Comments on: Detailed Analysis of Washington State Banks via Seattle Times

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:48:42 +0000

RE: anonymous @ 19 – I never said “just like.” My comment that we’re discussion was just pointing you you should not make decisions based solely on what is best for your family, as was claimed by Ray.

Sorry, I said “exactly like”, and you responded it “gets down to whether they have the ability”.

Ray was talking about letting a property go to foreclosure, and in this case I think you do what is best for your family.

Think of it this way. Your family is kind of like your shareholders. If you knowingly make decisions that harm the shareholders instead of benefiting them in a legal, moral way, you aren’t really doing your job, are you?

Reply – Kary L. Krismer @ 20<\/a>:

RE:<\/b> anonymous @ 19<\/a> - I never said \"just like.\" My comment that we\'re discussion was just pointing you you should not make decisions based solely on what is best for your family, as was claimed by Ray.<\/blockquote>\r\nSorry, I said \"exactly like\", and you responded it \"gets down to whether they have the ability\".\r\n\r\nRay was talking about letting a property go to foreclosure, and in this case I think you do what is best for your family.\r\n\r\nThink of it this way. Your family is kind of like your shareholders. If you knowingly make decisions that harm the shareholders instead of benefiting them in a legal, moral way, you aren\'t really doing your job, are you?',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:30:09 +0000

RE: anonymous @ 19 – I never said “just like.” My comment that we’re discussion was just pointing you you should not make decisions based solely on what is best for your family, as was claimed by Ray.
Reply – anonymous @ 19<\/a> - I never said \"just like.\" My comment that we\'re discussion was just pointing you you should not make decisions based solely on what is best for your family, as was claimed by Ray.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:24:52 +0000

By Kary L. Krismer @ 18:

By anonymous @ 17:

RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 16 – Letting a property go to foreclosure isn’t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts..

Again, it gets down to whether they have the ability.

So if they have the ability then it is just like stealing from neighbors? I respectfully disagree, for the reasons in comment 17.
Reply – Kary L. Krismer @ 18<\/a>:
By anonymous @ 17<\/a>:
RE:<\/b> Kary L. Krismer @ 16<\/a> - Letting a property go to foreclosure isn\'t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts..<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\nAgain, it gets down to whether they have the ability. <\/blockquote>\r\nSo if they have the ability then it is just like stealing from neighbors? I respectfully disagree, for the reasons in comment 17.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:16:20 +0000

By anonymous @ 17:

RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 16 – Letting a property go to foreclosure isn’t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts..

Again, it gets down to whether they have the ability. In the bankruptcy area I would often suggest that people see the good folks at CCC to see if they could come up with a reasonable repayment plan. Sometimes it was obvious they wouldn’t be able to do that. At some point people are in so big of a hole that there is no way they could realistically dig themselves out.

That said, I did find that people in general will say they’ll do more to repay their debts than what they actually are willing to do when push comes to shove.
Reply – anonymous @ 17<\/a>:
RE:<\/b> Kary L. Krismer @ 16<\/a> - Letting a property go to foreclosure isn\'t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts..<\/blockquote>\n\nAgain, it gets down to whether they have the ability. In the bankruptcy area I would often suggest that people see the good folks at CCC to see if they could come up with a reasonable repayment plan. Sometimes it was obvious they wouldn\'t be able to do that. At some point people are in so big of a hole that there is no way they could realistically dig themselves out.\n\nThat said, I did find that people in general will say they\'ll do more to repay their debts than what they actually are willing to do when push comes to shove.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 18:51:24 +0000

RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 16 – Letting a property go to foreclosure isn’t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts.

I think this is a lot more like someone who signs a 12 month lease which specifies a $1000 penalty for breaking the lease early, and the person decides to buy a house, or move to another state, breaks the lease, pays the $1000, and moves. It is also like someone who signs a 2 year agreement on a cell phone plan with a $300 cancellation fee, moves to a place with no reception for that carrier, cancels the plan and pays the fee.

