5 ms·

During this same time period I had a project at a part-time gig which involved updating document templates and adding a few fields here and there for a legal ap

During this same time period I had a project at a part-time gig which involved updating document templates and adding a few fields here and there for a legal application. The application was used by a law firm which specialized in mortgages. So I saw the details of various documents one is served in these situations: notice of default, acceleration notices, notice to vacate, and ultimately evictions and foreclosure auctions. And of course you could see thousands of these documents being generated and mailed out. For a guy like the one in the post to show up, you probably would have had to completely ignore probably a dozen of these documents for at least 6 months, not paying your mortgage all along. Sometimes I feel like this experience, especially the idea that the entire principal balance can be accelerated if you don't make your payments regardless of the value of the house, left a bit of a scar on me that caused me to miss out on the ZIRP real estate boom II. But I am still happy with the way things are turning out overall.

DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
> you probably would have had to completely ignore probably a dozen of these documents for at least 6 months, not paying your mortgage all along. Fun-fact: thems the benefits of being a mortgage holder. If you're a tenant that's renting, you get no such legal protections - let alone discretion from whichever faceless entity actually owns the property: where I am in King County WA, I think, at most you can get 30 days' notice tops (and that's if nonpayment is the only thing they allege; it's trivially straightforward to make it a 3-day nuisance eviction, honestly). The whole thing doesn't feel right (I don't want to say "class warfare", but I haven't heard a better explanation for this double-standard).
- BobbyTables2 2y ago
  Indeed. When I lived in an apparent, got a very angry knock at the door. Before I even got up, manager already was unlocking the door without asking, with a formal eviction notice in hand. Every month I faithfully put my rent check in an envelope, deposited the slot at the office. That month they accidentally threw away the check after opening the envelope. They really didn’t believe I had paid, despite being a good tenant for years, always on time. Never caused any trouble. Marched me to the office and they discovered they had photocopied my check but didn’t deposit it (threw it away). That all happened in one month — no prior notice/warning/call about being late on rent. I’m still shocked at this treatment many many years later. Can’t even chalk it up to any type of prejudice… just utter stupidity.
  - jopsen 2y ago
    No amount of laws can protect renters from a stupid landlord :) I could certainly see places where using a master key without authorization is a stupid move.
    - Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
      Some landlords have a HUGE superiority complex which makes them look down upon or even despise their tenants for no reason at all.
      - jopsen 2y ago
        Logically thinking: if you are a landlord, most of your interactions with tenants aren't with easy tenants who pay on time and don't make unreasonable demands. A stupid landlord might not realize that easy tenants are worth gathering.
        Aeolun 2y ago
        Yeah, I’m more inclined to think they hear ‘I paid my bill!’ from every single person that’ll then stop paying going forward.
      - mingus88 2y ago
        Landlords have a financial incentive to dehumanize their tenants. Every repair or improvement they make directly affects their take. This is probably the #1 reason I haven’t bought a second house or investment property, despite it being the easiest way for me to kickstart some passive income. 20 years of renting has really embedded some class warfare into my psyche.
  - _DeadFred_ 2y ago
    I think this is part of the reason people don't want to live in big city condo buildings with co-ops or communal fees/maintenance. Even if you own your place you don't really own it and these other entity that care nothing about, your bill situation, etc you can impact your housing situation. If I have a place in the burbs I only have to worry about the soulless local government.
- bombcar 2y ago
  This is why the "if you have a loan you're just renting from the bank" people aren't right - sure, in a way it's true but there really IS a legal difference, and it DOES come into play when things go south.
  - santoshalper 2y ago
    Yes, of course, there is a huge difference between having a mortgage (you are the owner but the investor has a lien on your property) and renting.
  - Enginerrrd 2y ago
    Yeah and it goes both ways. When someone gets hurt in your front yard or something you're the one that's liable, not the bank.
    - 39896880 2y ago
      Unless they are a trespasser. Generally, you owe no duty of care to trespassers other than to avoid intentionally harming them, unless it’s a kid and you have a pool. Homeowner’s insurance covers it.
- Denvercoder9 2y ago
  > If you're a tenant that's renting, you get no such legal protections In the USA. Many countries in Europe have renters protection similar to that of mortgage holders.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    Depends on where you are in the U.S. Some places have extreme renter protections. Tenants can refuse to pay rent for months before you can even start an eviction proceeding. Then it takes months more. E.g. New York. https://www.reddit.com/r/Landlord/comments/15nn6o0/landlordus_ny_how_long_does_the_eviction_process https://www.reddit.com/r/Landlord/comments/15nn6o0/landlordu.... Landlords may forgo six months of back rent just to get the tenant out of the unit.
    - pnw 2y ago
      There's a renter here in Seattle that's not paid rent in two years and hasn't been evicted yet. It's not an uncommon issue. https://www.newsweek.com/squatter-forces-landlord-out-home-washington-1882028 https://www.newsweek.com/squatter-forces-landlord-out-home-w...
    - HarryHirsch 2y ago
      Meanwhile in Alabama the only recourse you have against a landowner who rents you something not habitable is to move out. American law generally is very bad at compelling a party to uphold a contract.
    - throwaway2037 2y ago
      In my experience, the worse the winter weather, the stronger the tenant laws. The goal is to prevent eviction during winter months.
  - pkaye 2y ago
    How long can renters go without paying their rent in those countries?
    - 2y ago
- bgnn 2y ago
