course, this is a great thing. If the charter schools renew faith in public, or quasi-public, education and encourage families to keep their kids in the schools, and in the city, then that strikes me as a desirable outcome. But it does mean that those students are now taking up portions of the budget that would otherwise remain in the district schools. And it can be subject to abuse. There have been several attempts to create Hebrew immersion charter schools. Many of these groups are people who want to send their kid to a Jewish day school but can't afford the high tuition. These families would usually not be sending their kids to public schools. There is also the question as to how "public" these schools are and whether this is a back door attempt to provide a religious education with taxpayer dollars.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 18:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
1099 is for any "non-employee" income. Link to some additional information: http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-n ... beware-the-taxes-due/370/ ?In my state, the banks send a notice saying that you owe taxes on the unpaid debt,? he wrote. He?s right. In many states, any part of a mortgage that the bank forgives is reported as taxable income. In some states, you?re off the tax hook if the bank forecloses on your original mortgage. But you could still be taxed on a home equity loan or a loan you refinanced. Read more: http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-n ... es-due/370/#ixzz1UStHPhnY
Posted on: 2011/8/8 18:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
Joined:
2008/10/19 1:18 Last Login : 2020/9/25 20:40 From somewhere else
Group:
Registered Users
Posts:
1609
|
Charter schools are public schools. The difference between a charter school and a "regular" public school, in terms of budget, is that the charter school has to provide it's own building and receives approximately half the funding a "regular" public school does. If your big beef with charter schools is that they are somehow costing you more money, you are wrong. They cost the taxpayer considerably less and do not represent duplicative spending.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 18:27
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I know there are 10 of them in Jersey City alone. A whole other school system that has to be funded and a lot of money that could be going to the regular schools. I also looked at the report cards of the some of the schools and see they are funded by federal, state and local dollars and little or no private money. Oh, and maybe I haven't come across a really good one yet but the academic statistics when compared with the district and state's statistics aren't that great either. Of course, I'm sure I'll be told that the state doesn't measure the statistics fairly.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 17:39
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You obviously know so little about NJ Charter schools and their finances it's not even worth flaming you.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 16:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
I'll say it again, I don't have any sympathy for these people, and I don't think this woman is asking for it either, but her column makes for a good read.
If you don't like what this woman has to say, why are you reading her column ? Obviously some of us are more entertained by it than they choose to say in this discussion group. All of this woman's crummy decisions seem to have had consequences and she is being punished for them in one way or another. We as taxpayers might be footing some of the bill but the effect of it on our own federal and/or state taxes is really hard to trace. Although I might even agree with a lot of the earlier comments about this woman, I'll tell you something that pissed me off a lot more. I was riding the bus to work one morning when a married couple got on the bus with two fairly young, cute kids, along with another parent and kid. They were having a conversation about their kids starting school in the fall, and mentioned that they would all be going to a certain charter school in Jersey City (not going to name it). I suppose this is a whole other conversation topic, but I really hate the concept of a charter school and the tax dollars it takes away from the regular school system, yet doesn't answer to the local school board, all while my property taxes continue to rise. Somehow this city has a large contingent of middle class and upper middle class families with young children that want to continue living in this urbanized suburb as their children grow into school age, yet wouldn't be caught dead putting them in the regular public schools, but don't want to pay for a private school or home school them. So all of us (children or no children) have to continue subsidizing this charter school nonsense for the people that feel entitled to stay in a more urbanized suburb where they probably still wouldn't let your kids ride their bikes out on the street or walk to a friends house by themselves (at least not at night) versus a suburb with cul-de-sacs where kids can be out by themselves with a relative degree of safety. Yes, I know that even places like that aren't perfectly safe either but I'm guessing there are fewer child abductions per capita as you go further out into the suburbs. Anyway, I feel a much greater pinch in my property tax bill to subsidize an extra set of schools than for the bad decisions of various underwater borrowers on my federal income tax bill. Can't wait for all the flaming I'm going to get...
