Comments on: Jingle-mail datapoint of the day http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Mike http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-7859 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 03:30:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-7859 Why not go the Australian way and make all mortgages full recourse?

]]>
By: muldoon http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-7851 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:16:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-7851 Corporations walk away from their obligations everyday. The “morality” of this action is almost never debated just the soundness of the action as a business decision. There is no reason to hold an underwater homeowner to a higher standard than a giant multi-national corporation.

]]>
By: Jim http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-7822 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 16:18:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-7822 I agree with Felix. IMO, we have to rely on contracts to specify the rules of engagement. As long as there’s no fraud involved, walkaways are a perfectly “moral” or “ethical” option. Sure, we can question the logic of allowing agreements to be written where walkaways are part of the deal, but that’s a different matter.

The idea that we can somehow overlay extra-legal “moral” or “ethical” obligations onto contracts is just silly on its face. There are legal remedies for fraud and for acting in bad faith. Beyond that, our only option is to read the contract and weep.

]]>
By: Ledbury http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-7818 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 15:43:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-7818 I’ve never understood this notion that you are being nice to your lender by fulfilling your obligations. Look, just because there are pre-agreed remedies to an issue doesn’t mean that it is OK to violate the agreement to lead to those remedies. Just like it isn’t OK to sell drugs even though there is a mandatory sentencing guideline.
The pre agreed remedies are to save time and let everyone know upfrot the consequences, but it doesn’t make it a morally acceptable choice.

]]>
By: Shnaps http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-7815 Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:24:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/10/12/jingle-mail-datapoint-of-the-day/#comment-7815 Maybe that’s because the FHA has been pushing Cash-for-Keys so hard lately.

Note: the way the reporter defines a deficiency judgment in that article makes me want to deliver a Tanta-style smackdown:

In a deed-in-lieu, a borrower behind on the mortgage deeds the property over to the lender in exchange for a release from the obligation to repay the mortgage. A lender may or may not decide to waive their deficiency judgment rights, which is the right to make the borrower repay the lender down the road for the amount of money it took to fix up and sell the property.

]]>