›

Rain City Guide: Foreclosure post

AlanAlan
edited July 2007 in Housing Bubble
Referencing this post: http://www.raincityguide.com/2007/06/30/to-foreclose-or-not-to-foreclose/

I didn't have anything constructive to say so I'm starting a non-constructive thread here.

My comment:
That is the sort of problem a 2:1 buy to rent ratio causes and why I am not buying in the King County market at this time.

Comments

  • Lake Hills RenterLake Hills Renter
    Just a couple of sentences into the story and I'm wondering how anyone can think buying 1.5 hours away is better than renting much closer for cheaper. Sucks for the guy, but he brought it on himself.
  • femtofemto
    The Bay Area is whack, and that guy's situation is far from unique. Renting isn't always a palatable option, particularly for families with young children. When renting a house you're always facing the possibility of the landlord selling it (which is more likely when sales prices are very high relative to rents), and then no guarantee you'll get to stay near the same school, etc. Buying a house out in Gilroy or Salinas or Tracy could easily seem like a good move: more living space, bigger yard, etc. Also he probably wasn't comparing the $450K purchase price to what he could rent for in the new town, he was comparing it to the $1MM he'd pay for something comparable closer in to the Bay. That commute however is something few people truly understand the horror of until they live it. I used to live in Santa Cruz and worked remotely for a company in Campbell (just north of San Jose), and had to drive in about once a week. I could barely tolerate that, and now Santa Cruz is considered a relatively easy commute (and homes there have become rediculously expensive). Seattlites think Issaquah or Woodinville are long commutes, but compared to the 50 mile snail crawl up 101 to San Jose from one of the southen bedroom communities or (gack) driving in from Tracy through Contra Costa county and funneling across the bridge, our commutes are like a trip to the corner store.
  • EleuaEleua
    It is my undersanding that in both California and Washington the only recourse against a borrower is the house in foreclosure. I am also under the impression that if you went the refi route, they may have further recourse against your other assets.

    I am not an attorney, but I don't think a lender can come after you if they can't make the money in foreclosure unless you monkeyed with the original TD.

    Seconds and thirds may have recourse.

    Anyone know for sure?

    With all the refis that went out during the bubble, this could be a major fecal panini for banks and borrowers and a bonanza for the legal community.
Sign In or Register to comment.