Posted on: 2011/8/8 3:45
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
You absolutely did go over the line. Gabbie never used her husband's full name, for good reason. He's a professional in the working world, where a prospective employer might google his full name and see the train wreck. The last name in the blog was not enough for an E-trail, but your post is. Uncalled for. We either knew his name, or didn't need to know.
Posted on: 2011/8/8 2:57
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
I don't know a lot about the mortgage modification process, but from a tax standpoint, there are a lot of different types of 1099 income. Independent contractor income is just one of them. For cancelled debt, the lender will issue a 1099-C. How much the bank would issue a 1099-C for depends on how much they think the house was worth at the time you turned the keys over to them, I believe.
Posted on: 2011/8/7 22:13
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Further, even if you did receive a 1099 because presumably the mortgage amount was a "forgiven liability" (my words) since you walked away from the asset (the house) with no remuneration and no financial benefit, how would this be (1099) income? Only way I can see this being considered any kind of income is if the house was still owned or occupied by the owner. The excerpt below should help answer this question - as does the link to the main IRS website help page. Tick, tock to anyone that is considering foreclosure or short sale tax relief on a primary residence. This act ends in 2012 (don't know if it will be extended) and offers a significant tax savings to those who go this route. It takes months (and months) to negotiate with banks, so begin the process now if you're thinking about it. ----------------------------------------------- The Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act and Debt Cancellation If you owe a debt to someone else and they cancel or forgive that debt, the canceled amount may be taxable. The Mortgage Debt Relief Act of 2007 generally allows taxpayers to exclude income from the discharge of debt on their principal residence. Debt reduced through mortgage restructuring, as well as mortgage debt forgiven in connection with a foreclosure, qualifies for the relief. This provision applies to debt forgiven in calendar years 2007 through 2012. Up to $2 million of forgiven debt is eligible for this exclusion ($1 million if married filing separately). The exclusion does not apply if the discharge is due to services performed for the lender or any other reason not directly related to a decline in the home?s value or the taxpayer?s financial condition. More information, including detailed examples can be found in Publication 4681, Canceled Debts, Foreclosures, Repossessions, and Abandonments. Also see IRS news release IR-2008-17. Link to More Information About the Relief Act
Posted on: 2011/8/7 21:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
teroli-
while i too wish anyone well in her journey to "find themself"...where u and i fundamentally disagree is that this is not a situation wholly outside her control: 1. she has control whether or not to educate herself about the family's finances --even years into the crisis, Creery refuses to look at an electric bill...then has the the chuzpah to moan about her husband not having paid it, and further implies to her jci readers that they don't have the money to pay it. How genuine is this if in another blog, she says they have been storing away the money they would have had to pay on their mortage, into their savings account? How genuine is this if she and her husband are now both working, he at a pretty decent job -- 2 income family, with, i'm assuming, more savings than the typical middle class family? as Josiered pointed out, unlike other families in foreclosure, they are still able to afford ipods, ballet, fencing, etc. lessons for their kids. as Sutherland pointed out, they are not in that "dire" a situation-- their 3 story downtown brownstone in todays market could fetch nearly enough to cover their debt -- that 300,000 market value is way low, but needed to be for the purposes of the news story, or for purposes of using the creeries to be"representative" of most families in foreclosure. so, why don't they take their savings and pay off part of their debts, work with the bank....or why don't they put their house on the market right now, and settle with the bank? It may be, to quote Gabby, in her virtually-realblog, because she "wants it all." She doen't want to have to make the hard choices. She wants to stay in the home as long as possible, so that they have a roof over their heads, without having to pay rent or a mortage, and save up the money for themselves, after they walk away from the financial mess they made. She herself admits they are "abusing the system." Don't tell us that and then expect the public to awholeheartedly embrace your journey "toward self-discovery" and "relevancy." [there's something classist here too- we criticize lowerincome welfare cheats for abusing the system, yet somehow r giving the better off a pass for doing the same thing?] 2. She also has control over what she puts out there for public consumption. It is one thing to be candid and honest with family, friends, and business associates, but this is far different. If u want to embark on a journey of self-discovery, you can write in a diary or goto therapy, if you don't want public scrutiny and critism. However, she is the one inviting the public be voyuers of this "trainwreck. That also brings up the aspect of an authenticity -- it seems there are many discrepencies, inconsistencies (are they truly broke or not? does she really want to move out, or is she trying to stay in the home as long as possible? etc) -- one cant help ask is this more an exercise in honesty and true self discovery, or more an excercise to be publically "relevant" at the expense of dignity?
