Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear
The bank is not giving you a loan of 300k on a house worth 200k. You also forgot the bank doesn't actually have 300k to lend , they are simply borrowing the 300k at a lower interest rate than you 
If the bank sells the house for 400k do you think they give the 30k back ? So if the house sells for the same or more then you lost 30k and the bank made money.
Let's not use completely unrealistic examples.
Lets stick with your example except with a realistic re-sale value on the house.
Lets say i bought the house for rental income and the renters lost their job, they default to me , i default to the bank , the bank defaults to the government.
I shouldn't have relied on the renters to pay , the bank shouldn't have relied on me to pay and the gov shouldn't have relied on the bank to pay
everyone fucked up , but the renter didn't really lose shit, the bank didn't really lose shit , infact they made money , and i am the only one who lost a shitload of money , ya can't throw me a fucking fridge and some new drywall ?  |
Are you sure? The bank wouldn't loan someone more than a house is worth, you say? How could you possibly believe that? They were loaning whatever any half way almost coherent figure was in the "market" at the time. $100k houses were selling in some areas for $300k for chrissakes.
I've never heard of someone losing a house that sold for more than they owed.. but I would assume that if it sells for more than you owe, you would OF COURSE be paid the difference (but don't forget, they're going to want to deduct all kinds of expenses out of that... including "legal fees" with quotes)