house

[btbeme]

As for the Chase/WaMu short sale payout, the qualifiers are:

- Must be an Option ARM originated with WaMu
- Must be purchase money (hasn't been refinanced)
- Must not have a second or HELOC

If these are all in place, the process is simple - start the short sale packet with Chase and ask for the deal.

And, the short sale must close. That is sometimes the tricky part.

[tobee43]

As for the Chase/WaMu short sale payout, the qualifiers are:

- Must be an Option ARM originated with WaMu
- Must be purchase money (hasn't been refinanced)
- Must not have a second or HELOC

If these are all in place, the process is simple - start the short sale packet with Chase and ask for the deal.

And, the short sale must close. That is sometimes the tricky part.

yes, indeed, that does sound tricky and extremely limited as to who would qualify for the program, but what else is new? i'm just very glad for you that your fell into the category! now you have to get that closing date!

[btbeme]

I would encourage most people in this predicament to at least explore the short sale possibility. There could be financial compensation, and it shows that you attempted to take control of the situation - which may come in handy down the road.

Short sale is a PITA, but who knows what the banks will say down the road? On a short sale or a foreclosure, the banks say that you are "eligible" for a new loan after 2 years...but that doesn't say that you will get one. It is up to the bank and their underwriters, who might - MIGHT - see a short sale as a more positive outcome. But who knows?

[tobee43]

I would encourage most people in this predicament to at least explore the short sale possibility. There could be financial compensation, and it shows that you attempted to take control of the situation - which may come in handy down the road.

Short sale is a PITA, but who knows what the banks will say down the road? On a short sale or a foreclosure, the banks say that you are "eligible" for a new loan after 2 years...but that doesn't say that you will get one. It is up to the bank and their underwriters, who might - MIGHT - see a short sale as a more positive outcome. But who knows?

i hear you, however thus far, it's been more BAD than good. i'm hoping for the sake of many it may change, after all stranger things have happened right?

i must say, if chase called me today about a short sale, after our bk has already been closed for so long, and the house was surrendered just about 4 years ago, i'd most likely to tell them to take a nice long hike but, then again, that's just me LOL!

[btbeme]

Couldn't agree more, tobee. The housing market and the clowns involved will have to take a long hard look at how business is done in the future. If they refuse to lend due to the residue of this collapse (and all the foreclosures, short sales, BKs, etc), then their potential market has shrunk dramatically. And though the collapse was precipitated by folks who could not afford their mortgage, it has caught a lot of other folks who could, or did, or decided not to pay via strategic default. And how do you go about changing the laws to prevent it from happening again?

I think that they will have to lock down of certain aspects of of their lending practices and focus on the ability of the borrower to pay, regardless of past transgressions. I'll bet that it won't be impossible to get a loan in a few years, but the price may be higher and the down payment larger. Just a guess.

Frankly I'm not sure that we will want to own again for a while, at least - maybe ever - unless we can do it without a mortgage. I am exploring some new and interesting co-op builders and financiers who seem to have a pretty good way to make housing affordable without a traditional mortgage. Home ownership inside of 5 years, no mortgage, is possible with these folks. I'll post info if it pans out in a different forum.

[jst4f]

From a liability perspective it would be good to get your name off the deed as soon as possible since you are not living there or close by to keep an eye on it. If someone is injured they could name you in a lawsuit and whether they win or not it will be a huge drain on you to defend without insurance. We are keeping an umbrella insurance (liability only) as long as our name is on the deed. That said I would not lift a finger to short sale it either. If the bank and a realator want to do it fine. What I would do is ask for a deed in lieu. It might be fun to call the bank daily asking if they have started foreclosure yet.