  That sounds indeed not right. Here in the Netherlands the renters have the right, but mortgage holders do not. I was renting a place the owner had mortgage. For some reason the bank wanted to sale the place but couldn't evict me. Since this was the owners fault the bank's lawyers helped me to get like 6 months of rent back to agree to leave. The bank even offered me to buy the place, which in the hindsight, I should have done. Long story short, what you guys have in US feels wrong and it's not always like that in the rest of the world.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    It's very local location dependent. You can find lots of horror stories from both the renter and the landlord side. And, in a lot of cases, renters can probably get off with a lot unless the landlord is willing to take extreme illegal measures (which they may).
  - brigade 2y ago
    I don’t think it’s obviously “wrong” that renters don’t automatically get the right to occupy a property indefinitely once they move in, but rather only have that right for an agreed-upon term. Or that the owner has the right to decline to renew a lease after said term with a notice period (well maybe the standard 30 or 60 days notice is a little short…) The “3-day eviction” is that if you break the law in specific ways, the landlord can immediately terminate the lease and start court proceedings with 3 days notice. It still takes months for the eviction to grind through the courts just like it would in the Netherlands.
- lacker 2y ago
  TLDR: You pay for the benefits of being a mortgage holder, when you make the down payment. Think of it from the bank's point of view. A bank can afford to be patient with mortgage holders because there's an underlying asset. There's a $300,000 house and the owner still owes you $150,000. If you repossess right now as opposed to a few months from now, either way you're getting repaid from the value of the asset, minus the cost of dealing with everything. Whereas when renting, if someone misses rent one month, if you evict them immediately you're out a month's rent. If you wait two more months before evicting, now you're out three months' rent. The longer you delay, the more it costs you.
- klik99 2y ago
  For a bank, evicting someone from a house is expensive and the departments they have to handle it are very understaffed, their risk is so spread out that not getting 6 months payment is barely a blip. For a landlord, any loss of income for 6 months could be catastrophic, so there is much more urgency behind their action, and many act rashly and without compassion. While there are certainly asshole landlords, I don't think this situation happened because of a systematic class warfare, it's just landlords tend to be smaller institutions that have a much higher risk profile than banks. Add to that that renters tend to have less political power, and you end up with a situation that greatly prefers mortgage owners.
- closeparen 2y ago
  The bank will recover the money it lent you at the foreclosure sale; there's only the time-value-of-money element to whether they see it sooner or later. The landlord will never be reimbursed for the months of rent not paid, and is paying the mortgage out of their own pocket during this time.
- nullindividual 2y ago
  Depends on where you live in King County and on the property. In Seattle, certain property owners must inform the City 90 days prior to sale (“Intent to Sell” city ordinance). These laws are hyperlocal and making a sweeping statement about the County, State, or the US will ultimately be providing incorrect information.
  - DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
    Yes, you are correct; though I got my info from the King County website; there wasn’t any indication it varies.
0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago
There was a Planet Money story about Zombie Mortgages. Home owners thought a second mortgage had been annulled, sometimes even being explicitly told that. Years of no statements being sent and suddenly collections was asking for money on what the home owner thought was a done deal. Even the bank was claiming it was some weird fraud attempt. So of course you could feel safe ignoring that paperwork. Until they came and sold her house out from under her. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/10/1197959049/zombie-second-mortgages-homeowners-foreclosure https://www.npr.org/2024/05/10/1197959049/zombie-second-mort...
ToucanLoucan 2y ago
> For a guy like the one in the post to show up, you probably would have had to completely ignore probably a dozen of these documents for at least 6 months, not paying your mortgage all along. I find it interesting that in all of these discussions it's treated as known that the person at hand is ignoring the notices and just pretending they aren't in danger of losing their home, just like in issues of evictions for rent, it's treated that for some reason the tenant has decided they don't need to pay. When IMO, in both of these, it's much more reasonable to assume they can't pay. Maybe it's just a reflexive self-protection thing in people. It's easier to watch/envision a family being forced out of their home via state violence if you assume they were just stupid/inept in some way, that they did something wrong. That the very same thing couldn't happen to you because you would never just not pay your mortgage. And I mean, same. I would never not pay my mortgage. But I can easily conjure all kinds of nightmares that would render me unable to pay my mortgage. Maybe people just don't like thinking about that.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- yieldcrv 2y ago
  the reddit post doesn't assume that.
- analyte123 2y ago
  I'm aware that many of these people couldn't pay, mostly for lamentable reasons outside of their control, but pretending nothing is wrong usually doesn't help a bad situation. Ignoring letters from the IRS doesn't make you not owe them taxes. Ignoring letters from your lender or their lawyer doesn't make you owe less money. You still owe the money and it costs you interest and time that you could use to negotiate a settlement or forbearance. Perhaps if you make your situation bad enough, it's easier to file for bankruptcy and start over, but I doubt that people are thinking that far. In any case, it's a big stretch to call eviction "state violence". When they're even involved, the sheriff is mostly helping to enforce a private contract between the homeowner and their lender. The only conceivable alternative to this situation that still allows lending or private property to exist at all is for the police to not exist and everyone enforces their own contracts with their own violence.

