This isn't even about Kevin Martin anymore, it should be moved to D and D. In my opinion, if you have the money you should pay off the mortgage. It's not like Martin would have any problems paying it.
The bank takes the full loss on the depreciation, unless there was a down payment was 50% of the depreciation. It is not right for a bank to share in the devaluation, since borrowers never shared the appreciation during the good times. The bank was not a 50% owner. Before the bust, people used to think that housing prices would go up and up and they didn't think about the depreciation that other assets normally go through. Other financed items have a devaulation at an even higher depreciation rate than cars, such as cars for auto loans(10-20% instant drop after it is driven off the lot), furniture for furniture loans, and misc consumer goods(clothes, computers, radios, tvs, CDs) for credit cards.
I don't know what the laws are in the Cali, but in Texas, the bank can theoretically still sue you you for the your debt even if they foreclose on your property. Its happened to someone I knew in the 80s. He bought a newer bigger house while the housing market was in the tank and let the bank foreclose on the original house he had. The bank went after him.
He's not a bad guy its just not right. The lender gave him money to buy the house at the value he believed it was worth, why should the bank share the coat in the devaluing.
he has broken no law,.... dont feel sorry for the banks at all... banks only do what makes the the most money...
Well, both sides are trying their negotiating tactics. I'm sure he will do the right thing when the final decision has been made. Let's show respect for the guy. He's a Rocket, for goodness' sake. We don't know all the details to make an accurate judgment. So let's just hold off from making conclusions for now.
He wants to sell the house; he's not going to live in California anymore. I think he bought some property in Tampa, Florida this summer.
Regardless if this is a good business decision or not, having good credit is so much more powerful and prestigious than it was before. Who knows what the future will hold for KM, but if he does indeed default, his future borrowing capability will be reduced considerably. Who's to say he still will be highly liquid later in life?
Why don't people with enough money just pay cash? Why take out a mortgage for a 1.9mil house when you make multiple millions per year? That's just paying extra for no reason.
Because he would be in the whole for it right now because of the declining value of the house. He can save much more money by defaulting on the house given the market and the California laws. This is actually a shrewed move taking advantage of the situation. If he were in Texas, it would be a bad move.
Nobody is being disrespectful, just saying its not right. It's no different than a business reorganizing and screwing their shareholders. He signed the contact and he needs to own up to it since he can afford it.
Yes, a good discussion perfectly suited to Hangout (NOT D&D!!), but not Game Action and Roster Moves, in my humble opinion.
Loans can be renegotiated or refinanced. It's not like the banks set out to lend without profit. Martin can buy that house back for $1.1M at auction. It's in the banks interest to play ball. They probably see him as a dollar sign coming to this.
