You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
If you owe money on your home, are you really a 'homeowner?'
- Thread starter ByLoSellHi
- Start date
Quote from Hydroblunt:
At the end of the day, several government groups can come in and just take your property. FEMA, Port Authority, IRS, EPA and various uses of eminent domain & condemning the property . You won't even be allowed to finish a sentence before they kick you out. And no, they don't actually have to have a valid reason, IRS certainly does not need one.
.
Even funnier. The government can make a law - anyone called "Hydroblunt" on Elitetrader.com is subject to summary execution, and it will be legal and will happen. If you think the letter of the law is a protection, you are technically correct but meaningfully utterly wrong. Seriously dude you need to get a grip. No rights are absolute, they are de facto. Lender rights are far more precarious than owner rights. Renters even have pretty good rights. The mortgage holder is by far the weakest party in any property transaction.
If you start talking about the risk of a government voiding property rights, you have much more to worry about than your mortgage.
Quote from OldTrader:
Let me get this straight. You are completely wrong about your statement concerning mortgages being called, you admit it, and then you're gonna tell me to "do my homework"? LOL!
Try reading my whole post and noticing that I did admit that you are right about the mortgages being called nowdays. I assume you are correct on it, a bank can't just call the mortgage without a reason. The current regulations on residential mortgages prevent it
However, the tactic of extending loans & mortgages and then calling them at will to accomplish certain goals has occurred throughout history and in the past century. If you think it can't happen again, you're just being ignorant.
Where you are wrong is the notion that the government has little or no power to just take your land. The legislation since 2000, says otherwise. EPA has long had that power, so has Port Authority (which is actually a quasi government & private entity).
It's ok, I know you are a big proponent of owning real estate and think it's infallible. You feel that renting & leasing is always wrong, only buying (through whatever means) is the 100% correct answer.
Quote from OldTrader:
Nope. You're completely wrong. Residential mortgages cannot be called because they are sold. And no, it has never been done. The only reason a residential mortgage can be called is if the borrower defaults on the note. You can do that by not paying the monthly payment. There are other ways you can default of course, but this is by far the most common.
Further, transferring a mortgage does not make any of the clauses in the mortgage "void". Geezuz, where do you get this stuff? Complete nonsense.
In general, no, this is not true either. This is part of what the "responsibilities" of ownership entail. For instance, you have to pay your income taxes. If you don't, and the IRS obtains a lien against you, it attaches to the property. However, it's rare that the IRS will actually seize the property. Typically the lien sits there and encumbers the property.
EPA, yeah, you can't violate certain federal and/or local ordinances concerning the environment. Hello? This is part of being responsible. Do you claim you have no freedom if you are required to pay attention to traffic signals?
In recent years it is true there have been some real travestys regarding eminent domain. This affects very few however. I don't make light of it, I just am not willing to say you don't own property because their have been some ridiculous eminent domain cases. That said, even here, there is a legal process that must be undertaken, not all successful. And the owner must be fairly compensated for his property.
No renters don't have the same rights. Renters have a temporary right defined by a lease, which may be terminated as specified in the lease. The lease will also define how the renter may use the property. And the renter only has the right of possession and enjoyment. Not even close to ownership.
OldTrader
Read and learn. This is the difference between someone with real lengthy experience of a business, who has a pretty good understanding of the operational facts, and an internet message board blowhard who thinks he knows everything.
When it comes to legalities, rights, possession and so on - I take the opinion of a multi-decade landlord over a young prop trader any day.
Quote from Cutten:
When you actually take the time to read the legislation, such as Patriot Act I & II, Homeland Security Act, Military Commissions Act, then, maybe I can take your insults more seriously.
But then, how many people actually take the time to read the fine print, instead of just letting mass media giving them the Cliff Notes version.
When Port Authority built the tunnels, you think they took a vote among the stakeholders?
Quote from OldTrader:
At what point does one "own" their home? Legally, one owns it the instant the deed is executed and recorded.
The size of the mortgage and/or the amount of equity don't change legal ownership. The way it is referred to legally is that you own the property "subject to the mortgage". You own it, the bank has a lien recorded which secures their interest in the property that enabled you to buy it to begin with.
There are a certain "bundle of rights" that are legally transferred with the property. For instance, you have the "right of possession". No one else may "possess" this property unless they do something legally to permit that. A lender for example may foreclose to change "possession". But he may only foreclose after undertaking a legal procedure set forth in state law.
Another right is the right of "exclusion". Once the deed has been recorded in your name you may decide who may use or enter your property.
The "right of enjoyment", the "right of control", these are all parts of your bundle of rights that you legally obtain when the deed is recorded in your name.
You may bargain away part of your bundle of rights. For instance, you can lease your property to someone else which would give them the right of possession in return for a monthly fee (rent).
Yes, your property is encumbered by a loan perhaps. But that does not give the lender any of the bundle of rights that go with the ownership of the property. Again, the lender may only obtain ownership rights by foreclosing, which is only done if you default on your contract with the lender.
Perhaps you guys have the "rights" of legal ownership confused with the responsibilities of ownership. Some of those responsibilities may include paying your loan, paying taxes. You may also have to mow your lawn to be in compliance with city ordinances. These are all responsibilities, but they don't mean you don't "own" the property.
OldTrader
Nope - not in some states - a mortgage actually conveys the legal title to the lender.
Usually somebody asks 'well then what does a mortgage give the lender in the rest of the states?'
The answer is the equitable title is conveyed.
At that point we are so far over even Einstein's genius, it's better to just pay the fken lawyer.
You never "Own" your home. That is the American Dream turned to Nightmare. If you can't pay your property taxes, they take it away.
Owning a home is nothing more than Smoke Screen.
Owning Land is a little diffrent however, they can take your land away if you can't pay your taxes.
These are facts not rummors.
Sometimes you have to wake up , out of the matrix.
However, America has some of the best "Ownership" protection laws" unless you can't pay the taxes.
Wake Up
Owning a home is nothing more than Smoke Screen.
Owning Land is a little diffrent however, they can take your land away if you can't pay your taxes.
These are facts not rummors.
Sometimes you have to wake up , out of the matrix.
However, America has some of the best "Ownership" protection laws" unless you can't pay the taxes.
Wake Up
Quote from OldTrader:
Let me get this straight. You are completely wrong about your statement concerning mortgages being called, you admit it, and then you're gonna tell me to "do my homework"? LOL!
Actually, I retract my statement, and in fact, you are not correct.
Thanks to your nuthugger Cutten insulting me, I took the time to "do my homework".
Only FHA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and VA mortgages have strict guidelines about mortgage not being callable unless there is default.
All other mortgages, particularly subprime can be, depending on the fine print. Lenders can, have and are trying to call loans based on changing LTVs & FMVs, as they were able to hide it away in the fine print.
My guess is that you think that the noble & honorable mortgage industry would not put in demand features like this. It's not like an en masse call in of loans & mortgages has happened in the past 100 years.
Are you for real?Quote from ByLoSellHi:
At what point does one 'own' their home?
Is it when they have 20% equity, 50%, 85%?
Or does one really only 'own' one's home when it's completely unencumbered by any mortgage or other such albatross?
This is an important point that merits discussion in an age in which American Politicians, particularly, trumpet the home 'ownership' rates, even when we are in the midst of a fairly serious housing crisis in which many homes have lost relative value, and a fair share of homeowners have negative equity as they owe more on their homes than what the underlying home is worth.
Owning home itâs illusion, miss some payments and the owner will take it .Even after mortgage is paid off âmiss some tax payments and the owner will show up, you donât even own your selfâ¦
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7071159661604320560