DaiPlusPlus 2y ago

> you probably would have had to completely ignore probably a dozen of these documents for at least 6 months, not paying your mortgage all along. Fun-fact: thems the benefits of being a mortgage holder. If you're a tenant that's renting, you get no such legal protections - let alone discretion from whichever faceless entity actually owns the property: where I am in King County WA, I think, at most you can get 30 days' notice tops (and that's if nonpayment is the only thing they allege; it's trivially straightforward to make it a 3-day nuisance eviction, honestly). The whole thing doesn't feel right (I don't want to say "class warfare", but I haven't heard a better explanation for this double-standard).

BobbyTables2 2y ago
Indeed. When I lived in an apparent, got a very angry knock at the door. Before I even got up, manager already was unlocking the door without asking, with a formal eviction notice in hand. Every month I faithfully put my rent check in an envelope, deposited the slot at the office. That month they accidentally threw away the check after opening the envelope. They really didn’t believe I had paid, despite being a good tenant for years, always on time. Never caused any trouble. Marched me to the office and they discovered they had photocopied my check but didn’t deposit it (threw it away). That all happened in one month — no prior notice/warning/call about being late on rent. I’m still shocked at this treatment many many years later. Can’t even chalk it up to any type of prejudice… just utter stupidity.
- jopsen 2y ago
  No amount of laws can protect renters from a stupid landlord :) I could certainly see places where using a master key without authorization is a stupid move.
  - Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
    Some landlords have a HUGE superiority complex which makes them look down upon or even despise their tenants for no reason at all.
    - jopsen 2y ago
      Logically thinking: if you are a landlord, most of your interactions with tenants aren't with easy tenants who pay on time and don't make unreasonable demands. A stupid landlord might not realize that easy tenants are worth gathering.
      - Aeolun 2y ago
        Yeah, I’m more inclined to think they hear ‘I paid my bill!’ from every single person that’ll then stop paying going forward.
    - mingus88 2y ago
      Landlords have a financial incentive to dehumanize their tenants. Every repair or improvement they make directly affects their take. This is probably the #1 reason I haven’t bought a second house or investment property, despite it being the easiest way for me to kickstart some passive income. 20 years of renting has really embedded some class warfare into my psyche.
- _DeadFred_ 2y ago
  I think this is part of the reason people don't want to live in big city condo buildings with co-ops or communal fees/maintenance. Even if you own your place you don't really own it and these other entity that care nothing about, your bill situation, etc you can impact your housing situation. If I have a place in the burbs I only have to worry about the soulless local government.
bombcar 2y ago
This is why the "if you have a loan you're just renting from the bank" people aren't right - sure, in a way it's true but there really IS a legal difference, and it DOES come into play when things go south.
- santoshalper 2y ago
  Yes, of course, there is a huge difference between having a mortgage (you are the owner but the investor has a lien on your property) and renting.
- Enginerrrd 2y ago
  Yeah and it goes both ways. When someone gets hurt in your front yard or something you're the one that's liable, not the bank.
  - 39896880 2y ago
    Unless they are a trespasser. Generally, you owe no duty of care to trespassers other than to avoid intentionally harming them, unless it’s a kid and you have a pool. Homeowner’s insurance covers it.
Denvercoder9 2y ago
> If you're a tenant that's renting, you get no such legal protections In the USA. Many countries in Europe have renters protection similar to that of mortgage holders.
- rayiner 2y ago
  Depends on where you are in the U.S. Some places have extreme renter protections. Tenants can refuse to pay rent for months before you can even start an eviction proceeding. Then it takes months more. E.g. New York. https://www.reddit.com/r/Landlord/comments/15nn6o0/landlordus_ny_how_long_does_the_eviction_process https://www.reddit.com/r/Landlord/comments/15nn6o0/landlordu.... Landlords may forgo six months of back rent just to get the tenant out of the unit.
