"Borrowers would be eligible for the housing rescue if their mortgage holders were willing to take a substantial loss and allow them to refinance, and would ultimately have to share with the government a portion of any profits they made from selling or refinancing their properties."
When our loan resets in 2 years I don't want to weasle out of my original loan amount. I'm willing to pay on the full amount even though it has hemmoraged in value over 160K in less than 2 years. All I want is for my loan to stay at relatively the same rate...and to have the refinancing to a 30 year fixed be approved based on our stellar payment history, rather than our (now) sucky credit rating.
I know it's not fair that we've lost over 160K, but if I'm affording my mortgage on the original sale price I don't think I should get any "mortgage relief" because the market sucks. To me it seems like a win-win: I keep my home, the bank gets payments based on the original sale price rather than accepting a "substantial loss" or worse, foreclosing (having the home sit vacant for 18 months and eventually sell at an even bigger loss).
Unfortunately, it seems the prospects of the bank seeing it that way are pretty slim.
Sorry you took a loss, that really sucks. We didn't take a loss but we sure haven't gained a whole lot of equity. I know my home state of Arizona suffered some pretty serious losses as well. I am sure you're house will go back up in a couple of years. It's hard to be upside down on anything much less one of your largest investments. We financed my center at a fixed 5.5% for
Is this a really good idea?
"Borrowers would be eligible for the housing rescue if their mortgage holders were willing to take a substantial loss and allow them to refinance, and would ultimately have to share with the government a portion of any profits they made from selling or refinancing their properties."
When our loan resets in 2 years I don't want to weasle out of my original loan amount. I'm willing to pay on the full amount even though it has hemmoraged in value over 160K in less than 2 years. All I want is for my loan to stay at relatively the same rate...and to have the refinancing to a 30 year fixed be approved based on our stellar payment history, rather than our (now) sucky credit rating.
I know it's not fair that we've lost over 160K, but if I'm affording my mortgage on the original sale price I don't think I should get any "mortgage relief" because the market sucks. To me it seems like a win-win: I keep my home, the bank gets payments based on the original sale price rather than accepting a "substantial loss" or worse, foreclosing (having the home sit vacant for 18 months and eventually sell at an even bigger loss).
Unfortunately, it seems the prospects of the bank seeing it that way are pretty slim.
I'm thinking this is not good. Pandering from Congress...and gov't jumping in yet again.
I don't like it one bit.