Posted on: 2011/8/7 21:01
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Not too shy to talk
 
|
While it irks me that they've treated home ownership and paying taxes with such abandon, I find that she's been very honest about past mistakes. The blog is a lesson in self discovery for Gabby and we're voyeurs looking into this train-wreck of a situation. Writing about the situation and coming clean to the world is saving Gabby and keeping her relevant in a situation that she doesn't have any control over.
I wish Gabby the best of luck!
Posted on: 2011/8/7 19:55
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
sorry -- misspelled the blog's site; it's
Virtually-realblog.com
Posted on: 2011/8/7 19:20
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
GFD- really?
am i the one aggressively seeking publicity, airing out their family laundry, using the platform of foreclosure to further a career? they, not you nor i, made themselves into semi-public figures. Your indignation that i was somehow out of place to call the husband by name makes me think u either know them well, or perhaps r them? (how would anyone else, including me, know then, whether or not creery was making an effort to somehow "hide" her husband?!) certainly, her blogs couldn't be more t.m.i. I actually don't know these people, but have many friends who do and the consensus is that even the malmad's close friends are getting impatient -- and want them to get their head out of the sand and face reality. one pointed out that gabby posts the following on her blog, virtually-real.com(excerpted): ---------------------------------- "When we had money I had a housekeeper who worked for us three days a week. She was a saint! She did all of our laundry, cleaned our house from top to bottom, put every last thing in place and kept our home in tip top order. We held on to her as long as we possibly could after my husband lost his job. First cutting back to two days, then one and then every other week but finally we had to let the dear woman go, leaving me the ?housekeeper? of the family. Only at this time I was also going back to work and I was trying desperately to ?create? still more work for myself and I was still taking care of four kids who hadn?t a clue of how to take care of themselves. In my ignorance I had ?spoiled? my kids. My kids hadn?t the foggiest notion as to how to pick up after themselves, do the dishes, sweep, mop, or do any form of housekeeping at all. Everything fell on me and I?m guessing you can see how that turned out. I got crankier and crankier. Overnight I turned from the mom everyone adored to the mom everyone loathed. I became prone to yelling, nagging, and general impatience. Like it or not I now have my own set of CONSEQUENCES to deal with. And like my youngest daughter I am none too pleased with having to deal. Life really was easier with money. This is the cold hard fact that every now and again rears its ugly head and sticks its tongue out at me. True, my kids will be ?better off? having finally (I hope) learned to take care of themselves. True I will be ?better off? having gained some independence through working. But, I don?t think my family on the whole will be ?better off? until we find a way to kick all of this underlying stress and anxiety out of our lives. And that won?t happen until we are indeed ?better off?[i.e. financially rich -- she then goes on to excroriate the really rich for not "facing the consequences of their addiction to spending, while] "I wish I could have it all. I wish I could have all the wonderful things that my family and I have learned through all of this with the comfort and security that I felt when we had money. . .My daughter and I have had to face our individual consequences for our misdeeds and now I think it?s high time for the wealthy to face theirs. But there doesn?t seem to be any consequences for the rich. How can there be if they can buy their way out of them?. . . This leads me right back right back to that cold, hard ugly fact. Things really are easier when you have money. This is what I think of when I face the foreclosure of my house. I want to draw the process out as long as humanly possible. We live each day as if we are still making a house payment. We take that money and we religiously put it all in the bank, thus creating a cushion for our family for the day when this is finally over. Tell me this is not out of whack? It is. We are abusing the system. I know there will be consequences. I pray that they won?t be more severe than that which we?ve already gone through." ---------------------------- I'm not saying these aren't nice people, that they don't want the best for their kids. I'm sure they are, and do. and let me make clear, on some level of course i feel sympathy, as i would for anyone going through a reduction in life circumtances. But if these people are telling us that each month, they are putting away the money they owe to the bank into their own savings for the future, and now want to simply "walk away" from their obligations....or lamenting the fact that their electricity was turned off, not apparently because they don't have the money to pay it, but the wife couldn't be bothered to look at the bills...and then moaning about how the "rich" suffer no consequences, but they do (assuming they mean one consequence as being they no longer have the housekeeper every other day?)....well, that's where i want to say to them, welcome to normal life, with working moms who go to work, but don't have housekeepers, where we do have to make sure our bills get paid, where we don't have the luxury of squirrelling away the mortage money each month "for a rainy day."