Is it immoral, breaking a contract and paying the penalty prescribed in the contract for breaking it? Any large corporation wouldn’t hesitate to break the contract if the penalty is cheaper than the price of sticking to it. So if an individual decides to stop paying the loan and give the collateral back to the bank, is that really immoral? Presumably the bank knew or should have known the risks when it signed the contract and released the money, as much so as the individual.
Reply – Kary L. Krismer @ 16<\/a> - Letting a property go to foreclosure isn\'t exactly like stealing from your neighbors. As an ex bankruptcy lawyer I would think you would sympathize with people using legal means to reduce or get out of their debts.\n\nI think this is a lot more like someone who signs a 12 month lease which specifies a $1000 penalty for breaking the lease early, and the person decides to buy a house, or move to another state, breaks the lease, pays the $1000, and moves. It is also like someone who signs a 2 year agreement on a cell phone plan with a $300 cancellation fee, moves to a place with no reception for that carrier, cancels the plan and pays the fee. \n\nIs it immoral, breaking a contract and paying the penalty prescribed in the contract for breaking it? Any large corporation wouldn\'t hesitate to break the contract if the penalty is cheaper than the price of sticking to it. So if an individual decides to stop paying the loan and give the collateral back to the bank, is that really immoral? Presumably the bank knew or should have known the risks when it signed the contract and released the money, as much so as the individual.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 16:37:06 +0000

By Ray Pepper @ 9:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/34207654

Morally speaking do whats best for your family!

So it’s morally okay to go out and steal from your neighbors, if that benefits your family?
Reply – Ray Pepper @ 9<\/a>:
http:\/\/www.cnbc.com\/id\/34207654\r\n\r\nMorally speaking do whats best for your family!<\/blockquote>\r\n\r\nSo it\'s morally okay to go out and steal from your neighbors, if that benefits your family?',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: AMS

AMS — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:43:08 +0000

RE: Haybaler @ 14 – The FDIC has limits on how much interest can be paid. They don’t like to see troubled banks simply attract more deposits by paying an above-market rate. This may just accelerate the death.

I don’t give them long before the FDIC takeover.

We should have a poll on how long they will last.
Reply – Haybaler @ 14<\/a> - The FDIC has limits on how much interest can be paid. They don\'t like to see troubled banks simply attract more deposits by paying an above-market rate. This may just accelerate the death.\r\n\r\nI don\'t give them long before the FDIC takeover.\r\n\r\nWe should have a poll on how long they will last.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Haybaler

Haybaler — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:14:53 +0000

RE: Jillayne @ 10 –
I’ve noticed a bank advertising on TV.

The pitch is Portable CD’s. “Take them anywhere/anytime you want”.

It seems to me that the whole purpose of selling a CD is to build Capital/Cash/Reserves inside an institution. What good does it do to sell a CD that has no restrictions on it’s term of deposit?

Sounds desperate. Raises red flags in my mind. Then again, if they aren’t going to pay you anything when you deposit your funds with them I suppose one way to compete would be to eliminate restrictions…..Still, why bother?
Reply – Jillayne @ 10<\/a> - \r\nI\'ve noticed a bank advertising on TV. \r\n\r\nThe pitch is Portable CD\'s. \"Take them anywhere\/anytime you want\". \r\n\r\nIt seems to me that the whole purpose of selling a CD is to build Capital\/Cash\/Reserves inside an institution. What good does it do to sell a CD that has no restrictions on it\'s term of deposit? \r\n\r\nSounds desperate. Raises red flags in my mind. Then again, if they aren\'t going to pay you anything when you deposit your funds with them I suppose one way to compete would be to eliminate restrictions.....Still, why bother?',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: AMS

AMS — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:07:00 +0000

RE: David Losh @ 11 -
RE: Jillayne @ 10 –

Both are on the unofficial problem bank list.

