4 ms·
A $40k condo that the owner only wasn't upside-down on because part of the seizure process was zeroing out the mortgage, unless the government's lawyer was just
by yamtaddle 3y ago
A $40k condo that the owner only wasn't upside-down on because part of the seizure process was zeroing out the mortgage, unless the government's lawyer was just flat-out lying on NPR this morning.
[EDIT] To be fair, it might have sold for more than the mortgage balance in an ordinary sale, but I'm not sure it's reasonable to demand the government put in extra effort to maximize sale price, in cases like this. I do think this practice deserves some scrutiny, but IMO this is a pretty poor exemplar-case and the details seem to be rather overstated in much of the coverage and reactions.
- flerchin 3y agoThe county should not get to keep the excess. The mortgage should not be zeroed out, the bank should get the excess, then the owner. Right?
- yamtaddle 3y agoYeah, barring some compelling argument otherwise, I'd think the mortgage-holder is the one owed money here, and since it seems like most states make this system work without keeping profit from sales, I'm skeptical that compelling argument exists.