Comments on: Democrats’ central foreclosure-fighting measure may fall to filibuster

By: Brenda

Brenda — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:17:13 +0000

What would help break this mess up is a bill to stop the exemption and modifications by bankruptcy judges on second homes, vacation properties, yachts and boats, etc. If a primary home cannot be salvaged by the court, then the frills should also stop. This hits the same folks whose interests it is to prevent the ‘cramdowns’ of primary homes. Once they and their friends (the place where the lobbyists and banker fall), usually people used to living pretty high on the hog cannot shelter or modify these ‘less ‘ non essential’ properties, some negotiating room should open for the ordinary folks who are struggling with bad economic situations to save their homes when they meet the rules proposed.

By: Eric Ferguson

Eric Ferguson — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:48:27 +0000

Other loans can be modified in bankruptcy. I believe the credit card companies got themselves protected in the 2005 bankruptcy law, but otherwise, if I understand correctly, home mortgages are the only exceptions. Somehow, higher risk and interest rates aren’t a concern for other loans. My guess is the banks have credit default swaps on mortgage backed securities, so they do better with defaults than modifications.

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:42:50 +0000

*paying homeowners

By: Laura

Laura — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:42:25 +0000

This seems so backwards to me. If a family does go into foreclosure, the bank gets no money, and a house that they don’t want and can’t sell for any appreciable amount. Isn’t that why we’re having an economic melt down in the first place? Doesn’t re-negotiating mortgages work out best for everyone involved? The argument that they will have to raise rates on paying investors also makes no sense to me. If the houses foreclose, they get no money, they have to raise rates anyway, no?

By: alex

alex — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:36:34 +0000

Thanks for sharing. It is useful for me.