  - pnw 2y ago
    There's a renter here in Seattle that's not paid rent in two years and hasn't been evicted yet. It's not an uncommon issue. https://www.newsweek.com/squatter-forces-landlord-out-home-washington-1882028 https://www.newsweek.com/squatter-forces-landlord-out-home-w...
  - HarryHirsch 2y ago
    Meanwhile in Alabama the only recourse you have against a landowner who rents you something not habitable is to move out. American law generally is very bad at compelling a party to uphold a contract.
  - throwaway2037 2y ago
    In my experience, the worse the winter weather, the stronger the tenant laws. The goal is to prevent eviction during winter months.
- pkaye 2y ago
  How long can renters go without paying their rent in those countries?
  - 2y ago
bgnn 2y ago
That sounds indeed not right. Here in the Netherlands the renters have the right, but mortgage holders do not. I was renting a place the owner had mortgage. For some reason the bank wanted to sale the place but couldn't evict me. Since this was the owners fault the bank's lawyers helped me to get like 6 months of rent back to agree to leave. The bank even offered me to buy the place, which in the hindsight, I should have done. Long story short, what you guys have in US feels wrong and it's not always like that in the rest of the world.
- ghaff 2y ago
  It's very local location dependent. You can find lots of horror stories from both the renter and the landlord side. And, in a lot of cases, renters can probably get off with a lot unless the landlord is willing to take extreme illegal measures (which they may).
- brigade 2y ago
  I don’t think it’s obviously “wrong” that renters don’t automatically get the right to occupy a property indefinitely once they move in, but rather only have that right for an agreed-upon term. Or that the owner has the right to decline to renew a lease after said term with a notice period (well maybe the standard 30 or 60 days notice is a little short…) The “3-day eviction” is that if you break the law in specific ways, the landlord can immediately terminate the lease and start court proceedings with 3 days notice. It still takes months for the eviction to grind through the courts just like it would in the Netherlands.
lacker 2y ago
TLDR: You pay for the benefits of being a mortgage holder, when you make the down payment. Think of it from the bank's point of view. A bank can afford to be patient with mortgage holders because there's an underlying asset. There's a $300,000 house and the owner still owes you $150,000. If you repossess right now as opposed to a few months from now, either way you're getting repaid from the value of the asset, minus the cost of dealing with everything. Whereas when renting, if someone misses rent one month, if you evict them immediately you're out a month's rent. If you wait two more months before evicting, now you're out three months' rent. The longer you delay, the more it costs you.
klik99 2y ago
For a bank, evicting someone from a house is expensive and the departments they have to handle it are very understaffed, their risk is so spread out that not getting 6 months payment is barely a blip. For a landlord, any loss of income for 6 months could be catastrophic, so there is much more urgency behind their action, and many act rashly and without compassion. While there are certainly asshole landlords, I don't think this situation happened because of a systematic class warfare, it's just landlords tend to be smaller institutions that have a much higher risk profile than banks. Add to that that renters tend to have less political power, and you end up with a situation that greatly prefers mortgage owners.
closeparen 2y ago
The bank will recover the money it lent you at the foreclosure sale; there's only the time-value-of-money element to whether they see it sooner or later. The landlord will never be reimbursed for the months of rent not paid, and is paying the mortgage out of their own pocket during this time.
nullindividual 2y ago
Depends on where you live in King County and on the property. In Seattle, certain property owners must inform the City 90 days prior to sale (“Intent to Sell” city ordinance). These laws are hyperlocal and making a sweeping statement about the County, State, or the US will ultimately be providing incorrect information.
- DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
  Yes, you are correct; though I got my info from the King County website; there wasn’t any indication it varies.