[tobee43]

From a liability perspective it would be good to get your name off the deed as soon as possible since you are not living there or close by to keep an eye on it. If someone is injured they could name you in a lawsuit and whether they win or not it will be a huge drain on you to defend without insurance. We are keeping an umbrella insurance (liability only) as long as our name is on the deed. That said I would not lift a finger to short sale it either. If the bank and a realator want to do it fine. What I would do is ask for a deed in lieu. It might be fun to call the bank daily asking if they have started foreclosure yet.

i hear you and what you and others in calif. have been saying. i am happy that you can get liability insurance were you are, no one would do it, not a one company where we had/have the property. no one!

do you know any one this has happened to? again once you leave your premises or in some cases stop paying and staying the bank covers the house. not for your personal property but for fire hazard, and if you are smart and have no trespassing signs all around if you have a slip an fall, it's at the party's own risk to enter without permission. i'm not implying one would never attempt to sue, but it's certainly difficult to sue a an insolvent person that one was trespassing on the property you were squatting in.

if one is so worried i suggest they leave ASAP, just get out! i'm not talking about places one owns and is renting out. i have other thoughts about those situations, of people who rent out property they are on foreclosure on and keep the money etc. (i'll keep that one to myself).

that's like saying when a bank changes the locks on a place and decides not to re sale it for some reason and some neighbor kids went to play in the vacant and slips and falls 10 years later, they are going to go looking for the people's name on the old deed and not the bank who has secured/not secured the premises. not likely.



and, with all due respect, in many cases where a deed does not have to transfer for 15 years or, so no name change has occurred, it would be safe to say the person/persons names whom are on that deed that never transfered will not be responsible.

this question has gone round and round and round. again. i say. show me, show me where someone has been liable for someone else falling while trespassing and just because someone's name is still on the deed they are responsible.

again, if you stop paying your mortgage and still want liability insurance on the place, maybe you can do that in the state you are in, however in some states they simply do not allow it once the bank has put a notice of foreclosure.

just a general observation note here: it must be calif., i continue to see the same information coming for those living in calif. it could be that that is the way it may be there, but it's not a standard through out the country. not disqualify other states that may have the same type of situation.

[tobee43]

Couldn't agree more, tobee. The housing market and the clowns involved will have to take a long hard look at how business is done in the future. If they refuse to lend due to the residue of this collapse (and all the foreclosures, short sales, BKs, etc), then their potential market has shrunk dramatically. And though the collapse was precipitated by folks who could not afford their mortgage, it has caught a lot of other folks who could, or did, or decided not to pay via strategic default. And how do you go about changing the laws to prevent it from happening again?

I think that they will have to lock down of certain aspects of of their lending practices and focus on the ability of the borrower to pay, regardless of past transgressions. I'll bet that it won't be impossible to get a loan in a few years, but the price may be higher and the down payment larger. Just a guess.

Frankly I'm not sure that we will want to own again for a while, at least - maybe ever - unless we can do it without a mortgage. I am exploring some new and interesting co-op builders and financiers who seem to have a pretty good way to make housing affordable without a traditional mortgage. Home ownership inside of 5 years, no mortgage, is possible with these folks. I'll post info if it pans out in a different forum.

that' s such an excellent out look! also being creative is the key if one so choses to own again. i'm not saying everyone will luck into a situation ike ours, where we had 100% owner finacing and by passed the banks completely, but there are ways around the system!

[scooter6251]

Hi tobee,
Hope your holidays were fun & good. I had a realtor call me recently that had an interested buyer for our FL house that lost in BK7 and no longer occupy. Just because we would like to be rid of the house, I called the bank to see if there were interested in looking at the short sale. NO, not unless I completed a total financial package (same as a request for a loan modification) I said absolutely not ! All they need to know about my financial situation is that my debt to them was discharged by the BK court. I have no intention of providing them all my financial info a year after we were discharged. So without that, they will not consider any short sale or DIL. OK, fine. Dang they are a stupid bunch.

[jst4f]

i hear you and what you and others in calif. have been saying. i am happy that you can get liability insurance were you are, no one would do it, not a one company where we had/have the property. no one!

do you know any one this has happened to? again once you leave your premises or in some cases stop paying and staying the bank covers the house. not for your personal property but for fire hazard, and if you are smart and have no trespassing signs all around if you have a slip an fall, it's at the party's own risk to enter without permission. i'm not implying one would never attempt to sue, but it's certainly difficult to sue a an insolvent person that one was trespassing on the property you were squatting in.

if one is so worried i suggest they leave ASAP, just get out! i'm not talking about places one owns and is renting out. i have other thoughts about those situations, of people who rent out property they are on foreclosure on and keep the money etc. (i'll keep that one to myself).

