Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (78466)	5/30/2007 11:10:45 AM
From: Think4Yourself	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

That's an interesting scam. Since rent isn't usually tied to mortgage payments, owners going into default can rent out the home and pocket all the proceeds. Renter makes all payments but still gets evicted after foreclosure and owner walks away with more cash. Will have to remember that one. Suspect murder rates will go up in former bubble areas, and many of the victims (and perpetrators) will have foreclosures in their recent history. Our government sure isn't doing anything about all these problems. All along they have just sat on their worthless a$$es and collected tax revenues.

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (78466)	5/30/2007 11:12:06 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 306849

RE:"Wade and his girlfriend first rented from Victor Clavizzao, a loan officer and felon" Nah, can't be...lol

To: Travis_Bickle who wrote (78466)	5/30/2007 11:35:18 AM
From: ChanceIs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

>>>Forced to leave one house because the lender foreclosed, he wound up in another rental whose owner is also behind in mortgage payments.<<< Hmmmm. I am a little surprised that this is happening. I am sure that real estate law varies from state to state. In general, it has been written largely to favor the tenants. The lease contract I imagine would be binding regardless of who owned the property - in the sense that it is a contract between the house and the tenant. I would suppose that a foreclosing party would inherit the house and the obligations against the house i.e. the current lease contract. A foreclosing party certainly inherits the back tax obligation. By analogy, there is the obligation to provide the shelter for the specified period. Again, local real estate law and rental contract would have a lot to say, but fundamentally, the tenant is getting hammered there big time. One would suppose that the foreclosing banks would appreciate the rental income in the near term, especially with today's high foreclosure rates. Of course if the new owner attending the bank's REO sale wanted to move in, there would be real problems.