0cf8612b2e1e 2y ago

There was a Planet Money story about Zombie Mortgages. Home owners thought a second mortgage had been annulled, sometimes even being explicitly told that. Years of no statements being sent and suddenly collections was asking for money on what the home owner thought was a done deal. Even the bank was claiming it was some weird fraud attempt. So of course you could feel safe ignoring that paperwork. Until they came and sold her house out from under her. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/10/1197959049/zombie-second-mortgages-homeowners-foreclosure https://www.npr.org/2024/05/10/1197959049/zombie-second-mort...

ToucanLoucan 2y ago

> For a guy like the one in the post to show up, you probably would have had to completely ignore probably a dozen of these documents for at least 6 months, not paying your mortgage all along. I find it interesting that in all of these discussions it's treated as known that the person at hand is ignoring the notices and just pretending they aren't in danger of losing their home, just like in issues of evictions for rent, it's treated that for some reason the tenant has decided they don't need to pay. When IMO, in both of these, it's much more reasonable to assume they can't pay. Maybe it's just a reflexive self-protection thing in people. It's easier to watch/envision a family being forced out of their home via state violence if you assume they were just stupid/inept in some way, that they did something wrong. That the very same thing couldn't happen to you because you would never just not pay your mortgage. And I mean, same. I would never not pay my mortgage. But I can easily conjure all kinds of nightmares that would render me unable to pay my mortgage. Maybe people just don't like thinking about that.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
yieldcrv 2y ago
the reddit post doesn't assume that.
analyte123 2y ago
I'm aware that many of these people couldn't pay, mostly for lamentable reasons outside of their control, but pretending nothing is wrong usually doesn't help a bad situation. Ignoring letters from the IRS doesn't make you not owe them taxes. Ignoring letters from your lender or their lawyer doesn't make you owe less money. You still owe the money and it costs you interest and time that you could use to negotiate a settlement or forbearance. Perhaps if you make your situation bad enough, it's easier to file for bankruptcy and start over, but I doubt that people are thinking that far. In any case, it's a big stretch to call eviction "state violence". When they're even involved, the sheriff is mostly helping to enforce a private contract between the homeowner and their lender. The only conceivable alternative to this situation that still allows lending or private property to exist at all is for the police to not exist and everyone enforces their own contracts with their own violence.