http://cr4re.com/PBLNov2709.html

Hopefully that advertising pays off; otherwise, it’s likely to accelerate the FDIC takeover.
Reply – David Losh @ 11<\/a> -\r\nRE:<\/b> Jillayne @ 10<\/a> - \r\n\r\nBoth are on the unofficial problem bank list.\r\n\r\nhttp:\/\/cr4re.com\/PBLNov2709.html\r\n\r\nHopefully that advertising pays off; otherwise, it\'s likely to accelerate the FDIC takeover.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Haybaler

Haybaler — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:06:03 +0000

RE: Urban Artist @ 8 –
This is the story you were referring to? It mentions that Indymac is facing similar sanctions in Ca. too.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/judge_blasts_bad_bank_erases_debt_28ZS1oW8Y58z6gu1AQbWMI?ref=patrick.net
Reply – Urban Artist @ 8<\/a> - \r\nThis is the story you were referring to? It mentions that Indymac is facing similar sanctions in Ca. too.\r\nhttp:\/\/www.nypost.com\/p\/news\/local\/judge_blasts_bad_bank_erases_debt_28ZS1oW8Y58z6gu1AQbWMI?ref=patrick.net',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: David Losh

David Losh — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 04:23:53 +0000

RE: Jillayne @ 10 –

And Sterling Bank.
Reply – Jillayne @ 10<\/a> - \r\n\r\nAnd Sterling Bank.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Jillayne

Jillayne — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:16:55 +0000

Has anyone else noticed the feverish pace of the Cascade Bank radio ads over the past few days?
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Ray Pepper

Ray Pepper — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 02:12:39 +0000

http://www.cnbc.com/id/34207654

Morally speaking do whats best for your family!
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Urban Artist

Urban Artist — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:23:17 +0000

The other day I saw a news story about an East Coast judge that got so fed up with the bank involved that he awarded the house to the people the bank tried to foreclose on. I wonder if that will set a trend. Apparently the home owners tried to redo the loan but the bank was not willing to work with them at all. If the banks want to get rid of the toxic loans I would think they would rather work with the homeowners to avoid a foreclosure. I still have mixed feelings about it, I have no love for the banks but I think if you took out a loan you really could not afford then losing the house is what happens. Then on the other hand I thought it was great that the judge let the bank have it.
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 01:05:27 +0000

RE: Lanny Poffo @ 6 – We’ve already been discussion that article over at the mid-week open thread, starting at post 24.

http://seattlebubble.com/blog/2009/11/27/weekend-open-thread-2009-11-27/#comments

The discussion paper, IMHO, is horribly written and contains a number of errors. It’s surprising to me it’s actually written by someone with connections to the legal profession.

The summary of my position is you simply don’t know what the effects will be, because whatever the effects are today might be very different in 5, 10 or 20 years.
Reply – Lanny Poffo @ 6<\/a> - We\'ve already been discussion that article over at the mid-week open thread, starting at post 24.\r\n\r\nhttp:\/\/seattlebubble.com\/blog\/2009\/11\/27\/weekend-open-thread-2009-11-27\/#comments\r\n\r\nThe discussion paper, IMHO, is horribly written and contains a number of errors. It\'s surprising to me it\'s actually written by someone with connections to the legal profession.\r\n\r\nThe summary of my position is you simply don\'t know what the effects will be, because whatever the effects are today might be very different in 5, 10 or 20 years.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Lanny Poffo

Lanny Poffo — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:26:14 +0000

Abstract from the paper mentioned in the SF Gate article referenced is below. Looks like an interesting hypothesis, and I’d love to see how it is tested, but I don’t think I’m going to slog through 52 pages to get to it. I do notice that the SF Gate article does basically get a response from the mortgage industry insiders interviewed that is consistent with the abstract below. The primary defense by those interviewed is – it is shameful, immoral, & irresponsible to default on your mortgage. Well, that doesn’t answer the question though does it? What are the costs – legal & financial vs. what are the benfits – legal & financial should a homeowner choose to strategically default on their mortgage?