that's like saying when a bank changes the locks on a place and decides not to re sale it for some reason and some neighbor kids went to play in the vacant and slips and falls 10 years later, they are going to go looking for the people's name on the old deed and not the bank who has secured/not secured the premises. not likely.



and, with all due respect, in many cases where a deed does not have to transfer for 15 years or, so no name change has occurred, it would be safe to say the person/persons names whom are on that deed that never transfered will not be responsible.

this question has gone round and round and round. again. i say. show me, show me where someone has been liable for someone else falling while trespassing and just because someone's name is still on the deed they are responsible.

again, if you stop paying your mortgage and still want liability insurance on the place, maybe you can do that in the state you are in, however in some states they simply do not allow it once the bank has put a notice of foreclosure.

just a general observation note here: it must be calif., i continue to see the same information coming for those living in calif. it could be that that is the way it may be there, but it's not a standard through out the country. not disqualify other states that may have the same type of situation.

It might be a California thing. Not sure. In the Peoples Democratic Republic of California anyone can sue anyone at any time for any reason and get their time in court. (BTW just heard that in France you can sue a driver for mental distress if a friend of yours is killed in a car accident.) We got our umbrella liability insurance from our homeowners insurance company, Amica. It covers all our rental properties. Is it needed?? Not sure but we feel better knowing it is there.

[tobee43]

Hi tobee,
Hope your holidays were fun & good. I had a realtor call me recently that had an interested buyer for our FL house that lost in BK7 and no longer occupy. Just because we would like to be rid of the house, I called the bank to see if there were interested in looking at the short sale. NO, not unless I completed a total financial package (same as a request for a loan modification) I said absolutely not ! All they need to know about my financial situation is that my debt to them was discharged by the BK court. I have no intention of providing them all my financial info a year after we were discharged. So without that, they will not consider any short sale or DIL. OK, fine. Dang they are a stupid bunch.

hey scooter! you too! wish you a wondrous new year and hope your holidays were glorious


it's a wonder the realtor even bother. as des pointed out really the only one that benefits is those realtors!!

after many go through the process and stress of a bk, the last thing they want to go through is more paper work and MORE stress for someone else's benefit, at least that's the way i view it.

[tobee43]

It might be a California thing. Not sure. In the Peoples Democratic Republic of California anyone can sue anyone at any time for any reason and get their time in court. (BTW just heard that in France you can sue a driver for mental distress if a friend of yours is killed in a car accident.) We got our umbrella liability insurance from our homeowners insurance company, Amica. It covers all our rental properties. Is it needed?? Not sure but we feel better knowing it is there.

yes, i understand. i was born and raised in the bay area and it's usually been a fairly "fair" state in most cases. also since i pay monthly homeowners on two properties in calif for a trust i handle it's so much less expensive there than in many other states, i was somewhat shocked, i think the company is safeco.

i'm certain you feel much better having it. i think if we had stayed and not paid, we would have been really uneasy with no liability insurance for certain. i think my point is more with respect to once one vacates the premises and the bank changes the locks etc. France...LOL!! well, that is interesting, wonder what else they allow to sue for.

[jst4f]

It might be a California thing. Not sure. In the Peoples Democratic Republic of California anyone can sue anyone at any time for any reason and get their time in court. (BTW just heard that in France you can sue a driver for mental distress if a friend of yours is killed in a car accident.) We got our umbrella liability insurance from our homeowners insurance company, Amica. It covers all our rental properties. Is it needed?? Not sure but we feel better knowing it is there.

I have been corrected by the wife relative to the original post for this thread. To get the umbrella coverage you have to be current on your residence. The original post, they were no longer in their residence and were not current. Our umbrella covers our abandoned rental properties. Also the banks have not put their locks on the property....yet. Not sure how a lawyer's blame storming would go for the case where the bank had shown ownership via their locks on the door. I hope I don't find out.

[tobee43]

I have been corrected by the wife relative to the original post for this thread. To get the umbrella coverage you have to be current on your residence. The original post, they were no longer in their residence and were not current. Our umbrella covers our abandoned rental properties. Also the banks have not put their locks on the property....yet. Not sure how a lawyer's blame storming would go for the case where the bank had shown ownership via their locks on the door. I hope I don't find out.

i hope as well.