Posted on: 2011/8/7 19:15
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Quote:
Are you sure? I thought a 1099 was income received as an independent contractor. Further, even if you did receive a 1099 because presumably the mortgage amount was a "forgiven liability" (my words) since you walked away from the asset (the house) with no remuneration and no financial benefit, how would this be (1099) income? Only way I can see this being considered any kind of income is if the house was still owned or occupied by the owner. Next, what is in it for the note holder (IE bank)? Anything beyond vindictiveness? Can any one enlighten or point me to a place that explains?
Posted on: 2011/8/7 19:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
They have no assets to liquidate and pay down the mortgage so that is not an option. They are good people. And they did what they thought was best for them at the time. Thoughts? Gerald is a time-tested local business owner who helps individuals just like the good people you described. He's easy to talk to, highly knowledgeable about the process of being underwater, and able to negotiate with banks. I highly recommend his business and services. Gerald Lucas, Managing Director Performance Property, LLC 880 Bergen Ave, Suite 201 Jersey City, NJ 07306 Phone: (201)-222-2979 Fax: (201)-222-2978 www.sellhomenownj.com
Posted on: 2011/8/7 18:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Home away from home
|
Quote:
Walk away, hand the keys over to the mortgage company: Downsides..... Credit destroyed for 7 years Mortgage note holder could sue or issue a 1099 for the loan balance which would inflict a horrific tax bill on the former owner. Threaten to walk-away: Convince the lender to forgive part of the principal or allow a short-sale. Generally, the lender won't enter negotiation until after you have stopped paying.
Posted on: 2011/8/7 16:43
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Just can't stay away
|
Sounds like Beachguy did what he could and made the best of a bad situation. I commend him. I hope it works out in the long run, he certainly deserves it.
Nevertheless, I have some very close friends in a similar situation to what his was. Difference is I can see no way for them to get their head above water like Beachguy did. They paid 465K in early 2007 for a place that is now worth at most 300K. They still owe 400K. They have been making the payments but just barely. Husband has been actively looking for decent employment for slightly over a year now, he has not found anything that will pay much more than child care costs would be if he does work. I look at their situation and say, "why keep paying on a mortgage that will still probably be upside down 10 years from now.?" (Keep in mind this is the heights not DT so property values are not nears so great or have so much upside.) As a family I think they would be so much better off to just rent, pocket the difference, (about $800/month less to rent than their current payment). They have no assets to liquidate and pay down the mortgage so that is not an option. They are good people. And they did what they thought was best for them at the time. Thoughts?
Posted on: 2011/8/7 15:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Downtown: Having taken out huge second loan at height, couple now owes more than it's worth.
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Newbie
|
Really NJList? You had to go mention her husband's name, although she never has? You must know them. I'm not defending their actions...I'm just sayin'.
Posted on: 2011/8/7 13:44
|
|||
|
||||