Abstract:

“Despite reports that homeowners are increasingly “walking away” from their mortgages, most homeowners continue to make their payments even when they are significantly underwater. This article suggests that most homeowners choose not to strategically default as a result of two emotional forces: 1) the desire to avoid the shame and guilt of foreclosure; and 2) exaggerated anxiety over foreclosure’s perceived consequences. Moreover, these emotional constraints are actively cultivated by the government and other social control agents in order to encourage homeowners to follow social and moral norms related to the honoring of financial obligations – and to ignore market and legal norms under which strategic default might be both viable and the wisest financial decision. Norms governing homeowner behavior stand in sharp contrast to norms governing lenders, who seek to maximize profits or minimize losses irrespective of concerns of morality or social responsibility. This norm asymmetry leads to distributional inequalities in which individual homeowners shoulder a disproportionate burden from the housing collapse.”
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Ray Pepper

Ray Pepper — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:08:58 +0000

RE: hinten @ 3 –

Its just a matter of time. people are NOT stupid…Its not a question of if………………just when…………..

They’re all coming back either by foreclosure or short sale. We are a mobile society, but its like beating a dead horse. I think I have stated this 50x.

Many will go on paying like Steve Tytler’s Az broker friend who is upside down 200k+. Let him continue to pay. Some people just take ALOT longer to realize their financial dilemma.
Reply – hinten @ 3<\/a> - \r\n\r\nIts just a matter of time. people are NOT stupid...Its not a question of if..................just when..............\r\n\r\nThey\'re all coming back either by foreclosure or short sale. We are a mobile society, but its like beating a dead horse. I think I have stated this 50x.\r\n\r\nMany will go on paying like Steve Tytler\'s Az broker friend who is upside down 200k+. Let him continue to pay. Some people just take ALOT longer to realize their financial dilemma.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: softwarengineer

softwarengineer — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:44:34 +0000

RE: hinten @ 3 –

I Hear the Rich Do It All the Time

Don’t get me wrong, you know SWE and his lament to stay debt free….but this extra morality they put on the American middle class that may be able to pay the payments anyway and conveniently doesn’t apply to the banksters or the poor who borrowed too much and can’t make the payments is a double standard.

Its welfare to the rich and poor on the middle class’ dime.

I say no welfare to anyone when it comes to bank contracts.
Reply – hinten @ 3<\/a> - \r\n\r\nI Hear the Rich Do It All the Time\r\n\r\nDon\'t get me wrong, you know SWE and his lament to stay debt free....but this extra morality they put on the American middle class that may be able to pay the payments anyway and conveniently doesn\'t apply to the banksters or the poor who borrowed too much and can\'t make the payments is a double standard.\r\n\r\nIts welfare to the rich and poor on the middle class\' dime.\r\n\r\nI say no welfare to anyone when it comes to bank contracts.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: hinten

hinten — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 18:45:04 +0000

We can all do our little part in accelerating that trend:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/29/REG81AP4K1.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0YJDaBrNw
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Kary L. Krismer

Kary L. Krismer — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:15:51 +0000

RE: Ray Pepper @ 1 – I would guess the problem there is two-fold. First, they don’t really know what problems they’re buying. Second, the same bank might be a lot cheaper down the road once it’s taken over.
Reply – Ray Pepper @ 1<\/a> - I would guess the problem there is two-fold. First, they don\'t really know what problems they\'re buying. Second, the same bank might be a lot cheaper down the road once it\'s taken over.',''); return false;">Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0

By: Ray Pepper

Ray Pepper — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:10:39 +0000

“Nor, he said, are wobbly banks getting much interest from potential buyers.”

The epitomy of chasing good money after bad. STSA @ .65……Good Night Irene!
Reply – Quote

Rate this comment: 0 0